Name Changes

[Handull]

Originally Posted by loramin [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

A lot of people seem to misunderstand "immersion". The point of trying to preserve "immersion" isn't to try and make it so you log in to Project 1999 and never think of the real world. The point is that you log in to Project 1999 and you never think "this Project 1999 ... not classic EverQuest".

Did you play back in the day? Here's the screenshot I have from that time (or maybe just after classic, but same difference) with the most character names in it. I took this screenshot to document a GM event, not to prove anything about names 15-odd years later, but it perfectly illustrates my point:

[You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

Consider how many names violate the name policy: arguably zero. Even the names which might violate it are still mostly kosher (eg. Dome Nytewulf, Tuttas Frutt).

I strongly suspect that if you go through old group screenshots from the classic EverQuest period (or even several years after), and you don't cherry-pick, you will also see very few name violations.

So, just like everything else here, the point isn't to remake the best (or most immersive) MMOG ever: the point is just to recreate classic EverQuest. And classic EverQuest simply did not have a ton of people with names like "Papp Smear" running around.

P.S. Yes, that is the original live version of Loramin Frostseer, or at least his name and (tiny family) guild tag, down at the bottom [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

Minuvan Speedporter ?

[loramin]

Originally Posted by Handull [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

Minuvan Speedporter ?

Oh I somehow missed that one. But I never said there were never violating names like that on live (as I remember it live was like here: if no one petitioned your name and no GM happened to notice it you could keep a violating name). I just said that there were a lot fewer than here, and that they tended to be less violating/obvious (eg. that guy got away with Minuvan, because it sounds like a fantasy name, but he probably couldn't have gotten away with Minivan).

[daxchunjae1912]

@loramin, I have to disagree with you it IS subjective because in a way this IS cherry picking. If names policy is to be strictly enforced then why do some names go through while some don't? Also to apply this across not just names, but guild names, gm names, and possibly mechanics such as links , (which isn't classic, fine), but then buff timers showing for years then removed a year and half ago? (that wasn't classic to begin with). Why pick and choose when the whole point here is to be consistent with your outrage, that's all.

[brandonb1029]

Because classic live had 1 server for 8 years where people owned several accounts.

[loramin]

Originally Posted by daxchunjae1912 [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

@loramin, I have to disagree with you it IS subjective because in a way this IS cherry picking. If names policy is to be strictly enforced then why do some names go through while some don't? Also to apply this across not just names, but guild names, gm names, and possibly mechanics such as links , (which isn't classic, fine), but then buff timers showing for years then removed a year and half ago? (that wasn't classic to begin with). Why pick and choose when the whole point here is to be consistent with your outrage, that's all.

I'm VERY consistent with my outrage ...

GMs not magically fixing every name at once: no outrage
(they're human)

GMs fixing some names before fixing others: no outrage
(direct effect of the above; they're humans so they have to start with someone)

GMs not fixing guild names before player names: no outrage
(I don't tell them how, or in what order, to do their job ... especially when their "job" is volunteering to help me)

Deves not fixing something they can't (item links): no outrage
(again, humans can't just magically fix impossible or really difficult technical problems).

Originally Posted by brandonb1029 [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

Because classic live had 1 server for 8 years

A few volunteers working on a 100% free project to re-create a game published by a major company with tons of programmers, as classically as possible, for eight years of their lives, and letting me play on it the whole time while they work: no outrage

EDIT: You added "people owned several accounts" in an edit, so I feel compelled to point out that Live did in fact have many people who owned multiple accounts. For instance, Dome (in the screenshot above) was a friend of mine who also owned another account for "Domey". It was more the exception than the rule, but it did happen sometimes. Project 1999 has more of that than live did, but that's an "environment problem" the devs can't fix anymore than they can erase modern player's knowledge of how to acquire the Overthere Hammer using Puppet Strings (which was not common knowledge on live).

[brandonb1029]

Just because you have no outrage doesn't change the fact that it's not reasonable to think 1 server with several more characters created can reproduce as many unique names as you saw when you played during classic.

Or the fact that I think that the naming policy is excessive.

[loramin]

Originally Posted by brandonb1029 [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

1 server with several more characters created can reproduce as many unique names as you saw when you played during classic.

Oh, so your point wasn't "multiple characters isn't classic", it was "more characters means less name choices"? To me that's like saying "we only have 10 million names to choose from, not 10.1 million like on live." It's true, but there are still millions of non-violating names available, so who cares?

If we ever get to the point where you can't hit the random button and get a decent name for your character I'll buy that "too many names are taken, so we have to abandon classic EQ and allow characters named Papp Smear to accommodate all of the players" ... but I suspect that day will never come.

[MiRo2]

EQ Live had considerably less naming violations, and almost no obvious ones for two reasons.

1.) When you requested a name a character selection it was checked against a database of obvious naming violations (swears, celebrities, etc)

2.) If it passed the first check, a tiny box(rez/tl box style) would pop up to any server guides that were online at the time and they would have 30 seconds to approve or disapprove the name, if no one approved/disproved it within 30 seconds, it was automatically approved.

[Brocode]

on live classic era had all my characters named as real figures from japanese culture, and never had a name violation, EQ is year 3000, meaning everything exists.

Wiz named Jiraia Ninja http://metalheroes.wikia.com/wiki/Toha_Yamaji
Mnk named Hyoga http://saintseiya.wikia.com/wiki/Cygnus_Hy%C5%8Dga

Once i moved servers i asked to be named Chuck, they said it was not allowed bla bla, until i told them Chuck alone is a common name, so they accepted, later i added surname Norriz, never been witchhunted by them.

Feels like gms are killing peoples way to do the immersion on the little they can choose by themselfs, on other hand, free name changes for a few selected.

[skarlorn]

brocode, you've been added to the list.