We have detected that cookies are not enabled on your browser. Please enable cookies to ensure the proper experience.
Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 1 2 3 LastLast
Results 26 to 50 of 60
  1. #26
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Location
    Bristol, England
    Posts
    6,029
    Quote Originally Posted by daneyul View Post
    If they added marriage--with explicit support for same sex marriage (ie, allowing husband/husband or wife/wife labels)--and did it in a bold, no apologies kind of way--they could ride a wave of publicity and internet-karma that could in the long run increase the user base and give the game a very positive reputation amongst the lion's share of their potential customers.

    Yeah, there will be some significant portion that won't like it, but I'd surmise only a very small portion of those would quit or even actively complain. Just like in real life, for most straight people, it's not like allowing gay marriage will turn your neighborhood into never-ending gay pride week. We already have tons of gay couples running around ME, sanctioning it isn't going to make much difference in the day to day game.

    But for those that do approve of it, and for those non-players who read about it (if Turbine is actually smart enough to do some PR) it could be a big boost for LotRO to be painted as the first game to show that kind of tolerance and acceptance. With the current climate of quickly growing support for gay marriage, SOME big game is going to take advantage of the positive wave of publicity that being the first to embrace it will generate sooner or later. Why not this big game? It's easy, positive publicity and a feel-good move. And IMO the right thing to do.

    Seriously, it's time companies realize this issue is no longer a "can of worms" to be avoided. It's an inevitability that should be embraced. The timing is perfect. They should do it!
    There's more to it than that: bringing modern societal norms to a classic fantasy in such a ham-handed manner would be a travesty. Turbine are already doing the smart thing by leaving well enough alone.

  2. #27
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    The Perilous Realm
    Posts
    2,488
    Quote Originally Posted by Radhruin_EU View Post
    There's more to it than that: bringing modern societal norms to a classic fantasy in such a ham-handed manner would be a travesty. Turbine are already doing the smart thing by leaving well enough alone.
    There's also the question of how the Tolkien Estate would react. Such a move would be explicitly against the values of Tolkien and his writings. It's possible they could sue over having the brand damaged in such a way and get the rights back. The Estate has already shown themselves more than willing to sue over what they see as breaches of contract. They are incredibly proactive about protecting the Estate and the brand. Even if they didn't have much of a case, I don't think Turbine or WB would want to risk more litigation with the Estate.
    [URL="https://sarahmccabemythopoet.wordpress.com/"][COLOR=#b22222]Falling Toward Mythopoesis[/COLOR][/URL][COLOR=#ffd700]~[/COLOR] My personal blog.

    [URL="https://lotromusic.wordpress.com/"][COLOR=#008080]LOTRO Music[/COLOR][/URL][COLOR=#ffd700]~[/COLOR] ABCs, guides and resources for the compleat LOTRO musician.

  3. #28
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Location
    Everywhere
    Posts
    1,693
    Quote Originally Posted by daneyul View Post
    If they added marriage--with explicit support for same sex marriage (ie, allowing husband/husband or wife/wife labels)--and did it in a bold, no apologies kind of way--they could ride a wave of publicity and internet-karma that could in the long run increase the user base and give the game a very positive reputation amongst the lion's share of their potential customers.

    Yeah, there will be some significant portion that won't like it, but I'd surmise only a very small portion of those would quit or even actively complain. Just like in real life, for most straight people, it's not like allowing gay marriage will turn your neighborhood into never-ending gay pride week. We already have tons of gay couples running around ME, sanctioning it isn't going to make much difference in the day to day game.

    But for those that do approve of it, and for those non-players who read about it (if Turbine is actually smart enough to do some PR) it could be a big boost for LotRO to be painted as the first game to show that kind of tolerance and acceptance. With the current climate of quickly growing support for gay marriage, SOME big game is going to take advantage of the positive wave of publicity that being the first to embrace it will generate sooner or later. Why not this big game? It's easy, positive publicity and a feel-good move. And IMO the right thing to do.

    Seriously, it's time companies realize this issue is no longer a "can of worms" to be avoided. It's an inevitability that should be embraced. The timing is perfect. They should do it!
    I will just categorically respond to this with a couple of points and a question... will attempt to do this without getting too political...

    1. Same-sex marriage opens up a whole can of worms that the majority of people just don't understand. There is so much more to marriage than just 2 people agreeing to spend the rest of their lives together (for better or worse).

    (Want proof? Look at all the drama that went down over Aragorn and Arwen making the choice to be married. And that is just an example from LOTR. They had to grapple with what all it meant to be married apart from the fact that it would be an inter-racial marriage. Elrond made a huge effort to discourage it because he knew what that marriage would mean for his daughter.)

    2. As others have pointed out, allowing such a thing in LOTRO would be in direct opposition to all of the beliefs and values of JRR Tolkien. Yes, I know exactly what he believed and I am fairly certain (as others pointed out) that something like allowing same-sex marriage (IF Turbine allowed a "marriage system") would be grounds for a major violation of whatever contract allows LOTRO to exist.

    I am still curious as well... why is it so important for Turbine to part with the lore on this when, so often, people fight for Turbine to stay true to the lore?
    Dagranhad - Burglar | Aldgarea - Loremaster | Barathrothir - Hunter | Golladhar - Captain

  4. #29
    Turbine broke lore when they made the RK :P
    Just sayin.
    “A single dream is more powerful than a thousand realities.” -???

  5. #30
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Location
    Bristol, England
    Posts
    6,029
    Quote Originally Posted by Ceremony View Post
    Turbine broke lore when they made the RK :P
    Just sayin.
    And as ever, two wrongs don't make a right.

  6. #31
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Posts
    1,587
    Quote Originally Posted by Ceremony View Post
    stuff
    Auto Combine ALL by Me
    - agree with that

    Kinship Revamp Proposal: Started by Galuhad
    - only problem I have with that is kin-only quest or other such content, no thanks, don't need to go where GW2's gone and seriously handicapped small guilds to the point they're rapidly disappearing since they're not big enough to even unlock the content let alone complete it.

    Housing Resign:Started by Adder
    - housing is a great distraction from killing orcs, and seriously needs improving from the cobbled-together content we have now, which was great when it came out in a hurry but should never have been left in the pitiful state it is.

    Marriages: Started by mmantsevich1
    - don't care, they have them in FFXI and the two I attended were fun (neither mine!) but as others have said, the same-sex lobby will use it as a platform to cause trouble so best left alone.

    New Class: Beorning Started by
    - man/bear shapeshifters are this way -----> (points to WOW's Druid class)

    65 FA add to Skirmish camp Started by Me
    - pointless really, you'll out level it before capping it unless you throws IXP items at it, in which case that's a huge waste IMO, but IDC if they do it'd be harmless.

    Auto harvest when farming: Started by Daecon
    - Dunno, where do you drawn the line until it's one-button-press-from-0-to-Grand-Master?

    Moving Charaters to another accounts:
    - Never see it happening due to paranoia of account theft, pity because many players have good reasons for wanting to do it.

    Players choose the looting system:Started by Taldeen
    - No, just no, endless arguing in WOW, and others, where the loot mode is selectable. In any case, that guy's suggestions only relate to kin groups (his several reference to DKP clearly show he's thinking kin-only), which don't need this sort of thing anyway.

    Turbine Account Authenticators:
    - no desire to have one, probably a good idea for those less capable of surfing safely I suppose.

    Stop I.E
    - they already did this didn't they?

    New outfits, decorations, and housing add ons.
    - as long as the content designers are needed for real content rather than just fluff. I LOVE fluff myself but not at the expense of progression.

    Skip session play repeats
    - skip session play entirely, which apparently U11 does, is a better solution for me.

    Forecloses
    - Turbine already did this too.

  7. #32
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Posts
    10,510
    Quote Originally Posted by Fionnuala View Post
    There's also the question of how the Tolkien Estate would react. Such a move would be explicitly against the values of Tolkien and his writings. It's possible they could sue over having the brand damaged in such a way and get the rights back. The Estate has already shown themselves more than willing to sue over what they see as breaches of contract. They are incredibly proactive about protecting the Estate and the brand. Even if they didn't have much of a case, I don't think Turbine or WB would want to risk more litigation with the Estate.
    The Tolkien estate has very little to do with the issue, as the license is held by SZC/MEE.

    That having been said, JRRT's formative years were late-Victorian (he was 9 when Queen Victoria died) and Edwardian. He was a grown man 100 years ago. The lack of strong female characters in his works is emblematic of the attitudes of his youth. For the other issues at hand, go look up how Oscar Wilde was treated during the period when Tolkien was a child.

  8. #33
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Posts
    10,510
    Quote Originally Posted by Kerin_Eldar View Post
    Marriages: Started by mmantsevich1
    - don't care, they have them in FFXI and the two I attended were fun (neither mine!) but as others have said, the same-sex lobby will use it as a platform to cause trouble so best left alone.
    Probably more trouble from the anti-same-sex-marriage side unless Turbine barred SSM. (Of course, in the unlikely event that in game marriage were implemented, to be consistent with LotR, they'd have to bar inter-species marriage and people would throw six kinds of fits about *that*.)

    Stop I.E
    - they already did this didn't they?
    Implemented in Update 11.

    Skip session play repeats
    - skip session play entirely, which apparently U11 does, is a better solution for me.
    Sort of....the session plays associated with Book III.10 are optional. A couple of general session plays are part of the quest lines in Wildermore and not doing them will block other quests.

    However, this whole issue begs the question about being able to avoid skirmishes, solo-only instances, group-only instances, escort quests, and any other game mechanism that some people have an intense dislike for. What's sauce for the goose... and all that.

    Forecloses
    - Turbine already did this too.
    Implemented in Update 11, plus being able to pre-pay house maintenance for about 5 months.

  9. #34
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Posts
    355
    One simple thing I haven't seen mentioned here or in the suggestions thread:

    Pre-sets for audio.

    Switching between different modes--ie, solo (speakers) and group (headphones) settings is an exercise in adjusting multiple settings over and over again--not just picking your headphones vs speakers, but also adjusting the balance of game sounds for voice play. For instance, my combat/ambient sounds go way down when I'm playing with voice on.

    And if you use Vent/Team speak/whatever, you may have completely different preferences for how the sounds should be set up compared to the others.

    Adjusting your sound settings can be a pain--especially when a group is waiting for you to get it right.

    Why not a simple "save audio preset" that allows you to setup multiple audio configurations and choose them at one click?
    I7-950, Sabertooth X58, 6950, 840SSD (250gig), 6gb ram, 1920x1200 28i, Win 8

  10. #35
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Location
    The Netherlands
    Posts
    459
    some things I like to comment on.
    Quote Originally Posted by Ceremony View Post
    Kinship Revamp Proposal: Started by Galuhad
    http://forums.lotro.com/showthread.p...evamp-Proposal
    Totally agree. Right now it is just a glorified chatroom with very limited moderator options. Improving the system would do so much for a big part of the community.

    Quote Originally Posted by Ceremony View Post
    I really hope they will do a good job with this. Almost as important as the kinship system

    Quote Originally Posted by Ceremony View Post
    Easy enough to roleplay. Add "married to:..." in your personal note if you really want to. I have played the part of priest for a big wedding event once personally.

    Quote Originally Posted by Ceremony View Post
    I like the idea. I think some people are a bit too eager to discard this.
    When I think of a Beorning I don't think about a shapeshifter, but rather some sort of savage berserker. Inspiring his allies with total disregard of own well-being and animal-like ferocity. That thread also gives some other possibilities. Anyway, I think it is worth trying to look beyond the shapeshifter-stigma the beorning suggestions tend to get.
    [B][URL="https://www.lotro.com/forums/showthread.php?385713-Kinship-Revamp-Proposal"][COLOR=#ed2669]A vote for the kinship revamp proposal is a vote for progress! Vote today![/COLOR][/URL][/B]

  11. #36
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Location
    Bristol, England
    Posts
    6,029
    Quote Originally Posted by Kalderic View Post
    I like the idea. I think some people are a bit too eager to discard this.
    When I think of a Beorning I don't think about a shapeshifter, but rather some sort of savage berserker. Inspiring his allies with total disregard of own well-being and animal-like ferocity. That thread also gives some other possibilities. Anyway, I think it is worth trying to look beyond the shapeshifter-stigma the beorning suggestions tend to get.
    That may have been suggested before but the Champion's got the 'ferocity' thing pretty much covered already. I've not seen anyone suggest how to get around that.

  12. #37
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Location
    England
    Posts
    753
    The concept of a Beorning would break the current class-race structre, before any other issues are even considered.

    You have to have both race and class locked, since you can't rightly have a Dwarven skinchanger any more than you could have a Benorning Minstrel running around.

    The current system allows the populous races to take on a number of defined, specific roles. A "Beorning" race/class doesn't fit into that anywhere.
    [CENTER][I][FONT=georgia]"Never laugh at live dragons"[/FONT][/I]
    [/CENTER]

  13. #38
    Quote Originally Posted by Radhruin_EU View Post
    And as ever, two wrongs don't make a right.
    Hey now :P
    I am simple saying Turbine opened that gate, I am just simply using it.
    It like the whole no locks thing, People know there will be farming of the instances.
    “A single dream is more powerful than a thousand realities.” -???

  14. #39
    Instead of questing, I think this would be more fun for newbies to get a feel of Lotro.

    Rebuilding Archet by robbie1435
    http://forums.lotro.com/showthread.p...uilding-Archet

    A few others:
    AH in Esteldin by Degoman
    http://forums.lotro.com/showthread.p...in-North-Downs

    Destroy all option for pending loot by Kalderic
    http://forums.lotro.com/showthread.p...r-pending-loot
    “A single dream is more powerful than a thousand realities.” -???

  15. #40
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Posts
    10,510
    Quote Originally Posted by Ceremony View Post
    Destroy all option for pending loot by Kalderic
    http://forums.lotro.com/showthread.p...r-pending-loot
    AC2 has a system in which you can open the corpse for looting, take those items you want, and then take the rest as cash equivalent.

  16. #41
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Location
    England
    Posts
    753
    Quote Originally Posted by whheydt View Post
    AC2 has a system in which you can open the corpse for looting, take those items you want, and then take the rest as cash equivalent.
    I doubt many will agree with me here but that'd feel too "gamey" for me. If I don't want to take the 48th broken dagger hilt fair enough, but I don't think any of my characters are blessed with mastery of alchemy such that they can turn it into gold and silver coins on the fly. RK might be in with a shout, I suppose...
    [CENTER][I][FONT=georgia]"Never laugh at live dragons"[/FONT][/I]
    [/CENTER]

  17. #42
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Posts
    10,510
    Quote Originally Posted by Curandhras View Post
    I doubt many will agree with me here but that'd feel too "gamey" for me. If I don't want to take the 48th broken dagger hilt fair enough, but I don't think any of my characters are blessed with mastery of alchemy such that they can turn it into gold and silver coins on the fly. RK might be in with a shout, I suppose...
    I wasn't so much advocating the idea, as showing that Turbine has the in-house history (and coding ability) of having included such a feature.

  18. #43
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Location
    Bristol, England
    Posts
    6,029
    Quote Originally Posted by whheydt View Post
    I wasn't so much advocating the idea, as showing that Turbine has the in-house history (and coding ability) of having included such a feature.
    Adopting 'lazy' features like that would be a step backwards - that was a flaw in AC2, an example of a naked game mechanic that was basically inexplicable and hence metagaming, and really represented things that were just plain missing. Turning unwanted stuff into gold directly without having to sell it meant that they didn't have to have NPCs, which went along with that whole 'rebuilding' fiasco.

  19. #44
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Location
    The Netherlands
    Posts
    459
    How about giving NPC vendors the option to buy-out your complete pending loot then? or at least give them to option to relieve you of the stuff in a couple clicks.
    [B][URL="https://www.lotro.com/forums/showthread.php?385713-Kinship-Revamp-Proposal"][COLOR=#ed2669]A vote for the kinship revamp proposal is a vote for progress! Vote today![/COLOR][/URL][/B]

  20. #45
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Posts
    10,510
    Quote Originally Posted by Radhruin_EU View Post
    Adopting 'lazy' features like that would be a step backwards - that was a flaw in AC2, an example of a naked game mechanic that was basically inexplicable and hence metagaming, and really represented things that were just plain missing. Turning unwanted stuff into gold directly without having to sell it meant that they didn't have to have NPCs, which went along with that whole 'rebuilding' fiasco.
    I disagree. It meant that one could stay "out in the field" longer because inventory didn't fill up with useless vendor trash (one--effectively--vendored it in situ). There were vendors in towns where the junk could be sold, should one prefer to delay the vendor/keep decision, so it didn't save Turbine any effort in that regard.

    I'm not sure what you mean by "rebuilding fiasco", unless you're referring to the effort to build consignment shops. But then, I was on the only server that managed to open all shops by our own efforts without having to wait for Turbine to force-open them. If *that* was a "fiasco" it was really only one on the KvK and PvP servers...which is, I think, another strike against those particular server models.

  21. #46
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Location
    Bristol, England
    Posts
    6,029
    Quote Originally Posted by whheydt View Post
    I disagree. It meant that one could stay "out in the field" longer because inventory didn't fill up with useless vendor trash (one--effectively--vendored it in situ). There were vendors in towns where the junk could be sold, should one prefer to delay the vendor/keep decision, so it didn't save Turbine any effort in that regard.
    Sorry, but when AC2 launched there were no vendors of any kind, anywhere. Turning things into gold straight from your bags was therefore a necessity, not a mere convenience feature. The point, however, was that no RPG should ever be that contemptuous towards the whole idea of providing the illusion of a living world. Hell, even Diablo made you visit town to sell your stuff and that was only an action game.

    I'm not sure what you mean by "rebuilding fiasco", unless you're referring to the effort to build consignment shops. But then, I was on the only server that managed to open all shops by our own efforts without having to wait for Turbine to force-open them. If *that* was a "fiasco" it was really only one on the KvK and PvP servers...which is, I think, another strike against those particular server models.
    Don't tell me you've forgotten the original business about rebuilding the towns and how sadly limited that was, how much they under-delivered there? The point was that being able to transmute stuff into gold saved them the effort of having to have the usual NPCs in towns to sell stuff to.

  22. #47
    Another suggestion:

    IXP rune combine option by Weezle
    http://forums.lotro.com/showthread.p...combine-option
    “A single dream is more powerful than a thousand realities.” -???

  23. #48
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Location
    Maryland
    Posts
    149
    Quote Originally Posted by TheCrossbow View Post
    I will just categorically respond to this with a couple of points and a question... will attempt to do this without getting too political...

    1. Same-sex marriage opens up a whole can of worms that the majority of people just don't understand. There is so much more to marriage than just 2 people agreeing to spend the rest of their lives together (for better or worse).

    (Want proof? Look at all the drama that went down over Aragorn and Arwen making the choice to be married. And that is just an example from LOTR. They had to grapple with what all it meant to be married apart from the fact that it would be an inter-racial marriage. Elrond made a huge effort to discourage it because he knew what that marriage would mean for his daughter.)

    2. As others have pointed out, allowing such a thing in LOTRO would be in direct opposition to all of the beliefs and values of JRR Tolkien. Yes, I know exactly what he believed and I am fairly certain (as others pointed out) that something like allowing same-sex marriage (IF Turbine allowed a "marriage system") would be grounds for a major violation of whatever contract allows LOTRO to exist.

    I am still curious as well... why is it so important for Turbine to part with the lore on this when, so often, people fight for Turbine to stay true to the lore?
    Rep, and I concur. Allowing homosexual marriages is not simply permitting something, but making a point which goes against Tolkien's philosophy.

    I also agree that there is more to marriage than simply "getting" together. Just because the majority (or supposed majority) want something, doesn't mean that it is a good idea. If, as some other user stated, there a copious amounts of "gay"users now, what is the big deal? Obviously they are getting by fine, as well as the myriad of couples who are married in real life, as opposed to some game. There is no need for "marriage" in a game. Feel otherwise? Not my problem. I don't think anyone has ever really denied that marriage contains a very " specific action" which cannot take place in a game world. Having ceremonies is one thing... Marriage is really another altogether.

    Further, some of you need to mature a little bit. Calling people "homophobes" is an ad hominem fallacy with no grounds. There are perfectly legitimate reasons a person can be against homosexual marriages that are beyond religon. Being against homosexual marriages is not at all the same thing as being against homosexuals. lotro is not a place for those discussions. Calling someone gay can also be inappropriate. I have never Identified myself as Luke the heterosexual. Why the heck should we identify people by their sex? There are people on this game... human beings. As a highschool teacher, i see kids lives turn upside down because they are labelled. Stop with the identities, go kill an Orc and level a toon.

  24. #49
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Posts
    10,510
    Quote Originally Posted by Coolhandlukeboy View Post
    There are perfectly legitimate reasons a person can be against homosexual marriages that are beyond religon.
    At some considerable risk of getting this thread closed... Name one reason that is NOT rooted in religion.

  25. #50
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Location
    Estonia
    Posts
    913
    Considering Tolkien was a devout roman catholic this game should honour his values despite what I or whichever player of this game would feel about that.
    Quit.

    Find me on Steam and ESO, same name.

 

 
Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 1 2 3 LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  

This form's session has expired. You need to reload the page.

Reload