Originally posted by Margulis SOE devs have said that themselves, it's not like he's just coming up with that since he saw a preview.
Right. There has been a lot of skepticism here with people claiming the devs are trolling for hype or it could mean anything, etc. - that we haven't seen the game and won't know until the game is revealed. But Massively has seen the game, which is why I'm bringing it up. We have a third party confirming that this is very different from EQ1 and EQ2, and that SOE is probably going for a different market.
So we're on page 3 now and so far "world PVP" is the only idea for how EQN could target a different segment of the market without cannibalizing EQ1 and EQ2.
Does no one have anything else that's compelling?
They could make an extremely PVE heavy sandbox experience with skill based action combat. One with horizontal character progression and gear collection. With a heavy emphasis on crafting, exploring and city building/defending. Players who like gear treadmills, themepark content riding and tab target combat will most likely stick with EQ/EQ2/VG and will have no interest in EQN.
Even without PVP.
That's another way, since you asked.
They have an extremely PVE heavy sandbox, it's called Free Realms. A PVE sandbox is purely about building stuff. That gear collection is just a gear treadmill which Smedley said it won't have. What you are describing is something that your average PVE player would finish really quickly and then leave because they are bored. The only way something like that would viable is if it is Dark Souls difficult and there is permanent gear loss.
Plus they already have a PVE sandbox that involves action combat and collecting things to gain abilities, it's called Dragon's Prophet.
Free Realms I would kind of give you as being sandbox, although it's aimed at kids. Dragon's Prophet a sandbox?? That's laughable.
Well... considering that EQ pretty much has the people with a hardon for what is called "PVE sandbox" and EQ 2 has the people with a mind for themepark grind... if they're going for new people... there's only really one way they can go for a completely untapped market...
While I don't doubt this possibility, especially based on some tweets by Smed, all I can really say is "great, another PvP focused sandbox game...."
Not only that but why would anybody interested in a sandbox game play EQ? There's nothing really sandboxy about Everquest, so a sandbox PVE game wouldn't affect EQ.
A PVE sandbox would cannibalize Free Realms and their recently released Dragon's Prophet.
Do you really believe what you're typing here? Cannibalize FREE REALMS, and DRAGON'S PROPHET. ?????
SOE said it's so different from any other MMO out there that they had to be extra quiet to ensure that they got a lead on their competition before the reveal.
Given that, why "forced open PVP" comes to mind for so many people, I have no idea. That is not an original concept and generally a less popular one to boot.
I also have no idea why the PvP crowd seem so offended by the idea of PvP servers and PvE servers separately. Do they just get off on killing people who don't want to/aren't prepared to fight?
I really don't think SoE is going to shoot themselves in the foot, but we'll know soon enough!
I think EQN will be accessible but deep. This was actually what I wanted GW2 to be, but to me they went extra casual. ANet pretty much confirmed with the much needed changes they are making by years end.
The problem with current MMOs is they follow a limited, linear, fast-paced questing model (with no real effort for the quests) and then try to expand during end game which end up leaving no real option for growth. Is it fun? For a little bit yes, but I cant see someone playing something like that for years - which to me is a 'pillar' or main staple of an MMO.
Im thinking (and hoping) EQN goes back to that model but updated with todays standards. Node sharing, easy grouping, etc. Is the world persistent or instanced? I don't really care. My main staple is worthy exploration. I just dont want to find something for the sake of finding it... I want it to mean something in the context of the game.
I dont care if its class restricted or open as long as I can build my character the way I want. I also hope they throw out balance because I think thats a huge deterrent to unique character creation. This notion of making every character being perfectly equal so every has a fair chance is rediculous. But I also understand the impact of the Internet. Within hours (being general here) there will be posts of how to make 'the best' character and I just think thats wrong, but also dont see how you can stop it.
I also hope for casual complexity. Something that looks simple and intuitive but under the covers reveals a deep system.
What makes a MMO fun to me always was the fact that I couldnt predict what another player would do essentially making the game unique and have a soul. I hope EQN can bring that back.
I find this article from Guthrie at Massively really interesting. He actually saw the game, and is basically telling us EQN will be very different from EQ1 and EQ2 and will probably attract a new playerbase instead of cannibalizing the older games. This is significant because he's saying he can't really spoil it, but is giving us hints by repeating stuff that was said by SOE devs in the past.
"What EQN is not
Although it's third in line in the EQ franchise, EverQuest Next is not a sequel. Both Smedley and Georgeson have spoken on multiple occasions about how the EQN versions that were originally turning out more like EQ 2.5 or EQ IIIwere scrapped. Even the title itself, EverQuest Next, draws focus away from the game's being just a rehash of its predecessors. In the aforementioned PAX East interview, Georgeson teased us with the line that EverQuest Next is "an MMO you've never played before" -- that it's "a completely different critter."
In that light, will this next version sound the death knell for EQ and EQII? Even before EQN's big shreenshot-blowing-up reveal at the convention, Georgeson addressed this concern by assuring that "EQN is not being designed to replace those games." And when I talked with him at SOE Live 2012, he reaffirmed that stance, pointing out that the newest sibling to the franchise is such a different game and fans are so loyal to their respective games that there is little worry of a mass migration. That certainly makes sense: If you've been a player of EverQuest for the almost 15 years or EverQuest II for nearly nine, would you seriously just drop everything and switch? It's not as likely. Besides, it stands to reason that SOE wouldn't want to cannibalize its other games for customers and instead will look at reaching out and grabbing new ones.
And finally, what it's not is here yet! It's going to be a long two weeks until we can all hear and see what's coming. So until then, let's let your speculations fly!"
So basically from a business standpoint they're aiming for a new share of the market as opposed to just migrating their existing playerbase to a new game.
In what ways do you see this appealing to a whole other group of players and not digging into the populations of EQ1 and EQ2?
For me, it's making the game a TRUE sandbox with as few restrictions on play as possible. It won't appeal as much to the folks who prefer something more scripted and predictable because other players will have so much control over the game.
I want to respond to the parts I highlighted in Green as well as the whole article.
I read the whole thing yes, but what I am seeing in the hints is NOT a PvP MMO or any kind of MMO we have seen before. This article and the statements made give me more pause for concern about this genre than anything I have seen written in well over years. Open world PvP has been done. Sandbox PvP and Sandbox PvE has been done. Themepark is what Blizzard really made and so now that has been done too. Most of the guesses in this thread I think are wrong.
"Georgeson teased us with the line that EverQuest Next is "an MMO you've never played before" -- that it's "a completely different critter."... THIS is exactly what Blizzard did with WoW... they went after a different Player base instead of conforming to the existing. Most here see nothing wrong with WoW... but you weren't on "the receiving end" like some of old MMO fans.
I read the article. If the info is legit then I have a bad feeling EQN is going to be another pink elephant in the room. Some will think this is great, but I know for some it will be regretful. The last one sat on quite a few of us and it still stings.
Unfortunately now it's your turn to find out what's it like to see your favorite hobby turned inside out slowly. Now you will understand. Give it a year or so and you too will all be bitter vets wondering where these "Noobs" came from and why are they screwing up everything in MMOs.
New Players from outside the Genre are the LAST thing MMOs need, from this Player's point of view. It was a mess the last time.
...
tl;dr: Here is the second WoW, with the good and especially the bad that goes with it. You've been warned.
SOE said it's so different from any other MMO out there that they had to be extra quiet to ensure that they got a lead on their competition before the reveal.
Given that, why "forced open PVP" comes to mind for so many people, I have no idea. That is not an original concept and generally a less popular one to boot.
I also have no idea why the PvP crowd seem so offended by the idea of PvP servers and PvE servers separately. Do they just get off on killing people who don't want to/aren't prepared to fight?
I really don't think SoE is going to shoot themselves in the foot, but we'll know soon enough!
Georgeson also said a lot of the components of the game are already "out there" (in other MMOs) but that nobody has put them together in the form they're going to with EQN.
I'm not calling it "forced open PVP" because virtually everyone who plays the FREE game will know what they're getting themselves into. But I do believe open-world PVP will be one of the components that already exists in MMOs that they're putting together in a combination of features that blows everyone away.
By the way - it's not that I'm offended by the idea of separate servers. It's that I think the world is ready for a triple-A sandbox MMO built from the ground up with PVP in mind, and I don't think that can be achieved if it's just "one or two PVP servers" because then the game would be broken for the PVE-only people. Maybe I'm wrong though and SOE has come up with some brilliant way of doing a great job on both fronts.
Originally posted by Mendel
Originally posted by Bidwood
Besides, it stands to reason that SOE wouldn't want to cannibalize its other games for customers and instead will look at reaching out and grabbing new ones.
An interesting post.
The statement above and I have some differences. To me, there are a relatively finite number of Dedicated MMORPG players. Dedicated players are logging in 5 or more times a week and have probably been playing for years. EQ 1 brought in a first wave, WoW brought in a second wave. Everyone in this category who wants to play an MMORPG is already in the market and playing one game or another. Players move around when new games come along, spreading ourselves thinner and thinner across the genre. So, there's a limited number of dedicated MMORPG gamers out there, those that are only interested in playing MMORPGs.
Then there are, of course, casual players who come and go. They might be playing an MMORPG today, and into a FPS on the net, or devoting their time to RTS games with friends. They might even be 'hard-core' gamers, but are 'casual' when it comes to any MMORPG. These players are probably a much larger segment of the gaming marketplace, as these include all games including only those with only a passing interest in MMORPGs.
Finally there are non-gamers. They currently play no games, but might under the right circumstances.
I don't know if Bidwood's speculation is correct here. The second market, which appears to be the most untapped for MMORPGs, also seems to be an unstable financial source for a business in my estimation. These type of players will move from game to game, not worrying about loyalty to any one game. They might play 3 nights a week, but only 1 night of the 3 will be in an MMORPG.
If Bidwood is correct, and Sony has a scheme to tap into this market, I could see almost anything coming out as EQN -- everything from a clever marketing strategy targeting these players, or a hybrid game style like a FPS-MMO or RTS-MMO. I'd expect a heavy dose of RP elements (xp, levels, etc) to influence those, but I'd almost immediately wonder if it would be accurate to call such a game an MMORPG, at least as we currently know it.
I don't know a particular marketing strategy that will entice either of the last two groups. Maybe Sony has hit on something new. Could they have found some element to grow the fundamental core of MMORPG gamers? I don't know.
It'll be exciting to find out, though.
I'm not sure we can zero in on what the market is, but maybe it's safer to say what it's not... I think it's *not* necessarily the people who are really into the mainstream MMOs with loot/grind progression, themepark design, bloated UI and tab-target click and wait combat, with an affinity for fighting scripted enemies and a phobia for unplanned PVP.
If I had to guess, I'd see the market as... the people who embrace the "pure" sandbox experience with no artificial limitations/barriers on what you can do. Yes, this applies to every facet of the game but I'm thinking of open-world PVP when I say it. (Is anyone surprised?). I also see part of the market as console gamers who haven't necessarily been following the MMO genre. They will be blown away at the game and won't come with PVP baggage because tonnes of the multiplayer games on Playstation are competitive.
Smedley himself said the console market is profitable despite the limited hardware of the current gen, and it will be a lot bigger next gen. 70 per cent of DCUO's players are on PS3...
Originally posted by bcbully
aaaand they just made one of the best PvP games on the market, Planetside 2. SOE largest grosser. EQN will be using the same engine.
The writing is on the wall.
I didn't realize Planetside 2 was that successful. But am not surprised. You don't have to convince me that there's a highly profitable market for a PVP game.
Originally posted by Gardavsshade
Originally posted by Bidwood
I find this article from Guthrie at Massively really interesting. He actually saw the game, and is basically telling us EQN will be very different from EQ1 and EQ2 and will probably attract a new playerbase instead of cannibalizing the older games. This is significant because he's saying he can't really spoil it, but is giving us hints by repeating stuff that was said by SOE devs in the past.
"What EQN is not
Although it's third in line in the EQ franchise, EverQuest Next is not a sequel. Both Smedley and Georgeson have spoken on multiple occasions about how the EQN versions that were originally turning out more like EQ 2.5 or EQ IIIwere scrapped. Even the title itself, EverQuest Next, draws focus away from the game's being just a rehash of its predecessors. In the aforementioned PAX East interview, Georgeson teased us with the line that EverQuest Next is "an MMO you've never played before" -- that it's "a completely different critter."
In that light, will this next version sound the death knell for EQ and EQII? Even before EQN's big shreenshot-blowing-up reveal at the convention, Georgeson addressed this concern by assuring that "EQN is not being designed to replace those games." And when I talked with him at SOE Live 2012, he reaffirmed that stance, pointing out that the newest sibling to the franchise is such a different game and fans are so loyal to their respective games that there is little worry of a mass migration. That certainly makes sense: If you've been a player of EverQuest for the almost 15 years or EverQuest II for nearly nine, would you seriously just drop everything and switch? It's not as likely. Besides, it stands to reason that SOE wouldn't want to cannibalize its other games for customers and instead will look at reaching out and grabbing new ones.
And finally, what it's not is here yet! It's going to be a long two weeks until we can all hear and see what's coming. So until then, let's let your speculations fly!"
So basically from a business standpoint they're aiming for a new share of the market as opposed to just migrating their existing playerbase to a new game.
In what ways do you see this appealing to a whole other group of players and not digging into the populations of EQ1 and EQ2?
For me, it's making the game a TRUE sandbox with as few restrictions on play as possible. It won't appeal as much to the folks who prefer something more scripted and predictable because other players will have so much control over the game.
I want to respond to the parts I highlighted in Green as well as the whole article.
I read the whole thing yes, but what I am seeing in the hints is NOT a PvP MMO or any kind of MMO we have seen before. This article and the statements made give me more pause for concern about this genre than anything I have seen written in well over years. Open world PvP has been done. Sandbox PvP and Sandbox PvE has been done. Themepark is what Blizzard really made and so now that has been done too. Most of the guesses in this thread I think are wrong.
"Georgeson teased us with the line that EverQuest Next is "an MMO you've never played before" -- that it's "a completely different critter."... THIS is exactly what Blizzard did with WoW... they went after a different Player base instead of conforming to the existing. Most here see nothing wrong with WoW... but you weren't on "the receiving end" like some of old MMO fans.
I read the article. If the info is legit then I have a bad feeling EQN is going to be another pink elephant in the room. Some will think this is great, but I know for some it will be regretful. The last one sat on quite a few of us and it still stings.
Unfortunately now it's your turn to find out what's it like to see your favorite hobby turned inside out slowly. Now you will understand. Give it a year or so and you too will all be bitter vets wondering where these "Noobs" came from and why are they screwing up everything in MMOs.
New Players from outside the Genre are the LAST thing MMOs need, from this Player's point of view. It was a mess the last time.
...
tl;dr: Here is the second WoW, with the good and especially the bad that goes with it. You've been warned.
The game is almost certainly going to be on Playstation 4, so I'd say get ready for a massive influx of fresh blood even if the game isn't that different.
aaaand they just made one of the best PvP games on the market, Planetside 2. SOE largest grosser. EQN will be using the same engine.
The writing is on the wall.
I have always wondered why people use this saying, after all most of the ""writing"" I have seen on walls has been: illegible, inaccurate,or obscene or a combination of these.
As for the argument about PS2 being a success ( I really wonder about the highest grossing game though) if you have a new successful product in a market segment (online PvP games) why would you create a second product to compete in the same space? I would think that the success of PS2 is actually an argument against EQ NEXT being a PvP game.
aaaand they just made one of the best PvP games on the market, Planetside 2. SOE largest grosser. EQN will be using the same engine.
The writing is on the wall.
I have always wondered why people use this saying, after all most of the ""writing"" I have seen on walls has been: illegible, inaccurate,or obscene or a combination of these.
As for the argument about PS2 being a success ( I really wonder about the highest grossing game though) if you have a new successful product in a market segment (online PvP games) why would you create a second product to compete in the same space? I would think that the success of PS2 is actually an argument against EQ NEXT being a PvP game.
I think what he's getting at is that PVP is profitable in F2P microtransactions. But not everyone likes the futuristic shooter setting. There are potentially a ton of players who want their PVP with swords, magic, crafting, high fantasy, etc. that SOE could profit from using the F2P PVP microtransaction model.
So basically from a business standpoint they're aiming for a new share of the market as opposed to just migrating their existing playerbase to a new game.
In what ways do you see this appealing to a whole other group of players and not digging into the populations of EQ1 and EQ2?
For me, it's making the game a TRUE sandbox with as few restrictions on play as possible. It won't appeal as much to the folks who prefer something more scripted and predictable because other players will have so much control over the game.
i'll give you a +2 for optimism.
i see a larger share of potential consumers in the mobile market than i do in the current iteration of the mmo market.
"There are at least two kinds of games. One could be called finite, the other infinite. A finite game is played for the purpose of winning, an infinite game for the purpose of continuing play." Finite and Infinite Games, James Carse
aaaand they just made one of the best PvP games on the market, Planetside 2. SOE largest grosser. EQN will be using the same engine.
The writing is on the wall.
I have always wondered why people use this saying, after all most of the ""writing"" I have seen on walls has been: illegible, inaccurate,or obscene or a combination of these.
As for the argument about PS2 being a success ( I really wonder about the highest grossing game though) if you have a new successful product in a market segment (online PvP games) why would you create a second product to compete in the same space? I would think that the success of PS2 is actually an argument against EQ NEXT being a PvP game.
I think what he's getting at is that PVP is profitable in F2P microtransactions. But not everyone likes the futuristic shooter setting. There are potentially a ton of players who want their PVP with swords, magic, crafting, high fantasy, etc. that SOE could profit from using the F2P PVP microtransaction model.
Well SOE has a ton of data about player habits over the last 15 years, also they have been conducting in game polls and presumably other research so we will soon find out what their conclusions about PvP in a fantasy setting are.
My own guess based on observing players in MMORPGs like EQ, EQ2, Rift and WoW is that there are more than double the number of PvE players than there are PvP players. So my guess, as you no doubt know by now, is that EQ NEXT will be a PvE game with a side-dish of PvP.
I also believe that the original article that the OP refers to is wrong about SOE's internal estimate of how many EQ/EQ2 players will shift to their new game. While they will keep EQ and EQ2 going for as long as they make good money out of them they know that they are at the end of their lives and need to provide a place for these customers to go when they move on from their existing games. No they do not want to "cannibalize" the existing player base per se, but they definitely do not want them moving to a non-SOE game.
Also they will want to pick up as many former customers as possible.
So basically from a business standpoint they're aiming for a new share of the market as opposed to just migrating their existing playerbase to a new game.
In what ways do you see this appealing to a whole other group of players and not digging into the populations of EQ1 and EQ2?
For me, it's making the game a TRUE sandbox with as few restrictions on play as possible. It won't appeal as much to the folks who prefer something more scripted and predictable because other players will have so much control over the game.
i'll give you a +2 for optimism.
i see a larger share of potential consumers in the mobile market than i do in the current iteration of the mmo market.
Mobile is already huge and will continue to grow. SOE should definitely look for compelling ways to integrate mobile with the experience... at least parts of the game like managing your guild, making trade deals, etc. Controlling pets seems like a distinct possibility after seeing tablet-controlled drones in The Division.
aaaand they just made one of the best PvP games on the market, Planetside 2. SOE largest grosser. EQN will be using the same engine.
The writing is on the wall.
I have always wondered why people use this saying, after all most of the ""writing"" I have seen on walls has been: illegible, inaccurate,or obscene or a combination of these.
As for the argument about PS2 being a success ( I really wonder about the highest grossing game though) if you have a new successful product in a market segment (online PvP games) why would you create a second product to compete in the same space? I would think that the success of PS2 is actually an argument against EQ NEXT being a PvP game.
I think what he's getting at is that PVP is profitable in F2P microtransactions. But not everyone likes the futuristic shooter setting. There are potentially a ton of players who want their PVP with swords, magic, crafting, high fantasy, etc. that SOE could profit from using the F2P PVP microtransaction model.
Well SOE has a ton of data about player habits over the last 15 years, also they have been conducting in game polls and presumably other research so we will soon find out what their conclusions about PvP in a fantasy setting are.
My own guess based on observing players in MMORPGs like EQ, EQ2, Rift and WoW is that there are more than double the number of PvE players than there are PvP players. So my guess, as you no doubt know by now, is that EQ NEXT will be a PvE game with a side-dish of PvP.
I also believe that the original article that the OP refers to is wrong about SOE's internal estimate of how many EQ/EQ2 players will shift to their new game. While they will keep EQ and EQ2 going for as long as they make good money out of them they know that they are at the end of their lives and need to provide a place for these customers to go when they move on from their existing games. No they do not want to "cannibalize" the existing player base per se, but they definitely do not want them moving to a non-SOE game.
Also they will want to pick up as many former customers as possible.
under normal circumstances i would agree with that statement. the problem is that he's actually seen the end product, or something near like it. which means, to me at least, that the author is dropping hints.
"There are at least two kinds of games. One could be called finite, the other infinite. A finite game is played for the purpose of winning, an infinite game for the purpose of continuing play." Finite and Infinite Games, James Carse
So basically from a business standpoint they're aiming for a new share of the market as opposed to just migrating their existing playerbase to a new game.
In what ways do you see this appealing to a whole other group of players and not digging into the populations of EQ1 and EQ2?
For me, it's making the game a TRUE sandbox with as few restrictions on play as possible. It won't appeal as much to the folks who prefer something more scripted and predictable because other players will have so much control over the game.
i'll give you a +2 for optimism.
i see a larger share of potential consumers in the mobile market than i do in the current iteration of the mmo market.
Mobile is already huge and will continue to grow. SOE should definitely look for compelling ways to integrate mobile with the experience... at least parts of the game like managing your guild, making trade deals, etc. Controlling pets seems like a distinct possibility after seeing tablet-controlled drones in The Division.
gahd i wana play that game so bad.
"There are at least two kinds of games. One could be called finite, the other infinite. A finite game is played for the purpose of winning, an infinite game for the purpose of continuing play." Finite and Infinite Games, James Carse
aaaand they just made one of the best PvP games on the market, Planetside 2. SOE largest grosser. EQN will be using the same engine.
The writing is on the wall.
I have always wondered why people use this saying, after all most of the ""writing"" I have seen on walls has been: illegible, inaccurate,or obscene or a combination of these.
As for the argument about PS2 being a success ( I really wonder about the highest grossing game though) if you have a new successful product in a market segment (online PvP games) why would you create a second product to compete in the same space? I would think that the success of PS2 is actually an argument against EQ NEXT being a PvP game.
I think what he's getting at is that PVP is profitable in F2P microtransactions. But not everyone likes the futuristic shooter setting. There are potentially a ton of players who want their PVP with swords, magic, crafting, high fantasy, etc. that SOE could profit from using the F2P PVP microtransaction model.
Well SOE has a ton of data about player habits over the last 15 years, also they have been conducting in game polls and presumably other research so we will soon find out what their conclusions about PvP in a fantasy setting are.
My own guess based on observing players in MMORPGs like EQ, EQ2, Rift and WoW is that there are more than double the number of PvE players than there are PvP players. So my guess, as you no doubt know by now, is that EQ NEXT will be a PvE game with a side-dish of PvP.
I also believe that the original article that the OP refers to is wrong about SOE's internal estimate of how many EQ/EQ2 players will shift to their new game. While they will keep EQ and EQ2 going for as long as they make good money out of them they know that they are at the end of their lives and need to provide a place for these customers to go when they move on from their existing games. No they do not want to "cannibalize" the existing player base per se, but they definitely do not want them moving to a non-SOE game.
Also they will want to pick up as many former customers as possible.
You make a really good point about all the data they have from doing so many games over the years. Whatever we get on Aug. 2, I bet it's based on really thoughtful analysis and will achieve what it sets out to.
I disagree that EQ1 and EQ2 are end of life. Georgeson said they have had incredibly stable populations for years now and he doesn't see a reason why they'd ever end. Of course, he's exaggerating about them never ending, but he seems to believe the people who fell in love with them stuck around and aren't going anywhere any time soon.
Im sorry but there is what, 150k EQ1 players, and roughly the same eq2 players? This argument that the game wont contain elements of both games because they "dont want to cannibalize" those players is a hulking load of shit. Frankly its just more open world pvp ffa douchery trying to justify in their minds why this game will be ffa open world pvp, blah blah blah.
I'm literally at the point that i want this game to be an ultra carebear handholding super themepark hug a thon just so it will crush all these PVP'er posters fragile little psyches.
So sick of seeing thread after thread of how Georgeson was wearing a blue shirt when he said X, and he was also wearing a blue shirt when he said Y, so CLEARLY that means EQN will be open world pvp.
"The surest way to corrupt a youth is to instruct him to hold in higher esteem those who think alike than those who think differently."
Im sorry but there is what, 150k EQ1 players, and roughly the same eq2 players? This argument that the game wont contain elements of both games because they "dont want to cannibalize" those players is a hulking load of shit. Frankly its just more open world pvp ffa douchery trying to justify in their minds why this game will be ffa open world pvp, blah blah blah.
I'm literally at the point that i want this game to be an ultra carebear handholding super themepark hug a thon just so it will crush all these PVP'er posters fragile little psyches.
So sick of seeing thread after thread of how Georgeson was wearing a blue shirt when he said X, and he was also wearing a blue shirt when he said Y, so CLEARLY that means EQN will be open world pvp.
I find it ironic that you want to crush the psyches of people who are typically villainized for griefing... but anyway.
You misrepresented the argument. No one ever said that EQN "wont contain elements of both games". The argument is that EQN will be different enough that they don't expect the 300k EQ1 and EQ2 players to jump ship. It's better to keep profiting from them and grab even more players with something different. (Nice try though.)
And if you're tired of this kind of thread, there's also the option of not reading six more pages of it.
Im sorry but there is what, 150k EQ1 players, and roughly the same eq2 players? This argument that the game wont contain elements of both games because they "dont want to cannibalize" those players is a hulking load of shit. Frankly its just more open world pvp ffa douchery trying to justify in their minds why this game will be ffa open world pvp, blah blah blah.
I'm literally at the point that i want this game to be an ultra carebear handholding super themepark hug a thon just so it will crush all these PVP'er posters fragile little psyches.
So sick of seeing thread after thread of how Georgeson was wearing a blue shirt when he said X, and he was also wearing a blue shirt when he said Y, so CLEARLY that means EQN will be open world pvp.
I find it ironic that you want to crush the psyches of people who are typically villainized for griefing... but anyway.
You misrepresented the argument. No one ever said that EQN "wont contain elements of both games". The argument is that EQN will be different enough that they don't expect the 300k EQ1 and EQ2 players to jump ship. It's better to keep profiting from them and grab even more players with something different. (Nice try though.)
And if you're tired of this kind of thread, there's also the option of not reading an eight-pager...
Im sorry but there is what, 150k EQ1 players, and roughly the same eq2 players? This argument that the game wont contain elements of both games because they "dont want to cannibalize" those players is a hulking load of shit. Frankly its just more open world pvp ffa douchery trying to justify in their minds why this game will be ffa open world pvp, blah blah blah.
I'm literally at the point that i want this game to be an ultra carebear handholding super themepark hug a thon just so it will crush all these PVP'er posters fragile little psyches.
So sick of seeing thread after thread of how Georgeson was wearing a blue shirt when he said X, and he was also wearing a blue shirt when he said Y, so CLEARLY that means EQN will be open world pvp.
I find it ironic that you want to crush the psyches of people who are typically villainized for griefing... but anyway.
You misrepresented the argument. No one ever said that EQN "wont contain elements of both games". The argument is that EQN will be different enough that they don't expect the 300k EQ1 and EQ2 players to jump ship. It's better to keep profiting from them and grab even more players with something different. (Nice try though.)
And if you're tired of this kind of thread, there's also the option of not reading six more pages of it.
Well, be that as it may. I did read the original post and perhaps i misread but the way i read it was "they dont want to cannibalize, these games are themeparkey, etc, so that means the only option left is open world pvp..."
Apologies if im wrong.
As to your point about griefers, griefers are in essence bullies in mmos, and everyone knows bullies are actually cowards.
As far as the option of not reading. You are again correct, the problem arises that i work a late night shift in a call center which tends to get pretty slow sunday nights ;-). Since my work internet blocks pretty much everything i normally would like to read about/check out on the internet (guns, youtube, etc) I am left with catching up on the news, catching up on pcgamer news, and anandtech news/articles. After that you lucky lads get me for the rest of the night.
But seriously. The threads are just getting so insane. Its just pure numbers. SOE is not going to go after a market that encompasses at best 10% of the existing MMO playerbase. Anybody who thinks EQN is going to be an open world PVP ffa game ala darkfall or early UO, shadowbane, etc, is smoking large amounts of narcotic drugs.
"The surest way to corrupt a youth is to instruct him to hold in higher esteem those who think alike than those who think differently."
Comments
ok I get what you're saying.
Free Realms I would kind of give you as being sandbox, although it's aimed at kids. Dragon's Prophet a sandbox?? That's laughable.
aaaand they just made one of the best PvP games on the market, Planetside 2. SOE largest grosser. EQN will be using the same engine.
The writing is on the wall.
Do you really believe what you're typing here? Cannibalize FREE REALMS, and DRAGON'S PROPHET. ?????
SOE said it's so different from any other MMO out there that they had to be extra quiet to ensure that they got a lead on their competition before the reveal.
Given that, why "forced open PVP" comes to mind for so many people, I have no idea. That is not an original concept and generally a less popular one to boot.
I also have no idea why the PvP crowd seem so offended by the idea of PvP servers and PvE servers separately. Do they just get off on killing people who don't want to/aren't prepared to fight?
I really don't think SoE is going to shoot themselves in the foot, but we'll know soon enough!
I think EQN will be accessible but deep. This was actually what I wanted GW2 to be, but to me they went extra casual. ANet pretty much confirmed with the much needed changes they are making by years end.
The problem with current MMOs is they follow a limited, linear, fast-paced questing model (with no real effort for the quests) and then try to expand during end game which end up leaving no real option for growth. Is it fun? For a little bit yes, but I cant see someone playing something like that for years - which to me is a 'pillar' or main staple of an MMO.
Im thinking (and hoping) EQN goes back to that model but updated with todays standards. Node sharing, easy grouping, etc. Is the world persistent or instanced? I don't really care. My main staple is worthy exploration. I just dont want to find something for the sake of finding it... I want it to mean something in the context of the game.
I dont care if its class restricted or open as long as I can build my character the way I want. I also hope they throw out balance because I think thats a huge deterrent to unique character creation. This notion of making every character being perfectly equal so every has a fair chance is rediculous. But I also understand the impact of the Internet. Within hours (being general here) there will be posts of how to make 'the best' character and I just think thats wrong, but also dont see how you can stop it.
I also hope for casual complexity. Something that looks simple and intuitive but under the covers reveals a deep system.
What makes a MMO fun to me always was the fact that I couldnt predict what another player would do essentially making the game unique and have a soul. I hope EQN can bring that back.
Cant wait to see the reveal.
I want to respond to the parts I highlighted in Green as well as the whole article.
I read the whole thing yes, but what I am seeing in the hints is NOT a PvP MMO or any kind of MMO we have seen before. This article and the statements made give me more pause for concern about this genre than anything I have seen written in well over years. Open world PvP has been done. Sandbox PvP and Sandbox PvE has been done. Themepark is what Blizzard really made and so now that has been done too. Most of the guesses in this thread I think are wrong.
"Georgeson teased us with the line that EverQuest Next is "an MMO you've never played before" -- that it's "a completely different critter."... THIS is exactly what Blizzard did with WoW... they went after a different Player base instead of conforming to the existing. Most here see nothing wrong with WoW... but you weren't on "the receiving end" like some of old MMO fans.
I read the article. If the info is legit then I have a bad feeling EQN is going to be another pink elephant in the room. Some will think this is great, but I know for some it will be regretful. The last one sat on quite a few of us and it still stings.
Unfortunately now it's your turn to find out what's it like to see your favorite hobby turned inside out slowly. Now you will understand. Give it a year or so and you too will all be bitter vets wondering where these "Noobs" came from and why are they screwing up everything in MMOs.
New Players from outside the Genre are the LAST thing MMOs need, from this Player's point of view. It was a mess the last time.
...
tl;dr: Here is the second WoW, with the good and especially the bad that goes with it. You've been warned.
Making Ultima Online 2 but calling it Everquest Next is not what they are doing...
Everyone's fan nerdgasm wet dream is that they are making SWG 2 - but in EQ.
Will it happen?
We'll see, but I have zero faith in Smed.
Georgeson also said a lot of the components of the game are already "out there" (in other MMOs) but that nobody has put them together in the form they're going to with EQN.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_detailpage&v=wVIIIZ6ETtY&list=PLSCa57dkQP45BjjPLXtBf2_cbCjCFmyTS#t=38s
I'm not calling it "forced open PVP" because virtually everyone who plays the FREE game will know what they're getting themselves into. But I do believe open-world PVP will be one of the components that already exists in MMOs that they're putting together in a combination of features that blows everyone away.
By the way - it's not that I'm offended by the idea of separate servers. It's that I think the world is ready for a triple-A sandbox MMO built from the ground up with PVP in mind, and I don't think that can be achieved if it's just "one or two PVP servers" because then the game would be broken for the PVE-only people. Maybe I'm wrong though and SOE has come up with some brilliant way of doing a great job on both fronts.
I'm not sure we can zero in on what the market is, but maybe it's safer to say what it's not... I think it's *not* necessarily the people who are really into the mainstream MMOs with loot/grind progression, themepark design, bloated UI and tab-target click and wait combat, with an affinity for fighting scripted enemies and a phobia for unplanned PVP.
If I had to guess, I'd see the market as... the people who embrace the "pure" sandbox experience with no artificial limitations/barriers on what you can do. Yes, this applies to every facet of the game but I'm thinking of open-world PVP when I say it. (Is anyone surprised?). I also see part of the market as console gamers who haven't necessarily been following the MMO genre. They will be blown away at the game and won't come with PVP baggage because tonnes of the multiplayer games on Playstation are competitive.
Smedley himself said the console market is profitable despite the limited hardware of the current gen, and it will be a lot bigger next gen. 70 per cent of DCUO's players are on PS3...
I didn't realize Planetside 2 was that successful. But am not surprised. You don't have to convince me that there's a highly profitable market for a PVP game.
The game is almost certainly going to be on Playstation 4, so I'd say get ready for a massive influx of fresh blood even if the game isn't that different.
I have always wondered why people use this saying, after all most of the ""writing"" I have seen on walls has been: illegible, inaccurate,or obscene or a combination of these.
As for the argument about PS2 being a success ( I really wonder about the highest grossing game though) if you have a new successful product in a market segment (online PvP games) why would you create a second product to compete in the same space? I would think that the success of PS2 is actually an argument against EQ NEXT being a PvP game.
I think what he's getting at is that PVP is profitable in F2P microtransactions. But not everyone likes the futuristic shooter setting. There are potentially a ton of players who want their PVP with swords, magic, crafting, high fantasy, etc. that SOE could profit from using the F2P PVP microtransaction model.
i'll give you a +2 for optimism.
i see a larger share of potential consumers in the mobile market than i do in the current iteration of the mmo market.
"There are at least two kinds of games.
One could be called finite, the other infinite.
A finite game is played for the purpose of winning,
an infinite game for the purpose of continuing play."
Finite and Infinite Games, James Carse
Well SOE has a ton of data about player habits over the last 15 years, also they have been conducting in game polls and presumably other research so we will soon find out what their conclusions about PvP in a fantasy setting are.
My own guess based on observing players in MMORPGs like EQ, EQ2, Rift and WoW is that there are more than double the number of PvE players than there are PvP players. So my guess, as you no doubt know by now, is that EQ NEXT will be a PvE game with a side-dish of PvP.
I also believe that the original article that the OP refers to is wrong about SOE's internal estimate of how many EQ/EQ2 players will shift to their new game. While they will keep EQ and EQ2 going for as long as they make good money out of them they know that they are at the end of their lives and need to provide a place for these customers to go when they move on from their existing games. No they do not want to "cannibalize" the existing player base per se, but they definitely do not want them moving to a non-SOE game.
Also they will want to pick up as many former customers as possible.
Mobile is already huge and will continue to grow. SOE should definitely look for compelling ways to integrate mobile with the experience... at least parts of the game like managing your guild, making trade deals, etc. Controlling pets seems like a distinct possibility after seeing tablet-controlled drones in The Division.
under normal circumstances i would agree with that statement. the problem is that he's actually seen the end product, or something near like it. which means, to me at least, that the author is dropping hints.
"There are at least two kinds of games.
One could be called finite, the other infinite.
A finite game is played for the purpose of winning,
an infinite game for the purpose of continuing play."
Finite and Infinite Games, James Carse
gahd i wana play that game so bad.
"There are at least two kinds of games.
One could be called finite, the other infinite.
A finite game is played for the purpose of winning,
an infinite game for the purpose of continuing play."
Finite and Infinite Games, James Carse
You make a really good point about all the data they have from doing so many games over the years. Whatever we get on Aug. 2, I bet it's based on really thoughtful analysis and will achieve what it sets out to.
I disagree that EQ1 and EQ2 are end of life. Georgeson said they have had incredibly stable populations for years now and he doesn't see a reason why they'd ever end. Of course, he's exaggerating about them never ending, but he seems to believe the people who fell in love with them stuck around and aren't going anywhere any time soon.
Im sorry but there is what, 150k EQ1 players, and roughly the same eq2 players? This argument that the game wont contain elements of both games because they "dont want to cannibalize" those players is a hulking load of shit. Frankly its just more open world pvp ffa douchery trying to justify in their minds why this game will be ffa open world pvp, blah blah blah.
I'm literally at the point that i want this game to be an ultra carebear handholding super themepark hug a thon just so it will crush all these PVP'er posters fragile little psyches.
So sick of seeing thread after thread of how Georgeson was wearing a blue shirt when he said X, and he was also wearing a blue shirt when he said Y, so CLEARLY that means EQN will be open world pvp.
"The surest way to corrupt a youth is to instruct him to hold in higher esteem those who think alike than those who think differently."
- Friedrich Nietzsche
look at reaching out and grabbing new ones.
Better get a hold of your fans and shake them until they understand. It is not "old way or no way". It is not "modern gamers = the Enemy".
I find it ironic that you want to crush the psyches of people who are typically villainized for griefing... but anyway.
You misrepresented the argument. No one ever said that EQN "wont contain elements of both games". The argument is that EQN will be different enough that they don't expect the 300k EQ1 and EQ2 players to jump ship. It's better to keep profiting from them and grab even more players with something different. (Nice try though.)
And if you're tired of this kind of thread, there's also the option of not reading six more pages of it.
Well, be that as it may. I did read the original post and perhaps i misread but the way i read it was "they dont want to cannibalize, these games are themeparkey, etc, so that means the only option left is open world pvp..."
Apologies if im wrong.
As to your point about griefers, griefers are in essence bullies in mmos, and everyone knows bullies are actually cowards.
As far as the option of not reading. You are again correct, the problem arises that i work a late night shift in a call center which tends to get pretty slow sunday nights ;-). Since my work internet blocks pretty much everything i normally would like to read about/check out on the internet (guns, youtube, etc) I am left with catching up on the news, catching up on pcgamer news, and anandtech news/articles. After that you lucky lads get me for the rest of the night.
But seriously. The threads are just getting so insane. Its just pure numbers. SOE is not going to go after a market that encompasses at best 10% of the existing MMO playerbase. Anybody who thinks EQN is going to be an open world PVP ffa game ala darkfall or early UO, shadowbane, etc, is smoking large amounts of narcotic drugs.
"The surest way to corrupt a youth is to instruct him to hold in higher esteem those who think alike than those who think differently."
- Friedrich Nietzsche
Making all EQN play open PvP would fall within the "not cannabilizing any other game" limits.