Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!

Fuzzy Avatars Solved! Please re-upload your avatar if it was fuzzy!

[Preview] EverQuest: A Series Spanning the MMO Ages

SBFordSBFord Associate Editor - News ManagerThe Land of AZPosts: 16,643MMORPG.COM Staff Uncommon

During SOE Live, developers from both EverQuest and EverQuest 2 were on hand to talk about their games and the upcoming expansions for each. In addition, new information was released about the so-called EverQuest Next. We've got a report straight out of SOE Live so keep reading!

Any time a list of genre-altering MMOs is made, it is nearly inevitable that the EverQuest series will make its appearance. With almost seventeen years of continuous development since the original game was planned, EverQuest and EverQuest 2 are perennial favorites of many players. With EverQuest Next looming on the distant horizon, it's clear that Sony Online Entertainment is vested in its flagship property.

Read more of Suzie Ford's EverQuest: A Series Spanning the MMO Ages.

image

Associate Editor: MMORPG.com
Follow me on Twitter: @MMORPGMom

image
«1

Comments

  • Dreamo84Dreamo84 Niagara Falls, NYPosts: 3,437Member Uncommon
    What if EQN is like a modern day or Sci-fi Norrath?! That would be weird...but I suppose even fantasy worlds would have to evolve eventually :-p

    image
  • ZekiahZekiah Aurora, COPosts: 2,499Member

    "Autonomous Brokering that allows players to buy things from anywhere in the world without having to run to another zone to get it. Items can even be delivered straight to inventories right where players are but that will also incur a delivery surcharge."

    Bad idea but not surprising.

    "Censorship is never over for those who have experienced it. It is a brand on the imagination that affects the individual who has suffered it, forever." - Noam Chomsky

  • Entris38Entris38 Somewhere, OHPosts: 323Member Uncommon

    The EQ2 information is a bit off on purchasing, CoE will be all in one, excluding AoD.

  • SkuzSkuz WorcesterPosts: 1,034Member Uncommon
    I thought AoD was remaining "out of the pack" as a # feature set expansion #, I recall seeing an official post to that effect.
  • RimmersmanRimmersman MonacoPosts: 885Member
    I am an EQ vet, i have had a sub with SOE since 2000. No mmo can ever come closew to the joy and feeling EQ gave me over a period of six years.
     

    image
  • LukainLukain WestmeadPosts: 593Member Uncommon

     

    Chains of Eternity is expected to officially launch on November 13th. Players prepurchasing the expansion will gain access to all previous content as well! ?

     

    Is this really the Case  as Dexella "Community Relations at SOE: stated on the forums that :

    Chains of Eternity will include Destiny of Veliousimage

    It won't include Age of Discovery.

     

     

  • AmarantharAmaranthar OhioPosts: 2,430Member Uncommon

    I didn't play EQ1 or EQ2. I want Sandbox, not Themepark, as an experience to play in.

    I have very little hope that EQN will really give us a Sandbox experience. I think it's all hype and bull, and I think the best they will offer is illusion and busted bubbles. But I'll watch and make a final determination when info is available to do so. If it does, I'll sing Smed's praises. Otherwise, I really can't say I'll be disappointed since I don't really expect much. It's not just Smed, it's the whole way of doing business in the industry. No faith in it at all.

    Once upon a time....

  • NadiaNadia Canonsburg, PAPosts: 11,866Member Uncommon

    EQ Rain of Fear will include all past expansions

    EQ2 Chains of Eternity will not include AOD

     

    EQ2 COE will give players 2 baubles allowing lvl 90 chars to reach 280 AA

    http://eq2wire.com/2012/10/20/280-aas-claim-item-with-expansion/

    EQ2 COE will also include tradeskill recipes for all of Tier 10

    http://massively.joystiq.com/2012/10/24/soe-live-2012-everquest-ii-interviews-highlight-focus-on-crafti/

     

    on EQNext, ZAM interview w Smed

    http://www.zam.com/story.html?story=30916

    You’ll be able to destroy, massive, massive parts of this world, almost all of it. You can light the forest on fire; we have ambition with this thing. We want it to be something where the world you log into, might not be the world you log into in five days.

    What you saw in WoW’s Cataclysm could take place because someone cast a spell that is powerful enough to do something major. We want it to be meaningful. And that’s what we’re building. It’s actually what we’ve built, because we’ve got this now. It just isn’t quite at the level where we’re OK [to reveal it to the public]. We have a story that we want to tell for the announcement of it, we want it that you’re seeing every aspect of the gameplay, we’re one aspect short of that until we’re ready to show, so we’re close now.”

  • darkhalf357xdarkhalf357x Brooklyn, NYPosts: 1,164Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by Zekiah

    "Autonomous Brokering that allows players to buy things from anywhere in the world without having to run to another zone to get it. Items can even be delivered straight to inventories right where players are but that will also incur a delivery surcharge."

    Bad idea but not surprising.

    Why?  I like this idea.  I dont like the fact that if I have a full bag I have to run all the way back to a merchant to sell.  Or if I want to buy something I have to run to the Bazaar in PoK.  This adds a much needed convenience at least for me.

    image
  • darkhalf357xdarkhalf357x Brooklyn, NYPosts: 1,164Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by Nadia

    EQ Rain of Fear will include all past expansions

    EQ2 Chains of Eternity will not include AOD

     

    EQ2 COE will give players 2 baubles allowing lvl 90 chars to reach 280 AA

    http://eq2wire.com/2012/10/20/280-aas-claim-item-with-expansion/

    EQ2 COE will also include tradeskill recipes for all of Tier 10

    http://massively.joystiq.com/2012/10/24/soe-live-2012-everquest-ii-interviews-highlight-focus-on-crafti/

     

    on EQNext, ZAM interview w Smed

    http://www.zam.com/story.html?story=30916

    You’ll be able to destroy, massive, massive parts of this world, almost all of it. You can light the forest on fire; we have ambition with this thing. We want it to be something where the world you log into, might not be the world you log into in five days.

    What you saw in WoW’s Cataclysm could take place because someone cast a spell that is powerful enough to do something major. We want it to be meaningful. And that’s what we’re building. It’s actually what we’ve built, because we’ve got this now. It just isn’t quite at the level where we’re OK [to reveal it to the public]. We have a story that we want to tell for the announcement of it, we want it that you’re seeing every aspect of the gameplay, we’re one aspect short of that until we’re ready to show, so we’re close now.”

     

    I like Smed is saying but I am questioning the result.  The problem with pure sandboxes is once you give people a toolbox to do whatever they want, they typically end up destroying everything.  The concern is, what happens to players who start playing 2-3 months after launch?  Do they only get to see the destruction from the prior players?  Doesn't add much incentive unless they give the ability to rebuilt.  If I see a burnt down forest I can to replant a new one.  So it could be interesting, very curious about implementation.

    image
  • darkhalf357xdarkhalf357x Brooklyn, NYPosts: 1,164Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by Amaranthar

    I didn't play EQ1 or EQ2. I want Sandbox, not Themepark, as an experience to play in.

    I have very little hope that EQN will really give us a Sandbox experience. I think it's all hype and bull, and I think the best they will offer is illusion and busted bubbles. But I'll watch and make a final determination when info is available to do so. If it does, I'll sing Smed's praises. Otherwise, I really can't say I'll be disappointed since I don't really expect much. It's not just Smed, it's the whole way of doing business in the industry. No faith in it at all.

     

    You should try EQ. Its free to play to try it out.  The later expansions have more themepark like elements, but is the farthest thing from a themepark in the context I believe you use above.  There is a trail or golden path you can follow but at anytime you can break away and literally do whatever you want.  You want to craft (all professions - they dont limit it to two) go ahead.  You want to go to another zone?  (there are hundreds and multiple ones at different levels) go ahead.  You are limited by where you know where to go and what to do.  Which used to be the fun of the game, but today with the internet and EQ websites you can look up every mystery and bypass the incentive to do it yourself.

    Wish there was an updated EQ to play, but only have EQN to think about.  Not convinced, but open to try it out to see how they changed it.

    Didnt particularly like the aesthetic of EQ2, though it is a good game as well.

    image
  • ext1ext1 south bend, INPosts: 98Member


    Originally posted by darkhalf357x
    Originally posted by Zekiah "Autonomous Brokering that allows players to buy things from anywhere in the world without having to run to another zone to get it. Items can even be delivered straight to inventories right where players are but that will also incur a delivery surcharge." Bad idea but not surprising.
    Why?  I like this idea.  I dont like the fact that if I have a full bag I have to run all the way back to a merchant to sell.  Or if I want to buy something I have to run to the Bazaar in PoK.  This adds a much needed convenience at least for me.


    Convenience turned MMORPGs into single player carnival games where "everyone's a winner!"

    image

  • darkhalf357xdarkhalf357x Brooklyn, NYPosts: 1,164Member Uncommon

    Some people go back to WoW when new MMOs are released. I go back to EQ.  I love its freedom and 'old school' challenging feel.  No hand holding (unless you want it), tons of content to go through, extensive lore, and a great friendly talkative community.

    Its been holding my interest longer than any other MMO.   Cant wait for rain of fire.

    image
  • thetimesthetimes Roseville, MIPosts: 49Member
    I never played EQ, but I'm looking forward to EQNext.
  • darkhalf357xdarkhalf357x Brooklyn, NYPosts: 1,164Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by ext1

     


    Originally posted by darkhalf357x

    Originally posted by Zekiah "Autonomous Brokering that allows players to buy things from anywhere in the world without having to run to another zone to get it. Items can even be delivered straight to inventories right where players are but that will also incur a delivery surcharge." Bad idea but not surprising.
    Why?  I like this idea.  I dont like the fact that if I have a full bag I have to run all the way back to a merchant to sell.  Or if I want to buy something I have to run to the Bazaar in PoK.  This adds a much needed convenience at least for me.

     


    Convenience turned MMORPGs into single player carnival games where "everyone's a winner!"

     

    I disagree. I think content turned MMORPGs into single player carnival games.  Leading me from quest to quest, waiting in line to do what the person did before me.  Using this convenience will not stop me from being an active member in my guild, or speaking with/helping out strangers I run across.

    Doing all that (unecessary) running around didnt make me more social.  It just made me more fustrated.  Convenience <> easy.

     

    image
  • AmarantharAmaranthar OhioPosts: 2,430Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by darkhalf357x
    Originally posted by Amaranthar

    I didn't play EQ1 or EQ2. I want Sandbox, not Themepark, as an experience to play in.

    I have very little hope that EQN will really give us a Sandbox experience. I think it's all hype and bull, and I think the best they will offer is illusion and busted bubbles. But I'll watch and make a final determination when info is available to do so. If it does, I'll sing Smed's praises. Otherwise, I really can't say I'll be disappointed since I don't really expect much. It's not just Smed, it's the whole way of doing business in the industry. No faith in it at all.

     

    You should try EQ. Its free to play to try it out.  The later expansions have more themepark like elements, but is the farthest thing from a themepark in the context I believe you use above.  There is a trail or golden path you can follow but at anytime you can break away and literally do whatever you want.  You want to craft (all professions - they dont limit it to two) go ahead.  You want to go to another zone?  (there are hundreds and multiple ones at different levels) go ahead.  You are limited by where you know where to go and what to do.  Which used to be the fun of the game, but today with the internet and EQ websites you can look up every mystery and bypass the incentive to do it yourself.

    Wish there was an updated EQ to play, but only have EQN to think about.  Not convinced, but open to try it out to see how they changed it.

    Didnt particularly like the aesthetic of EQ2, though it is a good game as well.

    With respects, you don't know what I mean by Sandbox. I'll explain, since I didn't before and left you in the dark on my comment.

    You see, I strongly believe that in a Sandbox game, you can go anywhere and play. I do expect that some areas should be much more difficult, and that newbies should not be able to survive most monster areas (as opposed to normal animal wilds). I do expect that a character that's half developed should need the help of more developed characters to survive the more dangerous areas. But I think it should not only be possible but common that they have this in their daily game play, in cooperation with guild mates or friends of any level. There's a huge social interaction in a worldly sense that's missing from these Themepark games.

    I feel this way because a game world does not feel accessible otherwise. Dividing a game world up into zones (or levelled content as in EQ's case) that are built for particular level ranges is exactly what I think a Themepark is all about. And that is most certainly what EQ was about.

    And that does not work for an immersive world. Sure, you can have immersion in other ways, and EQ was good at that sometimes. But as far as feeling like you were in a single world, rather than a game world that was chunked up with levels in mind to play through as in a game of controlled activity...no, EQ was not a Sandbox game.

    Once upon a time....

  • darkhalf357xdarkhalf357x Brooklyn, NYPosts: 1,164Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by Amaranthar
    Originally posted by darkhalf357x
    Originally posted by Amaranthar

    I didn't play EQ1 or EQ2. I want Sandbox, not Themepark, as an experience to play in.

    I have very little hope that EQN will really give us a Sandbox experience. I think it's all hype and bull, and I think the best they will offer is illusion and busted bubbles. But I'll watch and make a final determination when info is available to do so. If it does, I'll sing Smed's praises. Otherwise, I really can't say I'll be disappointed since I don't really expect much. It's not just Smed, it's the whole way of doing business in the industry. No faith in it at all.

     

    You should try EQ. Its free to play to try it out.  The later expansions have more themepark like elements, but is the farthest thing from a themepark in the context I believe you use above.  There is a trail or golden path you can follow but at anytime you can break away and literally do whatever you want.  You want to craft (all professions - they dont limit it to two) go ahead.  You want to go to another zone?  (there are hundreds and multiple ones at different levels) go ahead.  You are limited by where you know where to go and what to do.  Which used to be the fun of the game, but today with the internet and EQ websites you can look up every mystery and bypass the incentive to do it yourself.

    Wish there was an updated EQ to play, but only have EQN to think about.  Not convinced, but open to try it out to see how they changed it.

    Didnt particularly like the aesthetic of EQ2, though it is a good game as well.

    With respects, you don't know what I mean by Sandbox. I'll explain, since I didn't before and left you in the dark on my comment.

    You see, I strongly believe that in a Sandbox game, you can go anywhere and play. I do expect that some areas should be much more difficult, and that newbies should not be able to survive most monster areas (as opposed to normal animal wilds). I do expect that a character that's half developed should need the help of more developed characters to survive the more dangerous areas. But I think it should not only be possible but common that they have this in their daily game play, in cooperation with guild mates or friends of any level. There's a huge social interaction in a worldly sense that's missing from these Themepark games.

    I feel this way because a game world does not feel accessible otherwise. Dividing a game world up into zones (or levelled content as in EQ's case) that are built for particular level ranges is exactly what I think a Themepark is all about. And that is most certainly what EQ was about.

    And that does not work for an immersive world. Sure, you can have immersion in other ways, and EQ was good at that sometimes. But as far as feeling like you were in a single world, rather than a game world that was chunked up with levels in mind to play through as in a game of controlled activity...no, EQ was not a Sandbox game.

    I see.  Based on your reply I dont believe you will like EQN (an assumption).  It sounds like it will be too close to themepark for you to enjoy. Time will tell. True sandboxes as what you are looking for I would say check out XYSON.  Just heard they have a free trial but can't confirm.  

    Also interested in what sandbox games you are playing now.  I might check them out.

    image
  • AmarantharAmaranthar OhioPosts: 2,430Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by darkhalf357x
    Originally posted by ext1

     


    Originally posted by darkhalf357x

    Originally posted by Zekiah "Autonomous Brokering that allows players to buy things from anywhere in the world without having to run to another zone to get it. Items can even be delivered straight to inventories right where players are but that will also incur a delivery surcharge." Bad idea but not surprising.
    Why?  I like this idea.  I dont like the fact that if I have a full bag I have to run all the way back to a merchant to sell.  Or if I want to buy something I have to run to the Bazaar in PoK.  This adds a much needed convenience at least for me.

     


    Convenience turned MMORPGs into single player carnival games where "everyone's a winner!"

     

    I disagree. I think content turned MMORPGs into single player carnival games.  Leading me from quest to quest, waiting in line to do what the person did before me.  Using this convenience will not stop me from being an active member in my guild, or speaking with/helping out strangers I run across.

    Doing all that (unecessary) running around didnt make me more social.  It just made me more fustrated.  Convenience <> easy.

     

    I think you are missing the point. I take it you didn't play UO, and that game is still the classic example of the sort of "social" game play based not only on not having things conveniently wrapped up for the player, but also giving players the tools to do something about it...through game play.

    In UO, for example, there were no auction houses. But players could own houses, and they were able to set up their own auctions. Guilds did this since it was generally beyond a single player's ability (mostly due to time, but also handling things). Also, in UO players organized and set up "Trade Fairs". Events where craft players got together and sold and repaired to service other players. Customers got deals and low prices, were able to stock up, while the merchants made more money by volume. This is game play. Not "hack'n'slash game play, but game play for a wise range of player types...together. It adds to the overall game, feels more like a world, and gives depth in a wide range of ways to the entire game experience.

    The alternative, where games have gone today, gives convenience, but removes all the other game activity. This was social activity. It's almost entirely missing today. And the result is hardly nothing else outside of the hack'n'slash. And players for the most part rarely talk to others. (yeah, yeah, I know, there's a few people here who say they always talk and are very social, what with talking about their favorite music and rock bands and all that. image)

    Once upon a time....

  • AmarantharAmaranthar OhioPosts: 2,430Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by darkhalf357x
    Originally posted by Amaranthar
    Originally posted by darkhalf357x
    Originally posted by Amaranthar

    I didn't play EQ1 or EQ2. I want Sandbox, not Themepark, as an experience to play in.

    I have very little hope that EQN will really give us a Sandbox experience. I think it's all hype and bull, and I think the best they will offer is illusion and busted bubbles. But I'll watch and make a final determination when info is available to do so. If it does, I'll sing Smed's praises. Otherwise, I really can't say I'll be disappointed since I don't really expect much. It's not just Smed, it's the whole way of doing business in the industry. No faith in it at all.

     

    You should try EQ. Its free to play to try it out.  The later expansions have more themepark like elements, but is the farthest thing from a themepark in the context I believe you use above.  There is a trail or golden path you can follow but at anytime you can break away and literally do whatever you want.  You want to craft (all professions - they dont limit it to two) go ahead.  You want to go to another zone?  (there are hundreds and multiple ones at different levels) go ahead.  You are limited by where you know where to go and what to do.  Which used to be the fun of the game, but today with the internet and EQ websites you can look up every mystery and bypass the incentive to do it yourself.

    Wish there was an updated EQ to play, but only have EQN to think about.  Not convinced, but open to try it out to see how they changed it.

    Didnt particularly like the aesthetic of EQ2, though it is a good game as well.

    With respects, you don't know what I mean by Sandbox. I'll explain, since I didn't before and left you in the dark on my comment.

    You see, I strongly believe that in a Sandbox game, you can go anywhere and play. I do expect that some areas should be much more difficult, and that newbies should not be able to survive most monster areas (as opposed to normal animal wilds). I do expect that a character that's half developed should need the help of more developed characters to survive the more dangerous areas. But I think it should not only be possible but common that they have this in their daily game play, in cooperation with guild mates or friends of any level. There's a huge social interaction in a worldly sense that's missing from these Themepark games.

    I feel this way because a game world does not feel accessible otherwise. Dividing a game world up into zones (or levelled content as in EQ's case) that are built for particular level ranges is exactly what I think a Themepark is all about. And that is most certainly what EQ was about.

    And that does not work for an immersive world. Sure, you can have immersion in other ways, and EQ was good at that sometimes. But as far as feeling like you were in a single world, rather than a game world that was chunked up with levels in mind to play through as in a game of controlled activity...no, EQ was not a Sandbox game.

    I see.  Based on your reply I dont believe you will like EQN (an assumption).  It sounds like it will be too close to themepark for you to enjoy. Time will tell. True sandboxes as what you are looking for I would say check out XYSON.  Just heard they have a free trial but can't confirm.  

    Also interested in what sandbox games you are playing now.  I might check them out.

    I'm not playing anything now. There's nothing worth playing. Xyson (or however it;s spelled, that seems wrong somehow) is very lacking. I do, after all, want a good game.

    All Sandbox games have issues for me, enough that I'm not interested. Most have been "King of the Hill" PvP games and very much lacking in other content. Due to shoe string budgets.

    The only good Sandbox games to come out are these, with their current issues for me (and I think most other gamers too)...

    • UO- old, 2-D, lots of bad choices over the years, has tended to move farther towards Themepark design. Lot's of very good things added too, but overall too many issues that combine to vastly reduce my desire to play it. I played UO from the very first hour of release, and for about 10 years after. Left several times to try out a few other games, came back repeatedly, finally just gave up.
    • AC. The thing is, I never played it, so I'm not entirely sure if it's actually a good game. Just recently I found out that I made an assumption that it was "Themepark", at least sort of, but evidently was wrong. I think a lot of others like me made this same mistake. We didn't realize that all those levels moved more sideways than up. Their mistake was not getting this out well enough to us.
    • Eve. Space game, no boots-on-the-ground world. I strongly prefer Fantasy, but could accept a good Sci-Fi Sandbox.
    And no, I do not think SWG was a Sandbox game. It had those levels, and gear that progressed in levels just like other Themepark games, and content divided accordingly. It did have some Sandbox elements, but that does not make it a Sandbox game. Heck, EQ had some nice Sandbox elements from what I gather, mostly in the form of the world design (some book in a forest? things like that.)

    Once upon a time....

  • darkhalf357xdarkhalf357x Brooklyn, NYPosts: 1,164Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by Amaranthar
    Originally posted by darkhalf357x
    Originally posted by ext1

     


    Originally posted by darkhalf357x

    Originally posted by Zekiah "Autonomous Brokering that allows players to buy things from anywhere in the world without having to run to another zone to get it. Items can even be delivered straight to inventories right where players are but that will also incur a delivery surcharge." Bad idea but not surprising.
    Why?  I like this idea.  I dont like the fact that if I have a full bag I have to run all the way back to a merchant to sell.  Or if I want to buy something I have to run to the Bazaar in PoK.  This adds a much needed convenience at least for me.

     


    Convenience turned MMORPGs into single player carnival games where "everyone's a winner!"

     

    I disagree. I think content turned MMORPGs into single player carnival games.  Leading me from quest to quest, waiting in line to do what the person did before me.  Using this convenience will not stop me from being an active member in my guild, or speaking with/helping out strangers I run across.

    Doing all that (unecessary) running around didnt make me more social.  It just made me more fustrated.  Convenience <> easy.

     

    I think you are missing the point. I take it you didn't play UO, and that game is still the classic example of the sort of "social" game play based not only on not having things conveniently wrapped up for the player, but also giving players the tools to do something about it...through game play.

    In UO, for example, there were no auction houses. But players could own houses, and they were able to set up their own auctions. Guilds did this since it was generally beyond a single player's ability (mostly due to time, but also handling things). Also, in UO players organized and set up "Trade Fairs". Events where craft players got together and sold and repaired to service other players. Customers got deals and low prices, were able to stock up, while the merchants made more money by volume. This is game play. Not "hack'n'slash game play, but game play for a wise range of player types...together. It adds to the overall game, feels more like a world, and gives depth in a wide range of ways to the entire game experience.

    The alternative, where games have gone today, gives convenience, but removes all the other game activity. This was social activity. It's almost entirely missing today. And the result is hardly nothing else outside of the hack'n'slash. And players for the most part rarely talk to others. (yeah, yeah, I know, there's a few people here who say they always talk and are very social, what with talking about their favorite music and rock bands and all that. image)

    Correct I have not tried UO, but have been thinking about it.  I see your point.  But I can also see (some reasons) why it had to change.  At least for me.  I simply dont have the time I did 10 years ago to play at that level. But I still want to play.  I still want a world to explore and live in.  I still want my housing :-)    These conveniences (which may ruin the original experience) provides a means for me to enjoy the aspects of what I like within the constraints of my time.

    If a game designed as UO was then came out today.  Regardless of how much I praised it, I simply would not have the necessary time to invest to enjoy it.  I guess I'm selfish in thinking I would like to have an option (keep the original mechanics give me the choice to use convenience) to enjoy it as well :-)

    image
  • iatesandiatesand Portland, TNPosts: 44Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by Fendel84M
    What if EQN is like a modern day or Sci-fi Norrath?! That would be weird...but I suppose even fantasy worlds would have to evolve eventually :-p

    Actually .. thats what makes a fantasy world, It never evolves. Tolken, R Jordens, D Eddings, if you pick  fantasy world they all have thousands of years where the world stays the same. Thats what makes them fantasy

  • AmarantharAmaranthar OhioPosts: 2,430Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by darkhalf357x
    Originally posted by Amaranthar
    Originally posted by darkhalf357x
    Originally posted by ext1

     


    Originally posted by darkhalf357x

    Originally posted by Zekiah "Autonomous Brokering that allows players to buy things from anywhere in the world without having to run to another zone to get it. Items can even be delivered straight to inventories right where players are but that will also incur a delivery surcharge." Bad idea but not surprising.
    Why?  I like this idea.  I dont like the fact that if I have a full bag I have to run all the way back to a merchant to sell.  Or if I want to buy something I have to run to the Bazaar in PoK.  This adds a much needed convenience at least for me.

     


    Convenience turned MMORPGs into single player carnival games where "everyone's a winner!"

     

    I disagree. I think content turned MMORPGs into single player carnival games.  Leading me from quest to quest, waiting in line to do what the person did before me.  Using this convenience will not stop me from being an active member in my guild, or speaking with/helping out strangers I run across.

    Doing all that (unecessary) running around didnt make me more social.  It just made me more fustrated.  Convenience <> easy.

     

    I think you are missing the point. I take it you didn't play UO, and that game is still the classic example of the sort of "social" game play based not only on not having things conveniently wrapped up for the player, but also giving players the tools to do something about it...through game play.

    In UO, for example, there were no auction houses. But players could own houses, and they were able to set up their own auctions. Guilds did this since it was generally beyond a single player's ability (mostly due to time, but also handling things). Also, in UO players organized and set up "Trade Fairs". Events where craft players got together and sold and repaired to service other players. Customers got deals and low prices, were able to stock up, while the merchants made more money by volume. This is game play. Not "hack'n'slash game play, but game play for a wise range of player types...together. It adds to the overall game, feels more like a world, and gives depth in a wide range of ways to the entire game experience.

    The alternative, where games have gone today, gives convenience, but removes all the other game activity. This was social activity. It's almost entirely missing today. And the result is hardly nothing else outside of the hack'n'slash. And players for the most part rarely talk to others. (yeah, yeah, I know, there's a few people here who say they always talk and are very social, what with talking about their favorite music and rock bands and all that. image)

    Correct I have not tried UO, but have been thinking about it.  I see your point.  But I can also see (some reasons) why it had to change.  At least for me.  I simply dont have the time I did 10 years ago to play at that level. But I still want to play.  I still want a world to explore and live in.  I still want my housing :-)    These conveniences (which may ruin the original experience) provides a means for me to enjoy the aspects of what I like within the constraints of my time.

    If a game designed as UO was then came out today.  Regardless of how much I praised it, I simply would not have the necessary time to invest to enjoy it.  I guess I'm selfish in thinking I would like to have an option (keep the original mechanics give me the choice to use convenience) to enjoy it as well :-)

    I can see your point there. And I do think that there needs to be changes to accomodate players that don't have the time.
    But the changes I think we need to see are actually an advancement to make these game worlds Worlds. They aren't for players who want fast driven hack and slash game play, who I think are a small minority anyways, especially these days where there are so many "old" gamers in the market for a good worldly MMORPG.

    Once upon a time....

  • darkhalf357xdarkhalf357x Brooklyn, NYPosts: 1,164Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by Amaranthar
    Originally posted by darkhalf357x
    Originally posted by Amaranthar
    Originally posted by darkhalf357x
    Originally posted by ext1

     


    Originally posted by darkhalf357x

    Originally posted by Zekiah "Autonomous Brokering that allows players to buy things from anywhere in the world without having to run to another zone to get it. Items can even be delivered straight to inventories right where players are but that will also incur a delivery surcharge." Bad idea but not surprising.
    Why?  I like this idea.  I dont like the fact that if I have a full bag I have to run all the way back to a merchant to sell.  Or if I want to buy something I have to run to the Bazaar in PoK.  This adds a much needed convenience at least for me.

     


    Convenience turned MMORPGs into single player carnival games where "everyone's a winner!"

     

    I disagree. I think content turned MMORPGs into single player carnival games.  Leading me from quest to quest, waiting in line to do what the person did before me.  Using this convenience will not stop me from being an active member in my guild, or speaking with/helping out strangers I run across.

    Doing all that (unecessary) running around didnt make me more social.  It just made me more fustrated.  Convenience <> easy.

     

    I think you are missing the point. I take it you didn't play UO, and that game is still the classic example of the sort of "social" game play based not only on not having things conveniently wrapped up for the player, but also giving players the tools to do something about it...through game play.

    In UO, for example, there were no auction houses. But players could own houses, and they were able to set up their own auctions. Guilds did this since it was generally beyond a single player's ability (mostly due to time, but also handling things). Also, in UO players organized and set up "Trade Fairs". Events where craft players got together and sold and repaired to service other players. Customers got deals and low prices, were able to stock up, while the merchants made more money by volume. This is game play. Not "hack'n'slash game play, but game play for a wise range of player types...together. It adds to the overall game, feels more like a world, and gives depth in a wide range of ways to the entire game experience.

    The alternative, where games have gone today, gives convenience, but removes all the other game activity. This was social activity. It's almost entirely missing today. And the result is hardly nothing else outside of the hack'n'slash. And players for the most part rarely talk to others. (yeah, yeah, I know, there's a few people here who say they always talk and are very social, what with talking about their favorite music and rock bands and all that. image)

    Correct I have not tried UO, but have been thinking about it.  I see your point.  But I can also see (some reasons) why it had to change.  At least for me.  I simply dont have the time I did 10 years ago to play at that level. But I still want to play.  I still want a world to explore and live in.  I still want my housing :-)    These conveniences (which may ruin the original experience) provides a means for me to enjoy the aspects of what I like within the constraints of my time.

    If a game designed as UO was then came out today.  Regardless of how much I praised it, I simply would not have the necessary time to invest to enjoy it.  I guess I'm selfish in thinking I would like to have an option (keep the original mechanics give me the choice to use convenience) to enjoy it as well :-)

    I can see your point there. And I do think that there needs to be changes to accomodate players that don't have the time.
    But the changes I think we need to see are actually an advancement to make these game worlds Worlds. They aren't for players who want fast driven hack and slash game play, who I think are a small minority anyways, especially these days where there are so many "old" gamers in the market for a good worldly MMORPG.

    Agreed.  Originally was for GW2 until I played it for a few weeks.  I am definitely not a fan of this 'action combat' that has been all the rave recently.

    Hoping EQN can deliver something closer to what we both can enjoy.

    image
  • TheocritusTheocritus Gary, INPosts: 3,758Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by Amaranthar

    I didn't play EQ1 or EQ2. I want Sandbox, not Themepark, as an experience to play in.

    I have very little hope that EQN will really give us a Sandbox experience. I think it's all hype and bull, and I think the best they will offer is illusion and busted bubbles. But I'll watch and make a final determination when info is available to do so. If it does, I'll sing Smed's praises. Otherwise, I really can't say I'll be disappointed since I don't really expect much. It's not just Smed, it's the whole way of doing business in the industry. No faith in it at all.

              If EQN is modeled after EQ1 and not EQ2 then I can see it being a sandbox type game......

  • cybertruckercybertrucker Pensacola, FLPosts: 1,119Member
    While i look back thru my pristine rose colored glasses of EQ and remember a few of the better moments of EQ2. I will look forward to hearing and seeing more of what is being planned for EQN, while i enjoy a truly amazing game GW2..My question to MMORPG.com is when are we going to get a dedicated EQN forum?
«1
Sign In or Register to comment.