› ›

Howdy, Stranger!

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

Sign In Register

Quick Links

Will you play this game if ...

Lord.BachusLord.Bachus Member RarePosts: 9,686
in EverQuest Next

 

... If the game has an oldfashioned death pennalty with corps runs in the open world, if mobs are unleashed (trains) and in such a way scripted that the world is allways challenging with danger lurking around every other corner.

 

... If the core of the game is one big open PvP world with factional PvP 

 

... if the game has instances for PvE, so people can PvE without getting hurt by gankers. Mind you, challenging instances, but still instances/zones that are PvE only

 

... If the gameworld would be truely dynamic, one step further then Dynamic events, truely Dynamic meaning players can change everything, and NPC remember players and act base on the players factions, so being good will yield you other results in the world as being evil, as well as the 50 collors of grey in between.

 

... If combat is more action based like GW2 with total freedom of movement, but still is based on the advanced trinnity we have come to know from SOE

 

... If EQnext is just an evolution in MMO design and not a revolution.

Best MMO experiences : EQ(PvE), DAoC(PvP), WoW(total package) LOTRO (worldfeel) GW2 (Artstyle and animations and worlddesign) SWTOR (Story immersion) TSW (story) ESO (character advancement)

«1

Comments

  • Electro057Electro057 Member UncommonPosts: 683
    Is it still free to play? Then yep! 

    --Custom Rig: Pyraxis---
    NZXT Phantom 410 Case
    Intel Core i5-4690 Processor - Quad Core, 6MB Smart Cache, 3.5GHz
    Asus Sabertooth Z87 Motherboard
    Asus GeForce GTX 760 Video Card - 2GB GDDR5, PCI-Express 3.0
    Kingston HyperX Fury Blue 16GB

  • ScalplessScalpless Member UncommonPosts: 1,426
    I'll play it if it's good. Features don't mean anything by themselves.
  • azzamasinazzamasin Member UncommonPosts: 3,105
    Originally posted by Lord.Bachus

     

    ... If the game has an oldfashioned death pennalty with corps runs in the open world, if mobs are unleashed (trains) and in such a way scripted that the world is allways challenging with danger lurking around every other corner.

     

    ... If the core of the game is one big open PvP world with factional PvP 

     

    ... if the game has instances for PvE, so people can PvE without getting hurt by gankers. Mind you, challenging instances, but still instances/zones that are PvE only

     

    ... If the gameworld would be truely dynamic, one step further then Dynamic events, truely Dynamic meaning players can change everything, and NPC remember players and act base on the players factions, so being good will yield you other results in the world as being evil, as well as the 50 collors of grey in between.

     

    ... If combat is more action based like GW2 with total freedom of movement, but still is based on the advanced trinnity we have come to know from SOE

     

    ... If EQnext is just an evolution in MMO design and not a revolution.

     Bolded in red would be a deal breaker for me.  The other deal breaker for me would be a slow tab target based combat system with rows and rows of abilities.

     

    Everything else is fair game for me.  Including some sort of PvP system which featured realistic anti-griefing systems like Bcbully proposes.  However I wouldn't be happy with this system.  I would prefer differing rule set servers.

    Sandbox means open world, non-linear gaming PERIOD!

    Subscription Gaming, especially MMO gaming is a Cash grab bigger then the most P2W cash shop!

    Bring Back Exploration and lengthy progression times. RPG's have always been about the Journey not the destination!!!

    image

  • deveilbladdeveilblad Member UncommonPosts: 193
    Originally posted by Lord.Bachus

     

    ... If the game has an oldfashioned death pennalty with corps runs in the open world, if mobs are unleashed (trains) and in such a way scripted that the world is allways challenging with danger lurking around every other corner.

     Yes

    ... If the core of the game is one big open PvP world with factional PvP 

     With no PvE, no. If you just mean a normal PvP server lol, than yes.

    ... if the game has instances for PvE, so people can PvE without getting hurt by gankers. Mind you, challenging instances, but still instances/zones that are PvE only

     Yes

    ... If the gameworld would be truely dynamic, one step further then Dynamic events, truely Dynamic meaning players can change everything, and NPC remember players and act base on the players factions, so being good will yield you other results in the world as being evil, as well as the 50 collors of grey in between.

     Yes, but that won't happen, it would be way too complex to do...

    ... If combat is more action based like GW2 with total freedom of movement, but still is based on the advanced trinnity we have come to know from SOE

     Yes

    ... If EQnext is just an evolution in MMO design and not a revolution.

    If it's better than TESO and FFXIV, yes.

     

  • TheJodaTheJoda Member UncommonPosts: 605
    Originally posted by Lord.Bachus

     

    ... If the game has an oldfashioned death pennalty with corps runs in the open world, if mobs are unleashed (trains) and in such a way scripted that the world is allways challenging with danger lurking around every other corner.

     

    ... If the core of the game is one big open PvP world with factional PvP 

     

    ... if the game has instances for PvE, so people can PvE without getting hurt by gankers. Mind you, challenging instances, but still instances/zones that are PvE only

     

    ... If the gameworld would be truely dynamic, one step further then Dynamic events, truely Dynamic meaning players can change everything, and NPC remember players and act base on the players factions, so being good will yield you other results in the world as being evil, as well as the 50 collors of grey in between.

     

    ... If combat is more action based like GW2 with total freedom of movement, but still is based on the advanced trinnity we have come to know from SOE

     

    ... If EQnext is just an evolution in MMO design and not a revolution.

    Game must work and live up to its EQ1 roots, it will be a different animal for sure but MUST have those as key features!

     

     

    ....Being Banned from MMORPG's forums since 2010, for Trolling the Trolls!!!

  • SiugSiug Member UncommonPosts: 1,257
    Only deal breaker would be non-consensual PvP because I don't want sociopaths in my Everquest.
  • NadiaNadia Member UncommonPosts: 11,798
    Originally posted by Piiritus
    Only deal breaker would be non-consensual PvP

    that would turn me off too (assuming its everywhere)

    EQ2 fan sites

  • Storm_CloudStorm_Cloud Member UncommonPosts: 401
    Originally posted by Lord.Bachus

     

    ... If the game has an oldfashioned death pennalty with corps runs in the open world, if mobs are unleashed (trains) and in such a way scripted that the world is allways challenging with danger lurking around every other corner. YES

     

    ... If the core of the game is one big open PvP world with factional PvP  YES, I'd try, but most likely quit after a while since I don't like forced PvP

     

    ... if the game has instances for PvE, so people can PvE without getting hurt by gankers. Mind you, challenging instances, but still instances/zones that are PvE only NO, I'm done with instances. If it's going to be a sandbox, I don't want any instances on it.

     

    ... If the gameworld would be truely dynamic, one step further then Dynamic events, truely Dynamic meaning players can change everything, and NPC remember players and act base on the players factions, so being good will yield you other results in the world as being evil, as well as the 50 collors of grey in between. YES

     

    ... If combat is more action based like GW2 with total freedom of movement, but still is based on the advanced trinnity we have come to know from SOE NO, I prefer the old fashioned type of gameplay (EQ, WOW, etc)

     

    ... If EQnext is just an evolution in MMO design and not a revolution. YES, but I doubt it will be just a evolution.

     

  • SavageHorizonSavageHorizon Member EpicPosts: 3,466
    Bit of a mumbo jumbo thread imo, it's all over the place but we know you like GW2 which EQN thankfully will share nothing in common with imo.




  • nerovipus32nerovipus32 Member Posts: 2,735
    Originally posted by Piiritus
    Only deal breaker would be non-consensual PvP because I don't want sociopaths in my Everquest.

    Most mmo's players are sociopaths hence why they play mmo's.

  • Storm_CloudStorm_Cloud Member UncommonPosts: 401
    Originally posted by nerovipus32
    Originally posted by Piiritus
    Only deal breaker would be non-consensual PvP because I don't want sociopaths in my Everquest.

    Most mmo's players are sociopaths hence why they play mmo's.

    I lol'd... I admit it... 

  • ste2000ste2000 Member EpicPosts: 6,194
    Originally posted by Lord.Bachus

     

    ... If the game has an oldfashioned death pennalty with corps runs in the open world, if mobs are unleashed (trains) and in such a way scripted that the world is allways challenging with danger lurking around every other corner.

    Absolutely YES (Although SoE won't impleement it)

    ... If the core of the game is one big open PvP world with factional PvP 

    PvP is not necessary in EQ, I can easily live without it (Although SoE will implement it)

    ... if the game has instances for PvE, so people can PvE without getting hurt by gankers. Mind you, challenging instances, but still instances/zones that are PvE only

    Yes, I don't mind instanced dungeons, as long the world map is not instanced

    ... If the gameworld would be truely dynamic, one step further then Dynamic events, truely Dynamic meaning players can change everything, and NPC remember players and act base on the players factions, so being good will yield you other results in the world as being evil, as well as the 50 collors of grey in between.

    Of course

    ... If combat is more action based like GW2 with total freedom of movement, but still is based on the advanced trinnity we have come to know from SOE

    The beuty of EQ is that it hasn't a Trinity but a Tank, a Healer, a Buffer, a Crowd Control and of course a DPS.

    This kind of design has been forgotten, but it is much needed. I hope SoE will bring it back.

    ... If EQnext is just an evolution in MMO design and not a revolution.

    Basically SoE has to make EQ with modern standards, without revolutionizing too much.

  • MasterfuzzfuzzMasterfuzzfuzz Member Posts: 169
    Originally posted by Electro057
    Is it still free to play? Then yep! 

    f2p will ruin this game. It's going to be garbage like when eq2 went f2p.

  • IadienIadien Member UncommonPosts: 638
    Originally posted by Masterfuzzfuzz
    Originally posted by Electro057
    Is it still free to play? Then yep! 

    f2p will ruin this game. It's going to be garbage like when eq2 went f2p.

    Please tell us more, Master.

  • DeolusDeolus Member UncommonPosts: 392
    Originally posted by Lord.Bachus

     

    ... If the game has an oldfashioned death pennalty with corps runs in the open world, if mobs are unleashed (trains) and in such a way scripted that the world is allways challenging with danger lurking around every other corner.

    Definitely. I'm up for the challenge.

    ... If the core of the game is one big open PvP world with factional PvP 

    PVP?  Definitely not ... but are you confusing dev comments about factions? Factions in old EQ are NPC factions... not player factions. I.e. at the start of the game you are friendly with dwarves of the Coldain faction, but kill enough of them and they will become hostile.

    ... if the game has instances for PvE, so people can PvE without getting hurt by gankers. Mind you, challenging instances, but still instances/zones that are PvE only

    I actually enjoy instanced areas because that leads to scripted events designed around the number of players allowed to enter the instance. Some of my most memorable moments have been from instanced areas with a good group or raid.

     .. If the gameworld would be truely dynamic, one step further then Dynamic events, truely Dynamic meaning players can change everything, and NPC remember players and act base on the players factions, so being good will yield you other results in the world as being evil, as well as the 50 collors of grey in between.

    Sounds interesting. If they can pull this off I'm sure it would keep me interested for a long time.

     

    ... If combat is more action based like GW2 with total freedom of movement, but still is based on the advanced trinnity we have come to know from SOE

    I prefer slower tactical gameplay. I hate it when someone in the group is measuring everyones dps. Total freedom of movement? Yes, I don't like being rooted to one spot while carrying out an action. Trinity? I doubt they will have the same trinity as the older games. I think they will give every player some sort of healing ability at least.

    ... If EQnext is just an evolution in MMO design and not a revolution.

    It's EQ.. I would still play it if it was pong in disguise!

     

  • sanshi44sanshi44 Member UncommonPosts: 1,187
    Yes to everything but the instance parts, dopnt wanna play a game with instances again.
  • DullahanDullahan Member EpicPosts: 4,536
    Originally posted by Lord.Bachus

     

    ... If EQnext is just an evolution in MMO design and not a revolution.

    There is no evolution.  For every good new feature, we lose 3 good old ones.

    MMOs need to get back to the features that made them so fun, immersive and challenging.

    ps. fuk instances


  • bcbullybcbully Member EpicPosts: 11,838
    Originally posted by Lord.Bachus

     

    ... If the game has an oldfashioned death pennalty with corps runs in the open world, if mobs are unleashed (trains) and in such a way scripted that the world is allways challenging with danger lurking around every other corner.

     

    ... If the core of the game is one big open PvP world with factional PvP 

     

    ... if the game has instances for PvE, so people can PvE without getting hurt by gankers. Mind you, challenging instances, but still instances/zones that are PvE only

     

    ... If the gameworld would be truely dynamic, one step further then Dynamic events, truely Dynamic meaning players can change everything, and NPC remember players and act base on the players factions, so being good will yield you other results in the world as being evil, as well as the 50 collors of grey in between.

     

    ... If combat is more action based like GW2 with total freedom of movement, but still is based on the advanced trinnity we have come to know from SOE

     

    ... If EQnext is just an evolution in MMO design and not a revolution.

    Smartest guy on the forum, atleast today :p Sign me up. 

    "We see fundamentals and we ape in"
  • bcbullybcbully Member EpicPosts: 11,838
    Originally posted by Piiritus
    Only deal breaker would be non-consensual PvP because I don't want sociopaths in my Everquest.

    You will have a instance area for PvE, what's the problem?

    "We see fundamentals and we ape in"
  • JedidiahTheadoreJedidiahTheadore Member Posts: 48
    Probably the only things that would keep me from playing would be one mega server with each region having instances/channels (like ESO's world, I love Elder Scrolls lore, and was excited by a ES MMO, but I won't play because I don't like their idea of how a virtual world should operate), WoWs gear grind, and any zone loading (zone loading completely destroys the feeling of a "world" for me).

    I can live with everything else and the good usually outweighs the bad, at least for awhile.
  • MargulisMargulis Member CommonPosts: 1,614
    Originally posted by Lord.Bachus

     

    ... If the game has an oldfashioned death pennalty with corps runs in the open world, if mobs are unleashed (trains) and in such a way scripted that the world is allways challenging with danger lurking around every other corner.

    YES!!

    ... If the core of the game is one big open PvP world with factional PvP 

     If that is the CORE of the game, I will likely still play it but be much less excited or interested.

    ... if the game has instances for PvE, so people can PvE without getting hurt by gankers. Mind you, challenging instances, but still instances/zones that are PvE only

     Smedley already confirmed ZERO instancing in the game - so this question doesn't even matter.

    ... If the gameworld would be truely dynamic, one step further then Dynamic events, truely Dynamic meaning players can change everything, and NPC remember players and act base on the players factions, so being good will yield you other results in the world as being evil, as well as the 50 collors of grey in between.

     Of course sounds awesome.

    ... If combat is more action based like GW2 with total freedom of movement, but still is based on the advanced trinnity we have come to know from SOE

     Yeah that's fine.

    ... If EQnext is just an evolution in MMO design and not a revolution.

    Yeah why not?  Considering that all the shite coming down the pipeline is hardly even an evolution, I'll take what I can get.

     

  • MargulisMargulis Member CommonPosts: 1,614

    ... if the game has instances for PvE, so people can PvE without getting hurt by gankers. Mind you, challenging instances, but still instances/zones that are PvE only

     

    In case some of you aren't aware, Smedley confirmed a long time ago ZERO instancing in the game.

     

    Source:

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_detailpage&v=-Cp3j-7yz3I#t=45s

  • Lord.BachusLord.Bachus Member RarePosts: 9,686
    Originally posted by Margulis

    ... if the game has instances for PvE, so people can PvE without getting hurt by gankers. Mind you, challenging instances, but still instances/zones that are PvE only

     

    In case some of you aren't aware, Smedley confirmed a long time ago ZERO instancing in the game.

     

    Source:

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_detailpage&v=-Cp3j-7yz3I#t=45s

    Smedley?  Is that that single guy in MMO history that allways delivered us what he promissed?

     

    Tough if there where no instances that would be in line with what i am expecting from an EQ game, and something that can be done with a more dynamic world.....  As long as the game does not turn intoo oldfashioned bosscamping or bosszerging.

    Best MMO experiences : EQ(PvE), DAoC(PvP), WoW(total package) LOTRO (worldfeel) GW2 (Artstyle and animations and worlddesign) SWTOR (Story immersion) TSW (story) ESO (character advancement)

  • rodingorodingo Member RarePosts: 2,870
    Maybe this could have been a poll?  Just so we could see at a glance a more general consensus.

    "If I offended you, you needed it" -Corey Taylor

  • AeliousAelious Member RarePosts: 3,521
    Originally posted by bcbully
    Originally posted by Piiritus
    Only deal breaker would be non-consensual PvP because I don't want sociopaths in my Everquest.

    You will have a instance area for PvE, what's the problem?

     

    Yeah because PvEers like instances just like PvPers right? How do you like those battlegrounds? image

Sign In or Register to comment.