Howdy, Stranger!
It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!
Quick Links
POLL: Should EQN be a guild focused game?
Gholos
Member Posts: 209
Do you prefer a type of game like EQ or WOW where playing in a guild was very important expecially for the end game contents, or a type of game like GW2 where you can pratically do all things alone or with a 5 men group, without the real need of a guild?
I decisively prefer the classic approach, this is why i want to play a MMORPG and not a single player game...what do you think?
I vote: YES
"Brute force not work? It because you not use enought of it"
-Karg, Ogryn Bone'ead.
Comments
why design the entire endgame to cater to niche guilds
guilds divide the community
instead Id like to see a sort of per Faction hierarchy that everyone is a member of and individuals can rise and fall, where endgame is a factional endeavor
Raids just need to be part of endgame, not the whole endgame. I am more concerned with what the world will be than what the endgame will be. If its just another solo-centric world then we have another stinker on our hands. If its a group centric world then we could see something truly unique.
"Its better to look ugly and win than pretty and lose"
Looking for a family that you can game with for life? Check out Grievance at https://www.grievancegaming.org !
EQ2 fan sites
I like the notion of "clan" than ArcheAge has. It's essentially a play-group sized mini-guild.
Your clan can then join larger guilds for territorial conflict matters and so forth.
Kind of like the "bannermen" concept from Game of Thrones.
What is the "no" option supposed to mean? That everyone solos? That multi-person content is done exclusively via PUGs and just random bunches of strangers?
Guild-focused means many different things. I voted "yes", because I think having a strong guild system makes for good community and more pleasant gameplay, but I am not really sure what the other option was. Can you give me some examples of major MMORPGs that you would consider NOT guild-focused?
In my experience, even in games like GW2, neverwinter and TSW - having a guild is extremely beneficial and makes for an enhanced experience. Even if you only need 5 people to run a zone, it's always nice to have a pool of 20 non-retarded people from whom to choose those 5.
"Id rather work on something with great potential than on fulfilling a promise of mediocrity."
- Raph Koster
Tried: AO,EQ,EQ2,DAoC,SWG,AA,SB,HZ,CoX,PS,GA,TR,IV,GnH,EVE, PP,DnL,WAR,MxO,SWG,FE,VG,AoC,DDO,LoTRO,Rift,TOR,Aion,Tera,TSW,GW2,DCUO,CO,STO
Favourites: AO,SWG,EVE,TR,LoTRO,TSW,EQ2, Firefall
Currently Playing: ESO
I put no because it seems to me that a non-guild based game only has bad things.
One way to make it non-guild based is to take away guild tools. That would only make guilds complicated, it wouldn't do away with them. People would just set up outside of the game structure.
The other way is to force encounters to group size or smaller and that's just more dev control of the game and nothing I want anything to do with.
Asdar
That is completely asinine. If you don't have an end game then the game fails. Example: GW2.. no end game to speak of and game was a total failure.
If you cant be social enough to be part of a guild, why are you playing an MMO?
EQNext will have a very strong End Game Raiding mentality. As the Devs have stated.. they have EQ1 and EQ2 from which to draw from and test new ideas. Both EQ1 and EQ2 were built around end game raiding. To think EQNext will not follow the same principles is naive.
If you don't want to raid, stay with GW2 that is a MMO that feels like a single player game.
Lets see your Battle Stations /r/battlestations
Battle Station
I voted no, even though I am of the same opinion. The OP has mixed up two things which do not inherently have to be combined. Large group raiding and guilds.
I could probably do without large group raiding. If the toughest PVE content can be taken down by 5 to 12 players, that's fine with me. However, I typically prefer to be in a guild of like-minded players.
It was coalitions of guilds that were doing the first dragon raids and fear breaks in EQ. It was only later, in part because of the ease and privacy of using guild chat, and in part because of scarcity of raid targets that the raiding became single-guild endeavors. I remember on the EQ1 Povar server as late as PoP, there were still coalition raids (Legion of Little People with some shaman guild, for one example, and a Japanese and South Korean guild for a second).
I tend to think that EQN is going to have a multi-faction/guild functionality (maybe one guild for raiding, one guild for crafting/socializing and a third faction-based one for questing). That's the sort of simple, but outside of their own box thinking I hope SOE has been doing.
Speaking of naïve, are they making a new game or just taking elements of EQ1 and EQ2 and making EQ3? Let's look at this quote from Krimzin "they have EQ1 and EQ2 from which to draw from and test new ideas." End game raiding is not a new idea, it's a 16 year old idea, so based on the information that Krimzin has provided us, we can safely conclude that "end game raiding" will be discarded.
All we really know is that factions are going to be really important, it will have something called spellweaving, there's not going to be open world PVP, and the game is going to make us poop our pants. Any other "info" is really just speculation at this point.
I am sure if all the fans of EQN wrote down all the features they are sure will be in the game, they'd all probably be wrong on 30% of them, and it would be a different 30% for each person, myself included.
Well, I voted no, although I might as well vote yes.
I hope it's not too guild focused. I'm saying this even though I've been in a guild for years in EQ.
I love my guild, but my favorite thing to do in MMO is still meeting strangers, if guilds and guild benefits get too strong you sort of lose some of that random encounter feeling, I want to play with the server, not just my guild.
I do like end-game raids, I like them a lot, and I want to see them in EQNext, but that doesn't mean I wouldn't want to run some pick-up raids or that I wouldn't want to help people outside of my guild, I want to meet new people.
Guilds are fine, as long as they don't give guilds extra powers or benefits.
I voted yes, but would like more emphasis on community focus.
There should lots of game mechanics and systems in place to allow fun game play for all group sizes.
1 player, 2 players, 3 players, 6 players, 12, 24, 48, 100+...
The game should have something to do that's fun and rewarding regardless of how many people you have with you.
solo content should be a part of the game, but it can't over-shadow or be "better/faster/just as good" as group content, because then you're trivializing grouping or even discouraging it all together.
People enjoy large guild events, so there should be something to fit guilds of all sizes and play styles.
Legends of Kesmai, UO, EQ, AO, DAoC, AC, SB, RO, SWG, EVE, EQ2, CoH, GW, VG:SOH, WAR, Aion, DF, CO, MO, DN, Tera, SWTOR, RO2, DP, GW2, PS2, BnS, NW, FF:XIV, ESO, EQ:NL
I'd be pretty pleased if it wasn't.
Not been a fan of guilds in general in MMOs. Not that I think they should go for those so inclined of course.
Seems all that ends up happening is instead of playing with lots of people on your server, everyone segregates themselves to their little guild channels...only coming out into the real world if they absolutely have to.