It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!
Originally posted by Grailer Also the games characters look like cartoons so I hope they don't make the game too serious because how can you take a cartoon serious ? It needs to be funny and witty . See Wildstar .
Pretty easily actually.
It's hard to make a cartoon authentic.
You received 25 Agrees. You're posting some good content. Great!
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Now Doesn't That Make You Feel All Warm And Fuzzy? :P
Originally posted by Grailer Seems like they are doing exactly what SWTOR did with timelines and story etc . Of course we know how SWTOR turned out. And tbh those stories in SWTOR didn't effect the game much or make it feel more authentic. While having all that stuff is good I think the game needs to be authentic within the game itself . Also the games characters look like cartoons so I hope they don't make the game too serious because how can you take a cartoon serious ? It needs to be funny and witty . See Wildstar . Or make the characters look serious and have a serious game which most people want.
I will use this example because this is what the Kerran reminds me of....
Well, the lion king was a cartoon, and within the first 20 or 30 minutes of that movie, you get to see the main character's father (Mufasa) fall off a cliff and get trampled to death by a stampede. I'm pretty sure everyone in the theater was crying on that one, parents included.
Its not so hard for cartoons to be serious... even if they're goofy looking. It's all about mood, plot, and setting (or in one word... Lore).
Also, i'm pretty sure you don't speak for "most people"... not everyone is so shallow that they can't look a little deeper into the game without passing judgement on the graphics.
OH yeah... and i feel like I should note I'm not a HUGE fan of the character graphics, but I definitely agree that stylized art ages better than realistic graphics do, so i can understand it from a developer perspective. The way they've pieced it together, it's a beautiful world from everything I've seen so far.
Incognitowww.incognito-gaming.us"You're either with us or against us"
Originally posted by Kalisutra Originally posted by Grailer Seems like they are doing exactly what SWTOR did with timelines and story etc . Of course we know how SWTOR turned out. And tbh those stories in SWTOR didn't effect the game much or make it feel more authentic. While having all that stuff is good I think the game needs to be authentic within the game itself . Also the games characters look like cartoons so I hope they don't make the game too serious because how can you take a cartoon serious ? It needs to be funny and witty . See Wildstar . Or make the characters look serious and have a serious game which most people want.
At SOE Live they made it quite clear why they developed the characters the way they have, and it is a very good reason. There's a saying, and in this context it's an important one; and it's function before fashion. Sure they could have tried to make the characters completely realistic looking, but in doing would impose limitations that were counterproductive to the emotive and rich environment (through their characters in this case) they SOE are trying to create.
Watch the video of the "Everquest Next Worldwide Debut: Part 1" from about 32:15, and you'll hear Dave Georgeson give a number of ideas they wanted to achieve in game, which in turn corresponds to the number of reasons why they developed the characters to look like they are.
It's not perfect, nothing ever is, but it is what it is. I for one think the human avatars look excellent. Just remember though, That's just one look.
"Its better to look ugly and win than pretty and lose"
Originally posted by Miblet Originally posted by maplestone Are the events of EQ1/EQ2 going to be a part of the archeology? Or is it a true reboot that puts players into a version of the world where those two games never happened?
No. Think of this as a new version of Norrath, same natural landscape though different people's and history (and as such differing cities etc...well ruins of such cities anyway,
Does that not seem like a missed opportunity that devalues the earlier games? I mean, is not the lore that accumulates from games themselves (both developer lore and the actions of players themselves) rather important to the history of a world, to the sense that what one is doing while playing matters?
seeing how the other games are still in development i am sure they did not want to limit them self with a convoluted canon for three games that need to fit together... Much better to let things be as they are.
Also for the people complaining about the art style... Three words. Deal... With... It, or Take... Care... Bye... Especially as both EQ and EQ2 are still in development. If you like to play those games... Play them. Don´t force the people who have no interest in them to adhere to your narrow idea of what makes a good game.
Oersonally this game looks very interesting and as i always say, if they can deliver on even half of the things they say it will be a very good game.
This have been a good conversation
Originally posted by maplestone Originally posted by Miblet Originally posted by maplestone Are the events of EQ1/EQ2 going to be a part of the archeology? Or is it a true reboot that puts players into a version of the world where those two games never happened?
Isn't this game in a time setting before those games?
One thing about written history, it's often wrong or incomplete. Is it possible that they will actually use that lore as a guide in this sort of way? But don't want to say so, so as not to give anything away? (Which would allow them some freedom in the "correct history" sort of way.)
I'm not making a statement, just wondering.
Once upon a time....
While I loved eq1 and its lore, I have to say I belive a reboot is the correct move, like some have pointed out the lore from eq1 is just to deep and messy at this point with the amount of expansions it has had.
In a way what I've heard of eqn makes me think of the colonization of america, and in a way it feels like it could be the prequel to eq1, however if you keept the eq1 lore it would severly limit how far forward in time eqn could progress, which would be a shame.
Also I have to say I am extremly happy to see a eq universe where shadows of luclin and planes of power havnt happened yet, those two turned my eq experience from something great to something meh.
While we will all start of in qeynos I kinda get the feeling that the races might at some point start going theyr own ways and setting up theyr own towns, this would feel like the players were colonizing norrath, to me that sounds extremly cool.
Don't get me wrong there are things I dislike about what I've heard of eqn, but I think rebooting the lore is a good move, I just hope we never visit the moon in this universe.
Originally posted by EndoRoboto It sounds like a lot of people want to play the same game that came out in 1999 but without any improvements. Sorry folks but the past is history, look forward to the future!
Sad part is if we indeed got that we'd already know where the story was going, alot of people don't seem to realise that
I feel bad for them. They will wait until the end of time and never get what they are waiting for. In the meantime, they will miss every good (and bad) MMO made.
Originally posted by winter Well that pretty much answers the question on start up areas. Seems there will only be one area where everyone starts Qeynos. Seems pretty limited compared to both EQ and EQ2
A game that's not developed around linear (or even loose) quest hubs doesn't really need to rely as heavily upon a variety of static locations to provide alternate play experiences (which seems to be the biggest reason for people wanting tons of starting cities). Most of the other concerns can be handled in the character creation screen.
If previous procedurally generated games are any indication, the world will be absolutely massive, varied and likely constantly changing. It seems unlikely in a sandbox this large, with the tools they've shown us, that player housing will be instanced. If that's the case, I expect player 'cities' of a sort to spring up as well, even if there's no actual city functionality.
I'd take that over a variety of racial starting cities that mainly existed to service old limitations of content delivery. Creating an area that gives a sense of place and has personal significance is worth way more to me than just inheriting a place that I'd likely move on from anyway - especially if it's just for the sake of having a number of starting areas - which seems unnecessary to me in a model like this.
If this were another static themepark I'd be in total agreement with you, more starting places = more replayability. But in the context of what they've shown us and what they intend to do, it doesn't seem like something that would serve a purpose that couldn't be handled at character creation.