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!

Graphics: The Least of EQ: Next's Problems

StrayfeStrayfe Los Angeles, CAPosts: 189Member Uncommon

The graphics are the least of this game's problems.  I've done my best to avoid the great World War EQNext debate, but it seems rather absurd to me that some of the core problems that the design philosophy behind EQN will create tend to go completely unnoticed.

You're combining four things, F2P, action/twitch combat, console gameplay and destructible environments.  Think about that for a second.  You're going to take the console crowd, toss them in with the F2P crowd, throw in the FPS/Twitch gaming crowd, and then place them in an environment where things can be destroyed?  This is like taking a prison camp on a field trip to a Columbian drug cartel, or a group of sex offenders to a whorehouse.

You are taking the bottom feeders of the MMORPG community, the lowest common denominators, and giving them an environment where they have carte blanche to devastate any efforts at forming an actual community.  Minecraft succeeds in part BECAUSE it is a contained experience.  When you allow such things to promulgate over a massive environment, involving many servers, you lose the ability to effectively police the demonstrated, natural instinct of the F2P/Console/Twitch playerbase to turn everything they touch into a free for all.

I'll wait for someone to offer the inevitable argument that, "You're generalizing a huge group of people, and it's not going to be that bad."  Trust me, it is.  Lower barrier of entry -always-, without exception, results in lower commitment and loyalty.  Lack of loyalty and commitment results in a lower quality of customer.  This is really simple business practice and simple logic.  You don't see many people changing careers once they become a doctor or a lawyer, because it takes so much hard work and dedication to become a doctor or a lawyer.  How many quality people do you know who work at a fast food joint their entire life?  Exactly.

That being said, steps will need to be taken by SOE to ensure that the playerbase they are pitching EQN toward doesn't steamroll their intended features and create an unplayable environment full of jerkwads.  To do that, I'd imagine many of the proposed elements of their pillars will need to be curtailed and cut back to some extent.  The holy trinity and aggro style of combat mechanics are used, in part, not because they're outdated and work well, but because they are impossible (or very difficult) to exploit, being as basic as they are.  Any "advanced" AI can be tricked, outsmarted and exploited once it becomes understood because AI simply hasn't evolved far enough to create what SOE are claiming they can create, unless, by some miracle, SOE has a secret robotics and AI division that has managed to outdo NASA and MIT. 

Having said that, you are again, taking a system that will be easier to exploit and placing it in front of the people most likely to exploit it.  You are taking a game mechanic in destructible environments, and placing it in front of the people most likely to use it in a negative manner.  It is far easier to destroy than it is to create, and even if you suggest a ratio of 1 troll/jerkwad for every 50 legit players (very conservative estimate), the damage that many jerkwads can do far outweighs the benefits of including community building features to this extent.

If SOE responds by limiting the methods by which trolls and jerkwads can ruin the experience for anyone else, it will necessarily limit their vision, their proposed features and create a watered down game on all fronts.  IF (and I say if speculatively, because I won't go as far as everyone else does and doomsay by saying the game will fail) Everquest: Next fails, it will be because SOE is severely underestimating the destructive behavior their target audience is capable of, within the context of an environment that would appear to be a perfect breeding ground for said behavior.

«1345

Comments

  • donpopukidonpopuki Dearborn, MIPosts: 591Member
    First you do realize the environments heal themselves over time right?

    You need to be more accepting different types of people that have different interests. I've meet plenty of jerks that shared my same interests. Now who is being an antisocial jerk here?
  • StrayfeStrayfe Los Angeles, CAPosts: 189Member Uncommon
    It doesn't matter if environments heal themselves over time, when you will have entire guilds full of trolls dedicated to camping areas and immediately destroying them again the moment they "respawn".  But please, go ahead and try to tell me it won't happen and that I'm just antisocial.
  • DullahanDullahan Posts: 2,053Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by Strayfe

    That being said, steps will need to be taken by SOE to ensure that the playerbase they are pitching EQN toward doesn't steamroll their intended features and create an unplayable environment full of jerkwads.  To do that, I'd imagine many of the proposed elements of their pillars will need to be curtailed and cut back to some extent.  The holy trinity and aggro style of combat mechanics are used, in part, not because they're outdated and work well, but because they are impossible (or very difficult) to exploit, being as basic as they are.  Any "advanced" AI can be tricked, outsmarted and exploited once it becomes understood because AI simply hasn't evolved far enough to create what SOE are claiming they can create, unless, by some miracle, SOE has a secret robotics and AI division that has managed to outdo NASA and MIT. 

     

    You definitely nailed this part.

    As far as the problem with a low quality community as it relates to destruction, I'm not so sure that will be the biggest issue.  I think the low quality community in a game thats supposed to become a virtual world is problem enough in its own rite, but destruction is an easy mechanic to place limitations on in particular.  You may not know, but a lot of the world will be protected. Probably more than SOE has come to realize.


  • MischiefMischief Salem, ORPosts: 81Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by donpopuki
    First you do realize the environments heal themselves over time right?

    You need to be more accepting different types of people that have different interests. I've meet plenty of jerks that shared my same interests. Now who is being an antisocial jerk here?

    I believe you might be looking at his point too simplistically.  Yes the environments heal over time, but that by no means takes away the ability of significant griefing.   For example, if the environments are destructible and you can fall into holes under the ground, what is to keep someone with malicious intent to destroy the ground underneath you while you fight a mob you have been hunting just to mess with you.   Now maybe it wont be as big of a problem as he says but there is certainly a cause for concern with what we know so far.

  • StrayfeStrayfe Los Angeles, CAPosts: 189Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by evilized

    my narcissism sense is tingling.

     

    if SOE making the game the way they did keeps people like you away, OP, then all the more power to them. read what you wrote and then ask yourself why you play online games with other people. seriously consider it and then reflect on your attitude.

     

    Thank you for eschewing the point of my post to engage in a personal attack which offers nothing to the discussion.  This discussion is about the potential of SOE's pillars to be exploited and griefed by their target player base.  Next time you feel the need to derail my thread, please ask yourself why you post on online message boards.  Seriously consider it and then reflect on your attitude.

    I will go ahead and point out that I played FFXI for almost five years.  FFXI is arguably the most group and community focused AAA MMORPG ever made.  If I was incapable of playing well with others, I'd have never managed the success I had in that game.  If you value the 'virtual world' aspect of an MMORPG at all, whatsoever, you should be well aware of the ways in which it can be thwarted and undermined by griefers.

    Procuring a moral soapbox, firing off an ad hominem and engaging in Ostrich Mode will not make the obvious issue go away.

  • SojhinSojhin Tacoma, WAPosts: 213Member
    These 'problems' you speak to are what are necessary for a sand box pvp game to work. There has to be the option for people to play those aggressive roles in order for the more 'heroic' roles to surface (i.e., defend the land, protect the caravan, defend the city, etc).
  • MardyMardy hollywood, CAPosts: 2,213Member
    Originally posted by Sojhin
    These 'problems' you speak to about are what are necessary for a sand box pvp game to work. There has to be the option for people to play those aggressive roles in order for the more 'heroic' roles to surface (i.e., defend the land, protect the caravan, defend the city, etc).

     

    Except SOE didn't build this game with PvP in mind, they're focusing primarily on PvE.  They've got their hands full with making sure the game will function right and function well in the player vs environment part of the game.  The OP is right in that companies always...even after 14 years of MMO genre, companies always underestimate gamers.  They always have this utopian attitude that everybody's going to get along, everybody's going to hold hands, help each other, and share.  Unfortunately, after 14 years, gamers are still the same.  Gamers are human beings, which means gamers backstab each other, act like bullies, do whatever they can to gain advantage, do whatever they can do one up someone else, and gamers don't mind ruining other's game time for their own enjoyment.

     

    Destructibility is going to be a problem when hundreds and thousands of players are actively playing the game.  SOE kind of put themselves in a bad spot by talking so much about destructibility, making it sound like the whole game could be broken up and broken apart.  Because I think even they know if the game was that destructible, the amount of grief and bad behavior will be insane.  Think about you minding your own business, digging a tunnel to try to find some loot and what not, then someone else comes and breaks a hole under you and you fall.   Think about you fighting a mob or a group of mobs, you have only 1 escape route to exercise your combat moves, and someone puts up a wall that blocks your movement.  Think about you finding some world class loot, after 3 long days, and boom someone collapses the roof or breaks a hole under your feet, steals the loot and gets the fame for finding the loot.

     

    What I'm listing above are but a fraction of the things players could and will do in a live MMORPG environment.  Now tell me, how could SOE counter these types of behaviors?  How could they police it?  The only way to prevent the griefing I listed above, they would have to simply make destruction not possible in a lot of the places.   So then they would contradict one of their holy grails of destructility, because they'd need to limit them severely to prevent exploits and bad behavior.

     

    So I agree with the OP in a way that graphics is the least of EQN's problems.  Graphics will alienate some playerbase, pretty much a good chunk of the Everquest fanbase who are used to a different style of art, look, and feel of EQ.  But there are a lot of problems with the currently proposed design of the game.  The game currently is nothing but a theorycraft, everything is still a concept talk.  Which is why I'm partly disappointed because I was hoping SOE was further along than concept talk this year.  This tells me they simply have not had a chance to test a lot of their concepts.  This also tells me there will be some major changes that'll happen between now and beta, and between beta and live.  Changes that some here may cry over.

    EQ1-AC1-DAOC-FFXI-L2-EQ2-WoW-DDO-GW-LoTR-VG-WAR-GW2-ESO

  • evilizedevilized columbus, OHPosts: 564Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by Strayfe
    Originally posted by evilized

    my narcissism sense is tingling.

     

    if SOE making the game the way they did keeps people like you away, OP, then all the more power to them. read what you wrote and then ask yourself why you play online games with other people. seriously consider it and then reflect on your attitude.

     

    Thank you for eschewing the point of my post to engage in a personal attack which offers nothing to the discussion.  This discussion is about the potential of SOE's pillars to be exploited and griefed by their target player base.  Next time you feel the need to derail my thread, please ask yourself why you post on online message boards.  Seriously consider it and then reflect on your attitude.

    I will go ahead and point out that I played FFXI for almost five years.  FFXI is arguably the most group and community focused AAA MMORPG ever made.  If I was incapable of playing well with others, I'd have never managed the success I had in that game.  If you value the 'virtual world' aspect of an MMORPG at all, whatsoever, you should be well aware of the ways in which it can be thwarted and undermined by griefers.

    Procuring a moral soapbox, firing off an ad hominem and engaging in Ostrich Mode will not make the obvious issue go away.

     

    when you call pretty much anybody that would enjoy a certain game the bottom of the barrel and lowest common denominator, you are displaying hostility towards others.

     

    in truth you have no idea who will play this game. i bet there will be people from all walks of life, just like with any other big MMO. insulting everybody in this forum isn't the best way to start a discussion or make friends.

  • OzivoisOzivois Phoenix, AZPosts: 598Member

    OP you bring up great points and I couldn't agree more.

     

    The game world will be constantly tore up by all these bored kids since it's free to play.

     

    At least with subscription accounts players tend to watch their reputation to a certain extent.

    If the breakable stuff heals right away than that's just fake sandbox.

  • cichy1012cichy1012 riverside, CAPosts: 278Member
    Originally posted by Strayfe

    The graphics are the least of this game's problems.  I've done my best to avoid the great World War EQNext debate, but it seems rather absurd to me that some of the core problems that the design philosophy behind EQN will create tend to go completely unnoticed.

    You're combining four things, F2P, action/twitch combat, console gameplay and destructible environments.  Think about that for a second.  You're going to take the console crowd, toss them in with the F2P crowd, throw in the FPS/Twitch gaming crowd, and then place them in an environment where things can be destroyed?  This is like taking a prison camp on a field trip to a Columbian drug cartel, or a group of sex offenders to a whorehouse.

    You are taking the bottom feeders of the MMORPG community, the lowest common denominators, and giving them an environment where they have carte blanche to devastate any efforts at forming an actual community.  Minecraft succeeds in part BECAUSE it is a contained experience.  When you allow such things to promulgate over a massive environment, involving many servers, you lose the ability to effectively police the demonstrated, natural instinct of the F2P/Console/Twitch playerbase to turn everything they touch into a free for all.

    I'll wait for someone to offer the inevitable argument that, "You're generalizing a huge group of people, and it's not going to be that bad."  Trust me, it is.  Lower barrier of entry -always-, without exception, results in lower commitment and loyalty.  Lack of loyalty and commitment results in a lower quality of customer.  This is really simple business practice and simple logic.  You don't see many people changing careers once they become a doctor or a lawyer, because it takes so much hard work and dedication to become a doctor or a lawyer.  How many quality people do you know who work at a fast food joint their entire life?  Exactly.

    That being said, steps will need to be taken by SOE to ensure that the playerbase they are pitching EQN toward doesn't steamroll their intended features and create an unplayable environment full of jerkwads.  To do that, I'd imagine many of the proposed elements of their pillars will need to be curtailed and cut back to some extent.  The holy trinity and aggro style of combat mechanics are used, in part, not because they're outdated and work well, but because they are impossible (or very difficult) to exploit, being as basic as they are.  Any "advanced" AI can be tricked, outsmarted and exploited once it becomes understood because AI simply hasn't evolved far enough to create what SOE are claiming they can create, unless, by some miracle, SOE has a secret robotics and AI division that has managed to outdo NASA and MIT. 

    Having said that, you are again, taking a system that will be easier to exploit and placing it in front of the people most likely to exploit it.  You are taking a game mechanic in destructible environments, and placing it in front of the people most likely to use it in a negative manner.  It is far easier to destroy than it is to create, and even if you suggest a ratio of 1 troll/jerkwad for every 50 legit players (very conservative estimate), the damage that many jerkwads can do far outweighs the benefits of including community building features to this extent.

    If SOE responds by limiting the methods by which trolls and jerkwads can ruin the experience for anyone else, it will necessarily limit their vision, their proposed features and create a watered down game on all fronts.  IF (and I say if speculatively, because I won't go as far as everyone else does and doomsay by saying the game will fail) Everquest: Next fails, it will be because SOE is severely underestimating the destructive behavior their target audience is capable of, within the context of an environment that would appear to be a perfect breeding ground for said behavior.

     

    I love posts like these.... By the way operator, what do you do for a living, cause Im sure with your highly advanced knowledge on the MMO creation, maybe you should make a game or heck go apply for Sony. I think they really need you..

     

    Oh and its free........

  • OzivoisOzivois Phoenix, AZPosts: 598Member
    ...
  • StrayfeStrayfe Los Angeles, CAPosts: 189Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by cichy1012

    I love posts like these.... By the way operator, what do you do for a living, cause Im sure with your highly advanced knowledge on the MMO creation, maybe you should make a game or heck go apply for Sony. I think they really need you..

     

    Oh and its free........

    And here we have an implication that one needs to be a game developer in order to be qualified to offer an opinion on game development, another ineffective argument.

    Do you think game developers are some mythical, magical creatures with specialized knowledge that nobody else on earth has access to?  Game developers get into game development for one of two reasons: 1) To make the type of games they enjoyed playing, or to be part of a team that makes said games and/or 2) To make money.  Requirements for fulfilling 1) are more about understanding people than anything.  What people find "fun", what people find "immersive", what types of systems draw players, what types of systems are proven to be for a niche only.

    The only other requirement for 1) is skill in an applicable area of game development.  Either programming, art, music, writing, etc.  If you understand people, if you understand gaming and have a good number of games played under your belt, if you have one of the above-mentioned skills, you are just as qualified to make a game, or to render an opinion on game development as an entry level employee (what most programmers/artists actually are) for ANY DEVELOPER.

    Experience is the only major variable factor, and when it boils down to it, whether or not you put any stock in the "experience" of guys like Smedley depends on whether or not you agree personally with his visions, and whether or not you agree that his past games have been or could be considered a success.  Brad McQuaid was an "experienced" game developer.  He crapped out Vanguard: Saga of Heroes.

    Notch (creator of Minecraft) was one guy in a basement.  He made one of the most popular games of all time.

    To answer your question, I'm a Paralegal.  I work in both civil and criminal law, and I am very familiar with people and their motivations.  I have also been an avid gamer since I was 6 years old, beginning with Final Fantasy for the NES.  Finally, the points that I have made in my OP do not require anything more than common sense to understand.  These are not complex development metrics.  They are simple behavioral dynamics and the most basic of business retention concepts.

  • wizardanimwizardanim Apple Valley, CAPosts: 278Member
    Originally posted by Strayfe

    Having said that, you are again, taking a system that will be easier to exploit and placing it in front of the people most likely to exploit it.

    Your use of the word "will" makes me believe you've played the game, or have information that the rest of us don't.  Can you share how these systems will work please so I can see your point?

    In my opinion, people have become lazy over the years, with dumb'd down mechanics like you said.  Throwing something at them that will make them think might be a good thing :)

  • DamonVileDamonVile Vancouver, BCPosts: 4,818Member
    Originally posted by wizardanim

     

    In my opinion, people have become lazy over the years, with dumb'd down mechanics like you said.  Throwing something at them that will make them think might be a good thing :)

    Or show devs that losing the lazy people and running with a smaller number of players ends up better for them and the fans of the game in the long run.

    Trying to please a spoiled brat is more work and tends to pay less than someone who is just there to have fun and enjoy the game for what it is.

  • wsmarwsmar Nashville, TNPosts: 122Member
    Originally posted by Strayfe

    The graphics are the least of this game's problems.  I've done my best to avoid the great World War EQNext debate, but it seems rather absurd to me that some of the core problems that the design philosophy behind EQN will create tend to go completely unnoticed.

    You're combining four things, F2P, action/twitch combat, console gameplay and destructible environments.  Think about that for a second.  You're going to take the console crowd, toss them in with the F2P crowd, throw in the FPS/Twitch gaming crowd, and then place them in an environment where things can be destroyed?  This is like taking a prison camp on a field trip to a Columbian drug cartel, or a group of sex offenders to a whorehouse.

    You are taking the bottom feeders of the MMORPG community, the lowest common denominators, and giving them an environment where they have carte blanche to devastate any efforts at forming an actual community.  Minecraft succeeds in part BECAUSE it is a contained experience.  When you allow such things to promulgate over a massive environment, involving many servers, you lose the ability to effectively police the demonstrated, natural instinct of the F2P/Console/Twitch playerbase to turn everything they touch into a free for all.

    I'll wait for someone to offer the inevitable argument that, "You're generalizing a huge group of people, and it's not going to be that bad."  Trust me, it is.  Lower barrier of entry -always-, without exception, results in lower commitment and loyalty.  Lack of loyalty and commitment results in a lower quality of customer.  This is really simple business practice and simple logic.  You don't see many people changing careers once they become a doctor or a lawyer, because it takes so much hard work and dedication to become a doctor or a lawyer.  How many quality people do you know who work at a fast food joint their entire life?  Exactly.

    That being said, steps will need to be taken by SOE to ensure that the playerbase they are pitching EQN toward doesn't steamroll their intended features and create an unplayable environment full of jerkwads.  To do that, I'd imagine many of the proposed elements of their pillars will need to be curtailed and cut back to some extent.  The holy trinity and aggro style of combat mechanics are used, in part, not because they're outdated and work well, but because they are impossible (or very difficult) to exploit, being as basic as they are.  Any "advanced" AI can be tricked, outsmarted and exploited once it becomes understood because AI simply hasn't evolved far enough to create what SOE are claiming they can create, unless, by some miracle, SOE has a secret robotics and AI division that has managed to outdo NASA and MIT. 

    Having said that, you are again, taking a system that will be easier to exploit and placing it in front of the people most likely to exploit it.  You are taking a game mechanic in destructible environments, and placing it in front of the people most likely to use it in a negative manner.  It is far easier to destroy than it is to create, and even if you suggest a ratio of 1 troll/jerkwad for every 50 legit players (very conservative estimate), the damage that many jerkwads can do far outweighs the benefits of including community building features to this extent.

    If SOE responds by limiting the methods by which trolls and jerkwads can ruin the experience for anyone else, it will necessarily limit their vision, their proposed features and create a watered down game on all fronts.  IF (and I say if speculatively, because I won't go as far as everyone else does and doomsay by saying the game will fail) Everquest: Next fails, it will be because SOE is severely underestimating the destructive behavior their target audience is capable of, within the context of an environment that would appear to be a perfect breeding ground for said behavior.

    I get where you are going with this, and it makes sense; however, these posts, and these attitudes are the ones that constantly trouble me the most. Not only do we barely know anything about the game STILL.. but even if we knew everything there is to know on paper about the game, that will never substitute for actually playing it. Even if the points you made flesh out to be exactly the way you speculate they will be, that doesn't mean you won't still enjoy the game.

     

    What I'm trying to say is, that many people lately have been taking their games too seriously. I'm not specifically pointing you out, I've been guilty of it too, but I think there is a real issue here. This post is riddled with negativity and worst case scenario instances, that in my opinion aren't even game breaking. So you die every so often from a griefer? If that's the worst that happens to you in a game, I'd say that's pretty good.

     

    SOE is trying to do something very different, and I think that they should be commended for that. It isn't easy. There are so many variables that go into an MMORPG, and often times that isn't quite understood by gamers. I think we as a community would do them a better service if we made logical statements(which you did) but didn't lace them in negativity. It happens so often, but I have always felt that it is more important to state issues, rather than say, here are the issues, if they aren't fixed the game will fail.

     

    That's just my 2 cents.

  • StrayfeStrayfe Los Angeles, CAPosts: 189Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by wizardanim

    Your use of the word "will" makes me believe you've played the game, or have information that the rest of us don't.  Can you share how these systems will work please so I can see your point?

    In my opinion, people have become lazy over the years, with dumb'd down mechanics like you said.  Throwing something at them that will make them think might be a good thing :)

    As I said, I have allowed for the possibility that SOE has a secret, hidden robotics and AI division that has managed to develop a game AI that can't be exploited.  Look at any RTS game, StarCraft, for example.  The entire concept of "Micro" exists because players are utilizing the best and easiest ways to defeat their opponent without taking damage themselves.

    In WoW and most modern MMOs: consider this extremely simple example:  Player One is on the top of a very steep hill.  Player Two is at the bottom of the very steep hill.  Player Two lures a monster to the edge of the hill and uses a stealth skill to disappear.  Player One proceeds to shoot the monster from an unassailable position on top of the hill.

    Modern MMOs deal with this in one of two ways.  The monster will simply begin to evade every attack thrown at it and return to its spawn point.  Or else the monster will defy physics and walk directly up the side of the cliff to beat on the player.  Both of these break immersion.  What is considered a valid tactic in actual warfare is deemed an exploit by developers who then include "cheats" to enable the monster to continue fighting the player.  Players are discouraged from thinking and using the environment to their advantage.

    A player, when confronted with the same scenario will remain out of Player One's range, or else disengage from combat and attack from a more opportune place and at a more opportune time.  The technology required to automate every possible scenario and tactical advantage in every single area that a player could use to "exploit" an "advanced" AI is DECADES AND DECADES away.

    Ergo, in the modern MMO, The AI "will" be exploited, and SOE will need to develop a way to prevent that.

  • kyssarikyssari Tipton, IAPosts: 142Member

    I find your analogy of doctors and lawyers being more loyal and better community members so to speak because of the hard work and dedication they put into getting there kind of ironic. In pretty much every f2p game out there the people who don't spend a dime have to put far more work and time into getting to max lvl and advancing their character than any player who dishes out the cash for all the perks to make it easier, yet the F2P player is the worthless bottom feeder? While your entitled to your opinions of course you don't need to come off sounding like the Hitler of online gaming by declaring anyone and everyone who doesn't subscribe to a game is a worthless bottomfeeder that ruins every game they touch. Theres just as many bad people who subscribe and dish out the cash as there are those who don't spend a dime. I've also played numerous games that are f2p with plenty of people who play them without spending a dime and said games have a far better community than a lot of sub games. I'll take the Vanguard community over the WoW community any day. Regardless of the games business model every game will have its bad apples, the simple fact of wether they spend the money or not doesn't mean they are any better or worse a member of the community. More and more I see more subscribers that are worse people because they become selfentitled arrogant elitists who think simply because they dished out some cash they are better than everyone else and this is not the case at all. Sorry to say but throwing a little cash around doesn't make you a better person than anyone else.

     

    I've been laid up for over 7 years with a damaged spine, unable to get out hardly let alone work, surviving off of limited assistance, only really able to interact with people online but regardless of that I am apparently a worthless bottom feeder because I can't afford to dish out the cash on a regular basis. Thanks for clearing that up OP I appreciate it.

  • cichy1012cichy1012 riverside, CAPosts: 278Member
    Originally posted by Strayfe

    The graphics are the least of this game's problems.  I've done my best to avoid the great World War EQNext debate, but it seems rather absurd to me that some of the core problems that the design philosophy behind EQN will create tend to go completely unnoticed.

    You're combining four things, F2P, action/twitch combat, console gameplay and destructible environments.  Think about that for a second.  You're going to take the console crowd, toss them in with the F2P crowd, throw in the FPS/Twitch gaming crowd, and then place them in an environment where things can be destroyed?  This is like taking a prison camp on a field trip to a Columbian drug cartel, or a group of sex offenders to a whorehouse.

    You are taking the bottom feeders of the MMORPG community, the lowest common denominators, and giving them an environment where they have carte blanche to devastate any efforts at forming an actual community.  Minecraft succeeds in part BECAUSE it is a contained experience.  When you allow such things to promulgate over a massive environment, involving many servers, you lose the ability to effectively police the demonstrated, natural instinct of the F2P/Console/Twitch playerbase to turn everything they touch into a free for all.

    I'll wait for someone to offer the inevitable argument that, "You're generalizing a huge group of people, and it's not going to be that bad."  Trust me, it is.  Lower barrier of entry -always-, without exception, results in lower commitment and loyalty.  Lack of loyalty and commitment results in a lower quality of customer.  This is really simple business practice and simple logic.  You don't see many people changing careers once they become a doctor or a lawyer, because it takes so much hard work and dedication to become a doctor or a lawyer.  How many quality people do you know who work at a fast food joint their entire life?  Exactly.

    That being said, steps will need to be taken by SOE to ensure that the playerbase they are pitching EQN toward doesn't steamroll their intended features and create an unplayable environment full of jerkwads.  To do that, I'd imagine many of the proposed elements of their pillars will need to be curtailed and cut back to some extent.  The holy trinity and aggro style of combat mechanics are used, in part, not because they're outdated and work well, but because they are impossible (or very difficult) to exploit, being as basic as they are.  Any "advanced" AI can be tricked, outsmarted and exploited once it becomes understood because AI simply hasn't evolved far enough to create what SOE are claiming they can create, unless, by some miracle, SOE has a secret robotics and AI division that has managed to outdo NASA and MIT. 

    Having said that, you are again, taking a system that will be easier to exploit and placing it in front of the people most likely to exploit it.  You are taking a game mechanic in destructible environments, and placing it in front of the people most likely to use it in a negative manner.  It is far easier to destroy than it is to create, and even if you suggest a ratio of 1 troll/jerkwad for every 50 legit players (very conservative estimate), the damage that many jerkwads can do far outweighs the benefits of including community building features to this extent.

    If SOE responds by limiting the methods by which trolls and jerkwads can ruin the experience for anyone else, it will necessarily limit their vision, their proposed features and create a watered down game on all fronts.  IF (and I say if speculatively, because I won't go as far as everyone else does and doomsay by saying the game will fail) Everquest: Next fails, it will be because SOE is severely underestimating the destructive behavior their target audience is capable of, within the context of an environment that would appear to be a perfect breeding ground for said behavior.

     

    Like I said in an earlier post "THE BANE OF MMO EXISTENCE"

     

    I love this site, but all I ever hear when a game is about to come out is "IT SUCKS", "ITS GONNA BE STUPID", "IM NOT A FANBOY OR ANYTHING BUT..."  " I PLAYED TO LEVEL 2 AND HERES MY 15 PAGE ESSAY" Its become the bane of MMO existance.

    chill out, try it out. If your an EQ fan go for it, if not who gives a crap. Try it anyway.

    Its free for pete's sake....

  • ZorgoZorgo Deepintheheartof, TXPosts: 2,226Member
    Originally posted by Strayfe

     

    You're combining four things, F2P, action/twitch combat, console gameplay and destructible environments.  Think about that for a second.  You're going to take the console crowd, toss them in with the F2P crowd, throw in the FPS/Twitch gaming crowd, and then place them in an environment where things can be destroyed?  This is like taking a prison camp on a field trip to a Columbian drug cartel, or a group of sex offenders to a whorehouse.

    You are taking the bottom feeders of the MMORPG community, the lowest common denominators, and giving them an environment where they have carte blanche to devastate any efforts at forming an actual community.  Minecraft succeeds in part BECAUSE it is a contained experience.  When you allow such things to promulgate over a massive environment, involving many servers, you lose the ability to effectively police the demonstrated, natural instinct of the F2P/Console/Twitch playerbase to turn everything they touch into a free for all.

     

    Pardon me....but aren't all three of those pure speculation at this point - I'm not saying it isn't a good guess, but isn't it a guess?

    Second.....aren't 99% of all mmo's f2p in some way now? I mean....so you respect WoW players, EVE players and....Secret World? Are there any others?

    Well - good luck in your endeavors to say that 1% of the gaming community deserves 99% of the catering by developers to be paid for by the bottom feeders....

     

     

  • hayes303hayes303 Edmonton, ABPosts: 369Member

    The title and tone of this seems a little draconian based on whats known to date. There is a lot of time to go until release, and I would imagine there are many things that will alter the perceptions we currently have of how the various mechanics will mesh.

    SOE has been working on this for a while, I'm sure they have noted a lot of these concerns themselves. If not, thats what a real beta is for. 

  • StrayfeStrayfe Los Angeles, CAPosts: 189Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by kyssari

    I find your analogy of doctors and lawyers being more loyal and better community members so to speak because of the hard work and dedication they put into getting there kind of ironic. In pretty much every f2p game out there the people who don't spend a dime have to put far more work and time into getting to max lvl and advancing their character than any player who dishes out the cash for all the perks to make it easier, yet the F2P player is the worthless bottom feeder? While your entitled to your opinions of course you don't need to come off sounding like the Hitler of online gaming by declaring anyone and everyone who doesn't subscribe to a game is a worthless bottomfeeder that ruins every game they touch. Theres just as many bad people who subscribe and dish out the cash as there are those who don't spend a dime. I've also played numerous games that are f2p with plenty of people who play them without spending a dime and said games have a far better community than a lot of sub games. I'll take the Vanguard community over the WoW community any day. Regardless of the games business model every game will have its bad apples, the simple fact of wether they spend the money or not doesn't mean they are any better or worse a member of the community. More and more I see more subscribers that are worse people because they become selfentitled arrogant elitists who think simply because they dished out some cash they are better than everyone else and this is not the case at all. Sorry to say but throwing a little cash around doesn't make you a better person than anyone else.

     

    I've been laid up for over 7 years with a damaged spine, unable to get out hardly let alone work, surviving off of limited assistance, only really able to interact with people online but regardless of that I am apparently a worthless bottom feeder because I can't afford to dish out the cash on a regular basis. Thanks for clearing that up OP I appreciate it.

    You misunderstood my post.  Doctors and lawyers aren't inherently better members of the community.  They are more loyal to their professions, because of the time and effort and money for school they have spent to get where they are.  They are less likely to change careers.  Likewise, a gaming experience that requires time, effort and money is more likely to retain customers long term, because they have more invested in it.

    A free to play game is like a McDonalds.  There are more people working at McDonalds than there are lawyers and doctors in the world.  But the turnover is extremely high, the quality of people working at a fast food place is generally lower because the job is easier and has far less requirements.  And employees at a McDonalds aren't likely to work there over the long term.  Why is this difficult to understand?  This isn't a personal attack.  It's a simple fact.

  • kyssarikyssari Tipton, IAPosts: 142Member
    Originally posted by Zorgo
    Originally posted by Strayfe

     

    You're combining four things, F2P, action/twitch combat, console gameplay and destructible environments.  Think about that for a second.  You're going to take the console crowd, toss them in with the F2P crowd, throw in the FPS/Twitch gaming crowd, and then place them in an environment where things can be destroyed?  This is like taking a prison camp on a field trip to a Columbian drug cartel, or a group of sex offenders to a whorehouse.

    You are taking the bottom feeders of the MMORPG community, the lowest common denominators, and giving them an environment where they have carte blanche to devastate any efforts at forming an actual community.  Minecraft succeeds in part BECAUSE it is a contained experience.  When you allow such things to promulgate over a massive environment, involving many servers, you lose the ability to effectively police the demonstrated, natural instinct of the F2P/Console/Twitch playerbase to turn everything they touch into a free for all.

     

    Pardon me....but aren't all three of those pure speculation at this point - I'm not saying it isn't a good guess, but isn't it a guess?

    Second.....aren't 99% of all mmo's f2p in some way now? I mean....so you respect WoW players, EVE players and....Secret World? Are there any others?

    Well - good luck in your endeavors to say that 1% of the gaming community deserves 99% of the catering by developers to be paid for by the bottom feeders....

     

     

    Even The Secret World is B2P now like GW2 and such. Only other sub game I can think of off the top of my head these days is FFXIV ARR.

  • CyclopsSlayerCyclopsSlayer Minneapolis, MNPosts: 532Member
    @OP, I agree 100%. These were among my first thoughts when I watched the EQN presentation.
    That and surrounding some new settlement with land claims to seal others in/out or undermining buildings and walls so that they fall into the fires below. Much as I did in Populous lo these many years ago.
  • bingbongbrosbingbongbros Vista, CAPosts: 650Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by Strayfe 
    Bleep bloop.

     

    Now just imagine if SOE put something in EQN to capture the MOBA community!!! I think it would actually trigger the apocalypse.

    Playing: Smite, Marvel Heroes
    Played: Nexus:Kingdom of the Winds, Everquest, DAoC, Everquest 2, WoW, Matrix Online, Vangaurd, SWG, DDO, EVE, Fallen Earth, LoTRo, CoX, Champions Online, WAR, Darkfall, Mortal Online, Guild Wars, Rift, Tera, Aion, AoC, Gods and Heroes, DCUO, FF14, TSW, SWTOR, GW2, Wildstar, ESO, ArcheAge
    Waiting On: Nothing. Mmorpg's are dead.

  • ignore_meignore_me Apple Valley, CAPosts: 1,987Member

    When they announced the game I noticed that they kept on harping on a robust reporting system. I assumed this was meant to keep people from making structures that look like giant dicks, but now that you bring this up, there is a great deal of potential for all kinds of griefing and dumbfuckery.

    Free accounts made by purposeful malefactors looking to simply frustrate others for fun. As a PvP game enthusiast, I harbor no illusions about the close genetic relationship between PvP gamers and Career Griefers. EQN has the potential to change the landscape, and that landscape could quickly become a post-apocalyptic zone of virtual assholes unless Sony is vigilant.

    Survivor of the great MMORPG Famine of 2011

«1345
Sign In or Register to comment.