It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!
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 The holy trinity and aggro style of combat mechanics are used, in part, not because they're outdated and work well, but because they are impossible (or very difficult) to exploit, being as basic as they are.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.