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!

EverQuest Next: All Races Can Play All Classes

24

Comments

  • sgtalonsgtalon Lenox, MIPosts: 128Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by Drakephire
    I am disturbed by one aspect of this video. They pretty much admitted that the player round table was simply a gimmick.  As long as the developer vision coincided with the voting outcome, then they could pretend like the players had input. But as soon as the voting deviates from the developers view, then it's a no go.

    I have been along for the entire Planetside 2 ride. From initial announcement to until 9 months after release and I don't think it is like that.

    They take in the suggestions and requests of the community and use that to guide their decisions. They don't say well 60% of the community want this so we have to do it. Especially when we don't know the whole picture. They even gave the example of why limits would not work.

    What they do is the have a choice to make. A or B, both have merits, both are cool, and then someone in the community comes up with a really cool idea that expands the concept to something that makes one of them even better. 

    In the case of class restrictions it could have been more like, well if 90% of the community really wanted class restrictions we would do it. 

    You have to know that the creation of a game like this is immensely complex. Every little thing can effect thousands of other things in a ripple effect. All of those choices have to be weighed against the overall design of the game. It isn't simply, well more than 50% want it so lets do it... That is not leadership, that is not going to give us a game that is going to stand out from the WoW clones of the world.

  • jerlot65jerlot65 Lake Mary, FLPosts: 788Member
    Originally posted by GimiZigi
    It is not a game breaker for me but it is unfortunate news because it reveals (for me) what SOE's true focus is which is money and not the players. If they were truly listening to the players then they would of stuck with the majority vote.

    i always found these arguments funny.  You really think companies sit back and think about how much they can piss off their customer base in order to "make more money"?   If a companies soul purpose is to make money (which if 99.99999999999% of the time), then their decisions are based on getting and keeping the most customers possible.

    Now is a company's goal is to "stay true to its product's direction above all else" then they can piss off as many people they like because they don't care about the money.

    So basically people have better odds of liking something a "Money grubbing" company has to offer......

    image
  • OzmodanOzmodan Hilliard, OHPosts: 7,183Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by Wiha
    So I can roll gnome shadow knight-paladin-druid-necromancer? Personally I'm less interested in this game with every new info they reveal. SOE devs must really hate Everquest to erase everything from that game.

    You don't seem to understand, they are fixing all the things that are wrong with EQ based games.  Good for them.

  • DihoruDihoru ConstantaPosts: 2,731Member
    Originally posted by Vivasvan
    No idea what the voting system is for. Maybe to allude people to think that they are making this game "together" with the "community"

    Lets get real. They have stated its F2P - that means they will make this game the cheapest way possible.

    What better way then to just remove all the restrictions based on lore etc so they don't have to work or think too much about the stuff.

    I really wish people would open there eyes a little and see what is going on here.

     

    -points- Might want to take the tinfoil hat off. The US might be dicking allot of countries over but there's no NWO led by aliens.

    As to your actual points:

    1) F2P =/= shit but if you believe it hard enough it will be true for you;

    2) Removing class restrictions regarding races doesn't make things easier, it actually makes them harder ;) (now you don't know which side will be fielding what based on races);

    3) Some of us have our eyes wide open. We no longer demand the world in a MMO (gameplay, graphics,etc) and certainly do not act like petulant and entitled children because what we want isn't happening. We enjoy what we get that we like and ignore what we don't, the cyber world is no longer made up of 1 or 2 MMOs and it's certainly no longer a big boys only game.

    image
  • Tek101Tek101 Denver, COPosts: 3Member
    Ogre hybrid bard/rogue/enchanter here i come!!

    fear not on how the way of the light hits

  • ChochChoch Stamford, CTPosts: 157Member
    Originally posted by jerlot65
    Originally posted by GimiZigi
    It is not a game breaker for me but it is unfortunate news because it reveals (for me) what SOE's true focus is which is money and not the players. If they were truly listening to the players then they would of stuck with the majority vote.

    i always found these arguments funny.  You really think companies sit back and think about how much they can piss off their customer base in order to "make more money"?   If a companies soul purpose is to make money (which if 99.99999999999% of the time), then their decisions are based on getting and keeping the most customers possible.

    Now is a company's goal is to "stay true to its product's direction above all else" then they can piss off as many people they like because they don't care about the money.

    So basically people have better odds of liking something a "Money grubbing" company has to offer......

    Where exactly did I say in my statement that SOE is trying to piss off their player base to make money? I think you're getting a little dramatic on me here and making things up. Now go grab a tissue box and dry up those tears.

    All I am saying is that SOE had this vote to see what we (the players) think. The majority of people voted one way and how does SOE respond? Toss it out the window and go with their own plan (which they had planned on doing in the first place anyways - so why even have a vote?). This leads me to believe they only care about giving everyone what they want, even if it means having giant troll rogues or tiny gnome tanks. They want as many people to play EQN as possible so they can make as much money as possible. I have no problem with that but it simply leads ME to believe that they care more about making money than actually listening to the majority of people playing the game and keeping the core values and integrity of EQ at heart.

  • ChochChoch Stamford, CTPosts: 157Member
    Originally posted by Arglebargle
    Originally posted by Drakephire
    I am disturbed by one aspect of this video. They pretty much admitted that the player round table was simply a gimmick.  As long as the developer vision coincided with the voting outcome, then they could pretend like the players had input. But as soon as the voting deviates from the developers view, then it's a no go.

    Not sure about the gimmick thing.  Maybe.  But you shouldn't design games by majority rule.  Developer vision should indeed trump that.   It needs to be informed developer vision:  You'd better have a feel for what's prefered.   But you need to do what's best for the game, and prospective players don't always have that.   Something that's cool to have in a game may not be worth the effort to produce and support.

     

    I wouldn't call it a 'gimmick' myself but the dev's did say in the video that they originally didn't want to have class restriction. So why even have the vote? For sh*ts and giggles? Seems like a pretty big waste of time if you ask me.

    However, I do agree that I think developers vision for the game should trump the majority vote but I don't think developers should completely throw out the majorities vote out the windows and say 'screw you, i'm doing it my way'. There should be some kind of compromise that holds true to the developers vision while appealing to the majority which is not impossible.

  • RamanadjinnRamanadjinn Huntsville, ALPosts: 1,365Member Uncommon

    It makes me happy to see they aren't just doing what the majority of the MMO community/EQ fanbase wants.

    When I heard about the roundtable and saw the reveal I all but wrote this game off.  Things like this give me hope this could still be a fun game for me though.  

     

    I am of the opinion that making a game based on the wishes of the MMO community majority is how you make WoW.

  • hraethhraeth Hillsboro, ORPosts: 34Member
    The Round Table isn't a place for you to put in your democratic vote on how the game should be.  Good games aren't made by democratic election of features.  The Round Table is a place for your voice to be heard so that the developers can get an overall picture of how people feel about certain aspects of game play and to spark dialogue about it.  If you look at these results and think, "OMG they're ignoring their player base!" then you're missing the point of The Round Table.
  • onlinenow25onlinenow25 San Diego, CAPosts: 275Member
    Originally posted by bcbully

    "We don't want players to be forced to make a decision they would regret based on knowledge they didn't have." 

     

    I strongly disagree with the general premise of this statement. There should be meaningful choices throughout the game. From character creation to high level character design. I can live with no race/class restrictions, but if the over arching design of EQN is to never put players in a position of making tough lasting choices, I will be sorely disappointed. 

     

    edit- sound reasoning behind the decision. Why even put it to a vote? hmmm...

     

    Did you not read the part about "Knowledge They Didn't Have" in that sentence? 

     

    You can't make a meaningful choice if you don't have the knowledge that its a meaningful choice.  At that point it just looks like a meaningless hidden restriction and not based on a choice you made.

     

    Also I am kinda sick of hearing that phrase 'meaningful choice' when we are talking about video games.  If you want meaningful choice you can do that in real life, but in a video game nothing is actually meaningful.  The point of a game is to entertain, if you want immersion to the extent that your action change the game world well your probably never going to get that in a multiplayer game simply because programming a MMO where each action an individual player makes changes the world is just not possible unless you have a dev team that works 24/7 on creating new content every single day.  Even then you still won't have 'meaningful choice' because your impact on the game wouldn't be very meaningful when there are hundreds of thousands of other players making the same 'meaningful choices' as you and impacting the game in the same fashion, your 'change' on the game would really be no different than anyone else hence your 'meaningful choice' no longer has any significance in the game and then your back here saying how you want 'meaningful choice' in your MMO.

     

    It really seems like most people that ask for 'meaningful choice' in a video game want it because they feel in real life nothing they do is meaningful because nothing drastically changes.  Fact of the matter is if a video game was able to be designed to be almost exactly like real life, you would still feel the same way you do now because your actions would still seem insignificant because there would be hundreds of thousands of players making those same or similar 'meaningful choices.'

     

     

     

     

  • RyowulfRyowulf Greensburg, PAPosts: 668Member

    The poll just has a lot of uninformed people voting that's all.  Not only that but if you broke it down. I think you would find these people would be fine or even want to play some race/classes. They just don't want to see the particular race/class they dislike in game.

    In EQN you can make your own class.  You can be just a warrior or you could add a few wizard skills and become a swordmage.  Why limit people's choice? The lore? Well just don't have lore that says so and so can't be that or use this.

    And what about later when they add a new class? Sorry Mr. Ogre player you never knew we were going to add this class and now that you see it you think some of its skills would enhance your gameplay, but you can't use it.

    Here is the thing, if a player has a bias against a race/class. He just can't accept it. It makes no sense to him. Just don't play that race/class. 

  • ChochChoch Stamford, CTPosts: 157Member
    Originally posted by onlinenow25
    Originally posted by bcbully

    "We don't want players to be forced to make a decision they would regret based on knowledge they didn't have." 

     

    I strongly disagree with the general premise of this statement. There should be meaningful choices throughout the game. From character creation to high level character design. I can live with no race/class restrictions, but if the over arching design of EQN is to never put players in a position of making tough lasting choices, I will be sorely disappointed. 

     

    edit- sound reasoning behind the decision. Why even put it to a vote? hmmm...

     

    Did you not read the part about "Knowledge They Didn't Have" in that sentence? 

     

    You can't make a meaningful choice if you don't have the knowledge that its a meaningful choice.  At that point it just looks like a meaningless hidden restriction and not based on a choice you made.

     

    Also I am kinda sick of hearing that phrase 'meaningful choice' when we are talking about video games.  If you want meaningful choice you can do that in real life, but in a video game nothing is actually meaningful.  The point of a game is to entertain, if you want immersion to the extent that your action change the game world well your probably never going to get that in a multiplayer game simply because programming a MMO where each action an individual player makes changes the world is just not possible unless you have a dev team that works 24/7 on creating new content every single day.

    The purpose of making a meaningful decision is that you have to base your decision off the information you have at the time of that decision but more importantly, having to deal with those consequences in the future. What those consequences are is entirely up to the dev's to decide but they chose to just not deal with it entirely and go the easy route.

    As for the use of the word 'meaningful choice', it  is based off the amount of time and effort you personally invest in that one decision. Whether you spend that much time and effort thinking of about it in a game or in real life is irrelevant, the only difference is that you can always start over in a game, not so much in real life.

     

  • ChochChoch Stamford, CTPosts: 157Member
    Originally posted by Ryowulf

    The poll just has a lot of uninformed people voting that's all.  Not only that but if you broke it down. I think you would find these people would be fine or even want to play some race/classes. They just don't want to see the particular race/class they dislike in game.

    In EQN you can make your own class.  You can be just a warrior or you could add a few wizard skills and become a swordmage.  Why limit people's choice? The lore? Well just don't have lore that says so and so can't be that or use this.

    And what about later when they add a new class? Sorry Mr. Ogre player you never knew we were going to add this class and now that you see it you think some of its skills would enhance your gameplay, but you can't use it.

    Here is the thing, if a player has a bias against a race/class. He just can't accept it. It makes no sense to him. Just don't play that race/class. 

    No offense but I honestly have no idea what your point is here so I will simply respond to your "And what about later when they add a new class? Sorry Mr. Ogre player you never knew we were going to add this class and now that you see it you think some of its skills would enhance your gameplay, but you can't use it."  statement.

    This is not new. ANY time there is an expansion or game update, players either rerole a new character so they can play that new race/class or the developers allow you the chance to make changes to your character to include that new change. Players want immersion, they want a game with real meaningful decisions, not a free-for-all, do-whatever-you-want game.

  • ChochChoch Stamford, CTPosts: 157Member
    Originally posted by Ramanadjinn

    It makes me happy to see they aren't just doing what the majority of the MMO community/EQ fanbase wants.

    When I heard about the roundtable and saw the reveal I all but wrote this game off.  Things like this give me hope this could still be a fun game for me though.  

     

    I am of the opinion that making a game based on the wishes of the MMO community majority is how you make WoW.

    If I am not mistaken, doesn't this decision make EverQuest Next MORE of a wow-clone with no class/race restriction?

  • DrDreamDrDream Mill Hall, PAPosts: 163Member
    I feel like im one of a few but i like Class restrictions based upon lore, while many may disagree many raced in WoW wouldn't make good druids, my biggest gripe is tauren rogues, i just cant see  them being viable rogues when it comes to there size, along with Tauren paladins. In games like Rift it makes sense they all seem like they could do anything but i guess in the end it all depends on the game the races and the choices of course. we shall see how it all fairs i guess.

    image

  • DihoruDihoru ConstantaPosts: 2,731Member
    Originally posted by DrDream
    I feel like im one of a few but i like Class restrictions based upon lore, while many may disagree many raced in WoW wouldn't make good druids, my biggest gripe is tauren rogues, i just cant see  them being viable rogues when it comes to there size, along with Tauren paladins. In games like Rift it makes sense they all seem like they could do anything but i guess in the end it all depends on the game the races and the choices of course. we shall see how it all fairs i guess.

    ^ people should take lessons from this guy on objectivity.

    image
  • YizleYizle Atlanta, GAPosts: 517Member
    Originally posted by Wiha
    So I can roll gnome shadow knight-paladin-druid-necromancer? Personally I'm less interested in this game with every new info they reveal. SOE devs must really hate Everquest to erase everything from that game.

    Getting this same feeling. My interest wanes the more I hear about it.

  • NadiaNadia Canonsburg, PAPosts: 11,866Member Common
    Originally posted by GimiZigi

    the dev's did say in the video that they originally didn't want to have class restriction. So why even have the vote? For sh*ts and giggles? Seems like a pretty big waste of time if you ask me.

    I agree - why put it up for vote?

  • bcbullybcbully Westland, MIPosts: 8,273Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by eric_w66
    It's being made for the PS4, that's all you need know about this game.

    image

  • NadiaNadia Canonsburg, PAPosts: 11,866Member Common
    Originally posted by GimiZigi

    Players want immersion, they want a game with real meaningful decisions, not a free-for-all, do-whatever-you-want game.

    as I posted earlier

    at SOE fanfaire they said there are class restrictions - you cannot choose both a paladin and shadowknight

  • DistopiaDistopia Baltimore, MDPosts: 16,905Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by neobahamut20
    So much for having a round table. Another bunch of liars, like the ones working on GW2.

    A round table like this isn't put in place to govern the developers. It's simply there to provide feedback and opinions of the playerbase. That doesn't mean they will allow the players to dictate the games design.

    For every minute you are angry , you lose 60 seconds of happiness."-Emerson

    It is a sign of a defeated man, to attack at ones character in the face of logic and reason- Me

  • MardyMardy hollywood, CAPosts: 2,213Member
    Originally posted by Nadia
    Originally posted by GimiZigi

    the dev's did say in the video that they originally didn't want to have class restriction. So why even have the vote? For sh*ts and giggles? Seems like a pretty big waste of time if you ask me.

    I agree - why put it up for vote?

     

    Agreed, seems like the round table is nothing but a PR stunt.  They never intended on changing their minds based on the votes, they likely already know exactly what they want to do with the game inside out.  The EQ Next Round Table seems to be just a way for them to keep players interested in the game while they pretend to take notice to what players want from the game.

     

    The whole ninja & guns question, you can bet they already have their minds made up about putting them in the game before they even put the votes up.

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

  • ChochChoch Stamford, CTPosts: 157Member
    Originally posted by Nadia
    Originally posted by GimiZigi

    Players want immersion, they want a game with real meaningful decisions, not a free-for-all, do-whatever-you-want game.

    as I posted earlier

    at SOE fanfaire they said there are class restrictions - you cannot choose both a paladin and shadowknight

    Sorry for the confusion, I was referring to no class restriction as per your race. With no restriction, we end up living in a world with giant ogre/troll rogues, things that are completely out of place and ultimately making the game less immersive. This may not be a big deal for people which is why I said that this subject is not a game-breaker for me but it does make you feel like you're playing in some silly cartoon game with oddball characters running around.

  • GolelornGolelorn Hiding From Social Media Peeping Toms, ALPosts: 1,099Member Uncommon
    This will be a game that tries to cater to everyone, and no one will like it for that very reason. Stand for something SOE. Have some balls.
  • ChochChoch Stamford, CTPosts: 157Member
    Originally posted by Golelorn
    This will be a game that tries to cater to everyone, and no one will like it for that very reason. Stand for something SOE. Have some balls.

    If there was a like button on this website, I would break it for you.

    +1 for you sir!

Sign In or Register to comment.