I'm not a huge fan of waiting these days either, but that shows I've lost some of my patience. I believe having to rest and heal after a fighter is more realistic (doesn't kill immersion) and find that getting your health/magic back to full after a fight is dumb. I'd rather have something in between. Make it so your health and magic don't come back. You have to go to a town and rest to get it back. Let the player restore health (but not magic via potions(but has a finite amount)). They can also restore via magic if they have spells. This would mean people don't have to rest all the time, but they also can't keep killing non stop. Eventually they have to town and restock/rest.
Really? More boring stuff before players can really play.
And why would "realistic" be desirable in video games where the goal is to entertain. I laugh out loud when people put "realism" and "magic" in the same paragraph.
I say it is super realistic to take 2 second to charge all the mana back because that is how "realistic" magic work. If you don't believe me, ask David Copperfield.
I don't really understand how you are entertained by non stop mindless killing in most cases, but it seems those are the games you like. I'm attempting to put some measure of strategy into the gaming without having the burden of having to sit constantly. The strategy I put up there would be great for a non instanced game IMO. It would stop people from camping and force them to think about what they are doing instead of mindlessly running around and clicking on exclamation marks/following GPS. They would have to plan their trip, how long it will take, and how far they can go before coming back. To me this would be a lot more entertaining then what you see in a game like Diablo 3. I'd also like to see more choices in combat. Have different equipment for different and combat abilities for different situations, but only allow you to use a finite amount of abilities at once. That at least makes you figure out what will work and won't work. Magic is a source to me, but it is only for magic users. Health is a determination of how much one can take before death. Magic can restore health, but health doesn't just regenerate back to full after a fight IMO. Can it be that way? Sure it can be any way a developer wants it to be, but it sure doesn't make any sense to me and it detracts from the game for me.
I really don't understand how you are confused between "strategy" and "boring and easy mode down time". Is there any strategy in waiting for regen .. i think not.
Now strategy in using skills, optimizing DPS, those I am all for .. waiting .. not so much.
I just explained it all in my post. It was an alternative to downtime. There is not really any down time. You just have to go back to town to rest once in a while. It's like driving a car. You stop for a few minutes at the gas station to refill. This keeps the player moving instead of staying stationary. It helps in a non instanced environment to keep people from camping spawns non stop. It makes the player or group think about how far they can venture into the world.
You are contradicting yourself again. If you go back to town to "rest", then it is down-time, unless you rest for only a second. In that case, you are asking the players to make town trips frequently, which is no strategy and boring.
When I think about it, the only thing I really want from original EQ is the need to group. I'm so tired of all these solo based MMO's, let's actually have an MMO that deserves to be online. I mean, seriously, why build an online game if the only thing you're going to do online is walk past another player and say Hi on the way. It's completely pointless.
Of course, for that need to group you'll need to add other parts of EQ, like the death penalty - if people are worried about death then they'll play better and be more considerate of the people who are supporting their game. That builds community and that's what MMO's, to me, are all about. With solo based MMO's, the players might as well be replaced by bots, I wouldn't be able to tell the difference anyway.
When I think about it, the only thing I really want from original EQ is the need to group. I'm so tired of all these solo based MMO's, let's actually have an MMO that deserves to be online. I mean, seriously, why build an online game if the only thing you're going to do online is walk past another player and say Hi on the way. It's completely pointless.
Pointless to you ... what many others like.
That is no difference than lobby games, which i bet is also "pointless" to you.
Liking a thing and ruining a genre to aim for the lowest common denominator (single player fan creating to play a mmo as if there are nO real people) is different things.
rpg/mmorg history: Dun Darach>Bloodwych>Bards Tale 1-3>Eye of the beholder > Might and Magic 2,3,5 > FFVII> Baldur's Gate 1, 2 > Planescape Torment >Morrowind > WOW > oblivion > LOTR > Guild Wars (1900hrs elementalist) Vanguard. > GW2(1000 elementalist), Wildstar
Originally posted by Bladestrom Liking a thing and ruining a genre to aim for the lowest common denominator (single player fan creating to play a mmo as if there are nO real people) is different things.
"ruining" is just a matter of perspective. To me, MMOs are much better games today than the UO/EQ days. Heck, if MMOs are still like UO/EQ, i doubt i would be playing any.
If they put mechanics in the game that require socialization (no built in auction feature, no minimap, difficult soloing, no quest hubs), then people will socialize. If they make socialization optional then practically no one will socialize. Sadly EQ Next looks more like WoW to me than EQ (arcade-like combat, cartoons, and death penalty is most likely nonexistent, and you can expect quest hub leveling.)
Originally posted by SquireX Ahh...1999. I remember going into Babbage's and trying to decide between UO or EQ as my very first MMORPG. Legends of Kunark had just released and I finally was lured by the 3D State of the Art Graphics :)I fondly remember late, late nights spending hours upon hours with EQ. Way before KEI, etc when it took at least 15 minutes between battles for my caster to gain back mana to be ready. And back in the day when you spent Sunday afternoon at the EC Tunnel to WTS or WTB ;)I played EQ for years (/timeplayed was a depressing thing to see), but then finally was lured to the "next" big things like Planet Side, DAOC, WoW...I think others nailed it when they said EQ was more social because we had to be for grouping, barter, plus we had a ton of down time. But as others have also noted, today we have so many other distractions, be it social media or other games (fire up a quick game of Hearthstone) :)I definitely yearn for a greater challenge and something different than today's standard MMORPG experience. For me (today anyway), I've been enjoying Age of Wushu. I actually posted a similar EQ nostalgia theme thread this morning on that forum.[mod edit please don't discuss emulated games [/mod edit] But I think many of us (including myself) really can't go back to the graphics of those days.
Ha, first time I saw EQ was in babbages. The dragon intrigued me so I checked out the box. Didn't really understand it and set it down. Months later when contemplating buying UO Second Age, I decided to check out gamecenter.com for reviews; and EQ was front page news; everyone saying how much they love it and even the game reviewers were saying how they'd rather be playing EQ than reviewing other games.
Luckily, i don't need you to like me to enjoy video games. -nariusseldon. In F2P I think it's more a case of the game's trying to play the player's. -laserit
If they put mechanics in the game that require socialization (no built in auction feature, no minimap, difficult soloing, no quest hubs), then people will socialize. If they make socialization optional then practically no one will socialize. Sadly EQ Next looks more like WoW to me than EQ (arcade-like combat, cartoons, and death penalty is most likely nonexistent, and you can expect quest hub leveling.)
If they put the mechanics you propose (no built in auction feature, no minimap, difficult soloing, no quest hubs), then most people will quit and go to another game that has those features.
There is a reason why those features are more or less standard.
You can't force people to socialize in games if they don't want to .. because they have choices of what games to play.
If they put the mechanics you propose (no built in auction feature, no minimap, difficult soloing, no quest hubs), then most people will quit and go to another game that has those features.
There is a reason why those features are more or less standard.
You can't force people to socialize in games if they don't want to .. because they have choices of what games to play.
That would be great, let them go to another game, get rid of the disease of solo whiners and let's get the people who want to actually play an online game back into the genre. Those 'features', as you put it, appeal to the brainless masses who just want to stare zombie like at the screen, pressing buttons until they get bright flashes of colour and cheery sounds to praise them for how 'amazing' they are at playing the game.
Yeah, I wouldn't shed any tears if they up and left.
That would be great, let them go to another game, get rid of the disease of solo whiners and let's get the people who want to actually play an online game back into the genre. Those 'features', as you put it, appeal to the brainless masses who just want to stare zombie like at the screen, pressing buttons until they get bright flashes of colour and cheery sounds to praise them for how 'amazing' they are at playing the game.
Yeah, I wouldn't shed any tears if they up and left.
ROFL!
'Disease of solo whiners'?
You do realize this is a VIDEO GAME right?
I mean, I can understand trying to feel superior but trying to feel superior on the fact you like a particular VIDEO GAME?
/Facepalm
Gdemami - Informing people about your thoughts and impressions is not a review, it's a blog.
That would be great, let them go to another game, get rid of the disease of solo whiners and let's get the people who want to actually play an online game back into the genre. Those 'features', as you put it, appeal to the brainless masses who just want to stare zombie like at the screen, pressing buttons until they get bright flashes of colour and cheery sounds to praise them for how 'amazing' they are at playing the game.
Yeah, I wouldn't shed any tears if they up and left.
ROFL!
'Disease of solo whiners'?
You do realize this is a VIDEO GAME right?
I mean, I can understand trying to feel superior but trying to feel superior on the fact you like a particular VIDEO GAME?
/Facepalm
well its not a simple Video Game as the rest, its an MMORPG, means Massive Multiplay Online Role Play Game ..
Agreed. OP.. however, the community and era has changed.. EQ1 was more of a RPG experience as you covered, from exploration, training, wanderering, etc etc.. Today's gamers don't want that.. I believe a vast majority just want some arcade action shooting gallery.. Line up the mobs and let us mow them down.. Battles are quick with instant recovery and on to the next mob 3 feet away (ok I exaggerated a little).. I think the days of AD&D type of behavior are lost.. There is something lost when people speed through the forest without looking at the trees...
That would be great, let them go to another game, get rid of the disease of solo whiners and let's get the people who want to actually play an online game back into the genre. Those 'features', as you put it, appeal to the brainless masses who just want to stare zombie like at the screen, pressing buttons until they get bright flashes of colour and cheery sounds to praise them for how 'amazing' they are at playing the game.
Yeah, I wouldn't shed any tears if they up and left.
ROFL!
'Disease of solo whiners'?
You do realize this is a VIDEO GAME right?
I mean, I can understand trying to feel superior but trying to feel superior on the fact you like a particular VIDEO GAME?
/Facepalm
well its not a simple Video Game as the rest, its an MMORPG, means Massive Multiplay Online Role Play Game ..
nah ... mmorpg does not mean much .. it is just a convenient label for a group of online games that share some common features (like LFD).
That would be great, let them go to another game, get rid of the disease of solo whiners and let's get the people who want to actually play an online game back into the genre. Those 'features', as you put it, appeal to the brainless masses who just want to stare zombie like at the screen, pressing buttons until they get bright flashes of colour and cheery sounds to praise them for how 'amazing' they are at playing the game.
Yeah, I wouldn't shed any tears if they up and left.
ROFL!
'Disease of solo whiners'?
You do realize this is a VIDEO GAME right?
I mean, I can understand trying to feel superior but trying to feel superior on the fact you like a particular VIDEO GAME?
/Facepalm
well its not a simple Video Game as the rest, its an MMORPG, means Massive Multiplay Online Role Play Game ..
Originally posted by vandal5627 Originally posted by loulakiOriginally posted by jpnzOriginally posted by UsualSuspect
That would be great, let them go to another game, get rid of the disease of solo whiners and let's get the people who want to actually play an online game back into the genre. Those 'features', as you put it, appeal to the brainless masses who just want to stare zombie like at the screen, pressing buttons until they get bright flashes of colour and cheery sounds to praise them for how 'amazing' they are at playing the game.Yeah, I wouldn't shed any tears if they up and left.ROFL!'Disease of solo whiners'?You do realize this is a VIDEO GAME right?I mean, I can understand trying to feel superior but trying to feel superior on the fact you like a particular VIDEO GAME?/Facepalm well its not a simple Video Game as the rest, its an MMORPG, means Massive Multiplay Online Role Play Game ..I'm sure it's still simply a VIDEO GAME.
I don't think veterans with 8,000 hours played in the MMO of their choice would characterize the MMO genre as simple at the time. It certainly is now, however.
/agree UsualSuspect and Vandal562. I think this genre needs more polarization. What we have now is a gaming soup kitchen feeding the same slop to everyone.
Luckily, i don't need you to like me to enjoy video games. -nariusseldon. In F2P I think it's more a case of the game's trying to play the player's. -laserit
I don't think veterans with 8,000 hours played in the MMO of their choice would characterize the MMO genre as simple at the time. It certainly is now, however.
What does time played have to do with anything? Lots of people spend lots of time on farmville, tetris, freecell too.
MMO is just part of video games, no more, no less.
That would be great, let them go to another game, get rid of the disease of solo whiners and let's get the people who want to actually play an online game back into the genre. Those 'features', as you put it, appeal to the brainless masses who just want to stare zombie like at the screen, pressing buttons until they get bright flashes of colour and cheery sounds to praise them for how 'amazing' they are at playing the game.
Yeah, I wouldn't shed any tears if they up and left.
As opposed to the features that appealed to the brainless zombies who like old school games like EQ?
That would be great, let them go to another game, get rid of the disease of solo whiners and let's get the people who want to actually play an online game back into the genre. Those 'features', as you put it, appeal to the brainless masses who just want to stare zombie like at the screen, pressing buttons until they get bright flashes of colour and cheery sounds to praise them for how 'amazing' they are at playing the game.
Yeah, I wouldn't shed any tears if they up and left.
As opposed to the features that appealed to the brainless zombies who like old school games like EQ?
You actually cannot get more brainless than staring at a spellbook.
The overly nostalgic always leave out the grinding a mob spawn for days at a time waiting for a loot drop or for EXP.
I don't think you would actually find this fun anymore. Yes, people talked during the down time and made friends, but only because you had nothing else to do. Questing and a faster pacing was a direct response to people not wanting to wait for 10 minutes in between every fight and sit there killing the same mobs over and over and over. Waiting for mobs to spawn kills my immersion.
I'm not a huge fan of waiting these days either, but that shows I've lost some of my patience. I believe having to rest and heal after a fighter is more realistic (doesn't kill immersion) and find that getting your health/magic back to full after a fight is dumb. I'd rather have something in between. Make it so your health and magic don't come back. You have to go to a town and rest to get it back. Let the player restore health (but not magic via potions(but has a finite amount)). They can also restore via magic if they have spells. This would mean people don't have to rest all the time, but they also can't keep killing non stop. Eventually they have to town and restock/rest.
Or, you know, implement support classes back into MMO's that take care of mana and health regen. I'd love to play a proper bard today and just focus on mana regen and debuffing mobs.
I'm not a huge fan of waiting these days either, but that shows I've lost some of my patience. I believe having to rest and heal after a fighter is more realistic (doesn't kill immersion) and find that getting your health/magic back to full after a fight is dumb. I'd rather have something in between. Make it so your health and magic don't come back. You have to go to a town and rest to get it back. Let the player restore health (but not magic via potions(but has a finite amount)). They can also restore via magic if they have spells. This would mean people don't have to rest all the time, but they also can't keep killing non stop. Eventually they have to town and restock/rest.
Really? More boring stuff before players can really play.
And why would "realistic" be desirable in video games where the goal is to entertain. I laugh out loud when people put "realism" and "magic" in the same paragraph.
I say it is super realistic to take 2 second to charge all the mana back because that is how "realistic" magic work. If you don't believe me, ask David Copperfield.
I don't really understand how you are entertained by non stop mindless killing in most cases, but it seems those are the games you like. I'm attempting to put some measure of strategy into the gaming without having the burden of having to sit constantly. The strategy I put up there would be great for a non instanced game IMO. It would stop people from camping and force them to think about what they are doing instead of mindlessly running around and clicking on exclamation marks/following GPS. They would have to plan their trip, how long it will take, and how far they can go before coming back. To me this would be a lot more entertaining then what you see in a game like Diablo 3. I'd also like to see more choices in combat. Have different equipment for different and combat abilities for different situations, but only allow you to use a finite amount of abilities at once. That at least makes you figure out what will work and won't work. Magic is a source to me, but it is only for magic users. Health is a determination of how much one can take before death. Magic can restore health, but health doesn't just regenerate back to full after a fight IMO. Can it be that way? Sure it can be any way a developer wants it to be, but it sure doesn't make any sense to me and it detracts from the game for me.
I really don't understand how you are confused between "strategy" and "boring and easy mode down time". Is there any strategy in waiting for regen .. i think not.
Now strategy in using skills, optimizing DPS, those I am all for .. waiting .. not so much.
What your describing amounts to rushing to endgame to get the best gear and smashing buttons as fast as you can.
Originally posted by Dihoru So EQ was a non-structured theme park and wow a structured one. Do not get drunk with memories both games are responsible for the last decade of rehashed theme parks, a genre EQ arguably founded, and the neglect of the sandbox genre because EQ is easier to make than an EVE or UO well let alone how piss easy a structured theme park like WoW.
WoW and EQ are totally different games. Classifying them both as a themepark is misleading. EQ was a world. Wow is something else.......nothing good....
When I think about it, the only thing I really want from original EQ is the need to group. I'm so tired of all these solo based MMO's, let's actually have an MMO that deserves to be online. I mean, seriously, why build an online game if the only thing you're going to do online is walk past another player and say Hi on the way. It's completely pointless.
Pointless to you ... what many others like.
That is no difference than lobby games, which i bet is also "pointless" to you.
A lobby game shouldn't be an MMO. They should be separate. Lobby games can be lobby games and MMOs can be MMOs
Originally posted by Dihoru So EQ was a non-structured theme park and wow a structured one. Do not get drunk with memories both games are responsible for the last decade of rehashed theme parks, a genre EQ arguably founded, and the neglect of the sandbox genre because EQ is easier to make than an EVE or UO well let alone how piss easy a structured theme park like WoW.
WoW and EQ are totally different games. Classifying them both as a themepark is misleading. EQ was a world. Wow is something else.......nothing good....
) Played both (even went so far as to try the private server that tries to recapture the old feeling of EQ) and I can tell you quite honestly: Both are worlds just that one tells you what to do the other just throws you in and hopes you can swim.
Originally posted by Dihoru So EQ was a non-structured theme park and wow a structured one. Do not get drunk with memories both games are responsible for the last decade of rehashed theme parks, a genre EQ arguably founded, and the neglect of the sandbox genre because EQ is easier to make than an EVE or UO well let alone how piss easy a structured theme park like WoW.
WoW and EQ are totally different games. Classifying them both as a themepark is misleading. EQ was a world. Wow is something else.......nothing good....
) Played both (even went so far as to try the private server that tries to recapture the old feeling of EQ) and I can tell you quite honestly: Both are worlds just that one tells you what to do the other just throws you in and hopes you can swim.
One has instances, one does not. One has (had?) a harsh death penalty, the other does not. One has actual classes, the other has classes that are all hybrids. One makes you depend on other people, the other you can solo to endgame. One take you by the hand from the moment you log in to end game, the other is a world for you to explore. One had danger, in the sense that everything you were doing could be for nothing, if you failed in the other game it was no big deal. One has you smash buttons non stop, the other doesn't.
When I think about it, the only thing I really want from original EQ is the need to group. I'm so tired of all these solo based MMO's, let's actually have an MMO that deserves to be online. I mean, seriously, why build an online game if the only thing you're going to do online is walk past another player and say Hi on the way. It's completely pointless.
Pointless to you ... what many others like.
That is no difference than lobby games, which i bet is also "pointless" to you.
A lobby game shouldn't be an MMO. They should be separate. Lobby games can be lobby games and MMOs can be MMOs
Says you.
MMO devs clearly disagree since many MMOs are lobby games, or have lobby features.
Comments
You are contradicting yourself again. If you go back to town to "rest", then it is down-time, unless you rest for only a second. In that case, you are asking the players to make town trips frequently, which is no strategy and boring.
When I think about it, the only thing I really want from original EQ is the need to group. I'm so tired of all these solo based MMO's, let's actually have an MMO that deserves to be online. I mean, seriously, why build an online game if the only thing you're going to do online is walk past another player and say Hi on the way. It's completely pointless.
Of course, for that need to group you'll need to add other parts of EQ, like the death penalty - if people are worried about death then they'll play better and be more considerate of the people who are supporting their game. That builds community and that's what MMO's, to me, are all about. With solo based MMO's, the players might as well be replaced by bots, I wouldn't be able to tell the difference anyway.
Pointless to you ... what many others like.
That is no difference than lobby games, which i bet is also "pointless" to you.
rpg/mmorg history: Dun Darach>Bloodwych>Bards Tale 1-3>Eye of the beholder > Might and Magic 2,3,5 > FFVII> Baldur's Gate 1, 2 > Planescape Torment >Morrowind > WOW > oblivion > LOTR > Guild Wars (1900hrs elementalist) Vanguard. > GW2(1000 elementalist), Wildstar
Now playing GW2, AOW 3, ESO, LOTR, Elite D
"ruining" is just a matter of perspective. To me, MMOs are much better games today than the UO/EQ days. Heck, if MMOs are still like UO/EQ, i doubt i would be playing any.
If they put mechanics in the game that require socialization (no built in auction feature, no minimap, difficult soloing, no quest hubs), then people will socialize. If they make socialization optional then practically no one will socialize. Sadly EQ Next looks more like WoW to me than EQ (arcade-like combat, cartoons, and death penalty is most likely nonexistent, and you can expect quest hub leveling.)
Ha, first time I saw EQ was in babbages. The dragon intrigued me so I checked out the box. Didn't really understand it and set it down. Months later when contemplating buying UO Second Age, I decided to check out gamecenter.com for reviews; and EQ was front page news; everyone saying how much they love it and even the game reviewers were saying how they'd rather be playing EQ than reviewing other games.
Luckily, i don't need you to like me to enjoy video games. -nariusseldon.
In F2P I think it's more a case of the game's trying to play the player's. -laserit
If they put the mechanics you propose (no built in auction feature, no minimap, difficult soloing, no quest hubs), then most people will quit and go to another game that has those features.
There is a reason why those features are more or less standard.
You can't force people to socialize in games if they don't want to .. because they have choices of what games to play.
That would be great, let them go to another game, get rid of the disease of solo whiners and let's get the people who want to actually play an online game back into the genre. Those 'features', as you put it, appeal to the brainless masses who just want to stare zombie like at the screen, pressing buttons until they get bright flashes of colour and cheery sounds to praise them for how 'amazing' they are at playing the game.
Yeah, I wouldn't shed any tears if they up and left.
ROFL!
'Disease of solo whiners'?
You do realize this is a VIDEO GAME right?
I mean, I can understand trying to feel superior but trying to feel superior on the fact you like a particular VIDEO GAME?
/Facepalm
Gdemami -
Informing people about your thoughts and impressions is not a review, it's a blog.
well its not a simple Video Game as the rest, its an MMORPG, means Massive Multiplay Online Role Play Game ..
nah ... mmorpg does not mean much .. it is just a convenient label for a group of online games that share some common features (like LFD).
I'm sure it's still simply a VIDEO GAME.
ROFL! 'Disease of solo whiners'? You do realize this is a VIDEO GAME right? I mean, I can understand trying to feel superior but trying to feel superior on the fact you like a particular VIDEO GAME? /Facepalm
well its not a simple Video Game as the rest, its an MMORPG, means Massive Multiplay Online Role Play Game ..
I'm sure it's still simply a VIDEO GAME.
I don't think veterans with 8,000 hours played in the MMO of their choice would characterize the MMO genre as simple at the time. It certainly is now, however.
/agree UsualSuspect and Vandal562. I think this genre needs more polarization. What we have now is a gaming soup kitchen feeding the same slop to everyone.
Luckily, i don't need you to like me to enjoy video games. -nariusseldon.
In F2P I think it's more a case of the game's trying to play the player's. -laserit
What does time played have to do with anything? Lots of people spend lots of time on farmville, tetris, freecell too.
MMO is just part of video games, no more, no less.
As opposed to the features that appealed to the brainless zombies who like old school games like EQ?
You actually cannot get more brainless than staring at a spellbook.
Yes please
What your describing amounts to rushing to endgame to get the best gear and smashing buttons as fast as you can.
WoW and EQ are totally different games. Classifying them both as a themepark is misleading. EQ was a world. Wow is something else.......nothing good....
A lobby game shouldn't be an MMO. They should be separate. Lobby games can be lobby games and MMOs can be MMOs
One has instances, one does not. One has (had?) a harsh death penalty, the other does not. One has actual classes, the other has classes that are all hybrids. One makes you depend on other people, the other you can solo to endgame. One take you by the hand from the moment you log in to end game, the other is a world for you to explore. One had danger, in the sense that everything you were doing could be for nothing, if you failed in the other game it was no big deal. One has you smash buttons non stop, the other doesn't.
Says you.
MMO devs clearly disagree since many MMOs are lobby games, or have lobby features.