Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!

Why do some of you even want an eq1 reboot/reskin?

13

Comments

  • munx4555munx4555 Member Posts: 169

    Personally have no intrest in a eq1 reskin, however I do want consequences to return to mmo gaming.

    The whole convenience race among mmos have gone way to far, death dosnt mather, class dosnt mather, race dosnt mather, risk is gone.

     

     

  • DullahanDullahan Member EpicPosts: 4,516
    Originally posted by munx4555

    Personally have no intrest in a eq1 reskin, however I do want consequences to return to mmo gaming.

    The whole convenience race among mmos have gone way to far, death dosnt mather, class dosnt mather, race dosnt mather, risk is gone.

     

     

    Ya, those are exactly why I want a reskin, but I'd rather have a new game that implements those things.

    I mean little things like race and class making a difference of how the world at large views you.  Everywhere you went you had to actually stop and consider how NPCs regarded you, or risk getting dog piled by angry guards.  Now nothing cares who or what you are, and even if they did they probably wouldn't be able to kill you if they tried.


  • RydesonRydeson Member UncommonPosts: 3,852

    Dear OP.. 

         Maybe because there is a market for it.. just like the demographic market that wanted the modern day remake of the Camaro, Mustang, Challenger and Charger..  Sometimes an old classic just never goes away..  Today I was playing a little on GW2 and really LOVED some of the zones that Arenet did and said to myself.. "Now I can see this zone being a new Everfrost", or  a new Karanas..  BUT it has to be done right or we end up with another retro Thunderbird that was overpriced and unwanted..

  • grifjgrifj Member Posts: 110
    Originally posted by Markusrind

    2 Reasons.

    Fear of change.

    Inability to adapt.

    1 Reason.

    It's better than anything that has released since.

  • ReallyNow10ReallyNow10 Member UncommonPosts: 2,225
    The naysayers say we want a reboot/reskin.  But I think want many of the old school EQ players want is a new game with the elements that made EQ great (i.e.,. PVE focus, harsh enough penalty for dying, challenging content requiring frequent grouping, enough downtime to talk, combat pace slow enough to strategize, open free range world, racial starting areas, defined classes, racial abilities, etc...).
  • ZorgoZorgo Member UncommonPosts: 2,254
    Originally posted by KingsField
    Originally posted by Zorgo

    And what would that do to EQ1? If they love it so much, why do they wish it to die?

    The EQ1 that everybody talks fondly about doesn't exist anymore. SOE so thoroughly dumbed it down over the years that it bears little resemblance to what it once was. This is why many of us want a new game that captures the old feeling.

    So why not concentrate efforts to campaign for changes to be made to EQ1 to bring back 'that lovin' feeling'? I think it has a slightly better chance of happening than the snowball's chance in hell that they are going to go back to the drawing board on EQN. 

    I actually agree with a lot of the detractors. 

    I think with new graphics and a new engine and a streamline - EQ could be reborn and gain or re-gain some customers. But not shake up the industry. A EQ reboot is a totally different project. That isn't EQNext, it is EQAgain - which is not what this project is about. 

    Maybe they'll do so well on EQN that they have the resources to do the re-boot everyone is talking about; but I cannot imagine re-hashing EQAgain would have any large or lasting impact on the gaming world. 

    Building anything, anytime, anywhere with vertical content, horizontal exploration-based progression and emergent AI is absolutely, positively a NEXT step.

    Whether they deliver or not is still up for debate.

    Anyway - this seems to be the history:

    EQ is too hardcore! Make games more accessible!

    EQ2/WoW is too casual!

    Stop making EQ2/WoW clones! We want something new.

    EQN? Just re-make the old games again! Who said we want something new?

    Developer scratches head.

  • donpopukidonpopuki Member Posts: 591
    Originally posted by Zorgo
    Originally posted by KingsField
    Originally posted by Zorgo

    And what would that do to EQ1? If they love it so much, why do they wish it to die?

    The EQ1 that everybody talks fondly about doesn't exist anymore. SOE so thoroughly dumbed it down over the years that it bears little resemblance to what it once was. This is why many of us want a new game that captures the old feeling.

    So why not concentrate efforts to campaign for changes to be made to EQ1 to bring back 'that lovin' feeling'? I think it has a slightly better chance of happening than the snowball's chance in hell that they are going to go back to the drawing board on EQN. 

    I actually agree with a lot of the detractors. 

    I think with new graphics and a new engine and a streamline - EQ could be reborn and gain or re-gain some customers. But not shake up the industry. A EQ reboot is a totally different project. That isn't EQNext, it is EQAgain - which is not what this project is about. 

    Maybe they'll do so well on EQN that they have the resources to do the re-boot everyone is talking about; but I cannot imagine re-hashing EQAgain would have any large or lasting impact on the gaming world. 

    Building anything, anytime, anywhere with vertical content, horizontal exploration-based progression and emergent AI is absolutely, positively a NEXT step.

    Whether they deliver or not is still up for debate.

    Anyway - this seems to be the history:

    EQ is too hardcore! Make games more accessible!

    EQ2/WoW is too casual!

    Stop making EQ2/WoW clones! We want something new.

    EQN? Just re-make the old games again! Who said we want something new?

    Developer scratches head.

    Hehe EQAgain.

     

    Yeah I don't understand this site. For the last two years I've been visting the site people have been complaining companies have been making unispired games and rehashing the same old mmo tropes. Finally when the grandaddy of all mmo devs decides to take the genre in a different direction all hell breaks loose and people start flipping out that it's not exactly like they've been feed for the last 15 years.

  • Alec_StormAlec_Storm Member UncommonPosts: 17
    Originally posted by evilastro
    Originally posted by Alec_Storm

    To my knowledge no company has ever taken an old game that was a hit and simply rebuilt it back to its original state with a brand new engine & updated graphics without changing so many other things that they should of just called it a new game.   I get nervous at the term reboot because of the heavy handed tendency to change things too much.  

    Runescape has done this three times now. Anarchy Online is planning a graphics update in the near future too.  But yes, a HD EQ1 would definitely have a solid following of about 200-300k players at least.

     

    Thanks for the info!  I never really got into Runescape and although I haven't followed anything AO -related in 3 years, I've played it off and on since beta2, so I'll have to check into the graphics update.

    image
  • sh33pishsh33pish Member UncommonPosts: 54
    Originally posted by tixylix
    The real questions is why call EQN EverQuest? It's not like the name packs any weight any more, the only people who care about EverQuest are fans who are all old now. If you're going to make EQN then appeal to your fanbase, if you're going to make something totally different, then don't call it EverQuest.

    I couldn't agree more.  EQN will likely be fun and successful, but using the EverQuest IP is incredibly misleading, since it shares almost nothing in common with EverQuest except for NPC, town, and location names.

    Complete cop-out from SOE if you ask me.  It should be called Guild Wars 3.

  • ThomasN7ThomasN7 87.18.7.148Member CommonPosts: 6,690
    Because some mmos should never die and EQ1 is one of those mmos.
    30
  • ArclanArclan Member UncommonPosts: 1,550


    Originally posted by Gildenlore
    Immersion is the biggest draw of a MMORPG for me.  EQN is shaping up to be a TWITCH Console-Centric Button-Mashing Action RPG.  I don't necessarily want a reskin of EQ, but this play style undeniably kills immersion at its very core.  I can make my peace with everything else...

    This says a lot of how I feel about EQN.

    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

  • Drunder40Drunder40 Member Posts: 4

    Why? because I love the EQ1 mechanics/gameplay.. I want all that back but with a new graphics engine.. I love group experience grinding at "camp 1". I love single pulls being the norm with a roamer add or 2 being a tough situation that forced the whole group having to help manage the fight to survive.

    I love camping placeholder mobs in hopes the named will pop and maybe get the item you are looking for.

    I only left EQ1 because of the antiquated graphics engine. After the reveal I am not convinced I will like EQN or maybe just be dissappointed.

    We will see..

  • MellowTiggerMellowTigger Member UncommonPosts: 84

    I'm surprised that nobody has mentioned the specific features that I think are responsible for that feeling of immersion that people remember from EQ1.  I guess it shows how subtle these mental influences can be.

    Mass.  Our virtual bodies had mass.  You could take a very large character, place it in front of you in a tight corridor, and you simply felt safer because instinct told you that the bad guys couldn't reach you directly.  The programmers did a great job for the time at collision detection, and I don't know of any game since that has made the effort.  These days, everyone is a ghost, and we simply glide through each other and our enemies.

    Interconnection.  Player levels actually had some reason to interact with each other.  Zones had their wandering high-level monster that the whole zone would cheer when it was taken down by a group of high level players.  Even level 1 players would interact with high level mages who still needed a supply of bat wings for their inventory.  These days, leveling is completely tiered and it's just "second verse, same as the first" with no reason at all to interact between tiers.

    Helping.  I remember taking my halfling druid to Erudin, sitting down on the back porch, and buffing all the newbies as they passed within range of me.  They quickly learned to stop in front of me every time their buffs ended.  These days, developers treat magnanimity as a cheat.  They work specifically to prohibit cross-level boosting because they see it as a game-destroying exploit of some kind.

    Mass again: Even our money had weight.  I remember using my druid's teleport service to help everyone in a zone by serving as a bank branch.  I would exchange everyone's coppers for higher denominations, then teleport back to city and walk very slowly to the official bank to exchange all of my coppers.  These days, again, everything is phantasmal with no weight or consequence.

    Text.  Picking up a quest meant actually "speaking" to characters.  You had to notice key words in their speech that you could ask them about.  You talked (yes, to the NPCs) to receive and advance quests.  These days, I don't even bother reading texts any more.  I just click the icon to get my quest, follow the icon to the destination, click the icon to retrieve my prize.  No immersion necessary.

    Food.  While not strictly necessary, food and drink were too useful to ignore.  You couldn't ignore them, actually, since the game would remind you with recurring messages when your character was hungry or thirsty.  These days, characters are essentially invulnerable unless an NPC is poking them with sharp objects.  There's no need for a player's mind to extend their perceptions to their virtual character.

    Interloping: Mobs wandered everywhere.  There were stationary camps, yes, but most mobs wandered far and wide.  You never knew when you would fall victim to bad luck and several mobs would happen to path near you at the same time.  You had to remain alert unless you found a rare safe spot, because you were the invader to their territory.  These days, most mobs exist and roam in very limited circles of influence.  You feel like the mobs are chained to their spot rather than roaming their native domain.  You can approach them at your own convenience.

    There are lots of things wrong with EQ1 (camping and killstealing and bickering over loot), and that's why I eventually left it behind after several years of play.  An HD release would definitely pique my interest again.
  • DracockDracock Member Posts: 75

    A EQ remake means different things to different people. I've let my attachment to the idea go after the forced release of Vanguard. I knew then, that no one would ever take classic EQ style MMO seriously. Which is unfair given that it really was a funding failure more than anything. Nevertheless, that's how the industry was going to view the market potential for this style of game for a long time to come.

    What I'd venture most people mean by an EQ remake:

    • Same classes with updated abilities and better overall role balance
    • Many of the same zones, only revamped and better
    • Much better itemization, smoother progression
    • More active combat (especially for classes like rogue and warrior) that is still more strategic based, not twitch based.
    Basically a new game that has a lot of core feature of old EQ. "Forced grouping," harsh death penalty, dangerous world, no instances, and no quest hubs/linear storyline. There really hasn't been one game the fits the bill.
     

    There are some people that want the more dated features like trains, downtime, and long camps for items. This is just a vocal minority though. Most people don't want to wait on mana constantly, or camp a spawn for 18 hours straight.

    I reject the notion that WoW is a modern version of EQ. WoW has a lot of glaring differences between EQ. Namely, the stuff listed above.

    Its not as simple as EQ being dated. Some of it is just fundamental design decisions that are still viable for a growing niche market. But producers want a WoW killer with 10 million players. Not an EQ successor with 2-3 million players.

    The good news is, as the niche continues to grow, a game will be provided to service the demand. the bad news is, it might take another 5-10 years.

     

     

  • DracockDracock Member Posts: 75
    Originally posted by sh33pish
    Originally posted by tixylix
    The real questions is why call EQN EverQuest? It's not like the name packs any weight any more, the only people who care about EverQuest are fans who are all old now. If you're going to make EQN then appeal to your fanbase, if you're going to make something totally different, then don't call it EverQuest.

    I couldn't agree more.  EQN will likely be fun and successful, but using the EverQuest IP is incredibly misleading, since it shares almost nothing in common with EverQuest except for NPC, town, and location names.

    Why should they call it "World of Warcraft"? It plays nothing like Warcraft 1, 2 , or 3. They should call it "Blizzardquest," which is important because. . .

    I have no idea why you guys think you have a point here. There using more or less the same world, races, NPC names, and probably some items as well. That's why its called Everquest, and that's a good enough reason.

  • IcewhiteIcewhite Member Posts: 6,403
    Originally posted by Burntvet

    Ironically, it is likely due to people wanting something "different".

    SOE provided its players with "something different", back in 2004.

    Playerbase (A), inertia, sunk costs, EQ1.

    Playerbase (B), change, EQ2.

    Playerbase (C), went to play WoW.

     

    Presumably, EQ2's base is more flexible re: change. But there's really no way to test that. The most adaptable (re:change) players may be the ones who left SOE completely.

    Big, broad very generalized wide paint brush here, of course.

     

    Not sure what happens with EQN. Presumably, some back-traffic of markets A, B, and C, some influx of D (general sandbox fans) and E (just curious/marketed from other sources). Call it market F.

    Self-pity imprisons us in the walls of our own self-absorption. The whole world shrinks down to the size of our problem, and the more we dwell on it, the smaller we are and the larger the problem seems to grow.

  • MeltdownMeltdown Member UncommonPosts: 1,182

    For me a lot of things have gone backwards, was watching a retrospective video on the original EQ, released in 1999 with like 12 playable races and 14 playable classes all with some unique skills and spells. EQN has me grinning ear to ear with 40+ classes, although just 8 choosable at the start I believe. Check out games coming out, 4 classes? Hell I just saw a game with 2 starting classes and only 1 playable race WTF?

     

    I think reskinned or HD versions of games can do quite well. Go check out the High Res pack for Duke Nukem 3D (The original one) and don't tell me that doesn't knock the socks off a long list of current FPS games. I feel MMOs could do the same, unfortunately all attempts at reskinning or revamping EQ has always been half-assed and ends up just looking like a hack (looking at you SOE). 

     

    Also of course we want what we had when we were younger. You don't see grandpa sucking it up and getting down with "the hip hop". He wants to listen to his jazz, drink tea and play backgammon... 

    "They essentially want to say 'Correlation proves Causation' when it's just not true." - Sovrath

  • GrixxittGrixxitt Member UncommonPosts: 545

    I would absolutely love to play an EQ reboot with modern graphics and a -FEW- modern tweaks here and there, not only for nostalgia, but because it just seems like a game that I would want to play.

    I'm also looking forward to playing EQN, though, and I would still likely play it regardless of what other games are currently out.

    (Unless by some miracle EA sold the rights to the Ultima universe to Raph Koster. I'm pretty sure I'd quit my job and sell my wife to stay home and play that one)

     

     

    Edit: Since I noticed you mentioned the Gold Box series, I figure I'd mention the fact that I would happily trade my eye teeth for a remake of that entire series.

    The above is my personal opinion. Anyone displaying a view contrary to my opinion is obviously WRONG and should STHU. (neener neener)

    -The MMO Forum Community

  • KingsFieldKingsField Member UncommonPosts: 38
    Originally posted by Dracock

    Why should they call it "World of Warcraft"? It plays nothing like Warcraft 1, 2 , or 3.

    Actually, a lot of things from previous Warcraft games carried over to WoW. The art style was consistent with Warcraft 3. The music and sound was consistent. It shared spells and abilities from previous games. You could tell that Warcraft 3's hero classes were the starting point for the classes in WoW. It was still very much a Warcraft game even though it wasn't an RTS.

  • RaroicRaroic Member Posts: 16
    Originally posted by sh33pish
    Originally posted by tixylix
    The real questions is why call EQN EverQuest? It's not like the name packs any weight any more, the only people who care about EverQuest are fans who are all old now. If you're going to make EQN then appeal to your fanbase, if you're going to make something totally different, then don't call it EverQuest.

    I couldn't agree more.  EQN will likely be fun and successful, but using the EverQuest IP is incredibly misleading, since it shares almost nothing in common with EverQuest except for NPC, town, and location names.

    Complete cop-out from SOE if you ask me.  It should be called Guild Wars 3.

    As much as it sucks to say it I think this is pretty accurate. They are using the EQ legacy to promote a new product. I for one would like to see a company go back to the roots like EQ. Group centric play, complex classes and strats. Crowd control is non existent in todays games. WoW is just an AE threat fest. People piss and moan in instances if the tank cant hold agro on multiple mobs. Back in EQ threat management fell on the other players not just the tank.

    EQ in itself was one of the most complex diverse games made. While people bash the trinity of today ... the trinity of EQ was vastly more complex then just tank/heal/dps. Aligning yourself with factions to work on certain quests or rewards. Having real choice in a game. Sadly MMO's have become a fast food supplier to the masses. Give me what I want when I want it. Consequence for actions I no longer present in todays mmo games either. All of the factors that made EQ great have been abandoned in search of the mighty pay day.

    Todays game developers keep trying to reinvent what is an mmo. You don't see people reinventing the wheel. No they try and make the wheel better but it is still a wheel. You can not remove core mechanics from a genre and expect to call it the same thing. Games today are Single player online RPG's where you can bump into other players. If they truly want to freshen up the mmo pool of stagnant water. Then bring back what made EQ great if not its just more of the same with slightly varied combats.

  • grifjgrifj Member Posts: 110
    Originally posted by Raroic
    Originally posted by sh33pish
    Originally posted by tixylix
    The real questions is why call EQN EverQuest? It's not like the name packs any weight any more, the only people who care about EverQuest are fans who are all old now. If you're going to make EQN then appeal to your fanbase, if you're going to make something totally different, then don't call it EverQuest.

    I couldn't agree more.  EQN will likely be fun and successful, but using the EverQuest IP is incredibly misleading, since it shares almost nothing in common with EverQuest except for NPC, town, and location names.

    Complete cop-out from SOE if you ask me.  It should be called Guild Wars 3.

    As much as it sucks to say it I think this is pretty accurate. They are using the EQ legacy to promote a new product. I for one would like to see a company go back to the roots like EQ. Group centric play, complex classes and strats. Crowd control is non existent in todays games. WoW is just an AE threat fest. People piss and moan in instances if the tank cant hold agro on multiple mobs. Back in EQ threat management fell on the other players not just the tank.

    EQ in itself was one of the most complex diverse games made. While people bash the trinity of today ... the trinity of EQ was vastly more complex then just tank/heal/dps. Aligning yourself with factions to work on certain quests or rewards. Having real choice in a game. Sadly MMO's have become a fast food supplier to the masses. Give me what I want when I want it. Consequence for actions I no longer present in todays mmo games either. All of the factors that made EQ great have been abandoned in search of the mighty pay day.

    Todays game developers keep trying to reinvent what is an mmo. You don't see people reinventing the wheel. No they try and make the wheel better but it is still a wheel. You can not remove core mechanics from a genre and expect to call it the same thing. Games today are Single player online RPG's where you can bump into other players. If they truly want to freshen up the mmo pool of stagnant water. Then bring back what made EQ great if not its just more of the same with slightly varied combats.

    I wish I could upvote or 5 star posts like this.

  • kjempffkjempff Member RarePosts: 1,635

    @OP. I doubt many want eq1 in a new skin. What they.. I.. want is a game with the same quality and game feel that eq1 gave us, and that no game has been close to delivering since. Eq1 is to many including myself not only the best game ever made, but by so much that the best mmorpg games only scratches the surface.

    Uhm "we" dont see trying to re-make the eq1 magic is a step backwards, that would be a step forward in a genre that has stepped backwards for years. So basically "we" would love to see a living breathing world with roles to play, so that we can get lost in the game and the world and BE one with our character, aka roleplaying. Everquest gave us that, aswell as a meaningful and mystic game with advanced mechanic and systems that combined has not been equalled yet.

    So not the same game, but a better version of eq1 with the same qualities.

  • ZorgoZorgo Member UncommonPosts: 2,254
    Originally posted by kjempff

    @OP. I doubt many want eq1 in a new skin. What they.. I.. want is a game with the same quality and game feel that eq1 gave us, and that no game has been close to delivering since. Eq1 is to many including myself not only the best game ever made, but by so much that the best mmorpg games only scratches the surface.

    Uhm "we" dont see trying to re-make the eq1 magic is a step backwards, that would be a step forward in a genre that has stepped backwards for years. So basically "we" would love to see a living breathing world with roles to play, so that we can get lost in the game and the world and BE one with our character, aka roleplaying. Everquest gave us that, aswell as a meaningful and mystic game with advanced mechanic and systems that combined has not been equalled yet.

    So not the same game, but a better version of eq1 with the same qualities.

    How can you know that EQN cannot deliver those things? 

    If it's because of graphics you don't like.....well, EQ delivered those things with stick figures;

    If it's because of a combat system you haven't played....well, why don't you give them the benefit of the doubt? A warrior on day 1 of EQ had: autoattack, kick, taunt, and bash. That's it - four buttons to tank. And that combat system delivered what you decsribed.

    So I say, give it a little space; they've blown you away before - just because it isn't the concept 'we' envisioned; it may be that they truly are going to re-define the genre again - you cannot do that with stuff we've had before - and you cannot know until you've got your hands on it, at the very least more info than the art direction and the basics of the combat system.

  • ZorgoZorgo Member UncommonPosts: 2,254
    Originally posted by KingsField
    Originally posted by Dracock

    Why should they call it "World of Warcraft"? It plays nothing like Warcraft 1, 2 , or 3.

    Actually, a lot of things from previous Warcraft games carried over to WoW. The art style was consistent with Warcraft 3. The music and sound was consistent. It shared spells and abilities from previous games. You could tell that Warcraft 3's hero classes were the starting point for the classes in WoW. It was still very much a Warcraft game even though it wasn't an RTS.

    Those same concepts can be applied here.

    Sure EQN doesn't have the same art direction, like the warcraft series, however, none of their EQ games have the same art direction, they are all as different as night and day; and so you can say, changing art styles is consistent with the franchise. The music and sound may still be consistent. We may see shared spells and abilities from the previous EQ games. We may be able to tell that the starting point for characters will be based on previous EQ games.

    It may still very much be a EQ game even though it plays differently.

  • kellian1kellian1 Member UncommonPosts: 235

    I would say because if you take everything EQ1 did great (which was alot) added in modern features and graphics, it would probably be what everyone here has been looking for in an MMO over the last few years.

Sign In or Register to comment.