Howdy, Stranger!

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

I wish for EQ3, instead of EQ Next, I don't like any of it ( Poll )

124678

Comments

  • AvanahAvanah Member RarePosts: 1,596

    Until ANYONE has actually played EQN, the 2nd line in my signature would like a word with you.

    Have a great day all. :-)

    "My Fantasy is having two men at once...

    One Cooking and One Cleaning!"

    ---------------------------

    "A good man can make you feel sexy,

    strong and able to take on the whole world...

    oh sorry...that's wine...wine does that..."





  • Redik23Redik23 Member Posts: 3
    This is what bothers me.  They started out making EQ3 in the veign of World of Warcraft.  I'm really tired of people saying all the MMO's of the past 10 years are EQ based, because that is very very loosely true.  The only thing that the original EQ has in common with modern themepark MMO is that it was primarily Player vs Enemy.  EQ had no instancing, no quest based leveling, no "you are the one saviour of the entire world" BS storyline.   EQ was very much a PVE sandbox.  You started a character and then did what you want.  Did you want to go solo skeletons? go kill skeletons.  Did you wanna get a group together and try to dungeon crawl your way to Emperor Crushbone?  Do that.  Once you gained some levels you could get together and kill some dragons, or whatever.

    Modern MMO's are glorified single player games and Dave Georgeson was right that they need to move away from that model.  Where he was wrong (and most of the people who werent there in the beginning days of MMOs) is assuming that EVERYTHING from EQ was bad.

    In my opinion the main ingredient missing from MMO's is the Multiplayer part of it.  And please nobody pull the BS card that just because you're on a server with other people its Multiplayer.  Thats just being pedantic.

    The lack of defined classes and class interdependency is what has ruined any aspect of a community and any sense of pride or individuality in your character.

    Humans gain satisfaction from having a purpose in life.  Not from being a jack of all trades.  Look at any walk of life and the people who are happiest are the ones who have found their course in life and are pursuing that.

    That doesnt change in MMO's.

    Also, something obtained easily has no worth.

    (I quoted this for a purpose.. give me a second)

    Points and Observations from this thread:

    So,  I came to this website today for the first time.  I'm a former EQ player (2000 - 2005) coming back to the realm of MMO's looking for something to play.  Naturally I look for an EQ-esque game because that's what I liked.. (I mean, I dedicated 5 years to it) --  EQ:N isn't out, so I looked at some other stuff.  First, TSO.. I played Morrowind and Skyrim, they were fun single player games..  maybe give TSO a chance..  Until I youtubed gameplay of a max level character beating the final boss, BY HIMSELF.. a week after the game came out.   What?!  An MMO you can BEAT by yourself?  Are you serious?  If you want to play a game by yourself..  why are you playing an MMO?  And why do you want to play.. or pay.. for  a game you can win in one week?  

        Section for people making excuses:

                    "He probably is a hardcore grinder, played 24 hours a day for the week.. which is why he's max level"

                                  -There were hundreds of these youtube videos

                                                    (And they weren't from beta, they were from live)

                    "Some people have other obligations and can't grind 8 hours a day to be in an "uber" guild, they want to play casually, and still get to endgame content"  

                                   -No game-design or mechanic should put casual gamers on par with hardcore gamers...   You mean to tell me that if I work a job casually, I should be rewarded the same as the person who works 60 hours a week?  That's inane.  If you want a casual game play experience, buy a WiiU -   I think it's arrogant of people to expect more for less... in any situation.  If you have a full-time job because you need to pay the bills.. guess what... you have to miss out on other stuff.  If i work a part-time job and live with roomates and can spend more time playing video games...  I'm choosing to miss out on stuff as well.. (Building equity in a house, etc)

     

    The same idea goes for these Multi-class or Hybrid class systems...   Why are you people playing MMO's if you want to do everything by yourself?  Play Skyrim.  I hate the idea of a "Battle Mage" or some stupid hybrid of a Silk Armor wearing class able to take blows..  Why implement a group / guild system in a game if there are 500,000 battle mages running around nuking and tanking everything to death?   "I can nuke/tank and heal, and my char never dies! I must be the best gamer on the planet!"   Wrong.  The best gamers on the planet were the people killing Avatar of War in ONLY Kunark/Velious gear with under 50 people in their raid.  Back when there was no raid function, or "Alternate Abilities".  Remember when you wiped.. you were spending 2 hours CRing.. not waiting for a Graveyard or some other "Convenience" that was implemented because people couldn't hack it.

     

    Also, a special note to the guy who said "Taunt" was the worst idea ever...  then proceeded to explain why taunt was needed in a group / guild based system...   I'm pretty sure you said.. if you are a meatshield, you just need to be able to take blows....

    Ok.

    How am I supposed to "take blows.." if some rogue is doing 3x my damage output?  Without a taunt?  (And proc Rage/Hate = taunt, btw)  How "real" is a game where the Raid boss isn't intuitive enough to attack the person he "Hates" most...  (Usually the person hitting him the hardest, unless someone else is TAUNTING him...)

     

    Anyway, back to my point..   Whoever wrote this piece I quoted (Sorry, I forgot your name) -- You are a genius.  I've been trying to make this point for years.  EQ died when Luclin came out.  Period.  Actually, more specifically.. when the BAZAAR came out.  You went from having to associate with your entire server (North Freeport /auction /ooc to buy/sell)  To being able to set up a market bot and AFK.  The nexus/PoK (I know PoK wasn't luclin)  --didn't help.  Because you no longer needed to get "rides" from helpful Druids or Wizards.   You went from having to know your entire server to just having to talk to your 40 or 50 guild mates and setting up your market Bot at night. 

    Unfortunately that trend caught on and more massive "multiplayer" online games continued it...

    Multiplayer isn't being on a server with 1,000 people.. Multiplayer is INTERACTING with 1,000 people.

     

    Also, to add on to your point...  Instances killed multiplayer, as well.  People having to spawn camp, and learn spawn timers was what turned good guilds into GREAT guilds.  If your guild could mobilize faster than the other guild.. you got the kill.  It also made for great rivalries.  What fun is watching the Yankees take batting practice?   I'm pretty sure you all would rather watch them play the Red Sox.  So why eliminate rivalries on EQ?

     

    I think there is a space for Instances, though.  Don't get me wrong.  I think instancing encounters that reward things like Augments and Rare tradeskill items would be a good idea.   Because you and your guild / group could farm them at your leisure.  If another guild on the server can get to "X" boss faster than you... you shouldn't be SOL on raiding.. but you shouldn't get "X" bosses loot. 

    And the early/mid game level grind could be a little easier...  I will give a little on that.  I played through some project99 the last few months, and spent 8 hours getting from lvl 10 to 11.  That was painful.  I think instead of having a "Tutorial" and some stupid "Loot 10 snake feet" quests..  Have a legit quest-set that teaches people how to do stuff, yields some decent starting items (Choice of: Tradeskill kit, Tank/Mage/Priest/Chain/Leather armor peices, Weapon)  and good XP.  Get people into the 20's or so quick then let them grind from there.

     

    I don't want EQ:N to be Everquest from 1999.  But I sure as hell don't want it to be a single player game where the only purpose other people have on the server is to Troll and Lag me.

    Sorry for the lofty expectations. 

                      

     

  • TankYou88TankYou88 Member Posts: 310
    Arent they making EQ3? I thought it was suppose to be Everquest Landmark which is nothing like EQ and then Everquest Next which is the next installment of the game we all love. Am I wrong about this?
  • azzamasinazzamasin Member UncommonPosts: 3,105
    Originally posted by delete5230

    First I'll say, I don't know much about this MMO.  But the little I do, I don't like it at all.  I may be slightly off track on my negatives listed below.  But everything about this game turns me off.

    If you Don't know much about the game and there's been very little information released, don't you think you're a bit premature on your doom and gloom?

     

    - Fully destructible world, I know players are screaming for a change, but this isn't it !

    Within context of what we know about the game, then yes it is something many have been clammoring for

    - F2P turns me right off, leave it to SOE to pull this crap.

    SOE is a F2P studio now, and F2P is the future of the genre.

    - Few abilities on your bar ?.....I hate this in the more recent mmo's.....Maybe it's just me, but I like versatility in both talent builds and like to choose and be in control of how I play......I like having something to look forward to, More abilities, not just some minor enhancements.  

    As opposed to having umpteen rows of hotbar abilities with tens of identical mediocre abilities that offer little to no true diversity.  ALso lest ye forget, original EQ only used 1 hotbar of 8 abilities too.

    - What's so bad about class roles ? It works and it will always work, it has nothing to do with old style.

    I see your little knowledge of the game has come to the forfront here.  As EQN is not getting rid of Class Roles, only the reliance on the Holy Trinity.  In an age of smart AI having a front line dude in plate with a shield who screams at mobs runs counterintuitive to the design philosophy of the game.  Unlike GW2, NPC AI will be much smarter.

    - The marketing.  Now I know developers like to give long notice about there product. But I don't think SOE even knows much about what they will eventually give us.

     

    I would like to see a real remake of EQ2. Open world and non instanced, Very cool abilities, something never thought of yet. Vanguard had done this, they were innovative, it's just that it ran like dog poo !.....When I first found out about EQ Next, I figured great !....Until I started reading about it.

    Vanguard was horrible even without all the bugs.  The combat was shallow and the world was uninspiring.

    If you want EQ3 then play one of the myriad of predecessors that are plaguing this genre.  From WoW to Wildstar. from LOTRO to ESO.  All have their vision of the EQ stylization. 

     

    How about we let them design the game first before we past judgement.

    Sandbox means open world, non-linear gaming PERIOD!

    Subscription Gaming, especially MMO gaming is a Cash grab bigger then the most P2W cash shop!

    Bring Back Exploration and lengthy progression times. RPG's have always been about the Journey not the destination!!!

    image

  • observerobserver Member RarePosts: 3,685

    If EQN is anything like Landmark, then i don't have high hopes for this game.  I seriously doubt there will be an EQ3.

    The Landmark devs have no idea what they're doing.  Yes, they've presented a roadmap, about 3(?) times now, and it's always changing drastically.  Landmark went from a sandbox to another themepark, which is very sad.  It had so much potential.  I only bring up Landmark, because it's supposedly being used to create EQN. 

  • azzamasinazzamasin Member UncommonPosts: 3,105
    Originally posted by Redik23
    This is what bothers me.  They started out making EQ3 in the veign of World of Warcraft.  I'm really tired of people saying all the MMO's of the past 10 years are EQ based, because that is very very loosely true.  The only thing that the original EQ has in common with modern themepark MMO is that it was primarily Player vs Enemy.  EQ had no instancing, no quest based leveling, no "you are the one saviour of the entire world" BS storyline.   EQ was very much a PVE sandbox.  You started a character and then did what you want.  Did you want to go solo skeletons? go kill skeletons.  Did you wanna get a group together and try to dungeon crawl your way to Emperor Crushbone?  Do that.  Once you gained some levels you could get together and kill some dragons, or whatever.

    Modern MMO's are glorified single player games and Dave Georgeson was right that they need to move away from that model.  Where he was wrong (and most of the people who werent there in the beginning days of MMOs) is assuming that EVERYTHING from EQ was bad.

    In my opinion the main ingredient missing from MMO's is the Multiplayer part of it.  And please nobody pull the BS card that just because you're on a server with other people its Multiplayer.  Thats just being pedantic.

    The lack of defined classes and class interdependency is what has ruined any aspect of a community and any sense of pride or individuality in your character.

    Humans gain satisfaction from having a purpose in life.  Not from being a jack of all trades.  Look at any walk of life and the people who are happiest are the ones who have found their course in life and are pursuing that.

    That doesnt change in MMO's.

    Also, something obtained easily has no worth.

    (I quoted this for a purpose.. give me a second)

    Points and Observations from this thread:

    So,  I came to this website today for the first time.  I'm a former EQ player (2000 - 2005) coming back to the realm of MMO's looking for something to play.  Naturally I look for an EQ-esque game because that's what I liked.. (I mean, I dedicated 5 years to it) --  EQ:N isn't out, so I looked at some other stuff.  First, TSO.. I played Morrowind and Skyrim, they were fun single player games..  maybe give TSO a chance..  Until I youtubed gameplay of a max level character beating the final boss, BY HIMSELF.. a week after the game came out.   What?!  An MMO you can BEAT by yourself?  Are you serious?  If you want to play a game by yourself..  why are you playing an MMO?  And why do you want to play.. or pay.. for  a game you can win in one week?  

        Section for people making excuses:

                    "He probably is a hardcore grinder, played 24 hours a day for the week.. which is why he's max level"

                                  -There were hundreds of these youtube videos

                                                    (And they weren't from beta, they were from live)

                    "Some people have other obligations and can't grind 8 hours a day to be in an "uber" guild, they want to play casually, and still get to endgame content"  

                                   -No game-design or mechanic should put casual gamers on par with hardcore gamers...   You mean to tell me that if I work a job casually, I should be rewarded the same as the person who works 60 hours a week?  That's inane.  If you want a casual game play experience, buy a WiiU -   I think it's arrogant of people to expect more for less... in any situation.  If you have a full-time job because you need to pay the bills.. guess what... you have to miss out on other stuff.  If i work a part-time job and live with roomates and can spend more time playing video games...  I'm choosing to miss out on stuff as well.. (Building equity in a house, etc)

     

    The same idea goes for these Multi-class or Hybrid class systems...   Why are you people playing MMO's if you want to do everything by yourself?  Play Skyrim.  I hate the idea of a "Battle Mage" or some stupid hybrid of a Silk Armor wearing class able to take blows..  Why implement a group / guild system in a game if there are 500,000 battle mages running around nuking and tanking everything to death?   "I can nuke/tank and heal, and my char never dies! I must be the best gamer on the planet!"   Wrong.  The best gamers on the planet were the people killing Avatar of War in ONLY Kunark/Velious gear with under 50 people in their raid.  Back when there was no raid function, or "Alternate Abilities".  Remember when you wiped.. you were spending 2 hours CRing.. not waiting for a Graveyard or some other "Convenience" that was implemented because people couldn't hack it.

     

    Also, a special note to the guy who said "Taunt" was the worst idea ever...  then proceeded to explain why taunt was needed in a group / guild based system...   I'm pretty sure you said.. if you are a meatshield, you just need to be able to take blows....

    Ok.

    How am I supposed to "take blows.." if some rogue is doing 3x my damage output?  Without a taunt?  (And proc Rage/Hate = taunt, btw)  How "real" is a game where the Raid boss isn't intuitive enough to attack the person he "Hates" most...  (Usually the person hitting him the hardest, unless someone else is TAUNTING him...)

     

    Anyway, back to my point..   Whoever wrote this piece I quoted (Sorry, I forgot your name) -- You are a genius.  I've been trying to make this point for years.  EQ died when Luclin came out.  Period.  Actually, more specifically.. when the BAZAAR came out.  You went from having to associate with your entire server (North Freeport /auction /ooc to buy/sell)  To being able to set up a market bot and AFK.  The nexus/PoK (I know PoK wasn't luclin)  --didn't help.  Because you no longer needed to get "rides" from helpful Druids or Wizards.   You went from having to know your entire server to just having to talk to your 40 or 50 guild mates and setting up your market Bot at night. 

    Unfortunately that trend caught on and more massive "multiplayer" online games continued it...

    Multiplayer isn't being on a server with 1,000 people.. Multiplayer is INTERACTING with 1,000 people.

     

    Also, to add on to your point...  Instances killed multiplayer, as well.  People having to spawn camp, and learn spawn timers was what turned good guilds into GREAT guilds.  If your guild could mobilize faster than the other guild.. you got the kill.  It also made for great rivalries.  What fun is watching the Yankees take batting practice?   I'm pretty sure you all would rather watch them play the Red Sox.  So why eliminate rivalries on EQ?

     

    I think there is a space for Instances, though.  Don't get me wrong.  I think instancing encounters that reward things like Augments and Rare tradeskill items would be a good idea.   Because you and your guild / group could farm them at your leisure.  If another guild on the server can get to "X" boss faster than you... you shouldn't be SOL on raiding.. but you shouldn't get "X" bosses loot. 

    And the early/mid game level grind could be a little easier...  I will give a little on that.  I played through some project99 the last few months, and spent 8 hours getting from lvl 10 to 11.  That was painful.  I think instead of having a "Tutorial" and some stupid "Loot 10 snake feet" quests..  Have a legit quest-set that teaches people how to do stuff, yields some decent starting items (Choice of: Tradeskill kit, Tank/Mage/Priest/Chain/Leather armor peices, Weapon)  and good XP.  Get people into the 20's or so quick then let them grind from there.

     

    I don't want EQ:N to be Everquest from 1999.  But I sure as hell don't want it to be a single player game where the only purpose other people have on the server is to Troll and Lag me.

    Sorry for the lofty expectations. 

                      

     

    I disagree with everything you posted so much that my disagree meter is pegged out.  I'm happy your want something like that in a VIDEO GAME but even the oldest of hardcore players such as myself got started in this genre with Asheron's Call....thankfully so I might add.  It was these reasons you posted in this post is the reason why back in 1999 and my friends at my local Hobby/Magic shop were starting to get into the whole PC/MMO genre immediately ruled out EQ and went with the more sane and promising Asheron's Call. 

    Good luck on your journey for a game like you want, but let it be known if a game is ever made to suit your tastes then it will have the smallest population of any MMO on the market.  Who knows, maybe one of these days an Indie developer might take up your cause.

    Sandbox means open world, non-linear gaming PERIOD!

    Subscription Gaming, especially MMO gaming is a Cash grab bigger then the most P2W cash shop!

    Bring Back Exploration and lengthy progression times. RPG's have always been about the Journey not the destination!!!

    image

  • Redik23Redik23 Member Posts: 3

    "I disagree with everything you posted so much that my disagree meter is pegged out.  I'm happy your want something like that in a VIDEO GAME but even the oldest of hardcore players such as myself got started in this genre with Asheron's Call....thankfully so I might add.  It was these reasons you posted in this post is the reason why back in 1999 and my friends at my local Hobby/Magic shop were starting to get into the whole PC/MMO genre immediately ruled out EQ and went with the more sane and promising Asheron's Call. 

    Good luck on your journey for a game like you want, but let it be known if a game is ever made to suit your tastes then it will have the smallest population of any MMO on the market.  Who knows, maybe one of these days an Indie developer might take up your cause."

    --

    --

    --

    ...You mean a MMO that forces people to interact?

    ...You mean a MMO that rewards the people who dedicate more time and effort?

    ...you mean a MMO that actually requires thought and skill?

    ...you mean a MMO that doesn't let one single person win the game by himself / herself?

     

    Desiring those things in a MMO now-a-days puts me in the "Smallest Market of any MMO on the market?"

     

    What?!

    ....did I read that right?

     

    And I didn't know people who played Asherons Call were "the oldest of hardcore players such as myself" --

    I believe Everquest; post kunark release & pre-Luclin release (Which was pretty much where I was directing my design ideas from) -- Had more people on one SERVER than AC had in its entirety (I realize that is an exaggeration)... but still.. how does being an Asherons Call player make you an expert on Gaming Experience and Longevity...  I'm pretty sure there are STILL servers with EQ on them.. and they are rocking what.. 25 expansions?   And there is an entire sub-surface EQ gaming mecca (EQEmulator) going on.  I don't see that for AC.  So how, exactly, am I a minority?

     

    Thanks for your input and design suggestions, though. 

     

    ...

     

     

  • CleffyCleffy Member RarePosts: 6,403
    I find the art style choices in EQN to be interesting. The reason why is because the art style is very easy to achieve. A couple months back I had a character I needed to make in a hurry. What I ended up with was a style that looks very similar to EQN. I thought to myself then, they really aren't trying hard on this one. One of the things that takes time in mmo development is the player character. There is a lot of complexity in it being multiple pieces with a lot of feature choices. Doing something that has complex requirements with a complex art style would have probably been too time consuming and resource intensive. So I think it was a good idea they went with the easier to achieve graphics in order to gain more in other areas.
  • kingotnwkingotnw Member UncommonPosts: 103
    Originally posted by Redik23
    This is what bothers me.  They started out making EQ3 in the veign of World of Warcraft.  I'm really tired of people saying all the MMO's of the past 10 years are EQ based, because that is very very loosely true.  The only thing that the original EQ has in common with modern themepark MMO is that it was primarily Player vs Enemy.  EQ had no instancing, no quest based leveling, no "you are the one saviour of the entire world" BS storyline.   EQ was very much a PVE sandbox.  You started a character and then did what you want.  Did you want to go solo skeletons? go kill skeletons.  Did you wanna get a group together and try to dungeon crawl your way to Emperor Crushbone?  Do that.  Once you gained some levels you could get together and kill some dragons, or whatever.

    Modern MMO's are glorified single player games and Dave Georgeson was right that they need to move away from that model.  Where he was wrong (and most of the people who werent there in the beginning days of MMOs) is assuming that EVERYTHING from EQ was bad.

    In my opinion the main ingredient missing from MMO's is the Multiplayer part of it.  And please nobody pull the BS card that just because you're on a server with other people its Multiplayer.  Thats just being pedantic.

    The lack of defined classes and class interdependency is what has ruined any aspect of a community and any sense of pride or individuality in your character.

    Humans gain satisfaction from having a purpose in life.  Not from being a jack of all trades.  Look at any walk of life and the people who are happiest are the ones who have found their course in life and are pursuing that.

    That doesnt change in MMO's.

    Also, something obtained easily has no worth.

    (I quoted this for a purpose.. give me a second)

    Points and Observations from this thread:

    So,  I came to this website today for the first time.  I'm a former EQ player (2000 - 2005) coming back to the realm of MMO's looking for something to play.  Naturally I look for an EQ-esque game because that's what I liked.. (I mean, I dedicated 5 years to it) --  EQ:N isn't out, so I looked at some other stuff.  First, TSO.. I played Morrowind and Skyrim, they were fun single player games..  maybe give TSO a chance..  Until I youtubed gameplay of a max level character beating the final boss, BY HIMSELF.. a week after the game came out.   What?!  An MMO you can BEAT by yourself?  Are you serious?  If you want to play a game by yourself..  why are you playing an MMO?  And why do you want to play.. or pay.. for  a game you can win in one week?  

        Section for people making excuses:

                    "He probably is a hardcore grinder, played 24 hours a day for the week.. which is why he's max level"

                                  -There were hundreds of these youtube videos

                                                    (And they weren't from beta, they were from live)

                    "Some people have other obligations and can't grind 8 hours a day to be in an "uber" guild, they want to play casually, and still get to endgame content"  

                                   -No game-design or mechanic should put casual gamers on par with hardcore gamers...   You mean to tell me that if I work a job casually, I should be rewarded the same as the person who works 60 hours a week?  That's inane.  If you want a casual game play experience, buy a WiiU -   I think it's arrogant of people to expect more for less... in any situation.  If you have a full-time job because you need to pay the bills.. guess what... you have to miss out on other stuff.  If i work a part-time job and live with roomates and can spend more time playing video games...  I'm choosing to miss out on stuff as well.. (Building equity in a house, etc)

     

    The same idea goes for these Multi-class or Hybrid class systems...   Why are you people playing MMO's if you want to do everything by yourself?  Play Skyrim.  I hate the idea of a "Battle Mage" or some stupid hybrid of a Silk Armor wearing class able to take blows..  Why implement a group / guild system in a game if there are 500,000 battle mages running around nuking and tanking everything to death?   "I can nuke/tank and heal, and my char never dies! I must be the best gamer on the planet!"   Wrong.  The best gamers on the planet were the people killing Avatar of War in ONLY Kunark/Velious gear with under 50 people in their raid.  Back when there was no raid function, or "Alternate Abilities".  Remember when you wiped.. you were spending 2 hours CRing.. not waiting for a Graveyard or some other "Convenience" that was implemented because people couldn't hack it.

     

    Also, a special note to the guy who said "Taunt" was the worst idea ever...  then proceeded to explain why taunt was needed in a group / guild based system...   I'm pretty sure you said.. if you are a meatshield, you just need to be able to take blows....

    Ok.

    How am I supposed to "take blows.." if some rogue is doing 3x my damage output?  Without a taunt?  (And proc Rage/Hate = taunt, btw)  How "real" is a game where the Raid boss isn't intuitive enough to attack the person he "Hates" most...  (Usually the person hitting him the hardest, unless someone else is TAUNTING him...)

     

    Anyway, back to my point..   Whoever wrote this piece I quoted (Sorry, I forgot your name) -- You are a genius.  I've been trying to make this point for years.  EQ died when Luclin came out.  Period.  Actually, more specifically.. when the BAZAAR came out.  You went from having to associate with your entire server (North Freeport /auction /ooc to buy/sell)  To being able to set up a market bot and AFK.  The nexus/PoK (I know PoK wasn't luclin)  --didn't help.  Because you no longer needed to get "rides" from helpful Druids or Wizards.   You went from having to know your entire server to just having to talk to your 40 or 50 guild mates and setting up your market Bot at night. 

    Unfortunately that trend caught on and more massive "multiplayer" online games continued it...

    Multiplayer isn't being on a server with 1,000 people.. Multiplayer is INTERACTING with 1,000 people.

     

    Also, to add on to your point...  Instances killed multiplayer, as well.  People having to spawn camp, and learn spawn timers was what turned good guilds into GREAT guilds.  If your guild could mobilize faster than the other guild.. you got the kill.  It also made for great rivalries.  What fun is watching the Yankees take batting practice?   I'm pretty sure you all would rather watch them play the Red Sox.  So why eliminate rivalries on EQ?

     

    I think there is a space for Instances, though.  Don't get me wrong.  I think instancing encounters that reward things like Augments and Rare tradeskill items would be a good idea.   Because you and your guild / group could farm them at your leisure.  If another guild on the server can get to "X" boss faster than you... you shouldn't be SOL on raiding.. but you shouldn't get "X" bosses loot. 

    And the early/mid game level grind could be a little easier...  I will give a little on that.  I played through some project99 the last few months, and spent 8 hours getting from lvl 10 to 11.  That was painful.  I think instead of having a "Tutorial" and some stupid "Loot 10 snake feet" quests..  Have a legit quest-set that teaches people how to do stuff, yields some decent starting items (Choice of: Tradeskill kit, Tank/Mage/Priest/Chain/Leather armor peices, Weapon)  and good XP.  Get people into the 20's or so quick then let them grind from there.

     

    I don't want EQ:N to be Everquest from 1999.  But I sure as hell don't want it to be a single player game where the only purpose other people have on the server is to Troll and Lag me.

    Sorry for the lofty expectations. 

                      

     

    I agree with pretty much everything you have said here, but there has to be room for innovation in the field as well. Let's see what SOE has in store for us with EQN. I actually think it sounds fairly promising... On paper anyways.

  • AldersAlders Member RarePosts: 2,207
    Originally posted by Redik23
     

    Also, to add on to your point...  Instances killed multiplayer, as well.  People having to spawn camp, and learn spawn timers was what turned good guilds into GREAT guilds.  If your guild could mobilize faster than the other guild.. you got the kill.  It also made for great rivalries.  

     

    I agree and disagree with this.  Instancing everything is bad but it was the players that forced this outcome.  I'll use my experience in FFXI, which was basically an EQ clone, as an example.

    The ability to camp never equated to guild skill.  The best guilds were the ones with the most players with no jobs that could camp mobs 24/7.  Later this turned into a claiming bot paradise where guilds parked their alt accounts at camps while they actually played the game on their main accounts.  You're correct about the mobilization of ones guild but how we got to that point took no skill.

    The encounters themselves were usually mostly trivial in comparison to actually claiming and getting a shot at fighting something.  That was a problem and one that drove away many players.  I was in a great guild that competed against 5-6 other great guilds for spawns every week.  If we managed to get to fight something once a week it was considered a success.  That's just simply not enough today.

    I'm all for more open world content and player interdependence, but there has to be a new way to implement both without resorting to an archaic method such as the one used in EQ/FFXI.

  • alyndalealyndale Member UncommonPosts: 936
    Originally posted by Ivylena

    Until ANYONE has actually played EQN, the 2nd line in my signature would like a word with you.

    Have a great day all. :-)

    <Smiles> Hi Ivy

    There are times when a post like this is like a nice exclamation mark at the "end" of a sentence. I do think we've come near the end of this one...

    /bows

    Alyn

    All I want is the truth
    Just gimme some truth
    John Lennon

  • alyndalealyndale Member UncommonPosts: 936

    If you want EQ3 then play one of the myriad of predecessors that are plaguing this genre.  From WoW to Wildstar. from LOTRO to ESO.  All have their vision of the EQ stylization. 

    How about we let them design the game first before we past judgement.

    Ubove taken from poster, Azza...

    Exactly and thank you! Now, we just need a few more to drive home this point!

    /smiles and pumps arm

    Alyn

    <div footer="" cfpostactions"=""> Reply Add Multi-Quote Quote

    All I want is the truth
    Just gimme some truth
    John Lennon

  • SupaAPESupaAPE Member Posts: 100

    The game will be action combat based.

    The game will have cartoonish graphics, for various reasons that I agree with. 

    The game will have various features deemed 'successful' from MMO's of the past, EQ, WoW, maybe DaoC, GW2, NW. This is a product being sold by a business at the end of the day.

    The game is being designed to appeal to a large audience across a larger demographic than most MMO's attempt to reach. This is not being designed as a 'niche' game.

     

    If you don't like any of the points above, then this might not be your MMO. The points above are set in stone and this is the way SOE are designing their game. If you're looking for a true EQ successor, you're not going to get it it's as simple as that. No matter how much you cry or whine, a) nobody really cares, b) you will not get that first MMO experience again deal with it, c) make the best of your time and the games you choose to play.

     

    Naysayers and doombringers need to get out, breath some fresh air, and do something more positive and constructive. What makes you think that if you're sure the game is going to suck, from all that SOE has presented, that any of the design direction is going to change? IT WON'T. They want MONEY, they have teams of people SMARTER THAN YOU, and they are going to design their game based on their inhouse TEAM. Any feedback they get from you, or me, is not going to drastically change anything about the game. They may take ideas and suggestions into hand, but it will not change the direction of their game.

     

    It would be more wise to spend your time trying to look for that perfect MMO that fits your bill, instead of whining about something which will not change. I'm sure if your 'ideal' MMO is demanded by the public, it will happen sooner or later, if it hasn't already.

     

    good day:) 

  • AbdarAbdar Member UncommonPosts: 400
    Originally posted by delete5230

    First I'll say, I don't know much about this MMO.  

    So why even bother making a comment?

  • daimerdaimer Member Posts: 7
    I think ill pass on this game... doesnt strik me as anything new either...

    image
  • delete5230delete5230 Member EpicPosts: 7,007
    Originally posted by SupaAPE

    The game will be action combat based.

    The game will have cartoonish graphics, for various reasons that I agree with. 

    The game will have various features deemed 'successful' from MMO's of the past, EQ, WoW, maybe DaoC, GW2, NW. This is a product being sold by a business at the end of the day.

    The game is being designed to appeal to a large audience across a larger demographic than most MMO's attempt to reach. This is not being designed as a 'niche' game.

     

    If you don't like any of the points above, then this might not be your MMO. The points above are set in stone and this is the way SOE are designing their game. If you're looking for a true EQ successor, you're not going to get it it's as simple as that. No matter how much you cry or whine, a) nobody really cares, b) you will not get that first MMO experience again deal with it, c) make the best of your time and the games you choose to play.

     

    Naysayers and doombringers need to get out, breath some fresh air, and do something more positive and constructive. What makes you think that if you're sure the game is going to suck, from all that SOE has presented, that any of the design direction is going to change? IT WON'T. They want MONEY, they have teams of people SMARTER THAN YOU, and they are going to design their game based on their inhouse TEAM. Any feedback they get from you, or me, is not going to drastically change anything about the game. They may take ideas and suggestions into hand, but it will not change the direction of their game.

     

    It would be more wise to spend your time trying to look for that perfect MMO that fits your bill, instead of whining about something which will not change. I'm sure if your 'ideal' MMO is demanded by the public, it will happen sooner or later, if it hasn't already.

     

    good day:) 

    I read you loud and clear Supa. I read every word, I get your point and I could also see that your somewhat mad.

     

    HOWEVER, I would like to point out a few things :

    1) The poll showes players would like EQ3 ( this totally suprised me )

    2) EQ1 and EQ2 are extreamly old. A new Everquest game would by far be welcomed by many. Both would have been better.

    3) If SOE called it compleatly something diffrient other than Everquest, alarms would most likley not had gone off.

    4) Free-to-play. Now before anything this subject could very well start arguements.

    It's pritty much a fact that F2P is devided 50% and 50%.  Now where my opinion comes in I would say more like 90% dont like it but there are many here just looking for a free game, no matter what they say.  It's also My opinion that F2P games don't last near as long as Pay per month.....But then again this is my opinion.

  • RandomCasualtyRandomCasualty Member UncommonPosts: 316

    From all the game footage I have seen, you are not in Norrath anymore, you are in disneyland

    To this day I still like EQ2's graphics, but left due to the dumbing down WoW theme park intrusion. 

    Maybe the gameplay is completely different from WoW in EQN, but they sure did a great job bring the atmosphere/graphics closer .. we shall see

  • CaldrinCaldrin Member UncommonPosts: 4,505

    I really like what WOE have been doing recently.. PS2 is a great game even if it is f2p that has not made it less fun...

    I am also tesing Landmark and they are donig great work with the engine and this will be used in EQ:N. I also like the features they have talked about for EQ:N...

    no no I do not want Everquest 3 as that would end up being yet another themepark clone and we have a million of those to choose from already and none are better than wow so whats the point.

     

     

  • azzamasinazzamasin Member UncommonPosts: 3,105
    Originally posted by Redik23

    "I disagree with everything you posted so much that my disagree meter is pegged out.  I'm happy your want something like that in a VIDEO GAME but even the oldest of hardcore players such as myself got started in this genre with Asheron's Call....thankfully so I might add.  It was these reasons you posted in this post is the reason why back in 1999 and my friends at my local Hobby/Magic shop were starting to get into the whole PC/MMO genre immediately ruled out EQ and went with the more sane and promising Asheron's Call. 

    Good luck on your journey for a game like you want, but let it be known if a game is ever made to suit your tastes then it will have the smallest population of any MMO on the market.  Who knows, maybe one of these days an Indie developer might take up your cause."

    --

    --

    --

    ...You mean a MMO that forces people to interact?

    ...You mean a MMO that rewards the people who dedicate more time and effort?

    ...you mean a MMO that actually requires thought and skill?

    ...you mean a MMO that doesn't let one single person win the game by himself / herself?

     

    Desiring those things in a MMO now-a-days puts me in the "Smallest Market of any MMO on the market?"

     

    What?!

    ....did I read that right?

     

    And I didn't know people who played Asherons Call were "the oldest of hardcore players such as myself" --

    I believe Everquest; post kunark release & pre-Luclin release (Which was pretty much where I was directing my design ideas from) -- Had more people on one SERVER than AC had in its entirety (I realize that is an exaggeration)... but still.. how does being an Asherons Call player make you an expert on Gaming Experience and Longevity...  I'm pretty sure there are STILL servers with EQ on them.. and they are rocking what.. 25 expansions?   And there is an entire sub-surface EQ gaming mecca (EQEmulator) going on.  I don't see that for AC.  So how, exactly, am I a minority?

     

    Thanks for your input and design suggestions, though. 

     

    ...

     

     

    I never said AC was more successful but I did say that AC was extremely different from EQ and that is why many people played it over EQ.  The early years of MMO's were terrible IMO.  It catered to a small niche market and AC was so different that it featured a few ideals that made MMO's not seen as horrible.  Such as ease of soloing, Exploration centric.  Questing with emphasis on rewards and difficulty with depth.  I will never ever play an EQ type of game that FORCED grouping, and catered to people with MORE time then me.  I play games because their fun and count me lucky that the modern MMO has realized that most of the features that EQ instilled which I hated have been left out.  And yes desiring those things does put you into the smallest market because no MMO at least no Triple-A MMO will ever run that hardcore EQ mentality content again.  Might I suggest you look into McQuaids new Pantheon game.  I'm sure that indie development is right up your ally. 

    Sandbox means open world, non-linear gaming PERIOD!

    Subscription Gaming, especially MMO gaming is a Cash grab bigger then the most P2W cash shop!

    Bring Back Exploration and lengthy progression times. RPG's have always been about the Journey not the destination!!!

    image

  • azzamasinazzamasin Member UncommonPosts: 3,105
    Originally posted by Caldrin

    I really like what WOE have been doing recently.. PS2 is a great game even if it is f2p that has not made it less fun...

    I am also tesing Landmark and they are donig great work with the engine and this will be used in EQ:N. I also like the features they have talked about for EQ:N...

    no no I do not want Everquest 3 as that would end up being yet another themepark clone and we have a million of those to choose from already and none are better than wow so whats the point.

     

     

    Not only would it be a Themepark clone but it would feature ideals and systems not seen in 15 years of MMO gaming.  Systems that kept this genre in the smallest niche market audience for 5 years.  It wasn't until WoW came along that revolutionized the genre and gave it more appeal which caused the genre to grow.  I don't like WoW anymore because I'm tired of that sort of leveling gameplay but I do like what it did for the genre.  Namely removed Spawn Camping and Forced grouping.  2 Ideals that I think were the most stupidest things ever. 

     

    No what we need is a new revolutionary ideal in the genre, which I think if SOE can pull off with EQN might be the trick.

    Sandbox means open world, non-linear gaming PERIOD!

    Subscription Gaming, especially MMO gaming is a Cash grab bigger then the most P2W cash shop!

    Bring Back Exploration and lengthy progression times. RPG's have always been about the Journey not the destination!!!

    image

  • AlleinAllein Member RarePosts: 2,139
    Originally posted by delete5230

    HOWEVER, I would like to point out a few things :

    1) The poll showes players would like EQ3 ( this totally suprised me )

    2) EQ1 and EQ2 are extreamly old. A new Everquest game would by far be welcomed by many. Both would have been better.

    3) If SOE called it compleatly something diffrient other than Everquest, alarms would most likley not had gone off.

    4) Free-to-play. Now before anything this subject could very well start arguements.

    It's pritty much a fact that F2P is devided 50% and 50%.  Now where my opinion comes in I would say more like 90% dont like it but there are many here just looking for a free game, no matter what they say.  It's also My opinion that F2P games don't last near as long as Pay per month.....But then again this is my opinion.

    1) Why would it surprise you? EQ/EQ2 are both good games, both very dated at this point, but lots of memories and emotion tied to them. It's like thinking people wouldn't want another Diablo, Final Fantasy, Half-Life, etc. While the poll is a 50/50 split, unfortunately for those that want to live in the past, they are a small minority and the industry has moved on. Several indie and "old school" type games coming out and I highly doubt any will make much of a splash.

    Then again, people think they want something and when they are given it, never seem satisfied. 

    2) EQN is a new EQ game and beyond those with closed minds, will be welcomed by many unless SOE totally screws it up.

    3) True, nor would it have instant connection to one of the oldest games/brands in the genre. Just like with whatever Blizzard comes up with next. If they make another mmorpg and have a totally new IP, might not be a complete instant success as if they went with Warcraft-Starcraft-Diablo. Even if people are upset, they still have the nostalgia going and many that swear they won't try EQN, will try it simply to prove they were right. Win for SOE.

    4) Not sure how you came to the 50/50 "fact" but I know of quite a few games (almost all of them) that either went F2P because subs weren't working or died because they went sub until the end. MMOish type games that have released F2P or switched over painlessly have been going strong (MOBA, FPS, many mmorpgs). Without digging, can't think of any F2P games that didn't last long or closed down quickly.

    F2P is the future. I could care less either way as long as I have a quality game that continues to receive updates and support on top of actually being played by a decent number of people. Unfortunately, those items are hard to do with either system.

    GW2 is probably the best example of a AAA "F2P" game with a big initial cash shop purchase (game itself). It has done pretty well so far. Beyond that, I don't know of any other high end F2P games at release. SOE is trying to break the mold in many ways, payment being one of them. If they have enough pride in their product that they aren't slapping a fee to enter, that says something to me. Then again it could totally suck and be a micro-transaction hell, we shall see.

    F2P has a bad rap because it deserves it. Many companies/games have gone out of their way to make it as painful as possible. SOE included. While others have done a great job. SOE included. As long as SOE continues to do it well (PS2 style) hopefully it turns out okay. EQN will also be part of the SOE sub as well for those that love seeing an automatic payment from SOE every month.

  • LokopukoLokopuko Member Posts: 13

    The problem with EQ is SOE.

    So far every game they touched started out good and died/became terrible later.

    Their problem is the management.

    And a consecutive problem is this:

    1. They make people buy landmark (people don't have to I know, let's leave the crap at the door)

    2. People build great stuff, castles and you name it but they give up all rights to their work and SOE owns it

    3. SOE uses this work, best pieces in EQ Next, not only for free but they made people pay to work for SOE to do their job

    4. They make the same (and other people) pay again for EQ Next

    If that's not evil I don't know what is.

    A game is similar to a movie or tv series. When watching I want to be amazed, given a new perspective, dive into a different world, be entertained. The same applies to games. If I can sink in and forget reality for a while and actually pretend to be something else that's a good game. I don't remember when the last time was (apart from EQ2) in the past decade I was able to.

    I hate WoW but it's the biggest reason for its success. At the end of Warcraft 3, which had a great story, it all lead to World of Warcraft. And even I played it in the beginning that's how strong the pull from WC3 to WoW was.

    EQ1 had story but it was also a shitty game, sorry. EQ2 had a great story and with it also events that sucked you into the story, into the world, away from the real world.

    I watched a few EQ2 raidvids just a few hours ago, and I was raiding pretty no-life hardcore for a while in EQ2. I don't think I could stomach another random noob raid where few people say what you have to do and miserable players ruin the fun because of single mistakes made again and again. And let's not forget the "meet at 7 p.m. hey it's 7:30 where's joe? oh he went to the mall said he'll brb" unorganized crap. And the raid itself, watching timers, moving because of some script. DPS epeen waving. Ugh. EQ3 yes, maybe, but different, not like this again. Only thinking about this creates a bad feeling.

    EQ Next, meh I'll give it a chance, if I don't have to pay for it and I'll always have "It's SOE" in mind, "they'll ruin it eventually anyway"

  • LokopukoLokopuko Member Posts: 13
    Originally posted by Torgrim

    EQN migration system sounds really intresting, long gone are the static mob spawn, mobs move around and if you kill them to much they migrate to other places.

    Old Everquest ala themepark are dead, get over it, we are entering a new era of MMO gaming, flow with it or stay back and play your arcane stale themepark buildup It's your choice.

    I embrase changes.

    It's what Darkfall promised but never delivered, sadly.

  • GhavriggGhavrigg Member RarePosts: 1,308
    People living in the past can't appreciate the present.
  • AlleinAllein Member RarePosts: 2,139
    Originally posted by Darq1

    The problem with EQ is SOE.

    So far every game they touched started out good and died/became terrible later.

    Their problem is the management.

    Can't disagree, but without SOE, we wouldn't have those games to begin with, heck might not have the genre as quickly as we did. Not sure what went through their minds when they made sweeping changes to EQ/SWG, could of been fear of the competition, listening to the wrong players/devs, or simply trying something else in hopes to be more successful. Many still enjoy EQ/EQ2, but who knows where they would of ended up if they had done it differently. 

    And a consecutive problem is this:

    1. They make people buy landmark (people don't have to I know, let's leave the crap at the door)

    I wasn't "made" to buy landmark.  If someone isn't willing/able to pay $20 for a game, they probably shouldn't be playing games. They could of simply said it costs ~$20 like almost all EA games, would you or anyone been upset then? Will be F2P eventually so not sure why people so angry about this. Don't want to pay for the chance to participate, don't. I've waited for games to drop in price or go F2P, we all place value on products and have our limits.

    2. People build great stuff, castles and you name it but they give up all rights to their work and SOE owns it

    Which is built with their tools on their servers. Players will be able to make a profit as well. Not much different then apps or any other online market. Don't like it, don't participate. If I hated Apple taking a percent from my music/app or whatever, I wouldn't use iTunes, guess what? Many don't. Those who do, take advantage of all that it provides.

    3. SOE uses this work, best pieces in EQ Next, not only for free but they made people pay to work for SOE to do their job

    Again, no one "made" anyone do it nor are they stealing work. People submit their creations and want their work to be in EQN or be sold to players in either game. Think you are missing the point of why people are enjoying Landmark and the connection to EQN. We get to be part of the game's development. That is reward to some. Not everyone needs a huge check. I'd love to see people using what I create and know I made it.

    4. They make the same (and other people) pay again for EQ Next

    Hate when SOE comes into my home and "makes" me do these things...as Landmark/EQN will be F2P and players can choose to purchase items or not, still missing what you are upset about.

    If that's not evil I don't know what is.

    Turn on the news. Google evil in the world. If that is where your bar is, you must live a pretty blissful life. That isn't even "first world problem" status.

    EQ Next, meh I'll give it a chance, if I don't have to pay for it and I'll always have "It's SOE" in mind, "they'll ruin it eventually anyway"

    You are perfectly fine playing a game and potentially not spending a dime for endless entertainment, yet think it is evil of SOE to try and make a profit off of players willingly participating in their ecosystem? Makes sense to me. 

    Sounds like you want your cake, pie, ice cream, a back rub and for SOE to pay you to play their game. Really doesn't make any sense to me. They are trying to make it as free as possible for those unable/willing to pay, with that comes ways to make a profit. Don't like it, play another game.

    I'm assuming you either haven't played Landmark and or don't submit things in the building competition. Which goes back to I don't know what you are going on about. SOE could easily build EQN with zero outside input, some of us enjoy them not going this route. Don't like it? Wait until it is released and enjoy for free. Take advantage of all those that put in the effort to make it as good as it can be.

    Edit: Problem with gaming and the world in general is entitled people thinking others owe them something. Unless you are on top of the food chain, expect to be paying with your time-money-energy to someone else for a bit of reward in return. That's life.

Sign In or Register to comment.