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 )

123468

Comments

  • Gallus85Gallus85 Member Posts: 1,092
    Originally posted by Azoth

    While those points are certainly in most mmo released since then, they are not what made EQ special to me and others I know. EQ wasn't my first, I played meridian and UO for years before playing EQ. Yet EQ is still the game I enjoyed the most.

    Cool, I played LoK and UO before stepping into EQ 1999 day one of launch.

    EQ had more than the basic trinity most clones gave us. You had tank, healer, buffer, debuffer, puller, dps and crowd control. You could have combination of those, making many setup work. The following games trivialized it down to 3 roles.

    Many games have most or all those rolls incorporated into their class design similar to EQ.  Again you're making a blanket statement that seems to stem from a lack of experience with MMORPGs.

    While you are right that EQ was vertical progression, there was multiple ladder to get there. Many location with the same level content you could go to. How many starting location did any game post EQ had ?

    A ton of games have multiple places to start off and level in just like EQ did.  FFXIV, Vanguard, GW2, etc etc.

    EQ had races that mattered, important stats and also different reputation with other races. The world was huge and dangerous, I hate leashed mobs that run slower than you. Today's game are way easier than vanilla EQ.

    Many games have a huge amount of races that matter for your character.  Some don't, but many do.  Easier is also subjective.  There are games that are far more complex and challenging than EQ was in as far as world danger and mobs go.

    The slower combat, with finite ressources. Ressources management was important to optimize your actions. You could not just round up every mobs, kill em in 5 sec, rinse and repeat every minutes. You had to meditate between fights, which probably helped make the game a better socializing game.

    The combat system left a lot to be desired but it did well for what it had to work with back in 1999.  There are far more interesting and complex combat systems in many games out there.  I will agree that down time between fighting did lead to a more "social" experience when grouping with PUGs and not using voice chat.  However I feel that modern games with structured guilds using voice chat goes a long way into making a very social experience. An in game area / group wide VOIP system would go a long way to making random encounters with non-guildmates more social without forcing huge amounts of boring down time.  We also know this is something SOE is capable of doing for EQN, as it's been proven in Planetside 2 to work very well.

    Sometimes the answer isn't to go backwards to get a desired effect.  Sometimes you need to think forward.

    Corpse run could become and adventure by itself. Minotaur cave in steamfont, my first couple days of playing the game. You could get mezed and pulled deep in there, nothing you could do about it. Real challenge. There are a lot more small things that made EQ better, I won't go deeper in it as it's been discussed many time.

    A lot of games have real challenge.  You need to look harder.  I did enjoy corpse runs in EQ for the simple fact that they made death more meaningful and in turn made a close fight more exciting.  However, there are games to achieve this same effect with and without a corpse run system.

    If going back to the game now, with the knowledge I have would certainly make the game easier, but never as easy as all the crap we have been fed in the last 12 years.

    A lot of games are "Easier" than EQ was in some ways.  A lot of new games are far harder than EQ was in other ways.  It's subjective, but there are plenty of games out there that provide enough challenge.

    While you are right that EQ is the father of the themepark games, none succeeded in cloning what really made it a great game to me and probably many others.

     

    Again, this seems to be nastolgia talking.  I was simply pointing out that most games hold to the same formula that EQ had all while having many of the features you spoke about here.  Except none of them have received your attention.  So my initial statement was most likely correct.

     

     

     

    Legends of Kesmai, UO, EQ, AO, DAoC, AC, SB, RO, SWG, EVE, EQ2, CoH, GW, VG:SOH, WAR, Aion, DF, CO, MO, DN, Tera, SWTOR, RO2, DP, GW2, PS2, BnS, NW, FF:XIV, ESO, EQ:NL

  • Gallus85Gallus85 Member Posts: 1,092
    Originally posted by Knytta
    Originally posted by Vorthanion
     

    Maybe the real issue is that the developers haven't learned what the masses really want any more than those who poll it on this website.  I see a lot of lambasting aimed at casual gamers, yet most casual games are hardly that in the eyes of casual gamers as they are subjected to many types of content and mechanics that are far from casual friendly, whether it's raiding with little or no alternative at end game or forced pvp in a pve game or having to deal with stupidly low drop rates for quest items or competition for quest related npc's and items.  Let alone the recent departure from roleplaying and focusing too much on combat and action combat at that, with few if any systems beyond the hack and slash formula (something I consider to be very casual unfriendly).

    This is one of the best posts in the history of this website, I agree 100%

    I played a Shaman in EQ from late 1999 and it was not always that fun when you did not get a group or you had a job so you could not do a hard dungeon with a significant risk for a long corpse run late on a weekday evening. EQ was fun but it would have lasted longer  if they had removed some of the most hardcore elements earlier.

    Except it's not really a good post because it fails to understand some core issues.

    MMORPGs are out of reach for Indies because of the size and complexity of creating an MMORPG that would be acceptable to today's standards.  A major studio trying to appeal to niche audience also doesn't work because MMO gamers in general have certain expectations that they want met in their games.

    With these expections comes high costs, and creating a niche game runs into the problem that their game would probably have to skimp on many features and aspects that other major MMO projects already provide.

    So they'd be making a game that is feature lite, in an attempt to save money while other games out there can boast that their game does all of those features, and more, for near the same price, all while targeting an already much smaller player base with niche gameplay mechanics?  It's a hard sell, if not an impossible one.

    I agree it's a nice dream, but it's not feasible.

    Legends of Kesmai, UO, EQ, AO, DAoC, AC, SB, RO, SWG, EVE, EQ2, CoH, GW, VG:SOH, WAR, Aion, DF, CO, MO, DN, Tera, SWTOR, RO2, DP, GW2, PS2, BnS, NW, FF:XIV, ESO, EQ:NL

  • AzothAzoth Member UncommonPosts: 840
    Originally posted by Gallus85
    Originally posted by Azoth

    While those points are certainly in most mmo released since then, they are not what made EQ special to me and others I know. EQ wasn't my first, I played meridian and UO for years before playing EQ. Yet EQ is still the game I enjoyed the most.

    Cool, I played LoK and UO before stepping into EQ 1999 day one of launch.

    EQ had more than the basic trinity most clones gave us. You had tank, healer, buffer, debuffer, puller, dps and crowd control. You could have combination of those, making many setup work. The following games trivialized it down to 3 roles.

    Many games have most or all those rolls incorporated into their class design similar to EQ.  Again you're making a blanket statement that seems to stem from a lack of experience with MMORPGs.

    While you are right that EQ was vertical progression, there was multiple ladder to get there. Many location with the same level content you could go to. How many starting location did any game post EQ had ?

    A ton of games have multiple places to start off and level in just like EQ did.  FFXIV, Vanguard, GW2, etc etc.

    EQ had races that mattered, important stats and also different reputation with other races. The world was huge and dangerous, I hate leashed mobs that run slower than you. Today's game are way easier than vanilla EQ.

    Many games have a huge amount of races that matter for your character.  Some don't, but many do.  Easier is also subjective.  There are games that are far more complex and challenging than EQ was in as far as world danger and mobs go.

    The slower combat, with finite ressources. Ressources management was important to optimize your actions. You could not just round up every mobs, kill em in 5 sec, rinse and repeat every minutes. You had to meditate between fights, which probably helped make the game a better socializing game.

    The combat system left a lot to be desired but it did well for what it had to work with back in 1999.  There are far more interesting and complex combat systems in many games out there.  I will agree that down time between fighting did lead to a more "social" experience when grouping with PUGs and not using voice chat.  However I feel that modern games with structured guilds using voice chat goes a long way into making a very social experience. An in game area / group wide VOIP system would go a long way to making random encounters with non-guildmates more social without forcing huge amounts of boring down time.  We also know this is something SOE is capable of doing for EQN, as it's been proven in Planetside 2 to work very well.

    Sometimes the answer isn't to go backwards to get a desired effect.  Sometimes you need to think forward.

    Corpse run could become and adventure by itself. Minotaur cave in steamfont, my first couple days of playing the game. You could get mezed and pulled deep in there, nothing you could do about it. Real challenge. There are a lot more small things that made EQ better, I won't go deeper in it as it's been discussed many time.

    A lot of games have real challenge.  You need to look harder.  I did enjoy corpse runs in EQ for the simple fact that they made death more meaningful and in turn made a close fight more exciting.  However, there are games to achieve this same effect with and without a corpse run system.

    If going back to the game now, with the knowledge I have would certainly make the game easier, but never as easy as all the crap we have been fed in the last 12 years.

    A lot of games are "Easier" than EQ was in some ways.  A lot of new games are far harder than EQ was in other ways.  It's subjective, but there are plenty of games out there that provide enough challenge.

    While you are right that EQ is the father of the themepark games, none succeeded in cloning what really made it a great game to me and probably many others.

     

    Again, this seems to be nastolgia talking.  I was simply pointing out that most games hold to the same formula that EQ had all while having many of the features you spoke about here.  Except none of them have received your attention.  So my initial statement was most likely correct.

    We will have to agree to disagree. I know how I feel as I am certain you know how you feel. I have played pretty much every mmo that came out in the last 15 years so no I don't lack experience with mmorpg. EQ simply had most of the gameplay features I am looking for in a better package than any of the games released after.

     

  • Gallus85Gallus85 Member Posts: 1,092
    Originally posted by Azoth

    We will have to agree to disagree. I know how I feel as I am certain you know how you feel. I have played pretty much every mmo that came out in the last 15 years so no I don't lack experience with mmorpg. EQ simply had most of the gameplay features I am looking for in a better package than any of the games released after.

     

    Well hopefully you will enjoy what EQN has to offer.  It's shaping up to be a great game so far.

    Legends of Kesmai, UO, EQ, AO, DAoC, AC, SB, RO, SWG, EVE, EQ2, CoH, GW, VG:SOH, WAR, Aion, DF, CO, MO, DN, Tera, SWTOR, RO2, DP, GW2, PS2, BnS, NW, FF:XIV, ESO, EQ:NL

  • AzothAzoth Member UncommonPosts: 840
    Originally posted by Gallus85
    Originally posted by Azoth

    We will have to agree to disagree. I know how I feel as I am certain you know how you feel. I have played pretty much every mmo that came out in the last 15 years so no I don't lack experience with mmorpg. EQ simply had most of the gameplay features I am looking for in a better package than any of the games released after.

     

    Well hopefully you will enjoy what EQN has to offer.  It's shaping up to be a great game so far.

    I am still keeping an open mind about it, but I don't have much hope. I fear it will try to cater to the biggest denominator, which I am not a part of. We will see how it goes, we still don't have much to chew on.

  • umcorianumcorian Member UncommonPosts: 519

    OP makes some good points, but I'm confused as to where he gets his info from.

    A. The world is not *fully* destructable.  There will be some places that are protected, like Newbie cities and whatnot. Everything else, however, is going the route of Minecraft. If you see a tree, you can chop it down. If you see a rock, you can smash it. And if you see an orc town, you can raise it if you can kill enough of them.

    That, to me, just sounds awesome. 

    B.  I'm normally with you about F2P, but SOE has shown it's very savvy and keen with a F2P model that is neither pay-to-win, nor borderline petulant (like EA's model in SWTOR) that tries to get you to pay for very petty things ("Gimmie money if you wanna have the option to hide yer helm!"), or gets you to try and sub through negative reinforcement ("This is the quest reward you'd have gotten if you weren't a FREELOADER... complete with the negative red pen to show how much you're losing."). I have faith that SOE's free-to-play model will be fair and that, if I shell out an average of 10-15 each month I play it, I'll be happier than a pig in crap. I accept the fact that the company needs to make money and if I'm playing a free-to-play game as much as one I've paid $60 + a subscription fee for, it's time for me to crack open my wallet just a bit. 

    C. Few abilities on your bar. This is one of your good points. I really don't like this particular direction. 

    D. Class roles, from what I understand, aren't going away. You can just level up to 40 different classes and craft your own role. To down content, you'll need to have strong healers. You'll need tanky-style characters to absorb the brunt of the action. And people specializing in damage/support will make everything bette.r

    E. Not really sure what your beef with the marketing is. Seems all they're doing, for the time being, is releasing a 3-4 video each week, addressing a community question. That seems very minimalistic - they aren't trying to build this massive hype train with flashy trailers. 

     

     

  • Gallus85Gallus85 Member Posts: 1,092
    Originally posted by umcorian

    OP makes some good points, but I'm confused as to where he gets his info from.

    A. The world is not *fully* destructable.  There will be some places that are protected, like Newbie cities and whatnot. Everything else, however, is going the route of Minecraft. If you see a tree, you can chop it down. If you see a rock, you can smash it. And if you see an orc town, you can raise it if you can kill enough of them.

    That, to me, just sounds awesome. 

    B.  I'm normally with you about F2P, but SOE has shown it's very savvy and keen with a F2P model that is neither pay-to-win, nor borderline petulant (like EA's model in SWTOR) that tries to get you to pay for very petty things ("Gimmie money if you wanna have the option to hide yer helm!"), or gets you to try and sub through negative reinforcement ("This is the quest reward you'd have gotten if you weren't a FREELOADER... complete with the negative red pen to show how much you're losing."). I have faith that SOE's free-to-play model will be fair and that, if I shell out 10-15 each month I play it, I'll be happier than a pig in crap.

    C. Few abilities on your bar. This is one of your good points. I really don't like this particular direction. 

    D. Class roles, from what I understand, aren't going away. You can just level up to 40 different classes and craft your own role. To down content, you'll need to have strong healers. You'll need tanky-style characters to absorb the brunt of the action. And people specializing in damage/support will make everything bette.r

    E. Not really sure what your beef with the marketing is. Seems all they're doing, for the time being, is releasing a 3-4 video each week, addressing a community question. That seems very minimalistic - they aren't trying to build this massive hype train with flashy trailers. 

     

    Right on. 

    I'm not sure why people think that destructible environments are just going to lead to trolls breaking everything.  Imporant areas that shouldn't be broken will be coded to not break and the rest of the world is going to feel that much more real because they are destructible.  It's a win win all around.

    SOE does F2P right.  In Planetside, a player can be just as competitive even if he or she doesn't pay anything, as everything in the game is earnable through playing.  It's a great system that rewards all players and all levels of income.  I have seen very few P2P games done as well as SOE games and their F2P model is the best around.

    I personally like the design of few skills vs the massive amount of hotbars.  Each button on massive hotbards is always some lackluster, tiny effect that you just end up playing the 1 2 3 4 5 alt1 2 3 4 5 shuffle on.  With the fewer skills, they can make each one more meaningful.  Give them amazing effects, with each ability having a huge positive or negative effect on the fight.  Rewarding skill, timing and strategy over rotation memorization and playing simon says all day.

    I was also under the impression as you are, that there are roles in EQN, it's just that you can mix and match roles, and swap between builds depending on what your group needs or what the encounter calls for, adding not only more depth to combat in the game, but also making grouping with other people friendlier and keeping the small hotboar count from getting stale, even after years of playing the same character.

    And ya, I agree with the marketing.  They are releasing dev descussions about lore, game play, and talking with the fans.  Not sure why people are mad about a company that is trying to get the community involved in the development process.

    Legends of Kesmai, UO, EQ, AO, DAoC, AC, SB, RO, SWG, EVE, EQ2, CoH, GW, VG:SOH, WAR, Aion, DF, CO, MO, DN, Tera, SWTOR, RO2, DP, GW2, PS2, BnS, NW, FF:XIV, ESO, EQ:NL

  • AlleinAllein Member RarePosts: 2,139
    Originally posted by Azoth
    We will have to agree to disagree. I know how I feel as I am certain you know how you feel. I have played pretty much every mmo that came out in the last 15 years so no I don't lack experience with mmorpg. EQ simply had most of the gameplay features I am looking for in a better package than any of the games released after.

    Out of curiosity, what gameplay features did EQ have that EQN won't have from what we know without making large assumptions? Which of those features are actually challenging-fun and not just a time-sink for those that have a lot of free time?

    Why I'm so interested in EQN is that it seems to be going back to UO-EQ-SWG type games. While incorporating new tech and the fact we aren't in 99-04 anymore. A carbon copy of any game from 5-10-15+ years ago isn't going to make it out of the gates. Doesn't mean it has to be a ADD fueled instant gratification game either. Wildstar is a decent example of this, they went the carbon copy route (WoW) but updated several systems, without totally going down the path WoW itself has gone.

    Hopefully after SOE Live we'll have some more details, but I've yet to see many reasons why EQ was so much better then any other game. Beyond feelings and memories of how amazing it was. I enjoyed it, but I've enjoyed many games since. I enjoyed MUDs just as much before EQ existed.

  • swarmdieswarmdie Member UncommonPosts: 65
    Originally posted by OMGr8573
    Originally posted by time007
    dude, they are riding the wave of crap that is popular now. haha.  they basically pick crap that is popular and throw it in their game.  hah.  too bad.  I was looking for something old school as well, but they take some thing the kids like, mix it in with things vets like, the mix in some things the wow kids like, and the result is a new MMO. 

    See that's where a lot of companies cannot win for losing. They give us something "old school" and people scream "We don't want old stuff, we want new and different!!!" they give us new and different and it's "We want MMORPGs like how they used to be!!!"

    And the reason why that happens is because the most vocal part of the community is the one that is NOT pleased. People who like the ideas are less likely to feel an impulse to be heard. In the end, like you said, no matter which direction the game takes there's going to be people screaming on the forums that they want something else.

  • AzothAzoth Member UncommonPosts: 840
    Originally posted by Allein
    Originally posted by Azoth
    We will have to agree to disagree. I know how I feel as I am certain you know how you feel. I have played pretty much every mmo that came out in the last 15 years so no I don't lack experience with mmorpg. EQ simply had most of the gameplay features I am looking for in a better package than any of the games released after.

    Out of curiosity, what gameplay features did EQ have that EQN won't have from what we know without making large assumptions? Which of those features are actually challenging-fun and not just a time-sink for those that have a lot of free time?

    Why I'm so interested in EQN is that it seems to be going back to UO-EQ-SWG type games. While incorporating new tech and the fact we aren't in 99-04 anymore. A carbon copy of any game from 5-10-15+ years ago isn't going to make it out of the gates. Doesn't mean it has to be a ADD fueled instant gratification game either. Wildstar is a decent example of this, they went the carbon copy route (WoW) but updated several systems, without totally going down the path WoW itself has gone.

    Hopefully after SOE Live we'll have some more details, but I've yet to see many reasons why EQ was so much better then any other game. Beyond feelings and memories of how amazing it was. I enjoyed it, but I've enjoyed many games since. I enjoyed MUDs just as much before EQ existed.

    It's all personal preferance, it is obvious that for you the time sink in EQ were just wasted time, to me they are key moment that adds to the immersion.

    Waiting for the boat, corpse recovery, dangerous traveling (you ran slower than most mobs), big zones, no map or mini map. To me those added to the feeling of living in a world, to others it's unimaginable. How come in 99 we could have something that massive and diverse.

    I am not against progress, like a map that auto reveal when you have explored an area for example. The combat of EQ also probably wouldn't cut it in a game today. You would have to add to it, some classes had 3 or 4 skills while caster had multiple options. So yes this would need to be refined and upgraded. But the interdepency between classes, most of them played totally differently. Most of games today are a lot simplier, with mostly 3 or less roles.

    Personally what keeps me playing an mmo is if I get the feeling that I am living an adventure, not just watching a show. I don't need to be the savior of the world, I just want to be an adventurer that may accomplish great things or not. There needs to be a possibility to fail bad. How many games really have harsh death penalty ? Death should be a big deal, not just a free port to your bind point.

    I enjoy a lot of games, but as far as mmo goes there is nothing I played more than 2 months since vanilla EQ.

    Now tell me about you. What about EQN do you like ? What about it makes it go back to UO EQ SWG games (which are all pretty different games) ?

  • AlleinAllein Member RarePosts: 2,139
    Originally posted by Azoth
    Originally posted by Allein
    Originally posted by Azoth
    We will have to agree to disagree. I know how I feel as I am certain you know how you feel. I have played pretty much every mmo that came out in the last 15 years so no I don't lack experience with mmorpg. EQ simply had most of the gameplay features I am looking for in a better package than any of the games released after.

    Out of curiosity, what gameplay features did EQ have that EQN won't have from what we know without making large assumptions? Which of those features are actually challenging-fun and not just a time-sink for those that have a lot of free time?

    Why I'm so interested in EQN is that it seems to be going back to UO-EQ-SWG type games. While incorporating new tech and the fact we aren't in 99-04 anymore. A carbon copy of any game from 5-10-15+ years ago isn't going to make it out of the gates. Doesn't mean it has to be a ADD fueled instant gratification game either. Wildstar is a decent example of this, they went the carbon copy route (WoW) but updated several systems, without totally going down the path WoW itself has gone.

    Hopefully after SOE Live we'll have some more details, but I've yet to see many reasons why EQ was so much better then any other game. Beyond feelings and memories of how amazing it was. I enjoyed it, but I've enjoyed many games since. I enjoyed MUDs just as much before EQ existed.

    It's all personal preferance, it is obvious that for you the time sink in EQ were just wasted time, to me they are key moment that adds to the immersion.

    Waiting for the boat, corpse recovery, dangerous traveling (you ran slower than most mobs), big zones, no map or mini map. To me those added to the feeling of living in a world, to others it's unimaginable. How come in 99 we could have something that massive and diverse.

    I'm not a fan of over used instant travel myself, we'll see how that goes in EQN. Corpse recovery rarely was "fun" for me. Usually just a run and a bit of this or that to get it back. Others times it was so tedious (dying in the ocean) and just punishment for trying to enjoy the game. Travel was a big deal and I hope this comes back in EQN. Mini-Map with super gps is a problem, again we'll see how this goes, but as soon as I could, I printed every map available so why kill trees for something so simple. Like I said, to me it seems like they are trying to get back to UO-SWG-EQ wih the "virtual world" aspect. Seems to be a pretty big deal to DG.

    I am not against progress, like a map that auto reveal when you have explored an area for example. The combat of EQ also probably wouldn't cut it in a game today. You would have to add to it, some classes had 3 or 4 skills while caster had multiple options. So yes this would need to be refined and upgraded. But the interdepency between classes, most of them played totally differently. Most of games today are a lot simplier, with mostly 3 or less roles.

    That is an issue with other games. We've yet to see what EQN really will offer. If they do go sort of a MOBA type route, interdependence will be important. There were many roles in EQ, but every single one wasn't needed 100% of the time. No reason with 40+ classes that this can't be the same. Also no reason one class/build couldn't do a couple roles at a time or change it up as needed. Games that are just about DPSing lose this element, hopefully EQN doesn't go down that road. I see the EQN system and the more flexible in general to be more along the lines of D&D. Why do we have to have XYZ to accomplish everything? Very limiting and unimaginative.

    Personally what keeps me playing an mmo is if I get the feeling that I am living an adventure, not just watching a show. I don't need to be the savior of the world, I just want to be an adventurer that may accomplish great things or not. There needs to be a possibility to fail bad. How many games really have harsh death penalty ? Death should be a big deal, not just a free port to your bind point.

    They've said players won't be "The Hero" which is funny with their use of Heroic combat/movement/classes. DG has talked about how players are free to try anything they want with the open world and are also going to die because of this. Unlike many games where 1-5 players can solo the hardest content possible. I'm assuming if Joe Gamer runs into a Dragon, they aren't going to be soloing it.

    Death is odd subject for me. While I get the need for penalties, at the same time, I remember completely avoiding situations due to fear of death when I probably could of won. It taught me to avoid anything that seemed risky. Where's the fun in that? Beyond permadeath, no system is really that harsh. Some XP lose, broken gear, gold, run back, whatever are all just time-sinks, nothing more. Yes time is precious, but I'm not going to cry if I lose an hour of my time. Never did I find EQ's system harsh.

    I enjoy a lot of games, but as far as mmo goes there is nothing I played more than 2 months since vanilla EQ.

    Which is unfortunate. Obviously you like what you like. But I've tried, enjoyed, hated, experienced many games since EQ and am glad I did. Gave me a better overall understand of the genre and what I like or don't. Many games have had qualities that really shined. Might have been bad overall game, but some elements were worth remembering. Same goes for EQ, it was far from perfect for me.

    Now tell me about you. What about EQN do you like ? What about it makes it go back to UO EQ SWG games (which are all pretty different games) ?

    My mention of UO-SWG-EQ are more to the open "sandbox" type experience. UO being the most sandboxy I guess. Players are able to go about and aren't punished for straying from the pre-determined best route to get to the magical carrot and win the imaginary race to the finish line. Not as much focus on the "end game" or beating everything.

    While I'm basing my assumptions on what has been said, they are still assumptions. EQN seems to be a game that will cater to a wide audience and provide a good time for all. Instead of all the good stuff being locked away for the best of the best or require devoting countless hours to the game. Nor will it go the WoW route with instant instanced gratification where players are rewarded for moving 2 feet forward or sneezing. There can be a balance, doesn't have to be either or.

    While not a totally free system, the multi-classing allows for basically limitless combos of class-skill-gear-builds. Crafting is supposed to be very diverse and with it, I'm assuming a decent player economy that doesn't revolve around staring at an AH screen mindlessly. I hate being locked into one class/role forever without having to re-do it all over again just to find out if I even like where it ends up.

    Procedurally generated content if done well means limitless PVE fun. No static, beat it once, farm it forever content. Really hoping the Tiers (layers) of the world are a huge deal and not just mini-dungeons in specific locations that change some times. Not knowing what is out there adds to the mystery, danger, and adventure.

    New AI should bring a new element of life to everything. Shop keeper, quest givers, lore, combat, etc. Hopefully which makes database websites less effective.

    Movement and action combat look great to me. Having to be apart of the experience and not standing there clicking 12345678. VOIP is a much better replacement for text chat which seems to be something people of EQ time found immersive. Talking to actual people has always been more immersive and real to me.

    We don't know how resources management will work yet, but I'm not a fan of having to wait after every single fight. Again, with VOIP, allows players to be active and continuing on the adventure. Doesn't need to be a mindless DPSfest, but doesn't need to put me to sleep either.

    Overall, I'm hoping EQN is what I make of it. My own adventure. No hand holding or signs pointing which way to go. Even in EQ with multiple areas to level (grind) it still lead down a path to the finish. Much rather the finish be what I want it to be.

    Hanging out in town crafting should be just as rewarding and fun as slaying dragons or people. Challenge/difficulty should be fairly easy to accomplish with the tech they are using. With enough content for everyone for a long time.

    I want a virtual world to adventure in. Not a themepark that shows me the way. They can accomplish this is many ways, some of which may bring a lot of praise or hate. Hopefully they know what they are doing.

    Honestly, we know very little about the details and it is just a guessing game for now. Put some of the leaps people seem to make like assuming EQN will be a super casual friendly, P2W, no challenge game don't seem to have a lot of data to back the idea up. Will it be exactly what anyone wants? No. No game is made specifically for one person. No game will ever be perfect. Doesn't mean it can't still be fun and offer a good experience for a long time.

    I've tried to play Project99. Just can't do it. As much fun as I had in EQ, I have changed and my tastes. Same for MUDs, WoW, DAoC, and other games I've enjoyed. If I still enjoyed them, I wouldn't have left. Same reason I don't play DOS PC games or own an Atari. As much as thinking about them makes my heart tingle, they had their time and it has past.

  • AzothAzoth Member UncommonPosts: 840
    Originally posted by Allein
    Originally posted by Azoth

    It's all personal preferance, it is obvious that for you the time sink in EQ were just wasted time, to me they are key moment that adds to the immersion.

    Waiting for the boat, corpse recovery, dangerous traveling (you ran slower than most mobs), big zones, no map or mini map. To me those added to the feeling of living in a world, to others it's unimaginable. How come in 99 we could have something that massive and diverse.

    I'm not a fan of over used instant travel myself, we'll see how that goes in EQN. Corpse recovery rarely was "fun" for me. Usually just a run and a bit of this or that to get it back. Others times it was so tedious (dying in the ocean) and just punishment for trying to enjoy the game. Travel was a big deal and I hope this comes back in EQN. Mini-Map with super gps is a problem, again we'll see how this goes, but as soon as I could, I printed every map available so why kill trees for something so simple. Like I said, to me it seems like they are trying to get back to UO-SWG-EQ wih the "virtual world" aspect. Seems to be a pretty big deal to DG.

    I am not against progress, like a map that auto reveal when you have explored an area for example. The combat of EQ also probably wouldn't cut it in a game today. You would have to add to it, some classes had 3 or 4 skills while caster had multiple options. So yes this would need to be refined and upgraded. But the interdepency between classes, most of them played totally differently. Most of games today are a lot simplier, with mostly 3 or less roles.

    That is an issue with other games. We've yet to see what EQN really will offer. If they do go sort of a MOBA type route, interdependence will be important. There were many roles in EQ, but every single one wasn't needed 100% of the time. No reason with 40+ classes that this can't be the same. Also no reason one class/build couldn't do a couple roles at a time or change it up as needed. Games that are just about DPSing lose this element, hopefully EQN doesn't go down that road. I see the EQN system and the more flexible in general to be more along the lines of D&D. Why do we have to have XYZ to accomplish everything? Very limiting and unimaginative.

    Personally what keeps me playing an mmo is if I get the feeling that I am living an adventure, not just watching a show. I don't need to be the savior of the world, I just want to be an adventurer that may accomplish great things or not. There needs to be a possibility to fail bad. How many games really have harsh death penalty ? Death should be a big deal, not just a free port to your bind point.

    They've said players won't be "The Hero" which is funny with their use of Heroic combat/movement/classes. DG has talked about how players are free to try anything they want with the open world and are also going to die because of this. Unlike many games where 1-5 players can solo the hardest content possible. I'm assuming if Joe Gamer runs into a Dragon, they aren't going to be soloing it.

    Death is odd subject for me. While I get the need for penalties, at the same time, I remember completely avoiding situations due to fear of death when I probably could of won. It taught me to avoid anything that seemed risky. Where's the fun in that? Beyond permadeath, no system is really that harsh. Some XP lose, broken gear, gold, run back, whatever are all just time-sinks, nothing more. Yes time is precious, but I'm not going to cry if I lose an hour of my time. Never did I find EQ's system harsh.

    I enjoy a lot of games, but as far as mmo goes there is nothing I played more than 2 months since vanilla EQ.

    Which is unfortunate. Obviously you like what you like. But I've tried, enjoyed, hated, experienced many games since EQ and am glad I did. Gave me a better overall understand of the genre and what I like or don't. Many games have had qualities that really shined. Might have been bad overall game, but some elements were worth remembering. Same goes for EQ, it was far from perfect for me.

    Now tell me about you. What about EQN do you like ? What about it makes it go back to UO EQ SWG games (which are all pretty different games) ?

    My mention of UO-SWG-EQ are more to the open "sandbox" type experience. UO being the most sandboxy I guess. Players are able to go about and aren't punished for straying from the pre-determined best route to get to the magical carrot and win the imaginary race to the finish line. Not as much focus on the "end game" or beating everything.

    While I'm basing my assumptions on what has been said, they are still assumptions. EQN seems to be a game that will cater to a wide audience and provide a good time for all. Instead of all the good stuff being locked away for the best of the best or require devoting countless hours to the game. Nor will it go the WoW route with instant instanced gratification where players are rewarded for moving 2 feet forward or sneezing. There can be a balance, doesn't have to be either or.

    While not a totally free system, the multi-classing allows for basically limitless combos of class-skill-gear-builds. Crafting is supposed to be very diverse and with it, I'm assuming a decent player economy that doesn't revolve around staring at an AH screen mindlessly. I hate being locked into one class/role forever without having to re-do it all over again just to find out if I even like where it ends up.

    Procedurally generated content if done well means limitless PVE fun. No static, beat it once, farm it forever content. Really hoping the Tiers (layers) of the world are a huge deal and not just mini-dungeons in specific locations that change some times. Not knowing what is out there adds to the mystery, danger, and adventure.

    New AI should bring a new element of life to everything. Shop keeper, quest givers, lore, combat, etc. Hopefully which makes database websites less effective.

    Movement and action combat look great to me. Having to be apart of the experience and not standing there clicking 12345678. VOIP is a much better replacement for text chat which seems to be something people of EQ time found immersive. Talking to actual people has always been more immersive and real to me.

    We don't know how resources management will work yet, but I'm not a fan of having to wait after every single fight. Again, with VOIP, allows players to be active and continuing on the adventure. Doesn't need to be a mindless DPSfest, but doesn't need to put me to sleep either.

    Overall, I'm hoping EQN is what I make of it. My own adventure. No hand holding or signs pointing which way to go. Even in EQ with multiple areas to level (grind) it still lead down a path to the finish. Much rather the finish be what I want it to be.

    Hanging out in town crafting should be just as rewarding and fun as slaying dragons or people. Challenge/difficulty should be fairly easy to accomplish with the tech they are using. With enough content for everyone for a long time.

    I want a virtual world to adventure in. Not a themepark that shows me the way. They can accomplish this is many ways, some of which may bring a lot of praise or hate. Hopefully they know what they are doing.

    Honestly, we know very little about the details and it is just a guessing game for now. Put some of the leaps people seem to make like assuming EQN will be a super casual friendly, P2W, no challenge game don't seem to have a lot of data to back the idea up. Will it be exactly what anyone wants? No. No game is made specifically for one person. No game will ever be perfect. Doesn't mean it can't still be fun and offer a good experience for a long time.

    I've tried to play Project99. Just can't do it. As much fun as I had in EQ, I have changed and my tastes. Same for MUDs, WoW, DAoC, and other games I've enjoyed. If I still enjoyed them, I wouldn't have left. Same reason I don't play DOS PC games or own an Atari. As much as thinking about them makes my heart tingle, they had their time and it has past.

    All reasonable expectation. I would probably enjoy a game like that but as you said we know almost nothing of the game at this time. The video we saw seemed to imply way too fast gameplay for my taste tho. Almost diablo like facerolling. Now it could of been a simple demo that doesn't represent the game at all, but if so why show it at all.

    We will know in 2 or 3 years I guess.

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

    All reasonable expectation. I would probably enjoy a game like that but as you said we know almost nothing of the game at this time. The video we saw seemed to imply way too fast gameplay for my taste tho. Almost diablo like facerolling. Now it could of been a simple demo that doesn't represent the game at all, but if so why show it at all.

    We will know in 2 or 3 years I guess.

    The demo was completely staged from what I understand. No real AI, just spawning mobs to slaughter or dev controlled NPCs. They showed it so people would get excited (hopefully). Whole hour of combat info at SOE Live next month, hopefully they show some updated game play.

    While I don't want Diablo style combat, I wouldn't mind some epic battles with large number of mobs. If you've read the novellas, they describe such battles in a couple encounters.

    The 1-70+ vs 1 mob deal is fun, but there are more ways to do combat.

  • KanethKaneth Member RarePosts: 2,286
    Originally posted by Allein
    Originally posted by Azoth

    All reasonable expectation. I would probably enjoy a game like that but as you said we know almost nothing of the game at this time. The video we saw seemed to imply way too fast gameplay for my taste tho. Almost diablo like facerolling. Now it could of been a simple demo that doesn't represent the game at all, but if so why show it at all.

    We will know in 2 or 3 years I guess.

    The demo was completely staged from what I understand. No real AI, just spawning mobs to slaughter or dev controlled NPCs. They showed it so people would get excited (hopefully). Whole hour of combat info at SOE Live next month, hopefully they show some updated game play.

    While I don't want Diablo style combat, I wouldn't mind some epic battles with large number of mobs. If you've read the novellas, they describe such battles in a couple encounters.

    The 1-70+ vs 1 mob deal is fun, but there are more ways to do combat.

    I agree. A good mix of different combat options is a good way to keep things broken up while leveling. I enjoy having the 1v1 challenging fights, but also having to wade through a sea of individually weak but lethal in group mobs can be equally challenging as well. 

  • RydesonRydeson Member UncommonPosts: 3,852

         I still have yet to see ANY substantial information on actual in game content..  Oh sure we hear about what's if, maybe, blah blah blah.. and yada yada yada.. But absolutely nothing to sink your teeth into..  I hear the marketing about AI, voxels and procedural this and that and more, but nothing that proves it works, or has a future..  This is like looking at Da Vinci's flying invention .. OH SURE, it looks believable on paper in the right era, but in modern day reality, it was  CRAP..  

  • LyrianLyrian Member UncommonPosts: 412

    The major concern that I have with EQN, is that the gameplay will essentially be a mix of Diablo 3 and Guildwars 2. That has been nixed to an extent seeing the play and movement of Landmark. But I am concerned that the game itself is going to melt down into a 'casual fest' and essentially force replayablity in order to keep wanting to play the game.

    With the total of 40 classes to play, its difficult to say how the game will progress. Are we going to be blowing through the first 3-4 tiers of these classes in a few play sessions until we get to the 'elite' sort of classes. Which still will inevitablity take 20-30 hours of play to max out?

    Or are we going to head back toward the old system, where each and every single class can take upwards of 100-200 hours to level and play, 'just' to unlock the next neat thing we can do?

  • baphametbaphamet Member RarePosts: 3,311

    agree with OP. i will try this game when its launched but only because its F2P, probably try it in beta too.

  • alyndalealyndale Member UncommonPosts: 936
    Originally posted by Lyrian

    The major concern that I have with EQN, is that the gameplay will essentially be a mix of Diablo 3 and Guildwars 2. That has been nixed to an extent seeing the play and movement of Landmark. But I am concerned that the game itself is going to melt down into a 'casual fest' and essentially force replayablity in order to keep wanting to play the game.

    With the total of 40 classes to play, its difficult to say how the game will progress. Are we going to be blowing through the first 3-4 tiers of these classes in a few play sessions until we get to the 'elite' sort of classes. Which still will inevitablity take 20-30 hours of play to max out?

    Or are we going to head back toward the old system, where each and every single class can take upwards of 100-200 hours to level and play, 'just' to unlock the next neat thing we can do?

    Now I have been following EQ Next since before 2013 SoE Live. I really do not have enough quality information to know exactly how it will play. I am still playing around with the crafting/building tools in Landmark. As of now I'm feeling like game play isn't anything like hack and slash D 3. GW 2, well what we know thus far is that many people, be they fans or critics, seem to believe that the lack of traditional trinity will mean it will play exactly or similarly to GW 2. I think this is due to not enough experience with anything different than what we already know.

    I mean maybe it will track a bit like GW 2. Maybe not. I just do not have any evidence from the developers or leadership at SoE how the new mmo will look. We'll just have to be patient.

    The last news I saw from "Smokejumper" was that we will learn more about the new mmo and it will be important. They simply will not reveal anything until SoE Live 2014.

    Alyn

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

  • KnyttaKnytta Member UncommonPosts: 414
    Originally posted by Nightbringe1

    This: SOE is so focused on appealing to the widest possible audience that they have completely lost touch with the core base of customers that made EQ and EQ2 successful.

    While I am sure they will launch to a very large initial audience, I wonder how much of that player base will remain after the first three months, and what percentage of that player base will be fans of the games earlier iterations.

    Considering the much talked about content locusts in MMORPGs nowadays, is a different target audience that bad? If SOE manages finally  to build something new, exiting and different it is a good thing even if you might not be the target group. Many on these forums talks about new ideas, and when something new (might) be on the horizon "oh no not that new".

    I still think Landmark will be the bigger game when finished. But EQN will hopefully be good and move the idea of MMORPGS forward.

    Chi puo dir com'egli arde é in picciol fuoco.

    He who can describe the flame does not burn.

    Petrarch


  • BoltharBolthar Member Posts: 62

    If this game is playable and it has a decent crafting system and it has faction systems that allow you to modify costs of goods in cities based on your faction level (not greatly to make it unfair) as well as make you KOS or not to a city (or to specific people of that faction IN another city you are liked in) or not I would be all in.

    The fact that nothing NPC wise attacks you until you go into a field of all the same level mobs just gets so boring. I absolutely LOVE when you walk into a city and some random NPC yells at you and runs at you because they do not like you. Or on the alternate side when you go into an "enemy" city and are able to just walk right in because you have made them love you by all you have done for them. I don't know about others but it really gives me a sense of accomplishment and immersion when you can modify the actions of the NPCs in general.

  • phantomghostphantomghost Member UncommonPosts: 738

    I was excited for EQN... I remember when it was just a rumor... back when EQ1 was still fun.

     

    Then a couple months of The EQN Roundtable... and I realized how bad the game would be.

     

    I also realized the game sounds a lot like The Elder Scrolls Online, except more cartoon WoW like graphics.


  • phantomghostphantomghost Member UncommonPosts: 738
    Originally posted by time007
    dude, they are riding the wave of crap that is popular now. haha.  they basically pick crap that is popular and throw it in their game.  hah.  too bad.  I was looking for something old school as well, but they take some thing the kids like, mix it in with things vets like, the mix in some things the wow kids like, and the result is a new MMO. 

    And the result is everybody wasting their money on the game, that they play 1-2 months and are looking for the next MMO.


  • NanfoodleNanfoodle Member LegendaryPosts: 9,759
    Originally posted by phantomghost

    I was excited for EQN... I remember when it was just a rumor... back when EQ1 was still fun.

     

    Then a couple months of The EQN Roundtable... and I realized how bad the game would be.

     

    I also realized the game sounds a lot like The Elder Scrolls Online, except more cartoon WoW like graphics.

    We have less then 5% of the information on what the game is and its already a bad game? I have watched every round table and twitter feed and we still know next to nothing but lore. Calling it a bad game already is like saying I hate that food when we dont even know what it is other then the cook who made it. SoE live is a week away and will be the first look at what the game will be about.

  • alyndalealyndale Member UncommonPosts: 936
    Originally posted by Nanfoodle
    Originally posted by phantomghost

    I was excited for EQN... I remember when it was just a rumor... back when EQ1 was still fun.

     

    Then a couple months of The EQN Roundtable... and I realized how bad the game would be.

     

    I also realized the game sounds a lot like The Elder Scrolls Online, except more cartoon WoW like graphics.

    We have less then 5% of the information on what the game is and its already a bad game? I have watched every round table and twitter feed and we still know next to nothing but lore. Calling it a bad game already is like saying I hate that food when we dont even know what it is other then the cook who made it. SoE live is a week away and will be the first look at what the game will be about.

    Agreed Nanfoodle and I have stressed this more than once. Additionally, as graphics go, in my opinion, it's really not as "cartoony" as one might think. Landmark vistas are truly breath-taking in many areas. Character models are much, much better than either of the two predecessors. I'm not sure if the folks at the San Diego campus will tweak the graphical engine at all, however they have reworked the Kerran model as per fan suggestions.

    We shall see in August, 2014 at the next SoE Live what they have done...

    Alyn

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

  • cesmode8cesmode8 Member UncommonPosts: 431
    Originally posted by Allein

    From what you wrote I'm getting the impression that you might need to look a bit more into it or at least wait until some more details are released before jumping to conclusions.

    Beyond doing the same old thing with a fresh coat of paint, EQN is going away from many/most of the things that have been making games have limited entertainment for many years. While not going back to the boring grind of the old days.

    F2P can be done well. Destructible world has never been done, no idea why you wouldn't think that is fun, have you seen anything about the cave/tier system? You seem to also have a small grasp on the class/role system. You can play 40+ classes and mix/match skills, pretty versatile. Roles will be there, just not the boring and forced holy trinity.

    EQ3 might have been interesting, but seeing how little interest both EQ/EQ2 have these days, I doubt SOE needs a 3rd EQ title just taking up space on the servers. They are going way out on limb with EQN and doing things new and outside of what "old school" and "new school" have come to love/hate. They are trying to make the next-gen mmorpg, not just another game.

    I agree, I don't think the OP has a clue what he/she is talking about.

    And essentially, isn't EQN ...EQ3?  Progressing lore, new graphics/engine, new things to do, etc etc...??  Not sure what he/she is getting at with this one.

    Destructable world has never been done before.  Looking forward to smashing my way through the ground into a cave.  

    The 40+ classes they launch with will give you more versatility than most any game currently out there...and thats just what they are launching with.  Pick any ability from any class.

    While I think Im sort of done with MMOs, I am keeping a watchful eye on EQN.  Im SO sick of hearing landmark crap.  It makes me think that SOE isn't even developing EQN, just that they are focusing on milking EQL.  We'll see.

    If EQN has NO raids and actually has things for me to do at max level other than run of the mill "exploring, dungeoneering, crafting, pvp, etc..." I'll get it.  If it has raids, no.  I dont want to play  a game with raids.

Sign In or Register to comment.