Howdy, Stranger!

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

Is EQNext Vaporware?

11617192122

Comments

  • Fractal_AnalogyFractal_Analogy Member UncommonPosts: 350
    I think you peeps are looking in all the wrong threads.

    There is plenty of hip-hop MMORPG'ing going on. Why hang out here in this flytrap.




    The Baby Bells are coming. Go find one and open your thoughts up there.


  • NanfoodleNanfoodle Member EpicPosts: 7,760
    Daffid011 said:
    Nanfoodle said:
    2. For some reason SoE no longer needed or wanted to keep SB contracted to help them finish the AI. I think its because SoE didnt have access to the lead programmer.
    .


    Based on what?

    Daybreak cut Storybricks and nearly 50% of the company at the same time.  Are we to assume they didn’t need or want those employees either?

    Trying to suggest that after firing half the company, Daybreak thought they were somehow better off working on Story Bricks themselves makes no sense and sounds like denial.


    The two are not connected. Maybe if the lead programmer had stayed like Voxel Farms SB would have been retained. But when the main resource you want is gone, why keep spending the money? Like I said from what I dug up on the net, when the lead programmer left they parted ways before they became DGC, was the events of the buy out that triggered the lay off. Two events not connected but announced at the same time. Little digging on the net and you will find the same info. 



  • Daffid011Daffid011 Member UncommonPosts: 7,945
    Daranar said:
    Did anyone share this from the Landmark Forums?  

     "And on the EverQuest Next front, I announced on the Workshop Show that this week started our process of internal play tests and usability tests for the combat for EQN. Yesterday was the first time members from other teams inside of the company were able to sit down and kill some monsters for the first time and we're collecting great feedback to help us hone in on our goals. Initial responses have definitely let us know that what we have is fun and engaging in the ways we wanted. We will continue to have internal play tests over the next several weeks as we incorporate feedback and continue to polish the systems up."  - Fairan

    Sounds like it's not vaporware as of September 4th.  It's just hush mode because I think they learned they announced stuff too soon and smed ruined the hype factor.

    It could still end up as vaporware, but they claim development is still continuing so hopefully we will see something more than concept art in the future. 

    Though context is important.  This is the same combat system that a few months ago the producer said was just a concept and they had no idea if it would be fun or even work. 

    Also in the same workshop as referenced in your post (last weeks), the developers said they are still deciding on how to build the world.  So that isn't done yet either.

    It sounds like nothing is done and mostly concepts.  World, classes, combat, AI, characters races, cities, npcs, quests, etc.

    Just based on the things the developers are saying it doesn't sound like they had anything they could hype even if they wanted to.  Ignoring all that to conclude that there is some they are now protecting and that is what caused the communication black out appears to be nothing more than wishful thinking.


    Food for thought.

    How were they able to show video of combat 2 years ago, but they are just now testing combat for the first time?  Something doesn't add up.  Any ideas?

  • BlaedusBlaedus Member UncommonPosts: 100
    Well, 2015 is supposed to be "the year of EQN".  Whatever that means, they still have over three months left.  I'm...hoping for something really substantial by year's end.  I don't mean a game or playable Alpha/Beta.  I mean some real meaty info.  Something I can really sink my teeth into and say "Ah, that's EQN right there!".
  • MendelMendel Member EpicPosts: 3,363
    Daffid011 said:
    Food for thought.

    How were they able to show video of combat 2 years ago, but they are just now testing combat for the first time?  Something doesn't add up.  Any ideas?

    I thought that the 'game-play video' from the 2013 SOE Live event were not actually game-play videos, but CGI movies that the developers sat in front of, while the video was playing.  Evidence: developers not able to stop in mid-sequence, synchronization of on-screen activities without visible developer input, no visible UI displayed, and rapid (and rather unnatural) on-the-fly camera changes.   I am still convinced that those specific images came not from any game, but from an animation tool used to do character modeling.  That idea was roundly dismissed at the time.

    Now, with the very recent Landmark downtime (and subsequent video explanation) while they separated Landmark and EQ:N onto distinct code bases, the statement that SOE/Daybreak had a functional internal EQ:N game server than no-one had seen are shown to be a similar falsification.

    No one outside Daybreak has a clear idea of exactly how far along EQ:N may be, or what features it contains or doesn't contain.   While I think there's still entirely too much of EQ:N that is at the conceptual stages, the separation of the code bases actually appears to be a positive step in the life of EQ:N.

    Logic, my dear, merely enables one to be wrong with great authority.

  • NanfoodleNanfoodle Member EpicPosts: 7,760
    Mendel said:
    Daffid011 said:
    Food for thought.

    How were they able to show video of combat 2 years ago, but they are just now testing combat for the first time?  Something doesn't add up.  Any ideas?

    I thought that the 'game-play video' from the 2013 SOE Live event were not actually game-play videos, but CGI movies that the developers sat in front of, while the video was playing.  Evidence: developers not able to stop in mid-sequence, synchronization of on-screen activities without visible developer input, no visible UI displayed, and rapid (and rather unnatural) on-the-fly camera changes.   I am still convinced that those specific images came not from any game, but from an animation tool used to do character modeling.  That idea was roundly dismissed at the time.

    Now, with the very recent Landmark downtime (and subsequent video explanation) while they separated Landmark and EQ:N onto distinct code bases, the statement that SOE/Daybreak had a functional internal EQ:N game server than no-one had seen are shown to be a similar falsification.

    No one outside Daybreak has a clear idea of exactly how far along EQ:N may be, or what features it contains or doesn't contain.   While I think there's still entirely too much of EQ:N that is at the conceptual stages, the separation of the code bases actually appears to be a positive step in the life of EQ:N.
    Funny how people say we dont know but DGC has been very clear where they are. We know whats working and what is not. Ask anyone playing Landmark and watches the streams can tell you. Storybricks AI: In R&D will update when they get it working. Voxels: Working well for art, awesome advancments in voxelmancy but still conflicting with Forgelight. Combat: Sucks but they are working on it. They have a focus group testing it now. When its playable it will be in Landmark and we will let you know how well it play. I know I will be putting many hours into seeing if its any better. Sumup: Most of the game is R&D and the fact we have not had an update on that in 8 months. Its not going as planed. Will they get it working? I dont think even DGC even knows for sure. So its clear where we are, 100% clear, waiting. If you dont know this info, you have not been looking.



  • MrSnufflesMrSnuffles Member UncommonPosts: 1,117
    Nanfoodle said:
    Mendel said:
    Daffid011 said:
    Food for thought.

    How were they able to show video of combat 2 years ago, but they are just now testing combat for the first time?  Something doesn't add up.  Any ideas?

    I thought that the 'game-play video' from the 2013 SOE Live event were not actually game-play videos, but CGI movies that the developers sat in front of, while the video was playing.  Evidence: developers not able to stop in mid-sequence, synchronization of on-screen activities without visible developer input, no visible UI displayed, and rapid (and rather unnatural) on-the-fly camera changes.   I am still convinced that those specific images came not from any game, but from an animation tool used to do character modeling.  That idea was roundly dismissed at the time.

    Now, with the very recent Landmark downtime (and subsequent video explanation) while they separated Landmark and EQ:N onto distinct code bases, the statement that SOE/Daybreak had a functional internal EQ:N game server than no-one had seen are shown to be a similar falsification.

    No one outside Daybreak has a clear idea of exactly how far along EQ:N may be, or what features it contains or doesn't contain.   While I think there's still entirely too much of EQ:N that is at the conceptual stages, the separation of the code bases actually appears to be a positive step in the life of EQ:N.
    Funny how people say we dont know but DGC has been very clear where they are. We know whats working and what is not. Ask anyone playing Landmark and watches the streams can tell you. Storybricks AI: In R&D will update when they get it working. Voxels: Working well for art, awesome advancments in voxelmancy but still conflicting with Forgelight. Combat: Sucks but they are working on it. They have a focus group testing it now. When its playable it will be in Landmark and we will let you know how well it play. I know I will be putting many hours into seeing if its any better. Sumup: Most of the game is R&D and the fact we have not had an update on that in 8 months. Its not going as planed. Will they get it working? I dont think even DGC even knows for sure. So its clear where we are, 100% clear, waiting. If you dont know this info, you have not been looking.
    Which part of splitting the code base did you not understand?

    There will be nothing in Landmark that is EQ:N because they have separated the complete development. Most likely because Landmark is a failure and not much more than a novelty Minecraft type building simulator for a few people with an extreme Lego fetish.
    ▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬ஜ۩۞۩ஜ▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬

    "It's pretty simple, really. If your only intention in posting about a particular game or topic is to be negative, then yes, you should probably move on. Voicing a negative opinion is fine, continually doing so on the same game is basically just trolling."
    - Michael Bitton
    Community Manager, MMORPG.com

    "As an online discussion about Star Citizen grows longer, the probability of a comparison involving Derek Smart approaches 1" - MrSnuffles's law

    "I am jumping in here a bit without knowing exactly what you all or talking about." 
    - SEANMCAD

    ▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬
  • EQBallzzEQBallzz Member UncommonPosts: 205
    Nanfoodle said:
    Wizardry said:
    Well All Access definitely throws a spin onto this,i don't think they would have spent much on finishing it no matter what.I fully expect the gimmick to make money will be same as H1Z1,they will sell early access.Then run that early access for a long time until they feel nobody else will buy it,then call it released.

    What might not bother others that become embedded playing not caring but bothers me ,is after they do the early access release to basically sell an unfinished game,you will see VERY little go into it afterwards.
    They will probably push out a half arsed Alpha with Founders Pack similar to Landmark. Then once that dries up they will add alpha/beta to ALL ACCESS to get more people to subscribe to that. Then let it sit there for a couple years until no one cares anymore similar to Landmark.
    Landmark by far has been one of the best experiences I have had in my 17 years of MMOing. I got to pay to get into a beta I wanted. Gave feed back where devs listened and made changes on our feedback. Most of the cry babies left as SoE said they were looking for a core group that cared to make EQN a thing and thats what stayed. One of the best communities I have seen and they are not small. I have been part of many beta processes and never have I seen this level of care and consideration be given to the people taking part. I have had many conversations with the top Devs making EQN.

    If EQN follows the same path, it will be awesome. The people that care will stay and help build EQN just like the Landmark fans have. In the end we will have a better game and the QQ people will not be around to break it because they wont want to pay the gate price to get in. As always, your getting it wrong! 

    I just wanted to make clear that my "LOL" on your post was sarcastic and didn't mean "good job". :p I'm not saying that the theory of the process being used isn't interesting or even good but to say that it's producing good results in the case of EQN or Landmark is kind of laughable.

    It's all well and good that you like it but I don't think it's viable for a game company to produce quality games for a handful of loyalists. Niche is one thing but I think Landmark is way beyond niche at this point.

    It's nice for a game company to listen to feedback and allow players a voice and all but if it's only available to founders willing to pay ridiculous money for what is supposed to be a free game (and in an unfinished state} and then leads to results like we have seen in this project I have to seriously doubt the process or at least the people in charge of it.

    Landmark has some interesting elements but most would say is a flop. EQN looks to be well on it's way to flop status as well. I don't take great pleasure in saying that because I was a huge EQ and EQ2 fan but this franchise looks to be on a terrible and possibly fatal path. :(

    I'll be happy to eat crow if I turn out to be wrong.
  • ceratop001ceratop001 Member RarePosts: 1,588
    I don't think it will become vaporware. Big money has already invested in this game. So a release will be coming, but what we might get could be questionable. I hope for the best like I do with so many games.
     
  • Fractal_AnalogyFractal_Analogy Member UncommonPosts: 350
    Nothing becomes vaporware, it starts out as it. Vaporware is the drafting stage before an idea actually becomes code and working stand-alone software.



    The question of asking is EQn vaporware, is asking has John Smedley been lying to all of us, and there are no actual internal EQN servers, running actual EQN code. Is there actual tangible working code on actual EQn specific server?

    We have seen repeated Landmark videos and Landmark code, but nothing to indicate that EQn is actually a real project, standing on it's own 2 feet. (ie vapor)

    That is why many have pigeon-hold Smedley, and probably why he coped out when questioned on the very subject. Now it seems DBG is doing everything they can, to get their own internal server up and running, while trying to migrate some/all of Landmark's code over to actually give birth to EQn as actual workable software.


    Something never reverts back to being vaporware, once it passes that stage of development. Vaporware doesn't mean "flop", like many believe.


  • Fractal_AnalogyFractal_Analogy Member UncommonPosts: 350
    edited September 2015
    Daffid011 said:

    Food for thought.

    How were they able to show video of combat 2 years ago, but they are just now testing combat for the first time?  Something doesn't add up.  Any ideas?

    Those were CGI animation/cartoons, there was no game recording. 
    Post edited by Fractal_Analogy on
  • craftseekercraftseeker Member RarePosts: 1,740
    Nanfoodle said:
    Mendel said:
    Daffid011 said:
    Food for thought.

    How were they able to show video of combat 2 years ago, but they are just now testing combat for the first time?  Something doesn't add up.  Any ideas?

    I thought that the 'game-play video' from the 2013 SOE Live event were not actually game-play videos, but CGI movies that the developers sat in front of, while the video was playing.  Evidence: developers not able to stop in mid-sequence, synchronization of on-screen activities without visible developer input, no visible UI displayed, and rapid (and rather unnatural) on-the-fly camera changes.   I am still convinced that those specific images came not from any game, but from an animation tool used to do character modeling.  That idea was roundly dismissed at the time.

    Now, with the very recent Landmark downtime (and subsequent video explanation) while they separated Landmark and EQ:N onto distinct code bases, the statement that SOE/Daybreak had a functional internal EQ:N game server than no-one had seen are shown to be a similar falsification.

    No one outside Daybreak has a clear idea of exactly how far along EQ:N may be, or what features it contains or doesn't contain.   While I think there's still entirely too much of EQ:N that is at the conceptual stages, the separation of the code bases actually appears to be a positive step in the life of EQ:N.
    Funny how people say we dont know but DGC has been very clear where they are. We know whats working and what is not. Ask anyone playing Landmark and watches the streams can tell you. Storybricks AI: In R&D will update when they get it working. Voxels: Working well for art, awesome advancments in voxelmancy but still conflicting with Forgelight. Combat: Sucks but they are working on it. They have a focus group testing it now. When its playable it will be in Landmark and we will let you know how well it play. I know I will be putting many hours into seeing if its any better. Sumup: Most of the game is R&D and the fact we have not had an update on that in 8 months. Its not going as planed. Will they get it working? I dont think even DGC even knows for sure. So its clear where we are, 100% clear, waiting. If you dont know this info, you have not been looking.
    Which part of splitting the code base did you not understand?

    There will be nothing in Landmark that is EQ:N because they have separated the complete development. Most likely because Landmark is a failure and not much more than a novelty Minecraft type building simulator for a few people with an extreme Lego fetish.
    ???????????  The code base was split in the last 60 days or so.  Everything that was in Landmark at that time is in the code base for EQ:N.  Now they may go on to delete some things and they will certainly add new stuff, but at the date of the split they were identical.

    Will they continue to develop the Landmark code base?  Probably they will, because it was not the failure you suggest.
  • MMOreaverMMOreaver Member UncommonPosts: 75
    edited September 2015
    sry, but Landmark is a big failure. And hopefully nothing more than some castles will make it into EQ:N
    otherwise they will not even beat the old WoW.
    If EQ:N fails that would be a dissaster.. not to mention damage to their reputation

    I think they promised too much, too early. Now development is in stagnation.
    good they split the code! And finally the game will get a more adult look compared to Landmark (which seems like a Crafting Simulator on PS4)

    Even If they would just Copy Everquest 2 with the new Gfx it would still be better than trying to provide something new like Wildstar and Flop after 4 months.
    Somehow I still hope they can create something longlasting like EQ2.. such a game is better than WoW and can satisfy some years^^
  • BlaedusBlaedus Member UncommonPosts: 100
    MMOreaver said:
    And finally the game will get a more adult look compared to Landmark (which seems like a Crafting Simulator on PS4)
    When and where was this stated?  And who stated it, for that matter?
  • AlleinAllein Member RarePosts: 2,089
    MMOreaver said:
    And finally the game will get a more adult look compared to Landmark 
    Really don't understand why people believe video games should cater to "adults." They are video games...

    The EQ franchise has never been for adults, no clue why they we go that route with EQN.

    Just because some folks have aged doesn't mean the products have to as well.

    Really feel bad for the inner children of some "adults."
  • Fractal_AnalogyFractal_Analogy Member UncommonPosts: 350
    edited September 2015
    Allein said:
    MMOreaver said:
    And finally the game will get a more adult look compared to Landmark 
    Really don't understand why people believe video games should cater to "adults." They are video games...

    The EQ franchise has never been for adults, no clue why they we go that route with EQN.

    Just because some folks have aged doesn't mean the products have to as well.

    Really feel bad for the inner children of some "adults."


    You tip your hand as to how disruptive you are.

    We are here at MMORPG.com. We are discusing MMORPGs. You are talking about average "video games" that usually fall under the console gaming space. And you try and use that notion to troll us here.




    MMORPGs are indeed Adult games.

    Meridian, Ultima, Ashron's and EQ all started back around 1998. Being online back then, was the purview of adults. Paying for internet back then was for adults. Building a PC back then was for adults.

    Children didn't play online games then, because in most places the internet was still per hour (& even dial up). They could not afford it. They still can't.

    Further more, Everquest is/was an extremely complicated game and most who played were College students, and techies. The children who did happen to play, was because they were taught threw Parenting. No child picked up EQ on their own.




    In 2005+

    World of Warcraft WAS a MMORPG designed for casuals. It was the Fisher Price of MMORPG and why it exploded. It added graphics and removed all the underlying game mechanics EQ had. Made for a much more simpler game, that casuals & CHILDREN could enjoy.

    In using dumm'd down mechanics, and offering mini-challenges WoW allowed children to make social clubs within cyberspace.


    After 10 million user in WoW, many business men took notice and decided to start making frill games using high fantasy to entice more and more younger people to play. And since these fledgling are not as discerning shoppers as paying adults, (nor could they afford to keep begging mommy & daddy for monthly $$), these newer & cheaper games took hold. These newer games didn't have any depth and had shallow gameplay, but a 15 year old doesn't know that...


    Among the kiddies playing these games, were weak adults who could not hang inside Adult games, so they felt empowered, when they could outspend 90% if the childings, and were reveled as gods by their in-game peers. Because they could afford item malls thingies, while kids could only on-line browse & wish one day.  Or until they could convince their mommy/daddy to use their CC# for a $10 mount, or suite of armor, etc.


    Whaling become part of the MMO space and all these developers were rushing out with their vessels, trying to harpoon all the sea life. Pulling in children and young adults who felt pressured by subscription games.

    Their new addiction felt better playing for free. Even is Mommy was paying. So recent F2P style of MMO games do cater towards children. It is all they can afford. But here at MMORPG, we are not children and can afford to talk about challenging content, not arcade games.




    The Baby Bells are coming, & they are all adult driven.





  • Daffid011Daffid011 Member UncommonPosts: 7,945
    Mendel said:
    Daffid011 said:
    Food for thought.

    How were they able to show video of combat 2 years ago, but they are just now testing combat for the first time?  Something doesn't add up.  Any ideas?

    I thought that the 'game-play video' from the 2013 SOE Live event were not actually game-play videos, but CGI movies that the developers sat in front of, while the video was playing.  Evidence: developers not able to stop in mid-sequence, synchronization of on-screen activities without visible developer input, no visible UI displayed, and rapid (and rather unnatural) on-the-fly camera changes.   I am still convinced that those specific images came not from any game, but from an animation tool used to do character modeling.  That idea was roundly dismissed at the time.

    Now, with the very recent Landmark downtime (and subsequent video explanation) while they separated Landmark and EQ:N onto distinct code bases, the statement that SOE/Daybreak had a functional internal EQ:N game server than no-one had seen are shown to be a similar falsification.

    No one outside Daybreak has a clear idea of exactly how far along EQ:N may be, or what features it contains or doesn't contain.   While I think there's still entirely too much of EQ:N that is at the conceptual stages, the separation of the code bases actually appears to be a positive step in the life of EQ:N.

    Sorry, I should have been more clear that those videos were scripted CGI movies and not recordings of actual gameplay.  I agree with your conclusion and points.

    The real question I was trying to raise, is how was the team able/willing to show combat, even with details about which classes had certain abilities, how it works, etc... when it has taken them 2 years to test version 1.0 of the combat engine?  It doesn't add up.

    I can only think of three possibilities that fit the scenario.

    1) They didn't have a combat engine 2 years ago when the videos were shown and were just selling hype based on concept. 

    2) There was some sort of combat engine built, but they have scrapped it and moved to something new.  The feedback from the combat videos wasn't good and a 2 year gap between reveal and first internal combat test seem to fit this.

    3) The team just can't develop.  Nearly 8 years developing and all they have to show for it is Landmark.  This seems to fit.



    As for the split in the code bases, you make some great points, but underneath all that I think there is a simpler explanation.

    Landmark and EQN were always the same project.  The team has only ever been working on 1 code base, calling it Landmark up until a few weeks ago, now they are calling it EQN.  Still the same project.

    Landmark was nothing more than clever marketing, smoke and mirrors. 


    Does anyone really believe that a team which had just wasted nearly 5 years work and multiple attempts to make EQN, suddenly was asked to make one of the most ambitious MMO ever attempted and simultaneously develop a second game. 

  • AlleinAllein Member RarePosts: 2,089
    The Baby Bells are coming, & they are all adult driven.
    Sigh.

    Guess we should determine what a "child" is?

    I played MUDs, EQ, UO, etc as a teenager. Years have gone by and now I consider teens to be children, but maybe you are talking about 0-13 or something?

    You have a very narrow view. Just because you were already X years old by the time online gaming started, doesn't mean everyone else was. My friends and I were young and there were plenty of others around our age. Although, I'll agree that EQ did have a lot of college+ aged folks.

    Regardless, that soon ended when the internet and products became more accessible.

    Vanilla WoW was very time intensive like EQ, not as much, but originally it was simply a more polished and accessible product that catered to a wider audience then grumpy folks like yourself that can only see inside your own little bubble. Now on the other hand...ya pretty silly where it and the genre have gone.

    Maybe I'm just better than you, but EQ was not extremely complicated. Pick a class, pick 8 skills, get a group, attack stuff, don't screw up. Everything was so pigeon holed that there wasn't much variety or room for experimenting. You either were good or not. WoW with its a million and one skills, allowed for a lot more variation and the dungeon/PVE design was much more complicated than simply tank and spank that was much of EQ.

    Years have gone by and WoW is now a joke as well, but this is all very subjective to our own personal experience and skill level. What made EQ "hard" was the limited resources and being unlike other products. By the time WoW rolled around, many had experience for years in multiple games and while it offered new challenges, the entire experience wasn't new. Much like going from PnP to MUDs to EQ.

    No clue how old you are (obviously a bit more than myself), you seem very out of touch with today's market, gamers, and the world. To believe that a 15 year old doesn't have access to money or know any better makes you sound like the naive one. Maybe when you were young you depended on mommy and daddy, that isn't the case for everyone.

    You're view of F2P, cash shops, and the genre aren't really off, but you do have a very one directional point of view that doesn't seem to factor in anything but what you want.

    As I said, these are video games. They are meant to be fun for people of all types. The idea that they were ever designed for old people with cash only is silly.

    Calling me a troll is an example of you simply having no idea what you are talking about.

    The "baby bells" are coming? Where have they been?

    Luckily, they and everyone is in for some good times since most upcoming games are going away from the terrible WoW model and getting into more niche designs.

    If you want to live in 1999, Pantheon is waiting. Chronicles of Elyria and other such games look like much better concepts to take the "old school" and bring it into the future. Not copying EQ because it is the only thing you can handle since it is so difficult...
  • Fractal_AnalogyFractal_Analogy Member UncommonPosts: 350
    edited September 2015
    Age is not an actual definition of "child". I know 21 year old children. Until you are earning an income, you are a child. Still nursing. Technically, an adult is someone who has taken responsibility for his actions in life. A child still dismisses them.

    But on average 0~15 are children.





    In any regards, you admit that EQ was made by adults, for the same like-minded adults.

    But I can now see what you have missed, being of your age. EQ mechanics are unsurpassed. Even WoW didn't have riposte, blind, charm, fear, block, levitate, shrink, illusion, rampage, bane style of game mechanics. All the different resists tables, and abilities. EQ was about all the things you did not see during combat, all the dice rolls going on.

    These mechanics are endless and actual written into the base code & combat mechanics within the game. World of Warcraft is arcade by comparison. And technically WoW had only a few character controllers or hooks into the actual game world. It is a Fisher Price toy.


    It was because of your young age, that you were focused on the game visually, and not understand the actual formulas and game mechanics underneath. How to do things was taught to you from those who figured it our on raids.

    EQ, like EVE, there is the the game. Then there is the "meta-game".




    World of Warcraft was a phenomenon. It was not good, or better than what was before it, WoW just had more candy around it.

  • VoqarVoqar Member UncommonPosts: 510
    I think EQNext is "wast of time" ware.  Nobody needs another MMORPG that's designed to be F2P sludge up front.  Nobody needs another massively single player not really an MMORPG.

    They had some interesting ideas up front (the way the AI and monsters would behave/evolve), some dumb ideas (destructable stuff as a major feature?  sorry, that's a weak gimmick at best).

    Like most modern not really MMORPGs they want to be everything to everybody and then some - and there's little point to it when your average solo/casual that they're aiming for won't care and won't stick regardless.

    I think they'll end up coming out with something, it won't be nearly as amazing as it was first described or envisioned, and it'll be just more generic and forgettable F2P rubbish that nobody cares about.

    Premium MMORPGs do not feature built-in cheating via cash for gold pay 2 win. PLAY to win or don't play.

  • SyndromofaDownSyndromofaDown Member UncommonPosts: 325
    edited September 2015

    Wasn't this considered gameplay? missing AI.
    Post edited by SyndromofaDown on
  • SyndromofaDownSyndromofaDown Member UncommonPosts: 325
    edited September 2015
    So what do you think? Imagine that with 40 classes and Storybricks content generation. Looks like a fun Sandbox. Skip to 1:17:06 for the gameplay
    Post edited by SyndromofaDown on
  • CrazKanukCrazKanuk Member EpicPosts: 6,130
    Age is not an actual definition of "child". I know 21 year old children. Until you are earning an income, you are a child. Still nursing. Technically, an adult is someone who has taken responsibility for his actions in life. A child still dismisses them.

    But on average 0~15 are children.





    In any regards, you admit that EQ was made by adults, for the same like-minded adults.

    But I can now see what you have missed, being of your age. EQ mechanics are unsurpassed. Even WoW didn't have riposte, blind, charm, fear, block, levitate, shrink, illusion, rampage, bane style of game mechanics. All the different resists tables, and abilities. EQ was about all the things you did not see during combat, all the dice rolls going on.

    These mechanics are endless and actual written into the base code & combat mechanics within the game. World of Warcraft is arcade by comparison. And technically WoW had only a few character controllers or hooks into the actual game world. It is a Fisher Price toy.


    It was because of your young age, that you were focused on the game visually, and not understand the actual formulas and game mechanics underneath. How to do things was taught to you from those who figured it our on raids.

    EQ, like EVE, there is the the game. Then there is the "meta-game".




    World of Warcraft was a phenomenon. It was not good, or better than what was before it, WoW just had more candy around it.


    Why do you always bring up age? I find it mildly amusing, since it's almost never followed by anything enlightening or valuable. 

    While you're correct that WoW is a dumbed-down version of EQ mechanics, EQ was merely a digitalized version of D&D. There is lots going on in the background, but this is it's strength and curse. If you never played D&D before (and few have) then you'd be hard-pressed to understand the significance of something as trivial as a dice roll. I can tell you're one who HAS played a lot of D&D because you seem very knowledgeable about it. However, that doesn't mean you're smarter or wiser, because you don't seem to recognize that the larger "win" here was the genre. I remember not mentioning EVER than I played EQ. NEVER! WoW came along and in ten years changed a genre that was viewed negatively into something that is recognized as a social platform. It also grew with the changing audience, opposed to remaining true to the D&D-style rule sets. Why? Simply because the D&D market never grew, as evidenced by EQs eventual decline in popularity. 

    EVE is another game that you use but is, again, something very specialized and time consuming. While it has maintained a stead and good-sized group, it's still niche. 

    You're arguing that he doesn't understand anything, but I think he's quite clear, and he's not wrong. EQ is a niche game the same way that D&D is. Saying that EQ mechanics haven't been surpassed is like saying muskets haven't been surpassed. Just because it was the best way to do things at the time, and while there may be some who still prefer to use muskets, I'm sure most would opt for a modern-day rifle. 

    Crazkanuk

    ----------------
    Azarelos - 90 Hunter - Emerald
    Durnzig - 90 Paladin - Emerald
    Demonicron - 90 Death Knight - Emerald Dream - US
    Tankinpain - 90 Monk - Azjol-Nerub - US
    Brindell - 90 Warrior - Emerald Dream - US
    ----------------

  • SyndromofaDownSyndromofaDown Member UncommonPosts: 325


    Sorry i just like looking at this video. The hate is strong in this thread. Lot of people are talking. Haters vs Hypers. Lets get this going next year. I can't wait.
  • kemono55kemono55 Member UncommonPosts: 124


    @SyndromofaDown I don't understand,
    that video you posted is Landmark, you can play it today.

    (except that they removed sliding from the game..for unknown reasons).
This discussion has been closed.