I suppose I can see both sides of it. Some very good points made on both sides. I love the game, I guess I am just a little worried because the beginning of the end for SWG started with small changes until finally they changed the whole game.
I won't necessarily vote to eliminate locked encounters, but I would absolutely vote for a change in them. To-wit: in EQ1, I loved playing a Shaman who roamed the world, helping those who need it, buffing those who needed it, and so forth (walk the Earth like Kane in Kung-fu, sort of thing). Can't do it in EQ2. If they altered the locked encounter so that it only locks the experience from the kill and allows spell-casting on the player, I'd be satisfied. Gotta think about whether to loosen it to the point of allowing out-of-encounter casting on the monster. Potential there to get out of hand in terms of a lvl50 helping a lvl 10 conquer a creature no lvl 30 should have attacked -- but then again, I'm an advocate of as open as possible a gameworld, in terms of game mechanics. Hm. As much as I dislike WoW, their system of "tagging" tags the intended target, keeps anyone else from stealing the experience/kill, but doesn't lock out the possibility to play as my Shaman above did in EQ1. Gotta put more thought into that one.
Thanks everyone!
(Somewhere in the mix of WoW, EQ1, and EQ2, there is an ideal game out there -- oh, a dash of DAoC, namely RvR.)
I usually don't agree with those who would make things harder for the soloer and the "casual" gamers, however, I do agree on this. Some complained that the access quests made the game too linear, but so far, I haven't found it so. After all, as a lot of you have said, what's a newbie going to do in those places anyway?
I don't want to see those places until I'm ready to begin hunting in them! I'll be spending enough time in them then, I'm sure! While I'm sure I'd probably be one of the players who didn't care for the access quests, I would probably have been content to wait for automatic admittance as I'm mostly a soloer.
I believe they still left the quests in the game though, so you can still do them for the other rewards.
I personally think that PvE EQ 2 is one of the easier MMORPGs out there right now. It's not as easy as say, WoW or Kingdom of Loathing but I'd argue that it's right up there with CoH or DAoC. I can literally gain close to a level an hour with a good solo toon in EQ 2, even in the low teens. I really can't see it getting much easier then it is. If you want something that is a harcorde grindfest I'd recommend EQ 1 or FF XI before this. Crafting in EQ 2 is another story of course, it's amazingly deep. But does anyone really think the PvE game is "hard"? I honestly can't see chest thumping over any being able to advance in EQ 2, it makes no sense.
More on topic, I like the idea of the access quests. The more quests the better in general. So I personally am sorry to see them go. But they weren't really "hard," just time consuming. I also like the idea of being able to wander into a zone where the lowest level bunny or grashopper I can find will butcher me with less than a thought. That seems a lot less "newb friendly" to me.
Ragarless of what I think, the fact of the matter is that Sony wants John Q. Gamer. They are not a botique publisher out to capture the minds of a hardcore raiders or RPers. They already have a game for those types, it's called EQ 1. They will do their best to be all things to all gamers, but when push comes to shove they are going to do what they think apeals to the greatest number of gamers. And the vast majoirty of PC gamers (remember the cost of entry for a modern PC game is at least an $800 system) these days have jobs, families, and all sorts of other time sinks in RL. You may hate Mr. "I only game 2-10 hours a week." But that is John Q. Gamer and that is the customer Sony wants to attract and retain with EQ 2. Rant, rave, make fun of John Q. all you want. But this is their game not yours (So speaketh SOE corperate execs, so shall it be!). Cope or leave.
I don't want to write this, and you don't want to read it. But now it's too late for both of us.
Just adding my own 2 coppers to an already well-commented thread.
The key for me is immersion. The world should be as seamless as possible. You can go pretty much everywhere, but if you go some places, you will get killed, so it's your decision as to where to go. It's not "cordoned off" from you, you can go and commit suicide if you want to, it's there, but you have a choice as to where to go. When things are not 'cordoned off' the world feels more put together, more knit together, and hence more immersive. So I think this is a good move from the gameplay perspective. Access quests were fun, some of them, but many of them really felt artificial and forced and realy a means of cordoning things off. I think keeping the quests (the better ones) and giving them nice rewards would be appropriate, but I don't see opening up the world as a bad thing. It just makes the world flow more seamlessly, gives the player a greater sense of freedom in that world (and the realization that some choices are fraught with danger).
I agree with the OP. But it is not a ''New'' or a Begin process, as an hardcore soloer & grouper, I can tell you it is VERY old. But since it work when it come to nerf soloers and get every ''guilded'' person happy, they figure it will work now with the heavy casual support, and indeed it will. Casuals will not understand your point of view and they will give you cheap arguments...somehow, it sooth a part of me to see raiders been handed the same medecine.
Althought my form and my view would be way to hard to explain here, since most peoples think solo = easy and just discredit my speech without reading nor understanding it. Building easier servers would have been wiser then affecting everyone on every servers.
But SoE always think in ''opposing & totalitarism" ways, which can only lead to having 1 group happy, and everyone else unhappy.
- "If I understand you well, you are telling me until next time. " - Ren
I see what you mean Wickes. Admittidley I didn't think of the aspect of Eq2 being a restrictive game which truth be told it is in some aspects. I did in fact go and check the zones out and they look awesome. They make me want to make it to a high enough level to do some damage there, which brings up a good point. Do you think they did this to give current players a reason to keep leveling? Maybe they thought if we mid-level players got a taste of the new zoned we'd want to play long enough to make it there. Something to think about.
No, no Wickes. Once my assassin starts doing proper DPS, THEN we are off the the races
This change is the exact OPPOSITE of "noobification". Before the game told you where to go at what level, and if a place was too hard for you then it would protect you from the big nasty mobs there. I'm happy they made this change. Let some "noob" wander into Lavastorm and get owned by the roamer in the first cave off the beach. They'll come away thinking "oh sh*t that place is rough, I can't wait until I'm strong enough for it." That's how things should be in an MMO world.
Oh my, I want to watch the lvl 20 trying to get off the island at permafrost (??) and past the killer whales. I had a real kick when I first saw them, and considering how freakish hard it would be to get my shard back I I aimed for shore I just turned around and left the place. I was 30 (or 32) at the time, beeing an artisan had its advantages.
I really hope they've got a team working on a no-zoning mechanism. That would be a real boost to the game.
Well today I ran into everfrost, lavastorm, and the feerott. While I really shouldnt see them till 40+, they were one of the coolest zones I have seen.
IMO Access Quests were a dumb idea that SOE came up with to limit high end content when Kunark came out. It was a dumb idea then and it's a dumb idea now. EQ1 got rid of them and people REJOICED when they did. I'm "old school" having played EQ during beta and early release and the game was MUCH better without access quests. All Access Quests did was keep people who didn't have huge friends lists or weren't in a big guild from being able to get to certain areas. Which was BS. Same in EQ2 but to a lesser extent.
Access Quests aren't a good thing. If you want to do the quests then by all means do so. But not everyone wants to have to finish a quest just to get into a zone. Hell I don't even like the so-called profession quests. All they are is time sinks.
Currently Playing: Dungeons and Dragons Online. Sig image Pending Still in: A couple Betas
Originally posted by 9216544 Well today I ran into everfrost, lavastorm, and the feerott. While I really shouldnt see them till 40+, they were one of the coolest zones I have seen.
I note in the other thread that you're a 33 beserker. Thus, don't overlook Feerott, which is a very good zone for your level. I took my templar there at 33 and did extremely well soloing. I see a lot of low and mid-30s groups there too.
Originally posted by Elnator Sorry,IMO Access Quests were a dumb idea that SOE came up with to limit high end content when Kunark came out. It was a dumb idea then and it's a dumb idea now. EQ1 got rid of them and people REJOICED when they did. I'm "old school" having played EQ during beta and early release and the game was MUCH better without access quests. All Access Quests did was keep people who didn't have huge friends lists or weren't in a big guild from being able to get to certain areas. Which was BS. Same in EQ2 but to a lesser extent.Access Quests aren't a good thing. If you want to do the quests then by all means do so. But not everyone wants to have to finish a quest just to get into a zone. Hell I don't even like the so-called profession quests. All they are is time sinks.
I loved them, and having too work for my next point of access. I am rather pissed that they have taken them out. SOE is making it too the top of my list this month for dumbest things done by an MMO company.
- Scaris
"What happened to you, Star Wars Galaxies? You used to look like Leia. Not quite gold bikini Leia (more like bad-British-accent-and-cinnamon-bun-hair Leia), but still Leia nonetheless. Now you look like Chewbacca." - Computer Gaming World
NOOBIFICATION OF EQ2? Just starting?! Bull****! EQ2 was always n00b. It was n00b since EQ1 turned n00b after kunark. It was n00b from the beginning. It got worse when they tried the initial balancing I am glad I left then I saw no hope or enjoyment in the pathetic game. SOE will keep making cookie cutter MMORPGs to pander to this carebear newbie group which is becoming a minority. Trials of Ascension, possibly Dark and Light, and definitely Ages of Athiria.... ditch this pile and check out those games.
Originally posted by Elnator Sorry, IMO Access Quests were a dumb idea that SOE came up with to limit high end content when Kunark came out. It was a dumb idea then and it's a dumb idea now. EQ1 got rid of them and people REJOICED when they did. I'm "old school" having played EQ during beta and early release and the game was MUCH better without access quests. All Access Quests did was keep people who didn't have huge friends lists or weren't in a big guild from being able to get to certain areas. Which was BS. Same in EQ2 but to a lesser extent. Access Quests aren't a good thing. If you want to do the quests then by all means do so. But not everyone wants to have to finish a quest just to get into a zone. Hell I don't even like the so-called profession quests. All they are is time sinks.
You really are a funny guy mate; you come over here to tell us that the access quests in EQ 2 are a time sink? Take a look in the SWG mirror buddy. SWG is the biggest time sink EVER.
The access quests were fun and challenging. Removing them does seem like a step towards death for the game. Don't get me wrong, I don't think EQ2 will suffer from it, but it irritates those of us who accomplished that task. It's like saying "wow you were stupid for bothering to play since launch. Next time don't bother playing for 6 or 7 months after release when we can make it easier for you."
It's not like the quests were THAT difficult either, just needed a group of people paying attention.
The quests weren't removed; they've simply become optional. What's more, you now get an additional item reward for doing them.
They were always optional, by the way. It's just that before this update you had to reach a certain level before you could access the zones without doing the boat rides.
=========================== Steve Danuser, a.k.a. Moorgard Game Designer, EverQuest II
This isnt a big deal. You guys are overeacting. LINK
Originally posted by anarchyart The access quests were fun and challenging. Removing them does seem like a step towards death for the game. Don't get me wrong, I don't think EQ2 will suffer from it, but it irritates those of us who accomplished that task. It's like saying "wow you were stupid for bothering to play since launch. Next time don't bother playing for 6 or 7 months after release when we can make it easier for you."
You just hit the nail right on the head. That is what is so infuriating about it. Why bother playing anything SOE sells at launch? That is the product they use to attract the "faithful". Then 7 months down the line (or in SWGs case 2 years) they just let everyone have all the things you worked so hard for.
The quests weren't removed; they've simply become optional. What's more, you now get an additional item reward for doing them.
They were always optional, by the way. It's just that before this update you had to reach a certain level before you could access the zones without doing the boat rides. =========================== Steve Danuser, a.k.a. Moorgard Game Designer, EverQuest II
This isnt a big deal. You guys are overeacting. LINK
Thats an even bigger slap in the face, I completed the quests before the extra reward, so to add to the indignity of everyone now being able to go everywhere, I have to redo the quest to get the reward. I don't think so!
You've completed them, why do you care? Are you yet another person that just can't see someone else bypass what you had to work hard for? I still remember the (in lack of a better word) idiots that complained about Funcom removing accessquests in AO:Shadowlands.
And now its some item that currently most likely is way behind your level. Yay for double standards. Sure you aint complaining just to complain?
Originally posted by xminator You've completed them, why do you care? Are you yet another person that just can't see someone else bypass what you had to work hard for? I still remember the (in lack of a better word) idiots that complained about Funcom removing accessquests in AO:Shadowlands. And now its some item that currently most likely is way behind your level. Yay for double standards. Sure you aint complaining just to complain?
No, I'm complaining because I am sick and tired of SOE screwing over their loyal user base in favour of casual idiots who dont usually stick around for more than a couple of months. Yes, I understand it's all about money! I think there is more money to be had by keeping the faithful playing and not pandering to the whining masses! A prime example of this is SWG. The failed experiment that is the CU combined with their lack of QC and Customer service is going to bury that game.
Yes, it will still be around in a few years I am sure, with far fewer clients and servers I suspect; a game world populated by PvP gits who like nothing more than to kill your Jedi and then spam you about how they took your XP.
I started this post with regards to EQ 2 as this is how the whole SWG debacle began. It worries me that there is a PvP add-on coming out for EQ2 and although SOE swear blind that the game will not turn into a PvP fest, I worry that their eternal lust for the dollar will make them do whatever it takes to turn EQ 2 into the SOE version of WoW.
I am not jealous or upset that people can go to zones that I had to work to get into. I do however, reject the argument that it somehow makes the game more immersive to not have zones or access. These "No zoning" complainers are obviously WoW players, so their opinions when it comes to EQ2, I could care less for. Unless your PC is a Ti-994A, zoning takes less than 10 seconds and is in no way intrusive to gameplay, nor does it detract from "immersion".
I also accept, that while EQ2 is nowhere near as complicated or as hard as EQ 1 was (Especially when EQ 1 first appeared) It still has greater longevity than any current fantasy based MMO on the market. Sure, SOE do not hold the MMO crown of most subscribers, but I could care less for "casual" gamers in a "Full-time" MMO. What SOE do have is a rich, detailed game world, very solid content and a relatively bug free game. I would hate to see that all ruined by trying to attract casual gamers as opposed to supporting the gamers that have made EQ and EQ 2 a viable brand.
The simple truth of the matter is some MMOs require you to put in a horrendous amount of time. Some of us are willing/have the time etc to do this. The unfortunate fact is that when you drastically change the game's structure in favor of casual gamers, you ostracise the "high level" or "hardcore" gamer. It is a difficult balance to srike and I hope SOE get it right.
Games that played strictly to their base: AC1, AC2. Current subscriptions, less than 50,000 for AC, less than 15,000 for AC2. Does that comment on their quality? No. It comments on the decision to focus on the loyal fan base.
Games that were designed specifically to draw as many people as possible (aka usually involving significant dumbing-down of the controls, how PCs relate to NPCs, etc.): WoW. Current subscription base: 3.5 million players.
Games that attempted to do both but without going to the dumbed-down limits like WoW or GW: EQ1, which, even with WoW and EQ2's release, is still over 400,000 subscribers.
Subscription #s don't mean squat about a game's quality. What they do mean is an exact translation into the money the company running them is making.
Why bring this up? To quote, "I think there is more money to be made by keeping the faithful playing and not pandering to the whining masses." MORE money to be made? There may be a model that can cater to the desires of players like yourself and make money, but in no way, shape, manner, or form can it be said to be MORE profitable than something like WoW. Not even close. And I am not a fan of WoW, by any stretch. That's not the point.
I love AC1. I still think it did things that NO game since has even tried (and some have tried and failed miserably). But is it making MORE money than the others? Not by a long, long, long shot. Is it profitable? Yup. Made it's money in its heyday, and can now run catering to its core base because the core base appears to be enough people to support it. Ditto for the very-long-in-the-tooth UO.
Why bring this up? To quote, "I think there is more money to be made by keeping the faithful playing and not pandering to the whining masses." MORE money to be made? There may be a model that can cater to the desires of players like yourself and make money, but in no way, shape, manner, or form can it be said to be MORE profitable than something like WoW. Not even close. And I am not a fan of WoW, by any stretch. That's not the point.
While I agree with much of what you said, your assessment of WoW and it's 3.5 million subscribers is not representative of the long term facts. WoW is doing well now, but I don't know where it will be in a year. No tradeskills, very quick completion path, even for someone who doesnt spend that much time on it. I played it for about 3 days and got to Lvl 23!
I would agree that the majority of MMO players NOW are casual. Having said that, they don't stick around for long. I know many people who I convinced to try SWG were not around for more than 3 months. The reason, they just couldn't hack the amount of time they had to put in. As I have stated previously, these games require a considerable investment of time. In WoW's case they really reduced the investment of time necessary, thus making it far more accessible!
Personally, I don't like that. If you want to talk about something that ruins "immersion" that would be the single biggest culprit. I do not want to be able to do 6 levels a day. I would comment that it is already a little bit too easy to level in EQ 2 but in the interests of balance, I don't complain. WoW on the other hand is a candy coated, cookie cutter bag of w**k. It looks like an episode of "The Smurfs" and it takes longer to "level" in BF2.
I have nothing against a game like WoW, I personally don't like it but if it keeps even some of the "casual" crowd away from EQ 2, then I am all for it. I think the point that is being missed is that traditionally, MMO's such as EQ and EvE to name a few were not games where you progressed particularly fast. I like this because it guarantees that I will be able to play the game for a significant amount of time. This new process a la WoW of making as many Alts as possible and levelling every half an hour does not appeal to me!
Again, no disrepect to the "casual" gamer, they have as much right to play as I do, but don't show up in the games we love demanding change to suit you!! There are plenty of games that cater to low skill/casual gamers around, don't ruin mine!
Thats an even bigger slap in the face, I completed the quests before the extra reward, so to add to the indignity of everyone now being able to go everywhere, I have to redo the quest to get the reward. I don't think so!
If you completed them and they were fun and productive then you should have no complaints as you got what you paid for. As an added bonus, if you found them highly enjoyable, you can now do them again for greater rewards.
If you did them and didn't enjoy them then you should be happy to see undesirable elements removed from the game. No doubt you'd like to see the game attract more players and thus favor removing undesirable tedium.
Comments
I suppose I can see both sides of it. Some very good points made on both sides. I love the game, I guess I am just a little worried because the beginning of the end for SWG started with small changes until finally they changed the whole game.
Cheers
S
I won't necessarily vote to eliminate locked encounters, but I would absolutely vote for a change in them. To-wit: in EQ1, I loved playing a Shaman who roamed the world, helping those who need it, buffing those who needed it, and so forth (walk the Earth like Kane in Kung-fu, sort of thing). Can't do it in EQ2. If they altered the locked encounter so that it only locks the experience from the kill and allows spell-casting on the player, I'd be satisfied. Gotta think about whether to loosen it to the point of allowing out-of-encounter casting on the monster. Potential there to get out of hand in terms of a lvl50 helping a lvl 10 conquer a creature no lvl 30 should have attacked -- but then again, I'm an advocate of as open as possible a gameworld, in terms of game mechanics. Hm. As much as I dislike WoW, their system of "tagging" tags the intended target, keeps anyone else from stealing the experience/kill, but doesn't lock out the possibility to play as my Shaman above did in EQ1. Gotta put more thought into that one.
Thanks everyone!
(Somewhere in the mix of WoW, EQ1, and EQ2, there is an ideal game out there -- oh, a dash of DAoC, namely RvR.)
I usually don't agree with those who would make things harder for the soloer and the "casual" gamers, however, I do agree on this. Some complained that the access quests made the game too linear, but so far, I haven't found it so. After all, as a lot of you have said, what's a newbie going to do in those places anyway?
I don't want to see those places until I'm ready to begin hunting in them! I'll be spending enough time in them then, I'm sure! While I'm sure I'd probably be one of the players who didn't care for the access quests, I would probably have been content to wait for automatic admittance as I'm mostly a soloer.
I believe they still left the quests in the game though, so you can still do them for the other rewards.
I personally think that PvE EQ 2 is one of the easier MMORPGs out there right now. It's not as easy as say, WoW or Kingdom of Loathing but I'd argue that it's right up there with CoH or DAoC. I can literally gain close to a level an hour with a good solo toon in EQ 2, even in the low teens. I really can't see it getting much easier then it is. If you want something that is a harcorde grindfest I'd recommend EQ 1 or FF XI before this. Crafting in EQ 2 is another story of course, it's amazingly deep. But does anyone really think the PvE game is "hard"? I honestly can't see chest thumping over any being able to advance in EQ 2, it makes no sense.
More on topic, I like the idea of the access quests. The more quests the better in general. So I personally am sorry to see them go. But they weren't really "hard," just time consuming. I also like the idea of being able to wander into a zone where the lowest level bunny or grashopper I can find will butcher me with less than a thought. That seems a lot less "newb friendly" to me.
Ragarless of what I think, the fact of the matter is that Sony wants John Q. Gamer. They are not a botique publisher out to capture the minds of a hardcore raiders or RPers. They already have a game for those types, it's called EQ 1. They will do their best to be all things to all gamers, but when push comes to shove they are going to do what they think apeals to the greatest number of gamers. And the vast majoirty of PC gamers (remember the cost of entry for a modern PC game is at least an $800 system) these days have jobs, families, and all sorts of other time sinks in RL. You may hate Mr. "I only game 2-10 hours a week." But that is John Q. Gamer and that is the customer Sony wants to attract and retain with EQ 2. Rant, rave, make fun of John Q. all you want. But this is their game not yours (So speaketh SOE corperate execs, so shall it be!). Cope or leave.
I don't want to write this, and you don't want to read it. But now it's too late for both of us.
Just adding my own 2 coppers to an already well-commented thread.
The key for me is immersion. The world should be as seamless as possible. You can go pretty much everywhere, but if you go some places, you will get killed, so it's your decision as to where to go. It's not "cordoned off" from you, you can go and commit suicide if you want to, it's there, but you have a choice as to where to go. When things are not 'cordoned off' the world feels more put together, more knit together, and hence more immersive. So I think this is a good move from the gameplay perspective. Access quests were fun, some of them, but many of them really felt artificial and forced and realy a means of cordoning things off. I think keeping the quests (the better ones) and giving them nice rewards would be appropriate, but I don't see opening up the world as a bad thing. It just makes the world flow more seamlessly, gives the player a greater sense of freedom in that world (and the realization that some choices are fraught with danger).
I agree with the OP. But it is not a ''New'' or a Begin process, as an hardcore soloer & grouper, I can tell you it is VERY old. But since it work when it come to nerf soloers and get every ''guilded'' person happy, they figure it will work now with the heavy casual support, and indeed it will. Casuals will not understand your point of view and they will give you cheap arguments...somehow, it sooth a part of me to see raiders been handed the same medecine.
Althought my form and my view would be way to hard to explain here, since most peoples think solo = easy and just discredit my speech without reading nor understanding it. Building easier servers would have been wiser then affecting everyone on every servers.
But SoE always think in ''opposing & totalitarism" ways, which can only lead to having 1 group happy, and everyone else unhappy.
- "If I understand you well, you are telling me until next time. " - Ren
I see what you mean Wickes. Admittidley I didn't think of the aspect of Eq2 being a restrictive game which truth be told it is in some aspects. I did in fact go and check the zones out and they look awesome. They make me want to make it to a high enough level to do some damage there, which brings up a good point. Do you think they did this to give current players a reason to keep leveling? Maybe they thought if we mid-level players got a taste of the new zoned we'd want to play long enough to make it there. Something to think about.
No, no Wickes. Once my assassin starts doing proper DPS, THEN we are off the the races
This change is the exact OPPOSITE of "noobification". Before the game told you where to go at what level, and if a place was too hard for you then it would protect you from the big nasty mobs there. I'm happy they made this change. Let some "noob" wander into Lavastorm and get owned by the roamer in the first cave off the beach. They'll come away thinking "oh sh*t that place is rough, I can't wait until I'm strong enough for it." That's how things should be in an MMO world.
Oh my, I want to watch the lvl 20 trying to get off the island at permafrost (??) and past the killer whales. I had a real kick when I first saw them, and considering how freakish hard it would be to get my shard back I I aimed for shore I just turned around and left the place. I was 30 (or 32) at the time, beeing an artisan had its advantages.
I really hope they've got a team working on a no-zoning mechanism. That would be a real boost to the game.
Well today I ran into everfrost, lavastorm, and the feerott. While I really shouldnt see them till 40+, they were one of the coolest zones I have seen.
Sorry,
IMO Access Quests were a dumb idea that SOE came up with to limit high end content when Kunark came out. It was a dumb idea then and it's a dumb idea now. EQ1 got rid of them and people REJOICED when they did. I'm "old school" having played EQ during beta and early release and the game was MUCH better without access quests. All Access Quests did was keep people who didn't have huge friends lists or weren't in a big guild from being able to get to certain areas. Which was BS. Same in EQ2 but to a lesser extent.
Access Quests aren't a good thing. If you want to do the quests then by all means do so. But not everyone wants to have to finish a quest just to get into a zone. Hell I don't even like the so-called profession quests. All they are is time sinks.
Currently Playing: Dungeons and Dragons Online.
Sig image Pending
Still in: A couple Betas
I loved them, and having too work for my next point of access. I am rather pissed that they have taken them out. SOE is making it too the top of my list this month for dumbest things done by an MMO company.
- Scaris
"What happened to you, Star Wars Galaxies? You used to look like Leia. Not quite gold bikini Leia (more like bad-British-accent-and-cinnamon-bun-hair Leia), but still Leia nonetheless. Now you look like Chewbacca." - Computer Gaming World
NOOBIFICATION OF EQ2? Just starting?! Bull****! EQ2 was always n00b. It was n00b since EQ1 turned n00b after kunark. It was n00b from the beginning. It got worse when they tried the initial balancing I am glad I left then I saw no hope or enjoyment in the pathetic game. SOE will keep making cookie cutter MMORPGs to pander to this carebear newbie group which is becoming a minority. Trials of Ascension, possibly Dark and Light, and definitely Ages of Athiria.... ditch this pile and check out those games.
The access quests were fun and challenging. Removing them does seem like a step towards death for the game. Don't get me wrong, I don't think EQ2 will suffer from it, but it irritates those of us who accomplished that task. It's like saying "wow you were stupid for bothering to play since launch. Next time don't bother playing for 6 or 7 months after release when we can make it easier for you."
It's not like the quests were THAT difficult either, just needed a group of people paying attention.
This isnt a big deal. You guys are overeacting.
LINK
This isnt a big deal. You guys are overeacting.
LINK
Thats an even bigger slap in the face, I completed the quests before the extra reward, so to add to the indignity of everyone now being able to go everywhere, I have to redo the quest to get the reward. I don't think so!
S
You've completed them, why do you care? Are you yet another person that just can't see someone else bypass what you had to work hard for? I still remember the (in lack of a better word) idiots that complained about Funcom removing accessquests in AO:Shadowlands.
And now its some item that currently most likely is way behind your level. Yay for double standards. Sure you aint complaining just to complain?
Games that played strictly to their base: AC1, AC2. Current subscriptions, less than 50,000 for AC, less than 15,000 for AC2. Does that comment on their quality? No. It comments on the decision to focus on the loyal fan base.
Games that were designed specifically to draw as many people as possible (aka usually involving significant dumbing-down of the controls, how PCs relate to NPCs, etc.): WoW. Current subscription base: 3.5 million players.
Games that attempted to do both but without going to the dumbed-down limits like WoW or GW: EQ1, which, even with WoW and EQ2's release, is still over 400,000 subscribers.
Subscription #s don't mean squat about a game's quality. What they do mean is an exact translation into the money the company running them is making.
Why bring this up? To quote, "I think there is more money to be made by keeping the faithful playing and not pandering to the whining masses." MORE money to be made? There may be a model that can cater to the desires of players like yourself and make money, but in no way, shape, manner, or form can it be said to be MORE profitable than something like WoW. Not even close. And I am not a fan of WoW, by any stretch. That's not the point.
I love AC1. I still think it did things that NO game since has even tried (and some have tried and failed miserably). But is it making MORE money than the others? Not by a long, long, long shot. Is it profitable? Yup. Made it's money in its heyday, and can now run catering to its core base because the core base appears to be enough people to support it. Ditto for the very-long-in-the-tooth UO.
Double post, my bad!
S
If you completed them and they were fun and productive then you should have no complaints as you got what you paid for. As an added bonus, if you found them highly enjoyable, you can now do them again for greater rewards.
If you did them and didn't enjoy them then you should be happy to see undesirable elements removed from the game. No doubt you'd like to see the game attract more players and thus favor removing undesirable tedium.
See .... there's no problem