Howdy, Stranger!

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

EG7's Co-Founder Provides A Community Update, Talking About What EG7 Daybreak Acquisition Means | MM

SystemSystem Member UncommonPosts: 7,110
edited April 30 in Videos Discussion

imageEG7's Co-Founder Provides A Community Update, Talking About What EG7 Daybreak Acquisition Means | MMORPG.com

Enad Global 7's CEO and Founder, Robin Flodin, took to both YouTube as well as Daybreak Game Company's website to give players insight as to how the acquisition of the MMO developer worked and just who EG7 is actually.

Read the full story here


Comments

  • xpsyncxpsync Member EpicPosts: 1,771
    Just make EQ2 worth playing again or better yet an EQ3 proper.
    Your legend ends here and now! - (Battles Won Long Ago)

    Remember your ABC's, Always Be Casting! - Preheat 2021

    Currently Playing; WOW, SWG:L

  • SenbonFanSenbonFan Member UncommonPosts: 9

    xpsync said:

    Just make EQ2 worth playing again or better yet an EQ3 proper.



    To get anything remotely playable out of EQ2, you'd have to do a pretty significant reboot so yeah, I'd lean towards EQ3 proper.

    Ascensions have made classes feel "off", even if they are looking like they're about to possibly phase them out. The spell tiering system has gotten out of control and there are far too many abilities/spells. Dungeon design leads to players requiring higher-than-necessary stats to make sure runs are quick leading to a vicious cycle that pushes out newcomers/returning players. Raids were somewhat fun in DoF, KoS, and RoK but ever since I want to say DoV/AoD they really started to become too much.

    Just better at this point to rebuild and cut your losses, maybe move to a stat system that doesn't require a good squishing every three years lol.
    MendelTorvalxpsync
  • BruceYeeBruceYee Member EpicPosts: 2,264

    xpsync said:

    Just make EQ2 worth playing again or better yet an EQ3 proper.



    What would YOU change if you could to make "EQ2 playable again"?
  • WizardryWizardry Member LegendaryPosts: 18,926
    edited May 1
    They can't do a single thing to make me want to play the current set of games,THAT is the problem.

    ALL of the games Planetside ..EQ1/2 are done,time to shut them down.
    There was a movement long ago that allowed Blizzard to be a popular brand,Streamers and Epsort and this franchise did not adhere to either.VERY bad management by Smedley,he went for the simple dip in the cash shop pool but had no plan for the actual stable of games.

    So if were me,i would shut these down ALL of them.Would EQ3 be a good idea,NOPE because i just told you,there would be no streamers wanting to stream the game because it would not be lucrative for them and there is definitely no Esport involved so it would remain a small dying niche crowd.
    SO they "EG7" would NEED to invest a LOT into making a really good game that sells on merit alone without the need for streamers or Esport.IMO they already invested a lot into a losing proposition so they will definitely not invest in a really good game.

    IMO they MIGHT at the most try and make an EQ3 "i doubt it"and imo it wouldn't be good enough.IMO they THINK they have a plan to coerce people into playing games they already decided they don't want to play,lmao GOOD LUCK.

    Never forget 3 mile Island and never trust a government official or company spokesman.

  • WizardryWizardry Member LegendaryPosts: 18,926
    Also if EG7 have been playing attention,gamers jump o nth NEW hip bandwagon for a month or two then move on to the next,no game is sustaining a long term crowd that isn't a BR.

    The Warcraft and Final Fantasy brands will remain for awhile longer and only because neither studio is even trying to break free of that IP "afraid/cowards".

    Everquest is like the Volkswagon or the minivan,no longer popular,time to move on.So the rea lquestion not asked or answered is did EG7 simply buy a studio to make new games or did they simply buy a failing franchise IP in Everquest?
    I KNEW from day 1 that the DB acquisition made no sense and to me this one makes no sense either unless they come out and give me a good reason.

    All i got from this guy was VAGUE statements and sounding like he has no real plan.

    iller

    Never forget 3 mile Island and never trust a government official or company spokesman.

  • SovrathSovrath Member LegendaryPosts: 29,684
    Wizardry said:
    Also if EG7 have been playing attention,gamers jump o nth NEW hip bandwagon for a month or two then move on to the next,no game is sustaining a long term crowd that isn't a BR.

    The Warcraft and Final Fantasy brands will remain for awhile longer and only because neither studio is even trying to break free of that IP "afraid/cowards".

    Everquest is like the Volkswagon or the minivan,no longer popular,time to move on.So the rea lquestion not asked or answered is did EG7 simply buy a studio to make new games or did they simply buy a failing franchise IP in Everquest?
    I KNEW from day 1 that the DB acquisition made no sense and to me this one makes no sense either unless they come out and give me a good reason.

    All i got from this guy was VAGUE statements and sounding like he has no real plan.

    Actually, in the previous article, they list the monthly logins/subs so clearly the games are sustaining a player base.

    Having said that, it's a very realistic player base for older games of their magnitude. 
    illerPo_ggtzervo
  • ScotScot Member LegendaryPosts: 15,046
    So the priority will be making sure investors see these titles as money making machines.
    iller
  • SpiiderSpiider Member RarePosts: 921
    Money. Prio 1 is money. Prio 2 is... money. Prio 3... you get my point.
    iller

    No fate but what we make, so make me a ham sandwich please.

  • illeriller Member UncommonPosts: 514
    Paying lip-service to Quality of Life issues and somehow FIXING their Features, Jank & Bugs without actually promising to address ANY of those things in detail. ...For all we know, the "Pain points" he's talking about are just the confusing parts of the U.I.'s in their Cash-Shops which they'll spend a few minutes tweaking and tell their Investors "Look, we did our job, now it's just up to these dumb FreeLoader kiddies to buy this crap"
  • AkulasAkulas Member RarePosts: 2,756
    Q: Can I still play LotRO? A: Yep

    This isn't a signature, you just think it is.

  • MarknMarkn Member UncommonPosts: 228

    Wizardry said:

    Also if EG7 have been playing attention,gamers jump o nth NEW hip bandwagon for a month or two then move on to the next,no game is sustaining a long term crowd that isn't a BR.



    The Warcraft and Final Fantasy brands will remain for awhile longer and only because neither studio is even trying to break free of that IP "afraid/cowards".



    Everquest is like the Volkswagon or the minivan,no longer popular,time to move on.So the rea lquestion not asked or answered is did EG7 simply buy a studio to make new games or did they simply buy a failing franchise IP in Everquest?

    I KNEW from day 1 that the DB acquisition made no sense and to me this one makes no sense either unless they come out and give me a good reason.



    All i got from this guy was VAGUE statements and sounding like he has no real plan.






    How is a game that makes 4 times what it spends on development failing ? EQ has nearly 100k players and 65k all access players. Which btw is like 3 times as many as EQ2 it is the most profitable game they have even though the player numbers are 4 times less compared to DCUO which btw has like 400k players but majority are f2p but they do spend money on the game.

    Your definition of failing clearly fails itself.
    BruceYee
  • Po_ggPo_gg Member EpicPosts: 5,610
    edited May 2
    Markn said:
    EQ has nearly 100k players and 65k all access players. Which btw is like 3 times as many as EQ2 it is the most profitable game they have even though the player numbers are 4 times less compared to DCUO which btw has like 400k players but majority are f2p but they do spend money on the game.
    That's why I've been puzzled on -ever since those slides were published- how exactly they've allocated the subscriber numbers... since technically those 65k All Access players in EQ are also subscribers in the other three games as well.
    Not to mention in DCUO the sub is much more needed than in EQ - though it's mandatory for private servers access, and I'm certain that's a huge drive behind EQ numbers.


    Agree on the overall notion though, I too believe the whole "EQ as a failing franchise and/or the VW minivan" (which is still quite popular, for the record :) ) wasn't a spot-on statement from Wizardry.
    MendelTorval
  • BruceYeeBruceYee Member EpicPosts: 2,264

    Wizardry said:

    Also if EG7 have been playing attention,gamers jump o nth NEW hip bandwagon for a month or two then move on to the next,no game is sustaining a long term crowd that isn't a BR.



    The Warcraft and Final Fantasy brands will remain for awhile longer and only because neither studio is even trying to break free of that IP "afraid/cowards".



    Everquest is like the Volkswagon or the minivan,no longer popular,time to move on.So the rea lquestion not asked or answered is did EG7 simply buy a studio to make new games or did they simply buy a failing franchise IP in Everquest?

    I KNEW from day 1 that the DB acquisition made no sense and to me this one makes no sense either unless they come out and give me a good reason.



    All i got from this guy was VAGUE statements and sounding like he has no real plan.






    Pretty sure if a company buys another for 300mil they have a plan.
  • cheyanecheyane Member LegendaryPosts: 7,927
    edited May 2
    Please, please upgrade your servers for EQ2.

    By the way people are spending a lot of money on EQ2. You won't know it until you start playing. They have many hidden things like unless you spend currency unlocking your mercenary's ability to be hired anywhere, it is used for other aspects like their Overseer quests. You can send you merc on those to boost the bonus but only if they are unlocked.

    People spent money on upgrading their spells to the cash shop variant and those are the max level spells for that expansion and they do it again for the next. You will be old and grey if you wait for the normal time without spending.The people playing are definitely spending.

     I unlocked the mercenaries and mind you I am close to running out of the currency they give us for the sub. They also give progressively huge training times which also can be reduced via the currency. Top players also spend on ascendancies and mount training. They have really baked in some cash shop spending and especially for raiders. 

    The people spending on EQ2 are not the casual players like me who can get by with a little spending the top players are all heavy spenders and I suppose very reluctant to leave the game they have sunk so much time and money in.
    Torvalkitarad
    Chamber of Chains
  • MarknMarkn Member UncommonPosts: 228

    Po_gg said:


    Markn said:

    EQ has nearly 100k players and 65k all access players. Which btw is like 3 times as many as EQ2 it is the most profitable game they have even though the player numbers are 4 times less compared to DCUO which btw has like 400k players but majority are f2p but they do spend money on the game.


    That's why I've been puzzled on -ever since those slides were published- how exactly they've allocated the subscriber numbers... since technically those 65k All Access players in EQ are also subscribers in the other three games as well.
    Not to mention in DCUO the sub is much more needed than in EQ - though it's mandatory for private servers access, and I'm certain that's a huge drive behind EQ numbers.


    Agree on the overall notion though, I too believe the whole "EQ as a failing franchise and/or the VW minivan" (which is still quite popular, for the record :) ) wasn't a spot-on statement from Wizardry.



    They have data showing what accounts play what game the most so you would assume that's how they're allocating the numbers.

  • CuddleheartCuddleheart Member UncommonPosts: 341
    Wish we had more insight as to where EQ Next was in the development process. I had Landmark - it was what it was, but I really liked the art direction and was really bummed when it was cancelled.
    Mendel
  • xpsyncxpsync Member EpicPosts: 1,771

    BruceYee said:



    xpsync said:


    Just make EQ2 worth playing again or better yet an EQ3 proper.






    What would YOU change if you could to make "EQ2 playable again"?



    So easy. Just launch the original game again and don't wow'ify it.

    Desert of Flames, Kingdom of Sky, Echoes of Faydwer, and mostly Rise of Kunark were all still pretty amazing expansions.

    Although each one after KoS started to show more signs of simplification and The Shadow Odyssey was the end, it just wasn't good old hard af EQ2 anymore, and rapidly disintegrated from there to the point you can solo raids, like omg come on.

    It's why wow is so hated, legendary high end top tier mmorpg's became easy fisher price cash shops, where now wow is the top end game for hard af content, like damn!!!
    Your legend ends here and now! - (Battles Won Long Ago)

    Remember your ABC's, Always Be Casting! - Preheat 2021

    Currently Playing; WOW, SWG:L

  • MendelMendel Member EpicPosts: 4,478
    Wish we had more insight as to where EQ Next was in the development process. I had Landmark - it was what it was, but I really liked the art direction and was really bummed when it was cancelled.

    EQN was solidly in the 'smoke screen' phase of development.  There may have been actual EQN coding done somewhere, but no one really saw any of it.

    Odd.  If you look at the threads about the videos of EQN, the almost constant complaint was that people didn't like the art direction.  Congratulations on being about the first to actually like them.



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

Sign In or Register to comment.