Howdy, Stranger!
It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!
Quick Links
POLL: MMO'S
MMO_Munk
Member Posts: 299
What do you think should mostly be avoided in Vanguard?
post comment with selection you made, describing why.
Comments
17 votes and this is the first reply? I'd say repetive quests (why don't they buy their own apples anyway?)
18 votes now, lol.
I do not want to see "AA Points" in the mighty Vanguard.
AA is a wimpy way to make a Level Based game into a Skill Based game.
I can understand why EQ did this, since EQ was designed from the getgo as a Level Based game. Heck, the fact that EQ put AA in, aka steered a bit towards trying to be more Skill Based, shows even they admit a Skill Based game is where it is at.
IF Vanguard wants to be Level Based, or Skill Based, or a mix of both (like Anarchy Online is), then it should be designed that way from the start!
Re: EQ1 AAs
AAs aren't really much steering it in the direction of skill-based, since there are no trade offs at all. You can have ALL the available AA abilities if you want, and getting them is simply a matter of playing. I personally know a lot of people with 200+ AAs, and several with 600+. Considering that some of the abilities are "must haves", some are toys, and some are pretty much useless, it's not brain surgery to figure out where to spend them, and you can always get more if you change your mind. It's not really "skill-based" when you can have all of the options without sacrificing others. It's more like an extension of getting spells or abilites at different levels, just letting you choose the order. It's not like your Mass Group Buff gets better as you use it.
AAs have turned out to be a stupid way to add in things that should have been part of the class to begin with. IMO, FWIW.
As far as the poll, no more "go kill ten floobers" quests. And I don't want to collect 10 floober ears either. Nor do I want to deliver 7 yippits to Generic NPC X, unless that is just the start of something really interesting.
...
This is where I draw the line: __________________.
I made this poll for the simple fact of knowing that the dev's come and read these forums. They can see what to avoid, or at least cut back on. Cause i know i dont like alot of things on that list i made, those were just a few. See no matter hwat, they will do what they are going to do, but this can at least tell them to cut back on certain things, or if enough responses, get rid of the things that attract ALOT of votes.. Just trying to make a better game for all of us =p In the little way that i can. So post your reviews guys, explain why you voted what you did. Your only helping out further.
I've voted for the instanced raid zones.
You'll have to make a very good argument as to why instance zones are not only 'needed' but how they advance the game play of these M(assively)M(ultiplayer)ORPG's.
With proper game design, you can remove all reasons to include instances in game play. There is not one reason that instancing is needed that can't be designed differently.
Only the dead have seen the end of War! ~ Plato
i agree totally, but i just want to add that while aa's are skills that probably should just have been implemented when the class was created....its a great way to progress your toon when you have hit max level.
if im going to hit max level with my character i want to still be able to progress with him someway other than just gear. it doesn't have to be aa's, but some form of progression.....hopfully vanguard address's this before launch or maybe they have and i just haven't head of it
read this http://www.vanguardsoh.com/forums/showthread.php?p=1044304#post1044304 then come back and talk to me about the vanguard/soe fiasco.....
Well, I agree with you on that. And I am still playing EQ1, so I have collected a few AAs in my time. They've gotten easier for me to get now, but I do remember agonizing over some of my choices once upon a time-- should I go with offensive or defensive AAs first, for instance. Unlike many of my fellow SKs at the time, I went with the defensive AAs first because I was THE MT for the little alliance I was in. And I took some teasing for it, too, even though I could tank a lot of those guys under the table. I started another SK, now level 66, and it's just a little anticlimactic when you realize that you can have it all, and without all that much effort, ya know?
It might be interesting to have progressive quests that make new skills or abilities available. AA-type abilities might be good too, if they are planned as part of progression from the start. Just as an example, I think some AA abilities in EQ1 would have been better made as a one-time quest reward, or part of a line of progessive quests. For instance, wouldn't Mass Group Buff for various buffing classes be something better "learned" from doing some sort of quest, or maybe as a reward for finishing some encounter against a particular raid boss, rather than something that you have to grind away at for 9AAs? And what about Endless Quiver for rangers? Pet Hold for all the pet classes? Those are just things that it seems there could be a better approach to than making people just grind out more experience, since they are "no brainer" choices. In the case of Pet Hold, that helped pet classes become viable for raids-- why not just give it out as a max level skill? I dunno.
Eh, I don't know if I am explaining my thought very well.
I don't mind a very gear oriented game, myself, or I wouldn't keep playing melee and hybrid classes in EQ, but I have to agree that some other sort of progress when you hit max level does make the game more interesting and keeps you involved in your character development. What other kinds of progression could there be? That would be interesting to explore... Hmmm... I may take that question to the Developers Corner.
...
This is where I draw the line: __________________.
Im against both Instancing and item decay.
thay both make games not fun.
Ok, Ill throw in my two coppers. I love RPG, I love MMOG. Ive played EQ since day 1, played MUDs before that. I am currently playing WoW simply because EQ has so little left to offer me and I dont have to think to play it.
Instances have their place. Sure its fun to moblize, MYA tot he riad target, but this also lets people put the mob on farm status, or bottleneck other guilds. I remeber we farmed LMM in the PoP expansion of EQ just to keep other guilds from getting access to the Elemental Planes, so they could not compete wiht us for loot there. There was no skill in this, it sucked killing that same mob over and over again. Instancing was an idea to keep killjoys like this out. So instead of saying "No instances!!!1!" How about think of why they were put in and give a solution?
Travel time, Early EQ WAY to long! I remember when Kunark first came out and spending 45 min on the boat to get there. I love to play games, but if you want my money on a monthly basis, give me something more productive to do with 45 min of MY playing time!
My first online game, Gemstone3 had no level cap. If you wanted to gind and find a ways to get exp you did, it was hard. Some people resorted to collecting trash and throwing it away, but you got exp and that was that. what it really boils down to is in any adventure game there should be no cap, there is always room to grow. It dosent have to be an AA system. I like what I have read about learnign skills off mobs, I am sure that someoen out there can figure out a way ti make this work in a fashion to give higher levels somethign to strive for than just gear, I have that in WoW, give me something NEW!
PvP. Dont see the point, dosent make you better in the PvE world, which is my thing. I do play WoW on a PvP server and the only thing I would like to see is a method to get rid of griefers, thos immature little 13 year olds who have nothing better to do with their time than to make sure youdont spend yours productively with what ever task you are trying to accomplish. I like the idea of Battlegrounds in WoW, but what about everywhere else. I woudl like to see a protection go up that if Johnny kills Tommy X times in X minuites, Tommy becomes "immune" to Johnny for a cetrain amount of time. that way the people who like to cause the grief, will get some of their own when their attacks dont work.
I'm against several things on the list. I'd say my big no-no's for a MMORPG are item-decay, permadeath, and lack of endgame. I played WoW to 60 and simply ran out of stuff to do. I've got great equipment, but raiding is boring and I prefer UT for PvP by far. AA levels would at least allow me to improve my character somewhat.
Hopefully Vanguard doesn't allow players to cap and then expect them to have fun for eternity just PvPing or EQ-style raiding.
I voted for the unreal travel time. The reason for this is because when I went into beta for WOW there was no zone waiting. When I left beta and went back to my EQ account and started playing I realized I hated the 15 minutes for me to get through 3 zones to get to where I wanted to be and I immediately deleted my account and went and bought WOW. If I have maybe an hour to play and I have to use 1/4 of it trying to get to a place, that kills the whole game.
Necrotank
I'm hearing a lot of good talk here!
I voted instance for the same reasons as others.
The kill x amount of y quests do get a bit repeditive... It'd be cool if they had those quests, but made them unusually hard.. Or just implement some really hard quests at low levels.. Like kill 10 kobolds in 1 minute.. Something to make you genuinely interested in what you're trying to accomplish. I dunno it'd be different anyway.
camp/down times are rather lame i think.. Perhaps counter this by making all combat harder? more risk involved, more strategy involved (as opposed to time) just a thought
For some reason, long leveling time doesn't bother me too much. Maybe, as a lot of you said, I like the idea of knowing that i can still advance my character. I played EQ from the beginning up until a year or two ago, and I never reached the max level possible (of course, i had 5 level 55+ chars but still :P). I played WoW from the beginning also and got to level 60 in .. 6 months or so i guess (if that long).. and then got bored with the game's lack of high-end play. I will admit EQ's leveling was a bit slow for my taste. Hopefuly the exp rate in Vanguard will be somewhere between EQ and WoW. I don't think the exp rate matters so much, rather it's whether or not there's still ways of advancing your char.
ya know you runscape player ruin a good mmorpg, yo uknow that the killing X amount of enemies should be avaioded but the insane amount of ppl voting for it is from the slayer skill.
dont it, hate it
Alot of nice talk here, hopefully some of the devs look at this topic. I just really want this to become a good game, as you all know all to well =p did anyone read the posts from the beta testers ITS FREAKING AMAZING thank god they have done so much right, and very little to speak of being wrong.
I am against Long Camp Times. I hated the way you would have to camp a spawn point in EQ1 and kill placeholder after placeholder in hopes that a named would spawn that you needed. It never made any sense to me how after 10s or even 100s of mobs had been killed at that one spot a named would just decide to make its appearance. In EQ1 my main was a Monk and I endured a 16.5 hour camp to get Raster. 16.5 hours of mindnumbing useless killing to get one drop is insane.
Also I hope that key mobs that are needed for quests do not have days between respawn. I knew Paladins who were never able to get their 1.0 epics done due to having to kill a dragon that had a 5 day respawn and that would not always drop the item they needed for their quest.