There could be a successful EQ3 provided SOE has learned the lessons of the last 10 MMO years with both EQ and EQII, along with other MMO releases. What this new game will be is hard to call. We'll just have to wait till there is a little more information.
Sony developpers (at least the american ones) are clueless when it comes to MMO, as prooved by EQ2.
The name EverQuest has become infamous and unlikely to attract new players (that's why we see so many licensed MMO lately: easier to grab the noob).
Those 2 facts combined probably means EQ3 will forever remain wishful thinking.
My addiction History: >> EQ1 2000-2004 - Shaman/Bard/Wizard/Monk - nolife raid-whore >> WoW 2004-2009 + Cataclysm for 2 months - hardcore casual >> Current status : done with MMO, too old for that crap.
It has actually been confirmed that EverQuest 3 (or 'EverQuest Next' as it is currently being called) is in early stages of development. The 10th Anniversary EverQuest book has recently been published, written by Rich Waters , the Everquest creative director. In the final pages he says
"So you can see there's a lot to wrestle with as we begin laying the foundation for EverQuest 'Next.' As I write this, we have concept artists and game designers working hard in our studio-taking the lessons of the past, the best parts of the present and the most promising ideas for the future-to bring the world of Norrath to a new generation of players, as well as the dedicated legions of fans who made the EverQuest franchise timeless. I hope we'll see you there."
There is other information in the book, strongly suggesting a console/PC release. This topic is being hotly discussed in the EQ2 forums. Whatever shape it takes, its going to be a long way off. I will be following it closely and hope it turns out well. I have played EQ2 since launch and love it, despite its faults, it is a game I particularly enjoy playing and hope it gets a worthy successor. Any speculation on what the game will contain is just that, wild speculation, I guess we ownt see any hard detail for at least a couple of years. But I do love to specualte and read others speculations, so post on....
backs that up. also when smedly was on jace hall show he mentioned eq3 an consoles or ps3 or further if i recall right.which would mean even more dumbed down game play odds are.what made eq1 great was that it was tough.death was (then) problematic to a player it wasnt just a means to get back to guild lobby.
vanguard could have been a worthy spirtual eq3 but it was changed along the way .an atm if they anouced a eq3 i doubt id play it. eq1 is more than enuff content for me atm.tho graficaly its well behind the curve.its game play is still fun to me.an as a customer thats more important than them makeing another eq.
wow seems to have learned form soes mistakes.their even changeing the core world in the next expansion free.upgrading as they go.eq1 has done that to som starting zones then made those zones les apealing by puting all tehir eggs in the cresent reach basket.
"Civilized men are more discourteous than savages because they know they can be impolite without having their skulls split, as a general thing." Robert E. Howard, The Tower of the Elephant (1933)
I would rephrase that. *An* EQ3 game would be easy. A *sucessful* EQ3 game - well not so easy. Just extending an existing game like Vanguard or any other won't cut it anymore. What is needed to be a really big hit (perhaps not a WOW killer, but at least a bruiser) might end up just too expensive to fund, given that just to equal the amount of programming that older games like WOW, EQ, EQ2 etc etc have would cost 10's of millions - just to get it out of the door, before you make a cent from it.
Why do some people keep thinking to make a game that can be successful takes tons of money above what the last company built?
This is why people get their hopes built up and dashed, because X company announces they spent millions on this/that, and have the experience blah blah blah. People who don't know much about games seem to think "just spend MORE cash" and the game will be good.
Faulty thinking like this really just keeps games in the WoW mold with more and more people thinking "Hmmm.. if we only just spend MORE money.."
You don't have to "equal" the amount of programming older games has. Look at WoW. They are adapting features that are good from other games and retro-fitting them. Heck, Warhammer was nothing but a farm league training ground for Blizzard devs to take things from and incorporate into "Cataclysm". And they'll end up doing it better too.
All games borrow, so there's no need to invent everything from scratch. This "innovation" myth is what has killed all of these big titles who think people just have to have everything different, and then their devs can't deliver because their schemes are too complicated or too bizarre to work.
Games like AION show you just have to make basic mechanics that work and keep your fps at acceptable rates to get people to play. There isn't much "innovation" in AION at all, but it's lining up customers left and right eager to play, in addition to the already 3.5 million they have now.
I always think about an EQ3 but I don't think it is possible that it can (1) get the design which was appealling about EQ1 right and (2) make it appealling to players- new and old. I mean I think: (1) the old fantasy backdrop with kobalds, frogloks, gnolls, giants is still appealling.
(2) Group-camping I think can still be appealling- I don't see rabid dungeon crawls as the newer better model. Soloing however would be a must for any new mmo, how grouping can then be incented with soloing is a challenge.
(3) Compelling dungeons and unique items, is still appealling
(4) The setting and lore of EQ is still appealling.
(5) The extra nerdy details such as having components, research of spells, weight management,keys, having a fire beetle eye to provide light is still appealling.
(6) Distinct, engaging fantasy areas- places like Dragon Necropolis or Velks labs I think is still appealling, capturing player's imaginations instead of being not-another-area where I can fight mobs.
(7) Alt advancement was a winner- that combined with raiding is what keeps people such an old game today. The lure of new abilities and advancements.
The problem, however, is this:
1) Same old classes- you played all out of the old classes, how will the same ones yet again be appealling?
2) The yet again new start from level 1 syndrome. The game has to suck you in that first hour as somehow different from the rest to incent you to keep playing. How would it do that?
3) Art direction- EQ and EQ2 were very different art directions. Even later EQ is a different art direction from it's early start. Making use of much better graphics now combining with what appeal of the first I think would be a challenge.
4) Same old mechanics- Tank-healer-DD. Is that still appealling replicated so many times? I'm not so sure.
5) Same old braindead mobs. Though perhaps things have advanced that something can be different. Your thoughts on the idea of a EQ3?
EQ3 wont have to use the same classes as the first 2 games. You could even make the game classless if you wanted to.
If you want EQ3 to be EQ with modern graphics you really don't need EQ3, you just want SOE to revamp EQs graphic and change the graphical engine. It would still be a massive work but a lot cheaper than a totally new game.
The tank-healer-DPS thing is kinda boring, yes. Guildwars uses a lot better system but I don't see SOE use it.
But the AI could be a lot better.
The question is just if Vanguard isn't really EQ3, it could be. The most likely EQ3 is however a PS3 version of EQ with modern graphics and a different combatsystem closer to DCU. Still, I would buy it.
Originally posted by Omega3 Originally posted by BuzWeaver There could be a successful EQ3 provided SOE has learned the lessons of the last 10 MMO years with both EQ and EQII, along with other MMO releases. What this new game will be is hard to call. We'll just have to wait till there is a little more information.
Sony developpers (at least the american ones) are clueless when it comes to MMO, as prooved by EQ2. The name EverQuest has become infamous and unlikely to attract new players (that's why we see so many licensed MMO lately: easier to grab the noob). Those 2 facts combined probably means EQ3 will forever remain wishful thinking.
Developers are only as good as what their company allows them to be. Everquest may get a good bit of criticism, but SOE is still a viable company and a MMO trend setter. I'm not always in agreement with the direction that SOE goes in, but I have enough respect for the fact that they can make good games when all the right pieces are put together.
The Old Timers Guild Laid back, not so serious, no drama. All about the fun!
www.oldtimersguild.com An opinion should be the result of thought, not a substitute for it. - Jef Mallett
A lot of people call Everquest "generic" because it has the traditional goblins, elves and trolls and such but the original world had character. Norath had a expansive vibe unlike anything before it. The Dark Elf city, the Wood Elf city, the dungeons and world was alive. To do a new EQ requires that EQ not only top the original's lore and scope but to also top more modern games. Freeport in EQ was astounding at first view in 2000. Compare it to the road leading to the Dwarven city in WOW and it pales in comparison. Bring back the original lore, add in new graphics and art direction that conveys a world of danger and exploration and you have a baseline for a great game. When you look at many games now they all do a Forest area, a Frost area, a Dessert area. Nine times out of ten they all look identical. You can do "generic" fantasy and make it look new and exciting with art and lore that trumps those other Elf/Dwarf High Fantasy games.
On the subject of Vanguard, it was close to being EQ3 except it was missing the lore and the "spice" that would've made it seem exciting. I rode from the Dwarf to the Human lands and saw absolutely nothing of interest past the generic cities. The combat was awesome but the animations were horrible. The land looked neat but nothing of interest was happening. EQ1 was exciting because you could round a hill and get stepped on by a Hill Giant or attacked by a Griifin. You could walk up a hill and have a group of Wraiths wax you or find a boat to a far away land. Vanguard had the groundwork with the landscape and the combat being interesting but it lacked the soul that makes a traditional fantasy game stand out even if it follows the same path.
I would love to see EQ3. Many people would love to see a game with a combat upgrade from EQ1 but not the 10000 random attacks of EQ2. Nostalgia could bring many people back to SOE if they could bring out a new Norrath with all those goodies from the first game. Even EQ2 learned the hardway that without the nostalgia of the first game the second game floundered. Their best selling expansions were the ones that brought the old world back. Sadly it was still Norrath 500 years after the gods, after stuff blew up and after the old world faded. I bet there are at least 400,000 people who would spaz to see a new Sleeper or a new Kael or a new Lady Vox set in the original time frame of old EQ but with a nice new shiny package. Those 400,000 will then tell all their WOW friends and LOTR friends and they could see 1 million subscribers easy.
A lot of people call Everquest "generic" because it has the traditional goblins, elves and trolls and such but the original world had character. Norath had a expansive vibe unlike anything before it. The Dark Elf city, the Wood Elf city, the dungeons and world was alive. To do a new EQ requires that EQ not only top the original's lore and scope but to also top more modern games. Freeport in EQ was astounding at first view in 2000. Compare it to the road leading to the Dwarven city in WOW and it pales in comparison. Bring back the original lore, add in new graphics and art direction that conveys a world of danger and exploration and you have a baseline for a great game. When you look at many games now they all do a Forest area, a Frost area, a Dessert area. Nine times out of ten they all look identical. You can do "generic" fantasy and make it look new and exciting with art and lore that trumps those other Elf/Dwarf High Fantasy games. On the subject of Vanguard, it was close to being EQ3 except it was missing the lore and the "spice" that would've made it seem exciting. I rode from the Dwarf to the Human lands and saw absolutely nothing of interest past the generic cities. The combat was awesome but the animations were horrible. The land looked neat but nothing of interest was happening. EQ1 was exciting because you could round a hill and get stepped on by a Hill Giant or attacked by a Griifin. You could walk up a hill and have a group of Wraiths wax you or find a boat to a far away land. Vanguard had the groundwork with the landscape and the combat being interesting but it lacked the soul that makes a traditional fantasy game stand out even if it follows the same path. I would love to see EQ3. Many people would love to see a game with a combat upgrade from EQ1 but not the 10000 random attacks of EQ2. Nostalgia could bring many people back to SOE if they could bring out a new Norrath with all those goodies from the first game. Even EQ2 learned the hardway that without the nostalgia of the first game the second game floundered. Their best selling expansions were the ones that brought the old world back. Sadly it was still Norrath 500 years after the gods, after stuff blew up and after the old world faded. I bet there are at least 400,000 people who would spaz to see a new Sleeper or a new Kael or a new Lady Vox set in the original time frame of old EQ but with a nice new shiny package. Those 400,000 will then tell all their WOW friends and LOTR friends and they could see 1 million subscribers easy.
^ Nicely said. An EQ3, if done right, can be a successful game. It can easily take the top 5 spots in U.S. and have a steady 300-400k subscribers. Remember now Everquest was a phenomenon in the United States mostly, it isn't a well known name around the world unlike Warcraft. So if the developers focus on pleasing the US playerbase and do a good job of building it, it can be a successful game.
It won't reach WoW's numbers, but no game has in the U.S. and I really hate for developers go out to try to shoot for it. To make EQ mass appeal the way WoW is, is to change the game into something that Everquest is not. It would be a mistake, one that has been made by Mark Jacobs/EA Mythic recently with Warhammer. In an effort to mass appeal, they made a game with worse RvR than DAOC (their first successful title), and they've made PvE nothing close to what WoW has to offer. So WAR ended up losing 70%+ of its subscribers within 6 months and closed over half of their servers. That's not a success story, and I can only hope developers learn from that.
EQ3 must find a way to cater to its loyal playerbase, those people that they failed to attract with EQ2. I'm talking about people who always loved EQ1 but just can't find themselves enjoy EQ2. It needs to have strong lore, because one of the big attractions back in the days was picking deities, side with different Gods, and kill Dragons. Not to mention all the different starting racial towns, each with its own look/feel to them.
People these days don't necessarily dislike EQ1, but they do want to see the game get upgraded, sort of getting a face lift. The game has great environmental & npc graphics, they've really improved on the engine. But the character models need to get upgraded so we can have better looking armor. This is one area we all wish would get upgraded, but SOE doesn't want to spend the money to upgrade it. So the hope is to see an EQ3 with upgraded engine/graphics, while keeping the gameplay/lore that people love. I can't say I'm optimistic about this happening, mainly due to the way Smed has been running things these past few years. But you never know, things can always change, and we can always hope.
I think an EQ 3 would be an unwise decision, for all the "shoulda, coulda, wouldas" from eq1 and eq 2.
I mean EQ is about to launch another expansion. EQ 2 i hear is getting exciting as well..
I dont see what you cannot add to these games already instead of start from scratch.
There's always a way...
people these days arent interested in long haul raids. Instanced things, get in get out.
Most of EQ has been rounded out to fit the casual gamer, rather than the long hour dedicated raider.
And if its going to be another item driven game. It's just an arms race for a good 5 years until you get tired of it?
"Tell me what your gamer plays. Show me why you pay. Teach me every single part. I'll be your guide. You are a prisoner. Cash-cowing slows you down. You can change your game. But can't change your mind. No matter what they do."
the Luclin moon was fun. it has a tremendous amount of lore, almost too much.
I would love to see even a single player action adventure of the Luclin Lore.
From Combine Empire to the Vah Shir, the Shissar, Vex Thal and the shades, Khati sha and the grimlings especially.
If SoE made the game smaller, and just expanded on one portion of already written storyline. it would be fantastic.
"Tell me what your gamer plays. Show me why you pay. Teach me every single part. I'll be your guide. You are a prisoner. Cash-cowing slows you down. You can change your game. But can't change your mind. No matter what they do."
Comments
Sony developpers (at least the american ones) are clueless when it comes to MMO, as prooved by EQ2.
The name EverQuest has become infamous and unlikely to attract new players (that's why we see so many licensed MMO lately: easier to grab the noob).
Those 2 facts combined probably means EQ3 will forever remain wishful thinking.
My addiction History:
>> EQ1 2000-2004 - Shaman/Bard/Wizard/Monk - nolife raid-whore
>> WoW 2004-2009 + Cataclysm for 2 months - hardcore casual
>> Current status : done with MMO, too old for that crap.
거북이는 목을 내밀 때 안 움직입니다
multiplayerblog.mtv.com/2008/10/03/sony-online-talks-dc-everquest-massive-action-game/
backs that up. also when smedly was on jace hall show he mentioned eq3 an consoles or ps3 or further if i recall right.which would mean even more dumbed down game play odds are.what made eq1 great was that it was tough.death was (then) problematic to a player it wasnt just a means to get back to guild lobby.
vanguard could have been a worthy spirtual eq3 but it was changed along the way .an atm if they anouced a eq3 i doubt id play it. eq1 is more than enuff content for me atm.tho graficaly its well behind the curve.its game play is still fun to me.an as a customer thats more important than them makeing another eq.
wow seems to have learned form soes mistakes.their even changeing the core world in the next expansion free.upgrading as they go.eq1 has done that to som starting zones then made those zones les apealing by puting all tehir eggs in the cresent reach basket.
an if www.maximumpc.com/article/news/nvidia_ceo_claims_gpu_performance_grow_570x_next_six_years holds true grafics wil be a biger factor in game emrsion.just think where eq would have been if eq was modified with eq2 grafic engine an dev monies poured into it? atm eq1s devs are pulled off eq alot to work on dc online an free realms .
"Civilized men are more discourteous than savages because they know they can be impolite without having their skulls split, as a general thing." Robert E. Howard, The Tower of the Elephant (1933)
This is why people get their hopes built up and dashed, because X company announces they spent millions on this/that, and have the experience blah blah blah. People who don't know much about games seem to think "just spend MORE cash" and the game will be good.
Faulty thinking like this really just keeps games in the WoW mold with more and more people thinking "Hmmm.. if we only just spend MORE money.."
You don't have to "equal" the amount of programming older games has. Look at WoW. They are adapting features that are good from other games and retro-fitting them. Heck, Warhammer was nothing but a farm league training ground for Blizzard devs to take things from and incorporate into "Cataclysm". And they'll end up doing it better too.
All games borrow, so there's no need to invent everything from scratch. This "innovation" myth is what has killed all of these big titles who think people just have to have everything different, and then their devs can't deliver because their schemes are too complicated or too bizarre to work.
Games like AION show you just have to make basic mechanics that work and keep your fps at acceptable rates to get people to play. There isn't much "innovation" in AION at all, but it's lining up customers left and right eager to play, in addition to the already 3.5 million they have now.
"TO MICHAEL!"
EQ 3 = guild wars console mmo
EQ3 wont have to use the same classes as the first 2 games. You could even make the game classless if you wanted to.
If you want EQ3 to be EQ with modern graphics you really don't need EQ3, you just want SOE to revamp EQs graphic and change the graphical engine. It would still be a massive work but a lot cheaper than a totally new game.
The tank-healer-DPS thing is kinda boring, yes. Guildwars uses a lot better system but I don't see SOE use it.
But the AI could be a lot better.
The question is just if Vanguard isn't really EQ3, it could be. The most likely EQ3 is however a PS3 version of EQ with modern graphics and a different combatsystem closer to DCU. Still, I would buy it.
The name EverQuest has become infamous and unlikely to attract new players (that's why we see so many licensed MMO lately: easier to grab the noob).
Those 2 facts combined probably means EQ3 will forever remain wishful thinking.
Developers are only as good as what their company allows them to be. Everquest may get a good bit of criticism, but SOE is still a viable company and a MMO trend setter. I'm not always in agreement with the direction that SOE goes in, but I have enough respect for the fact that they can make good games when all the right pieces are put together.
The Old Timers Guild
Laid back, not so serious, no drama.
All about the fun!
www.oldtimersguild.com
An opinion should be the result of thought, not a substitute for it. - Jef Mallett
A lot of people call Everquest "generic" because it has the traditional goblins, elves and trolls and such but the original world had character. Norath had a expansive vibe unlike anything before it. The Dark Elf city, the Wood Elf city, the dungeons and world was alive. To do a new EQ requires that EQ not only top the original's lore and scope but to also top more modern games. Freeport in EQ was astounding at first view in 2000. Compare it to the road leading to the Dwarven city in WOW and it pales in comparison. Bring back the original lore, add in new graphics and art direction that conveys a world of danger and exploration and you have a baseline for a great game. When you look at many games now they all do a Forest area, a Frost area, a Dessert area. Nine times out of ten they all look identical. You can do "generic" fantasy and make it look new and exciting with art and lore that trumps those other Elf/Dwarf High Fantasy games.
On the subject of Vanguard, it was close to being EQ3 except it was missing the lore and the "spice" that would've made it seem exciting. I rode from the Dwarf to the Human lands and saw absolutely nothing of interest past the generic cities. The combat was awesome but the animations were horrible. The land looked neat but nothing of interest was happening. EQ1 was exciting because you could round a hill and get stepped on by a Hill Giant or attacked by a Griifin. You could walk up a hill and have a group of Wraiths wax you or find a boat to a far away land. Vanguard had the groundwork with the landscape and the combat being interesting but it lacked the soul that makes a traditional fantasy game stand out even if it follows the same path.
I would love to see EQ3. Many people would love to see a game with a combat upgrade from EQ1 but not the 10000 random attacks of EQ2. Nostalgia could bring many people back to SOE if they could bring out a new Norrath with all those goodies from the first game. Even EQ2 learned the hardway that without the nostalgia of the first game the second game floundered. Their best selling expansions were the ones that brought the old world back. Sadly it was still Norrath 500 years after the gods, after stuff blew up and after the old world faded. I bet there are at least 400,000 people who would spaz to see a new Sleeper or a new Kael or a new Lady Vox set in the original time frame of old EQ but with a nice new shiny package. Those 400,000 will then tell all their WOW friends and LOTR friends and they could see 1 million subscribers easy.
I agree with everything in this post.
^ Nicely said. An EQ3, if done right, can be a successful game. It can easily take the top 5 spots in U.S. and have a steady 300-400k subscribers. Remember now Everquest was a phenomenon in the United States mostly, it isn't a well known name around the world unlike Warcraft. So if the developers focus on pleasing the US playerbase and do a good job of building it, it can be a successful game.
It won't reach WoW's numbers, but no game has in the U.S. and I really hate for developers go out to try to shoot for it. To make EQ mass appeal the way WoW is, is to change the game into something that Everquest is not. It would be a mistake, one that has been made by Mark Jacobs/EA Mythic recently with Warhammer. In an effort to mass appeal, they made a game with worse RvR than DAOC (their first successful title), and they've made PvE nothing close to what WoW has to offer. So WAR ended up losing 70%+ of its subscribers within 6 months and closed over half of their servers. That's not a success story, and I can only hope developers learn from that.
EQ3 must find a way to cater to its loyal playerbase, those people that they failed to attract with EQ2. I'm talking about people who always loved EQ1 but just can't find themselves enjoy EQ2. It needs to have strong lore, because one of the big attractions back in the days was picking deities, side with different Gods, and kill Dragons. Not to mention all the different starting racial towns, each with its own look/feel to them.
People these days don't necessarily dislike EQ1, but they do want to see the game get upgraded, sort of getting a face lift. The game has great environmental & npc graphics, they've really improved on the engine. But the character models need to get upgraded so we can have better looking armor. This is one area we all wish would get upgraded, but SOE doesn't want to spend the money to upgrade it. So the hope is to see an EQ3 with upgraded engine/graphics, while keeping the gameplay/lore that people love. I can't say I'm optimistic about this happening, mainly due to the way Smed has been running things these past few years. But you never know, things can always change, and we can always hope.
EQ1-AC1-DAOC-FFXI-L2-EQ2-WoW-DDO-GW-LoTR-VG-WAR-GW2-ESO
I think an EQ 3 would be an unwise decision, for all the "shoulda, coulda, wouldas" from eq1 and eq 2.
I mean EQ is about to launch another expansion. EQ 2 i hear is getting exciting as well..
I dont see what you cannot add to these games already instead of start from scratch.
There's always a way...
people these days arent interested in long haul raids. Instanced things, get in get out.
Most of EQ has been rounded out to fit the casual gamer, rather than the long hour dedicated raider.
And if its going to be another item driven game. It's just an arms race for a good 5 years until you get tired of it?
"Tell me what your gamer plays.
Show me why you pay.
Teach me every single part. I'll be your guide.
You are a prisoner.
Cash-cowing slows you down.
You can change your game.
But can't change your mind.
No matter what they do."
I want EQ3 to be set on the moon (:
the Luclin moon was fun. it has a tremendous amount of lore, almost too much.
I would love to see even a single player action adventure of the Luclin Lore.
From Combine Empire to the Vah Shir, the Shissar, Vex Thal and the shades, Khati sha and the grimlings especially.
If SoE made the game smaller, and just expanded on one portion of already written storyline. it would be fantastic.
"Tell me what your gamer plays.
Show me why you pay.
Teach me every single part. I'll be your guide.
You are a prisoner.
Cash-cowing slows you down.
You can change your game.
But can't change your mind.
No matter what they do."