The first iteration of the first draft of combat in an Alpha build of the precursor to EQN.
Doom and gloom of an EPIC scale!
Anytime developers in previous games have released something for the players to experience it has always changed very little by the time the game ships.
Name 1 game that has been release like Landmark and EQN. Where on an almost minute by minute basis there is direct contact between the developers and the participants in Alpha and Beta. Where things are and will continue to radically change based on iteration and feedback. Where there are regular discussions on the direction on the games development.
it doesn't matter if it was beta, alpha, or pre-alpha. If the developers have decided to put it in the hands of the players, then they think its pretty good, fun and enjoyable.
And it IS good, fun and enjoyable but in no way is if the final system. Hell, in Landmark we have still not got the variations possible through having 7 different types of combat, the 40 starting character classes, the numerous weapons and all the skills that come with the weapons.
Your statement is about as accurate as claiming 100% of an iceberg floats on top of the water.
The first iteration of the first draft of combat in an Alpha build of the precursor to EQN.
Doom and gloom of an EPIC scale!
Exactly how much of this core element do you think is going to change?
Based on how the core systems already introduced into Landmark have changed through iteration and feedback I would say it will change a large amount.
And when the next element is released and people say "...Meh...nothing special here", and the next one after that, and the one following that...........
Until you get to a point where you put all the pieces together and realise that the system is more then the individual parts. You are of course making an assumption that you are the norm and that each iteration isn't an improvement on the previous part, something you seem to consistently do...make baseless assumptions.
When do you start looking at what IS instead of what might never be?
Each iteration is what it is. When the game is realised then you could call it finished but even then iteration improves on it.
YOU don't like it. Many do. Perhaps the game is just not for you and you should waste your time elsewhere, like playing the perfect game whatever you think that is.
Until they release a video that truly does show something worthy of this hype, then I'll take a serious look. Single player RPG combat in an MMORPG? Well, OK, it can certainly work, but it's not really impressive.
I am making a leap here but I honestly think you are the type of person who, even if the game were perfect, would stick to your guns and rage and fume about it just because that is how you are.
Let those of us that like it enjoy it while you and all the other doubters slink away into a corner somewhere and play some other perfect game.
I wouldn't want you to keep moaning about Landmark and EN and not spend your time playing something that might cheer you up.
As it's F2P I will not invest one dime into Landmark. Maybe I will try it out when it's finished. My guess is that I will do the same with EQN, as combat doesn't look so interesting and fun as I hoped for. It will be the first time I will not buy an EQ game. It looks I will have more fun with singleplayer games the coming years. However I wish them good luck with their console based games.
Originally posted by jircris really people, you complain about something that was JUST added to a BUILDING and exploration game.....get over your self's i mean honestly its not going to be perfect considering the game is still in an alpha phase.
My thinking as well, if this was a combat oriented game like warcraft or actually EQnext, then i might be on their side, but It's a combat system they added to a game that's got pretty much nothing to do with combat. Like i said before, to expect a mind blowing combat system for a game about construction, crafting and exploratation is a bit silly imho
All we know for certain is it's going to be action combat.
I'll tell you what... I like the quality of the Youtube™ video. The intro music was a really nice touch. The voice of Mr. Zoran from the Teddy Bear clan has a nice deep almost commanding voice to carry us through the video. They got at least a year to make improvements!
Originally posted by jircris really people, you complain about something that was JUST added to a BUILDING and exploration game.....get over your self's i mean honestly its not going to be perfect considering the game is still in an alpha phase.
My thinking as well, if this was a combat oriented game like warcraft or actually EQnext, then i might be on their side, but It's a combat system they added to a game that's got pretty much nothing to do with combat. Like i said before, to expect a mind blowing combat system for a game about construction, crafting and exploratation is a bit silly imho
All we know for certain is it's going to be action combat.
You might be right if Georgeson didn't keep telling us how we were witnessing the making of EQN with landmark.
You might be right if Georgeson didn't keep telling us how we were witnessing the making of EQN with landmark.
Heavy emphasis on MAKING not on FINISHED. As I have mentioned, this is the first iteration of a first draft combat system, in the Alpha phase of a game preceding the EQN game. Even if you ignore the EQN part of the process there is still a long way to go.
It is the same problem with the discussions about Storybricks. Too many people dismissing something before it is even a finished or even half finished product based on faulty or incomplete information.
You might be right if Georgeson didn't keep telling us how we were witnessing the making of EQN with landmark.
Heavy emphasis on MAKING not on FINISHED. As I have mentioned, this is the first iteration of a first draft combat system, in the Alpha phase of a game preceding the EQN game. Even if you ignore the EQN part of the process there is still a long way to go.
It is the same problem with the discussions about Storybricks. Too many people dismissing something before it is even a finished or even half finished product based on faulty or incomplete information.
Because speculating on what could be is pretty useless. More constructive to comment on what is shown.
Honestly not sure what everyone was expecting. They said from the start (even showed us combat at the reveal) that it would be action oriented. Even threw out MOBAs as a comparison, SMITE being the easiest to compare.
Very simplified version of what we'll see in EQN, but looks and feels pretty good to me considering the context. Then again I've tired of standing still clicking 50 buttons. Glad my time with TF2 and Smite will come in handy.
Hopefully now that some of those already upset with the art style and other features of EQN can move on and find something better matching what they want in a game. No need to linger.
Originally posted by cheyane Looking at combat in Landmark means Everquest Next is not for me . These types of action games is out. Well one less game for me to follow.
Same for me. All that flipping and weaving back and forth almost mad me throw up. Might as well play Halo or something. Not the game for me sorry.
You can - I'm sure that current Landmark combat is fun to some.
I tried it and - it just feels crappy to me, yes I know that this is alpha combat - but I have to call it on how it is "now" - not what it *might* be a year from now.
Played PvP for a couple of hours - never went back
To me this combat is pretty much 100% proof that EQN is squarely aimed at the console market - SoE has no interest in appealing to EQ1/EQ2 players at all.
Basic attacks may be via right click/left click but there is a set of eight abilities from what we're told so far so not all will be. In fact, with a reticle based system there may be ten active abilities instead of eight. Who knows.
You might be right if Georgeson didn't keep telling us how we were witnessing the making of EQN with landmark.
Heavy emphasis on MAKING not on FINISHED. As I have mentioned, this is the first iteration of a first draft combat system, in the Alpha phase of a game preceding the EQN game. Even if you ignore the EQN part of the process there is still a long way to go.
It is the same problem with the discussions about Storybricks. Too many people dismissing something before it is even a finished or even half finished product based on faulty or incomplete information.
Because speculating on what could be is pretty useless. More constructive to comment on what is shown.
Speculating on what could be is not pointless. Especially when what is being discussed has been detailed and the roadmap laid out. It is the basis for constructing ANYTHING.
People would be correct if they simply added 'NOW' to the end of their statements rather then childishly taking a quick look and just throwing the toys out the pram.
I have no problem with people asking 'how' could something be achieved but I have no time for people that state something is impossible when they don't even know what stage of the design process the thing they are discussing is in.
You might be right if Georgeson didn't keep telling us how we were witnessing the making of EQN with landmark.
Heavy emphasis on MAKING not on FINISHED. As I have mentioned, this is the first iteration of a first draft combat system, in the Alpha phase of a game preceding the EQN game. Even if you ignore the EQN part of the process there is still a long way to go.
It is the same problem with the discussions about Storybricks. Too many people dismissing something before it is even a finished or even half finished product based on faulty or incomplete information.
Because speculating on what could be is pretty useless. More constructive to comment on what is shown.
Speculating on what could be is not pointless. Especially when what is being discussed has been detailed and the roadmap laid out. It is the basis for constructing ANYTHING.
People would be correct if they simply added 'NOW' to the end of their statements rather then childishly taking a quick look and just throwing the toys out the pram.
I have no problem with people asking 'how' could something be achieved but I have no time for people that state something is impossible when they don't even know what stage of the design process the thing they are discussing is in.
I agree with this and at the same time have no problem with people taking things at face value as long as they do it on both ends. One can, but shouldn't, say this is horrible because of X, Y and Z in comparison to a fully featured system when in reality it is because of the alpha condition, and at the same time say "well you can't say what improvements will be, only what it is now."
Does it work from a technical standpoint?
Are hit boxes correct?
Do damage modifiers work as intended?
These are the types of questions that should be asked if we are only taking the combat at face value. If someone doesn't like it because the fundamental design, such as the reticle targeting, that makes complete sense as that is a preference and has nothing to do with the game mechanics.
As a side note, just because this combat is contrary to EQ/EQ2 doesn't speak to its appeal to fans of those games. That assumes the preference and opinion of hundreds of thousands of people. Those like myself, for example, have enjoyed both titles and have honestly grown bored with tab combat. Even if others do not share my opinion who's to say they wont enjoy both combat styles? It's misleading to assert a majority on one's side to prove a point without the numbers to back it up, which would be near impossible to get.
Basic attacks may be via right click/left click but there is a set of eight abilities from what we're told so far so not all will be. In fact, with a reticle based system there may be ten active abilities instead of eight. Who knows.
The hotbar abilities are normal which i like. I don't like any attacks being bound to my mouse clicks though. My mouse is for strafing/moving/camera and any hotbar abilities i decide to bind to it. Clicking is for interacting with NPC's, not for combat attacks.
Since when was "spam left click" an interesting and engaging experience? Right, since never.
Sorry guys, this is just ridiculously spammy looking. I don't give a damn about having to lead or aim your attacks, you're still only spamming the same thing.
Feel free to use my referral link for SW:TOR if you want to test out the game. You'll get some special unlocks!
Basic attacks may be via right click/left click but there is a set of eight abilities from what we're told so far so not all will be. In fact, with a reticle based system there may be ten active abilities instead of eight. Who knows.
The hotbar abilities are normal which i like. I don't like any attacks being bound to my mouse clicks though. My mouse is for strafing/moving/camera and any hotbar abilities i decide to bind to it. Clicking is for interacting with NPC's, not for combat attacks.
I am a little confused here. You don't like using attacks that are bound to your mouse. OK. But then you say "My mouse is for.....any hotbar abilities I decide to bind to it." Aren't combat abilities on your hotbar? So you are saying you want the ability to use combat abilites from your hotbar to bind to your mouse but you don't like that? What? Do you see the confusion there?
Since when was "spam left click" an interesting and engaging experience? Right, since never.
Sorry guys, this is just ridiculously spammy looking. I don't give a damn about having to lead or aim your attacks, you're still only spamming the same thing.
and thats different to any other game?
in God of War you use the same combos over and over.
in Skyrim you use your weapon/spell over and over again
in Halo you shoot your gun over and over again.
in Dota you use the autoattack/skills over and over again.
in tetris you use the same blocks over and over again.
Originally posted by cheyane Looking at combat in Landmark means Everquest Next is not for me . These types of action games is out. Well one less game for me to follow.
Here's my opinion:
The target audience - vast console market.
It makes sense from a business perspective - SoE's current players are mostly all PC - with EQN they can tap into the console players and gain a whole new playerbase
This is why they have little interest at EQ1/EQ2 players at all - as EQN is a fundamentally different game
EQN is designed for controller play - it's an action game at heart - it will be pretty fun on a PS4 I'm sure, that's probably how I'll play it.
my 2c
You realize this combat is almost identical in style to Trove right? And yet you hail Trove as the second coming constantly. I love Trove too, but I really don't get you sometimes. Why not complain that Trove is too action based and aimed for a console market?
Are you just holding completely different standards because of the EverQuest name? I don't see why a developer can't make completely different type of game from the same IP. If you remember, people complained EQ2 was too different from EQ1 pretty much exactly the way people are complaining about EQN/Landmark now.
Comments
Name 1 game that has been release like Landmark and EQN. Where on an almost minute by minute basis there is direct contact between the developers and the participants in Alpha and Beta. Where things are and will continue to radically change based on iteration and feedback. Where there are regular discussions on the direction on the games development.
And it IS good, fun and enjoyable but in no way is if the final system. Hell, in Landmark we have still not got the variations possible through having 7 different types of combat, the 40 starting character classes, the numerous weapons and all the skills that come with the weapons.
Your statement is about as accurate as claiming 100% of an iceberg floats on top of the water.
Based on how the core systems already introduced into Landmark have changed through iteration and feedback I would say it will change a large amount.
Until you get to a point where you put all the pieces together and realise that the system is more then the individual parts. You are of course making an assumption that you are the norm and that each iteration isn't an improvement on the previous part, something you seem to consistently do...make baseless assumptions.
Each iteration is what it is. When the game is realised then you could call it finished but even then iteration improves on it.
YOU don't like it. Many do. Perhaps the game is just not for you and you should waste your time elsewhere, like playing the perfect game whatever you think that is.
I am making a leap here but I honestly think you are the type of person who, even if the game were perfect, would stick to your guns and rage and fume about it just because that is how you are.
Let those of us that like it enjoy it while you and all the other doubters slink away into a corner somewhere and play some other perfect game.
I wouldn't want you to keep moaning about Landmark and EN and not spend your time playing something that might cheer you up.
My thinking as well, if this was a combat oriented game like warcraft or actually EQnext, then i might be on their side, but It's a combat system they added to a game that's got pretty much nothing to do with combat. Like i said before, to expect a mind blowing combat system for a game about construction, crafting and exploratation is a bit silly imho
All we know for certain is it's going to be action combat.
I'll tell you what... I like the quality of the Youtube™ video. The intro music was a really nice touch. The voice of Mr. Zoran from the Teddy Bear clan has a nice deep almost commanding voice to carry us through the video. They got at least a year to make improvements!
You might be right if Georgeson didn't keep telling us how we were witnessing the making of EQN with landmark.
Heavy emphasis on MAKING not on FINISHED. As I have mentioned, this is the first iteration of a first draft combat system, in the Alpha phase of a game preceding the EQN game. Even if you ignore the EQN part of the process there is still a long way to go.
It is the same problem with the discussions about Storybricks. Too many people dismissing something before it is even a finished or even half finished product based on faulty or incomplete information.
Because speculating on what could be is pretty useless. More constructive to comment on what is shown.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qXecEroiyZQ
Now that is combat...
Honestly not sure what everyone was expecting. They said from the start (even showed us combat at the reveal) that it would be action oriented. Even threw out MOBAs as a comparison, SMITE being the easiest to compare.
Very simplified version of what we'll see in EQN, but looks and feels pretty good to me considering the context. Then again I've tired of standing still clicking 50 buttons. Glad my time with TF2 and Smite will come in handy.
Hopefully now that some of those already upset with the art style and other features of EQN can move on and find something better matching what they want in a game. No need to linger.
Same for me. All that flipping and weaving back and forth almost mad me throw up. Might as well play Halo or something. Not the game for me sorry.
+1 to this comment right here.
Basic attacks may be via right click/left click but there is a set of eight abilities from what we're told so far so not all will be. In fact, with a reticle based system there may be ten active abilities instead of eight. Who knows.
Speculating on what could be is not pointless. Especially when what is being discussed has been detailed and the roadmap laid out. It is the basis for constructing ANYTHING.
People would be correct if they simply added 'NOW' to the end of their statements rather then childishly taking a quick look and just throwing the toys out the pram.
I have no problem with people asking 'how' could something be achieved but I have no time for people that state something is impossible when they don't even know what stage of the design process the thing they are discussing is in.
I agree with this and at the same time have no problem with people taking things at face value as long as they do it on both ends. One can, but shouldn't, say this is horrible because of X, Y and Z in comparison to a fully featured system when in reality it is because of the alpha condition, and at the same time say "well you can't say what improvements will be, only what it is now."
Does it work from a technical standpoint?
Are hit boxes correct?
Do damage modifiers work as intended?
These are the types of questions that should be asked if we are only taking the combat at face value. If someone doesn't like it because the fundamental design, such as the reticle targeting, that makes complete sense as that is a preference and has nothing to do with the game mechanics.
As a side note, just because this combat is contrary to EQ/EQ2 doesn't speak to its appeal to fans of those games. That assumes the preference and opinion of hundreds of thousands of people. Those like myself, for example, have enjoyed both titles and have honestly grown bored with tab combat. Even if others do not share my opinion who's to say they wont enjoy both combat styles? It's misleading to assert a majority on one's side to prove a point without the numbers to back it up, which would be near impossible to get.
The hotbar abilities are normal which i like. I don't like any attacks being bound to my mouse clicks though. My mouse is for strafing/moving/camera and any hotbar abilities i decide to bind to it. Clicking is for interacting with NPC's, not for combat attacks.
Since when was "spam left click" an interesting and engaging experience? Right, since never.
Sorry guys, this is just ridiculously spammy looking. I don't give a damn about having to lead or aim your attacks, you're still only spamming the same thing.
Feel free to use my referral link for SW:TOR if you want to test out the game. You'll get some special unlocks!
I am a little confused here. You don't like using attacks that are bound to your mouse. OK. But then you say "My mouse is for.....any hotbar abilities I decide to bind to it." Aren't combat abilities on your hotbar? So you are saying you want the ability to use combat abilites from your hotbar to bind to your mouse but you don't like that? What? Do you see the confusion there?
Let's party like it is 1863!
and thats different to any other game?
in God of War you use the same combos over and over.
in Skyrim you use your weapon/spell over and over again
in Halo you shoot your gun over and over again.
in Dota you use the autoattack/skills over and over again.
in tetris you use the same blocks over and over again.
i could make this forever....
Herald of innovation, Vanquisher of the old! - Awake a few hours almost everyday!
You realize this combat is almost identical in style to Trove right? And yet you hail Trove as the second coming constantly. I love Trove too, but I really don't get you sometimes. Why not complain that Trove is too action based and aimed for a console market?
Are you just holding completely different standards because of the EverQuest name? I don't see why a developer can't make completely different type of game from the same IP. If you remember, people complained EQ2 was too different from EQ1 pretty much exactly the way people are complaining about EQN/Landmark now.
Yup if you liked Darkfall, you will love this!
Bunny hop, bunny hop. Barrel roll, superman, Bunny hop, bunny hop....... Die!
Whack - A - Mole at its best!!!
FFA Nonconsentual Full Loot PvP ...You know you want it!!