Howdy, Stranger!

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

When ?.....Its the ONLY important question.

13»

Comments

  • SinjaiSinjai Member Posts: 9
    I hate to be the bearer of horrific news, but the beta will not be released until the fall of 2018 with an official release date of late spring 2019.  Just move along there is nothing to see here.
  • SiugSiug Member UncommonPosts: 1,257
    Originally posted by Rusque
    Remember when EQN won best of show at E3 in June 2013?

    Yup that was pathetic. Probably the 1st time when that prize was given out completely on dev speak.

  • MMOVet74MMOVet74 Member UncommonPosts: 76
    Originally posted by Sinjai
    I hate to be the bearer of horrific news, but the beta will not be released until the fall of 2018 with an official release date of late spring 2019.  Just move along there is nothing to see here.

    Agreed. Most likely 2018, maybe 2019 if some unforeseen technical issues arise. The reason being is the voxel engine (ever wonder why Minecraft has such  shitty nintendo graphics) requires alot of cpu power, especially in large scale pvp battles and  the world  constantly changing, being destroyed, rebuilt,  factions moving, fighting with one another, etc...  They want the game to be accessible to everyone, not just gamers with that latest most powerful gaming pc.  If a gamer with a  3 year old laptop can't run the game that   is  money lost.  

  • RydesonRydeson Member UncommonPosts: 3,852
    Originally posted by MMOVet74
    Originally posted by Sinjai
    I hate to be the bearer of horrific news, but the beta will not be released until the fall of 2018 with an official release date of late spring 2019.  Just move along there is nothing to see here.

    Agreed. Most likely 2018, maybe 2019 if some unforeseen technical issues arise. The reason being is the voxel engine (ever wonder why Minecraft has such  shitty nintendo graphics) requires alot of cpu power, especially in large scale pvp battles and  the world  constantly changing, being destroyed, rebuilt,  factions moving, fighting with one another, etc...  They want the game to be accessible to everyone, not just gamers with that latest most powerful gaming pc.  If a gamer with a  3 year old laptop can't run the game that   is  money lost.  

         My thoughts too..  voxel world is so demanding and imagine a "raid" of 20 or 30 people in a confined area.. I already know that many people have issues just dealing with spell effects,, now add in voxel world, and the lag will be insane..  And voxel distruction is not something you can simply turn off like spell effects.. LOL  I agree it will be YEARS before EQN is ready, and maybe there might be enough customers with powerful computers to run it..  

  • MothanosMothanos Member UncommonPosts: 1,910

    My biggest fear is the free to play part or better said the cash shop.
    I rather pay a subscription, but as seen in Archeage it grants you peanuts compared to pay to win / pay to advance a years worth of effort in weeks / months.

    I hope there will one day be a good balance between free to play / subscription / cash shop.
    But lately the focus is on cash shop as studio's found out that the big $$$ is made there and not with people paying a monthly sub.

    Whales capable of spending thousands of dollars / Euro's worth a week or month is something extremely damaging for the ingame population when the cash shop offers pay to skip / pay to win items / progression.

    This is why i like Eve Online so much as in my opinion there isnt a better system invented then CCP offers to this day.
    keep cash shop cosmetic and keep all the other trash out of there.

    My biggest fear for 2015 and beyond is the cash shop mmo studio's are abusing to milk out the playerbase and killing off any sense of subscription combined with time / effort put in the game.

  • NanfoodleNanfoodle Member EpicPosts: 7,746
    My guess is sometime 2 or 3rd 1/4 of 2015 we will see some founders pack for EQN and the game will release 4th 1/4 of 2015 maybe 1st 1/4 of 2016. But thats just my guess =-) Watching the live streams the devs have said lots of little things like the plan was only for 1 starting city but fans wanted more so their will be many starting cities. Lots of things that expanded the first plans for EQN. This sort of thing added a lot of development time. Landmark was another side note that turned into a whole MMO of its own taking dev time as well. That was good and bad but again, its more time. In the end seeing EQN launch in 2016 would not be a shock. Good thing to as I am really enjoying WoD =-D



  • NanfoodleNanfoodle Member EpicPosts: 7,746
    Originally posted by Mothanos

    My biggest fear is the free to play part or better said the cash shop.
    I rather pay a subscription, but as seen in Archeage it grants you peanuts compared to pay to win / pay to advance a years worth of effort in weeks / months.

    I hope there will one day be a good balance between free to play / subscription / cash shop.
    But lately the focus is on cash shop as studio's found out that the big $$$ is made there and not with people paying a monthly sub.

    Whales capable of spending thousands of dollars / Euro's worth a week or month is something extremely damaging for the ingame population when the cash shop offers pay to skip / pay to win items / progression.

    This is why i like Eve Online so much as in my opinion there isnt a better system invented then CCP offers to this day.
    keep cash shop cosmetic and keep all the other trash out of there.

    My biggest fear for 2015 and beyond is the cash shop mmo studio's are abusing to milk out the playerbase and killing off any sense of subscription combined with time / effort put in the game.

     

    SoE F2P is not like most F2P games. Think of it as a really long trial that adds so many incentives to sub that most do. The few that dont have to work so much harder to get where sub players do that this is not something that fits the majority. The end game community in SoE games normally sub. 



  • Lord.BachusLord.Bachus Member RarePosts: 9,629

    The world hasnt been developed yet... because large parts of the world will come from what players create in Landmark... they outsourced that part.

    The tactical layer of the combat system is non excisting, yet they know they need to develop that

    Many of the required game systemes are still in early development

     

    Since this project has so many new things, it will take much more time then expected,,.. thats the nature of these things.  Developers are allways optimistic in planning thing, because the more optimisme there is, the easier they will get the required resources to start of the project.

     

    So dont expect to see this game in 2015

    and highly doubt 2016

    but expect 2017 when you are an optimist

    And 2018 if you are a pessimist

     

    Landmark however will go into alfa soon...   landmark is required for creating the main game both for creating money and creating resources...   Landmark however is not an MMO, it is minecraft on steroids...

    Best MMO experiences : EQ(PvE), DAoC(PvP), WoW(total package) LOTRO (worldfeel) GW2 (Artstyle and animations and worlddesign) SWTOR (Story immersion) TSW (story) ESO (character advancement)

  • IsilithTehrothIsilithTehroth Member UncommonPosts: 454
    Originally posted by Nanfoodle
    Originally posted by Mothanos

    My biggest fear is the free to play part or better said the cash shop.
    I rather pay a subscription, but as seen in Archeage it grants you peanuts compared to pay to win / pay to advance a years worth of effort in weeks / months.

    I hope there will one day be a good balance between free to play / subscription / cash shop.
    But lately the focus is on cash shop as studio's found out that the big $$$ is made there and not with people paying a monthly sub.

    Whales capable of spending thousands of dollars / Euro's worth a week or month is something extremely damaging for the ingame population when the cash shop offers pay to skip / pay to win items / progression.

    This is why i like Eve Online so much as in my opinion there isnt a better system invented then CCP offers to this day.
    keep cash shop cosmetic and keep all the other trash out of there.

    My biggest fear for 2015 and beyond is the cash shop mmo studio's are abusing to milk out the playerbase and killing off any sense of subscription combined with time / effort put in the game.

     

    SoE F2P is not like most F2P games. Think of it as a really long trial that adds so many incentives to sub that most do. The few that dont have to work so much harder to get where sub players do that this is not something that fits the majority. The end game community in SoE games normally sub. 

    Like Planetside 2? Where you can buy a gun that is overpowered instead of grinding 2 weeks for it? Or where their main focus is the cashshop while everything else got put on the back burner? There is a reason most Ps1 vets don't play planetside 2. Even after 2 years it still is a shell of a game. A fragfest fps with no incentive to play other than killing. I made multitudes of posts on how to make the game better and in similar fashion to the first game, but all they really want is the casuals who spend money in the shop.

     

    SoE seems to always destroy a game on way or another and ruin IPS. Dcuo for instance could have been great, but they went the wrong route after fxing all the exploits and bugs. H1z1 and EQ next could also be great, but their target audience is causals in a non casual demographic genre.

    MurderHerd

  • BearKnightBearKnight Member CommonPosts: 461
    Originally posted by delete5230

    I asked here about four months ago, and nine months ago.

    Why is this game even advertised when nothing even indicates a release date ?

    " When " is the only important question as far as I could see.  We have a lot of speculation to mechanics but very few facts.  Why even guess at this point......Why is EverQuest Next even on the list ?

    - Is it Sony Online or mmorpg.com that is responsible for this hype ?......I'm kind of leaning towards mmorpg for even adding it. 

     

     

    Advertising now is like Ford announcing there will be a 2027 Ford Mustang. Then stopping all announcements after that statement !

    "When" does not matter considering the audience for EQ:Next is NOT the EQ audience, but the "Mainstream" World of Warcraft audience.

     

    They've said it in many interviews that EQ:Next is not aimed at Everquest fans. Which means they're essentially left to rot in EQ1 and EQ2.

     

    SOE are also in the processing of retconning a LOT of the Everquest Lore and universe to completely redo the "Everquest" franchise in a mainstream "casual" F2P "experience".

     

    In essence, a pile of dirt with no replayability. 

     

    I'll be over here waiting for EQ3.

  • AlleinAllein Member RarePosts: 2,088
    Originally posted by Lord.Bachus

    The world hasnt been developed yet... because large parts of the world will come from what players create in Landmark... they outsourced that part.

    A lot of EQN will be procedurally generated, they're supposed to have a early version soon in Landmark. Players are submitting designs to help influence EQN a bit and earn a chance to have some of their work in EQN, but players aren't literally building EQN from the ground up. 20 random buildings =/= mmorpg world.

    Landmark however will go into alfa soon... 

    ?

     

  • AlleinAllein Member RarePosts: 2,088
    Originally posted by BearKnight

    "When" does not matter considering the audience for EQ:Next is NOT the EQ audience, but the "Mainstream" World of Warcraft audience.

    I'll agree that they are going for the "mainstream" but I think that is much larger then WoW. EQN is nothing like WoW or EQ, which are closer to each other then EQN is to either.

    SOE is a company and if they want to be a big name and have some nice profits to pay for their games, they need to go after gamers, not niche groups.

    They could of made EQ3 and pulled in some of the ex-EQ players and some of the current ones. Then they would be left with 3 meh games, maybe 1 doing well and 2 not so well, but overall not a huge deal. Making EQN a big step towards mass appeal, they have the potential to keep 2 games in the meh group and have a much larger profit machine. I can't fault them for wanting to do well.

    What I find funny is people fail to realize that EQ3 would be even closer to WoW if it continued where EQ/EQ2 have left off. There is no way they would of went back to 1999 and undone all the changes they've made over the last 15 years. World of Norrath doesn't sound too exciting to me.

    They've said it in many interviews that EQ:Next is not aimed at Everquest fans. Which means they're essentially left to rot in EQ1 and EQ2.

    I think it is less about not aiming at the fans themselves but at those that want EQ/EQ2 mechanics specifically. I'm a gamer first, EQ fan second. If people choose to limit themselves, that's on them. SOE or any company can't be expected to reproduce the same product if it doesn't prove to be successful or at least not to what they are aiming for.

    The EQ I loved died 10+ years ago with expansions that changed the game a lot. EQ/EQ2 today are closer to WoW then original EQ.

    Those that are able to play that same done to death system still have plenty of options, but some are looking for something outside the typical design.

    There is no reason someone that enjoyed EQ/EQ2 couldn't also enjoy EQN or any game for that matter. We set our own limits.

    In essence, a pile of dirt with no replayability. 

    You actually are right that EQN won't have a ton of replay value. Which is a great thing. Unlike say EQ or WoW where you play from 1-100 or whatever and then "beat" the game and either grind/farm the same crap forever or get to start a new character to do it all again, EQN will actually be about an endless adventure.

    The world, lore, story, etc will be ongoing and someone starting 5 years down the line won't be doing the exact same thing as what others did previously.

    Procedurally generated content and the AI are supposed to allow for a bit more dynamic world then what we've had before with the typical time/static "dynamic" content of some games.

    So if you find doing the same thing over and over exciting, then ya I guess EQN would be bad and actually progression forever without an "end game" to "beat" would be considered dirt...

    At least that's my take. For me, replay value assumes there is a start and end and a reason to keep playing after reaching the end. If there is no end, then there would just be play ability, no "re" needed. EQN seems to have potentially endless reasons to keep playing. Then again it could be really terrible, only time will tell.

    Depending on how creative they get, if someone decides to start a new character 5 years in, there is a decent chance they would be playing an entirely different experience, adventure, game. Instead of "Oh boy I get to do the same 1000 quests again!" To me this is true replay value.

     

  • RydesonRydeson Member UncommonPosts: 3,852
    Originally posted by Allein
    Originally posted by BearKnight

    "When" does not matter considering the audience for EQ:Next is NOT the EQ audience, but the "Mainstream" World of Warcraft audience.

    I'll agree that they are going for the "mainstream" but I think that is much larger then WoW. EQN is nothing like WoW or EQ, which are closer to each other then EQN is to either.

    SOE is a company and if they want to be a big name and have some nice profits to pay for their games, they need to go after gamers, not niche groups.

    They could of made EQ3 and pulled in some of the ex-EQ players and some of the current ones. Then they would be left with 3 meh games, maybe 1 doing well and 2 not so well, but overall not a huge deal. Making EQN a big step towards mass appeal, they have the potential to keep 2 games in the meh group and have a much larger profit machine. I can't fault them for wanting to do well.

    What I find funny is people fail to realize that EQ3 would be even closer to WoW if it continued where EQ/EQ2 have left off. There is no way they would of went back to 1999 and undone all the changes they've made over the last 15 years. World of Norrath doesn't sound too exciting to me.  

    You mean your definition of mainstream.. Can you even define mainstream, I can't.. If you want to look at pure numbers in MMORPG,  Blizzard leads the way and defines mainstream, which is NOT the direction EQN is following.. Or do you mean mainstream MOBA "esport" like LoL game?  You seem to be tunnel focused on YOUR DESIRES, while trying to evade and refute others, and then try to call it facts..

    Yep, World of Norrath doesn't sound too exciting to you, but League of Norrath does?  uhh hummm.. Like I said, it's all about YOUR taste of esport you are trying to save, at the expense of what others might want.. I don't think your genre is as big as YOU want it to be.. but good luck.. 

    They've said it in many interviews that EQ:Next is not aimed at Everquest fans. Which means they're essentially left to rot in EQ1 and EQ2.

    I think it is less about not aiming at the fans themselves but at those that want EQ/EQ2 mechanics specifically. I'm a gamer first, EQ fan second. If people choose to limit themselves, that's on them. SOE or any company can't be expected to reproduce the same product if it doesn't prove to be successful or at least not to what they are aiming for.

    The EQ I loved died 10+ years ago with expansions that changed the game a lot. EQ/EQ2 today are closer to WoW then original EQ.

    Those that are able to play that same done to death system still have plenty of options, but some are looking for something outside the typical design.

    There is no reason someone that enjoyed EQ/EQ2 couldn't also enjoy EQN or any game for that matter. We set our own limits. 

    Again, you admit that EQ "DIED" 10 years ago with all the changes.. and I agree, PoP expansion was the start of the end for me..  Too many radical changes.. So if YOU refuse to play current EQ because of changes, why should others settle and play EQN because of their changes?  You Sir have a VERY DOUBLE standard, of do as I say, not as I do.. 

    In essence, a pile of dirt with no replayability. 

    You actually are right that EQN won't have a ton of replay value. Which is a great thing. Unlike say EQ or WoW where you play from 1-100 or whatever and then "beat" the game and either grind/farm the same crap forever or get to start a new character to do it all again, EQN will actually be about an endless adventure.

    The world, lore, story, etc will be ongoing and someone starting 5 years down the line won't be doing the exact same thing as what others did previously.

    And you think that is a good thing?  I being a devils advocate can give plenty of examples how that is a bad thing.. Just look at a simple example of a Rally Call..  The goal is to build Halas, so it gets built in the first 3 months, which means that any new player after comes online afterwards MISSES out on that fun.. Right?  Get the idea where this is heading..  It is impossible for new players to every experience what they missed and eventually down the road there will be NO ROOM left.. At this point devs have to create 'new' land, or find a way to recycle what they already have.. OOPS, but that is against your desires of replayability.. However, if you keep on creating new land, then you run into the same problem many games ran into, EMPTY zones, and a world too big to enjoy..

    Procedurally generated content and the AI are supposed to allow for a bit more dynamic world then what we've had before with the typical time/static "dynamic" content of some games. 

    I don't think you quite understand what procedural content is. EQN is not a game that creates itself.. FYI..  It's scripted dynamic AI simulation that allows for player interaction, that influences the outcome of those events.. Nothing more, nothing less.. It's very much similar to what Rift and GW2 already does, but bigger (and surely not proven to work).. That has yet to be seen.. The only thing procedural about it is the world respawning all the holes players will be digging..  When people kill Mr, Smith, he will respawn with the exact same profile.. He never changes.. Only the land will change..

    So if you find doing the same thing over and over exciting, then ya I guess EQN would be bad and actually progression forever without an "end game" to "beat" would be considered dirt... 

    And you don't think the feuding between the dark elves and whoever isn't going to be the same thing..  Fighting over the same dirt like a tug of war.?? 

    At least that's my take. For me, replay value assumes there is a start and end and a reason to keep playing after reaching the end. If there is no end, then there would just be play ability, no "re" needed. EQN seems to have potentially endless reasons to keep playing. Then again it could be really terrible, only time will tell.

    Depending on how creative they get, if someone decides to start a new character 5 years in, there is a decent chance they would be playing an entirely different experience, adventure, game. Instead of "Oh boy I get to do the same 1000 quests again!" To me this is true replay value.

     Yep, and will never be able to relive that experience of building Halas and earning rewards for it.. Oooops.. instead they "have" to build Rivervale, in which they have no desire to earn faction with the Halflings.. Now your idea doesn't sound so good, does it?  Can I suggest you look at things from ALL angles and assume both the worst and best in everything and minimize the damage it causes.. You are very optimistic with EQN, and that is OK, but please reframe in putting down others that don't view the Norrath world their YOUR eyes..

    As a devils advocate in everything I do, I always assume things will NEVER go as planned (Murphy's Law), and I prepare for it.. EQN is no different.. This reminds me so much of all the hype and excitement that SWG and SWToR generated before their release, and it became clear many bugs and issues destroyed all the optimistic hype that was falsely created.. 

    Some of us like replayability.. hence golf courses.. Sure over the years, a course might be tweaked, but for the most part, players can depend on their stability to be the same.. Same with any hobby or game..  You are coming off with the tone you want most of the game to change on a regular basis..  To the point that it's completely different each time you log on.. I don't like that, nor want that, and I'm sure that is NOT MAINSTREAM..   Happy Holidays

  • StormyYammaschitaStormyYammaschita Member UncommonPosts: 24
    Originally posted by Vrika

    It's not the destination, it's the journey.

    The game will fail to meet your expectations to be the dream MMO you've been looking for, just like every other game released after WoW. The sensible thing to do would be to enjoy the wait, because it's going to be the only time you're happy with the game.

    ...true!

    SitH happens

  • Cramit845Cramit845 Member UncommonPosts: 395

      I feel like 'when' is a very valid question but a bit early.  Although I will agree an "expected" year of release shouldn't be too hard for them to come up with. I could definitely see that they may have given information a bit too early.

      That being said, I'm still a bit optimistic about the game.  I think it will have some good points but again will fall short of what many people are hoping for.  Personally I would prefer more of a focus on a EQ1 style game but I realize that that would be a possible risk on their part.  Even though EQ1 is one of the longest running MMO's and I believe the MMO with the most expansions, making a game that is based on that game would still be a risk because the community isn't as big as the mainstream or wow communities.  Since they have already made choices for current games and EQ:N that move in the direction of what I would guess those two communities would like, I would say the safe bet is that a lot of parts of the game aren't really going to make me happy.  Choices like wowish graphics for EQ:N, ! questing for EQ2, and obviously statements from the studio stating it will not be aimed towards the folks that made the EQ IP as big as it is now.

       All that being said I'm still looking forward to it.  As another poster said, I think EQ:N will live and die by the Storybricks AI.  If they can't get that to work right than a lot of folks will leave it especially if they just put in more ! quests to compensate.  Time will tell all, that's for sure.

       Some information on release would be nice but I agree that it's so early, it's doubtful we'll get anything worth believing for awhile.  The team seems content to just push Landmark stuff as much as possible and even if that's supposed to help EQ:N development or explain EQ:N development, I think a lot of people are like me and don't give a damn, we just want info on EQ:N without the Landmark BS.  That doesn't mean you can't research some info but I would say there still isn't a ton out there to eat up.  Release date won't be known for awhile and with good reason, but I would say more actual info on EQ:N without needing to listen to crap about Landmark would help the hype a lot more.

       Otherwise it's a wait and see scenario.  There are enough games out and on the cusp of getting into alpha's/beta's that I don't think it's that big of an issue unless you've completely fallen for the hype.

      

  • Arcane4176Arcane4176 Member UncommonPosts: 61

    Why even care unless you like being robbed for every penny you earned by the worst company to ever nickel and dime the genre.

     

  • AlleinAllein Member RarePosts: 2,088
    Originally posted by Arcane4176

    Why even care unless you like being robbed for every penny you earned by the worst company to ever nickel and dime the genre.

    Very true, terrible companies coming into my home and forcing me to play and pay for their products. 

  • AlleinAllein Member RarePosts: 2,088
    Originally posted by Rydeson

    You mean your definition of mainstream.. Can you even define mainstream, I can't.. If you want to look at pure numbers in MMORPG,  Blizzard leads the way and defines mainstream, which is NOT the direction EQN is following.. Or do you mean mainstream MOBA "esport" like LoL game?  You seem to be tunnel focused on YOUR DESIRES, while trying to evade and refute others, and then try to call it facts..

    Yep, World of Norrath doesn't sound too exciting to you, but League of Norrath does?  uhh hummm.. Like I said, it's all about YOUR taste of esport you are trying to save, at the expense of what others might want.. I don't think your genre is as big as YOU want it to be.. but good luck.. 

    I'm not sure where you cooked up this whole esport love fest honestly. I don't like LoL/Dota, have only played a little Smite, stopped playing CS a while back, and only play TF2 because I enjoy mindlessly killing others some times. I've never played COD or consider myself a console/twitch/FPS/esport fanatic.

    I enjoy competitive PVP in mmorpgs (EQ, DAoC, WAR, WoW, GW2, etc) but enjoy the PVE side just as much if not more, if only PVE was worth a damn in most of them. Hence why I'm excited for EQN. PVE. There is no esport involved. You seem to have this issue with aim = esport, the end. Doesn't make sense to me. I want to play with others, not against them. My favorite classes are support even.

    While obviously I want a game to be something I enjoy, I've said multiple times that I'd rather step back and let go of my ideals if it means a better game as in more people will play it. I don't believe my stance has ever been MY way or the highway. Although I have said if you don't like what the devs are doing with THEIR game, oh well. Complain to them.

    Not sure exactly what my genre is as I like many and am open minded. I don't want another EQ, WoW, GW2, LoL, whatever. I want something new and outside the box. Which EQN is to me.

    WoW might be the big kid on the block, but EQN is going beyond WoW fans or EQ or Minecraft or LoL or.... They seem to be targeting gamers as a whole, not niche markets or just YOU or I. That's what I meant my mainstream, don't need to get into definitions. Just find it silly that some have this idea that players fall into either EQ or WoW groups, even though they share a lot in common today and all the other types of games in or out of the mmorpg genre seem to not matter at all.

    Just for arguments sake, you might want to check the MOBA numbers and compare that to MMORPG numbers, it is rather large, but I in no way consider myself a MOBA player. 

    Again, you admit that EQ "DIED" 10 years ago with all the changes.. and I agree, PoP expansion was the start of the end for me..  Too many radical changes.. So if YOU refuse to play current EQ because of changes, why should others settle and play EQN because of their changes?  You Sir have a VERY DOUBLE standard, of do as I say, not as I do.. 

    Um, they shouldn't? Why would someone settle/play a game they don't like? This idea that SOE has to make a game that YOU or some other random player will love doesn't make sense. They are making a game, if you don't like it, move along. Sucks if you were looking for another EQ franchise game, but as I've said, same happened to me when EQ2 came along. I simply moved along. These are just games after all. Not that serious. If EQ released as is today, I wouldn't play it. If they updated EQ 1999 version, I wouldn't play it. I also wouldn't go on and on about what I don't like about them either.

    And you think that is a good thing?  I being a devils advocate can give plenty of examples how that is a bad thing.. Just look at a simple example of a Rally Call..  The goal is to build Halas, so it gets built in the first 3 months, which means that any new player after comes online afterwards MISSES out on that fun.. Right?  Get the idea where this is heading..  It is impossible for new players to every experience what they missed and eventually down the road there will be NO ROOM left.. At this point devs have to create 'new' land, or find a way to recycle what they already have.. OOPS, but that is against your desires of replayability.. However, if you keep on creating new land, then you run into the same problem many games ran into, EMPTY zones, and a world too big to enjoy..

    As far as it being "fair" to new players, I think if they can keep adding content, it isn't a problem. No different then other games adding in expansions and people burning through it and moving on to the next one. While they have already given some solutions to your problem, there is no real fix that will please everyone. Like everything, the horizontal more "sandbox" approach has cons along with its pros.

    Nothing is perfect.

    One solution they have is that even though Halas might be built, there is no reason a dragon or natural disaster couldn't knock down some walls or cause major damage causing another Rallying Call to rebuild. Maybe not 100% the same as the first time around, so it would be new to everyone.

    I'm not creative or a game designer, but I'm assuming they have a few other ideas brewing. Could simple be Rally Call 1: Build City, RC2: Defend city from goblins, RC3: Defend from Trolls (players lose), RC4: Recapture city...allows the story to continue without doing the exact same thing every time, be it not 100% crazy original or not. No offense, but to think you have thought of problems the devs haven't is a bit much. I'd hope that is exactly what they do when someone presents a new idea, tear it down with ways it won't work.

    I don't think you quite understand what procedural content is. EQN is not a game that creates itself.. FYI..  It's scripted dynamic AI simulation that allows for player interaction, that influences the outcome of those events.. Nothing more, nothing less.. It's very much similar to what Rift and GW2 already does, but bigger (and surely not proven to work).. That has yet to be seen.. The only thing procedural about it is the world respawning all the holes players will be digging..  When people kill Mr, Smith, he will respawn with the exact same profile.. He never changes.. Only the land will change..

    Parts of the world will be procedurally generated, specifically a lot of the TIers which make up the world/content POI. The caves/caverns, "dungeons" so to speak that make up the Tiers. Quests will be procedurally generated as well. Too lazy to link up the sources, but the details, vague as they are, exist.

    The world will spawn mobs that will go about the world and do things which is fairly dynamic with them changing as time goes on. Not kill Orc 29238 and it respawns in 10 minutes. They said spawning may occur from caves/lairs and less in the open world.

    I agree it isn't proven to work, but you seem to be simplifying it quite a bit and actually missing what they are doing. Regardless, if you had the option to have some procedurally generated content and more dynamic experiences or static, which would you go for?

    And you don't think the feuding between the dark elves and whoever isn't going to be the same thing..  Fighting over the same dirt like a tug of war.?? 

    No clue how it will actually work as in do events repeat or does everything move forward constantly. We don't knot the exact details yet, but it seems to be forward movement. And yes anything can get repetitive, but unlike a game where you have 10 dungeons to choose from to farm nonstop, being able to go anywhere in the world and possible see something relatively new seems like a much better experience.

     Yep, and will never be able to relive that experience of building Halas and earning rewards for it.. Oooops.. instead they "have" to build Rivervale, in which they have no desire to earn faction with the Halflings.. Now your idea doesn't sound so good, does it?  Can I suggest you look at things from ALL angles and assume both the worst and best in everything and minimize the damage it causes.. You are very optimistic with EQN, and that is OK, but please reframe in putting down others that don't view the Norrath world their YOUR eyes..

    Yes it does, as I want a more immersive RPG world where things actually change and progress. I don't want a game, I want a virtual world as they call it these days. Does it sound good for someone that wants to replay everything? No and I pointed that out. Again, no system is perfect for everyone. This is simply the model they've chosen. I'm not putting down the other ways (well I guess I kind of am), simply pointing out that EQN is not those and if someone is looking for X = Y, it is a pointless struggle. If you want static grinds that isn't EQN. Doesn't mean I haven't spent the last ~19 years playing and enjoying that design, but I'm ready to try something else.

    As a devils advocate in everything I do, I always assume things will NEVER go as planned (Murphy's Law), and I prepare for it.. EQN is no different.. This reminds me so much of all the hype and excitement that SWG and SWToR generated before their release, and it became clear many bugs and issues destroyed all the optimistic hype that was falsely created.. 

    I'm right there with you. I was extremely excited for SWG, but very quickly realized it wasn't going to be what I really wanted, barely played it. SWTOR was very obvious to what it was and I'm still shocked so many were surprised how it turned out. As a casual follower, the devs made it fairly clear from the get go.

    EQN is no different. I totally accept that it could be a terrible game. With all the details I've seen, I'm still hopeful that it will be good. I'm looking forward to what they produce and hopefully it isn't garbage. If it is, oh well, I'll be fine. Just because I like what they are doing doesn't mean I hate or look down upon what others like or how other games function.

    Guess I'm confused, as always, why those like yourself that clearly dislike what they are doing are bothering yourselves with it. Once I realized what SWTOR was going to be, I was out. No need to complain about design features that I have zero control over. Might as well went into the forums and went "OMG I hate Star Wars, they should redo it for Star Trek."

    At some point you are just complaining and looking for problems just for the heck of it. The line between devils advocate and negative nancy can be crossed.

    Like I've said, you give problem after problem and all your issues with what they are doing, yet provide no solutions. What could they realistically do to EQN that would make it enjoyable for you that wouldn't involve redoing the game or tossing out major pieces to the puzzle?

    Some of us like replayability.. hence golf courses.. Sure over the years, a course might be tweaked, but for the most part, players can depend on their stability to be the same.. Same with any hobby or game..  You are coming off with the tone you want most of the game to change on a regular basis..  To the point that it's completely different each time you log on.. I don't like that, nor want that, and I'm sure that is NOT MAINSTREAM..   Happy Holidays

    As we've never had a game like that, not sure what we all really want or not. It sounds good to me, but I might hate it, no clue yet. I believe EQN will still have replay value, but just in different ways. I doubt the procedurally generated content will be 100% unique all over the world at all times. Red Dragon 2039 raiding a village might be pretty close to Red Dragon 2022 doing the same some where else.

    For me, it seems that they have to make some pretty hard line design choices. They can't do everything for everyone. At least not at launch. Certain things have to be cut to get a product to the players in a somewhat timely manner. People have been complaining since the reveal about how long it will take to make.

    I don't see how they could make EQ/WoW and then add an entire sandboxish experience on top of that with the tech they are using. So far, you seem to dislike the majority of the major features of EQN. Not sure how they go about fixing the game for you personally without making an entirely different game.

    I don't want MY game, I want the game they are making. Just happens they match up in many ways. Luck of the draw. Just as many people liked the games after I quit or ones I never played, we can't all be winners all the time. I've learned when to accept defeat and walk away I guess. If EQN is garbage to ME, you won't see me complaining on the forums about all the things they should do. I'll move on as I've done so many times before.

     

  • DirtyblissDirtybliss Member UncommonPosts: 10
    This game looks kinda like an extremely re-vamped EQOA then a EQ or EQ2.
Sign In or Register to comment.