Quantcast

Howdy, Stranger!

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

We need monthly updates

13»

Comments

  • AeliousAelious Member RarePosts: 3,521
    Reallynow10

    That would indicate there is anything to hear, which at this point there isn't hehe.
  • RydesonRydeson Member UncommonPosts: 3,852
    Originally posted by ReallyNow10
    CRICKETS ... That's what I'm hearing here ... CRICKETS ....

    I would normally agree, however since the closure of the official forums, the crickets are muzzled.. LOL

  • ElikalElikal Member UncommonPosts: 7,912

    There is a sharp contrast between the big stream of regular info and changes from the first year in Landmark to today. For months the devs have gotten almost mute, and sorry Landmark Workshop is NOT "news". That's showing what players have built, and while that is nice and dandy, it isn't news about Everquest Next. I feel like the development has slowed down to a crawl, and the long lack of news starts to feel unsettling, like they have big quarrels about the direction or some huge issues.

    Maybe all is great, but my feeling is rather skeptical. If things go well, usually companies boast about it.

    People don't ask questions to get answers - they ask questions to show how smart they are. - Dogbert

  • Fractal_AnalogyFractal_Analogy Member UncommonPosts: 350
    Originally posted by Aelious
    Daffid011

    I think your two questions are related and reasonable. Something did go sideways with the expected development of EQN. They are trying to put many standalone systems in the same MMO and I think it took them longer than they thought it would. In fact they've stated as much that there are a lot of R&D hurddles. Add to that the whole transition to DGC and that's why I think they are quiet now, they learned their lesson. They are only going to get one shot at revealing and hyping EQN to it's release.

    They seen Landmark sell like hotcakes and plummet population wise because it didn't have the tools yet that people were sold on. Plus, they can't release the same since a sandbox that intruduces features over time is different than a world with a story.

    The forum thing was wierd. I think they said they'll open them back up down the road? They should.

     

    No, Landmark sold like hotcakes because it was tied to EverQuest's beta. And it's population didn't die-off because of tools, it was because LM is a joke, and easily was a year away from even being a beta client...  leaving people in Landmark wondering WTF, if EQ beta is suppose to be right around the corner.

    That is the ONLY reason Landmark got any action, or news. Because it was called Landmark EQ.

     

     

    Coincidentally, the only people playing LM now, are the ones who are holding on to the dream, that their art will appear in another game. (ie: they are being bribed)

  • NanfoodleNanfoodle Member EpicPosts: 7,935
    Originally posted by Fractal_Analogy
    Originally posted by Aelious
    Daffid011

    I think your two questions are related and reasonable. Something did go sideways with the expected development of EQN. They are trying to put many standalone systems in the same MMO and I think it took them longer than they thought it would. In fact they've stated as much that there are a lot of R&D hurddles. Add to that the whole transition to DGC and that's why I think they are quiet now, they learned their lesson. They are only going to get one shot at revealing and hyping EQN to it's release.

    They seen Landmark sell like hotcakes and plummet population wise because it didn't have the tools yet that people were sold on. Plus, they can't release the same since a sandbox that intruduces features over time is different than a world with a story.

    The forum thing was wierd. I think they said they'll open them back up down the road? They should.

     

    No, Landmark sold like hotcakes because it was tied to EverQuest's beta. And it's population didn't die-off because of tools, it was because LM is a joke, and easily was a year away from even being a beta client...  leaving people in Landmark wondering WTF, if EQ beta is suppose to be right around the corner.

    That is the ONLY reason Landmark got any action, or news. Because it was called Landmark EQ.

     

     

    Coincidentally, the only people playing LM now, are the ones who are holding on to the dream, that their art will appear in another game. (ie: they are being bribed)

    Landmark is not for everyone but there is a solid community there and I see more build that have nothing to do with EQN then I do for their EQN contents. Landmark is really setting itself up as its own game. Builders that want more then to build with blocks. Judge it harshly but I have to ask, when is the last time you logged into the game? Its changed allot and some big changes are coming soon.



  • BuccaneerBuccaneer Member UncommonPosts: 654
    Originally posted by Daffid011
    Originally posted by Aelious
    There is no benefit to DGC releasing information until they have a set trajectory to ride the hype train to some sort of launch.  With a lot of things being R&D'd for EQN that may be a while.  I doubt they are worried about a few people grumbling on a forum and it's not like people will refuse to play strictly because DGC took too long to reveal information.

    Then why did SOE start hyping the game two years ago?

    The real question is why did SOE/Daybreak stop communicating about the game?   Heck, they wen as far as to close down the official forums for the game.

     

    What gives?

    IMO the reason we got the SOE live event for EQN a couple of years ago was not for the players but more a marketing tactic from Sony to entice prospective buyers to buy SOE.  I cannot fathom any other reason to hype the game early when you only have a couple of tech demos and nothing else to back it up.

  • AeliousAelious Member RarePosts: 3,521
    Fractal_Analogy

    I wouldn't dispute anything you said other than Landmark is a joke. You and whoever can think that of course but the title is what it is. It's an open development title that is incomplete. Even in its incomplete state it is accomplishing one of its directives, being a platform for players to create structures for EQN. The "end game" for Landmark is an open sandbox for players to create full MMO content. Development has taken its sweet time for sure but without knowing the challenges involved I won't assume as to why.

    I'd save your final review of Landmark once it is the Landmark talked about in PC Gamer.
  • ArchlyteArchlyte Member RarePosts: 1,405
    I agree that landmark is not a joke, but it's not good either. It feels empty and pointless really fast. I think it was a big mistake on their part to put Landmark out as proto-EQN. All it did was illustrate what wasn't done, and what was likely to be terrible even in the final game (graphics, combat, performance, lack of complexity)
    MMORPG players are often like Hobbits: They don't like Adventures
  • AeliousAelious Member RarePosts: 3,521
    Archelyte

    I agree that it feels empty and pointless very quickly, and the reason why it gets the attention, or lack of, that it does. When you see a structure in the distance you know it has nothing in it. Some of the builds are absolutely amazing but from the perspective of a content consumer there isn't much there. Once content tools are in and that cemetary/crypt in the distance could be filled with mobs and a backstory then consumers will pay attention.

    With that distinction I wouldn't call it bad either because I think it depends on what you like to play and how you like to play it. This extends to graphics, combat, etc. As you know well :) I personally like the combat and when I do play LM I typically run around killing mobs to collect items for builders. I've built myself but don't have the time for that rabbit hole right now.
  • ElikalElikal Member UncommonPosts: 7,912
    Originally posted by Archlyte
    I agree that landmark is not a joke, but it's not good either. It feels empty and pointless really fast. I think it was a big mistake on their part to put Landmark out as proto-EQN. All it did was illustrate what wasn't done, and what was likely to be terrible even in the final game (graphics, combat, performance, lack of complexity)

    image alas I feel similar about it all now

    People don't ask questions to get answers - they ask questions to show how smart they are. - Dogbert

  • NitthNitth Member UncommonPosts: 3,904


    Originally posted by ReallyNow10
    As in official announcements and "state of the game" updates.  A lot of folks have invested a lot of hope, time, and money (yes, some of us have bought new systems) JUST for EQ Next. So, I think at the very least, having Smed or some official from daybreak or whatever the new studio is called, step forward monthly and say, "Hey guys/gals, this is where we are at, and we are not going away" would be of great relief to many on this message board.


    Why? to perpetuate your hype?

    image
    TSW - AoC - Aion - WOW - EVE - Fallen Earth - Co - Rift - || XNA C# Java Development

  • MukeMuke Member RarePosts: 2,614
    Originally posted by ReallyNow10

    As in official announcements and "state of the game" updates.  A lot of folks have invested a lot of hope, time, and money (yes, some of us have bought new systems) JUST for EQ Next. 

     

    Buying a new system just because of running a hyped game that is in development and won't be released anytime soon, if ever is not really a smart thing to do.

     

     

     

     

     

    "going into arguments with idiots is a lost cause, it requires you to stoop down to their level and you can't win"

  • nolfnolf Member UncommonPosts: 859
    Originally posted by ReallyNow10

    As in official announcements and "state of the game" updates.  A lot of folks have invested a lot of hope, time, and money (yes, some of us have bought new systems) JUST for EQ Next. 

    So, I think at the very least, having Smed or some official from daybreak or whatever the new studio is called, step forward monthly and say, "Hey guys/gals, this is where we are at, and we are not going away" would be of great relief to many on this message board.

    Invested hope?!?!?!  You can't be serious.  Time?  The game isn't even out yet.  You haven't invested any time into it.

    If you consider a hardware purchase as a monetary investment in a game, I highly recommend you find some Economics for Dummies books or something, because no.

    Basically this OP can be summed up by saying "I unwisely let my mismanaged expectations about a game so early in development that it may never see the light of day drive me to buy a new system that will be already aged by the time said game come out, and this makes me entitled to make demands from the development team!"

    Any experienced gamer would rather a dev team's resources and efforts go into the actual game than appeasing entitled fools' needs for "being in the loop."

    I really hope that *insert game name here* will be the first game to ever live up to all of its pre-release promises, maintain a manageable hype level and have a clean release. Just don't expect me to hold my breath.

Sign In or Register to comment.