Howdy, Stranger!

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

Is EQNext Vaporware?

11617181921

Comments

  • Fractal_AnalogyFractal_Analogy Member UncommonPosts: 350
    Plz read threw.

    I responded, because the thread was being derailed. Matter of fact, I have openly discussed the actual state of EQN.

    Today this thread serves no purpose, because DBG are trying diligently to bring it out of it's current vapor status.



  • AlleinAllein Member RarePosts: 2,089
    edited September 2015
    It is quite obvious you do not understand the meta-game.

    You play your MMORPG's on a superficial level and do not understand the spreadsheets and formulas techies use to surmise and discuss, just to beat mobs. And to loose to them, many times just to collect enough data to form a new strategy to beat such mobs. Once a formula was found, it was kept well hidden.
    You do not understand probabilities and dice rolls. You are more focused on the arcade action.
    WoW's mechanics are nothing but Fisher Price compared to EverQuest's. Mathematicians and PhD's will tell you so.
    You were a teenager, what did you care?
    Oh boy, so you are telling me the "real game" is a spreadsheet and not actually playing? Got it.

    Easy questions, did you actually play Vanilla WoW and how far did you make it? 

    What are some of the EQ mechanics that were so amazing in comparison? Believe you said "Shrink" earlier...

    I believe more people care about Fantasy Football then actual Football these days, so maybe you're right. Numbers, math, spreadsheets!

    I was in my 20s when WoW came out, teen when EQ did. Clearly the math was too complicated for me to understand and as an "adult" I was blown away by the amazing art style of Warcraft, oh my /s

    Would love for you to explain how the numbers mattered more in EQ than WoW or what you are going on about.

    While I was a min/max type gamer and focused on the math in my early years, at this point I really don't care as long as I'm having a good time.

    Not sure if you sat down and spent 10 hours before killing your first Rat or Orc in EQ, but much of it really didn't require too much brain power.

    Maybe you just didn't get it and had to formulate a plan to overcome what others could do in-game without burning the midnight oil over an excel sheet?

    I remember a heck of a lot of trial and error. Because actually playing a game is why I do it. Not to beat the calculator and pave the way to victory.

    When it comes to PVP meta, ya I'll be concerned, vs crappy AI, not so much.
  • AlleinAllein Member RarePosts: 2,089
    Plz read threw.

    I responded, because the thread was being derailed. Matter of fact, I have openly discussed the actual state of EQN.

    Today this thread serves no purpose, because DBG are trying diligently to bring it out of it's current vapor status.
    This entire thread is one huge derailment and never served a purpose, pretty much like all discussions on this site.

    Bunch of people with too much time talking at each other.
  • Fractal_AnalogyFractal_Analogy Member UncommonPosts: 350
    Allein said:
    It is quite obvious you do not understand the meta-game.

    You play your MMORPG's on a superficial level and do not understand the spreadsheets and formulas techies use to surmise and discuss, just to beat mobs. And to loose to them, many times just to collect enough data to form a new strategy to beat such mobs. Once a formula was found, it was kept well hidden.
    You do not understand probabilities and dice rolls. You are more focused on the arcade action.
    WoW's mechanics are nothing but Fisher Price compared to EverQuest's. Mathematicians and PhD's will tell you so.
    You were a teenager, what did you care?
    Oh boy, so you are telling me the "real game" is a spreadsheet and not actually playing? Got it.


    Yes, I am telling you that^. (surprised?)
    The rest is role playing your character within the party, to best ability and role as you can.


    When you played Dungeons & Dragons, the dice was the battles. Those are represented in EQ as animations. When you strike a mob, it is not actually your character animation making contact, those are just there to represent the dice rolls and saves (math) going on underneath the game. The underlying mechanics of the game.


    In modern games, where the dice rolls (mechanics) are removed, and there is just button pressing and no resist or saves, and 15 things on a spell bar like in many MMOs.. then the game becomes shallow (ie: RIFT)

    But again, young people do not get into this, that are after action arcade stuff. Visual, not meta.
  • AlleinAllein Member RarePosts: 2,089
    edited September 2015
    Yes, I am telling you that^. (surprised?)
    The rest is role playing your character within the party, to best ability and role as you can.

    When you played Dungeons & Dragons, the dice was the battles. Those are represented in EQ as animations. When you strike a mob, it is not actually your character animation making contact, those are just there to represent the dice rolls and saves (math) going on underneath the game. The underlying mechanics of the game.

    In modern games, where the dice rolls (mechanics) are removed, and there is just button pressing and no resist or saves, and 15 things on a spell bar like in many MMOs.. then the game becomes shallow (ie: RIFT)

    But again, young people do not get into this, that are after action arcade stuff. Visual, not meta.
    To me that is simply a different approach to the same thing. If you spend hours figuring out the math outside of game while I experiment and try different things in-game and we both reach the same result, not a huge difference. Except I'm actually enjoying/playing the game and not battling a calculator.

    Still not sure what magic math you think EQ has, but many mmorpgs and games in general have RNG mechanics of various types.

    You trash on WoW, but I'm doubting you even played it (Vanilla?) or made it far. If you had, not sure how you could believe some of the comments you've made.

    To me there is no "skill" in rolling a dice. It is completely up to chance. Where as I do actually prefer having to make the decisions that result in the outcome I want. Be it figuring out the best rotation with a million skills like EQ2/WoW like games, action oriented with more movement involvement, and or FPS with even more mechanical requirements.

    What you like is fine, but is just one of many ways to play/approach a video game. There is no right/wrong.

    Personally I think solving the equation or whatever outside of the game to increase or almost guarantee a victory in-game is pretty boring. Might as well activate cheats that you know will magically make you win. Because all they do is basically overcome the math you love so much and do it for you.

    Reminds me of sports "experts" that can't play the games they know so much about. To each their own.

    I'm a fan of trial and error. I might die a lot and waste a ton of time, but when I do figure it out, I've figured it out as intended. Not looked behind the curtain and solved some spreadsheet formula.
  • kemono55kemono55 Member UncommonPosts: 124
    Yes, I hope Daybreak can bring Everquest Next out of its vaporware status.
    I am very doubtful it will happen this side of the year, maybe we will get to see something (solid) from EQN around easter/spring next year?
  • hyancithhyancith Member CommonPosts: 1
    Apparently , they still DO work on Everquest Next 
    http://https//www.youtube.com/watch?v=5x5OeZUIZbw
    If you listen to this guy (Terry Michaels ?) producer , he says it clearly
  • Fractal_AnalogyFractal_Analogy Member UncommonPosts: 350
    edited September 2015
    Allein said:
    Yes, I am telling you that^. (surprised?)
    The rest is role playing your character within the party, to best ability and role as you can.

    When you played Dungeons & Dragons, the dice was the battles. Those are represented in EQ as animations. When you strike a mob, it is not actually your character animation making contact, those are just there to represent the dice rolls and saves (math) going on underneath the game. The underlying mechanics of the game.

    In modern games, where the dice rolls (mechanics) are removed, and there is just button pressing and no resist or saves, and 15 things on a spell bar like in many MMOs.. then the game becomes shallow (ie: RIFT)

    But again, young people do not get into this, that are after action arcade stuff. Visual, not meta.
    To me that is simply a different approach to the same thing. If you spend hours figuring out the math outside of game while I experiment and try different things in-game and we both reach the same result, not a huge difference. Except I'm actually enjoying/playing the game and not battling a calculator.

    Still not sure what magic math you think EQ has, but many mmorpgs and games in general have RNG mechanics of various types.

    You trash on WoW, but I'm doubting you even played it (Vanilla?) or made it far. If you had, not sure how you could believe some of the comments you've made.

    To me there is no "skill" in rolling a dice. It is completely up to chance. Where as I do actually prefer having to make the decisions that result in the outcome I want. Be it figuring out the best rotation with a million skills like EQ2/WoW like games, action oriented with more movement involvement, and or FPS with even more mechanical requirements.

    What you like is fine, but is just one of many ways to play/approach a video game. There is no right/wrong.

    Personally I think solving the equation or whatever outside of the game to increase or almost guarantee a victory in-game is pretty boring. Might as well activate cheats that you know will magically make you win. Because all they do is basically overcome the math you love so much and do it for you.

    Reminds me of sports "experts" that can't play the games they know so much about. To each their own.

    I'm a fan of trial and error. I might die a lot and waste a ton of time, but when I do figure it out, I've figured it out as intended. Not looked behind the curtain and solved some spreadsheet formula.
    Please stop.

    It is obvious and illustrative, that you played those games, without understanding or playing the met-game within.

    EVE is based on the meta game.



    Secondly, you have not carried that meta-aspect with you into all the new games you played, so you never missed them when they were gone. You are unable to discern which games don't have chance, or rolls vs saves and have become simple button pressing. With no chance involved. No partial resists, no fizzles, etc.

    A few posts ago, you asked to someone how did you fail on a raid. Without understanding how hilarious and green you sounded. EQ was a chess match, you played along mimicking people. You didn't break mobs.


    Nothing in WoW's first years was hard, in beta we were calling WoW spoon fed and Fisher Price. Our EQ guild rolled and destroyed all mobs in game in 4 months, and went back to spending months in one EQ dungeon trying to solve them. See Tim Renfail's comments about how it was back then.


    We we not solving equations outside the game, we were logging the data to find a way to defeat mobs, then get back on next weekend and try a new theory tactic.

    You didn't experience any of that, you didn't understand any of that. You own remarks have reveled you know nothing about this. It is ok, we understand you played these games on a superficial level. That is why today you seek games that are superficial.

    I am not the only one here pointing that out to you.


    Understand, I never suggested you are wrong (?). I am saying you are missing out on the depth of the meta game. And still are, by refusing to admit it exists.










  • craftseekercraftseeker Member RarePosts: 1,740
    hyancith said:
    Apparently , they still DO work on Everquest Next 
    http://https//www.youtube.com/watch?v=5x5OeZUIZbw
    If you listen to this guy (Terry Michaels ?) producer , he says it clearly
    Consider a duck swimming against the current in a river.  You do not see much happening on the surface but you known that a lot is happening under the water.  Zoom out a little, upstream is a nice big lake with a lot of food for our duck, downstream is a waterfall.   Now if the duck is making progress upstream everything is cool.  But if the duck is drifting towards the waterfall we have a problem.  Heck even if the duck is just standing still we have a problem as even ducks get tired.

    Now consider EQ:N on the evidence we have is it making good progress towards a release, or is it standing still or maybe losing ground?   What I see is a project that is not making its milestones and losing resources. THAT is why I think it is vaporware.  Not because it is not being worked on but because it does not seem to be getting any closer to release.
  • AlleinAllein Member RarePosts: 2,089
    edited September 2015
    Please stop.
    It is obvious and illustrative, that you played those games, without understanding or playing the met-game within.
    EVE is based on the meta game.
    Secondly, you have not carried that meta-aspect with you into all the new games you played, so you never missed them when they were gone. You are unable to discern which games don't have chance, or rolls vs saves and have become simple button pressing. With no chance involved. No partial resists, no fizzles, etc.
    A few posts ago, you asked to someone how did you fail on a raid. Without understanding how hilarious and green you sounded. EQ was a chess match, you played along mimicking people. You didn't break mobs.
    Nothing in WoW's first years was hard, in beta we were calling WoW spoon fed and Fisher Price. Our EQ guild rolled and destroyed all mobs in game in 4 months, and went back to spending months in one EQ dungeon trying to solve them. See Tim Renfail's comments about how it was back then.
    We we not solving equations outside the game, we were logging the data to find a way to defeat mobs, then get back on next weekend and try a new theory tactic.
    You didn't experience any of that, you didn't understand any of that. You own remarks have reveled you know nothing about this. It is ok, we understand you played these games on a superficial level. That is why today you seek games that are superficial.
    I am not the only one here pointing that out to you.
    Understand, I never suggested you are wrong (?). I am saying you are missing out on the depth of the meta game. And still are, by refusing to admit it exists.
    I prefer PVP and all the meta that comes with that. I find PVE as a whole to be very tedious and not very challenging. Learn the dance, master it, move on, repeat. While that process can take time, it eventually shows a weakness and players can overcome and trivialize it. Not really possible vs players of equal or better skill level.

    The meta you speak of be it EQ or any game can be learned and mastered over time. To me that isn't very challenging in comparison. Might take a while to figure it out, but it can be done. Can't  say the same for PVP.

    You rolled all of WoW in 4 months? Considering there were very little challenging raids/dungeons at that time, clearly you didn't accomplish much. The "hardest" release dungeon wasn't defeated until 5+ months after launch and those added later increased in difficulty greatly. Good story you have, don't believe you. Feel free to provide Guild name and what you defeated, google makes things easy to clarify.

    Clearly you haven't experience much outside of EQ to believe that other games have no "chance, resists, fizzle, etc." Other games might call them by another name, but EQ is not unique. Unless you can give an example of this that is unique and how it functions. Sounds like RNG to me.

    Maybe this is "real RPG" to you or whatever elitist views you might have, but there are other just as if not more challenging ways to go about it. If you are looking for a D&D experience in a virtual world, ya I'd get you want something that mimics that, not everyone prefers this way nor find its entertaining. Roll x Roll x Roll or whatever can be designed multiple ways.

    WoW was just as much a Chess match as EQ. Again, clearly you didn't fully experience it to know any better.

    I asked why wipes happened in EQ because the individual implied that wiping in EQ wasn't because of player error or something of that nature, not going to bother back tracking. Has nothing to do with being green. If players know how to do something, wiping is the result of not doing it properly and or unforeseen mechanics (RNG) that can't be fully planned for and allow for little player error while reacting.

    While I quite both relatively early, even today with the Mythic (believe that's correct) difficulty in WoW, they are still very difficult. You and your guild couldn't hop in and clear it in a day, most likely never going by what you've said and most likely lack of experience with other systems.

    Logging data sounds like solving problems outside of game. How did you log and review data within game? To me, this is basically cheating. Data mining, logging data, addons and 3rd party stuff that figures it out for you or allows you to more easily than you could do naturally doesn't provide for the most challenging experience.

    You want to go the easy route and call it "meta," I'd prefer a more challenging experience in a PVE game. It is already easier than PVP by default. Top guilds in WoW do the same thing to get world firsts and what not. It is a different approach and isn't easy, but isn't the only way to do it nor is it intended by the devs.

    You continue to speak as if you represent some unknown group of individuals, not sure if they are in your head or what, but I'm not seeing others point out your baby bell nonsense.

    To each their own, but you and I prefer different game types. Luckily there are several upcoming for both of us I'm assuming by what you seem to prefer. Good luck with them.
  • SyndromofaDownSyndromofaDown Member UncommonPosts: 325
    Before i was done with my first month in WoW i was level cap. And i remember rolling 12 mobs with green armor at lvl 38 in EQ...err wait, that was WoW. ;)
  • AlleinAllein Member RarePosts: 2,089
    Before i was done with my first month in WoW i was level cap. And i remember rolling 12 mobs with green armor at lvl 38 in EQ...err wait, that was WoW. ;)
    When did you start playing WoW?
  • AldersAlders Member RarePosts: 2,163
    Are people seriously trying to state that there was some sort of difficulty with EQ content? Much like FFXI, which was pretty much a clone of EQ, the difficulty was in fighting the mechanics of the game rather than the mechanics of the enemy or boss. 

    Boss encounters have become infinitely more difficult over the years. Unfortunately everything else has regressed to the point that players can level in their sleep without worry or fear.
  • SyndromofaDownSyndromofaDown Member UncommonPosts: 325
    Allein said:
    Before i was done with my first month in WoW i was level cap. And i remember rolling 12 mobs with green armor at lvl 38 in EQ...err wait, that was WoW. ;)
    When did you start playing WoW?
    2009 for 2 months. I basically picked a guild too early that wasn't raiding and wasn't doing anything sides running around and got bored.
  • SyndromofaDownSyndromofaDown Member UncommonPosts: 325
    Im saying in EQ you don't solo. If you want to solo (well you could cause theres mercernaries) you probably play a necro or mage. Much different mechanics at least it used to be. With defiant armor you could solo up till level 60, then you are forced to group for anything.
  • GrailerGrailer Member UncommonPosts: 893
    Allein said:
    Plz read threw.

    I responded, because the thread was being derailed. Matter of fact, I have openly discussed the actual state of EQN.

    Today this thread serves no purpose, because DBG are trying diligently to bring it out of it's current vapor status.
    This entire thread is one huge derailment and never served a purpose, pretty much like all discussions on this site.

    Bunch of people with too much time talking at each other.

    I'm still not 100% sure this game is going to actually be released .


    Looking at the latest workshop they are talking about Landmark rooftops or something .  Not any actual EQN game play as such .

    Correct me if Im wrong?
  • azarhalazarhal Member RarePosts: 1,355
    Grailer said:
    Allein said:
    Plz read threw.

    I responded, because the thread was being derailed. Matter of fact, I have openly discussed the actual state of EQN.

    Today this thread serves no purpose, because DBG are trying diligently to bring it out of it's current vapor status.
    This entire thread is one huge derailment and never served a purpose, pretty much like all discussions on this site.

    Bunch of people with too much time talking at each other.

    I'm still not 100% sure this game is going to actually be released .


    Looking at the latest workshop they are talking about Landmark rooftops or something .  Not any actual EQN game play as such .

    Correct me if Im wrong?
    The Workshop is about cultural building designs for EQN not about gameplay (although they sometimes gives hints about it).
  • Fractal_AnalogyFractal_Analogy Member UncommonPosts: 350
    Allein said:
    Please stop.
    It is obvious and illustrative, that you played those games, without understanding or playing the met-game within.
    EVE is based on the meta game.
    Secondly, you have not carried that meta-aspect with you into all the new games you played, so you never missed them when they were gone. You are unable to discern which games don't have chance, or rolls vs saves and have become simple button pressing. With no chance involved. No partial resists, no fizzles, etc.
    A few posts ago, you asked to someone how did you fail on a raid. Without understanding how hilarious and green you sounded. EQ was a chess match, you played along mimicking people. You didn't break mobs.
    Nothing in WoW's first years was hard, in beta we were calling WoW spoon fed and Fisher Price. Our EQ guild rolled and destroyed all mobs in game in 4 months, and went back to spending months in one EQ dungeon trying to solve them. See Tim Renfail's comments about how it was back then.
    We we not solving equations outside the game, we were logging the data to find a way to defeat mobs, then get back on next weekend and try a new theory tactic.
    You didn't experience any of that, you didn't understand any of that. You own remarks have reveled you know nothing about this. It is ok, we understand you played these games on a superficial level. That is why today you seek games that are superficial.
    I am not the only one here pointing that out to you.
    Understand, I never suggested you are wrong (?). I am saying you are missing out on the depth of the meta game. And still are, by refusing to admit it exists.
    I prefer PVP and all the meta that comes with that. I find PVE as a whole to be very tedious and not very challenging. Learn the dance, master it, move on, repeat. While that process can take time, it eventually shows a weakness and players can overcome and trivialize it. Not really possible vs players of equal or better skill level.

    The meta you speak of be it EQ or any game can be learned and mastered over time. To me that isn't very challenging in comparison. Might take a while to figure it out, but it can be done. Can't  say the same for PVP.

    You rolled all of WoW in 4 months? Considering there were very little challenging raids/dungeons at that time, clearly you didn't accomplish much. The "hardest" release dungeon wasn't defeated until 5+ months after launch and those added later increased in difficulty greatly. Good story you have, don't believe you. Feel free to provide Guild name and what you defeated, google makes things easy to clarify.

    Clearly you haven't experience much outside of EQ to believe that other games have no "chance, resists, fizzle, etc." Other games might call them by another name, but EQ is not unique. Unless you can give an example of this that is unique and how it functions. Sounds like RNG to me.

    Maybe this is "real RPG" to you or whatever elitist views you might have, but there are other just as if not more challenging ways to go about it. If you are looking for a D&D experience in a virtual world, ya I'd get you want something that mimics that, not everyone prefers this way nor find its entertaining. Roll x Roll x Roll or whatever can be designed multiple ways.

    WoW was just as much a Chess match as EQ. Again, clearly you didn't fully experience it to know any better.

    I asked why wipes happened in EQ because the individual implied that wiping in EQ wasn't because of player error or something of that nature, not going to bother back tracking. Has nothing to do with being green. If players know how to do something, wiping is the result of not doing it properly and or unforeseen mechanics (RNG) that can't be fully planned for and allow for little player error while reacting.

    While I quite both relatively early, even today with the Mythic (believe that's correct) difficulty in WoW, they are still very difficult. You and your guild couldn't hop in and clear it in a day, most likely never going by what you've said and most likely lack of experience with other systems.

    Logging data sounds like solving problems outside of game. How did you log and review data within game? To me, this is basically cheating. Data mining, logging data, addons and 3rd party stuff that figures it out for you or allows you to more easily than you could do naturally doesn't provide for the most challenging experience.

    You want to go the easy route and call it "meta," I'd prefer a more challenging experience in a PVE game. It is already easier than PVP by default. Top guilds in WoW do the same thing to get world firsts and what not. It is a different approach and isn't easy, but isn't the only way to do it nor is it intended by the devs.

    You continue to speak as if you represent some unknown group of individuals, not sure if they are in your head or what, but I'm not seeing others point out your baby bell nonsense.

    To each their own, but you and I prefer different game types. Luckily there are several upcoming for both of us I'm assuming by what you seem to prefer. Good luck with them.

    You are trying to defend World of Warcraft, but still unable to accept there are games before it, that have incredible depth. World of Warcraft is Fisher Price. The mere fact they now have dungeons with difficulty choices on them, makes your argument moot & laughable.



    Secondly, wiping in EQ wasn't always because of a player error as you claim (ie: green player), it was because there was chance. Your top 3 Wizard at a time of need, could all get resisted, or fizzle.  End of raid!

    How you mitigate against that and everything else, is well thought out meta game.




    World of Warcraft & other newer games are not based on chance, but simply pressing buttons to achieve a known outcome. On rails and is not meta game. (compared to EQ).

    EQ you only had 8 spells, in Rift you can have 100 spells up and combat is still stale and repetitive because there is no actual depth to the underlying mechanics running the game. It is all arcade action. You are now starting to realize a good part of MMORPG and how they differ. Let it sink in, you will finally start to realize what you have been missing.

    BTW, nothing you say about WoW, or Player vs Player in WoW matters, the game's mechanics are for children. It is like comparing Monopoly to Wall Street. There is not enough underneath running the game, to make your claim.


    Go play EVE, you'll see what you don't see.

  • AlleinAllein Member RarePosts: 2,089
    Allein said:
    Before i was done with my first month in WoW i was level cap. And i remember rolling 12 mobs with green armor at lvl 38 in EQ...err wait, that was WoW. ;)
    When did you start playing WoW?
    2009 for 2 months. I basically picked a guild too early that wasn't raiding and wasn't doing anything sides running around and got bored.
    Ah, ya by that time WoW was very different than what it was for the first few years. Much like EQ which today is a very different experience compared to 99-02 or so. Back when players actually grouped in EQ, didn't box multiple accounts and have mercs as friends.
  • AlleinAllein Member RarePosts: 2,089


    You are trying to defend World of Warcraft, but still unable to accept there are games before it, that have incredible depth. World of Warcraft is Fisher Price. The mere fact they now have dungeons with difficulty choices on them, makes your argument moot & laughable.

    Secondly, wiping in EQ wasn't always because of a player error as you claim (ie: green player), it was because there was chance. Your top 3 Wizard at a time of need, could all get resisted, or fizzle.  End of raid!

    How you mitigate against that and everything else, is well thought out meta game.

    World of Warcraft & other newer games are not based on chance, but simply pressing buttons to achieve a known outcome. On rails and is not meta game. (compared to EQ).

    EQ you only had 8 spells, in Rift you can have 100 spells up and combat is still stale and repetitive because there is no actual depth to the underlying mechanics running the game. It is all arcade action. You are now starting to realize a good part of MMORPG and how they differ. Let it sink in, you will finally start to realize what you have been missing.

    BTW, nothing you say about WoW, or Player vs Player in WoW matters, the game's mechanics are for children. It is like comparing Monopoly to Wall Street. There is not enough underneath running the game, to make your claim.

    Go play EVE, you'll see what you don't see.
    I did a little PnP in my teens, played many RPGs pre-Online era, MUDs, UO, etc. I didn't wake up one day and discover online gaming and WoW. Nor did I ever find it or any previous game to be as amazing as you do apparently. Guess it takes a bit more to impress me.

    I'm not trying to "defend" WoW. I'm simply stating my experience after playing EQ for a few years then WoW for a few years, both in their "primes" in my opinion. While EQ's population dropped after changes, WoW's exploded, but neither were games I wanted to play anymore.

    You can bash on WoW, but if you have little to no experience or played it after X years when it was turned into "Fisher Price" then your opinion is limited. Just as if someone hopped into EQ today and never experienced it in the first few years. Today's version of both are pretty pathetic and have been for a long time.

    As you didn't respond to my question as to what you defeated in WoW in the short time you played, I'm assuming you are talking out your rear end when it comes to it.

    Rift is a joke and clear WoW copy, BUT a copy of what it became, not what it was originally. Clearly you don't see that.

    I'll give you that EQ had a lot of RNG (chance), but to me it's the same difference. WoW has resists, misses, and due to the mobility of most high end content has a form of "fizzle" even as you can't just stand in a spot and must react to the environment as well, be it is player induced in reaction. Are they identical in every mechanic? No, but WoW did copy EQ in many ways.

    As I said, wiping in EQ (or WoW) is due to player error, be it direct "oops I pushed wrong button" or "oops I didn't see or react to X in time." Same difference to me. Regardless if it is RNG throwing a nasty curve ball or whatever. Both can be boiled down to math and figured out one way or another. It isn't like Naggy hasn't been killed till this day. Players overcome the limited challenges they are given.

    With 8 skills you can only plan for so much so I still disagree that EQ was extremely complicated. Unless you are bringing 100+ players and have every single possible outcome accounted for, there will be a limit to how much "meta" needs to be accounted for. Might take you a day to figure it out or months, but it will happen.

    I wasn't speaking only PVP in WoW, but in any game. Chess, CS:GO, EQ... this meta is impossible to predict what the enemy is going to do 100% of the time and is much greater than any PVE encounter unless it is total chaos and doesn't allow for strategy, which to me would be entertaining but a total mess. As much RNG that EQ might have, it isn't total chaos.

    As I've said, we all like what we like. If you think your preference is "better" so be it. You and your baby bell army can enjoy all the games upcoming that you say are made for them. I will enjoy the upcoming games that look good to me. Neither of us is going to prove or convince the other of anything. After all we are both "adults" and likely are stuck in our ways.

    To me though, if you are going to say something is "better" even if subjective, you should have some decent experience with it.
  • Fractal_AnalogyFractal_Analogy Member UncommonPosts: 350
    I did not say better, I said it offers more depth.
    I am glad you now understand the meta-game better.


    I'll leave you with this:  " I'll give you that EQ had a lot of RNG (chance), but to me it's the same difference."



  • GrailerGrailer Member UncommonPosts: 893
    Allein said:


    You are trying to defend World of Warcraft, but still unable to accept there are games before it, that have incredible depth. World of Warcraft is Fisher Price. The mere fact they now have dungeons with difficulty choices on them, makes your argument moot & laughable.

    Secondly, wiping in EQ wasn't always because of a player error as you claim (ie: green player), it was because there was chance. Your top 3 Wizard at a time of need, could all get resisted, or fizzle.  End of raid!

    How you mitigate against that and everything else, is well thought out meta game.

    World of Warcraft & other newer games are not based on chance, but simply pressing buttons to achieve a known outcome. On rails and is not meta game. (compared to EQ).

    EQ you only had 8 spells, in Rift you can have 100 spells up and combat is still stale and repetitive because there is no actual depth to the underlying mechanics running the game. It is all arcade action. You are now starting to realize a good part of MMORPG and how they differ. Let it sink in, you will finally start to realize what you have been missing.

    BTW, nothing you say about WoW, or Player vs Player in WoW matters, the game's mechanics are for children. It is like comparing Monopoly to Wall Street. There is not enough underneath running the game, to make your claim.

    Go play EVE, you'll see what you don't see.
    I did a little PnP in my teens, played many RPGs pre-Online era, MUDs, UO, etc. I didn't wake up one day and discover online gaming and WoW. Nor did I ever find it or any previous game to be as amazing as you do apparently. Guess it takes a bit more to impress me.

    I'm not trying to "defend" WoW. I'm simply stating my experience after playing EQ for a few years then WoW for a few years, both in their "primes" in my opinion. While EQ's population dropped after changes, WoW's exploded, but neither were games I wanted to play anymore.

    You can bash on WoW, but if you have little to no experience or played it after X years when it was turned into "Fisher Price" then your opinion is limited. Just as if someone hopped into EQ today and never experienced it in the first few years. Today's version of both are pretty pathetic and have been for a long time.

    As you didn't respond to my question as to what you defeated in WoW in the short time you played, I'm assuming you are talking out your rear end when it comes to it.

    Rift is a joke and clear WoW copy, BUT a copy of what it became, not what it was originally. Clearly you don't see that.

    I'll give you that EQ had a lot of RNG (chance), but to me it's the same difference. WoW has resists, misses, and due to the mobility of most high end content has a form of "fizzle" even as you can't just stand in a spot and must react to the environment as well, be it is player induced in reaction. Are they identical in every mechanic? No, but WoW did copy EQ in many ways.

    As I said, wiping in EQ (or WoW) is due to player error, be it direct "oops I pushed wrong button" or "oops I didn't see or react to X in time." Same difference to me. Regardless if it is RNG throwing a nasty curve ball or whatever. Both can be boiled down to math and figured out one way or another. It isn't like Naggy hasn't been killed till this day. Players overcome the limited challenges they are given.

    With 8 skills you can only plan for so much so I still disagree that EQ was extremely complicated. Unless you are bringing 100+ players and have every single possible outcome accounted for, there will be a limit to how much "meta" needs to be accounted for. Might take you a day to figure it out or months, but it will happen.

    I wasn't speaking only PVP in WoW, but in any game. Chess, CS:GO, EQ... this meta is impossible to predict what the enemy is going to do 100% of the time and is much greater than any PVE encounter unless it is total chaos and doesn't allow for strategy, which to me would be entertaining but a total mess. As much RNG that EQ might have, it isn't total chaos.

    As I've said, we all like what we like. If you think your preference is "better" so be it. You and your baby bell army can enjoy all the games upcoming that you say are made for them. I will enjoy the upcoming games that look good to me. Neither of us is going to prove or convince the other of anything. After all we are both "adults" and likely are stuck in our ways.

    To me though, if you are going to say something is "better" even if subjective, you should have some decent experience with it.


    I found EQ Vanilla was great because it offered a challenge in that you would've been silly to rush off into a place you couldn't handle for fear of not being able to get your corpse/gear back .


    Also open world dungeons ... remember yelling TRAIN!!!

    Camping rare spawns for loot .

    DING! Leveling up took ages and felt like a reward for hard grinding .

    Enchanters CCing entire group of mobs.

    Plane of Fear runs end game.

    Farming for Jboots

    Lower Guk camps

    Quests didn't have arrows or pointers on maps

    Auction house ? West commons.
  • AlleinAllein Member RarePosts: 2,089
    Grailer said:
    I found EQ Vanilla was great because it offered a challenge in that you would've been silly to rush off into a place you couldn't handle for fear of not being able to get your corpse/gear back .

    Also open world dungeons ... remember yelling TRAIN!!!

    Camping rare spawns for loot .

    DING! Leveling up took ages and felt like a reward for hard grinding .

    Enchanters CCing entire group of mobs.

    Plane of Fear runs end game.

    Farming for Jboots

    Lower Guk camps

    Quests didn't have arrows or pointers on maps

    Auction house ? West commons.
    Much of why I enjoyed early EQ as well.

    Although much of it was dependent on the time/market. I can no longer wake up at 4 am to check a rare spawn nor grind countless hours for xp just to die and lose a chunk of it. The time commitment is not possible for me anymore and I'm assuming many others. The "Evercrack" status back then was the norm because those playing were the "hardcore" or very dedicated. Now a days that style is the minority from what I can tell.

    EQN has me interested as it could possible bring back open dungeons, finding rare spawns (not camping them), discovering new items for fun builds that aren't best in slot because the devs say so, and more of the social/world experience. Although I'm doubting it will really be anything like the "spirit" of EQ.

    Unfortunately or fortunately, there are several games coming that seem to share the spirit of vanilla EQ, but aren't going to be in Norrath. Hopefully one of them hits enough bullet points to really make for a quality experience. I still have hope EQN blends the old and modern designs, but only time will tell.

    If Daybreak (SOE) could actually have a decent launch for once that would be pretty great. Hopefully they can take some inspiration from Blizzard and work on the polish/quality part of things. I believe the WoW vs EQ debate is pointless, both had their pros/cons. WoW's was the quality and accessibility. Games don't have to be designed for the lowest common denominator to still be accessible to a wide audience, hopefully EQN gets that right.
  • Fractal_AnalogyFractal_Analogy Member UncommonPosts: 350
    Allein said:
    Grailer said:
    I found EQ Vanilla was great because it offered a challenge in that you would've been silly to rush off into a place you couldn't handle for fear of not being able to get your corpse/gear back .

    Also open world dungeons ... remember yelling TRAIN!!!

    Camping rare spawns for loot .

    DING! Leveling up took ages and felt like a reward for hard grinding .

    Enchanters CCing entire group of mobs.

    Plane of Fear runs end game.

    Farming for Jboots

    Lower Guk camps

    Quests didn't have arrows or pointers on maps

    Auction house ? West commons.
    Much of why I enjoyed early EQ as well.

    Although much of it was dependent on the time/market. I can no longer wake up at 4 am to check a rare spawn nor grind countless hours for xp just to die and lose a chunk of it. The time commitment is not possible for me anymore and I'm assuming many others. The "Evercrack" status back then was the norm because those playing were the "hardcore" or very dedicated. Now a days that style is the minority from what I can tell.

    EQN has me interested as it could possible bring back open dungeons, finding rare spawns (not camping them), discovering new items for fun builds that aren't best in slot because the devs say so, and more of the social/world experience. Although I'm doubting it will really be anything like the "spirit" of EQ.

    Unfortunately or fortunately, there are several games coming that seem to share the spirit of vanilla EQ, but aren't going to be in Norrath. Hopefully one of them hits enough bullet points to really make for a quality experience. I still have hope EQN blends the old and modern designs, but only time will tell.

    If Daybreak (SOE) could actually have a decent launch for once that would be pretty great. Hopefully they can take some inspiration from Blizzard and work on the polish/quality part of things. I believe the WoW vs EQ debate is pointless, both had their pros/cons. WoW's was the quality and accessibility. Games don't have to be designed for the lowest common denominator to still be accessible to a wide audience, hopefully EQN gets that right.

    I found your post insightful.

    I agree waking up at 4am to check rare spawns was a bummer. That is obviously because quest mobs where highly camped and usually static do to back-then coding. In a 64bit deep-mechanic game (being currently built) such mobs can have incredible scripts for roaming, or random spawns. Or tied into your party's quest. Triggered and/or become part of a random 6-person mini-raid, etc.

    Ponder on that.

    While imagining Original EQ, (with not just 20 zones representing Antonica like at release), but with 113 zones representing the whole continent ? Complete coast line, etc.

    So that no matter where YOU are questing, there are a bazillion more Questors, in places other people are not worried about. Think on that. Grinding time, would cease to exists, if you could sit at a tavern and scrum up some tough lads to attempt a quest that evening. True adventure.

    To become part of the world again, and have friend there to rez you when you die. Or to catch you when you fall. For years.



    Consequently, you do not need graphic to push a game, you need mechanics and EQNext is not going to break any new ground there, unless they stop hiding their secrets. I think we are close to seeing EQN materialize out of it's vapor status, and have it's own code running on it's own server soon. That is good news. But it may be too late.


    I fear the EQ franchise might not be able to compete with the Baby Bells in 2018. These Bells will eat lifeless games up & spit them out. Too much quality coming. I think DBG will eventually work out their voxel engine issues and deliver a run of the mill product. Only because of what it could've been.

    I hope they prove me wrong. (Who is running the ship?)





  • AlleinAllein Member RarePosts: 2,089

    I hope they prove me wrong. (Who is running the ship?)

    That's one big issue I see. EQN has never had a real leader from what they've presented. Individuals might be "the boss" or whatever, but no real leadership or vision driving things.

    At this point in time with the tech available, so much is possible in gaming. Chronicles of Elyria has some really interesting concepts that I hope they can pull off. Same goes for several others that are pushing their respective niches into new areas. I doubt most will achieve what they set out to do, but even if 1/5 or whatever can do it, we should have a few worth while products to experience.

    EQN, although it will probably be a bit too modern and accessible for your group or even someone like myself, still has a ton of potential with the basic concepts. If they are any company can really pull off next-gen AI that brings a virtual world to life will have years of success.
This discussion has been closed.