I was so upset when Dave left SOE....I got the big landmark package because I believed in Daves vison for EQN and Landmark.
Don't get me wrong I love landmark and eagerly await EQN but i went from thinking EQN is a can't miss to oh shit I hope this is not a disaster.
I have faith in Terry but with so much talent leaving SOE now Daybreak I am nervous.
But I'm glad to hear Dave is doing great and him talking about Elite with Oculus has me sold.
I have a great HOTAS and now I don't even want to play till I get a rift!
Lets be honest here. EQN will never come out. Well, not in as much as it was pitched to us, anyway. They removed storybrix. That was the KEY function of the emergent AI, without it, emergent AI will NEVER exist and hence EQN will NEVER exist... Daybreak games scammed us all. They did the same with H1Z1.... These were the only 2 games I had been hyped about for years and they took our money and changed the game after getting it. They lost an asset when they lost Dave and until they get back onto the roadmap we were promised with BOTH of these games I will never spend money on another DB (douche bag) game...
I think it was a mistake for them to let this guy go.
They saved money but in the long run I think they would've benefited more by keeping him as face of Landmark and EQN so ppl wouldn't lose faith in those games.
Heya Dave!
You know I am a big fan of your work so I am looking forward to see what you are cooking up. Just please give up on the whole payment model (F2/P marketplace) you did with SOE, it really ruined those games for me. Otherwise you have great ideas, you are hard working, innovative, enthusiatstic and a great salesman - I wish you luck and I look forward to playing one of you new creations!
Dave seems a nice person but I can't forgive him the way he handled the EQ IP for the last couple of years. Specifically the poor vision of EQNext and its shallow little brother Landmark.
I don't think he understood what EQ fans expect from the IP.
Mcquaid will get there first and Pantheon will kill EQ and EQ2 in a single strike, mark my word. Daybreak need to understand that if the want to keep cashing on EQ popularity they need to give their core customers what they crave before they all move to something else.
I'm just not sold on VR at all. Maybe I really do need to experience it to embrace it, but at this point I couldn't care less about it.
The price point alone makes me not interested. Why would I buy a peripheral device, supported by a handful of games, for the price I could buy a new next gen console? Look at how many people were up in arms because Kinect made XBOX one $100 more expensive. The gaming community basically demanded that they drop the device to lower the price. I am honestly surprised game devs are excited about VR. It seems like it is hard enough for a company to survive without developing for a device with a smaller target audience.
Maybe some day it will wow and amaze me, but I am doubtful.
I'm just not sold on VR at all. Maybe I really do need to experience it to embrace it, but at this point I couldn't care less about it.
The price point alone makes me not interested. Why would I buy a peripheral device, supported by a handful of games, for the price I could buy a new next gen console? Look at how many people were up in arms because Kinect made XBOX one $100 more expensive. The gaming community basically demanded that they drop the device to lower the price. I am honestly surprised game devs are excited about VR. It seems like it is hard enough for a company to survive without developing for a device with a smaller target audience.
Maybe some day it will wow and amaze me, but I am doubtful.
Every kid is definitely not going to be getting it for Christmas. Also there is definitely a viable market that includes many things as well as gaming.
Things like FPS's, I personally couldn't be bothered with it. But take things like flight and driving simulations, the immersion can be mind blowing.
For me, as I've said earlier in this thread, the resolution will have to improve before I can use it for extended periods of time.
VR headsets are definitely not going to be a fad for certain applications.
I'm just not sold on VR at all. Maybe I really do need to experience it to embrace it, but at this point I couldn't care less about it.
The price point alone makes me not interested. Why would I buy a peripheral device, supported by a handful of games, for the price I could buy a new next gen console? Look at how many people were up in arms because Kinect made XBOX one $100 more expensive. The gaming community basically demanded that they drop the device to lower the price. I am honestly surprised game devs are excited about VR. It seems like it is hard enough for a company to survive without developing for a device with a smaller target audience.
Maybe some day it will wow and amaze me, but I am doubtful.
Every kid is definitely not going to be getting it for Christmas. Also there is definitely a viable market that includes many things as well as gaming.
Things like FPS's, I personally couldn't be bothered with it. But take things like flight and driving simulations, the immersion can be mind blowing.
For me, as I've said earlier in this thread, the resolution will have to improve before I can use it for extended periods of time.
VR headsets are definitely not going to be a fad for certain applications.
Kids may get it for the holidays, but I doubt that VR will find much acceptance with anyone, kids included, who wears glasses.
I don't know that MMORPGs are really in need of VR technology, nor if it's really desired. Almost every MMORPG currently available has the option to use a 1st person perspective or a 3rd person view. Most players I have talked to use the 3rd person view. The reason I've heard most often: players want to see what is behind them. The strength of VR is the 1st person view. I really wonder how useful a pricey utility is going to be in games where a great number of players prefer a 3rd person perspective.
Flight and driving simulators, absolutely. FPS games, definitely. Strategy or RP games, not so much. At least, that's my assessment.
Logic, my dear, merely enables one to be wrong with great authority.
I'm just not sold on VR at all. Maybe I really do need to experience it to embrace it, but at this point I couldn't care less about it.
The price point alone makes me not interested. Why would I buy a peripheral device, supported by a handful of games, for the price I could buy a new next gen console? Look at how many people were up in arms because Kinect made XBOX one $100 more expensive. The gaming community basically demanded that they drop the device to lower the price. I am honestly surprised game devs are excited about VR. It seems like it is hard enough for a company to survive without developing for a device with a smaller target audience.
Maybe some day it will wow and amaze me, but I am doubtful.
lol anyone who thinks a "next gen console" is even worth dropping money for in the first place needs to not be buying VR for at least a decade, anyway.... Consoles are for kids and noobs #PCMasterRace
Ark IMO is where we should be going. It's Sandbox. It CAN be PVP but also is smart enough to allow us Carebears our own little playground.
It also can be infinitely customizable. Just add another Ark with Alien stuff or whatnot.
I mentioned before that ARK actually succeeded because it took elements of classic mmos and evolved it. The mmo industry did the exact opposite. It stripped the core elements that drove it's own creation.
At the very heart of early mmorpgs resided a survival game. Those who played early mmos know the excitement of entering a large, unknown world that could face plant you at any time. Very first time I logged into Asheron's Call with a friend we ran off and engaged some Drudge a couple levels higher than us and "OMG!" ... dead. It was incredibly fun and amazingly difficult at times. Same memories for many in EQ as well.
Perhaps it is entirely accidental but ARK has captured the essence of what old school mmos strove for which modern day mmos have lost. Mmos need to be completely rethought from the ground up. They need the originators back that resided in genres like RPGs who want a living, breathing and realistic world back even if high fantasy. Even if level capped in D&D the game is only fun knowing you can die at any moment. Realism must be kept no matter the genre.
Ark IMO is where we should be going. It's Sandbox. It CAN be PVP but also is smart enough to allow us Carebears our own little playground.
It also can be infinitely customizable. Just add another Ark with Alien stuff or whatnot.
I mentioned before that ARK actually succeeded because it took elements of classic mmos and evolved it. The mmo industry did the exact opposite. It stripped the core elements that drove it's own creation.
At the very heart of early mmorpgs resided a survival game. Those who played early mmos know the excitement of entering a large, unknown world that could face plant you at any time. Very first time I logged into Asheron's Call with a friend we ran off and engaged some Drudge a couple levels higher than us and "OMG!" ... dead. It was incredibly fun and amazingly difficult at times. Same memories for many in EQ as well.
Perhaps it is entirely accidental but ARK has captured the essence of what old school mmos strove for which modern day mmos have lost. Mmos need to be completely rethought from the ground up. They need the originators back that resided in genres like RPGs who want a living, breathing and realistic world back even if high fantasy. Even if level capped in D&D the game is only fun knowing you can die at any moment. Realism must be kept no matter the genre.
Ark is filled with cheaters. How can you guys even suggest a B2P $30 game to ppl that is filled with cheats that the devs are powerless to control.
They even have a thread on their steam forum offering $200 to anyone who can provide them with cheats used in the game.
http://steamcommunity.com/app/346110/discussions/0/523890046867909905/
I agree with you about the other things you said though. I felt like that in SWG.
Anyone who really doesn't understand why VR is important, should check out the book Ready Player One. It really gives you a look at the many possible things VR could do.
If VR can trick your mind into thinking, what you are seeing is real, that alone will change your mind on it.
VR games are being designed from the ground up, just for VR, because running games already made, can trip your brain up. There are a lot of companies, that are working on games, and not talking about it.
I think video is going to be a big deal for VR. To be able to sit in a virtual theater, and look at a screen that looks to be 100' wide to you will be nice.
Then 360 degree video, where you can take vacation videos, and be able to relive the moment like you were there.
Be able to go to virtual concerts, sporting events, vacation spots.
There are tons of companies, and people making all kinds of things for VR, trying to get it ready by launch, and then those that will work on it after the launch.
I think MMO's in VR will be huge. 1st person will be awesome, and sound will be very important in VR. So, if there is lack of a 3rd person mode, I'm sure they will make it possible for you to clearly hear someone sneaking up on you. The point of VR is to make you feel like you are in the game. In real life, you don't really have access to a 3rd person mode do you. But you can hear if someone is coming closer to you though, right?
The whole idea, of turning your head, and looking around, just like you would have to do in real life, will make you feel more part of the game, or environment. Maybe when they get the virtual hand controls ready, you can use a sword and shield, and actually fight your battles.
There are so many possibilities to look forward too. It might be $400 for the Rift, hopeful not more, but it opens up so many possible uses, that it's easily worth the money. I'm sure it will take time for software to be made, just like any gaming console. But the future is full of possibilities. I can't wait.
His nickname is PERFECT.....SmokeBlower, dave you are so callous of your abilities! You need something a little LESS in your face, so it takes people a little while to figure you out.
Comments
They saved money but in the long run I think they would've benefited more by keeping him as face of Landmark and EQN so ppl wouldn't lose faith in those games.
Stage 2 must've been a blast. /jelly
The Tripods
Specifically the poor vision of EQNext and its shallow little brother Landmark.
I don't think he understood what EQ fans expect from the IP.
Mcquaid will get there first and Pantheon will kill EQ and EQ2 in a single strike, mark my word.
Daybreak need to understand that if the want to keep cashing on EQ popularity they need to give their core customers what they crave before they all move to something else.
Things like FPS's, I personally couldn't be bothered with it. But take things like flight and driving simulations, the immersion can be mind blowing.
For me, as I've said earlier in this thread, the resolution will have to improve before I can use it for extended periods of time.
VR headsets are definitely not going to be a fad for certain applications.
"Be water my friend" - Bruce Lee
I don't know that MMORPGs are really in need of VR technology, nor if it's really desired. Almost every MMORPG currently available has the option to use a 1st person perspective or a 3rd person view. Most players I have talked to use the 3rd person view. The reason I've heard most often: players want to see what is behind them. The strength of VR is the 1st person view. I really wonder how useful a pricey utility is going to be in games where a great number of players prefer a 3rd person perspective.
Flight and driving simulators, absolutely. FPS games, definitely. Strategy or RP games, not so much. At least, that's my assessment.
Logic, my dear, merely enables one to be wrong with great authority.
You stay sassy!