Howdy, Stranger!
It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!
Quick Links
People hate innovation and change!
arieste
Member UncommonPosts: 3,309
There has been a lot of criticism of EQN over the last couple of days and inevitably in response to every criticism is this statement that "it's new and innovative, and you don't like it because you can't handle change".
Here is the thing though. The innovative pieces of EQN - Rally Calls, Voxel World, Landmark, Dynamic Content - these ARE NOT what are "hating" on. Even the "hater" threads tend to like some or all of these innovative and new things.
What people are criticizing is stuff that's been done in multiple other games and that people have hated.
The WoW-meets disney character models - there is nothing innovative about them. It is an inappropriate choice for the EQ franchise. It has nothing to do with it being new, it has to do with them being ugly and just wrong.
The GW2 action-combat and removal of the trinity - this sucked in GW2 and resulted in extremely trivial easy-mode encounters, no reliance on other people, poor socialization (no one ever talked in GW2 raids) and general boredom. There are other action-combat game (NW, TSW - that do a better job designing complex encounters with action-combat, but only GW2 has totally tossed out the trinity and their encounters are crap.)
So yeah, before you blame people for hating change, consider that it's not change they hate, it's bad or inappropriate features that they've seen before and did not like. I don't see too many people talking about how "Rally Calls are a bad idea" or "being able to build anything via landmark is stupid". Poeple LIKE the new and innovative ideas. It's stuff copied from WoW and GW2 that people are hating on.
"Id rather work on something with great potential than on fulfilling a promise of mediocrity."
- Raph Koster
Tried: AO,EQ,EQ2,DAoC,SWG,AA,SB,HZ,CoX,PS,GA,TR,IV,GnH,EVE, PP,DnL,WAR,MxO,SWG,FE,VG,AoC,DDO,LoTRO,Rift,TOR,Aion,Tera,TSW,GW2,DCUO,CO,STO
Favourites: AO,SWG,EVE,TR,LoTRO,TSW,EQ2, Firefall
Currently Playing: ESO
Comments
That is a lucid, intelligent and well thought out post. I agree with all of it.
I love you.
-Ellessar-
"mmorpg.com forum admins are all TROLLS and losers in real life"
My opinion
Hmph I never played Guild Wars 2. I did play Vindictus which I think might be similar in combat style.
The same complaints you all bring forward about GW2 are present in Vindictus.
You don't rely on anyone because you keep rushing forward with your group at a super fast pace, you never talk to anyone since everyone can do DPS so you don't rely on anyone...no one talks, because why would you....everyone is too busy facerolling.
I'm guessing the same problems are present in GW2.
People love innovation and change. They just wanted it to be the innovation and change that they thought of when they heard all of the non-specific things about the game.
I can not remember winning or losing a single debate on the internet.
i agree there is nothing innovative but using different models
but there is nothing harmful in using the chosen models too
personally, the EQN models remind of being inspired from FreeRealms more than WOW
EQ2 fan sites
While I find the graphic complaints a bit silly, I totally hate that theyr are going the gw2 route with combat.
Most of the features have me drooling, but I really can't get past the gw2 combat system, Its something that I absolutely hated in gw2, infact its prob the one feature in a mmo i've hated the most since eq1.
I am not a huge fan of the trinity, but if you are gonna replace it, it has to be for something that is actually better, this is not better, and its most definatly not in the spirit of eq.
While Tsw also moved away from the trinity somewhat, you were still heavily encouraged to fill these roles, and this is a much better approach overall.
I have to agree. The majority of stuff that was presented at the EQN reveal presentation was mind blowing.
But when the details came out, the lack of class roles, lack of meaningful massive raiding (scaled down raids to 2 people .. really?), and the arcade style flashy combat seem too much like GW2, which is fine for people who love GW2.
But if someone wants a GW2 style game, they will just play GW2. .. And if they are willing to hop from GW2 to EQN to play the Next greatest thing, what does that say for the longevity of EQN?
EQN isn't screaming a game that I will play for as long as I played the original EQ1. I think it needs to go back to the drawing board some more.
Want a nice understanding of life? Try Spirit Science: "The Human History"
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U8NNHmV3QPw&feature=plcp
Recognize the voice? Yep sounds like Penny Arcade's Extra Credits.
Agreed. Well it is innovative, nothing against that. Main problem is; is the game world is compelling enough and interesting enough for players to play for more than a few weeks? Also, most people that are complaining, aren't complaining about how the mobs will behave or the destructible environments. The majority of complaints about how the game looks and the simplified console based combat. Before launch I was told that it had cartoony graphics and played like Diablo. None of us in my guild believed him because it was an EQ game, not some spin off. Now he's going "I told you".
Edit: I'm going to stick up for the art direction, somewhat. Although I didn't think it was appropriate for an EQ game, I can totally understand why a game studio would chose that style. Realistic humans rarely feel right in games. The seem too light and therefore need to exaggerate their gestures, which reinforces the wrongness. Plus there is this phenomenon when it looks too real it gets a bit uncanny and uncomfortable to look at. There was this Dreamwork animation that crossed that line a few years back.
Graphics are a personal thing, some will like the way SoE have gone (Millions seemed to enjoy it in WoW for some odd reason) and some will hate it, but graphics certainly won't hurt the game (Minecraft anyone?)
Where on earth did you get the idea there is no holy trinity? the panels and info I've been reading have told us quite clearly that there will be the same classes and some new as you have found in the other EQ games.
I will have to play the game first before I decide if I will like the combat, I'm 50/50 about GW2's approach, and if it's going the same way as DCUO then again I'm 50/50.
Please don't try to make out that the EQ franchise couldn't withstand a new graphical approach, it tried it in EQ2 and got moaned at by the graphics police that it was too realistic, now they are going with a more stylised approach they are again being moaned at, rock and a hard place, but again millions seem to like it in other games.
It's also a bit of a stretch to assume we all think the changes are inappropiate, I would have loved EQ1 to use the WoW graphics and I would still be playing it if it had rather than the current dated models.
― Terry Pratchett, Making Money
Well said.
OP I agree with mostly everything you stated.
I thought they said there would be a trinity in the game. I will reserve judgement until I see some more combat action and character details.
Also GW2...by far the worse thing in that game is that characters did not matter. I think combat was the factor that contributed to that. MMO's are about exploration. You need to have a party for that. The harder stuff is in the dungeons that are deeper inside and require team work and effort to get to.
Hm...I liked Elder scrolls MMO combat so perhaps EQn will have the same style.
If it is GW2 style where there is no tank generating threat then I'll probably just stick to making things for people. GW2's whole character set-up was destroyed by that one implimentation.
Also I like the idea of exploring to find all 40 classes. I'm curious how the skills will play out in the long run and I like the idea of mixing skills...its like Final Fantasy 14's system where you only need one character and they can play all classes. Instead in EQ you can switch skills out and be say a Warrior that can heal himself albeit not as easy as a Cleric could heal themselves I'm sure.
They quite clearly said you wont need healer or tanks, this means no holy trinity, if you won't need them players wont use them as it will not beneficial to use them, as it becomes counter productive when bosses are made for dps races.
Like I said earlier the TSW approach would have been a far more solid approach.
I disagree with some of what the OP says, for example those clinging to the trinity rather miss the point of its death, EQN is trying to evolve the genre, and make a real virtual world. That mean advanced AI among other things, which means, you cant have the trinity as it relies on the AI being stupid enough to attack the most heavily armored PC or whoever happens to taunt. (You still can play as tank and healer type classes, but they are not limited to a single role). You can't have it both ways, trinity or virtual world, and if you choose trinity you want your mmo to stay the same and not move forward, (and backward as this brings us closer to pen and paper D&D).
Also there is some knee jerk reactions going on here, assuming that everything similar to GW2 means it will be exactly the same as GW2 is lazy. As is assuming limited hotbar means faceroll combat, (given advanced AI that wont be the case).
So there is inconsistency here as those hating on some features don't realize that the features they like are the reason those other features may turn out rather well.
1. Cartoonish characters last longer... That's the only reason for this decision. If they can make a mmo with Halo 4 graphics and art style they WILL! Ever heard of uncanny valley? That's why all the big budget games are anime-like now. I don't want my mmo to look like shit in ten years, like EQ2 is right now, just because some people want it to be more realistic.
2. Hard holy trinity is the reason why there're so many unhappy healers and tanks back in EQ or WoW, because they're always forced to play certain ways, at certain hour of the day by their guildmates, and be hated forever when they decide to quit the game. Notice that I used the word "hard" here? Do you know that EQN will not fully abandon holy trinity and they want people to feel "needed" in some degree but not "WTF why can't you fXckers play tonight you little #$%^&*"
Go watch the Curse class panel then we'll talk...
Perfect. I couldn't have said it better myself, and I have been searching for the right words to describe my feelings about the reveal.
The innovative stuff sounds like a lot of fun and I'm excited to try it. I might not even give it a try because of the butchered combat that looks like it was copy and pasted directly from GW2.
That was an innovation when GW2 came out, but IMO it was a poor one. That game is fun for me for about 2-3 nights and then It gets old. It's new Coke, not all innovations are keepers.
So I have heard the "Trinity must die, since I can't ever find a tank of healer."
Now you have shown me another with "The trinity must die since tanks and healers are being bossed around and people are mean to them"
Seems the "trinity" just can't win.
I don't think this is true at all. In fact it seems to be quite the opposite. I know forums are not a good gauge of how a population feels, but there were a lot of people who thought that this game might go back to the roots of EQ1 in some ways.
I don't know, I've seen the "vocal minority" thing before, or maybe heard, but whatever. This seems different to me. I think there actually are a lot of upset EQ fans.
If they have the testicular fortitude to ask some questions on the round table and really leave some major game design decisions up to the fans, then we will know for sure.
We have seen a "tech demo" of ingame combat which was created to highlight aspects of movement and illustrate terrain destruction. There was virtually no AI used for the mobs, in fact most of them didn't actually move or fight.
We have no idea what the combat will actually be like. We know a few general details, but the specifics remain hidden. It certainly sounds like it will be similar to GW2 more than any other game, but how similar is the important part.
A great deal hinges on how well the new "Adaptive AI" will work. It is mentioned very frequently, and it certainly sounds like it will make or break the game.
OP you are spot on.
I actually like most of the innovative elements of EQNext.
What I don't like is how pointless the combat is going to be.
Granted we haven't seen much, but from what we saw we can safely say that the combat system is almost identical to GW2.
Zerg combat and lack of trinity is totally alien to the Everquest in my view, and a game breaker for me.
I find myself not agreeing with you 90% of the time, but what you've written here 100% reflects my views as well as the group of gamers whom i've followed from EQ1 to DAOC back to EQ1 then to EQ2 and finally back to EQ1 again hah.
We're just so heartbroken
. I won't go into how my kids feel about it, they're pretty angry lol!
We i know EXACTLY what the in-game combat will be like. Smedly already mentioned that we have about 40 multiclasses to choose from, but he also stated that the number of skills per class is LESS than the number of classes to choose from. That's pretty sad considering the Magician from EQ1 had about 200 spells give or take between level 1-60.
The combat is also going to be almost a direct ripoff of GW2. They're doing an "Action" based combat system with telegraphs. We saw "red circles" dictating what was going to happen. Boring, repetitive, nonsense. It's just horrible.
Then, we know the "Art-Style" that SOE is going with for Everquest:Next that looks NOTHING anywhere NEAR what an Everquest game should look like. It's just BAD.
We know a lot for not knowing much to be honest. It's rather frightening.
Oh really? Explain the methodology used to determine that it's a tiny amount of people complaining. You are clueless and have credibility until you do. Saying it does not make it true.