Howdy, Stranger!
It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!
Quick Links
EQ:N, the most Soul Crushing MMO to be released in the past 10 years!
BearKnight
Member CommonPosts: 461
I've never seen so many people, myself included, conflicted over a release in quite some time. It isn't the Hype that is the issue either, and that is highly surprising.
The issue, is that Smed is rolling some of the best aspects of an MMO in with some of the most horrible aspects for an MMO. Together, they form the most frustrating announcements that have been made in the past 10years. Even more frustrating than seeing the first iteration of what we were going to have thrown at us from gamesworkshop in the form of a WoW-Warahmmer 40k (google to see what i'm talking about).
So what's so amazing?
-Sandbox Core Gameplay
-Destructable Voxel based environemtn tied in with 3D models to handle animations (since voxels suck for animation)
-Multi-Class mentality
-Crafting that is trying to copy SWG's amazing system
-Mentality behind "An MMO isn't just made for one person", something Sandbox's actually encompass.
-Smed wants to make an EvE-style based fantasy Sandbox title, woo.
-Exploration being the emphasis over linear achievement.
So what's so absolutely frustrating that are potentially deal-breakers for such an amazing game??
-Graphics aimed at Children, think WoW 2.0
-Major mainstreaming of the Everquest brand, ie: dumbing down...something many didn't think was possible for a Sandbox
-GW2's horribly bland combat system, with attack telegraphs
-GW2's absolutely pathetic skill system, yaaay 8 abilities!
-GW2's Weapon system, ties in with above point about skills.
-Horizontal progression primarily based on gear (WoW raiding gear-stepping, but without levels?)
-The same engine that runs Planetside 2
-Developers that think making the graphics look BETTER, or correcting their mistakes, is a crime (ie: Banning for SweetFX)
Misc:
-PvP was mentioned, and then thrown under the bus to not be spoken about until Beta?
-How does the world handle "Troll" guilds destroying the world?
-What's the regeneration timer on destroyed world pieces?
-What's the limit to how much/deep you can destroy before the game physically stops you from doing any more?
-How does the Engine handle 100 players in the same area? Does it dynamically-instance players from each other like PS2? (this turned PS2 into a mess btw)
At the end of the day, the game is unplayable with their current WoW 2.0 Cartoon art-style, but is one of the more future-oriented core mechanics games we've seen since SWG/DAOC. Truly a frustrating event 
!!!
Comments
sigh......nevermnd
[mod edit]
Furthermore, I do not HATE EQ:N, I hate the lead director for yet again trying to Mainstream EQ. Look what happened to EQ2! It's the same blasted thing happening again.
I'd rather say something, and try, than give up and walk away.
What do you hope to achieve?
Balance for the average and 50% will suck at it. People who don't "win" leave.
So the solution is sought: balance below average skill requirements for most gameplay.
MOBAs have proven easier = more players.
Pi*1337/100 = 42
Ignoring all that other bullcrap this is the only thing I can agree with: -
And I agree with it simply because it has not been released yet not because you actually have any valid points.
The Forgelight engine is a "potential deal breaker"? Could you elaborate a little on this one? Whats a deal breaker about the core engine? I'm not ripping, just wondering.
Forgelight is amazing and sits above most other engines I've seen; and they built it themselves over using someone else spaghetti-coded engine which normally has to be massivally overhauled anyway (like Hero Engine for ToR).
what do you think you are accomplishing, though?
what would be the consequences of you 'giving up'?
is it really that bad?
So just cancel the project?
Hit the delete button on all the art assets?
Fire the team?
What is it you want them to do?
I call b.s. on that.
Sure I'm excited about it. But I have no idea whether I'll like it or not. Whether they will deliver or not. Whether SOE is fudging it again or not.
I'm an agnostic. I don't know.
I don't know anything about the game other than some rudimentary information. What my campaign is, is to calm people down and wait. I simply don't think we have enough information to start an internet campaign to bring the game to a grinding halt - and I doubt that would happen even if we tried.
It isn't defense of SOE. It is objection to blown-out-of-proportion doom and gloom. If anyone has been out there saying, 'soe can do no wrong' - I'd really like to see it.
I think what you are seeing is 'i like the graphics' 'i can see how the combat system could work' 'i like the mix and match idea' 'i like the horizontal progression idea' 'i like the idea of exploration for advancement'....etc.
People are defending the concepts - not SOE - the company hasn't even had the chance to prove whether they can deliver or not.
you might have a point if this was a SOE message board.
the OP is just crusading, nothing more.
personally, I haven't trusted SOE ever since they turned on my Vanguard account and charged me for it, and did not refund the money they stole from my bank account.
but even when that happened to me, I didn't try to rally people to help my cause. the most I did was post an inquiry on this site to see if it happened to others and if they had a better way of dealing with it than I did. (which was, get over it)
my point in mentioning that is because not everyone who puts down the OP is a die-hard SOE fan. some people might feel like he is a jackass for other reasons.
They have already done 2 reboots.. might as well make it 3 and back to the chalkboard
and btw.. they aren't that far along in this game anyways.. trust me.. lol
How can you say Hype isn't the problem? Of course hype is the problem, along with bad reading comprehension. People were hyped about the game, and had unrealistic expectations. However, this time it wasn't in the fault of the developers.
EQ devs strictly said they were making a hardcore sandbox game.
EQ1 & 2 were not a sandbox games.
Yet, you get hyped about sequel being EQ3.
It was never going to be EQ3.
They promised a sandbox, and they gave you sandbox.
And then recreate a game which pleases EQ1 and EQ2 fans - drain their population, close them down. Invest millions and millions and millions after 3 reboots to capture their existing customers and the very very very few who wish to see the same ol' combat and the same ol' tired graphic style and the same ol' gameplay we had 14 years ago.
Yeah - good plan.
But they won Best of Show at E3...
Sherman's Gaming
Youtube Content creator for The Elder Scrolls Online
Channel:http://https//www.youtube.com/channel/UCrgYNgpFTRAl4XWz31o2emw
MOBA's are only easy in that their controls are simple. To dominate in MOBA's in a competitive environment on the other hand is a completely different matter.
Games I've played/tried out:WAR, LOTRO, Tabula Rasa, AoC, EQ1, EQ2, WoW, Vangaurd, FFXI, D&DO, Lineage 2, Saga Of Ryzom, EvE Online, DAoC, Guild Wars,Star Wars Galaxies, Hell Gate London, Auto Assault, Grando Espada ( AKA SoTNW ), Archlord, CoV/H, Star Trek Online, APB, Champions Online, FFXIV, Rift Online, GW2.
Game(s) I Am Currently Playing:
GW2 (+LoL and BF3)
Playing obtuse? Is it so hard to understand the point here; not to mention understand the difference between speaking hypothetically and about possibility rather than declarations one way or the other?
To answer your question no, which is an obvious freaking answer, yet can you name any posters going around saying the game is a success or will be over and over and over? You know so we can compare the same type of activity?
For every minute you are angry , you lose 60 seconds of happiness."-Emerson
Nope people who are stating their personal beliefs based on nothing but words and a short tech demo are being called on it here negative or positive.Mostly everything you've seen in this thread is calling out BearKnight for once again stating his strongly held belief on what EQN will be,based on barely any actual evidence,as hard fact and restating it in a new thread for the 1 billionth time.
We have no idea what EQN will turn out like at this stage the only valid opinions one can state at this tiem are if you like,hate or ambivalent about the graphics,the parkour movement shown in the demo and the limited combat shown with no mob AI and only 3 abilities for 2 class
Once more information and solid game play video evidence is shown then we can have at it with more informed opinions.Right now all that's happening is wheel spinning with the same crap from both sides being repeated over and over,including mine.
Please stop calling everyone who only utters a minor complain about the game a hater. Why can't some people not understand, that you can like something and still criticise parts of it. You can be fan of a football team and still don't like one of the players or throw empty cans at the stupid lion mascot for that matter.
I know, you only want to defend the game. But I'm sure BearKnight is as exited about EQN as you are. As you see, he has 7 points that he finds "amazing". It must be allowed to say something critical about the game. Just consider that the greatest fans are always the greatest critics.
Do you honestly think someone would repeatedly write long posts about a game he hates? Most games on the list here at the site are cheap asian grinders. What do you think why he doesn't post there.
I find the idea that you can be a warrior one second and the next second a mage quite odd and somewhat immersion braking.
Dude, I feel your pain.
While I don't like it, I think that this is a necessity to some extent. EQN has to appeal also to casuals, otherwise it wouldn't. be successful. I only hope they cater to all groups equally as Dave Georgeson said.
I think the combat mechanics are not that bad. I don't know what fighting in EQ and EQ2 was like, but if I compare WoW and GW2, I prefer GW2. I find it to complicated and unnecessary to manage 30 skills at once, and it is a step forward to concentrate on the action instead in the skill bar. Maybe I'm not hardcore enough. I can understand that it sets off someone who has mastered the system if his skills are made worthless.
The problem with GW2 was that the fights with world bosses always ended in zergs. But I think that has not much with the basic fighting mechanics but with the AI and EQN will hopefully change that.
I like horizontal progression and hope they get rid of the gear grind. But I wouldn't be so sure here maybe it is not all that horizontal. I still don't get this thing with the tiers. I think the haven't told us the most important part jet.
Why is this bad? I thought the engine was well received everywhere.
What is this about? I haven't heart about it.
I'm sure they have thought about that. I only hope their solution will not involve phasing.
That is a good point. I hope the will be able to display more players at once because the game does not involve shooter mechanics and therefore only needs a lower latency.
You can say that aloud. I think with EQN the whole mmorpg genre is at a crossroad. If it is successful it will establish the AAA mainstream sandbox mmo, and if it fails we are in for 10 years of WoW-clones or the genre will collapse altogether.
Even if EQN should not be the perfect game for me, I'm already looking forward for all the EQN-clones.
That will be glorious new age of mmos!
So the game is "soul crushing" and "unplayable" because you don't care for the art?
You say WoW's art is "made for children". I say WoW's art is one of the major reasons it's been so successful. It has style. The textures are interesting. It's not overly realistic; it knows that people don't play this type of game for photo-realism.
If you haven't noticed, MMORPGs that try for photo-realistic graphics tend not to do so well. I won't go so far as to say the graphics are the cause, but photo-realism is certainly not a requirement and probably not even an asset in terms of making your game a success.
The graphics in EQ2 were one of the main things that turned me off from the game. They were overly realistic, particularly the textures, which I feel rarely looks good rendered in 3D at the level of the typical video card. Similarly, I felt like the graphics engine "upgrade" to Dark Age of Camelot was a total failure, largely because they tried to move more toward "realism" and lost the distinctive art style. The day WoW "updates" its iconic and evocative graphics engine will be the end of an era.
From what I've seen, EQ:N's art style is somewhere between the pseudo-realism of EQ2 and the highly stylized graphics of WoW. Dark Age of Camelot's original art was in a similar place, and that game's original art is possibly my favorite in the genre - "realistic", plausible, but tweaked in interesting and artistic ways.
A game's art is only going to make it "unplayable" if it's poorly done so as to not meet a minimum standard of quality. EQ:N's art clearly meets that standard, even if you personally don't care for the direction they've taken it.