So, given the devs have said they dont want any choice a player makes when making a character to limit them from being effective in any role, we must conclude that RACE will be no more than a cosmetic choice.
No racial factions
No racial limitations
No racial variation (that impacts on game play)
No racial advantage
In short race is about as relevant as choosing the color of your underpants.
For me this is a big disappointment.
If little Timmy was told that his Human Warrior was not as strong as the Ogre Warrior tantrums would be thrown. Therefore, you can expect complete homogenization of the game in every facet. There will be nothing unique in this game. There will be no meaningful decisions as the devs claim. Everything in this game will be made so that Timmy can faceroll his way to glory. You have to always keep in mind that people who grew up with RPG's in some form are not their target audience with this game. They are after the console gamers, the F2P crowd, and the vast number of players who have left WoW in search of something new.
We can also expect people to min/max and not play for fun regardless of racial limitations or lack thereof so kindly stop talking for everyone especially someone who's predominantly in the F2P crowd but an old guard in terms of MMOs and RPGs.
yes there will be no "racial faction" but it appears there will be good and evil choices that will determine if you are "evil" or "good" by the choices you make. This will then create a faction just not separated in the way most mmorpg's have been separated in the past. Its an interesting change to say the least.
Originally posted by xanthmetis yes there will be no "racial faction" but it appears there will be good and evil choices that will determine if you are "evil" or "good" by the choices you make. This will then create a faction just not separated in the way most mmorpg's have been separated in the past. Its an interesting change to say the least.
Bingo. I think it's more important for in game actions you make to declare whether you are "good" or "evil", not just selecting it from a pull down. Want to be a Shadowknight? Walk the walk and start slaying innocents. Want to be a Paladin? Better make sure you play like one. This assumes that the AI system works as intended though I wont count it out until it's not there.
So, given the devs have said they dont want any choice a player makes when making a character to limit them from being effective in any role, we must conclude that RACE will be no more than a cosmetic choice.
No racial factions
No racial limitations
No racial variation (that impacts on game play)
No racial advantage
In short race is about as relevant as choosing the color of your underpants.
For me this is a big disappointment.
If little Timmy was told that his Human Warrior was not as strong as the Ogre Warrior tantrums would be thrown. Therefore, you can expect complete homogenization of the game in every facet. There will be nothing unique in this game. There will be no meaningful decisions as the devs claim. Everything in this game will be made so that Timmy can faceroll his way to glory. You have to always keep in mind that people who grew up with RPG's in some form are not their target audience with this game. They are after the console gamers, the F2P crowd, and the vast number of players who have left WoW in search of something new.
While I think you are speaking from a very negative space (not sure why you are wasting your time honestly), but I have to agree with your overall point.
They are going after a "different" crowd so to speak then maybe 10-15+ years ago. Because the market and players have changed. The current "average" player is a wide variety and isn't only the die hard old school player that wants something that died off a long time ago (for many reasons).
I'd say that over my almost 20 years of online gaming, racial differences have generally ended badly or were pointless. Some races usually have a slight advantage, some have none or an actual disadvantage, and eventually all those special little unique features are pointless a month or year into the game when class/abilities/gear or whatever end up balancing everything because so many people complain. I can't think of a game that had very distinct racial features that was "balanced" or that was generally perceived as being done well. Of course those that had that special racial that gave them an advantage complain when it is taken away, but most likely they picked the race for that reason to begin with (I know I have).
In "general," most players seem to pick their race based on either cosmetics or racial abilities (min/max for the most part). By having all races on an even field to begin with, they can please those that actually care about the looks and lore of a race and not have to worry about the min/max crowd taking too much advantage of whatever racial differences might be.
It is just an extra amount of work for the devs to 1. create 2. balance 3. continue to balance after progressing the game. It's a waste of time.
Not sure if you have inside knowledge, but from here it seems you strongly dislike the direction they are going and are doing your best to spread that negatively. No facts, just your one sided opinion. To me, you actually seem like "Timmy."
I'm not the "console" or "F2P" crowd, I did leave WoW many years ago though. I've been gaming longer than many gamers have probably been alive, but I am an EQ fan, an mmorpg fan, and am looking forward to EQN. Will it be perfect? I highly doubt it. But compared to what is out and coming out, it seems to offer quite a bit more for players of all types. Maybe not some (like you) who expect XYZ or call failure, but there are plenty out there looking for a fresh take on the mmorpg.
Then again, as you said in another post, it could all be Vapor and we are all just wasting our time here...sadly Vapor looks much more exciting then anything out currently and I plan to patiently wait for the day it becomes reality.
If you actually are a fan and want EQN to be a success, maybe send your thoughts to the devs (email, twitter, fb, reddit, soe forums, etc), I'm assuming you wouldn't throw your money away on the founder's packs and try to have direct impact on the game's development.
If you are mad that they aren't designing a game specifically for you and have already given up, good luck with that I guess.
(Edit: Apologies to Thinlizzy) if you look at the round table polls https://www.everquestnext.com/round-table?poll=all-races-all-classes , the majority of potential players asked there to be race/class restrictions. Also a sizable group didn't necessarily want restrictions but wanted some races to be much more suited to classes than others. I seriously doubt the devs after having taken the time to ask the players in the first place are going to ignore that and release a series of homogenized races with little more than visual differences. They polled, and we responded. If any of you are interested in the game and care how the development goes, participate in the round table polls. They are doing this so they can make the game most of us would want to play.
Edit: Well if they are ignoring a lot of this player input it will be a shame. While people certainly aren't asking for an EQ1 clone, (nobody wants to do corpse runs in The Hole.. ever) there are aspects of EQ1 that made it a great game that players remember today. While I will wait and see how the class thing works out, if they don't implement race/class restrictions I don't see how things are going to make sense. People liked Shadowknights and Paladins (okay well maybe not paladins) they liked the good and evil factions and the benefits and penalties that came with them (save maybe the exp penalties). I really hope they at least give the races unique abilities or wildly different statistics that will make them more viable for certain roles/classes. If they just water everything down and ignore the polls they're just going to end up with a pile of crap just like every other MMO on the market, and while people will likely still play Landmark for its Minecraft meets NWN campaign editor sandbox, EQ Next will end up just like EQ2.
Originally posted by KolatSpy This Thinlizzy guy seems to be just spouting BS, and I'm guessing is either just an EQ hater or someone who is being paid to trashtalk EQNext. if you look at the round table polls https://www.everquestnext.com/round-table?poll=all-races-all-classes , the majority of potential players asked there to be race/class restrictions. Also a sizable group didn't necessarily want restrictions but wanted some races to be much more suited to classes than others. I seriously doubt the devs after having taken the time to ask the players in the first place are going to ignore that and release a series of homogenized races with little more than visual differences. They polled, and we responded. If any of you are interested in the game and care how the development goes, participate in the round table polls. They are doing this so they can make the game most of us would want to play.
The Round Table seems to be more for our entertainment, then having a huge impact on game development. I'm guessing they have the majority of the foundation already decided by this point. Maybe if it was a land slide vote against what they had planned, they might take a look at their initial design, but I think the polls are there to make us feel like we are having a say. They may alter certain decisions as development progresses, but so far all the polls and video responses seem to reflex that they are listening, but are making the game they want.
Originally posted by Vutar
You missed the poll where the majority wanted class restrictions for races eh? Ya, SOE decided to ignore the player wishes.
I think it is less about "ignoring" the player's wishes and more about how they are designing the game. Their explanation on the video made complete sense to me. With multi-classing, any strict race/class restrictions can not work. The system is too complex. Of course you could argue that "some" players don't want multi-classing, but this is their game and their design. It isn't EQ3, or just a copy of the race/class system that has been done so many times (not that multi-classing is original). If players don't play the game because of this or multiple design elements, they will either adapt or pay the price.
Personally, I voted for having all races/classes with the chance of penalties. I wouldn't mind having to put in a lot of extra effort for a combo that might be out of the ordinary, but I would like it to be a choice for me to make.
Then don't make a poll acting like the players have a choice.
Understandable, but I don't believe they ever said that polls would have a direct impact on development. I think it is a nice idea overall, but going with the "round table" theme which means all input is equal isn't the best when in reality, they have the final say regardless of what any players might want. Good idea, poor execution.
I think Wildstar is handling PR a bit better, their catch phrase "the devs are listening" and to contact them through social media is thrown out as much as possible.
If anything, I appreciate the polls because they lead to videos that give us insight into the game when they aren't really revealing any other details at the moment.
I'm assuming when Alpha/Beta roll around for LM/EQN and players actually have first hand experience, their input might actually start to have an impact. If there is a huge outcry for more distinction between the races, maybe they will change their minds. With the vast amount of things going into these games, I think the trivial elements might not be so important.
Either way, people are going to complain. Either it is too simple/balanced or unfair because elves have +5 resist to magic which is irrelevant after day 1 of playing.
Honestly, I don't mind having races being all cosmetic. I'm along both sides of it though. I don't mind races having perks behind them, but also don't like it being a 'Be this race or suck" mentality either. It really depends on the game and how its balanced.
Originally posted by bcbully I think they are really missing the boat here. The racial differences felt good in ESO.
It was good in the Original Everquest too. Which is why t hey are ignoring it in EQnext. This is Everquest in name only.
This seems to be a popular stance but one that is subjective for the most part depending on what EQ meant to each player. Of course EQN/LM will not be just like EQ but whether it's "like" EQ is yet to be seen. To me EQ was about a vast world where having friends got you farther and it took a long time to "win". From what I can see the only question is how hard content will or can be but the rest actually exceeds, in theory, what EQ was to me. We shall see.
I found the roundtable response to the race/class poll. While they talk about not restricting race/class combinations so players aren't screwed out of useful abilties later on, the interview with TenTonHammer I linked in my previous post (page14) mentions not having access to the Paladin class for alignment reasons.
IMO if lets say an ogre or a troll player wants access to something like that, time to faction grind like a mofo or do something akin to the betrayal quest from EQ2. If in their design race/class restrictions don't work, then they should at least make it so if someone of an evil race aspires to become a paladin, they have to prove themselves to said paladin faction to gain access.
Here is the character class panel from SOE Live.
They mention specifically around the 35-36 minute mark that a character may have to get faction to train certain classes.
Okay, back on topic. I'm still hopeful that they will have noticeably different stats for lets say an Ogre and a Gnome. Just because a race has access to a class/role doesn't mean that they have to have the same stats to start out. If you look back at EQ1 some races were more suited to certain classes, but not usually to the point that people wouldn't change it up. Like EQ1, I think that starting out as a non-optimal race/class combo should make things a bit more difficult. I'm also hoping for unique racial abilties, such as the ogre immunity to frontal stun, but I won't hold my breath.
Originally posted by bcbully I think they are really missing the boat here. The racial differences felt good in ESO.
It was good in the Original Everquest too. Which is why t hey are ignoring it in EQnext. This is Everquest in name only.
This seems to be a popular stance but one that is subjective for the most part depending on what EQ meant to each player. Of course EQN/LM will not be just like EQ but whether it's "like" EQ is yet to be seen. To me EQ was about a vast world where having friends got you farther and it took a long time to "win". From what I can see the only question is how hard content will or can be but the rest actually exceeds, in theory, what EQ was to me. We shall see.
Name the features of the Original EQ that have been announced for EQnext. There is nothing subjective about my statement.
Classes, races, lore, noteworthy mobs/items, and the world in general while not all 100% copied from EQ/EQ2 or the overall IP, so far I don't feel like I'm looking at a game taking place in WoW, GW2, Narnia, LOTR, ES, etc.
EQN is the NEXT evolution.
For some, EQ might of been the trinity, strict class/race/god combos, spawn camping, corpse runs, a small population, etc, but those were just blocks on top of the foundation. Many of the mechanics weren't original to EQ and have been done numerous times since.
What was original and continues to be so is the world itself. Just as EQ2 and other EQ games strayed away from the original, EQN is being taken in a new direction.
Personally, I really like their use of the new Star Trek movies as a comparison. New movies might not please hardcore ST fans, but they are appealing to a wide audience that may have never experienced ST before. Assuming the same will be done with the SW movies. While I hope the next 3 do the originals justice and aren't done in the same direction as the previous 3, we shall see. EQN could go in either direction, but so far I think they have the right idea.
And yes it is all very subjective. I loved EQ but had zero interest in EQ2 because it strayed and looked so different then the original. Assuming this is the same thing happening for many when comparing EQN to the previous games. We all like what we like and see the connections we wish to see.
EQN is not EQ in any way shape or form. As I and many others have said they took the name and are making an entirely different game with it. For anyone to deny that they have to be truly delusional or on SOE's payroll. You did not name one thing that isn't purely cosmetic.
There is nothing subjective about someone saying that EQN is not EQ. I find it comical that some are trying to make that claim but then go on to tell others to stop thinking EQN is EQ. You can't have it both ways.
depends what you are comparing EQ to
EQ2 was nothing like EQ1 for many disappointed EQgamers but it is still an EQ game
So, given the devs have said they dont want any choice a player makes when making a character to limit them from being effective in any role, we must conclude that RACE will be no more than a cosmetic choice.
No racial factions
No racial limitations
No racial variation (that impacts on game play)
No racial advantage
In short race is about as relevant as choosing the color of your underpants.
For me this is a big disappointment.
this is how it should've been from the start of mmorpgs :P
Why would I have to be a good elf? Simply because I'm an elf doesn't mean I want to join the "good guys", I wanna do evil stuffs and kill those "good guy bastards" so I can overtake the world with darkness (or my king, or whoever I'm helping).
I'm trying to say, why should my choice narrow down when I choose a race I want to play. It's "me" and I want to choose for myself where will my loyalty and bow lie. :P
"Happiness is not a destination. It is a method of life." -------------------------------
Originally posted by Vutar /facepalmEQN is not EQ in any way shape or form. As I and many others have said they took the name and are making an entirely different game with it. For anyone to deny that they have to be truly delusional or on SOE's payroll. You did not name one thing that isn't purely cosmetic.There is nothing subjective about someone saying that EQN is not EQ. I find it comical that some are trying to make that claim but then go on to tell others to stop thinking EQN is EQ. You can't have it both ways.
EQN is not EQ, just like the Clone Wars cartoon is not the Star Wars movies. You obviously dislike EQN and nothing will change that, but I find it funny that you ser zero connection between the two games. How is EQ2 like EQ? Unless you think nothing is like EQ and regardless of what they do, besides making an updated clone of EQ, you won't be happy. Classes, races, lore, mobs, items, the world are a little bit more then just cosmestic. I'm curious what you think makes a game worthy of the title EQ. Please give a list that doesn't include game mechanics found in other games.
It looks as if some like lore and tradition, while others just want free for all classes.. A high elf necromancer makes as much sense as a gnome druid, or a troll paladin.. I enjoyed the race restrictions as it often went hand in hand with the lore of the game.. plus it's only common sense that a barbarian would have more strength then an elf.. or the elf having more intelligence then the dwarf.. It's somewhat saddening that game worlds are so homogenized there is no longer a difference between characters and classes..
Originally posted by bcbully I think they are really missing the boat here. The racial differences felt good in ESO.
It was good in the Original Everquest too. Which is why t hey are ignoring it in EQnext. This is Everquest in name only.
This seems to be a popular stance but one that is subjective for the most part depending on what EQ meant to each player. Of course EQN/LM will not be just like EQ but whether it's "like" EQ is yet to be seen. To me EQ was about a vast world where having friends got you farther and it took a long time to "win". From what I can see the only question is how hard content will or can be but the rest actually exceeds, in theory, what EQ was to me. We shall see.
Name the features of the Original EQ that have been announced for EQnext. There is nothing subjective about my statement.
This is a loaded question because EQ as a feature list is a generic fantasy MMO with specific lore, which is why I said the comparison is subjective. Go read the box of any MMO and it will have about the same "features" including the need for an internet connection. If you want to say EQ is not like EQN strictly because the lore is different then I have no objections. We know the lore will be "similar but different" so there you go. Most of the EQ=/=EQN comments though go beyond that into the "watered down" and "homogenized" nonsense but we don't have that information to determine that yet.
My point was people liked EQ for different reasons. I liked it for the reasons I stated above and think that EQN COULD surpass EQ on my "I loved EQ because..." bullet list. Taking face value I know the big world, open exploration feeling will be much better in EQN. My one concern is how hard the content is overall. I'm hoping that at least 50% of the game world requires friends since that was a major plus for EQ. That along with a long overall progression will be key to how "like" EQ Everquest Next will be.
I think people are focusing on the wrong aspects when making a comparison.
Originally posted by bcbully I think they are really missing the boat here. The racial differences felt good in ESO.
It was good in the Original Everquest too. Which is why t hey are ignoring it in EQnext. This is Everquest in name only.
This seems to be a popular stance but one that is subjective for the most part depending on what EQ meant to each player. Of course EQN/LM will not be just like EQ but whether it's "like" EQ is yet to be seen. To me EQ was about a vast world where having friends got you farther and it took a long time to "win". From what I can see the only question is how hard content will or can be but the rest actually exceeds, in theory, what EQ was to me. We shall see.
Name the features of the Original EQ that have been announced for EQnext. There is nothing subjective about my statement.
This is a loaded question because EQ as a feature list is a generic fantasy MMO with specific lore, which is why I said the comparison is subjective. Go read the box of any MMO and it will have about the same "features" including the need for an internet connection. If you want to say EQ is not like EQN strictly because the lore is different then I have no objections. We know the lore will be "similar but different" so there you go. Most of the EQ=/=EQN comments though go beyond that into the "watered down" and "homogenized" nonsense but we don't have that information to determine that yet.
My point was people liked EQ for different reasons. I liked it for the reasons I stated above and think that EQN COULD surpass EQ on my "I loved EQ because..." bullet list. Taking face value I know the big world, open exploration feeling will be much better in EQN. My one concern is how hard the content is overall. I'm hoping that at least 50% of the game world requires friends since that was a major plus for EQ. That along with a long overall progression will be key to how "like" EQ Everquest Next will be.
I think people are focusing on the wrong aspects when making a comparison.
It really depends how SOE does open world. The new-age WoW cross-server zone is depressing for EQ.. but that's how it may end up, since SOE is copying other games with MMO aspects. It's "open", but without a "world" feel, similar to GW2.
Not surprising, since EQN is being described very similarly to GW2 anyways. Zzzzz...
This is a loaded question because EQ as a feature list is a generic fantasy MMO with specific lore, which is why I said the comparison is subjective. Go read the box of any MMO and it will have about the same "features" including the need for an internet connection. If you want to say EQ is not like EQN strictly because the lore is different then I have no objections. We know the lore will be "similar but different" so there you go. Most of the EQ=/=EQN comments though go beyond that into the "watered down" and "homogenized" nonsense but we don't have that information to determine that yet.
My point was people liked EQ for different reasons. I liked it for the reasons I stated above and think that EQN COULD surpass EQ on my "I loved EQ because..." bullet list. Taking face value I know the big world, open exploration feeling will be much better in EQN. My one concern is how hard the content is overall. I'm hoping that at least 50% of the game world requires friends since that was a major plus for EQ. That along with a long overall progression will be key to how "like" EQ Everquest Next will be.
I think people are focusing on the wrong aspects when making a comparison.
It really depends how SOE does open world. The new-age WoW cross-server zone is depressing for EQ.. but that's how it may end up, since SOE is copying other games with MMO aspects. It's "open", but without a "world" feel, similar to GW2.
Not surprising, since EQN is being described very similarly to GW2 anyways. Zzzzz...
I agree on GW2 not seeming to have a world feel but I believe SoE said EQN would be seemless, and it's procedurally based so adding more land is a matter of additional hardware. To be honest I'd much rather have a seemingly "seemless" but shared space across servers than to have each area a segmented zone with a loading screen. It may be the principal of it but at least in WoW you can walk from one end of a continent to the other without a loading screen. Who knows if EQN will adopt it. In EQN/LM players are able to port to any server to play and build so this may be true for EQN as well.
As far as the GW2 comparison the only connection I can think of is the hotbar/combat which SoE says is different. We'll have to see when it's shown but in every other respect IMO there is no GW2 comparison. The two are completely different fantasy MMOs.
Comments
Err .... good.
I always hated racial limitations or ability preferrences. More diversity, less uniformity.
People don't ask questions to get answers - they ask questions to show how smart they are. - Dogbert
We can also expect people to min/max and not play for fun regardless of racial limitations or lack thereof so kindly stop talking for everyone especially someone who's predominantly in the F2P crowd but an old guard in terms of MMOs and RPGs.
Bingo. I think it's more important for in game actions you make to declare whether you are "good" or "evil", not just selecting it from a pull down. Want to be a Shadowknight? Walk the walk and start slaying innocents. Want to be a Paladin? Better make sure you play like one. This assumes that the AI system works as intended though I wont count it out until it's not there.
While I think you are speaking from a very negative space (not sure why you are wasting your time honestly), but I have to agree with your overall point.
They are going after a "different" crowd so to speak then maybe 10-15+ years ago. Because the market and players have changed. The current "average" player is a wide variety and isn't only the die hard old school player that wants something that died off a long time ago (for many reasons).
I'd say that over my almost 20 years of online gaming, racial differences have generally ended badly or were pointless. Some races usually have a slight advantage, some have none or an actual disadvantage, and eventually all those special little unique features are pointless a month or year into the game when class/abilities/gear or whatever end up balancing everything because so many people complain. I can't think of a game that had very distinct racial features that was "balanced" or that was generally perceived as being done well. Of course those that had that special racial that gave them an advantage complain when it is taken away, but most likely they picked the race for that reason to begin with (I know I have).
In "general," most players seem to pick their race based on either cosmetics or racial abilities (min/max for the most part). By having all races on an even field to begin with, they can please those that actually care about the looks and lore of a race and not have to worry about the min/max crowd taking too much advantage of whatever racial differences might be.
It is just an extra amount of work for the devs to 1. create 2. balance 3. continue to balance after progressing the game. It's a waste of time.
Not sure if you have inside knowledge, but from here it seems you strongly dislike the direction they are going and are doing your best to spread that negatively. No facts, just your one sided opinion. To me, you actually seem like "Timmy."
I'm not the "console" or "F2P" crowd, I did leave WoW many years ago though. I've been gaming longer than many gamers have probably been alive, but I am an EQ fan, an mmorpg fan, and am looking forward to EQN. Will it be perfect? I highly doubt it. But compared to what is out and coming out, it seems to offer quite a bit more for players of all types. Maybe not some (like you) who expect XYZ or call failure, but there are plenty out there looking for a fresh take on the mmorpg.
Then again, as you said in another post, it could all be Vapor and we are all just wasting our time here...sadly Vapor looks much more exciting then anything out currently and I plan to patiently wait for the day it becomes reality.
If you actually are a fan and want EQN to be a success, maybe send your thoughts to the devs (email, twitter, fb, reddit, soe forums, etc), I'm assuming you wouldn't throw your money away on the founder's packs and try to have direct impact on the game's development.
If you are mad that they aren't designing a game specifically for you and have already given up, good luck with that I guess.
(Edit: Apologies to Thinlizzy) if you look at the round table polls https://www.everquestnext.com/round-table?poll=all-races-all-classes , the majority of potential players asked there to be race/class restrictions. Also a sizable group didn't necessarily want restrictions but wanted some races to be much more suited to classes than others. I seriously doubt the devs after having taken the time to ask the players in the first place are going to ignore that and release a series of homogenized races with little more than visual differences. They polled, and we responded. If any of you are interested in the game and care how the development goes, participate in the round table polls. They are doing this so they can make the game most of us would want to play.
Edit: Well if they are ignoring a lot of this player input it will be a shame. While people certainly aren't asking for an EQ1 clone, (nobody wants to do corpse runs in The Hole.. ever) there are aspects of EQ1 that made it a great game that players remember today. While I will wait and see how the class thing works out, if they don't implement race/class restrictions I don't see how things are going to make sense. People liked Shadowknights and Paladins (okay well maybe not paladins) they liked the good and evil factions and the benefits and penalties that came with them (save maybe the exp penalties). I really hope they at least give the races unique abilities or wildly different statistics that will make them more viable for certain roles/classes. If they just water everything down and ignore the polls they're just going to end up with a pile of crap just like every other MMO on the market, and while people will likely still play Landmark for its Minecraft meets NWN campaign editor sandbox, EQ Next will end up just like EQ2.
Second Edit: http://www.tentonhammer.com/everquest-next/ten-things-you-need-to-know-about-classes This article did address one of my worries about classes. They mention in example that to access the Paladin class one does at least have to be good aligned. Whether good/evil is based on race, in game actions, or both, I don't yet know.
It is the same vanilla they put into EQ when they took over all differences went away.
Nothing to see here move along.
I think it is less about "ignoring" the player's wishes and more about how they are designing the game. Their explanation on the video made complete sense to me. With multi-classing, any strict race/class restrictions can not work. The system is too complex. Of course you could argue that "some" players don't want multi-classing, but this is their game and their design. It isn't EQ3, or just a copy of the race/class system that has been done so many times (not that multi-classing is original). If players don't play the game because of this or multiple design elements, they will either adapt or pay the price.
Personally, I voted for having all races/classes with the chance of penalties. I wouldn't mind having to put in a lot of extra effort for a combo that might be out of the ordinary, but I would like it to be a choice for me to make.
Understandable, but I don't believe they ever said that polls would have a direct impact on development. I think it is a nice idea overall, but going with the "round table" theme which means all input is equal isn't the best when in reality, they have the final say regardless of what any players might want. Good idea, poor execution.
I think Wildstar is handling PR a bit better, their catch phrase "the devs are listening" and to contact them through social media is thrown out as much as possible.
If anything, I appreciate the polls because they lead to videos that give us insight into the game when they aren't really revealing any other details at the moment.
I'm assuming when Alpha/Beta roll around for LM/EQN and players actually have first hand experience, their input might actually start to have an impact. If there is a huge outcry for more distinction between the races, maybe they will change their minds. With the vast amount of things going into these games, I think the trivial elements might not be so important.
Either way, people are going to complain. Either it is too simple/balanced or unfair because elves have +5 resist to magic which is irrelevant after day 1 of playing.
This seems to be a popular stance but one that is subjective for the most part depending on what EQ meant to each player. Of course EQN/LM will not be just like EQ but whether it's "like" EQ is yet to be seen. To me EQ was about a vast world where having friends got you farther and it took a long time to "win". From what I can see the only question is how hard content will or can be but the rest actually exceeds, in theory, what EQ was to me. We shall see.
I found the roundtable response to the race/class poll. While they talk about not restricting race/class combinations so players aren't screwed out of useful abilties later on, the interview with TenTonHammer I linked in my previous post (page14) mentions not having access to the Paladin class for alignment reasons.
IMO if lets say an ogre or a troll player wants access to something like that, time to faction grind like a mofo or do something akin to the betrayal quest from EQ2. If in their design race/class restrictions don't work, then they should at least make it so if someone of an evil race aspires to become a paladin, they have to prove themselves to said paladin faction to gain access.
Here is the character class panel from SOE Live.
They mention specifically around the 35-36 minute mark that a character may have to get faction to train certain classes.
Okay, back on topic. I'm still hopeful that they will have noticeably different stats for lets say an Ogre and a Gnome. Just because a race has access to a class/role doesn't mean that they have to have the same stats to start out. If you look back at EQ1 some races were more suited to certain classes, but not usually to the point that people wouldn't change it up. Like EQ1, I think that starting out as a non-optimal race/class combo should make things a bit more difficult. I'm also hoping for unique racial abilties, such as the ogre immunity to frontal stun, but I won't hold my breath.
(edit: fixed a link)
Also
http://www.tentonhammer.com/everquest-next/ten-things-you-need-to-know-about-classes -interview where restriction from Paladin class is mentioned.
Classes, races, lore, noteworthy mobs/items, and the world in general while not all 100% copied from EQ/EQ2 or the overall IP, so far I don't feel like I'm looking at a game taking place in WoW, GW2, Narnia, LOTR, ES, etc.
EQN is the NEXT evolution.
For some, EQ might of been the trinity, strict class/race/god combos, spawn camping, corpse runs, a small population, etc, but those were just blocks on top of the foundation. Many of the mechanics weren't original to EQ and have been done numerous times since.
What was original and continues to be so is the world itself. Just as EQ2 and other EQ games strayed away from the original, EQN is being taken in a new direction.
Personally, I really like their use of the new Star Trek movies as a comparison. New movies might not please hardcore ST fans, but they are appealing to a wide audience that may have never experienced ST before. Assuming the same will be done with the SW movies. While I hope the next 3 do the originals justice and aren't done in the same direction as the previous 3, we shall see. EQN could go in either direction, but so far I think they have the right idea.
And yes it is all very subjective. I loved EQ but had zero interest in EQ2 because it strayed and looked so different then the original. Assuming this is the same thing happening for many when comparing EQN to the previous games. We all like what we like and see the connections we wish to see.
depends what you are comparing EQ to
EQ2 was nothing like EQ1 for many disappointed EQgamers but it is still an EQ game
same with the EQ console mmo, EQOA
EQ2 fan sites
this is how it should've been from the start of mmorpgs :P
Why would I have to be a good elf? Simply because I'm an elf doesn't mean I want to join the "good guys", I wanna do evil stuffs and kill those "good guy bastards" so I can overtake the world with darkness (or my king, or whoever I'm helping).
I'm trying to say, why should my choice narrow down when I choose a race I want to play. It's "me" and I want to choose for myself where will my loyalty and bow lie. :P
"Happiness is not a destination. It is a method of life."
-------------------------------
EQN is not EQ, just like the Clone Wars cartoon is not the Star Wars movies. You obviously dislike EQN and nothing will change that, but I find it funny that you ser zero connection between the two games. How is EQ2 like EQ? Unless you think nothing is like EQ and regardless of what they do, besides making an updated clone of EQ, you won't be happy. Classes, races, lore, mobs, items, the world are a little bit more then just cosmestic. I'm curious what you think makes a game worthy of the title EQ. Please give a list that doesn't include game mechanics found in other games.
This is a loaded question because EQ as a feature list is a generic fantasy MMO with specific lore, which is why I said the comparison is subjective. Go read the box of any MMO and it will have about the same "features" including the need for an internet connection. If you want to say EQ is not like EQN strictly because the lore is different then I have no objections. We know the lore will be "similar but different" so there you go. Most of the EQ=/=EQN comments though go beyond that into the "watered down" and "homogenized" nonsense but we don't have that information to determine that yet.
My point was people liked EQ for different reasons. I liked it for the reasons I stated above and think that EQN COULD surpass EQ on my "I loved EQ because..." bullet list. Taking face value I know the big world, open exploration feeling will be much better in EQN. My one concern is how hard the content is overall. I'm hoping that at least 50% of the game world requires friends since that was a major plus for EQ. That along with a long overall progression will be key to how "like" EQ Everquest Next will be.
I think people are focusing on the wrong aspects when making a comparison.
It really depends how SOE does open world. The new-age WoW cross-server zone is depressing for EQ.. but that's how it may end up, since SOE is copying other games with MMO aspects. It's "open", but without a "world" feel, similar to GW2.
Not surprising, since EQN is being described very similarly to GW2 anyways. Zzzzz...
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.
I agree on GW2 not seeming to have a world feel but I believe SoE said EQN would be seemless, and it's procedurally based so adding more land is a matter of additional hardware. To be honest I'd much rather have a seemingly "seemless" but shared space across servers than to have each area a segmented zone with a loading screen. It may be the principal of it but at least in WoW you can walk from one end of a continent to the other without a loading screen. Who knows if EQN will adopt it. In EQN/LM players are able to port to any server to play and build so this may be true for EQN as well.
As far as the GW2 comparison the only connection I can think of is the hotbar/combat which SoE says is different. We'll have to see when it's shown but in every other respect IMO there is no GW2 comparison. The two are completely different fantasy MMOs.