That's not what I meant. The point is that for me what you see in this video can't be the game SOE is talking about. The combat looks very simplistic and seems to have no depth to it. It looks odd to me that this supposed the same game that is going to bring us Storybricks and other great innovations.
That video shows nothing of "real" combat. Simple demo showing off skills and classes that use them. No different then if you go to any game site and click on a class page and see three 10 sec videos of class skills. Personally feel they did themselves a disservice by not having live combat or at least showing it from a player POV. The static spectator camera makes everything look pretty bad, no matter the game.
Some design decisions (the skill system and the graphics for example) point in the direction that EQN is going to be a rather casual game that is drawing a lot of inspiration from MOBAs. I don't see how this could at the same time be the next big sandbox mmo. These seem like polar opposites to me. Maybe SOE is going to make it fit somehow, but maybe not. We can only wait and see what they are going to release. Sometimes it seems to me that they are only toying around with ideas at this point and don't really plan to release anything in the foreseeable future.
Not sure what other big sandbox mmos you have to compare to, not that sandbox even means anything in particular. Same goes for other buzzwords like "casual". For me I translate that into time played. Where "hardcore" means you give up life and play all the time. Really doesn't require any more "skill" simply time invested.
Graphics are graphics. If something has to look hyper realistic with blood guts and nudity to be considered hardcore or a serious gamer's game, then there aren't many other there for what would be obviously reasons. To play Project 1999, I feel someone has to be fairly "hardcore" with how long it takes to do anything. Yet the graphics look like poo compared to what we have today.
Skill system wise, from what they showed at SOE Live last month, the gear system is fairly complex and should result in a fairly diverse class/skill system. Surely there will be common builds and what not, but the possibilities are pretty endless. I haven't played EQ/WoW in a long time, but EQN's system looks pretty massive compared. Maybe not POE crazy, but shouldn't be too simple to master.
Landmark is a great building game but is very far from being a mmorpg. At the moment I see it more as a tech demo.
It is also still missing quite a bit of the systems that will go in place. Been out since January and only had combat a couple weeks. Which they've been very upfront about. Those that wait till it is "finished" and F2P will have a very interesting mmorpg to experience. Not what I'm looking for, but should be a dream come true for the creative types.
I really don't excite easily... but given all that's been released about this game, I'm honestly so enchanted. My one fear is that it actually *cannot possibly* live up to what it's said it can do.
* A world about 1000x bigger than Skyrim.
* A world with emergent AI like what original UO was going to have... and actually work.
* A world you can just live in and make your own content - build anything, destroy almost anything. See an orc in the woods, know it's always for a reason. Follow the orc back to its base? Kill him and wait for his clan to come looking for him? Let him pass and slip through orc lands undetected to get to another destination.
* 40+ classes you can be + the ability to pick and choose from each class to completely make your own.
Honestly, if they deliver this to my computer, as they've promised... my only question will be: "Just tell me how much money you want me to pay for this, or would it be easier if I just give you my bank account number and you can withdraw whatever you like."
There are so many things in EQN that got me excited, the AI, the rallying calls, story bricks, voxel based layered world, all innovative stuff.
Unfortunately I then saw the combat presentation shown at SOE Live. If the finished product resembles that in any way, no thanks.
Completely agree.
I'm going to give them the benefit of the doubt for now and chalk it up to any early combat system that isn't ready for prime time. If the end result is just an iteration of GW2's combat, then i'll have no interest whatsoever in any of the other aspects.
There are so many things in EQN that got me excited, the AI, the rallying calls, story bricks, voxel based layered world, all innovative stuff.
Unfortunately I then saw the combat presentation shown at SOE Live. If the finished product resembles that in any way, no thanks.
+1..
Originally posted by umcorian
I really don't excite easily... but given all that's been released about this game, I'm honestly so enchanted. My one fear is that it actually *cannot possibly* live up to what it's said it can do.
* A world about 1000x bigger than Skyrim.
* A world with emergent AI like what original UO was going to have... and actually work.
* A world you can just live in and make your own content - build anything, destroy almost anything. See an orc in the woods, know it's always for a reason. Follow the orc back to its base? Kill him and wait for his clan to come looking for him? Let him pass and slip through orc lands undetected to get to another destination.
* 40+ classes you can be + the ability to pick and choose from each class to completely make your own.
Honestly, if they deliver this to my computer, as they've promised... my only question will be: "Just tell me how much money you want me to pay for this, or would it be easier if I just give you my bank account number and you can withdraw whatever you like."
That section in red is one that has bothered me since I first heard it.. Even others have commented on it as well.. 40 Classes? Just because you take some skills/spells that are virtually the same, put a different name on them and lump them together doesn't make it a true "Class".. Take for example a potential frost mage that has a spell that is called "Snowball" that deals 100 damage to a single target.. Then take a fire wizard that uses "Fireball" as his main spell that deals 100 damage to a single target? Getting the idea yet? You can dress different spells in different flashy graphics, but in the end are they mathematically the same spell? YES
Take away all the window dressing of spells.. What do the numbers say?, and how do they act/react to one another? That is what really counts.. In addition, from what I saw from SOELive, they are using spell origin (?) to differ one another.. Which relates to what I posted above.. A mage using death magic is given one class name, while another mage using elemental magic is given another, then add other mage using electrical.. etc etc.. Chances are you are going to play ALL the mages the same way because basically their skills are the same, just dressed differently..
It will be interesting to see a LIST of spells and abilities and how they work.. Such as playing the original EQ, no way you played a Wiz, Necro, Mage and a Chanter the same.. The each had distinctive abilities that made their classes unique..
Where im coming from i play these new mmos and within a month or two im level cap. I played ArcheAge for a weekend in closed beta and i have no desire to play it again because its the same game as the others. Make something new already, shit. If you are going to have the trinity and tab target make it hard. Because once you learn the trinity, you know how to play every mmo in existence to DEATH and Its only a matter of time before you reach the end. Its predictable. Im willing to dive into an mmo where they stated they "changed the core mechanics" no matter how stupid it looks. Because its at least doing something new. I don't care if its untried because if they can deliver a story around it im willing to play it for a month or two.
The AI looks exciting and i expect nothing but greatness for the content and lore from Everquest. The quest makers will deliver. Level-less, stat-less, multi-classing just to throw in the new features. Im willing to bet those people who write it off 2 years before its released will be looking for a game like this just to break the monotony. Creating your own story, they'll expand on that with IPad features in a "Rohsong" in other mmos or when Storybricks hits 2.0. The mmo is evolved and im glad i got a peek into the future with videos of Storybricks of what could be in mmo worlds.
All my cards are on this one. Im willing to make a bet this is the next big thing. Non static procedurally generated massive seamless worlds with multiple factions and rallying calls. Npcs that have "lives" and "emotions" that give you quests whenever they feel like it or need something of the adventurer. multi layered dungeons where cooperative play is more encouraged than any other mmos. A journal that updates your achievements and give hints to where you would want to go to accomplish things depending on playstyle, habits, likes and interests. Story driven scenarios to unlock classes and advanced items. "consensual" pvp where quests to "bounty hunt" is tied and relevant to what is going on in the region or story. Intelligent enviroments where people move around or get driven out depending on what is going on. An item system that doesn't allow stats. A health system that doesn't rely on hitpoints. Achievement system that unlocks combat abilities. A skill based combat system that allows for intelligent mobs. Permanent change and a real sense of accomplishment. Allowing to view others' stories and accomplishments in game or through a web browser or to find out what is happening or what happened to a region figure out what to do next now or in a future play session. Fully destructible worlds. This is about 60% of the features in EQNext. I imagine building and guild features they haven't told us to reveal next, because this is sandbox, not that silly Archeage stuff.
...That's essentially what being smug is. Acting like you're so blatantly right that even the thought of someone disagreeing with you is appallingly stupid and comical. you have a good chance of bullying them into believing you.
There are so many things in EQN that got me excited, the AI, the rallying calls, story bricks, voxel based layered world, all innovative stuff.
Unfortunately I then saw the combat presentation shown at SOE Live. If the finished product resembles that in any way, no thanks.
+1..
Originally posted by umcorian
I really don't excite easily... but given all that's been released about this game, I'm honestly so enchanted. My one fear is that it actually *cannot possibly* live up to what it's said it can do.
* A world about 1000x bigger than Skyrim.
* A world with emergent AI like what original UO was going to have... and actually work.
* A world you can just live in and make your own content - build anything, destroy almost anything. See an orc in the woods, know it's always for a reason. Follow the orc back to its base? Kill him and wait for his clan to come looking for him? Let him pass and slip through orc lands undetected to get to another destination.
* 40+ classes you can be + the ability to pick and choose from each class to completely make your own.
Honestly, if they deliver this to my computer, as they've promised... my only question will be: "Just tell me how much money you want me to pay for this, or would it be easier if I just give you my bank account number and you can withdraw whatever you like."
That section in red is one that has bothered me since I first heard it.. Even others have commented on it as well.. 40 Classes? Just because you take some skills/spells that are virtually the same, put a different name on them and lump them together doesn't make it a true "Class".. Take for example a potential frost mage that has a spell that is called "Snowball" that deals 100 damage to a single target.. Then take a fire wizard that uses "Fireball" as his main spell that deals 100 damage to a single target? Getting the idea yet? You can dress different spells in different flashy graphics, but in the end are they mathematically the same spell? YES
Take away all the window dressing of spells.. What do the numbers say?, and how do they act/react to one another? That is what really counts.. In addition, from what I saw from SOELive, they are using spell origin (?) to differ one another.. Which relates to what I posted above.. A mage using death magic is given one class name, while another mage using elemental magic is given another, then add other mage using electrical.. etc etc.. Chances are you are going to play ALL the mages the same way because basically their skills are the same, just dressed differently..
It will be interesting to see a LIST of spells and abilities and how they work.. Such as playing the original EQ, no way you played a Wiz, Necro, Mage and a Chanter the same.. The each had distinctive abilities that made their classes unique..
EQNext uses a keyword system that unifies what a said ability usually does. 3 examples are Physical might induce bleeding, armor mechanics and weapon attacks. Shadow would be deceptions, drains, tradeoffs. Fire attacks would be instant, induce burning and have critical strikes. Lightning certain abilities would regain your energy fluctuation, do damage and help with movement. Radiance is listed as healing, defense, helping others. Affliction dots, drains, debuffs. And finally, Water crowd control and defense. Each one of these keywords do different things and usually classes will have 2 or more different keyword options depending on class. Each class will have 2 origins which will give the power source of these keyword attacks and "iconic familiarity" which a fancy way of determining what each weapon each class can wield. Nature weapons will be different from Divine weapons. Nature physical weapons will be wieldable to all classes that have a Nature and Physical in their origin and keyword makeup. Nature Radiance weapons will be shared with people who are Nature Radiance but Nature Physical classes will not be able to wield it. Each class has 2 origins and keywords. Hence, each class can wield 2 different types of weapons. So weapons become a consideration when choosing classes and you will have 4 different weapons live on your hotbar. So each class is 2 origin 2 keyword that means 2 ways of fighting out of the possible 7 unless your a wizard who is 1 origin 3 keyword meaning he is more versatile. So classes will have roles in EQNext.
"Why do we want it to be intuitive? So you can create content. So if you don't understand how to play it, how can you possibly understand how to create it[in regards to building your own class]....simple to learn, challenging to master".
...That's essentially what being smug is. Acting like you're so blatantly right that even the thought of someone disagreeing with you is appallingly stupid and comical. you have a good chance of bullying them into believing you.
"You would be surprised by how changing one of those knobs[in regards to multi classing] change the way you play"
You can multi class to enhance your current class mixing secondary abilities and you can also custom rename the class you are using to whatever you want. So your cleric is Divine Radiance Divine Fire. You can borrow Martial Radiance passives from a monk/disciple to make your cleric more of a fighter or Arcane Fire abilities from a warlock to enhance your clerics fire abilities or Divine Physical abilites from a paladin to help your cleric tank.
Or you could single emphasize a class like Warrior leaping and Tempest dashing. Now all of a sudden your leaps restore armor a leap with bonus damage. "This guy build this warrior on leaping, this guy built his warrior on physical abilities, this guy built his warrior on martial stuff or this guy built his warrior and got an item that changes his martial stuff nature attacks so regenerative abilites come into play and that guy is going to play different than what this guy is going to play. Hopefully with all the variations we can see how this can unfold. There will be a lot of variations...There is not a lot of abilites in each class were aiming for at least 12, they will be tight, focused gameplay, if we made generalists across the board if will be difficult to make distinct feels. There are not going be classes that have 50 abilities, yeah, theyre not like the bard. Thats a lot of abilties to have at one time...[each class] will be distilled down to core elements and thats how we won't have 7 different versions of the wizard..."
...That's essentially what being smug is. Acting like you're so blatantly right that even the thought of someone disagreeing with you is appallingly stupid and comical. you have a good chance of bullying them into believing you.
The user and all related content has been deleted.
Somebody, somewhere has better skills as you have, more experience as you have, is smarter than you, has more friends as you do and can stay online longer. Just pray he's not out to get you.
"We won't [nerf] builds you might come across 4 or 5 builds that are very popular and we encourage that...the worst possible scenario lets say the rogue, which is a starting class, has his own set of armor and weapons, own set of abilities, viable and enjoyable to play all the way to the 5th tier or beyond, could be a situation where there would be an imbalance where that would not be the case...if items and gear and opportunity in the world would not offer opportunity than that would be the worst possible imbalance where we had a character that we tried to represent as playable and fun and that would fall off the wagon".
"We want the first ability of a class to be awesome where six months from now you're still playing it...because theres no leveling"
That being said...If SOE can make the #3 shooter of all time according to PC Gamer in Planetside 2. I think they can make the #1 mmorpg of all time in Everquest Next, their flagship.
...That's essentially what being smug is. Acting like you're so blatantly right that even the thought of someone disagreeing with you is appallingly stupid and comical. you have a good chance of bullying them into believing you.
"We won't [nerf] builds you might come across 4 or 5 builds that are very popular and we encourage that...the worst possible scenario lets say the rogue, which is a starting class, has his own set of armor and weapons, own set of abilities, viable and enjoyable to play all the way to the 5th tier or beyond, could be a situation where there would be an imbalance where that would not be the case...if items and gear and opportunity in the world would not offer opportunity than that would be the worst possible imbalance where we had a character that we tried to represent as playable and fun and that would fall off the wagon".
"We want the first ability of a class to be awesome where six months from now you're still playing it...because theres no leveling"
That being said...If SOE can make the #3 shooter of all time according to PC Gamer in Planetside 2. I think they can make the #1 mmorpg of all time in Everquest Next, their flagship.
We will see is all anyone can say. I personally think they are taking combat in the wrong direction, this is coming from someone who has a trailblazer pack for Landmark. Its not even the imbalance or the fact heroic movement has everyone hopping like bunnies (gets old fast) I just dont think the crosshair mouse lock for camera fits what the rest of the game is shooting for. Sandbox gamers who like FP2 controls? The cross over of that type of player is smaller then need be. Maybe Sandbox gamers will be given something they didnt know they wanted but for me, playing Landmark in classic MMO driving and then switching to combat having a totally different driving style really drives me nuts. I wish they would switch to a soft lock system.
Minecraft has that aiming style and quite a few people like it Taking the reticle aiming out of the equation would actually make it more like GW2 when considering the weapon based side of available abilities. Aside from those abilities there is nothing GW2-like about it, at least that we know of.
I'm glad they chose reticle based combat because it adds another skill factor and makes combat more engaging IMO. There will still be activated abilities (8 weapon abilities, if hot swap, and 4 mixed class abilities) so it will be more robust than a typical FPS. More robust than MC as well for that matter.
I am also concerned about the "zerg" style of combat though. I hope the abilities carry enough weight to make them strategic. The emphasis on CC as stated and shown is promising on that end. You can still have roles (Tank, Heal, CC) in this system, even more exciting that the historical setup IMO.
I'm keeping my excitement in check. After games such as:
Tablua Rasa
Warhammer Online
FFXIV (their first attempt)
I've become a skeptic. Sure, I like what I've seen from this year's and last year's SOE Live events. However, until I can sink my teeth into something more tangible, it is nothing but talk; albeit, good talk.
Raquelis in various games Played: Everything Playing: Nioh 2, Civ6 Wants: The World Anticipating:Everquest NextCrowfall, Pantheon, Elden Ring
"We won't [nerf] builds you might come across 4 or 5 builds that are very popular and we encourage that...the worst possible scenario lets say the rogue, which is a starting class, has his own set of armor and weapons, own set of abilities, viable and enjoyable to play all the way to the 5th tier or beyond, could be a situation where there would be an imbalance where that would not be the case...if items and gear and opportunity in the world would not offer opportunity than that would be the worst possible imbalance where we had a character that we tried to represent as playable and fun and that would fall off the wagon".
"We want the first ability of a class to be awesome where six months from now you're still playing it...because theres no leveling"
That being said...If SOE can make the #3 shooter of all time according to PC Gamer in Planetside 2. I think they can make the #1 mmorpg of all time in Everquest Next, their flagship.
We will see is all anyone can say. I personally think they are taking combat in the wrong direction, this is coming from someone who has a trailblazer pack for Landmark. Its not even the imbalance or the fact heroic movement has everyone hopping like bunnies (gets old fast) I just dont think the crosshair mouse lock for camera fits what the rest of the game is shooting for. Sandbox gamers who like FP2 controls? The cross over of that type of player is smaller then need be. Maybe Sandbox gamers will be given something they didnt know they wanted but for me, playing Landmark in classic MMO driving and then switching to combat having a totally different driving style really drives me nuts. I wish they would switch to a soft lock system.
Landmark combat is a bit of a letdown. The only one they've had so far. Because i was expecting deep satisfying system rather than a short term engaging fun for a while. When they add more weapons and armor set and allows you to block with shield, then who knows? Soft lock as in Dragon Age 2 is the best that they can possibly do. Landmark combat is not Everquest Next combat because in Landmark they couldn't have a targeting system because it was too hard and you would target terrain. EQNext doesn't have that limitation. In the end of the keynote video at the rallying call arrows shot from the castle targeted the siege weapon all simultaneously. Its the lack of trinity i hope they nail. That would be an obstacle in front of the grail.
...That's essentially what being smug is. Acting like you're so blatantly right that even the thought of someone disagreeing with you is appallingly stupid and comical. you have a good chance of bullying them into believing you.
Originally posted by Voqar The very thought of EQN is wrose than WHO for me, since I loved original EQ and to me EQN is EQ in name only, and is an abomonination of an idea for an MMORPG. It's truly sad to see the great EverQuest name being sucked down the toilet of modern not relaly MMORPG design and being tied to a single player arcade-like piece of F2P garbage. It would be refreshing to see a developer grow balls and make a real MMORPG and worry more about making a good game and less about making money for their corporate daddy, which is all MMORPGs are about these days - sucking max money from the max number of players the most efficiently, just like everything else corporate. The EQN devs don't care about what they're doing to the EQ name, they're just using it to make SOE more money. They don't care about making a good MMORPG, just about making more crap with the widest possible appeal to maximize profits. And they surely do not care about players except as bodies to draw more money from.
This is how I feel. Although I am hoping for the best, I am expecting far less.
Luckily, i don't need you to like me to enjoy video games. -nariusseldon. In F2P I think it's more a case of the game's trying to play the player's. -laserit
We will see is all anyone can say. I personally think they are taking combat in the wrong direction, this is coming from someone who has a trailblazer pack for Landmark. Its not even the imbalance or the fact heroic movement has everyone hopping like bunnies (gets old fast) I just dont think the crosshair mouse lock for camera fits what the rest of the game is shooting for. Sandbox gamers who like FP2 controls? The cross over of that type of player is smaller then need be. Maybe Sandbox gamers will be given something they didnt know they wanted but for me, playing Landmark in classic MMO driving and then switching to combat having a totally different driving style really drives me nuts. I wish they would switch to a soft lock system.
I have no idea what a "sandbox player" is, but I rather enjoy Landmark's combat. They've already said it will be toned down or whatever and I'm highly doubting we'll see Orcs flying through the air in EQN. Both games are far from finished and a lot of other systems, polish, and development need to happen. No idea why a "sandbox player" couldn't also enjoy FPS controls and compared to an actual FPS, Landmark really isn't that. Basically seeing Alpha combat, plenty of work to be done. No offense, but soft/hard lock is just not challenging, especially with a small skill pool. Hopefully combat is slowed down a bit for EQN where we aren't shooting off 12 skills per second and zipping around the map, but as you said, we shall see.
That section in red is one that has bothered me since I first heard it.. Even others have commented on it as well.. 40 Classes? Just because you take some skills/spells that are virtually the same, put a different name on them and lump them together doesn't make it a true "Class".. Take for example a potential frost mage that has a spell that is called "Snowball" that deals 100 damage to a single target.. Then take a fire wizard that uses "Fireball" as his main spell that deals 100 damage to a single target? Getting the idea yet? You can dress different spells in different flashy graphics, but in the end are they mathematically the same spell? YES
Where are you getting "virtually the same" from? That is a huge assumption based on no details unless you care to share. Your example is correct, but could easily be applied to Warrior vs Rogue vs Wizard etc. In the end each class probably will have some sort of mix of offense, defense, utility, movement with +/- in each category. How unique they make them is hopefully something they put time into. So far all the classes shown have been unique.
I think this is why they are only going with 12 skills per class and making stance and visuals a big deal. They want each of the 40 to stand on their own. If you've played SMITE or other MOBAs, there are so many "classes" that while on the basic level might not be crazy different, can all be played and enjoyed as if they are.
DAoC is one of my favorite games of all time and of the almost 50 classes, each was unique, yet skills were just shuffled between the 3 realms with a bit of extra flavor added to each class. I'm hoping EQN can be as creative without being too creative.
Take away all the window dressing of spells.. What do the numbers say?, and how do they act/react to one another? That is what really counts.. In addition, from what I saw from SOELive, they are using spell origin (?) to differ one another.. Which relates to what I posted above.. A mage using death magic is given one class name, while another mage using elemental magic is given another, then add other mage using electrical.. etc etc.. Chances are you are going to play ALL the mages the same way because basically their skills are the same, just dressed differently..
Again, assumptions, could be right/wrong, but seems very limiting if they do. A Necro = Wizard, just with cooler spell colors? I hope not. Unless you think they are going to have 8/40 classes be "mages" of different elemental types?
It will be interesting to see a LIST of spells and abilities and how they work.. Such as playing the original EQ, no way you played a Wiz, Necro, Mage and a Chanter the same.. The each had distinctive abilities that made their classes unique..
This is what I'm assuming will happen. Then toss in gear that can change what skills do and then mix in skills from other classes, then... should be a fairly interesting system. Will we have a Druid with 30 very unique skills? Probably not, but not to say that they can't be found on different classes. Could have a nature melee, range, caster, healer, etc.
Although their shift to more of a MOBA or even PnP role system does change it a bit. Where classes can fill in various roles instead of being stuck in one forever. As shown, a Cleric can be offensive and defensive, not simply a heal spam bot. Doesn't mean it has to be a total across the board GW2 experience where classes can do everything equally, but this won't be EQ either.
Games that go with high class count and class swapping usually play differently then the opposite. This is on purpose. Could you play a EQN Rogue forever? Sure, but it probably won't have the same depth and longevity as a EQ Wizard. Classes are meant to be swapped, skills mixed, gear added to totally change builds, etc. It is part of the fundamental design. If someone simply wants to be an Enchanter and play a specific role forever, they probably can to a point, but I'm doubting it will be that satisfying.
I play TF2 and while there are sessions where I don't swap classes, I find more enjoyment changing on the fly and swapping weapons/builds depending on what either I or my team needs. Very different approach to game play then EQ/WoW systems.
Overall, I'm assuming the devs that have played and built these games for years know what they are doing. Then again they could just have Red Mage, Blue Mage, White Mage with 5 identical skills with different colors or whatever.
We will see is all anyone can say. I personally think they are taking combat in the wrong direction, this is coming from someone who has a trailblazer pack for Landmark. Its not even the imbalance or the fact heroic movement has everyone hopping like bunnies (gets old fast) I just dont think the crosshair mouse lock for camera fits what the rest of the game is shooting for. Sandbox gamers who like FP2 controls? The cross over of that type of player is smaller then need be. Maybe Sandbox gamers will be given something they didnt know they wanted but for me, playing Landmark in classic MMO driving and then switching to combat having a totally different driving style really drives me nuts. I wish they would switch to a soft lock system.
I have no idea what a "sandbox player" is, but I rather enjoy Landmark's combat. They've already said it will be toned down or whatever and I'm highly doubting we'll see Orcs flying through the air in EQN. Both games are far from finished and a lot of other systems, polish, and development need to happen. No idea why a "sandbox player" couldn't also enjoy FPS controls and compared to an actual FPS, Landmark really isn't that. Basically seeing Alpha combat, plenty of work to be done. No offense, but soft/hard lock is just not challenging, especially with a small skill pool. Hopefully combat is slowed down a bit for EQN where we aren't shooting off 12 skills per second and zipping around the map, but as you said, we shall see.
Take weapon switching out of Landmark combat using starting weapons and you would have defined roles and tactics to kill the enemy group. Add heals and support and thats how i imagine a mock battle of a strategy in EQNext. I don't see nothing wrong with it. Battles would be fast, fun and requires you to think even in its basic form.
...That's essentially what being smug is. Acting like you're so blatantly right that even the thought of someone disagreeing with you is appallingly stupid and comical. you have a good chance of bullying them into believing you.
That section in red is one that has bothered me since I first heard it.. Even others have commented on it as well.. 40 Classes? Just because you take some skills/spells that are virtually the same, put a different name on them and lump them together doesn't make it a true "Class".. Take for example a potential frost mage that has a spell that is called "Snowball" that deals 100 damage to a single target.. Then take a fire wizard that uses "Fireball" as his main spell that deals 100 damage to a single target? Getting the idea yet? You can dress different spells in different flashy graphics, but in the end are they mathematically the same spell? YES
Where are you getting "virtually the same" from? That is a huge assumption based on no details unless you care to share. Your example is correct, but could easily be applied to Warrior vs Rogue vs Wizard etc. In the end each class probably will have some sort of mix of offense, defense, utility, movement with +/- in each category. How unique they make them is hopefully something they put time into. So far all the classes shown have been unique.We have NO DETAILS on what a full class even looks like.. They showed bits and parts, but nothing to really bite into..
I think this is why they are only going with 12 skills per class and making stance and visuals a big deal. They want each of the 40 to stand on their own. If you've played SMITE or other MOBAs, there are so many "classes" that while on the basic level might not be crazy different, can all be played and enjoyed as if they are.
DAoC is one of my favorite games of all time and of the almost 50 classes, each was unique, yet skills were just shuffled between the 3 realms with a bit of extra flavor added to each class. I'm hoping EQN can be as creative without being too creative. It's obvious you and I do NOT view classes the same.. There are only SO MANY ROLES and skills available to play with and I doubt EQN is going to have most of them..
Take away all the window dressing of spells.. What do the numbers say?, and how do they act/react to one another? That is what really counts.. In addition, from what I saw from SOELive, they are using spell origin (?) to differ one another.. Which relates to what I posted above.. A mage using death magic is given one class name, while another mage using elemental magic is given another, then add other mage using electrical.. etc etc.. Chances are you are going to play ALL the mages the same way because basically their skills are the same, just dressed differently..
Again, assumptions, could be right/wrong, but seems very limiting if they do. A Necro = Wizard, just with cooler spell colors? I hope not. Unless you think they are going to have 8/40 classes be "mages" of different elemental types? And that is ALL I ever said I was doing.. WHAT IF.. Did I make a statement of fact? NO.. I'm expressing a concern that things aren't as they appear.. I question and challenge EQN's 40 classes.. And how many are truly unique..
It will be interesting to see a LIST of spells and abilities and how they work.. Such as playing the original EQ, no way you played a Wiz, Necro, Mage and a Chanter the same.. The each had distinctive abilities that made their classes unique..
This is what I'm assuming will happen. Then toss in gear that can change what skills do and then mix in skills from other classes, then... should be a fairly interesting system. Will we have a Druid with 30 very unique skills? Probably not, but not to say that they can't be found on different classes. Could have a nature melee, range, caster, healer, etc. GEAR can not change skills.. Gear only modifies effect.. sorta like buff / debuff.. If your skill is for example hammer bash.. NO gear will change that hammer bash.. It will always be hammer bash regardless what gear you're wearing.. Now it could effect dps? or effect the type of damage such as nature > shadow.. etc etc.. I doubt EQN will have any class resembling a EQ druid or chanter.. But we'll see in time
Although their shift to more of a MOBA or even PnP role system does change it a bit. Where classes can fill in various roles instead of being stuck in one forever. As shown, a Cleric can be offensive and defensive, not simply a heal spam bot. Doesn't mean it has to be a total across the board GW2 experience where classes can do everything equally, but this won't be EQ either.
Games that go with high class count and class swapping usually play differently then the opposite. This is on purpose. Could you play a EQN Rogue forever? Sure, but it probably won't have the same depth and longevity as a EQ Wizard. Classes are meant to be swapped, skills mixed, gear added to totally change builds, etc. It is part of the fundamental design. If someone simply wants to be an Enchanter and play a specific role forever, they probably can to a point, but I'm doubting it will be that satisfying.
I play TF2 and while there are sessions where I don't swap classes, I find more enjoyment changing on the fly and swapping weapons/builds depending on what either I or my team needs. Very different approach to game play then EQ/WoW systems.
Overall, I'm assuming the devs that have played and built these games for years know what they are doing. Then again they could just have Red Mage, Blue Mage, White Mage with 5 identical skills with different colors or whatever.
And be prepared for that last part.. It's like the travel skill that can interchangeable.. Does it really matter if you BLINK, LEAP or DASH from point A to point B? NO.. The only difference is the graphic.. This is what I question with other skills on so many Classes (40).. So most of what I've seen looks very much like GW2's combat without tab targeting.. At least with GW2 they have a scaled encounter formula.. The more players in the area, the harder the mobs.. (big thumbs up).. So in EQN, what keeps a group of 5 just zergfesting everything in their path? There has been NO DISCUSSION that combat AI increases or decreases level of difficulty based on player involvement..
GW2 could scale up if certain thresholds were met but it wasn't by very small increments. It changed the "event scenario", and nay spawn higher level mobs but did not the change the actual HP/attack of existing mobs I don't believe. Either way to its credit GW2 was progress on content delivery in the genre.
I still don't see any connection between GW2 and EQN other than having abilities based around an equipped weapon. We could assume that the combat will be zergy like GW2 but all MMOs can be played like that, right?
We could also assume that there won't be definite or distinct roles but there have been interviews that there are roles: Tank, Healing (support) and CC. We've seen warrior abilities that could keep mobs away from other players (tank), abilities that heal HP/shields/revive(support) and a couple of CC abilities by other classes. We've seen them in action albiet not in a group combat scenario. I really hope they make abilities important and with resource management make it where spamming every ability is not feasible. We'll have to see the final result but we've been shown promising pieces IMO.
Regarding variety of classes/abilities. I will assume that of the 40 classes 10 will be Warrior influence, 10 Rogue influenced, 10 Mage influenced, etc. That's just a basis however. There was a collage of class animations (without textures) of about 20-30 classes showing how each "look" of the animations were different. One even featured dual pistols. They made a point that they want each class to feel different and have it's own identity. Will that mean each class a has completely different skill set. No, all MMO classes share certain types of damage packaged up differently be it animations or damage type.
Even in EQ, there really is no difference between a Druids DoT and an SKs other than animation, right? In EQN it's been explained however that damage type will play a big role. In the "classes" panel at this years Live they explained this and the combinations of, I think, type and power source as what makes up the classes and effects. I'll link the video in a bit (on mobile ATM).
Which ties into gear. It has been stated that it can change not just crit rate or chance to proc X if you crit by also what damage type it adds or modifies, which can also tie into other effects. For instance, a Tempest may deal lightning damage but can pick up a piece of gear that takes that damage and makes it physical as well, so now you deal lightning and physical based damage. The video lays it out a lot better of course.
I still want to see it in action but I've seen enough pieces to be optimistic.
Correction. In EQ there was also a difference in damage type. I was using it as an example of how two abilities can be virtually the same though by different classes.
To the people questioning the reticule or FPS combat decision - understand this (i think this has been mentioned already)
Tab target has been perfected and done with. It's an old system that can't be improved upon because it can't possibly change or get better really. Yes there can be some weird twists here or there, but in the end, most MMO gamers in this world have experienced it and are familiar with it. We've all been familiar for a while, if you're not I question your authenticity as a gamer, or the types of MMO's you indulge in.
Now, games evolve - if they didn't we would get bored.
If you want to play tab target games, or prefer EQ 1 or 2 type games, then they are available - just don't expect any modern company looking to make a profit to create a WoW carboncopy themepark. That cow has been milked since 2004. You can't milk her anymore shes dead and gone.
Now dynamic, action combat is where the PvP crowds are these days. This type of action combat has been seen in many games, it was a matter of time before a mainstream MMO adopted this and perfected it. The time is now, and SOE will most likely figure out the proper formula that everybody (PvPers, PvEers, casual hardcore) wants.
There will be many combat iteration phases, i'm so excited. The first phase in EQNL was funny looking, but it's defenitly the right step in my book and i'm a PvP fan.
You know what I fathom the most though? Imagining a type of advanced mix of PvP and PvE elements. Fighting open world bosses with advanced dynamic A.I decisions, whilst competing with other players in PvP.
The level of competition possible in this MMO is something unprecedented.
And be prepared for that last part.. It's like the travel skill that can interchangeable.. Does it really matter if you BLINK, LEAP or DASH from point A to point B? NO.. The only difference is the graphic.. This is what I question with other skills on so many Classes (40).. So most of what I've seen looks very much like GW2's combat without tab targeting.. At least with GW2 they have a scaled encounter formula.. The more players in the area, the harder the mobs.. (big thumbs up).. So in EQN, what keeps a group of 5 just zergfesting everything in their path? There has been NO DISCUSSION that combat AI increases or decreases level of difficulty based on player involvement..
If you are approaching and expecting EQN to function like EQ or another game, it is a waste.
As you said, they haven't shown off many things yet. They've shown nothing that would give me the indication that classes in the same role or not will be highly similar or that zerging is key to challenges.
Anything is possible, but going "What if" is pretty meaningless as "What if" they actually are capable of doing what they say and 40 classes will all be enjoyable and the game won't be a total disaster?
If you go in wanting an EQ Enchanter reborn, probably not going to happen as this isn't EQ 2014. Different game, different design and they've made it clear I'd hope.
Now if you want a support/CC type class? Who knows, very possible, even within the scope of the action combat and what not.
I"m approaching EQN with an open mind and hope that it will be a quality experience. Nothing else gives me any hope in the market currently or upcoming in the distant future (Thanks Blizzard).
I loved the EQ Bard along with all the DAoC and WAR classes that were pretty unique compared to the traditional EQ/WoW fantasy roles.
I'm expecting there to be shared qualities to classes, it just happens with a high number of classes, although it is totally possible to keep them interesting. Stealthy backstabbing is your thing? I'm sure a Rogue, Thief, Ninja, Assassin, etc could all fill that role while all doing it differently enough to be worth playing. Will you realize they all kind of work the same? Probably, but again, it happens. Guess what? Play a Cleric, totally different experience, gg multi-classing.
You're right in the literal sense that gear won't "change" skills, but the impact gear, achievements, and other skills might have on one in particular could be quite huge. As they've said and shown to some degree (look at Diablo 3 for better example), 1 item can totally change things. Maybe a ring worn by a Rogue impacts it totally differently then an Assassin. Once you start compounding the enhancements, only goes crazy from there.
I'm glad I've experienced and enjoyed MOBAs and games like DAoC which have shown that 50-100+ "classes" is doable. Yes there might be overlap within or outside of roles, but I've never felt any one is pointless because another exists.
Yes Dash and Blink are similar, just like Fireball and Arrow or Stun and Sleep. These are games, there are limitations.
Enchanters aren't like Druids, doesn't mean they can't have multiple Druid-Like classes. Maybe Druid, Hippy, Treehugger? All with the same theme and role just slightly turned a bit.
Think the biggest help to get my mind into it is to see EQN classes as simply the foundation of builds. Unique to my tastes. Not predetermined by the devs or meta.
If you boil things down long enough, most things start looking like a puddle of ooze, no real reason to though unless you really like ooze.
I'm much more interested in what I can do with the building blocks and where I can take not just a class or build, but my character.
If I have to give up a bard like class to have thousands of build options, so be it. That's what memories are for. I really hope they have some unique gems mixed in with all the Red and Blue Mages, but if the overall system works, I'm good. Even with the initial 40, no reason they can't add in more unique classes as time goes on.
Maybe they don't have the ability for an "Enchanter" to work on day one, maybe with time and feedback they figure out how to make it work and have a "Enchanter Pack" added with 3 new support/CC/illusion classes.
To me that is the best part of what they are doing, not limiting themselves. No reason they couldn't add in a class that only heals if that is what people want. As long as people know that the SupaHealz class isn't going to be slaying dragons solo or anything. Only real limitation is dev imagination and to some extent ours through feedback.
Originally posted by Aelious GW2 could scale up if certain thresholds were met but it wasn't by very small increments. It changed the "event scenario", and nay spawn higher level mobs but did not the change the actual HP/attack of existing mobs I don't believe. Either way to its credit GW2 was progress on content delivery in the genre.
I still don't see any connection between GW2 and EQN other than having abilities based around an equipped weapon. We could assume that the combat will be zergy like GW2 but all MMOs can be played like that, right? Not really.. A group of rogues going into Kanor's Castle for example will only DIE quickly and do lots of corpse runs.. But yes, you could over power an enemy with numbers, but that is different then zerging..
We could also assume that there won't be definite or distinct roles but there have been interviews that there are roles: Tank, Healing (support) and CC. All I ever heard from SOE was that you can "play" like a role if you want.. But lets be honest, that is just pretend.. Go around with a shield and a mace and pretend you are THE TANK.. There is a huge difference playing like a healer and actually BEING the healer..
Even in EQ, there really is no difference between a Druids DoT and an SKs other than animation, right? Yep, but I like to think druids and shamans were more alike.. But that is the point.. EQ1 wasn't promoting 40 classes.. There are only so many ways to cut the cake.. DPS only comes in so many forms (DD and DoT) and then you have single target or area effect.. Heals are the same way..
Which ties into gear. It has been stated that it can change not just crit rate or chance to proc X if you crit by also what damage type it adds or modifies, which can also tie into other effects. For instance, a Tempest may deal lightning damage but can pick up a piece of gear that takes that damage and makes it physical as well, so now you deal lightning and physical based damage. The video lays it out a lot better of course. Which is all smoke and mirrors.. A flaming mace will do 100 pts of fire damage.. Now if you pick up a special ring that allows your flaming mace to record "fire/nature" damage.. The ONLY time that means anything is if you run across a FIRE elemental that is immune to fire damage.. BUT NO WORRY, you have a ring that allows your mace to do "nature" damage as well.. So EQN is playing games with "resistance" checks and types of damage to justify all the 40 classes and gear.. And NO, you don't deal BOTH lightening AND physical damage.. It's an either / or check.. So you hit him for 100pts of damage, NOT 200..
Originally posted by SupaAPE
Now, games evolve - if they didn't we would get bored. Twitch targeting is NOT evolution from auto targeting.. FYI..
If you want to play tab target games, or prefer EQ 1 or 2 type games, then they are available - just don't expect any modern company looking to make a profit to create a WoW carboncopy themepark. That cow has been milked since 2004. You can't milk her anymore shes dead and gone. Twitch targeting has been around just as long.. So?
Now dynamic, action combat is where the PvP crowds are these days. I'm not a PvP fan, so now what?
Fighting open world bosses with advanced dynamic A.I decisions, whilst competing with other players in PvP. whoa whoa. beep beep back up the bus.. Where was it said that EQN will open world PvP?
The level of competition possible in this MMO is something unprecedented. competition for what? Do you think this is archeage or eve?
Originally posted by Allein
As you said, they haven't shown off many things yet. They've shown nothing that would give me the indication that classes in the same role or not will be highly similar
If you go in wanting an EQ Enchanter reborn, probably not going to happen as this isn't EQ 2014. Different game, different design and they've made it clear I'd hope. Which is a contradiction in logic and numbers.. How can you have 40 classes and not have one that plays like the EQ Enchanter or Bard? or is it possible that 40 classes are just nothing more watered down skills of similar number just colored different?
Now if you want a support/CC type class? Who knows, very possible, even within the scope of the action combat and what not. sorta like GW2? no thanks..
I loved the EQ Bard along with all the DAoC and WAR classes that were pretty unique compared to the traditional EQ/WoW fantasy roles.
You're right in the literal sense that gear won't "change" skills, but the impact gear, achievements, and other skills might have on one in particular could be quite huge. or NOT..
I'm glad I've experienced and enjoyed MOBAs and games like DAoC which have shown that 50-100+ "classes" is doable. Yes there might be overlap within or outside of roles, but I've never felt any one is pointless because another exists.
Yes Dash and Blink are similar, just like Fireball and Arrow or Stun and Sleep. These are games, there are limitations. Not sure what you're proving, or disproving.. I view classes as UNIQUE in abilities and playstyle.. Color coding doesn't make one different.. I can call it a "sharpshooter" and your team can call it a "marksman".. but if they use the same skills with same effects, they are the same damn class..
Think the biggest help to get my mind into it is to see EQN classes as simply the foundation of builds. Unique to my tastes. Not predetermined by the devs or meta. Actually I don't view them as classes at all.. They are nothing more then unlockable skill packs. These so called classes are ALL "origin" dependant.. Look at this way, remove the origin dynamic from the classes and skills, and what is left?
If you boil things down long enough, most things start looking like a puddle of ooze, no real reason to though unless you really like ooze. Hey, leave the ooz alone, he did nothing wrong here.. ha ha ha
BTW, there is a lot of ooze already out there.. and Why? LACK OF INFORMATION from SOE.. There are just some simple things I like to clear up.. If they are willing to do it..
I highly doubt things are going to be all glorious as Georgie wants to promote.. I"m not sold on the classes, and the AI is still on the chalkboard.. It still appears they are trying to make both a PvE and PvP balanced game and I have yet to see one of those made.. PvE and PvP mix as well as oil and water.. They don't..
Comments
There are so many things in EQN that got me excited, the AI, the rallying calls, story bricks, voxel based layered world, all innovative stuff.
Unfortunately I then saw the combat presentation shown at SOE Live. If the finished product resembles that in any way, no thanks.
I really don't excite easily... but given all that's been released about this game, I'm honestly so enchanted. My one fear is that it actually *cannot possibly* live up to what it's said it can do.
* A world about 1000x bigger than Skyrim.
* A world with emergent AI like what original UO was going to have... and actually work.
* A world you can just live in and make your own content - build anything, destroy almost anything. See an orc in the woods, know it's always for a reason. Follow the orc back to its base? Kill him and wait for his clan to come looking for him? Let him pass and slip through orc lands undetected to get to another destination.
* 40+ classes you can be + the ability to pick and choose from each class to completely make your own.
Honestly, if they deliver this to my computer, as they've promised... my only question will be: "Just tell me how much money you want me to pay for this, or would it be easier if I just give you my bank account number and you can withdraw whatever you like."
Completely agree.
I'm going to give them the benefit of the doubt for now and chalk it up to any early combat system that isn't ready for prime time. If the end result is just an iteration of GW2's combat, then i'll have no interest whatsoever in any of the other aspects.
That section in red is one that has bothered me since I first heard it.. Even others have commented on it as well.. 40 Classes? Just because you take some skills/spells that are virtually the same, put a different name on them and lump them together doesn't make it a true "Class".. Take for example a potential frost mage that has a spell that is called "Snowball" that deals 100 damage to a single target.. Then take a fire wizard that uses "Fireball" as his main spell that deals 100 damage to a single target? Getting the idea yet? You can dress different spells in different flashy graphics, but in the end are they mathematically the same spell? YES
Take away all the window dressing of spells.. What do the numbers say?, and how do they act/react to one another? That is what really counts.. In addition, from what I saw from SOELive, they are using spell origin (?) to differ one another.. Which relates to what I posted above.. A mage using death magic is given one class name, while another mage using elemental magic is given another, then add other mage using electrical.. etc etc.. Chances are you are going to play ALL the mages the same way because basically their skills are the same, just dressed differently..
It will be interesting to see a LIST of spells and abilities and how they work.. Such as playing the original EQ, no way you played a Wiz, Necro, Mage and a Chanter the same.. The each had distinctive abilities that made their classes unique..
Where im coming from i play these new mmos and within a month or two im level cap. I played ArcheAge for a weekend in closed beta and i have no desire to play it again because its the same game as the others. Make something new already, shit. If you are going to have the trinity and tab target make it hard. Because once you learn the trinity, you know how to play every mmo in existence to DEATH and Its only a matter of time before you reach the end. Its predictable. Im willing to dive into an mmo where they stated they "changed the core mechanics" no matter how stupid it looks. Because its at least doing something new. I don't care if its untried because if they can deliver a story around it im willing to play it for a month or two.
The AI looks exciting and i expect nothing but greatness for the content and lore from Everquest. The quest makers will deliver. Level-less, stat-less, multi-classing just to throw in the new features. Im willing to bet those people who write it off 2 years before its released will be looking for a game like this just to break the monotony. Creating your own story, they'll expand on that with IPad features in a "Rohsong" in other mmos or when Storybricks hits 2.0. The mmo is evolved and im glad i got a peek into the future with videos of Storybricks of what could be in mmo worlds.
All my cards are on this one. Im willing to make a bet this is the next big thing. Non static procedurally generated massive seamless worlds with multiple factions and rallying calls. Npcs that have "lives" and "emotions" that give you quests whenever they feel like it or need something of the adventurer. multi layered dungeons where cooperative play is more encouraged than any other mmos. A journal that updates your achievements and give hints to where you would want to go to accomplish things depending on playstyle, habits, likes and interests. Story driven scenarios to unlock classes and advanced items. "consensual" pvp where quests to "bounty hunt" is tied and relevant to what is going on in the region or story. Intelligent enviroments where people move around or get driven out depending on what is going on. An item system that doesn't allow stats. A health system that doesn't rely on hitpoints. Achievement system that unlocks combat abilities. A skill based combat system that allows for intelligent mobs. Permanent change and a real sense of accomplishment. Allowing to view others' stories and accomplishments in game or through a web browser or to find out what is happening or what happened to a region figure out what to do next now or in a future play session. Fully destructible worlds. This is about 60% of the features in EQNext. I imagine building and guild features they haven't told us to reveal next, because this is sandbox, not that silly Archeage stuff.
...That's essentially what being smug is. Acting like you're so blatantly right that even the thought of someone disagreeing with you is appallingly stupid and comical. you have a good chance of bullying them into believing you.
EQNext uses a keyword system that unifies what a said ability usually does. 3 examples are Physical might induce bleeding, armor mechanics and weapon attacks. Shadow would be deceptions, drains, tradeoffs. Fire attacks would be instant, induce burning and have critical strikes. Lightning certain abilities would regain your energy fluctuation, do damage and help with movement. Radiance is listed as healing, defense, helping others. Affliction dots, drains, debuffs. And finally, Water crowd control and defense. Each one of these keywords do different things and usually classes will have 2 or more different keyword options depending on class. Each class will have 2 origins which will give the power source of these keyword attacks and "iconic familiarity" which a fancy way of determining what each weapon each class can wield. Nature weapons will be different from Divine weapons. Nature physical weapons will be wieldable to all classes that have a Nature and Physical in their origin and keyword makeup. Nature Radiance weapons will be shared with people who are Nature Radiance but Nature Physical classes will not be able to wield it. Each class has 2 origins and keywords. Hence, each class can wield 2 different types of weapons. So weapons become a consideration when choosing classes and you will have 4 different weapons live on your hotbar. So each class is 2 origin 2 keyword that means 2 ways of fighting out of the possible 7 unless your a wizard who is 1 origin 3 keyword meaning he is more versatile. So classes will have roles in EQNext.
"Why do we want it to be intuitive? So you can create content. So if you don't understand how to play it, how can you possibly understand how to create it[in regards to building your own class]....simple to learn, challenging to master".
...That's essentially what being smug is. Acting like you're so blatantly right that even the thought of someone disagreeing with you is appallingly stupid and comical. you have a good chance of bullying them into believing you.
"You would be surprised by how changing one of those knobs[in regards to multi classing] change the way you play"
You can multi class to enhance your current class mixing secondary abilities and you can also custom rename the class you are using to whatever you want. So your cleric is Divine Radiance Divine Fire. You can borrow Martial Radiance passives from a monk/disciple to make your cleric more of a fighter or Arcane Fire abilities from a warlock to enhance your clerics fire abilities or Divine Physical abilites from a paladin to help your cleric tank.
Or you could single emphasize a class like Warrior leaping and Tempest dashing. Now all of a sudden your leaps restore armor a leap with bonus damage. "This guy build this warrior on leaping, this guy built his warrior on physical abilities, this guy built his warrior on martial stuff or this guy built his warrior and got an item that changes his martial stuff nature attacks so regenerative abilites come into play and that guy is going to play different than what this guy is going to play. Hopefully with all the variations we can see how this can unfold. There will be a lot of variations...There is not a lot of abilites in each class were aiming for at least 12, they will be tight, focused gameplay, if we made generalists across the board if will be difficult to make distinct feels. There are not going be classes that have 50 abilities, yeah, theyre not like the bard. Thats a lot of abilties to have at one time...[each class] will be distilled down to core elements and thats how we won't have 7 different versions of the wizard..."
...That's essentially what being smug is. Acting like you're so blatantly right that even the thought of someone disagreeing with you is appallingly stupid and comical. you have a good chance of bullying them into believing you.
Somebody, somewhere has better skills as you have, more experience as you have, is smarter than you, has more friends as you do and can stay online longer. Just pray he's not out to get you.
"We won't [nerf] builds you might come across 4 or 5 builds that are very popular and we encourage that...the worst possible scenario lets say the rogue, which is a starting class, has his own set of armor and weapons, own set of abilities, viable and enjoyable to play all the way to the 5th tier or beyond, could be a situation where there would be an imbalance where that would not be the case...if items and gear and opportunity in the world would not offer opportunity than that would be the worst possible imbalance where we had a character that we tried to represent as playable and fun and that would fall off the wagon".
"We want the first ability of a class to be awesome where six months from now you're still playing it...because theres no leveling"
That being said...If SOE can make the #3 shooter of all time according to PC Gamer in Planetside 2. I think they can make the #1 mmorpg of all time in Everquest Next, their flagship.
...That's essentially what being smug is. Acting like you're so blatantly right that even the thought of someone disagreeing with you is appallingly stupid and comical. you have a good chance of bullying them into believing you.
We will see is all anyone can say. I personally think they are taking combat in the wrong direction, this is coming from someone who has a trailblazer pack for Landmark. Its not even the imbalance or the fact heroic movement has everyone hopping like bunnies (gets old fast) I just dont think the crosshair mouse lock for camera fits what the rest of the game is shooting for. Sandbox gamers who like FP2 controls? The cross over of that type of player is smaller then need be. Maybe Sandbox gamers will be given something they didnt know they wanted but for me, playing Landmark in classic MMO driving and then switching to combat having a totally different driving style really drives me nuts. I wish they would switch to a soft lock system.
I'm glad they chose reticle based combat because it adds another skill factor and makes combat more engaging IMO. There will still be activated abilities (8 weapon abilities, if hot swap, and 4 mixed class abilities) so it will be more robust than a typical FPS. More robust than MC as well for that matter.
I am also concerned about the "zerg" style of combat though. I hope the abilities carry enough weight to make them strategic. The emphasis on CC as stated and shown is promising on that end. You can still have roles (Tank, Heal, CC) in this system, even more exciting that the historical setup IMO.
I'm keeping my excitement in check. After games such as:
Raquelis in various games
Played: Everything
Playing: Nioh 2, Civ6
Wants: The World
Anticipating: Everquest Next Crowfall, Pantheon, Elden Ring
Landmark combat is a bit of a letdown. The only one they've had so far. Because i was expecting deep satisfying system rather than a short term engaging fun for a while. When they add more weapons and armor set and allows you to block with shield, then who knows? Soft lock as in Dragon Age 2 is the best that they can possibly do. Landmark combat is not Everquest Next combat because in Landmark they couldn't have a targeting system because it was too hard and you would target terrain. EQNext doesn't have that limitation. In the end of the keynote video at the rallying call arrows shot from the castle targeted the siege weapon all simultaneously. Its the lack of trinity i hope they nail. That would be an obstacle in front of the grail.
...That's essentially what being smug is. Acting like you're so blatantly right that even the thought of someone disagreeing with you is appallingly stupid and comical. you have a good chance of bullying them into believing you.
This is how I feel. Although I am hoping for the best, I am expecting far less.
Luckily, i don't need you to like me to enjoy video games. -nariusseldon.
In F2P I think it's more a case of the game's trying to play the player's. -laserit
I have no idea what a "sandbox player" is, but I rather enjoy Landmark's combat. They've already said it will be toned down or whatever and I'm highly doubting we'll see Orcs flying through the air in EQN. Both games are far from finished and a lot of other systems, polish, and development need to happen. No idea why a "sandbox player" couldn't also enjoy FPS controls and compared to an actual FPS, Landmark really isn't that. Basically seeing Alpha combat, plenty of work to be done. No offense, but soft/hard lock is just not challenging, especially with a small skill pool. Hopefully combat is slowed down a bit for EQN where we aren't shooting off 12 skills per second and zipping around the map, but as you said, we shall see.
Take weapon switching out of Landmark combat using starting weapons and you would have defined roles and tactics to kill the enemy group. Add heals and support and thats how i imagine a mock battle of a strategy in EQNext. I don't see nothing wrong with it. Battles would be fast, fun and requires you to think even in its basic form.
...That's essentially what being smug is. Acting like you're so blatantly right that even the thought of someone disagreeing with you is appallingly stupid and comical. you have a good chance of bullying them into believing you.
And be prepared for that last part.. It's like the travel skill that can interchangeable.. Does it really matter if you BLINK, LEAP or DASH from point A to point B? NO.. The only difference is the graphic.. This is what I question with other skills on so many Classes (40).. So most of what I've seen looks very much like GW2's combat without tab targeting.. At least with GW2 they have a scaled encounter formula.. The more players in the area, the harder the mobs.. (big thumbs up).. So in EQN, what keeps a group of 5 just zergfesting everything in their path? There has been NO DISCUSSION that combat AI increases or decreases level of difficulty based on player involvement..
I still don't see any connection between GW2 and EQN other than having abilities based around an equipped weapon. We could assume that the combat will be zergy like GW2 but all MMOs can be played like that, right?
We could also assume that there won't be definite or distinct roles but there have been interviews that there are roles: Tank, Healing (support) and CC. We've seen warrior abilities that could keep mobs away from other players (tank), abilities that heal HP/shields/revive(support) and a couple of CC abilities by other classes. We've seen them in action albiet not in a group combat scenario. I really hope they make abilities important and with resource management make it where spamming every ability is not feasible. We'll have to see the final result but we've been shown promising pieces IMO.
Regarding variety of classes/abilities. I will assume that of the 40 classes 10 will be Warrior influence, 10 Rogue influenced, 10 Mage influenced, etc. That's just a basis however. There was a collage of class animations (without textures) of about 20-30 classes showing how each "look" of the animations were different. One even featured dual pistols. They made a point that they want each class to feel different and have it's own identity. Will that mean each class a has completely different skill set. No, all MMO classes share certain types of damage packaged up differently be it animations or damage type.
Even in EQ, there really is no difference between a Druids DoT and an SKs other than animation, right? In EQN it's been explained however that damage type will play a big role. In the "classes" panel at this years Live they explained this and the combinations of, I think, type and power source as what makes up the classes and effects. I'll link the video in a bit (on mobile ATM).
Which ties into gear. It has been stated that it can change not just crit rate or chance to proc X if you crit by also what damage type it adds or modifies, which can also tie into other effects. For instance, a Tempest may deal lightning damage but can pick up a piece of gear that takes that damage and makes it physical as well, so now you deal lightning and physical based damage. The video lays it out a lot better of course.
I still want to see it in action but I've seen enough pieces to be optimistic.
To the people questioning the reticule or FPS combat decision - understand this (i think this has been mentioned already)
Tab target has been perfected and done with. It's an old system that can't be improved upon because it can't possibly change or get better really. Yes there can be some weird twists here or there, but in the end, most MMO gamers in this world have experienced it and are familiar with it. We've all been familiar for a while, if you're not I question your authenticity as a gamer, or the types of MMO's you indulge in.
Now, games evolve - if they didn't we would get bored.
If you want to play tab target games, or prefer EQ 1 or 2 type games, then they are available - just don't expect any modern company looking to make a profit to create a WoW carboncopy themepark. That cow has been milked since 2004. You can't milk her anymore shes dead and gone.
Now dynamic, action combat is where the PvP crowds are these days. This type of action combat has been seen in many games, it was a matter of time before a mainstream MMO adopted this and perfected it. The time is now, and SOE will most likely figure out the proper formula that everybody (PvPers, PvEers, casual hardcore) wants.
There will be many combat iteration phases, i'm so excited. The first phase in EQNL was funny looking, but it's defenitly the right step in my book and i'm a PvP fan.
You know what I fathom the most though? Imagining a type of advanced mix of PvP and PvE elements. Fighting open world bosses with advanced dynamic A.I decisions, whilst competing with other players in PvP.
The level of competition possible in this MMO is something unprecedented.
If you are approaching and expecting EQN to function like EQ or another game, it is a waste.
As you said, they haven't shown off many things yet. They've shown nothing that would give me the indication that classes in the same role or not will be highly similar or that zerging is key to challenges.
Anything is possible, but going "What if" is pretty meaningless as "What if" they actually are capable of doing what they say and 40 classes will all be enjoyable and the game won't be a total disaster?
If you go in wanting an EQ Enchanter reborn, probably not going to happen as this isn't EQ 2014. Different game, different design and they've made it clear I'd hope.
Now if you want a support/CC type class? Who knows, very possible, even within the scope of the action combat and what not.
I"m approaching EQN with an open mind and hope that it will be a quality experience. Nothing else gives me any hope in the market currently or upcoming in the distant future (Thanks Blizzard).
I loved the EQ Bard along with all the DAoC and WAR classes that were pretty unique compared to the traditional EQ/WoW fantasy roles.
I'm expecting there to be shared qualities to classes, it just happens with a high number of classes, although it is totally possible to keep them interesting. Stealthy backstabbing is your thing? I'm sure a Rogue, Thief, Ninja, Assassin, etc could all fill that role while all doing it differently enough to be worth playing. Will you realize they all kind of work the same? Probably, but again, it happens. Guess what? Play a Cleric, totally different experience, gg multi-classing.
You're right in the literal sense that gear won't "change" skills, but the impact gear, achievements, and other skills might have on one in particular could be quite huge. As they've said and shown to some degree (look at Diablo 3 for better example), 1 item can totally change things. Maybe a ring worn by a Rogue impacts it totally differently then an Assassin. Once you start compounding the enhancements, only goes crazy from there.
I'm glad I've experienced and enjoyed MOBAs and games like DAoC which have shown that 50-100+ "classes" is doable. Yes there might be overlap within or outside of roles, but I've never felt any one is pointless because another exists.
Yes Dash and Blink are similar, just like Fireball and Arrow or Stun and Sleep. These are games, there are limitations.
Enchanters aren't like Druids, doesn't mean they can't have multiple Druid-Like classes. Maybe Druid, Hippy, Treehugger? All with the same theme and role just slightly turned a bit.
Think the biggest help to get my mind into it is to see EQN classes as simply the foundation of builds. Unique to my tastes. Not predetermined by the devs or meta.
If you boil things down long enough, most things start looking like a puddle of ooze, no real reason to though unless you really like ooze.
I'm much more interested in what I can do with the building blocks and where I can take not just a class or build, but my character.
If I have to give up a bard like class to have thousands of build options, so be it. That's what memories are for. I really hope they have some unique gems mixed in with all the Red and Blue Mages, but if the overall system works, I'm good. Even with the initial 40, no reason they can't add in more unique classes as time goes on.
Maybe they don't have the ability for an "Enchanter" to work on day one, maybe with time and feedback they figure out how to make it work and have a "Enchanter Pack" added with 3 new support/CC/illusion classes.
To me that is the best part of what they are doing, not limiting themselves. No reason they couldn't add in a class that only heals if that is what people want. As long as people know that the SupaHealz class isn't going to be slaying dragons solo or anything. Only real limitation is dev imagination and to some extent ours through feedback.