Howdy, Stranger!
It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!
Quick Links
Shut it down
![[Deleted User]](http://w8.vanillicon.com/v2/8ece51867e29232859f7a984b5f390b2.svg)
[Deleted User]
CommonPosts: 0
The user and all related content has been deleted.
Comments
Ummm...speaking for the bottom 3% are you?
I want to see the IP live on.
It's not very tired.
"actually...I feel fine" "I think I could pull through sir"...
"This may hurt a little, but it's something you'll get used to. Relax....."
@ Dren: One kids opinion above, So here is mine to counter.
EQ was my first MMO Id love to see the original aspects from back then in a new engine.
Issue with mmos today is they lost touch in what they originally were.
well dont play eqn then op and all yur problems r solved
You do realize where you are right? That's what happens here. Not sure why...but....
"This may hurt a little, but it's something you'll get used to. Relax....."
Amazing, I agree that EQ Not! would be better served with a new name that did not attempt to link it with Everquest.
However I fail to see "the stigma the game has gotten over the past 17 years", nor do I see how SOE even attempted to meet "all of the wants an EQ fan would want". It seems to me they were indeed aiming for "a whole new audience" and not existing customers at all.
You can gauge the interest when there is something to show in order to get said interest but until then there's no way to know. We've seen and heard bits, theorized how they can fit together but the complete picture has not been seen.
IMO the point of EQN was to revitalize the brand by creating a newer model to stand next to the existing ones (EQ/EQ2). It theoretically is poised to bring in a whole new audience. I'm not sure about the stigma you're referring to. Maybe you wanted EQN to be EQ3 and since it's not would rather just see the brand retired? I could see that point of view but I wouldn't hold your breath.
Yes, and there is a specific reason for that. Sony losing billions and any non-PS4 games not being a part of Sony's "pillars" going forward. I'm not saying Daybreak is pulling in record breaking numbers but they had to have some value in order to be acquired by CN, maintaining the titles, and still actively developing future ones.
While I completely agree with #3 that only pertains to an audience that isn't new to the genre so a renaming of the game wouldn't target the cause.
If any constructive association should be made between EverQuest, Daybreak pertaining to MMOs it's the smaller but great community that is formed around each related title (EQ, EQ2, Landmark). For this reason alone I wouldn't want the IP closed. I would rather take a queue from your forum quote and not care about the opinions of others.
/me shakes head
Stigmas? Seriously?
Everything written in this thread should be considered spam and deleted...
"This may hurt a little, but it's something you'll get used to. Relax....."
So few words, so much missunderstanding.
MMOs finally replaced social interaction, forced grouping and standing in a line while talking to eachother.
Now we have forced soloing, forced questing and everyone is the hero, without ever having to talk to anyone else. The evolution of multiplayer is here! We won,... right?
"This may hurt a little, but it's something you'll get used to. Relax....."
This exactly.
While I agree, EQN shouldn't have involved the EQ name, but for obvious reasons ($$$) it was. At this point its completely moot because they've already begun developing the game and its resources/lore to be a continuation of EQ. Its sad that this game is even going further away from classic EQ than they previous have (EQ2), but if you want to attract more players you can't expect to make a hardcore survival pve game thats dependent on community and the ability of players to socialize and cooperate with other players, if you want to make a lot of money and attract a large audience.
Like I said, its moot. Not only are they not going to change the name, but at this point EQ:N is vaporware. I'd bet large sums of money it will never launch whats been promised, and if it launches at all, it will be missing many of its big features.
I'm not sure what you are saying. Sony already did focus on the PS4 solely by selling what SoE was to CN and it was rebranded Daybreak. You are probably correct that Sony was spending more to operate than it should have been for what SoE/Daybreak was earning, which is why the recent cuts have happened, so there is more money to actually develop/maintain their titles in a sustainable way.
Maybe at some point in the future, if EQN/Landmark/H1Z1 adds some great revenue, SoE/Daybreak can afford to add the spice and icing back to the company. Until that happens sustainability is paramount.
Regarding the first part of your response, I'm not sure what it is you are advocating. Shutting anything "EverQuest" down doesn't make sense. For example, even if there are 10 people playing EQ there would be 0 if they shut it down. Regarding the current community it will serve as a selling point once the real EQN reveal happens, that was y point. You talked about the stigmas that the EQ brand has but there are also positives to focus on. Again I would point to your own quote, avoid the noise and enjoy what you like.
Umm, Sony had big losses last year, SOE were not making enough money, so it was only logical that they sold that division.
What the investment company will do -what ALL investments companies do actually- is go through the inventory, strip all stuff that can be missed and go on with a skeleton crew+product and sell it off again. And they didn't waste any time with laying off much of the crew.
There's your new SOE/Daybreak future.
"going into arguments with idiots is a lost cause, it requires you to stoop down to their level and you can't win"
Could you show another company CN has done this to? You said yourself that SoE was not making enough money so why would it surprise you that after any entity bought it up they wouldn't make cuts? Lastly, I think "much of the crew" is a bit of an overstatement. Do you know how many people were working on it before as opposed to now?
Sony would never have parted with SOE unless it was losing them money, that they were unwilling to restructure the division themselves rather than sell it off, probably is an indication of just how serious that was. Investment companies don't tend to gamble on the 'future' they tend deal with what they have in front of them, the recent lay offs are probably just the tip of the iceberg, one thing is for sure, SOE, now Daybreak, will not be allowed to lose any more money, they will do what they have to, to make this so, probably using measures that Sony would have considered unthinkable.
The Everquest IP is very rich - it has a very deep and well developed lore. It has an extremely diverse and rabid fanbase - some of them started playing in 1999, a few are just starting today, some of them say they hate it (but play it anyway), some unabashedly love it. A lot of people have come and gone through the Everquest world in all it's different incarnations, and it's left a lot of lasting impressions - some good (my first raid kill), some bad (my first lost corpse). A lot of people look back at it with nostalgia, and a lot of people still play the original Everquest.
As far as "not enough interest" - I don't think you could be more wrong. If you simply announced "Updated Graphics Engine on Legacy Servers" - you'd have such a huge spike in players on Everquest 1 that Daybreak probably couldn't handle it (almost definitely couldn't with their reduced staffing). There is a ton of pent up interest for just such a product.
The problem is, Everquest (and I speak across the entire IP, not just EQ/EQII) means a lot of different things to a lot of different people.
I think the absolute worst thing that Daybreak could do now, is release something that doesn't live up to being worthy of the IP. That's a tall order - I don't think it's possible to recreate that little bit of something that it was to every player across all the different games - but then again, I don't think you have to recreate it. I think you take the IP, the rich lore and history, and you run with it and make EQ:N, not a rehash of EQ1 or EQII or EQOA or LON - and that's the only way you can get away with it. That does mean EQ:N has to be utterly brilliant, but it doesn't mean you are slaved to simply republishing EQ I with a voxel engine and "Storybricks" (however that may ultimately turn out).
I will confess, I think EQ:N was dangerously heading down that path - chasing a lot of buzzwords (that seems to be Smedley's strong point - chasing buzzwords) and turning into a watered down version of what some focus group tested well for, rather than building upon it's own strengths and creating the game that the lead developer had in his heart. That is my opinion, I haven't played any EQ:N, I think Storybricks has incredible potential, but I was (and still am) pretty pessimistic about it.
Where EQ:N goes from here: Again, I think the absolute worst thing that could happen to to release something that isn't worthy of the rich IP that is Everquest. In my opinion there's been a good deal of mediocre slop put out lately (the last handful of EQ1 expansions don't like up to the legacy for me) in the Everquest world. I would rather them not release EQ:N at all than to push out something weak and diluted just to get it out the door in an attempt to cash in.
That's my opinion though - I don't trust Smedley very much, he's still very much there, and while I'm somewhat more optimistic than I was before about EQ:N, my expectations are still pretty low (and I'm hoping, but not betting, that I will be dead wrong and pleasantly surprised).
So I could very well make a case for "Shut it down" - but I really don't want to. I want EQ:N to be released, and I want it to be great, and I want it to be worthy of sucking away hours of my life with friends and family online - just like the original Everquest was (but no longer is). But that's me being selfish, and wishful. I would settle for "good enough", knowing that you can't make a game all things for all people, and how tall the order is for EQ:N. But I'll be honest, I don't know what "good enough" even looks like, and you can never live up to nostalgia - the old days were always better, and harder, at the same time. I guess with this paragraph what I'm trying to say is - if it were shut down, I'd never know what "good enough" was. But if Daybreak does release EQ:N, it will be immediately obvious if the game reaches that benchmark or not - and that's probably the only way for me to find out.