Originally posted by VengeSunsoar I really do believe must people are confusing depth with looking something better.Depth is the number of meaningful decisions that need to be made. There really is no difference in depth between missy old games and most new ones.You liking one more than the other does not mean more depth.
I agree with this. But I do not see the "meaningful choices" in today's MMOs. Maybe it is because combat is not the only meaningful activity in my own view?
EQ had factions that created "meaningful choices." They had many non-combat skills that created "meaningful choices." Today's MMOS? "Which method of killing do I imrpove?" is not, in my opinion a "meaningful choice."
- Al
Personally the only modern MMORPG trend that annoys me is the idea that MMOs need to be designed in a way to attract people who don't actually like MMOs. Which to me makes about as much sense as someone trying to figure out a way to get vegetarians to eat at their steakhouse. - FARGIN_WAR
@neogeo75, no story, no gameplay, no nothing? Why would I play a game like that then?
Don't play then. I not here to convince you otherwise. Story progression or end game content were never the main pursuit of the early day mmo. Leveling with other player was the fun part. It's more of a social gathering and the gaming part just tag along. I don't suppose any mmo gamer hat joined the genre after wow could understand. Nor do I could imagine them playing a game without quest holding their hand from zone to zone till end game.
Originally posted by VengeSunsoar I really do believe must people are confusing depth with looking something better.
Depth is the number of meaningful decisions that need to be made. There really is no difference in depth between missy old games and most new ones.
You liking one more than the other does not mean more depth.
I agree with this. But I do not see the "meaningful choices" in today's MMOs. Maybe it is because combat is not the only meaningful activity in my own view?
EQ had factions that created "meaningful choices." They had many non-combat skills that created "meaningful choices." Today's MMOS? "Which method of killing do I imrpove?" is not, in my opinion a "meaningful choice."
Well just off the top of my head we have:
Farming (wow actual farming)
gathering
fishing
Crafting
Achievements
Collections
Skill trees (although this is related to combat, it is definitely a choice in character development)
Exploration
Archeology
Reputations are still in most games (e.g. tillers in WoW)
Battle pets (again WoW)
AH
Building ((EQ2 housing, WoW the fortress thing)
Of course this is all aside from the normal things like character selection, class selection...
I'm sure there are many more but those are general good activities outside of combat.
Just because you don't like it doesn't mean it is bad.
Originally posted by fivoroth @neogeo75, no story, no gameplay, no nothing? Why would I play a game like that then?
Don't play then. I not here to convince you otherwise. Story progression or end game content were never the main pursuit of the early day mmo. Leveling with other player was the fun part. It's more of a social gathering and the gaming part just tag along. I don't suppose any mmo gamer hat joined the genre after wow could understand. Nor do I could imagine them playing a game without quest holding their hand from zone to zone till end game.
I am really beginning to hate the EQ community. I am so glad that that game is dead and I would hate to play with the elitist EQ fans anyway.
I mean read your last two sentences. Elitist garbage. But then again my favourite MMO is still alive and on top. EQ is down the F2P garbage route, long forgotten. It's meaningless existence was shortlived. How many people play EQ? 100?
I might enjoyed WOW which had quest and "hand holding" as you said but then again your praised EQ was a stupid grinder. You grinded mobs all day in one spot like a mindless drone.
Mission in life: Vanquish all MMORPG.com trolls - especially TESO, WOW and GW2 trolls.
Are you also fine with dramatically cutting the number of quests?
100 non-branching quests you can do in any order.
OR 50 faction-specific quests (in a 2-faction game)
OR 25 faction-specific branching quests (ie choose 1A or 1B)
OR ~8 two-stage branching quests where choosing 1A then leads to branching quest 2A/2B while 1B leads to 3A/3B.
These numbers are from the player's point of view. In the first case a new player can literally play 100 different quests. In the last case, a player will experience at most a total of about 8 quests.
Basically we're saying the team is going to work on 100% of quests, and any given player will only experience 8% of that work.
Not completely sure I'm following your line of thought on this.
Do you mean instead of the possibility of having hundreds, if not thousands (Highly unlikely, but doable with dedication) of quests ..most in a branching system, although single quests are included as well...to instead drastically cut the number of quests?
Originally posted by NEOGEO75 I agree with OP whole hearty. When I look at some of the complaint of the new mmo player, I saw stuff like no storyline, no achievement system, no leaderboard, no end game, etc. These are all expectation from people that mainly play console and single player game. I mean cmon, EQ had almost zero story progression. The orc never invade the elf tree town, they just frozen in time setting up camp at the downhill. Nobody complaint about end game because the leveling IS the game. There is no crap excuse like the game only start at level xx.
I fault WOW for all this, for making mmo mainstream, for bringing in console and single player game player to the genre. Sadly, all mmo company are blinded by the 12 millions subs count. They totally forgotten that EQ at its peak only have around 500k subs. When a company willing to create a game cater to this 500k player, that's when the golden age of mmo reignite
Actually, the highlighted portion is untrue. I know this from a personal experience. The GM's in EQ at one time did events.
I was around lvl 10 or so (Ranger), sitting at the bottom of Kelethin near the elevator that leads up to the town medding up to go out again...spent time while medding to fletch me some arrows. Next thing I know, someone yells "Orc invasion coming to Kelethin!"
I though it was another train of orcs someone was pulling to the guards so they wouldn't die. So I stand up, turn around and look up the hill. I see tons of orcs crest the hill..not chasing anyone. So I jumped on the elevator and start letting arrows loose like Legolas on crack as I ride it to the top.
For the next 30 minutes or so everyone in town, including the NPC's fought back the horde of orcs. It was a blast and something I will always remember.
But yeah, there were tons of events like that in EQ at one time. Those types of things making a return would be kick&*#!
Originally posted by fivoroth @neogeo75, no story, no gameplay, no nothing? Why would I play a game like that then?
Don't play then. I not here to convince you otherwise. Story progression or end game content were never the main pursuit of the early day mmo. Leveling with other player was the fun part. It's more of a social gathering and the gaming part just tag along. I don't suppose any mmo gamer hat joined the genre after wow could understand. Nor do I could imagine them playing a game without quest holding their hand from zone to zone till end game.
I am really beginning to hate the EQ community. I am so glad that that game is dead and I would hate to play with the elitist EQ fans anyway.
I mean read your last two sentences. Elitist garbage. But then again my favourite MMO is still alive and on top. EQ is down the F2P garbage route, long forgotten. It's meaningless existence was shortlived. How many people play EQ? 100?
I might enjoyed WOW which had quest and "hand holding" as you said but then again your praised EQ was a stupid grinder. You grinded mobs all day in one spot like a mindless drone.
"I am really beginning to hate the EQ community. "
Having gone back and re-read your posts, your hate is not just beginning it was there all the time.
"How many people play EQ? 100?"
This is the second time I have read this figure in recent days, I am guessing the other time was you too. It is phrased as a question but it is a deliberate deceit. No one is sure of the exact number of EQ players but 100,000 would be a lot closer than 100.
"I might enjoyed WOW which had quest"
Again if people go back and read your posts it is obvious you are an active WoW player and ardent fan.
The most consistent feature of your posts is vitriol and hate.
Originally posted by fivoroth @neogeo75, no story, no gameplay, no nothing? Why would I play a game like that then?
Don't play then. I not here to convince you otherwise. Story progression or end game content were never the main pursuit of the early day mmo. Leveling with other player was the fun part. It's more of a social gathering and the gaming part just tag along. I don't suppose any mmo gamer hat joined the genre after wow could understand. Nor do I could imagine them playing a game without quest holding their hand from zone to zone till end game.
I am really beginning to hate the EQ community. I am so glad that that game is dead and I would hate to play with the elitist EQ fans anyway.
I mean read your last two sentences. Elitist garbage. But then again my favourite MMO is still alive and on top. EQ is down the F2P garbage route, long forgotten. It's meaningless existence was shortlived. How many people play EQ? 100?
I might enjoyed WOW which had quest and "hand holding" as you said but then again your praised EQ was a stupid grinder. You grinded mobs all day in one spot like a mindless drone.
Sorry...but yet again. WoW, and every other MMORPG ever made...they all have grind in one way or another, or to some degree. Some just hide it better than others...but they ALL have it. Even your beloved WoW. I would know, I played it for 2 years (The first 2).
Originally posted by fivoroth @neogeo75, no story, no gameplay, no nothing? Why would I play a game like that then?
Don't play then. I not here to convince you otherwise. Story progression or end game content were never the main pursuit of the early day mmo. Leveling with other player was the fun part. It's more of a social gathering and the gaming part just tag along. I don't suppose any mmo gamer hat joined the genre after wow could understand. Nor do I could imagine them playing a game without quest holding their hand from zone to zone till end game.
I am really beginning to hate the EQ community. I am so glad that that game is dead and I would hate to play with the elitist EQ fans anyway.
I mean read your last two sentences. Elitist garbage. But then again my favourite MMO is still alive and on top. EQ is down the F2P garbage route, long forgotten. It's meaningless existence was shortlived. How many people play EQ? 100?
I might enjoyed WOW which had quest and "hand holding" as you said but then again your praised EQ was a stupid grinder. You grinded mobs all day in one spot like a mindless drone.
That last part is actually true. Unless you played the game at the time and spent a lot of time in it you wouldn't really understand that there was actually a lot to do. Some people at the time just didn't get it. I would akin it to saying you could understand a certain time/culture in history without actually having been there. Despite having been there you might still not get it like some people never understand certain styles of music. One thing that is obvious is the community in EQ was very devoted so the game must have done something right for a lot of people.
Originally posted by fivoroth @neogeo75, no story, no gameplay, no nothing? Why would I play a game like that then?
Don't play then. I not here to convince you otherwise. Story progression or end game content were never the main pursuit of the early day mmo. Leveling with other player was the fun part. It's more of a social gathering and the gaming part just tag along. I don't suppose any mmo gamer hat joined the genre after wow could understand. Nor do I could imagine them playing a game without quest holding their hand from zone to zone till end game.
I am really beginning to hate the EQ community. I am so glad that that game is dead and I would hate to play with the elitist EQ fans anyway.
I mean read your last two sentences. Elitist garbage. But then again my favourite MMO is still alive and on top. EQ is down the F2P garbage route, long forgotten. It's meaningless existence was shortlived. How many people play EQ? 100?
I might enjoyed WOW which had quest and "hand holding" as you said but then again your praised EQ was a stupid grinder. You grinded mobs all day in one spot like a mindless drone.
You sound offended.
The point is, we realize what we like doesn't appeal to everyone. If people don't like it they can play something else. We've said our piece, we aren't out to convince the world.
We like slower harder progression from level 1 on. Not a game that caters to everyone and provides a false sense of accomplishment until you hit the real grind at max level; A grind I might add, that's made worthless by solo content in the following expansion.
This isn't our idea of fun, don't be upset if its yours. Stand by what you like.
Originally posted by VengeSunsoar I really do believe must people are confusing depth with looking something better.
Depth is the number of meaningful decisions that need to be made.
There really is no difference in depth between missy old games and most new ones.
You liking one more than the other does not mean more depth.
I'll give you a single example as I stated above: Diablo.
If you played Diablo 1, you know how much more deph that game from the 90's had in comparison to his older brother that just got released (well, kinda...) Diablo 3. Diablo 3 has no character progression, you can't distribute your stats nor your skills, itemization looks dumb compared to the Uniques you found in Diablo 1 and 2 and the story is just meh, while Diablo 1 and 2 made me feel like I was inside an epic quest to slay down the prime evil himself. And please, don't make me start on the Runewords topic of Diablo 2, wich shows how much more deph it had, because I don't want to punnish D3 even further.
Originally posted by VengeSunsoar I really do believe must people are confusing depth with looking something better.
Depth is the number of meaningful decisions that need to be made.
There really is no difference in depth between missy old games and most new ones.
You liking one more than the other does not mean more depth.
I'll give you a single example as I stated above: Diablo.
If you played Diablo 1, you know how much more deph that game from the 90's had in comparison to his older brother that just got released (well, kinda...) Diablo 3. Diablo 3 has no character progression, you can't distribute your stats nor your skills, itemization looks dumb compared to the Uniques you found in Diablo 1 and 2 and the story is just meh, while Diablo 1 and 2 made me feel like I was inside an epic quest to slay down the prime evil himself. And please, don't make me start on the Runewords topic of Diablo 2, wich shows how much more deph it had, because I don't want to punnish D3 even further.
What 'meaningful decision' was there in D1 that D3 doesn't have?
You could make WRONG decision in D1/D2 which is different from meaningful decision. And the kicker was that your only option was to reroll in D1 / D2.
D1 / D2 was setup so players felt they had to avoid being tricked into the wrong decision rather than make 'right' decision.
It shows what PvP games are really all about, and no, it's not about more realism and immersion. It's about cowards hiding behind a screen to they can bully other defenseless players without any risk of direct retaliation like there would be if they acted like asshats in "real life". -Jean-Luc_Picard
Life itself is a game. So why shouldn't your game be ruined? - justmemyselfandi
Originally posted by fivoroth @neogeo75, no story, no gameplay, no nothing? Why would I play a game like that then?
Don't play then. I not here to convince you otherwise. Story progression or end game content were never the main pursuit of the early day mmo. Leveling with other player was the fun part. It's more of a social gathering and the gaming part just tag along. I don't suppose any mmo gamer hat joined the genre after wow could understand. Nor do I could imagine them playing a game without quest holding their hand from zone to zone till end game.
I am really beginning to hate the EQ community. I am so glad that that game is dead and I would hate to play with the elitist EQ fans anyway.
I mean read your last two sentences. Elitist garbage. But then again my favourite MMO is still alive and on top. EQ is down the F2P garbage route, long forgotten. It's meaningless existence was shortlived. How many people play EQ? 100?
I might enjoyed WOW which had quest and "hand holding" as you said but then again your praised EQ was a stupid grinder. You grinded mobs all day in one spot like a mindless drone.
You sound offended.
The point is, we realize what we like doesn't appeal to everyone. If people don't like it they can play something else. We've said our piece, we aren't out to convince the world.
We like slower harder progression from level 1 on. Not a game that caters to everyone and provides a false sense of accomplishment until you hit the real grind at max level; A grind I might add, that's made worthless by solo content in the following expansion.
This isn't our idea of fun, don't be upset if its yours. Stand by what you like.
Are you for real?
What you like, as time has shown, almost noone else likes.
Almost every new game has slew of "this modern POS, EQ was da shit, all this is POS... ... ..."
EQ was false sense of accomplishment.
Anf why is grind at endgame so bad, but when when whole game is one uber grind with 100s on mindless time sinks its awesome.
These games are gone for 1 reason only - almost noone likes them.
And yes, its uber nostalgia and super rosey glasses. They were super simplistic games with almost no content, just landscape with mobs lined up for grinding.
Originally posted by VengeSunsoar I really do believe must people are confusing depth with looking something better.
Depth is the number of meaningful decisions that need to be made.
There really is no difference in depth between missy old games and most new ones.
You liking one more than the other does not mean more depth.
I'll give you a single example as I stated above: Diablo.
If you played Diablo 1, you know how much more deph that game from the 90's had in comparison to his older brother that just got released (well, kinda...) Diablo 3. Diablo 3 has no character progression, you can't distribute your stats nor your skills, itemization looks dumb compared to the Uniques you found in Diablo 1 and 2 and the story is just meh, while Diablo 1 and 2 made me feel like I was inside an epic quest to slay down the prime evil himself. And please, don't make me start on the Runewords topic of Diablo 2, wich shows how much more deph it had, because I don't want to punnish D3 even further.
What 'meaningful decision' was there in D1 that D3 doesn't have?
You could make WRONG decision in D1/D2 which is different from meaningful decision. And the kicker was that your only option was to reroll in D1 / D2.
D1 / D2 was setup so players felt they had to avoid being tricked into the wrong decision rather than make 'right' decision.
You really have no idea what deph is in a game. You are just repeating that other users words, thinking deph means "meaningulf decisions", wich is absolutelly wrong. You don't have a concept biased on your own experience to dictate what deph is. I feel I am talking to a mimic or a marionete.
Originally posted by fivoroth @neogeo75, no story, no gameplay, no nothing? Why would I play a game like that then?
Don't play then. I not here to convince you otherwise. Story progression or end game content were never the main pursuit of the early day mmo. Leveling with other player was the fun part. It's more of a social gathering and the gaming part just tag along. I don't suppose any mmo gamer hat joined the genre after wow could understand. Nor do I could imagine them playing a game without quest holding their hand from zone to zone till end game.
I am really beginning to hate the EQ community. I am so glad that that game is dead and I would hate to play with the elitist EQ fans anyway.
I mean read your last two sentences. Elitist garbage. But then again my favourite MMO is still alive and on top. EQ is down the F2P garbage route, long forgotten. It's meaningless existence was shortlived. How many people play EQ? 100?
I might enjoyed WOW which had quest and "hand holding" as you said but then again your praised EQ was a stupid grinder. You grinded mobs all day in one spot like a mindless drone.
You sound offended.
The point is, we realize what we like doesn't appeal to everyone. If people don't like it they can play something else. We've said our piece, we aren't out to convince the world.
We like slower harder progression from level 1 on. Not a game that caters to everyone and provides a false sense of accomplishment until you hit the real grind at max level; A grind I might add, that's made worthless by solo content in the following expansion.
This isn't our idea of fun, don't be upset if its yours. Stand by what you like.
Are you for real?
What you like, as time has shown, almost noone else likes.
Almost every new game has slew of "this modern POS, EQ was da shit, all this is POS... ... ..."
EQ was false sense of accomplishment.
Anf why is grind at endgame so bad, but when when whole game is one uber grind with 100s on mindless time sinks its awesome.
These games are gone for 1 reason only - almost noone likes them.
And yes, its uber nostalgia and super rosey glasses. They were super simplistic games with almost no content, just landscape with mobs lined up for grinding.
You are mistaking profit with actual evolution in gaming. Those games didn't "slew" EQ or UO because they are better. They "slew" it because they are MUCH more profitable, since they are aimmed to a vast majority of dumb, avarage players, instead of hardcore players that want to have a virtual life.
Originally posted by VengeSunsoar I really do believe must people are confusing depth with looking something better.
Depth is the number of meaningful decisions that need to be made.
There really is no difference in depth between missy old games and most new ones.
You liking one more than the other does not mean more depth.
I'll give you a single example as I stated above: Diablo.
If you played Diablo 1, you know how much more deph that game from the 90's had in comparison to his older brother that just got released (well, kinda...) Diablo 3. Diablo 3 has no character progression, you can't distribute your stats nor your skills, itemization looks dumb compared to the Uniques you found in Diablo 1 and 2 and the story is just meh, while Diablo 1 and 2 made me feel like I was inside an epic quest to slay down the prime evil himself. And please, don't make me start on the Runewords topic of Diablo 2, wich shows how much more deph it had, because I don't want to punnish D3 even further.
What 'meaningful decision' was there in D1 that D3 doesn't have?
You could make WRONG decision in D1/D2 which is different from meaningful decision. And the kicker was that your only option was to reroll in D1 / D2.
D1 / D2 was setup so players felt they had to avoid being tricked into the wrong decision rather than make 'right' decision.
You really have no idea what deph is in a game. You are just repeating that other users words, thinking deph means "meaningulf decisions", wich is absolutelly wrong. You don't have a concept biased on your own experience to dictate what deph is. I feel I am talking to a mimic or a marionete.
From countless posts that talk about "depth" theres only 1 conxlusion: depth=annoyance. So the more annying game is, it has more "depth".
Yes i still remember all this "depth" and millions upon millions are relieved that this "depth" went way of the dodo.
Originally posted by fivoroth @neogeo75, no story, no gameplay, no nothing? Why would I play a game like that then?
Don't play then. I not here to convince you otherwise. Story progression or end game content were never the main pursuit of the early day mmo. Leveling with other player was the fun part. It's more of a social gathering and the gaming part just tag along. I don't suppose any mmo gamer hat joined the genre after wow could understand. Nor do I could imagine them playing a game without quest holding their hand from zone to zone till end game.
I am really beginning to hate the EQ community. I am so glad that that game is dead and I would hate to play with the elitist EQ fans anyway.
I mean read your last two sentences. Elitist garbage. But then again my favourite MMO is still alive and on top. EQ is down the F2P garbage route, long forgotten. It's meaningless existence was shortlived. How many people play EQ? 100?
I might enjoyed WOW which had quest and "hand holding" as you said but then again your praised EQ was a stupid grinder. You grinded mobs all day in one spot like a mindless drone.
You sound offended.
The point is, we realize what we like doesn't appeal to everyone. If people don't like it they can play something else. We've said our piece, we aren't out to convince the world.
We like slower harder progression from level 1 on. Not a game that caters to everyone and provides a false sense of accomplishment until you hit the real grind at max level; A grind I might add, that's made worthless by solo content in the following expansion.
This isn't our idea of fun, don't be upset if its yours. Stand by what you like.
Are you for real?
What you like, as time has shown, almost noone else likes.
Almost every new game has slew of "this modern POS, EQ was da shit, all this is POS... ... ..."
EQ was false sense of accomplishment.
Anf why is grind at endgame so bad, but when when whole game is one uber grind with 100s on mindless time sinks its awesome.
These games are gone for 1 reason only - almost noone likes them.
And yes, its uber nostalgia and super rosey glasses. They were super simplistic games with almost no content, just landscape with mobs lined up for grinding.
You are mistaking profit with actual evolution in gaming. Those games didn't "slew" EQ or UO because they are better. They "slew" it because they are MUCH more profitable, since they are aimmed to a vast majority of dumb, avarage players, instead of hardcore players that want to have a virtual life.
If you equate "virtual life" with chatting, you can do that without game. Otherwise those games were infinite times worse than todays games.
Lets be real. Everquest didn't get "Slew" it simply got dated and it was never updated with current graphics or a reasonable ui. Games like WoW have faired a bit better because the technology was much further along when it was released.
Originally posted by fivoroth @neogeo75, no story, no gameplay, no nothing? Why would I play a game like that then?
Don't play then. I not here to convince you otherwise. Story progression or end game content were never the main pursuit of the early day mmo. Leveling with other player was the fun part. It's more of a social gathering and the gaming part just tag along. I don't suppose any mmo gamer hat joined the genre after wow could understand. Nor do I could imagine them playing a game without quest holding their hand from zone to zone till end game.
I am really beginning to hate the EQ community. I am so glad that that game is dead and I would hate to play with the elitist EQ fans anyway.
I mean read your last two sentences. Elitist garbage. But then again my favourite MMO is still alive and on top. EQ is down the F2P garbage route, long forgotten. It's meaningless existence was shortlived. How many people play EQ? 100?
I might enjoyed WOW which had quest and "hand holding" as you said but then again your praised EQ was a stupid grinder. You grinded mobs all day in one spot like a mindless drone.
You sound offended.
The point is, we realize what we like doesn't appeal to everyone. If people don't like it they can play something else. We've said our piece, we aren't out to convince the world.
We like slower harder progression from level 1 on. Not a game that caters to everyone and provides a false sense of accomplishment until you hit the real grind at max level; A grind I might add, that's made worthless by solo content in the following expansion.
This isn't our idea of fun, don't be upset if its yours. Stand by what you like.
Are you for real?
What you like, as time has shown, almost noone else likes.
Almost every new game has slew of "this modern POS, EQ was da shit, all this is POS... ... ..."
EQ was false sense of accomplishment.
Anf why is grind at endgame so bad, but when when whole game is one uber grind with 100s on mindless time sinks its awesome.
These games are gone for 1 reason only - almost noone likes them.
And yes, its uber nostalgia and super rosey glasses. They were super simplistic games with almost no content, just landscape with mobs lined up for grinding.
You are mistaking profit with actual evolution in gaming. Those games didn't "slew" EQ or UO because they are better. They "slew" it because they are MUCH more profitable, since they are aimmed to a vast majority of dumb, avarage players, instead of hardcore players that want to have a virtual life.
If you equate "virtual life" with chatting, you can do that without game. Otherwise those games were infinite times worse than todays games.
This is true, but we are not talking about twitter and facebook. EQ itself was interesting enough that people wanted to talk about it in game and out of game. Most people these days don't talk about the game either in game or out of game. They don't need to because the games are usually so simple that you don't need to ask anyone for help with anything. You also don't care enough about the game generally to talk about it. It's just a side attraction for an a very short amount of time in most cases. It's impossible to build the type of attachment or social interaction from such games that you did with some of the older ones.
Okay, found it... Now to what Axehilt is stating...
Originally posted by Kaledren
Originally posted by Axehilt
Originally posted by Kaledren
Originally posted by Kaledren
Some other things that would be nice to see....
* Branching quests.* Example...
Find an NPC that gives a quest (No "!'s" Just greet NPC's to find hidden quests) to find the guys brother that has gone missing. Last seen going NW of town to collect cave moss for a medical potion that will save his ailing wife's life. Blah blah blah...accept and head NW. Find a cave and figure it's there. Deep inside, after fighting through droves of spiders, you find the guys brother slumped against one of the caverns walls. You inspect the man to find him dying.
He tells you he stumbled upon a band of goblins within the cave and overheard them talking about a large impending attack on Town B found through the other side of the cave and to the SW. They discovered him ease dropping and attacked, leaving him for dead. He wants you to deliver a message to Town B warning them of the coming attack set for the next evening.
From here, you are given options.
Before reading further, keep this in mind. Your development team, needs to put time into working on implementing all options you have in mind here. If I had to guess also, these options are leading to quest parts, consequences etc, that will not even be seen.
1. Tell him you will deliver the message, here by accepting the quest. (Dying man goes on a long respawn timer)
2. Ignore his request, take the dying man's coin, and continue on your own adventures. (Dying man goes on a long respawn timer). Spiders attack you while making noise looting the dying man. Possible Spider queen spawn upon killing X amount of spider drones.
3. Take the dying man's sword and medicine pouch to show to his brother as evidence of his brother's demise.
Possible outcomes to each decision:
1. Continue through the cave and find the exit, get to the village in question and warn them via the town Mayor. The Mayor will fortify the town walls with NPC soldiers, will start the attack shortly after. You can accept another quest for reward by helping fend off the attack, or choose not to. Other players can help fend off the attack as well. Any player in the village will have a quest pop up on screen for it and choose it or not.
2. Quest givers wife dies. Wife is on a long timer to respawn. Original quest giver (The guys husband) has a quest to find out what happened to his brother, tells you if you discover foul play..find the offenders and get revenge for him and bring back evidence. The village is still attacked upon you turning in..but it is attacked unprepared due to no warning. Players can attack the goblins as they attack. Goblin Captain spawns for the attack.
3. Quest giver mourns his brother, but thanks you for telling him. He gets the moss from the pouch, makes the potion, and heals his wife. She also thanks you and gives you a reward (Whatever decided on). The village is still attacked upon you turning in..but it is attacked unprepared due to no warning. Players can attack the goblins as they attack. Goblin Captain spawns for the attack.
I know this is complicated...but imagine quests like this.
Completely agreed, but I am playing Axehilt's advocate here...
*Random events*
Like if the had a boat travel system like EQ did to go between continents. What if pirates attacked randomly. Sea monsters, bad storms that throw the boat off course to a different continent, or maybe discovers an island, etc.
* Mini games*
If players want to unwind a bit with friends between quests, raids, etc. What if they incorporated a card game like in FF8 with collectible cards. Win them from other players and collect them all for a further reward. Even talk to NPC's and maybe discover they play and have rare cards you can win. Etc, etc.
*GM events*
Random orc raids on towns, bandits along travel paths. Wolf pack attacks, giants attacking, Dragons, etc, etc.
Add your own to this conversation.
Are you also fine with dramatically cutting the number of quests?
100 non-branching quests you can do in any order.
OR 50 faction-specific quests (in a 2-faction game)
OR 25 faction-specific branching quests (ie choose 1A or 1B)
OR ~8 two-stage branching quests where choosing 1A then leads to branching quest 2A/2B while 1B leads to 3A/3B.
These numbers are from the player's point of view. In the first case a new player can literally play 100 different quests. In the last case, a player will experience at most a total of about 8 quests.
Basically we're saying the team is going to work on 100% of quests, and any given player will only experience 8% of that work.
Not completely sure I'm following your line of thought on this.
Do you mean instead of the possibility of having hundreds, if not thousands (Highly unlikely, but doable with dedication) of quests ..most in a branching system, although single quests are included as well...to instead drastically cut the number of quests?
Now to what he is stating (even though at the moment I would like to slap the man silly)...
He is stating that your development team must put in time, effort, resources, get paid for, etc in order to build and implement 100% of these quests (including the parts that may never be seen).
Thus, if a single character only sees 8% of all that work accomplished, the $ and the time are going to add up. This is a good point from a purely business perspective. Another thing not even mentioned on this end, is the time it takes for players to consume content, in this case only 8% of it. This is as opposed to the 90%+ route as seems to be usually taken today. And that 90%+ is usually not able to be cranked out fast enough.
This is one of those points that I would love to see as you have demonstrated Kaledren, but at the same time, it is likely that a compromise somewhere, somehow needs to be made as well. I am fairly certain this is where such an MMORPG needs to have tools within the world, such that also allows for "emergent stories," above and beyond such a quest system. This would also take a company that is as interested in the artistic aspects of their work, as they are in the business aspects.
If this is indeed what he meant (and I'd like him to confirm this is indeed what he meant), then I completely understand and would agree. Maybe having such an idea as branching quests as I mentioned, but at a lower amount would be feasible. Looking at it from an implementation and business stand point.
Originally posted by fivoroth @neogeo75, no story, no gameplay, no nothing? Why would I play a game like that then?
Don't play then. I not here to convince you otherwise. Story progression or end game content were never the main pursuit of the early day mmo. Leveling with other player was the fun part. It's more of a social gathering and the gaming part just tag along. I don't suppose any mmo gamer hat joined the genre after wow could understand. Nor do I could imagine them playing a game without quest holding their hand from zone to zone till end game.
I am really beginning to hate the EQ community. I am so glad that that game is dead and I would hate to play with the elitist EQ fans anyway.
I mean read your last two sentences. Elitist garbage. But then again my favourite MMO is still alive and on top. EQ is down the F2P garbage route, long forgotten. It's meaningless existence was shortlived. How many people play EQ? 100?
I might enjoyed WOW which had quest and "hand holding" as you said but then again your praised EQ was a stupid grinder. You grinded mobs all day in one spot like a mindless drone.
You sound offended.
The point is, we realize what we like doesn't appeal to everyone. If people don't like it they can play something else. We've said our piece, we aren't out to convince the world.
We like slower harder progression from level 1 on. Not a game that caters to everyone and provides a false sense of accomplishment until you hit the real grind at max level; A grind I might add, that's made worthless by solo content in the following expansion.
This isn't our idea of fun, don't be upset if its yours. Stand by what you like.
Are you for real?
What you like, as time has shown, almost noone else likes.
Almost every new game has slew of "this modern POS, EQ was da shit, all this is POS... ... ..."
EQ was false sense of accomplishment.
Anf why is grind at endgame so bad, but when when whole game is one uber grind with 100s on mindless time sinks its awesome.
These games are gone for 1 reason only - almost noone likes them.
And yes, its uber nostalgia and super rosey glasses. They were super simplistic games with almost no content, just landscape with mobs lined up for grinding.
You are mistaking profit with actual evolution in gaming. Those games didn't "slew" EQ or UO because they are better. They "slew" it because they are MUCH more profitable, since they are aimmed to a vast majority of dumb, avarage players, instead of hardcore players that want to have a virtual life.
If you equate "virtual life" with chatting, you can do that without game. Otherwise those games were infinite times worse than todays games.
Nope, EQ is not virtual chat room, virtual chat has no goal where EQ is more like PnP adventure with a group of people. Also leveling in EQ are often fill with surprise as the environment is hazard and player have to react to different situation from time to time. MMO like wow had to resort to questing to keep the leveling fun because players mostly solo and even in group, they're just repeating their routine abilities rotation.
I really don't see this discussion going anywhere. It's fine that you guys don't like EQ and I could understand as the game hit its peak before your time. Still I don't see the need to go around and tell people that their feeling is wrong, like you're on some sort of crusader quest to awaken people from their nostalgia.
Originally posted by VengeSunsoar I really do believe must people are confusing depth with looking something better.Depth is the number of meaningful decisions that need to be made. There really is no difference in depth between missy old games and most new ones.You liking one more than the other does not mean more depth.
I agree with this. But I do not see the "meaningful choices" in today's MMOs. Maybe it is because combat is not the only meaningful activity in my own view?EQ had factions that created "meaningful choices." They had many non-combat skills that created "meaningful choices." Today's MMOS? "Which method of killing do I imrpove?" is not, in my opinion a "meaningful choice."
Well just off the top of my head we have:Farming (wow actual farming)gatheringfishingCraftingAchievementsCollectionsSkill trees (although this is related to combat, it is definitely a choice in character development)ExplorationArcheologyReputations are still in most games (e.g. tillers in WoW)Battle pets (again WoW)AHBuilding ((EQ2 housing, WoW the fortress thing) Of course this is all aside from the normal things like character selection, class selection...I'm sure there are many more but those are general good activities outside of combat.
This is a good list, though I may combine the first 3 (and Archeology) under "crafting." Otherwise, you'll end up listing each craft singularly
Now, most of those above Archeology were available in ONE old MMORPGs, EQ. Add to those the following: - Non-Combat Crafting: Remember race shaped cookie cutters for blacksmithing? - Languages. - Tracking. - Porting. - Travel Help (like Bard's Selos Accelerando song and Druid's Spirit of the Wolf Spell) - Buffing not combat related. - Chat with NPCs. Actually chat. In the Local chat box. Sometimes they may ignore you, but if they had that [keyword], you actually chatted with them. - Calls for help when players got lost (no maps or compasses or GPS locators). - Drowning with the subsequent swimming skill. - Factions. EQ had multiple tens of factions, not 2 or 3. I bet I can match you faction or faction with lots left over - AA (Alternate Advancement) Skills. - Not an AH, but The Bazaar was quite similar, if a bit crude.
I'm sure I am missing many activities, but I think you get my drift. And this from just ONE old MMORPG
- Al
Personally the only modern MMORPG trend that annoys me is the idea that MMOs need to be designed in a way to attract people who don't actually like MMOs. Which to me makes about as much sense as someone trying to figure out a way to get vegetarians to eat at their steakhouse. - FARGIN_WAR
Yep EQ definitely had those especially early on for porting.
WoW has porting (not nearly as many as EQ) too though, and tracking. True hunter tracking is not the same as the golden line but still it lets the hunter find things. (Hmm if I remember correctly wasn't the original tracking in EQ not the golden line but a XXX is north... can't quite recall)
Travel help... hmm I'll give it. Only a few classes in EQ had that buff. In modern games everyone has it. It is still there though, but is much more common.
The others definitely.
Especially the AA, I don't know why more games don't do this. Such an easy way to continue progressing.
So there are things that EQ has that WoW doesn't, and things that Wow has that EQ doesn't (collections, flight...)
See. Overall IMO anyway, not a lot of difference in depth (again meaningful choices). Some games have more than most modern games SWG and UO. However some modern games have more than most old ones - Age of Wushu - needlessly over complicated in my opinion but definitely a crapload ton of stuff that affects your character. Probably not more than UO, but definitely more than most of the early games. Even ESO (I admit I've only played the beta so can't comment a lot) but with the multi-classing in ESO or even the multiple skill trees in virtually all the other ones - again significantly affect your character.
So which age has more depth?
Lots of similarities. Several differences. But more?
edit - this is where I think we all get confused. If you like those activities in one game you can recognize the choices. In another game you don't like you are blind to the choices (not you specifically but you/us generally). However the choices are still there, and they are meaningful to the character, just not to us.
edit - I thought about listing Gathering under crafting but decided to leave it because in EQ you could craft but not gather, not without the combat anyway. Archeology, ya it really is just a funny kind of gathering I guess but with some interesting rewards.
edit - the exception is again as always swtor. Well my marauder was fun (before 3.0 hit, hated that) the game is just far far too limiting in every aspect. Small worlds with definate and set entrance and exit zones, limited houses with only specific items in specific slots, must finish this area before going to another area, and the skill tree (ish now?0 changes even more limited, egads). Anyway, that's my rant on that game.
Just because you don't like it doesn't mean it is bad.
Originally posted by djcincy Lets be real. Everquest didn't get "Slew" it simply got dated and it was never updated with current graphics or a reasonable ui. Games like WoW have faired a bit better because the technology was much further along when it was released.
To this day EQ and other first gens never were updated. After WoW hit, everyone started chasing their success and here we are today with a dozen versions of the same game in a genre where MMOs can't even get by on subscriptions.
Comments
EQ had factions that created "meaningful choices." They had many non-combat skills that created "meaningful choices." Today's MMOS? "Which method of killing do I imrpove?" is not, in my opinion a "meaningful choice."
- Al
Personally the only modern MMORPG trend that annoys me is the idea that MMOs need to be designed in a way to attract people who don't actually like MMOs. Which to me makes about as much sense as someone trying to figure out a way to get vegetarians to eat at their steakhouse.- FARGIN_WAR
Don't play then. I not here to convince you otherwise. Story progression or end game content were never the main pursuit of the early day mmo. Leveling with other player was the fun part. It's more of a social gathering and the gaming part just tag along. I don't suppose any mmo gamer hat joined the genre after wow could understand. Nor do I could imagine them playing a game without quest holding their hand from zone to zone till end game.Well just off the top of my head we have:
Farming (wow actual farming)
gathering
fishing
Crafting
Achievements
Collections
Skill trees (although this is related to combat, it is definitely a choice in character development)
Exploration
Archeology
Reputations are still in most games (e.g. tillers in WoW)
Battle pets (again WoW)
AH
Building ((EQ2 housing, WoW the fortress thing)
Of course this is all aside from the normal things like character selection, class selection...
I'm sure there are many more but those are general good activities outside of combat.
I am really beginning to hate the EQ community. I am so glad that that game is dead and I would hate to play with the elitist EQ fans anyway.
I mean read your last two sentences. Elitist garbage. But then again my favourite MMO is still alive and on top. EQ is down the F2P garbage route, long forgotten. It's meaningless existence was shortlived. How many people play EQ? 100?
I might enjoyed WOW which had quest and "hand holding" as you said but then again your praised EQ was a stupid grinder. You grinded mobs all day in one spot like a mindless drone.
Mission in life: Vanquish all MMORPG.com trolls - especially TESO, WOW and GW2 trolls.
Not completely sure I'm following your line of thought on this.
Do you mean instead of the possibility of having hundreds, if not thousands (Highly unlikely, but doable with dedication) of quests ..most in a branching system, although single quests are included as well...to instead drastically cut the number of quests?
Actually, the highlighted portion is untrue. I know this from a personal experience. The GM's in EQ at one time did events.
I was around lvl 10 or so (Ranger), sitting at the bottom of Kelethin near the elevator that leads up to the town medding up to go out again...spent time while medding to fletch me some arrows. Next thing I know, someone yells "Orc invasion coming to Kelethin!"
I though it was another train of orcs someone was pulling to the guards so they wouldn't die. So I stand up, turn around and look up the hill. I see tons of orcs crest the hill..not chasing anyone. So I jumped on the elevator and start letting arrows loose like Legolas on crack as I ride it to the top.
For the next 30 minutes or so everyone in town, including the NPC's fought back the horde of orcs. It was a blast and something I will always remember.
But yeah, there were tons of events like that in EQ at one time. Those types of things making a return would be kick&*#!
"I am really beginning to hate the EQ community. "
Having gone back and re-read your posts, your hate is not just beginning it was there all the time.
"How many people play EQ? 100?"
This is the second time I have read this figure in recent days, I am guessing the other time was you too. It is phrased as a question but it is a deliberate deceit. No one is sure of the exact number of EQ players but 100,000 would be a lot closer than 100.
"I might enjoyed WOW which had quest"
Again if people go back and read your posts it is obvious you are an active WoW player and ardent fan.
The most consistent feature of your posts is vitriol and hate.
Sorry...but yet again. WoW, and every other MMORPG ever made...they all have grind in one way or another, or to some degree. Some just hide it better than others...but they ALL have it. Even your beloved WoW. I would know, I played it for 2 years (The first 2).
That last part is actually true. Unless you played the game at the time and spent a lot of time in it you wouldn't really understand that there was actually a lot to do. Some people at the time just didn't get it. I would akin it to saying you could understand a certain time/culture in history without actually having been there. Despite having been there you might still not get it like some people never understand certain styles of music. One thing that is obvious is the community in EQ was very devoted so the game must have done something right for a lot of people.
You sound offended.
The point is, we realize what we like doesn't appeal to everyone. If people don't like it they can play something else. We've said our piece, we aren't out to convince the world.
We like slower harder progression from level 1 on. Not a game that caters to everyone and provides a false sense of accomplishment until you hit the real grind at max level; A grind I might add, that's made worthless by solo content in the following expansion.
This isn't our idea of fun, don't be upset if its yours. Stand by what you like.
I'll give you a single example as I stated above: Diablo.
If you played Diablo 1, you know how much more deph that game from the 90's had in comparison to his older brother that just got released (well, kinda...) Diablo 3. Diablo 3 has no character progression, you can't distribute your stats nor your skills, itemization looks dumb compared to the Uniques you found in Diablo 1 and 2 and the story is just meh, while Diablo 1 and 2 made me feel like I was inside an epic quest to slay down the prime evil himself. And please, don't make me start on the Runewords topic of Diablo 2, wich shows how much more deph it had, because I don't want to punnish D3 even further.
What 'meaningful decision' was there in D1 that D3 doesn't have?
You could make WRONG decision in D1/D2 which is different from meaningful decision. And the kicker was that your only option was to reroll in D1 / D2.
D1 / D2 was setup so players felt they had to avoid being tricked into the wrong decision rather than make 'right' decision.
It shows what PvP games are really all about, and no, it's not about more realism and immersion. It's about cowards hiding behind a screen to they can bully other defenseless players without any risk of direct retaliation like there would be if they acted like asshats in "real life". -Jean-Luc_Picard
Life itself is a game. So why shouldn't your game be ruined? - justmemyselfandi
Are you for real?
What you like, as time has shown, almost noone else likes.
Almost every new game has slew of "this modern POS, EQ was da shit, all this is POS... ... ..."
EQ was false sense of accomplishment.
Anf why is grind at endgame so bad, but when when whole game is one uber grind with 100s on mindless time sinks its awesome.
These games are gone for 1 reason only - almost noone likes them.
And yes, its uber nostalgia and super rosey glasses. They were super simplistic games with almost no content, just landscape with mobs lined up for grinding.
You really have no idea what deph is in a game. You are just repeating that other users words, thinking deph means "meaningulf decisions", wich is absolutelly wrong. You don't have a concept biased on your own experience to dictate what deph is. I feel I am talking to a mimic or a marionete.
You are mistaking profit with actual evolution in gaming. Those games didn't "slew" EQ or UO because they are better. They "slew" it because they are MUCH more profitable, since they are aimmed to a vast majority of dumb, avarage players, instead of hardcore players that want to have a virtual life.
From countless posts that talk about "depth" theres only 1 conxlusion: depth=annoyance. So the more annying game is, it has more "depth".
Yes i still remember all this "depth" and millions upon millions are relieved that this "depth" went way of the dodo.
If you equate "virtual life" with chatting, you can do that without game. Otherwise those games were infinite times worse than todays games.
This is true, but we are not talking about twitter and facebook. EQ itself was interesting enough that people wanted to talk about it in game and out of game. Most people these days don't talk about the game either in game or out of game. They don't need to because the games are usually so simple that you don't need to ask anyone for help with anything. You also don't care enough about the game generally to talk about it. It's just a side attraction for an a very short amount of time in most cases. It's impossible to build the type of attachment or social interaction from such games that you did with some of the older ones.
If this is indeed what he meant (and I'd like him to confirm this is indeed what he meant), then I completely understand and would agree. Maybe having such an idea as branching quests as I mentioned, but at a lower amount would be feasible. Looking at it from an implementation and business stand point.
Nope, EQ is not virtual chat room, virtual chat has no goal where EQ is more like PnP adventure with a group of people. Also leveling in EQ are often fill with surprise as the environment is hazard and player have to react to different situation from time to time. MMO like wow had to resort to questing to keep the leveling fun because players mostly solo and even in group, they're just repeating their routine abilities rotation.
I really don't see this discussion going anywhere. It's fine that you guys don't like EQ and I could understand as the game hit its peak before your time. Still I don't see the need to go around and tell people that their feeling is wrong, like you're on some sort of crusader quest to awaken people from their nostalgia.
Now, most of those above Archeology were available in ONE old MMORPGs, EQ. Add to those the following:
- Non-Combat Crafting: Remember race shaped cookie cutters for blacksmithing?
- Languages.
- Tracking.
- Porting.
- Travel Help (like Bard's Selos Accelerando song and Druid's Spirit of the Wolf Spell)
- Buffing not combat related.
- Chat with NPCs. Actually chat. In the Local chat box. Sometimes they may ignore you, but if they had that [keyword], you actually chatted with them.
- Calls for help when players got lost (no maps or compasses or GPS locators).
- Drowning with the subsequent swimming skill.
- Factions. EQ had multiple tens of factions, not 2 or 3. I bet I can match you faction or faction with lots left over
- AA (Alternate Advancement) Skills.
- Not an AH, but The Bazaar was quite similar, if a bit crude.
I'm sure I am missing many activities, but I think you get my drift. And this from just ONE old MMORPG
- Al
Personally the only modern MMORPG trend that annoys me is the idea that MMOs need to be designed in a way to attract people who don't actually like MMOs. Which to me makes about as much sense as someone trying to figure out a way to get vegetarians to eat at their steakhouse.- FARGIN_WAR
Yep EQ definitely had those especially early on for porting.
WoW has porting (not nearly as many as EQ) too though, and tracking. True hunter tracking is not the same as the golden line but still it lets the hunter find things. (Hmm if I remember correctly wasn't the original tracking in EQ not the golden line but a XXX is north... can't quite recall)
Travel help... hmm I'll give it. Only a few classes in EQ had that buff. In modern games everyone has it. It is still there though, but is much more common.
The others definitely.
Especially the AA, I don't know why more games don't do this. Such an easy way to continue progressing.
So there are things that EQ has that WoW doesn't, and things that Wow has that EQ doesn't (collections, flight...)
See. Overall IMO anyway, not a lot of difference in depth (again meaningful choices). Some games have more than most modern games SWG and UO. However some modern games have more than most old ones - Age of Wushu - needlessly over complicated in my opinion but definitely a crapload ton of stuff that affects your character. Probably not more than UO, but definitely more than most of the early games. Even ESO (I admit I've only played the beta so can't comment a lot) but with the multi-classing in ESO or even the multiple skill trees in virtually all the other ones - again significantly affect your character.
So which age has more depth?
Lots of similarities. Several differences. But more?
edit - this is where I think we all get confused. If you like those activities in one game you can recognize the choices. In another game you don't like you are blind to the choices (not you specifically but you/us generally). However the choices are still there, and they are meaningful to the character, just not to us.
edit - I thought about listing Gathering under crafting but decided to leave it because in EQ you could craft but not gather, not without the combat anyway. Archeology, ya it really is just a funny kind of gathering I guess but with some interesting rewards.
edit - the exception is again as always swtor. Well my marauder was fun (before 3.0 hit, hated that) the game is just far far too limiting in every aspect. Small worlds with definate and set entrance and exit zones, limited houses with only specific items in specific slots, must finish this area before going to another area, and the skill tree (ish now?0 changes even more limited, egads). Anyway, that's my rant on that game.
To this day EQ and other first gens never were updated. After WoW hit, everyone started chasing their success and here we are today with a dozen versions of the same game in a genre where MMOs can't even get by on subscriptions.