Howdy, Stranger!
It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!
Quick Links
One success, one failure, one change
Aelious
Member RarePosts: 3,521
No, I'm not talking about the "trifecta" of previous iterations of the next EverQuest /rimshot 
I'm asking for opinions on the current version of EQN, at least that's been relayed so far.
What is one key to EQN's success?
What is one road to EQN's failure?
What is one thing you would change about it's design direction?
(please don't cheat and say "everything!"... leave some for others heh)
Comments
One Success: It got Dave Georgeson fired.
One Failure: "Destructible Terrain", that "heals" itself in 30 minutes or so.
One Change: The name call it something else because it sure is not Everquest.
The success, or "good idea", they are working on is the notion of player accountability and a world comprised of a very complex system of factions and alignment. This is the proper foundation for building a compelling virtual world.
The problem I see in every system they've spoken of is their desire for everything to have mass appeal and therefore be as casual friendly as possible. No matter how many differences they boast in their mechanics and systems from WoW and its clones, the underlying philosophy is the same, and it is what will ultimately make EQN a failure of a game in my book. They are still operating under the illusion that if they check the right boxes and mix in the perfect concoction of ingredients, they just might topple WoW. That, as time has shown, is nothing but a recipe for disaster.
They need to change their ambition and stick to what made EverQuest an enticing and enjoyable experience. This however, I believe is beyond the comprehension of anyone currently working for Daybreak. The closest thing they had to an understanding of the "old ways" left with Jeff Butler and now they have resigned themselves to the creative "expertise" of a themepark apologist who thinks the way of the future is integrating MOBA combat into an MMORPG (McPhearson).
One Success: New ideas! destructible content!
One Failure: Smed didn't get fired!
One Change: add leveling system. Don't do Norrath again, make a new world.
Proud MMORPG.com member since March 2004! Make PvE GREAT Again!
Key to success
Since Kano took my #1 I'll go with the next in line:
Taking full advantage of the voxel world. It already has the advantages of adding depth and substance to the world as well as being easier to add content. They also need to come through with their idea to have underground caverns/ruins with content that shift around. Having that added sense of adventure is a huge plus IMO.
Path to failure
Making it solo centric and easy. Some have already written it off as such but I'm not so sure. Early on the devs talked about grouping as one of the ways of bringing back the social aspect of play. They need to bring that mentality to the final product of EQN. It's a contested issue whether or not EQN can live up to, or even share the name, of EQ. If EQN does not have a large chunk of content, or similar scaling features, made for groups I will agree that it isn't. It can't be IMO. This isn't to say there will not be any solo content, one could solo in EQ, but it should not be the majority of content. The content should also not be face roll easy. Since they've decided, or haven't rescinded, the idea of MOBA type combat (making decisions matter) it would go against having easy content.
Thing to change
Weapon based abilities. I get why they are doing it but I'd rather have the 8 weapon abilities be weapon agnostic and then add specific aspects to the different weapons (Dagger more crit, 2H more top end damage, etc.). That would add a fourth build aspect (Class (8 abilities), weapon, item effects, and (4) swap-able secondary abilities) and would further add to the depth of play.
I would have to agree with a few posters above me..
This would be my answer as well.
With a pretty big focus on point three. DON'T CALL THAT ABOMINATION EVERQUEST. It is not. You just can not sell a bannana and call it apple. People that love apples will hate you.
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?
Dynamic world. What they are shooting for is that the world is so dynamic that from server to server it wont be the same outcome. Unlike GW2 where events are on a 20-30 min cycle of the same steps, EQN story from server to server will play out over months and months. On one server there will be an NPC city from the actions players took, on another server their will be nothings or ruins.
Combat at the moment is really bad. They have painted a picture of what they want to bring to the table but what is current is just bad and not even close to their vision.
Bring back the trinity. The market is being flooded with Action combat and most times you can win just by button mashing. Nothing beats the tactics of the trinity. Action combact is fun for a few weeks but after a while I find dodging becomes the only I win button.
To your last point there, one needs only to look at ESO to see how that can go very very wrong. Stamina is for dodging and blocking, so EVERY offensive ability you have needs to be magic based. So much for build variety!
I am just not getting how much more obvious signs can people get that the game will never be released , and still post such topics ?
Its like those poor fanboys that still thought World of Darkness will be released after there was not even alpha gameplay shown and 6 years have passed, and CCP fired the whole team.
Cool story bro. Obvious troll is obvious. Kthxbai!
Storybricks or whatever it ends up being called. If Daybreak can pull off a real world that does dynamic things in a way that engages players, then the game could find a good following.
Leadership. Daybreak needs to get someone from outside the company with game design experience to come in and fix the problems of the team (and the company). Regardless of what those problems are specifically, they need to be addressed, because it has clearly affected the companies ability to produce good games that find success. Otherwise the same people are most certainly going to repeat the same mistakes again and again until someone comes in to change it.
At this point it is hard to tell what is and isn't in the game anymore and even if it isn't going through another design change.
A small complaint would be the overuse of particle effects during combat. As cool as they may look, they are far too heavy and used too frequently. It is hard to even see character models during many abilities.
A larger concern would be the choice to make the game free to play. Not a big fan of this companies attempts at free to play in the past, but beyond that it seems most free to play games of this type either a) punish players in an attempt to force them into the cash shop or b) pay 2 win.