EQ3 imo EQ3 = EQ1 + better graphics and all servers are PvP like Sullon Zek
signed
Why would anyone make a MMO that few wants to play? Just the horrible mob grind and down time will scare away most of the customers.
Not necessarily.......People play MMOs for different reasons.....You are just assuming everyone wants to get to end game quickly and that is not always the case...... When I first started playing EQ in 2000 many of the players I met were in no hurry at all......Most of them enjoyed the social aspect of the game as much as the leveling....i met several that had no interest at all in ever reaching max level........For too many MMo players now the games are all geared to reach end game quickly.....Its kinda like wanting to reach adulthood and not enjoying your childhood......I think there are quite a few of us that would like to see EQ3 only if it is reminiscent of EQ1 in its glory days (99-02 or so) and is nothing like what EQ2 turned out to be (WoW wannabe)......
EQ3 imo EQ3 = EQ1 + better graphics and all servers are PvP like Sullon Zek
signed
Why would anyone make a MMO that few wants to play? Just the horrible mob grind and down time will scare away most of the customers.
Not necessarily.......People play MMOs for different reasons.....You are just assuming everyone wants to get to end game quickly and that is not always the case...... When I first started playing EQ in 2000 many of the players I met were in no hurry at all......Most of them enjoyed the social aspect of the game as much as the leveling....i met several that had no interest at all in ever reaching max level........For too many MMo players now the games are all geared to reach end game quickly.....Its kinda like wanting to reach adulthood and not enjoying your childhood......I think there are quite a few of us that would like to see EQ3 only if it is reminiscent of EQ1 in its glory days (99-02 or so) and is nothing like what EQ2 turned out to be (WoW wannabe)......
I assume people want FUN gameplay and being fast is just a by-product. We are in 2009 now, not 2000. I played EQ too. At that time, it was great because I have NO alternative. The world has changed.
I don't think EQ with a new graphics engine will succeed in the market place.
I'm replaying Everquest at the moment and have expressed some frustration with the game in the EQ forums here. However, that aside I do still see an appeal to the game that a new graphics update etc would do it much more justice. The problem rightly pointed out in bringing such a new Everquest (with it's new super graphics improvements and all) would be esp. on the issue of design:
A new Everquest just wouldn't be Everquest For instance, aspects such as such an integral thing as it's classes would have to be completely changed. Eg, few people imo would want to play a new skinned Everquest with the same played-out classes of the original. And you change those classes, you'll inevitably change the game. (still Everquest?)
The gameplay would have to be changed Not WoW-like, contrary to WoW fanbois beliefs that there is only one mmorpg design, but it would have to be changed and would have to face new judgement/assessment of those changes. I mean taking out stuff like mass-downtime, like one-dimensional bashing mobs, and already the core game as people know it would be completely different- and would be questionable to how appealling people would find that with the changes implemented in it's place.
Many EQ1 players tried EQ2 when it first came out in 2004, many quit it because they were not satisfied. EQ2 was and still is not the same as EQ1, it never captured the playerbase that EQ1 once had. Everything from lore, to quest-on-a-rail style gameplay, to combat, everything in EQ2 is different.
Many EQ1 players also tried Vanguard, had high hopes Brad & Co. would bring us an updated EQ1 with better graphics. Of course we all know how that went, many left disappointed. Technical issues & bugs aside, I can honestly say Vanguard had potential, but still it is not EQ1. It tried to copy EQ's lore but because it's not of the same IP, it couldn't.
EQ1 players preferred EQ1, and many still prefer EQ1 today, because EQ1's lore is top notch, its nostalgia is not something EQ2 or Vanguard could reproduce, and its sandbox style gameplay & do what you want freedom is still pretty unique in today's MMO genre.
So personally I don't think EQ3 would work out well unless SOE goes back to their roots and please their own audience. I also don't think there will be an EQ3, when both EQ1 & 2 are still going with an expansion a year releases. If they ever do want to release an EQ3 and change many things, they might as well call the game something different.
It's an issue with sequels...the same problem movie sequels have. If you change from the original too much, many of your loyal audience won't like it. AC2 released totally different in gameplay than AC1, it failed because it never won AC1's playerbase support. Look at Warhammer, Mythic even changed the name but still ex-DAOC players expected Mythic to make WAR's siege & RvR to be as good as DAOC. Of course we all know it isn't, so because WAR didn't please their DAOC playerbase, and it isn't satisfying enough for WoW players, it's kind of not doing as well as Mythic had hoped. It's just hard making a 2, let alone a 3.
When are all you EQ/UO/AC vets gonna realize that the only reason your so attached to them is because you had zero perspective of mmos until you played your first one. You elevate features of these the same way you would their opposites had they been present in your first experience. MMOs during the time of EQ/UO/AC were revolutionary, a fresh new experience with which there was no comparison to be made, perhaps that is why people compare everything to them. BTW I played EQ from June 2000 until the summer of 2003, and logged over 160 days /played. I leveled a wizard when leveling was the hardest it ever was on the hardest class to level all the way to 65 with epic, no PLing no KEI, and I happily stared at my /book to med. Sure EQ was great, I'd personally love to see another MMO come out that is made in it's image. But I realize that I'm totally biased towards it due to it having been my first experience, and won't preach that it's the "best way" to make a MMO.
I think you're overgeneralizing. I started playing EQ in 2001, took a break from 06-08 and recently renewed my subscription again at the beginning of this year. I play EQ not because of nostalgia (though I admit I am very nostalgic about it) but because it's still the only game I've found that has a lot of the things I want in an MMO. I like that I don't have to press buttons every second, it gives me time to talk to people in my group. I like that not all of my spells and abilities are made for combat, it gives me more utility and the world more flavor. I like that I don't have to accept endless missions and quests, it gives me more time to strike out with a group of guildmates and just do our own thing without worrying too much about who has how many Sarnak tails. I like that I can stay at a constant level for months and still grow my character through AAs, it lets me choose how I want the leveling curve to play out and how long I get to see the content that I enjoy.
I could go on for awhile. I admit that it has aged somewhat especially in the areas of UI but I really do love it all the same. Not because of rose tinted, backwards-pointing glasses, but for what it offers that most games don't. Whether EQ3 will ever happen I have no idea but, judging by the amount of people still playing a 10 year old game, I'd say it would have a shot if done correctly.
EQ3 should be a new world to explore with a good combat system like vanguard's. EQ1 had a very well designed world and good lore, but the combat system was way too simplistic. I recently resubbed and found my L50 rogue had just one attack - backstab. I was looking around to try to see where were all the rest of my attacks but there werent any. Then vanguard came along with a great combat system, a great class system, but the world was very poorly coded. Put the two together and have a well designed world and great combat and class system.
Please explain where SOE is going to get funding for another EQ? I don't think they can find enough fools to fund it..
SOE is on a major downhill slide and unless one of these new games becomes a big hit the company is going to be in serious financial hardship soon, if it isn't already.
It is going to take a miracle to see a EQ3, and Smedley will have to go before there is a chance of that happening.
When are all you EQ/UO/AC vets gonna realize that the only reason your so attached to them is because you had zero perspective of mmos until you played your first one. You elevate features of these the same way you would their opposites had they been present in your first experience. MMOs during the time of EQ/UO/AC were revolutionary, a fresh new experience with which there was no comparison to be made, perhaps that is why people compare everything to them.
This reminds me of a developer that replies on a forum about rose colored glasses... yet can't explain how his own non rose colored glasses.. are seeing less subscribers than ever.
I personally was never really a fan of EQ... I only played EQ because my entire UO guild (except one other person) went to EQ. Then I would continiously lag behind on levels because I was always going back to UO.
When I look back at UO.. I don't see some perfect utopian gaming experience. I see a lot of mistakes that were made.. because they didn't have any other MMO .. relatively to learn from. Having M59 and NwN's on AoL is not a lot of perspective ...
Yet I also see a game I enjoyed more than anything the current "crap in a box" industry can drop out.
Your own arguement is flawed at its core. As time passes you indeed have more perspective to compare your experiences with... This does not make something seem better because it was "first"... but it does give you a very personal and relative view of a journey.
I'll give you a perspective.... you can take this as my opinion.
When UO came out I almost quit during my "30 days includeed". I met some people and ended up playing UO for the most consecutive period of time (no months of cancel or real breaks) of any MMO I ever played. It was difficult... you were going to be attacked... you were going to lose everything you had on you. The penalties were severe...
I didn't think it was a great game because of penalties... or wasted time... I enjoyed it (something you probably can't really explain).
I've never really enjoyed any other MMO long term. After UO the only thing I wanted was a game that didn't make many of the same core mistakes... and did EVERYthing better... bigger.. more.
Instead what I got were games that had a more narrow focus... more limits.. more controls.. less of everything.
Even SWG... which I took more time in the exile forum than I should have... the game some people thought walked on water. I saw its flaws... It was "like" UO but it had more limits... less less less
This has been a constant "opinion" of mine since 1997/1998... of what I wanted moving forward.
So to then say "well you only feel that way because when you look back... blah blah blah"
Is not only flawed... its trying to project your own opinion as fact... over my experience that you know nothing about.
Various people will feel differently about any subjective experience.. so please don't tell me I only feel some way because of something you have no knowledge of or clearly don't have a clue about (my perspective and where it comes from).
So I'll make my own odd statement...
Did you ever notice that when UO had a peak population of 250,000... EQ around 450,000... and AC1 was in there "somewhere"... That every forum you read... every person was part of that market.. and played the hardest class to level.. and knows everything...
Eventually you reach a point where the numbers of people who played those games.. and always the hardest classes in those games. Have surpassed the total number of players who actually played those games... back then. Let alone the numbers of people who actually leveled that "hardest class" to level X....
(not directed at the person I quoted actually... it is an observation I have made over time. Its more of an example of making a universal statement as if its true about everyone... yet is most definitely true about some people.)
*edit note* and if you didn't catch it... yes I've seen people who claim to be UO vets and think the game was the best ever.. who will list the exact same features... that made sure there was never another UO... and why EQ was the more popular game... who even claim that the exodus from UO to EQ was for the high tech uber "blocky hand" graphics... as opposed to one thing in the EQ FAQ that was actually in caps back then... "NO FORCED PVP..."
But my reply again if you missed it.. is about making blanket statements and passing opinon as universal fact. Posting opinion is awesome.. if its posted as such...
hmm going back to my earlier post- I'm playing Vanguard currently- due to the reactivated accounts atm, and I'm not drawn in by the game as all the classes I've basically played before. So it's a bit of a challenge to make an "EQ3" with classes that have have already made before and making that all seem new and enthralling.
Comments
Why would anyone make a MMO that few wants to play? Just the horrible mob grind and down time will scare away most of the customers.
Not necessarily.......People play MMOs for different reasons.....You are just assuming everyone wants to get to end game quickly and that is not always the case...... When I first started playing EQ in 2000 many of the players I met were in no hurry at all......Most of them enjoyed the social aspect of the game as much as the leveling....i met several that had no interest at all in ever reaching max level........For too many MMo players now the games are all geared to reach end game quickly.....Its kinda like wanting to reach adulthood and not enjoying your childhood......I think there are quite a few of us that would like to see EQ3 only if it is reminiscent of EQ1 in its glory days (99-02 or so) and is nothing like what EQ2 turned out to be (WoW wannabe)......
Why would anyone make a MMO that few wants to play? Just the horrible mob grind and down time will scare away most of the customers.
Not necessarily.......People play MMOs for different reasons.....You are just assuming everyone wants to get to end game quickly and that is not always the case...... When I first started playing EQ in 2000 many of the players I met were in no hurry at all......Most of them enjoyed the social aspect of the game as much as the leveling....i met several that had no interest at all in ever reaching max level........For too many MMo players now the games are all geared to reach end game quickly.....Its kinda like wanting to reach adulthood and not enjoying your childhood......I think there are quite a few of us that would like to see EQ3 only if it is reminiscent of EQ1 in its glory days (99-02 or so) and is nothing like what EQ2 turned out to be (WoW wannabe)......
I assume people want FUN gameplay and being fast is just a by-product. We are in 2009 now, not 2000. I played EQ too. At that time, it was great because I have NO alternative. The world has changed.
I don't think EQ with a new graphics engine will succeed in the market place.
I'm replaying Everquest at the moment and have expressed some frustration with the game in the EQ forums here. However, that aside I do still see an appeal to the game that a new graphics update etc would do it much more justice. The problem rightly pointed out in bringing such a new Everquest (with it's new super graphics improvements and all) would be esp. on the issue of design:
A new Everquest just wouldn't be Everquest
For instance, aspects such as such an integral thing as it's classes would have to be completely changed. Eg, few people imo would want to play a new skinned Everquest with the same played-out classes of the original. And you change those classes, you'll inevitably change the game. (still Everquest?)
The gameplay would have to be changed
Not WoW-like, contrary to WoW fanbois beliefs that there is only one mmorpg design, but it would have to be changed and would have to face new judgement/assessment of those changes. I mean taking out stuff like mass-downtime, like one-dimensional bashing mobs, and already the core game as people know it would be completely different- and would be questionable to how appealling people would find that with the changes implemented in it's place.
.
"Good? Bad? I'm the guy with the gun."
Many EQ1 players tried EQ2 when it first came out in 2004, many quit it because they were not satisfied. EQ2 was and still is not the same as EQ1, it never captured the playerbase that EQ1 once had. Everything from lore, to quest-on-a-rail style gameplay, to combat, everything in EQ2 is different.
Many EQ1 players also tried Vanguard, had high hopes Brad & Co. would bring us an updated EQ1 with better graphics. Of course we all know how that went, many left disappointed. Technical issues & bugs aside, I can honestly say Vanguard had potential, but still it is not EQ1. It tried to copy EQ's lore but because it's not of the same IP, it couldn't.
EQ1 players preferred EQ1, and many still prefer EQ1 today, because EQ1's lore is top notch, its nostalgia is not something EQ2 or Vanguard could reproduce, and its sandbox style gameplay & do what you want freedom is still pretty unique in today's MMO genre.
So personally I don't think EQ3 would work out well unless SOE goes back to their roots and please their own audience. I also don't think there will be an EQ3, when both EQ1 & 2 are still going with an expansion a year releases. If they ever do want to release an EQ3 and change many things, they might as well call the game something different.
It's an issue with sequels...the same problem movie sequels have. If you change from the original too much, many of your loyal audience won't like it. AC2 released totally different in gameplay than AC1, it failed because it never won AC1's playerbase support. Look at Warhammer, Mythic even changed the name but still ex-DAOC players expected Mythic to make WAR's siege & RvR to be as good as DAOC. Of course we all know it isn't, so because WAR didn't please their DAOC playerbase, and it isn't satisfying enough for WoW players, it's kind of not doing as well as Mythic had hoped. It's just hard making a 2, let alone a 3.
EQ1-AC1-DAOC-FFXI-L2-EQ2-WoW-DDO-GW-LoTR-VG-WAR-GW2-ESO
I think you're overgeneralizing. I started playing EQ in 2001, took a break from 06-08 and recently renewed my subscription again at the beginning of this year. I play EQ not because of nostalgia (though I admit I am very nostalgic about it) but because it's still the only game I've found that has a lot of the things I want in an MMO. I like that I don't have to press buttons every second, it gives me time to talk to people in my group. I like that not all of my spells and abilities are made for combat, it gives me more utility and the world more flavor. I like that I don't have to accept endless missions and quests, it gives me more time to strike out with a group of guildmates and just do our own thing without worrying too much about who has how many Sarnak tails. I like that I can stay at a constant level for months and still grow my character through AAs, it lets me choose how I want the leveling curve to play out and how long I get to see the content that I enjoy.
I could go on for awhile. I admit that it has aged somewhat especially in the areas of UI but I really do love it all the same. Not because of rose tinted, backwards-pointing glasses, but for what it offers that most games don't. Whether EQ3 will ever happen I have no idea but, judging by the amount of people still playing a 10 year old game, I'd say it would have a shot if done correctly.
EQ3 should be a new world to explore with a good combat system like vanguard's. EQ1 had a very well designed world and good lore, but the combat system was way too simplistic. I recently resubbed and found my L50 rogue had just one attack - backstab. I was looking around to try to see where were all the rest of my attacks but there werent any. Then vanguard came along with a great combat system, a great class system, but the world was very poorly coded. Put the two together and have a well designed world and great combat and class system.
SOE will never admit the inferiority of their current products...
Please explain where SOE is going to get funding for another EQ? I don't think they can find enough fools to fund it..
SOE is on a major downhill slide and unless one of these new games becomes a big hit the company is going to be in serious financial hardship soon, if it isn't already.
It is going to take a miracle to see a EQ3, and Smedley will have to go before there is a chance of that happening.
This reminds me of a developer that replies on a forum about rose colored glasses... yet can't explain how his own non rose colored glasses.. are seeing less subscribers than ever.
I personally was never really a fan of EQ... I only played EQ because my entire UO guild (except one other person) went to EQ. Then I would continiously lag behind on levels because I was always going back to UO.
When I look back at UO.. I don't see some perfect utopian gaming experience. I see a lot of mistakes that were made.. because they didn't have any other MMO .. relatively to learn from. Having M59 and NwN's on AoL is not a lot of perspective ...
Yet I also see a game I enjoyed more than anything the current "crap in a box" industry can drop out.
Your own arguement is flawed at its core. As time passes you indeed have more perspective to compare your experiences with... This does not make something seem better because it was "first"... but it does give you a very personal and relative view of a journey.
I'll give you a perspective.... you can take this as my opinion.
When UO came out I almost quit during my "30 days includeed". I met some people and ended up playing UO for the most consecutive period of time (no months of cancel or real breaks) of any MMO I ever played. It was difficult... you were going to be attacked... you were going to lose everything you had on you. The penalties were severe...
I didn't think it was a great game because of penalties... or wasted time... I enjoyed it (something you probably can't really explain).
I've never really enjoyed any other MMO long term. After UO the only thing I wanted was a game that didn't make many of the same core mistakes... and did EVERYthing better... bigger.. more.
Instead what I got were games that had a more narrow focus... more limits.. more controls.. less of everything.
Even SWG... which I took more time in the exile forum than I should have... the game some people thought walked on water. I saw its flaws... It was "like" UO but it had more limits... less less less
This has been a constant "opinion" of mine since 1997/1998... of what I wanted moving forward.
So to then say "well you only feel that way because when you look back... blah blah blah"
Is not only flawed... its trying to project your own opinion as fact... over my experience that you know nothing about.
Various people will feel differently about any subjective experience.. so please don't tell me I only feel some way because of something you have no knowledge of or clearly don't have a clue about (my perspective and where it comes from).
So I'll make my own odd statement...
Did you ever notice that when UO had a peak population of 250,000... EQ around 450,000... and AC1 was in there "somewhere"... That every forum you read... every person was part of that market.. and played the hardest class to level.. and knows everything...
Eventually you reach a point where the numbers of people who played those games.. and always the hardest classes in those games. Have surpassed the total number of players who actually played those games... back then. Let alone the numbers of people who actually leveled that "hardest class" to level X....
(not directed at the person I quoted actually... it is an observation I have made over time. Its more of an example of making a universal statement as if its true about everyone... yet is most definitely true about some people.)
*edit note* and if you didn't catch it... yes I've seen people who claim to be UO vets and think the game was the best ever.. who will list the exact same features... that made sure there was never another UO... and why EQ was the more popular game... who even claim that the exodus from UO to EQ was for the high tech uber "blocky hand" graphics... as opposed to one thing in the EQ FAQ that was actually in caps back then... "NO FORCED PVP..."
But my reply again if you missed it.. is about making blanket statements and passing opinon as universal fact. Posting opinion is awesome.. if its posted as such...
hmm going back to my earlier post- I'm playing Vanguard currently- due to the reactivated accounts atm, and I'm not drawn in by the game as all the classes I've basically played before. So it's a bit of a challenge to make an "EQ3" with classes that have have already made before and making that all seem new and enthralling.