Howdy, Stranger!
It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!
Quick Links
Everquest Next Artwork
Moodsor
Member UncommonPosts: 712
in Everquest II
Comments
EQ2wire.com
"10:15am Introductions…
We are not naming then game yet. Internal name is eqnext.
Concept art…
Harkening back to eq1 but more stylized.
Back to the concept art for eq1.
Won’t be getting anlot details but more QA.
Not a directnprogression of eq1 and eq2 but a reimagining. Changing some things. Keeping other things.
More interesting combat. More engaging.
Take the more familiar settings of eq and eq2 but also progression. History may play out differenntly.
10:25. We know then differences between eq and eq2. And are focusing more on eq1.
Tomorrows panel will have different concept art slides.
Opening the floor to questions from crowd.
Question: eq2 has too many classes can we go to base classes?
Huge applause
From eqnext lead: eqnext will make you happy.
10:35 designed from ground up with pvp in mind.
10:42 we intend to deliver the story lines and role in another way than clicking through npc dialog boxes. The world should change around you.
(more questions. Check back at
Smedley: the next two days will be a huge part of planning the game. We haven’t announce the game because it’s still early in development. We haven’t even decided on raid and group sizes.
10:56 wrapping up to go to eq2e panel
Done updating this until noon."
Why don't they ask the potential players about raid and group sizes and other stuff?
Do they really think that they know better than their customers?
The arrogance... it's mind boggling.
All those memories will be lost in time, like tears in the rain.
You can only hear this kind of thing from MMORPG community. It's mind boggling.
In the end DEVELOPERS make games, not PLAYERS.
Just like in the single player game industry, if you suck at developing then your game will suck too. And just like if you are good at developing your game will be good too. Nothing will save the game if the developers are shitty, and you don't need customer input more than in the form of Beta if the developers are good.
EQ developers do the right thing, it's just too bad they suck.
I liked the variety of classes in EQ2. Don't know why taking a step backwards with one of very few aspects of EQ2 that made it better would incite huge applause. I certainly don't want to see base cookie cutter classes where everyone is literraly the same.
They run these types of ideas by people at guild summits (Top players), not randoms at fanfaire.
You are one of the few that likes it. I hate it, personally.
Not impressed by those screenshots at all. Looks like SOE are going for a WOW style of look for the game which is just a mistake imho.
No screenshots.. just concept art...
Ok the fugly pictures linked then :P
find that most ppl love the amount of classes and the diversity of them. only time I see someone saying they dislike the amount of classes, it comes down to balance "issues" since EQ2 have moved away from being a quest for special items to an instance grinder, it matters alot more now than it used to, since the content is all about the boss fights.
what I personally hate is they have to balance the classses, they are slowly moving to non of them being anything special and could as well just be 5 classes at this time. tank, healer, bard, enchanter and DPS. *miss the days where ACT didnt exsist*
Agreed - we seem to have a miriad of classes which just leads to confusion and imbalance.
Loved EQ2, this is the bit that concerns me though:
' and be “designed from the ground up with PVP in mind.” '
Nothing like PvP to throw balance to the dogs - makes me wonder why MMO's even bother with PvP and PvE, apart from the more subs point of view. From a pure playing point of view it's a mare. PvEers complain about raiding so they change the chars, then the PvPers complain because of OP chars so they change the chars which means the PvEers compain about... rinse and repeat.
The 'balancing of chars' kinda goes as follows: DAOC, 10 years, failed - WOW, 5 years, failed - AoC, 2 years, failed - I mean, why bother. And no, the: "It's alot better now" isn't good enough.
Or just create 2 completely different systems, one for PvP, one for PvE. Seporate gear, leveling, play areas. What would be best is different servers - never shall the two meet.
But EQ3? Er, Next? If it does turn out to be another WOW clone... *sigh* I'd love to say: "Sony wouldn't do it!" but hey, it's Sony - look at the track record. *sigh*
In a perfect world an MMO would have elements of "realism" (graphics, true physics, lip syncing, etc,etc), open worlds and no instancing. But we don't live in such a place.
The simple issue comes down to time and money. In the last 10 years, as expectations with regards to graphics rose, the expectations in terms of development time dropped or remained the same. And as the old saying goes: you cannot put a full pint into a half pint pot.
Ignoring the fact that time is spent on developing the engine itself, what this means is that whilst an MMO dev company is forced to focus on making sure they get "realism" just right, then that activity eats into the development time to focus on other parts of the game, such as additional depth in gameplay, design of the game world, balancing of classes, itemisation, dungeon design, polish, more testing, etc, etc.
Regardless of what game they are making, shareholders want the game out of the door as fast as possible and MMO players expect it to be developed within a "reasonable" timeframe (e.g. 5 years). But that is getting increasingly hard to accomplish when more and more expectations are made of the product. So, in essence, something has to give. Either the design of the product has to be modified to allow it to be developed within the agreed timeframe (modifications which will have the least impact on the products attractiveness), or the timescale itself is extended to cater for the design. And we all know which one is the most attractive of those two.
Now, modifying the design can mean anything between the removal of gameplay depth and features to the design of a product with stylised graphics.
Personally speaking, if "realistic" graphics are replaced with "stylised" graphics just so the dev team can focus more on gameplay and polish, then I'm all for it. Why? Because gameplay is often touted as being the primary concern for MMO players.
I'd take a "stylised", polished and popular MMO, over a "realistic" looking, incomplete, unpolished shallow MMO, any day.
Both WoW and Eve Online showed the world that you don't have to have very detailed "realistic" graphics in order to have a successful and popular game. I'm glad that SOE are realising this as well, because its the big names (those who have a lot of money behind them) who have the power to lead this industry into maturity.
Top 10 Most Misused Words in MMO's
I find that most people hate a high amount of classes due to confusion and inbalance.