I sort of like the community dungeons because of the trains. It was sort of like watching a bunch of free climbers on a vertical wall, then one starts to fall and the others have to scramble and respond.
Now, in some of the more dangerous EQ dungeons, you did not have so much overcrowding, because of the danger. Lower Guk never seemed to be too crowded, from my experiences, and I always welcomed the presence of others.
In DAOC, that one Albion dungeon was very cool, and I used the presence of others having trashed mobs to make my way down there alone. And when they left, I sometimes got trapped, but that was pretty cool because it created a new sort of adventure to try to maneuver my way out.
I would accept a mix of both types of dungeons. Maybe have all dungeons open world, but have the boss sections instanced. But.... if someone loses to a boss in an instance, have it come out (minus drops) and train the zone all the way to the exit, hehe.
Oh don't read me wrong, the hilarity of some trains were amusing, I also met many friends in open dungeons. Some of those friendships last even to this day. I'd also accept a mix of both, because there are benefits as well as downsides to both approaches. Immersion isn't everything in an MMO. Socialization is also important, so I understand where you're coming from.
Are you referring to the tomb, that had that long stair way down, which was filled with ghosts, that used to be crowded as hell day and night? It's been so long but I think I know which Albion dungeon you're referring to. If so I loved that place.
For every minute you are angry , you lose 60 seconds of happiness."-Emerson
I will erase "SOE" from my memory and pretend they never existed if there's even an ounce of instancing in EQ Next.
I don't care and will never care about the so called "benefits" of instancing. As far as I'm concerned, there aren't any.
The second I enter an instance is the second I lose all immersion.
So incredibly sick and nauseated from all these instanced single player quest grinders. I can't take it anymore.
It's time for a renaissance, a revolution.
Keep it real SOE.
I'm of the complete opposite opinion. It completely breaks my immersion to come across a dungeon that has a block party going on inside it. A dungeon is supposed to be a dangerous foreboding place, not a dance club. Instancing helps give the impression of solidarity for your group within a dungeon. The opposite makes it feel as though there is no danger at all.
Then you've got WOW. in fact, WOW will even tell you what your "story" is and tell you how you are the "hero out to save the world," and instance the crap out of your gaming experience so it is not ruined by the presence of another player.
But for the players who want a shared experience, there needs to be a new AAA title, and I hope EQ Next is it. Time for a fully free range, open world, hardcore PVE game to come out.
Well I don't like WOW, besides nothing I said takes away from a shared experience. I just prefer to be the only group in a dungeon, rather than one of a hundred groups running through that dungeon. As much as I loved DAOC and SWG, my biggest complaint was showing up to a hidden cave or tomb that was not so hidden.
I can't share that mindset because that simply sounds like a multiplayer aspect to singleplayer rpg's. I love player interaction in MMO's and you achieve difficulties when dealing with other groups in long corridors. If you have intsanced dungeons, then everyone has the same experience more or less. If you have static dungeons, fewer will achieve their goals but it will be known to all. It makes accomplishment unique and politics (when dealing with other players) interesting. Personally I don't like the lobby feeling you get while getting groups to do an instance - I never was into Ldon for this reason when it came out. And trains. Trains would often be fun despite wiping. The few you held against made it worth it. Instanced dungeons tend to be a grind, at least to me. Going from start to finish in the same path 100 times isn't exactly exciting. I prefer getting to know the dungeon through careful exploration instead, something which most instances don't cater to (due to timelimit, group objectives, etc). Taking down a boss was much more difficult (and fun) in a large dungeon with many people, as opposed to a clean instance.
I will erase "SOE" from my memory and pretend they never existed if there's even an ounce of instancing in EQ Next.
I don't care and will never care about the so called "benefits" of instancing. As far as I'm concerned, there aren't any.
The second I enter an instance is the second I lose all immersion.
So incredibly sick and nauseated from all these instanced single player quest grinders. I can't take it anymore.
It's time for a renaissance, a revolution.
Keep it real SOE.
Well since the whole world of any mmo would be considered a giant instance guess you better stop playing any of them, since they ruin your immersion so bad.
Youd almost think there were games out that played just olike old games.....oh ya there called those old games, if you want them go play them, get with teh times or give up mmos, its as simple as that.
Oh, I'm sorry those of us from the old days want a new game that has more modern graphics, interface, but that hasn't sold out to the blank, bleating hordes. Don't worry b/c A) we won't get what we want and we don't want all MMO's to function like that, just one, OUR MMO, which would be EQ 3 (maybe DAoC 2, hey, I can dream). Hey, WoW is a fun game, no doubt, and its a well made one. As a casual gamer myself its good to be able to get on a game and get instant gratification, but all of us old EQ and UO players are the ones that got this started, and I don't think its to out of line for us to expect our old games back with new skins.
Here is what would make it an ideal from my perspective
1. All the original races from EQ1, racial starting areas, etc.
2. The God system from EQ2. I liked that you could devote yourself to a particular deity for a given benefit. Way cool.
3. The ability to pick various crafting professions. No tiered professions.
4. EQ1 class system. I like having my character called a cleric or druid
5. A WoW like talent system. Do away with the needless grind of AAs or have them given as quest rewards. I see no need or fun in divorcing Character Development from leveling. When I level, I want to advance my character then and there, not spend 5 years getting all my AAs. That is not fun.
6. Use the housing system as seen in EQ2. Perfect housing.
7. A diversity of mounts, racial and local.
8. No F2P option for God's Sake. Can we please leave the VIP club alone? I don't want teens who pop their collars to be in my Club Norrath.
9. A seemless open game with homesteading and diplomacy as seen in Vanguard.
That's my wishlist. Some may disagree, but whatever, that happens.
Just as a little fyi EQ1 had the god system also. And for number 5 on this post i respect you opinion but i have to disagree. Your spells upgraded as you lvled but the AA point system was sweet. Just think about all of the crappy skill you have on these talent trees that you need to spend points on to get to the good ones. The AA point system allowed you to pick what skills you wanted to upgrade or your stats. And as far as grinding for them think about it like this your gaining something more them that end game gear your gonna be grinding for anyway.
I'm always amazed at how many people here have forgotten why MMOs have moved past EQ1's gameplay.
Instancing was introduced because dungons were overcamped. No other MMO has had that problem since because "open" dungeon design drives away players in droves.
What EQ gameplay? You mean today where there are instances in EQ? Or back in 2003 when EQ came out with instances via LDoN and it was wildly popular, which happend before newer games started using instances. Games haven't exactly moved away from EQ1 gameplay, games took EQ1's ideas and sorta, upgraded them. Even EQ1 has rid of a lot of the old tedium and old design.
Believe me, EQ1 devs know the genre has changed. If EQ1 never got changed from the old school design, it would not have survived 11+ years the way it has today. It's really just some of the old nostalgia crews that really want the old harsh existence back, but they weren't there when games like Vanguard needed support, or they didn't survive long in harsh PvP games like Darkfall.
Personally, I like EQ's current design better. Open world, open dungeons, but instanced missions and instanced raids. It has a good balance of both, so it caters to everybody, not just 1 sector of the crowd. I'll admit for myself, someone that used to run large guilds, these days there are days I just want to play alone or with my friends and not be bothered by the idiocies of anonymous online players. So having choices between open world & instanced design is almost a must for me. A straight solid instance only design would drive me nuts honestly.
Nothing wrong with a game catering to only one 1 crowd! We as goold ol' boys, gals want this sort of thing back. In the golden days not every game was for every one which was fine and offered everyone the perfect game. Instances are bad I don't care if some carebears like them or not, I've played games with and without instances liked those without them much much better.
Please stop the BS about people weren't there when Vanguard needed them, its so flawed unbelievable. Most of us sticked with a highly buggy Beta tons of resets till Sigil anounced the coop with SoE. Beta 3 (dumbed down Vanguard) has been the final straw for the oldschool crowd.
I still can't believe why those who want easy mode and instances are looking for Everquest, this game is simple not for you like the new WoW is not for me, not hard to understand ey?
We need a MMORPG Cataclysm asap, finish the dark age of MMORPGS now!
"Everything you're bitching about is wrong. People don't have the time to invest in corpse runs, impossible zones, or long winded quests. Sometimes, they just want to pop on and play." "Then maybe MMORPGs aren't for you."
To me the open dungeons made perfect sense, if someone in town is telling people about it then it ain't secret. It also will not be hidden of sealed, how else did monsters get in? It allowed people to see what others were made of. Nothing in the world was like seeing a paladin actually be a paladin. The train is coming, everyone is boned cause of repops between them and the exit and the pally just starts rooting and blinding everything to get agro. Pops his lay on hands to keep alive, and get more agro, then did devine intervention to be unhitable while everyone else ran. Then he would run for the zone and usually die, but die as a hero.
I also loved the AA system, I liked it way better than the stupid skill trees of today. If I wanted to work that stuff up I could, if I wanted to level I turned it off. In the end it let me be my character as I wanted to be that character.
Nothing wrong with a game catering to only one 1 crowd! We as goold ol' boys, gals want this sort of thing back. In the golden days not every game was for every one which was fine and offered everyone the perfect game. Instances are bad I don't care if some carebears like them or not, I've played games with and without instances liked those without them much much better.
To be 100% honest I want a more hardcore game too, not original EQ with huge timesinks, but much more difficult than WoW.
if there is competition about mobs in an open dungeon, i dont think, instancing is the best solution. because instancing kills immersion and leads mostly to linear highly refined design. it is perhaps the most easy solution for the devs, but not for the players. i am fully convinced, that devs did not introduce instancing in order to solve the competition issue. they introduced it to better control the game experience with their damn refined and streamlined encounters. balanced to death and utterly boring.
- first of all, a bit competition doesnt hurt. ok, weekly queues for gods was not fun, so here we need some solution.
- make more and even bigger dungeons and/or more rewarding outdoor-mob/bosses. such simple.
- if really needed you could use logical instances, if your dungeon is just big enough. you activate the boss-spawn, via getting the quest or any other trigger. now your boss will spawn in the left wing of the dungeon. nobody else can kill him but your group/raid. next groups boss will spawn in the right wing, and so on. this is still limited and it is still instancing but sometimes a good compromise.
again, solving issues is nothing bad. but destroying more, than you fix, is the most stupid way to design games. the devs should recognize that accesability, linearity, refining and balancing is highly conflictuary to immersion, communication, challenge, versatility and a longterm positive game experience. so be careful, to what extend you implement thing, e.g accessability is a neccessary thing, but too much of it destroys your game.
I would love to see a more complex, difficult MMO that promoted grouping.
As much as people bemoan instanced dungeons I would love to see both implemented, both can be fun in their own ways. Though granted I would like to see dungeons go back to being sprawling affairs with lots of nooks and crannies to explore rather than the linear 15min sprints they have become. Allow players to pick their routes and have some 'freedom' in what they do
I don't think a challenging MMO with any real depth will happen though, mores the pity. EQNext will be another modern, by the numbers, soulless MMO, copying what has came before with little to no innovation on the current model for fear of limiting their mass appeal.
Not because there isn't a market for it, because there is....but because that market is smaller than the one every MMO is shooting for now. I cannot blame the companies for shooting for the largest target audience, they want the largest return for the least risk.
The people that play this genre have changed, hence why MMOs are becoming far more akin to singleplayer experiences with multiplayer aspects tagged on.
-Vanguard at launch was a nice game concept, but horribly unfinished. People shouldn't be expected to pay for a game that 'one day in the future MIGHT be fixed'. The same thing has killed several MMOs since, release unfinished, buggy mess and people will leave and rarely look back, regardless of whatever improvements you may make, or however much it is fixed (hello AoC, WAR etc).
Vanguard wasn't an SOE game. It was made by Brad McQuaid, but he wasn't with SOE when he created VG. Vanguard may or may not have worked had they actually finished the game on-time and within budget. They did neither, the game was launched 2 years ahead of being finished, and Sigil went bankrupt. So Vanguard should not be used as an example to whether or not an EQ1 remake would work. VG by definition failed before it even launched.
This is completely wrong.
Vanguard was supposed to be a AAA title. But when Microsoft switched management of their game department, that new department suddenly insisted that it wasnt supposed to be AAA, and should be released the way it was, which was far from finished.
This was the core reason for Vanguards failure, and not "over time" or "not on budget".
Afterwards, they switched from Microsoft to SOE. SOE made sure Sigil finally failed by forcing the early release, took Vanguard over after Sigils failure, and reduced staff and funding for Vanguard.
Vanguard wasn't an SOE game. It was made by Brad McQuaid, but he wasn't with SOE when he created VG. Vanguard may or may not have worked had they actually finished the game on-time and within budget. They did neither, the game was launched 2 years ahead of being finished, and Sigil went bankrupt. So Vanguard should not be used as an example to whether or not an EQ1 remake would work. VG by definition failed before it even launched.
This is completely wrong.
Vanguard was supposed to be a AAA title. But when Microsoft switched management of their game department, that new department suddenly insisted that it wasnt supposed to be AAA, and should be released the way it was, which was far from finished.
This was the core reason for Vanguards failure, and not "over time" or "not on budget".
Afterwards, they switched from Microsoft to SOE. SOE made sure Sigil finally failed by forcing the early release, took Vanguard over after Sigils failure, and reduced staff and funding for Vanguard.
Mardy was right. You are buying into some revisionist history. Back in the day, McQuaid used to boast in postings and interviews that Microsoft was giving Sigil basically free reign in how they designed and produced the game. But Sigil wasted a shocking amont of time and money. Eventually Microsoft did what any invester would do, and told them "finish it." That sent Sigil into a tailspin.
EQ1, EQ2, SWG, SWTOR, GW, GW2 CoH, CoV, FFXI, WoW, CO, War,TSW and a slew of free trials and beta tests
if there is a "EQ next", they should just focus on making it a "raid centric" game. raids has always been EQ's primary strength, and to this date, there is NO game on the market that even approach the complexity/difficulty of EQ raids.
cut out all the timesink garbage and just let people raid. cut out the existing AA system and rework it so that new/returning players arent "blocked" by a wall of 3000AA's they need to get before becoming raid worthy. IMO one of the primary failures of EQ1 was the AA system. it prevented people from starting/returning to the game. IF i was to go back today, I'd be like 3000AA's behind... and thats on a toon that was capped on AA's when i quit:D do i really want to spend the next 6 months grinding out AA's just so i dont feel like a total noob in a raid? even though i was one of the main tanks in one of the top 3 raiding guilds on my server before i quit the game?:D the "existing" AA system builds a huge barrier to entry for new players. and a big anti-incentive for people who considered to return to the game.
attrition is a presistant force in the MMO universe. having huge barriers to entry like the old AA system is just simply asking to kill off the game. if they can remove the timesinks and other barriers to entry and focus on enableing people to raid rather then locking them away from raids, I'm sure old school raiders would flock back to one of the most enjoyable experiances in their gaming lifespan. yah you still have to filter out all the noob idiots that app your guild, but thats not any different from EQ1. I know of plenty old school great players that never raided because they cant put in the time to keeping up with the raiders.
personally, I'm all for instancing on raids. anything that can keep the raid rolling w/o wasting time is a good thing. keep the access of content open so people dont feel they are wasting time. bring back the 72 man raids. bring back the complex 90 min to 2 hr long scripts. but keep the content open so poeple dont feel like they have to go back and reflag/rekey 3 people every 2 weeks just to keep up with attrition.
if there is a "EQ next", they should just focus on making it a "raid centric" game. raids has always been EQ's primary strength, and to this date, there is NO game on the market that even approach the complexity/difficulty of EQ raids.
cut out all the timesink garbage and just let people raid. cut out the existing AA system and rework it so that new/returning players arent "blocked" by a wall of 3000AA's they need to get before becoming raid worthy. (read the rest above)
I don't agree. It is true that the game have nailed the raids and that is the reason they should try to improve the rest of the game as well. Theree are several aspects of EQ 1 & 2 that needs improving and that have the potential of getting more players interested.
Crafting:
Here is the chance to make the game more like a sandbox. Many people love crafting and if people don't they rarely get annoyed of the possibilities. Let people build their home and a guildhall/castle/city, something like in AoC but with a lot more choices.
Combat:
Combat is more or less the same in any MMOs since EQ released. Time to pioneer some new and fresh mechanics. New improved AI would make the game more fun. Terrain should matter in combat, hold the higher ground and try to get the sun in your opponents eyes, particularly if you fight a troll or Darkelf. Make tanking harder and more about body blocking. Make it easier to move through combat to make it more tactical.
Diversity:
Why not let players create their own class if they want to? Have a few templates and let the players add balanced skills (you balance them against eachother) after a pointsystem. Of course should there also be regular classes as well.
Mounted combat:
Time to really add lances and similar mechanics. Imagine charging the enemy in speed from your nightmare. Also guilds should be able to compete against eachother in jousts.
Some better way to handle solo gaming.
Some people just don't like to group. But EQ2s soloing has passed all limits nowadays and people solo up to 90 without ever learning to play their character in groups (and not just a few but loads of people). Maybe something like the scaling dynamic events in GW2 were anyone can join in and everyone gets rewarded for helping out. Something closer to WARs PQs (but scaling) or Rifts rifts works fine as well. Just anything to reward soloplayers to jump in and help out a fellow player.
And other things:
Like gambling in taverns. And while we are at the tavern I want rules for drinking contests as well.
There are a lot of things that could make EQ Next a winner. They seems to already gotten the raids right but that isn't a reason to let everyone start out like max level character. In fact I think that kinda goes against thr RPG in MMORPG and would lead to a game even more gear focused than Wow.
New ideas (together with borrowing some from Meridian 59) is what made EQ to the top MMORPG a bit over 10 years ago. Just taking the parts it got right and taking away the rest of the game would lead to disaster. The game needs to have the freshness the first game had or it will do worse than EQ2, a lot worse.
Why can't there be open/real world dungeons, but as we reach the boss of said dungeon, we open a door and enter an instance? That way we get the best of both worlds.
And please, please, get rid of the quest arrows and quest markers and give us a "fog of war" map.
Why can't there be open/real world dungeons, but as we reach the boss of said dungeon, we open a door and enter an instance? That way we get the best of both worlds.
And please, please, get rid of the quest arrows and quest markers and give us a "fog of war" map.
if there is a "EQ next", they should just focus on making it a "raid centric" game. raids has always been EQ's primary strength, and to this date, there is NO game on the market that even approach the complexity/difficulty of EQ raids.
cut out all the timesink garbage and just let people raid.
That may appeal to the 10% of the MMO population who regularly raid, but I've a sneaking suspicion any developer will want to cater for the other 90% as well.
Please, no raid or die end game. For once, can SOE make a MMORPG that isn't all about raiding, just once. Please allow for meaningful content and rewards for other play styles at the high end of the game. No more elitist bullcrap or you won't get my dollars. That means catering to soloers, small groupers, full groupers and multi-groupers equally and without prejudice.
Make questing and hunting and any other activities, equally rewarding. I love questing, but I hate questing treadmills, where that is the only viable means of the leveling process. Sometimes I just do not want to run back and forth, back and forth, back and forth for a quest. I'd much rather commit genocide against the local camp of goblins and I should be rewarded for doing so.
I love to explore, a lot and yet most games give you very little incentive to do so if any. Put lots of easter egg quests, chests and dynamic events out in the wilderness, reward explorers for doing what they like best. Also, no invisible walls, there should be just as much to explore underwater, underground and above ground as there is overland. The world of Norrath is so very rich in history with huge numbers of ancient civilizations and lands dotted with ruins that have no meaning and no reason to explore them other than to house random mob #1. We should be able to come across ruins and dig for artifacts, read ancient scrolls about it's history or some ancient curse that could still be rectified today. Hints in the architecture and glyphics that could lead to treasure guarded by jealous monsters.
Please stick with auto-attack and reaction abilities. This trend to turn every MMO into an action game is ruining my enjoyment of the genre. There are many good reasons why I prefer playing on a PC instead of a Console. Button mashing, spastic twitching is one of the big reasons. Complete and I do mean complete customizability of the UI and keyboard / mouse is another and is paramount.
I know there are people who really enjoy crafting, but please do not lessen adventurer gameplay and rewards in order to cater to them. Find ways to reward thier play style without ruining it for the rest of us. What's the point of crafters becoming ultra rich if they don't have anything to spend it on, such as hiring guards, paying for shipping and caravans, paying taxes for imports and exports and so forth. I've noticed in past games the constant attention to money sinks for adventurers and almost nothing for crafters other than the purchasing of vendor materials. Creating huge amounts of wealth in the crafting sector and unbalancing the economy for everyone in the process.
If you're going to do housing and mounts, do them right. Make them meaningful, convenient and part of the world, no instancing, create non-instanced neighborhoods in and around cities and towns, Make the world feel alive and growing and make us a part of it. EQLive has all of these racial cities and yet no one lives in them, they are wasted resources that could have so much more meaning. Speaking of towns, isn't it about time that inteliigent mobs had their own towns and cities, not just hunting camps and dungeons? Make mounts useful in combat and exploration as well as for travelling. Make them critical for the transport of crafting materials between cities, allowing for defending of resources between cities from raiders, monsters and maybe even flagged players.
I dont think the new EQ or really ANY MMO should focus on one aspect of the game only.
A good MMO, in my mind, is a game you can play for years.
For that to happen, you need it to offer all kinds of ways of progression - solo adventuring, group adventuring, raids, crafting, harvesting, fishing, diplomacy, whatever.
My gut tells me that EQ Next might lean towards being "console" compatiable then retro original EQ1.. Companies have been trying to years to make that perfect "bridge" MMO that allows both PC and consoles to play together.. Who knows, but it's something to think about
Why can't there be open/real world dungeons, but as we reach the boss of said dungeon, we open a door and enter an instance? That way we get the best of both worlds.
Asheron's Call 2 had that. Unfortunately that idea seemed to die with the game. they called them Vaults or Dungeon Vaults.
Too bad, cuz its a FAR FAR FAR better 'solution' to the 'problem' of open dungeons than what we got from other hybrid 'MMOs'. which was just to take out the MMO element from all dungeon experiences. grrrrrrr
Comments
Oh don't read me wrong, the hilarity of some trains were amusing, I also met many friends in open dungeons. Some of those friendships last even to this day. I'd also accept a mix of both, because there are benefits as well as downsides to both approaches. Immersion isn't everything in an MMO. Socialization is also important, so I understand where you're coming from.
Are you referring to the tomb, that had that long stair way down, which was filled with ghosts, that used to be crowded as hell day and night? It's been so long but I think I know which Albion dungeon you're referring to. If so I loved that place.
For every minute you are angry , you lose 60 seconds of happiness."-Emerson
I can't share that mindset because that simply sounds like a multiplayer aspect to singleplayer rpg's. I love player interaction in MMO's and you achieve difficulties when dealing with other groups in long corridors. If you have intsanced dungeons, then everyone has the same experience more or less. If you have static dungeons, fewer will achieve their goals but it will be known to all. It makes accomplishment unique and politics (when dealing with other players) interesting. Personally I don't like the lobby feeling you get while getting groups to do an instance - I never was into Ldon for this reason when it came out. And trains. Trains would often be fun despite wiping. The few you held against made it worth it. Instanced dungeons tend to be a grind, at least to me. Going from start to finish in the same path 100 times isn't exactly exciting. I prefer getting to know the dungeon through careful exploration instead, something which most instances don't cater to (due to timelimit, group objectives, etc). Taking down a boss was much more difficult (and fun) in a large dungeon with many people, as opposed to a clean instance.
Oh, I'm sorry those of us from the old days want a new game that has more modern graphics, interface, but that hasn't sold out to the blank, bleating hordes. Don't worry b/c A) we won't get what we want and
we don't want all MMO's to function like that, just one, OUR MMO, which would be EQ 3 (maybe DAoC 2, hey, I can dream). Hey, WoW is a fun game, no doubt, and its a well made one. As a casual gamer myself its good to be able to get on a game and get instant gratification, but all of us old EQ and UO players are the ones that got this started, and I don't think its to out of line for us to expect our old games back with new skins.
Just as a little fyi EQ1 had the god system also. And for number 5 on this post i respect you opinion but i have to disagree. Your spells upgraded as you lvled but the AA point system was sweet. Just think about all of the crappy skill you have on these talent trees that you need to spend points on to get to the good ones. The AA point system allowed you to pick what skills you wanted to upgrade or your stats. And as far as grinding for them think about it like this your gaining something more them that end game gear your gonna be grinding for anyway.
What EQ gameplay? You mean today where there are instances in EQ? Or back in 2003 when EQ came out with instances via LDoN and it was wildly popular, which happend before newer games started using instances. Games haven't exactly moved away from EQ1 gameplay, games took EQ1's ideas and sorta, upgraded them. Even EQ1 has rid of a lot of the old tedium and old design.
Believe me, EQ1 devs know the genre has changed. If EQ1 never got changed from the old school design, it would not have survived 11+ years the way it has today. It's really just some of the old nostalgia crews that really want the old harsh existence back, but they weren't there when games like Vanguard needed support, or they didn't survive long in harsh PvP games like Darkfall.
Personally, I like EQ's current design better. Open world, open dungeons, but instanced missions and instanced raids. It has a good balance of both, so it caters to everybody, not just 1 sector of the crowd. I'll admit for myself, someone that used to run large guilds, these days there are days I just want to play alone or with my friends and not be bothered by the idiocies of anonymous online players. So having choices between open world & instanced design is almost a must for me. A straight solid instance only design would drive me nuts honestly.
EQ1-AC1-DAOC-FFXI-L2-EQ2-WoW-DDO-GW-LoTR-VG-WAR-GW2-ESO
Nothing wrong with a game catering to only one 1 crowd! We as goold ol' boys, gals want this sort of thing back. In the golden days not every game was for every one which was fine and offered everyone the perfect game. Instances are bad I don't care if some carebears like them or not, I've played games with and without instances liked those without them much much better.
Please stop the BS about people weren't there when Vanguard needed them, its so flawed unbelievable. Most of us sticked with a highly buggy Beta tons of resets till Sigil anounced the coop with SoE. Beta 3 (dumbed down Vanguard) has been the final straw for the oldschool crowd.
I still can't believe why those who want easy mode and instances are looking for Everquest, this game is simple not for you like the new WoW is not for me, not hard to understand ey?
We need a MMORPG Cataclysm asap, finish the dark age of MMORPGS now!
"Everything you're bitching about is wrong. People don't have the time to invest in corpse runs, impossible zones, or long winded quests. Sometimes, they just want to pop on and play."
"Then maybe MMORPGs aren't for you."
To me the open dungeons made perfect sense, if someone in town is telling people about it then it ain't secret. It also will not be hidden of sealed, how else did monsters get in? It allowed people to see what others were made of. Nothing in the world was like seeing a paladin actually be a paladin. The train is coming, everyone is boned cause of repops between them and the exit and the pally just starts rooting and blinding everything to get agro. Pops his lay on hands to keep alive, and get more agro, then did devine intervention to be unhitable while everyone else ran. Then he would run for the zone and usually die, but die as a hero.
I also loved the AA system, I liked it way better than the stupid skill trees of today. If I wanted to work that stuff up I could, if I wanted to level I turned it off. In the end it let me be my character as I wanted to be that character.
To be 100% honest I want a more hardcore game too, not original EQ with huge timesinks, but much more difficult than WoW.
I'm just scared it won't attract enough players.
Collector's editions are scams.
if there is competition about mobs in an open dungeon, i dont think, instancing is the best solution. because instancing kills immersion and leads mostly to linear highly refined design. it is perhaps the most easy solution for the devs, but not for the players. i am fully convinced, that devs did not introduce instancing in order to solve the competition issue. they introduced it to better control the game experience with their damn refined and streamlined encounters. balanced to death and utterly boring.
- first of all, a bit competition doesnt hurt. ok, weekly queues for gods was not fun, so here we need some solution.
- make more and even bigger dungeons and/or more rewarding outdoor-mob/bosses. such simple.
- if really needed you could use logical instances, if your dungeon is just big enough. you activate the boss-spawn, via getting the quest or any other trigger. now your boss will spawn in the left wing of the dungeon. nobody else can kill him but your group/raid. next groups boss will spawn in the right wing, and so on. this is still limited and it is still instancing but sometimes a good compromise.
again, solving issues is nothing bad. but destroying more, than you fix, is the most stupid way to design games. the devs should recognize that accesability, linearity, refining and balancing is highly conflictuary to immersion, communication, challenge, versatility and a longterm positive game experience. so be careful, to what extend you implement thing, e.g accessability is a neccessary thing, but too much of it destroys your game.
played: Everquest I (6 years), EVE (3 years)
months: EQII, Vanguard, Siedler Online, SWTOR, Guild Wars 2
weeks: WoW, Shaiya, Darkfall, Florensia, Entropia, Aion, Lotro, Fallen Earth, Uncharted Waters
days: DDO, RoM, FFXIV, STO, Atlantica, PotBS, Maestia, WAR, AoC, Gods&Heroes, Cultures, RIFT, Forsaken World, Allodds
I would love to see a more complex, difficult MMO that promoted grouping.
As much as people bemoan instanced dungeons I would love to see both implemented, both can be fun in their own ways. Though granted I would like to see dungeons go back to being sprawling affairs with lots of nooks and crannies to explore rather than the linear 15min sprints they have become. Allow players to pick their routes and have some 'freedom' in what they do
I don't think a challenging MMO with any real depth will happen though, mores the pity. EQNext will be another modern, by the numbers, soulless MMO, copying what has came before with little to no innovation on the current model for fear of limiting their mass appeal.
Not because there isn't a market for it, because there is....but because that market is smaller than the one every MMO is shooting for now. I cannot blame the companies for shooting for the largest target audience, they want the largest return for the least risk.
The people that play this genre have changed, hence why MMOs are becoming far more akin to singleplayer experiences with multiplayer aspects tagged on.
-Vanguard at launch was a nice game concept, but horribly unfinished. People shouldn't be expected to pay for a game that 'one day in the future MIGHT be fixed'. The same thing has killed several MMOs since, release unfinished, buggy mess and people will leave and rarely look back, regardless of whatever improvements you may make, or however much it is fixed (hello AoC, WAR etc).
.... ???
A world simulation isnt a game ?!?
Uh, no way I would ever start playing EQ1 now.
1. All lower levels are empty.
2. Calling the graphics "outdated" would be a massive understatement.
If you want me in a MMO, give me a new game and new graphics.
This is completely wrong.
Vanguard was supposed to be a AAA title. But when Microsoft switched management of their game department, that new department suddenly insisted that it wasnt supposed to be AAA, and should be released the way it was, which was far from finished.
This was the core reason for Vanguards failure, and not "over time" or "not on budget".
Afterwards, they switched from Microsoft to SOE. SOE made sure Sigil finally failed by forcing the early release, took Vanguard over after Sigils failure, and reduced staff and funding for Vanguard.
Mardy was right. You are buying into some revisionist history. Back in the day, McQuaid used to boast in postings and interviews that Microsoft was giving Sigil basically free reign in how they designed and produced the game. But Sigil wasted a shocking amont of time and money. Eventually Microsoft did what any invester would do, and told them "finish it." That sent Sigil into a tailspin.
EQ1, EQ2, SWG, SWTOR, GW, GW2 CoH, CoV, FFXI, WoW, CO, War,TSW and a slew of free trials and beta tests
Sorry, I dont buy that version.
if there is a "EQ next", they should just focus on making it a "raid centric" game. raids has always been EQ's primary strength, and to this date, there is NO game on the market that even approach the complexity/difficulty of EQ raids.
cut out all the timesink garbage and just let people raid. cut out the existing AA system and rework it so that new/returning players arent "blocked" by a wall of 3000AA's they need to get before becoming raid worthy. IMO one of the primary failures of EQ1 was the AA system. it prevented people from starting/returning to the game. IF i was to go back today, I'd be like 3000AA's behind... and thats on a toon that was capped on AA's when i quit:D do i really want to spend the next 6 months grinding out AA's just so i dont feel like a total noob in a raid? even though i was one of the main tanks in one of the top 3 raiding guilds on my server before i quit the game?:D the "existing" AA system builds a huge barrier to entry for new players. and a big anti-incentive for people who considered to return to the game.
attrition is a presistant force in the MMO universe. having huge barriers to entry like the old AA system is just simply asking to kill off the game. if they can remove the timesinks and other barriers to entry and focus on enableing people to raid rather then locking them away from raids, I'm sure old school raiders would flock back to one of the most enjoyable experiances in their gaming lifespan. yah you still have to filter out all the noob idiots that app your guild, but thats not any different from EQ1. I know of plenty old school great players that never raided because they cant put in the time to keeping up with the raiders.
personally, I'm all for instancing on raids. anything that can keep the raid rolling w/o wasting time is a good thing. keep the access of content open so people dont feel they are wasting time. bring back the 72 man raids. bring back the complex 90 min to 2 hr long scripts. but keep the content open so poeple dont feel like they have to go back and reflag/rekey 3 people every 2 weeks just to keep up with attrition.
I don't agree. It is true that the game have nailed the raids and that is the reason they should try to improve the rest of the game as well. Theree are several aspects of EQ 1 & 2 that needs improving and that have the potential of getting more players interested.
Crafting:
Here is the chance to make the game more like a sandbox. Many people love crafting and if people don't they rarely get annoyed of the possibilities. Let people build their home and a guildhall/castle/city, something like in AoC but with a lot more choices.
Combat:
Combat is more or less the same in any MMOs since EQ released. Time to pioneer some new and fresh mechanics. New improved AI would make the game more fun. Terrain should matter in combat, hold the higher ground and try to get the sun in your opponents eyes, particularly if you fight a troll or Darkelf. Make tanking harder and more about body blocking. Make it easier to move through combat to make it more tactical.
Diversity:
Why not let players create their own class if they want to? Have a few templates and let the players add balanced skills (you balance them against eachother) after a pointsystem. Of course should there also be regular classes as well.
Mounted combat:
Time to really add lances and similar mechanics. Imagine charging the enemy in speed from your nightmare. Also guilds should be able to compete against eachother in jousts.
Some better way to handle solo gaming.
Some people just don't like to group. But EQ2s soloing has passed all limits nowadays and people solo up to 90 without ever learning to play their character in groups (and not just a few but loads of people). Maybe something like the scaling dynamic events in GW2 were anyone can join in and everyone gets rewarded for helping out. Something closer to WARs PQs (but scaling) or Rifts rifts works fine as well. Just anything to reward soloplayers to jump in and help out a fellow player.
And other things:
Like gambling in taverns. And while we are at the tavern I want rules for drinking contests as well.
There are a lot of things that could make EQ Next a winner. They seems to already gotten the raids right but that isn't a reason to let everyone start out like max level character. In fact I think that kinda goes against thr RPG in MMORPG and would lead to a game even more gear focused than Wow.
New ideas (together with borrowing some from Meridian 59) is what made EQ to the top MMORPG a bit over 10 years ago. Just taking the parts it got right and taking away the rest of the game would lead to disaster. The game needs to have the freshness the first game had or it will do worse than EQ2, a lot worse.
Why can't there be open/real world dungeons, but as we reach the boss of said dungeon, we open a door and enter an instance? That way we get the best of both worlds.
And please, please, get rid of the quest arrows and quest markers and give us a "fog of war" map.
That's all.
EQ2 already have those. Like ruins of Varsoon.
It also have a fogged map and no arrows.
That may appeal to the 10% of the MMO population who regularly raid, but I've a sneaking suspicion any developer will want to cater for the other 90% as well.
Please, no raid or die end game. For once, can SOE make a MMORPG that isn't all about raiding, just once. Please allow for meaningful content and rewards for other play styles at the high end of the game. No more elitist bullcrap or you won't get my dollars. That means catering to soloers, small groupers, full groupers and multi-groupers equally and without prejudice.
Make questing and hunting and any other activities, equally rewarding. I love questing, but I hate questing treadmills, where that is the only viable means of the leveling process. Sometimes I just do not want to run back and forth, back and forth, back and forth for a quest. I'd much rather commit genocide against the local camp of goblins and I should be rewarded for doing so.
I love to explore, a lot and yet most games give you very little incentive to do so if any. Put lots of easter egg quests, chests and dynamic events out in the wilderness, reward explorers for doing what they like best. Also, no invisible walls, there should be just as much to explore underwater, underground and above ground as there is overland. The world of Norrath is so very rich in history with huge numbers of ancient civilizations and lands dotted with ruins that have no meaning and no reason to explore them other than to house random mob #1. We should be able to come across ruins and dig for artifacts, read ancient scrolls about it's history or some ancient curse that could still be rectified today. Hints in the architecture and glyphics that could lead to treasure guarded by jealous monsters.
Please stick with auto-attack and reaction abilities. This trend to turn every MMO into an action game is ruining my enjoyment of the genre. There are many good reasons why I prefer playing on a PC instead of a Console. Button mashing, spastic twitching is one of the big reasons. Complete and I do mean complete customizability of the UI and keyboard / mouse is another and is paramount.
I know there are people who really enjoy crafting, but please do not lessen adventurer gameplay and rewards in order to cater to them. Find ways to reward thier play style without ruining it for the rest of us. What's the point of crafters becoming ultra rich if they don't have anything to spend it on, such as hiring guards, paying for shipping and caravans, paying taxes for imports and exports and so forth. I've noticed in past games the constant attention to money sinks for adventurers and almost nothing for crafters other than the purchasing of vendor materials. Creating huge amounts of wealth in the crafting sector and unbalancing the economy for everyone in the process.
If you're going to do housing and mounts, do them right. Make them meaningful, convenient and part of the world, no instancing, create non-instanced neighborhoods in and around cities and towns, Make the world feel alive and growing and make us a part of it. EQLive has all of these racial cities and yet no one lives in them, they are wasted resources that could have so much more meaning. Speaking of towns, isn't it about time that inteliigent mobs had their own towns and cities, not just hunting camps and dungeons? Make mounts useful in combat and exploration as well as for travelling. Make them critical for the transport of crafting materials between cities, allowing for defending of resources between cities from raiders, monsters and maybe even flagged players.
Take the Magic: The Gathering 'What Color Are You?' Quiz.
I dont think the new EQ or really ANY MMO should focus on one aspect of the game only.
A good MMO, in my mind, is a game you can play for years.
For that to happen, you need it to offer all kinds of ways of progression - solo adventuring, group adventuring, raids, crafting, harvesting, fishing, diplomacy, whatever.
My gut tells me that EQ Next might lean towards being "console" compatiable then retro original EQ1.. Companies have been trying to years to make that perfect "bridge" MMO that allows both PC and consoles to play together.. Who knows, but it's something to think about
Nope, they said on Fan Faire that EQNext would lean towards EQ1.
Collector's editions are scams.
Asheron's Call 2 had that. Unfortunately that idea seemed to die with the game. they called them Vaults or Dungeon Vaults.
Too bad, cuz its a FAR FAR FAR better 'solution' to the 'problem' of open dungeons than what we got from other hybrid 'MMOs'. which was just to take out the MMO element from all dungeon experiences. grrrrrrr
---------------------------
Corpus Callosum
---------------------------