Originally posted by ignore_me ugh. Where combat is concerned MMO players have been thrown under the bus to attract the MOBA crowd. He says it in the interview. Money-wise this makes sense, but it's a dick move to be honest.
The two first EQ, but also WoW, Rift, LotRO and many more all have traditional MMO combat. You can still play those, most for free. It's not a "dick move" to not want to make all games the same.
They're making it the same as the other MOBAs. And while I don't find traditional tab target fun, I also don't like 3 buttons and a thumb up the butt either.
The EQ fans didn't get much out of this game, thus the comment.
EQ fans still have EQ, with a new XPac in beta right now. This is a new game. This is a different game, set in a different Norrath. If you want EQ, you can play EQ. There are plenty of games that offer what you are looking for. There is nothing this game has in common with MOBAs outside of possible group role playstyles
If they would have said what you just said the moment they announced EQNext then I would be with you 100%
Originally posted by ignore_me ugh. Where combat is concerned MMO players have been thrown under the bus to attract the MOBA crowd. He says it in the interview. Money-wise this makes sense, but it's a dick move to be honest.
The two first EQ, but also WoW, Rift, LotRO and many more all have traditional MMO combat. You can still play those, most for free. It's not a "dick move" to not want to make all games the same.
They're making it the same as the other MOBAs. And while I don't find traditional tab target fun, I also don't like 3 buttons and a thumb up the butt either.
The EQ fans didn't get much out of this game, thus the comment.
EQ fans still have EQ, with a new XPac in beta right now. This is a new game. This is a different game, set in a different Norrath. If you want EQ, you can play EQ. There are plenty of games that offer what you are looking for. There is nothing this game has in common with MOBAs outside of possible group role playstyles
And the small number of buttons on the bar. And the fact that combat was designed to appeal to them and draw that "huge" audience in to the game per the interview.
But if you are right, the MOBA crowd won't be interested anyway, so the whole thing was not successful at what they wanted.
Well, the amount of abilities you can have slotted on your action bar is similar to other popular MMOs as well, so you can drop that flag. And, per other statements made at SOE Live, the combat format developed is to combat the improved AI. If that appeals to a different crowd, so be it.
Like I said, real EQ fans are still playing EQ (Myself included). There are plenty of MMOs that offer the gameplay you are looking for, why slam a game for doing something different?
SWTOR Referral Bonus! Referral link 7 day subscriber level access Returning players get 1 free server transfer
EQ fans still have EQ, with a new XPac in beta right now. This is a new game. This is a different game, set in a different Norrath. If you want EQ, you can play EQ. There are plenty of games that offer what you are looking for. There is nothing this game has in common with MOBAs outside of possible group role playstyles
EQ (pre-luclin) is not EQ (post luclin). Every expac they added more solo, more convenient, more fast travel, more instance.
We hoped EQN would bring the old EQ back. Of course we also knew this was wishful thinking as it's highly unlikely it will happend.
That's also why I want to give them a chance. Maybe they will do something cool and new that I like. But I'm also worried they will just not make it that great.
And well there are a lot of things they could do cool. I just hope they get back to their ivory tower and throw out the welcome to our world and not this everyone can go into this ride newer games support, dumbing down content.
Originally posted by ignore_me ugh. Where combat is concerned MMO players have been thrown under the bus to attract the MOBA crowd. He says it in the interview. Money-wise this makes sense, but it's a dick move to be honest.
The two first EQ, but also WoW, Rift, LotRO and many more all have traditional MMO combat. You can still play those, most for free. It's not a "dick move" to not want to make all games the same.
They're making it the same as the other MOBAs. And while I don't find traditional tab target fun, I also don't like 3 buttons and a thumb up the butt either.
The EQ fans didn't get much out of this game, thus the comment.
EQ fans still have EQ, with a new XPac in beta right now. This is a new game. This is a different game, set in a different Norrath. If you want EQ, you can play EQ. There are plenty of games that offer what you are looking for. There is nothing this game has in common with MOBAs outside of possible group role playstyles
And the small number of buttons on the bar. And the fact that combat was designed to appeal to them and draw that "huge" audience in to the game per the interview.
But if you are right, the MOBA crowd won't be interested anyway, so the whole thing was not successful at what they wanted.
Well, the amount of abilities you can have slotted on your action bar is similar to other popular MMOs as well, so you can drop that flag. And, per other statements made at SOE Live, the combat format developed is to combat the improved AI. If that appeals to a different crowd, so be it.
Like I said, real EQ fans are still playing EQ (Myself included). There are plenty of MMOs that offer the gameplay you are looking for, why slam a game for doing something different?
I just think this was a bad decision on their part. The whole game is not doomed because of one feature, but I find it disappointing that they seemed to choose something that is problematic for fans of the franchise. And the other contemporary games with a small number of buttons have pretty much sucked too. The only one that has been decent is GW2, but many people couldn't hang with the combat and horizontal progression and left early.
EQ fans still have EQ, with a new XPac in beta right now. This is a new game. This is a different game, set in a different Norrath. If you want EQ, you can play EQ. There are plenty of games that offer what you are looking for. There is nothing this game has in common with MOBAs outside of possible group role playstyles
EQ (pre-luclin) is not EQ (post luclin). Every expac they added more solo, more convenient, more fast travel, more instance.
We hoped EQN would bring the old EQ back. Of course we also knew this was wishful thinking as it's highly unlikely it will happend.
That's also why I want to give them a chance. Maybe they will do something cool and new that I like. But I'm also worried they will just not make it that great.
And well there are a lot of things they could do cool. I just hope they get back to their ivory tower and throw out the welcome to our world and not this everyone can go into this ride newer games support, dumbing down content.
Project 1999 has what you are looking for then.
I have faith SOE can provide a fun and fufilling experience, as I enjoy and regularly play 4 of their MMOs and am an all access subscriber. I am not a fanboy, I just feel they can produce some solid MMOs (After wroking through the heavy bugs they tend to release with).
SWTOR Referral Bonus! Referral link 7 day subscriber level access Returning players get 1 free server transfer
Originally posted by ignore_me ugh. Where combat is concerned MMO players have been thrown under the bus to attract the MOBA crowd. He says it in the interview. Money-wise this makes sense, but it's a dick move to be honest.
The two first EQ, but also WoW, Rift, LotRO and many more all have traditional MMO combat. You can still play those, most for free. It's not a "dick move" to not want to make all games the same.
They're making it the same as the other MOBAs. And while I don't find traditional tab target fun, I also don't like 3 buttons and a thumb up the butt either.
The EQ fans didn't get much out of this game, thus the comment.
EQ fans still have EQ, with a new XPac in beta right now. This is a new game. This is a different game, set in a different Norrath. If you want EQ, you can play EQ. There are plenty of games that offer what you are looking for. There is nothing this game has in common with MOBAs outside of possible group role playstyles
And the small number of buttons on the bar. And the fact that combat was designed to appeal to them and draw that "huge" audience in to the game per the interview.
But if you are right, the MOBA crowd won't be interested anyway, so the whole thing was not successful at what they wanted.
Well, the amount of abilities you can have slotted on your action bar is similar to other popular MMOs as well, so you can drop that flag. And, per other statements made at SOE Live, the combat format developed is to combat the improved AI. If that appeals to a different crowd, so be it.
Like I said, real EQ fans are still playing EQ (Myself included). There are plenty of MMOs that offer the gameplay you are looking for, why slam a game for doing something different?
I just think this was a bad decision on their part. The whole game is not doomed because of one feature, but I find it disappointing that they seemed to choose something that is problematic for fans of the franchise. And the other contemporary games with a small number of buttons have pretty much sucked too. The only one that has been decent is GW2, but many people couldn't hang with the combat and horizontal progression and left early.
Flag not dropped. Planted. 8 buttons sucks ass
Then just accept that the game may not be for you. I understand your dislike for the system. My only qualm is why are people asking for more of the same when there is already a countless number of MMOs doing that?
No one is going to out-WoW World of Warcraft, it is propably the pinacle of that style of MMO. Sure people say it is bleeding tons of subs, but it still has more than any of it's competition. The fact that it has lost more subs than most games ever had says something.
SWTOR Referral Bonus! Referral link 7 day subscriber level access Returning players get 1 free server transfer
Originally posted by ignore_me ugh. Where combat is concerned MMO players have been thrown under the bus to attract the MOBA crowd. He says it in the interview. Money-wise this makes sense, but it's a dick move to be honest.
The two first EQ, but also WoW, Rift, LotRO and many more all have traditional MMO combat. You can still play those, most for free. It's not a "dick move" to not want to make all games the same.
They're making it the same as the other MOBAs. And while I don't find traditional tab target fun, I also don't like 3 buttons and a thumb up the butt either.
The EQ fans didn't get much out of this game, thus the comment.
EQ fans still have EQ, with a new XPac in beta right now. This is a new game. This is a different game, set in a different Norrath. If you want EQ, you can play EQ. There are plenty of games that offer what you are looking for. There is nothing this game has in common with MOBAs outside of possible group role playstyles
And the small number of buttons on the bar. And the fact that combat was designed to appeal to them and draw that "huge" audience in to the game per the interview.
But if you are right, the MOBA crowd won't be interested anyway, so the whole thing was not successful at what they wanted.
Well, the amount of abilities you can have slotted on your action bar is similar to other popular MMOs as well, so you can drop that flag. And, per other statements made at SOE Live, the combat format developed is to combat the improved AI. If that appeals to a different crowd, so be it.
Like I said, real EQ fans are still playing EQ (Myself included). There are plenty of MMOs that offer the gameplay you are looking for, why slam a game for doing something different?
I just think this was a bad decision on their part. The whole game is not doomed because of one feature, but I find it disappointing that they seemed to choose something that is problematic for fans of the franchise. And the other contemporary games with a small number of buttons have pretty much sucked too. The only one that has been decent is GW2, but many people couldn't hang with the combat and horizontal progression and left early.
Flag not dropped. Planted. 8 buttons sucks ass
Then just accept that the game may not be for you. I understand your dislike for the system. My only qualm is why are people asking for more of the same when there is already a countless number of MMOs doing that?
No one is going to out-WoW World of Warcraft, it is propably the pinacle of that style of MMO. Sure people say it is bleeding tons of subs, but it still has more than any of it's competition. The fact that it has lost more subs than most games ever had says something.
Exactly, SOE cannot compete with Blizzard making same kind of game again even if its better. They have to do something new. The sandbox is going to be new to most mmo players and most players have played or are playing WoW.
EQ fans still have EQ, with a new XPac in beta right now. This is a new game. This is a different game, set in a different Norrath. If you want EQ, you can play EQ. There are plenty of games that offer what you are looking for. There is nothing this game has in common with MOBAs outside of possible group role playstyles
EQ (pre-luclin) is not EQ (post luclin). Every expac they added more solo, more convenient, more fast travel, more instance.
We hoped EQN would bring the old EQ back. Of course we also knew this was wishful thinking as it's highly unlikely it will happend.
That's also why I want to give them a chance. Maybe they will do something cool and new that I like. But I'm also worried they will just not make it that great.
And well there are a lot of things they could do cool. I just hope they get back to their ivory tower and throw out the welcome to our world and not this everyone can go into this ride newer games support, dumbing down content.
Project 1999 has what you are looking for then.
I have faith SOE can provide a fun and fufilling experience, as I enjoy and regularly play 4 of their MMOs and am an all access subscriber. I am not a fanboy, I just feel they can produce some solid MMOs (After wroking through the heavy bugs they tend to release with).
That's true. Project 1999 is a good alternative, but just not enough players to play the games with.
And you might not be a SOE fanboy, but I am . I really liked some of their games and still believe they are the best company in the industry. That's also they only reason I'm giving them a chance. They are the only ones I believe that are able to make it. Any other company I would abandon until release and then see what they did, but as it's SOE I will follow them and hope they amaze me.
And the problem was never 8 buttons. TSW did a great job with only 7 buttons, GW1 did a good job with 8 buttons, GW2 did a good job with 10 buttons. The buttons aren't the problem. The problem is what you do with those 8 buttons. GW2 turned it into a dps fight, so they failed, they turned it into what do you think looks best grind, because if you want sparkles, you have to grind this boss. And GW2 failed because it did not add roles at all. Everyone can do everything and you just run in and spank the boss. Really GW2 showed us why roles are important. I really wonder if SOE can make the roles good, even if it's not the classic trinity
Originally posted by ignore_me ugh. Where combat is concerned MMO players have been thrown under the bus to attract the MOBA crowd. He says it in the interview. Money-wise this makes sense, but it's a dick move to be honest.
*repost of my earlier response (#18)*
I wouldn't say he gave a confirmation of MOBA inspired combat in this interview. He wasn't even describing the combat when he mentions MOBA. The question was asked, "What is your target market and how do they interact?" In regard to the numerous game styles offered in EQN, Georgeson responded in part, "...what we are doing with the classes is actually kind of similar to the way that classes are handled in MOBA games." He makes the connection to MOBA players in describing how they will recognize the similarity to classes; in hopes that this will be a factor in attracting them to EQN.
edit: (...starting at about 2:18 of the interview)
...So, no...he does not say anything where the combat is concerned that it was used to attract the MOBA crowd.
Ganker = dps that can take out side mobs real quick, but can't melt major mobs
Diasabler = CC/debuffs
Nuker = Big spells that can change the course of a battle (think big AoE vs carry melting things)
Initiator = Tanky class that goes in first and might have some cc/debuff, but not to the degree that the disabler does.
Jungler = Really good are self sufficiency and taking on smaller adds (aka off tank with some dps)
Pusher = Hmm, not sure about this, usually a class that takes down towers really well, sometimes can summon or control minions.
Support = heals/buff/cc/utility
So a fight would start with the Initiator going in to draw early fire, the jungler and ganker looking for stragglers the whole time, the Carry and nuker start burning down mobs, and the disablers CC anything that looks like it might get to the carry/nuker. And support is there to help whoever needs help.
Originally posted by ignore_me ugh. Where combat is concerned MMO players have been thrown under the bus to attract the MOBA crowd. He says it in the interview. Money-wise this makes sense, but it's a dick move to be honest.
The two first EQ, but also WoW, Rift, LotRO and many more all have traditional MMO combat. You can still play those, most for free. It's not a "dick move" to not want to make all games the same.
They're making it the same as the other MOBAs. And while I don't find traditional tab target fun, I also don't like 3 buttons and a thumb up the butt either.
The EQ fans didn't get much out of this game, thus the comment.
EQ fans still have EQ, with a new XPac in beta right now. This is a new game. This is a different game, set in a different Norrath. If you want EQ, you can play EQ. There are plenty of games that offer what you are looking for. There is nothing this game has in common with MOBAs outside of possible group role playstyles
And the small number of buttons on the bar. And the fact that combat was designed to appeal to them and draw that "huge" audience in to the game per the interview.
But if you are right, the MOBA crowd won't be interested anyway, so the whole thing was not successful at what they wanted.
Well, the amount of abilities you can have slotted on your action bar is similar to other popular MMOs as well, so you can drop that flag. And, per other statements made at SOE Live, the combat format developed is to combat the improved AI. If that appeals to a different crowd, so be it.
Like I said, real EQ fans are still playing EQ (Myself included). There are plenty of MMOs that offer the gameplay you are looking for, why slam a game for doing something different?
I just think this was a bad decision on their part. The whole game is not doomed because of one feature, but I find it disappointing that they seemed to choose something that is problematic for fans of the franchise. And the other contemporary games with a small number of buttons have pretty much sucked too. The only one that has been decent is GW2, but many people couldn't hang with the combat and horizontal progression and left early.
Flag not dropped. Planted. 8 buttons sucks ass
Then just accept that the game may not be for you. I understand your dislike for the system. My only qualm is why are people asking for more of the same when there is already a countless number of MMOs doing that?
No one is going to out-WoW World of Warcraft, it is propably the pinacle of that style of MMO. Sure people say it is bleeding tons of subs, but it still has more than any of it's competition. The fact that it has lost more subs than most games ever had says something.
Truth be told, I personally find the old systems pretty boring (EQ2, WoW). I tried Neverwinter with it's one-weapon, 6 button setup (That's how I remember it anyway) which to me is an awful system, and though GW2 has ten primary buttons (plus F keys) it still gets a bit stale at times. I don't know why the idea is lately always more restriction. If you want to offer a default 8-button setup then cool, but allow for enough flexibility that players can run more buttons if they want. Even if those are essentially just consumable, or non-combat buttons.
But 7 or 8 is just using what the average person can store in short-term memory. If you don't have to access long-term or intermediate memory then you are doing something by habit or at least with very little cognition. When people say Dumbing it Down, they are quite literally right.
That's true. Project 1999 is a good alternative, but just not enough players to play the games with.
And you might not be a SOE fanboy, but I am . I really liked some of their games and still believe they are the best company in the industry. That's also they only reason I'm giving them a chance. They are the only ones I believe that are able to make it. Any other company I would abandon until release and then see what they did, but as it's SOE I will follow them and hope they amaze me.
And the problem was never 8 buttons. TSW did a great job with only 7 buttons, GW1 did a good job with 8 buttons, GW2 did a good job with 10 buttons. The buttons aren't the problem. The problem is what you do with those 8 buttons. GW2 turned it into a dps fight, so they failed, they turned it into what do you think looks best grind, because if you want sparkles, you have to grind this boss. And GW2 failed because it did not add roles at all. Everyone can do everything and you just run in and spank the boss. Really GW2 showed us why roles are important. I really wonder if SOE can make the roles good, even if it's not the classic trinity
And there lies the problem. With games being as big as a production as they are nowadays you need to make a game that attracts a large audience. Unfortunately there isn't really room for niche games anymore. It sucks for sure.
But I must say out of all the games that have come in recent years I feel EQN has the most potential to be something different and keep players coming back for more. If they can pull off a dynamic world that changes as much as they claim then this game will truly be something special.
I did say the same about GW2, and although it is a good game, it just wasn't what I expected it to be.
Ganker = dps that can take out side mobs real quick, but can't melt major mobs
Diasabler = CC/debuffs
Nuker = Big spells that can change the course of a battle (think big AoE vs carry melting things)
Initiator = Tanky class that goes in first and might have some cc/debuff, but not to the degree that the disabler does.
Jungler = Really good are self sufficiency and taking on smaller adds (aka off tank with some dps)
Pusher = Hmm, not sure about this, usually a class that takes down towers really well, sometimes can summon or control minions.
Support = heals/buff/cc/utility
So a fight would start with the Initiator going in to draw early fire, the jungler and ganker looking for stragglers the whole time, the Carry and nuker start burning down mobs, and the disablers CC anything that looks like it might get to the carry/nuker. And support is there to help whoever needs help.
And the A.I will be using their own tactics, so the pve is going to be very much like pvp, where you have to switch tactics on the fly and time your abilities well.
Also people can switch roles if people leave the group or if the group needs more dps , healing or defensive walls.
Truth be told, I personally find the old systems pretty boring. I tried Neverwinter with it's one-weapon, 6 button setup (That's how I remember it anyway) which to me is an awful system, and though GW2 has ten primary buttons (plus F keys) it still gets a bit stale at times. I don't know why the idea is lately always more restriction. If you want to offer a default 8-button setup then cool, but allow for enough flexibility that players can run more buttons if they want. Even if those are essentially just consumable, or non-combat buttons.
But 7 or 8 is just using what the average person can store in short-term memory. If you don't have to access long-term or intermediate memory then you are doing something by habit or at least with very little cognition. When people say Dumbing it Down, they are quite literally right.
Oh please enough of your crap.
When you play Chess how many distinct moves are there?
Pawn can move 1 forward.
Bishop can move diagonal.
Castle can move in a striaght line.
Knight can move in an L formation.
King can move 1 space in any direction.
Queen can move in any direction.
6 total moves. Is Chess a dumbed down game?
Look back at the first streetfighter games, they only had 4 buttons.
The number of buttons to press has nothing to do with complexity, memory retention or any of the rest of the crap you mention.
How you can use the skills available and how they interact with the environment, other friendly players, enemy mons, enemy players...that is where the complexity comes in.
If you think the number of buttons to mash equates to how good the combat will be then you have a very limited mix of intelligence and experience.
Truth be told, I personally find the old systems pretty boring. I tried Neverwinter with it's one-weapon, 6 button setup (That's how I remember it anyway) which to me is an awful system, and though GW2 has ten primary buttons (plus F keys) it still gets a bit stale at times. I don't know why the idea is lately always more restriction. If you want to offer a default 8-button setup then cool, but allow for enough flexibility that players can run more buttons if they want. Even if those are essentially just consumable, or non-combat buttons.
But 7 or 8 is just using what the average person can store in short-term memory. If you don't have to access long-term or intermediate memory then you are doing something by habit or at least with very little cognition. When people say Dumbing it Down, they are quite literally right.
Oh please enough of your crap.
When you play Chess how many distinct moves are there?
Pawn can move 1 forward.
Bishop can move diagonal.
Castle can move in a striaght line.
Knight can move in an L formation.
King can move 1 space in any direction.
Queen can move in any direction.
6 total moves. Is Chess a dumbed down game?
Look back at the first streetfighter games, they only had 4 buttons.
The number of buttons to press has nothing to do with complexity, memory retention or any of the rest of the crap you mention.
How you can use the skills available and how they interact with the environment, other friendly players, enemy mons, enemy players...that is where the complexity comes in.
If you think the number of buttons to mash equates to how good the combat will be then you have a very limited mix of intelligence and experience.
I would have approached it a little less agressively, but this is a good way to look at the combat setup.
SWTOR Referral Bonus! Referral link 7 day subscriber level access Returning players get 1 free server transfer
Truth be told, I personally find the old systems pretty boring. I tried Neverwinter with it's one-weapon, 6 button setup (That's how I remember it anyway) which to me is an awful system, and though GW2 has ten primary buttons (plus F keys) it still gets a bit stale at times. I don't know why the idea is lately always more restriction. If you want to offer a default 8-button setup then cool, but allow for enough flexibility that players can run more buttons if they want. Even if those are essentially just consumable, or non-combat buttons.
But 7 or 8 is just using what the average person can store in short-term memory. If you don't have to access long-term or intermediate memory then you are doing something by habit or at least with very little cognition. When people say Dumbing it Down, they are quite literally right.
Oh please enough of your crap.
When you play Chess how many distinct moves are there?
Pawn can move 1 forward.
Bishop can move diagonal.
Castle can move in a striaght line.
Knight can move in an L formation.
King can move 1 space in any direction.
Queen can move in any direction.
6 total moves. Is Chess a dumbed down game?
Look back at the first streetfighter games, they only had 4 buttons.
The number of buttons to press has nothing to do with complexity, memory retention or any of the rest of the crap you mention.
How you can use the skills available and how they interact with the environment, other friendly players, enemy mons, enemy players...that is where the complexity comes in.
If you think the number of buttons to mash equates to how good the combat will be then you have a very limited mix of intelligence and experience.
I would have approached it a little less agressively, but this is a good way to look at the combat setup.
Meh I've posted harmless stuff and got banned for it so why should I bother trying to censor myself, they will ban me either way. The point is, he is constantly talking crap (or lying, or not telling the truth, or hinding the facts....take your pick as to which one you think is PC enough) and he is either doing it to troll people or believes it. If he is a troll then he should get more of a ban then me. if he is not a troll and believes what he writes then he is just dense.
Originally posted by ignore_me ugh. Where combat is concerned MMO players have been thrown under the bus to attract the MOBA crowd. He says it in the interview. Money-wise this makes sense, but it's a dick move to be honest.
The two first EQ, but also WoW, Rift, LotRO and many more all have traditional MMO combat. You can still play those, most for free. It's not a "dick move" to not want to make all games the same.
Exactly right, JLP.
Chances are, SOE isn't making EQ:N for anyone who is reading this. The traditional MMORPG player isn't the target audience for EQ:N. SOE is trying to expand its customer base, not move revenue from EQ1/EQ2/Vanguard/FR/Planetside/etc. games into a new game. They want to grab new money from new customers, and making a new game for existing customers doesn't accomplish their business goal.
Logic, my dear, merely enables one to be wrong with great authority.
Chances are, SOE isn't making EQ:N for anyone who is reading this. The traditional MMORPG player isn't the target audience for EQ:N.
I can only make a personal comment on this but I totally disagree. The idea's they are taling about are idea's I have been discussing with friends for a very long time. Hell I remember back when Doom first came out and I had arguments with friends over how you could make the idea of an FPS into a multiplayer game of D&D. They were talking about D&D being too complex and I was talking about mapping spells to keys, exploring dongeons and having raps and all sorts of stuff.
I think the traditional MMORPG players are the EXACT target of this game. The problems is, they have been stuck playing the most recent batch of games they have forgotten why MMO's were so exciting to beging with...a WORLD full of other players where you can live out fantastical stories in an ever changing environment.
I personally think it is a 100% match...but it might take a while for people to actually get their heads around what these changes are going to do for the genre.
Originally posted by ignore_me ugh. Where combat is concerned MMO players have been thrown under the bus to attract the MOBA crowd. He says it in the interview. Money-wise this makes sense, but it's a dick move to be honest.
The two first EQ, but also WoW, Rift, LotRO and many more all have traditional MMO combat. You can still play those, most for free. It's not a "dick move" to not want to make all games the same.
Exactly right, JLP.
Chances are, SOE isn't making EQ:N for anyone who is reading this. The traditional MMORPG player isn't the target audience for EQ:N. SOE is trying to expand its customer base, not move revenue from EQ1/EQ2/Vanguard/FR/Planetside/etc. games into a new game. They want to grab new money from new customers, and making a new game for existing customers doesn't accomplish their business goal.
MOBAs are pure PVP. So if SOE wants to attract those players they're going to have to go for open-world PVP. Which is acceptable if they are focusing on a new audience as you said.
On the topic of Landmark, he said no one will be able to destroy another player's creation unless he is given permission. He said that the potential for the future in Landmark as they bring in stuff from EQN such as PVP will be players being able to create their own PVP in Landmark.
I had to comment on this. I really don't think this means what most people seem to be taking from it, that there will be some kind of PvP in the EQ:NL game. Since the primary aim of Landmark is building, I think the ability to 'destroy another player's creation' is much more likely to involve the DEL key than any kind of combat. If someone wishes to call that PvP, fine. But it is using the 'PvP' label in a possibly misleading way.
Logic, my dear, merely enables one to be wrong with great authority.
Originally posted by ignore_me ugh. Where combat is concerned MMO players have been thrown under the bus to attract the MOBA crowd. He says it in the interview. Money-wise this makes sense, but it's a dick move to be honest.
The two first EQ, but also WoW, Rift, LotRO and many more all have traditional MMO combat. You can still play those, most for free. It's not a "dick move" to not want to make all games the same.
Exactly right, JLP.
Chances are, SOE isn't making EQ:N for anyone who is reading this. The traditional MMORPG player isn't the target audience for EQ:N. SOE is trying to expand its customer base, not move revenue from EQ1/EQ2/Vanguard/FR/Planetside/etc. games into a new game. They want to grab new money from new customers, and making a new game for existing customers doesn't accomplish their business goal.
MOBAs are pure PVP. So if SOE wants to attract those players they're going to have to go for open-world PVP. Which is acceptable if they are focusing on a new audience as you said.
You could be right, Bidwood. I've no problem with MMOFPS or MMORTS or MOBAs; they are all about a PvP experience. It's when the PvP is wedged into an MMORPG that I have issues.
And let's not forget we might both be wrong, and SOE is after a market that is completely outside the typical MMO or MOBA player. Maybe they've convinced themselves they can attract the Tetris market with EQ:N.
Logic, my dear, merely enables one to be wrong with great authority.
Originally posted by ignore_me ugh. Where combat is concerned MMO players have been thrown under the bus to attract the MOBA crowd. He says it in the interview. Money-wise this makes sense, but it's a dick move to be honest.
Bingo. I've been saying since the "reveal" that it looked like MOBA combat. All the spinning (hi garen), flash, etc. Meh. I LOVE MOBAs, and play a lot of LoL, but this is not what I want in my MMORPG.
Originally posted by ignore_me ugh. Where combat is concerned MMO players have been thrown under the bus to attract the MOBA crowd. He says it in the interview. Money-wise this makes sense, but it's a dick move to be honest.
The two first EQ, but also WoW, Rift, LotRO and many more all have traditional MMO combat. You can still play those, most for free. It's not a "dick move" to not want to make all games the same.
Exactly right, JLP.
Chances are, SOE isn't making EQ:N for anyone who is reading this. The traditional MMORPG player isn't the target audience for EQ:N. SOE is trying to expand its customer base, not move revenue from EQ1/EQ2/Vanguard/FR/Planetside/etc. games into a new game. They want to grab new money from new customers, and making a new game for existing customers doesn't accomplish their business goal.
MOBAs are pure PVP. So if SOE wants to attract those players they're going to have to go for open-world PVP. Which is acceptable if they are focusing on a new audience as you said.
MOBA's by design are focused towards PVP, however and I say this with a grain of salt. There are cases where players go into some MOBA's for the co op aspect. League of Legends sports a CO OP VS AI mode which I find great. It lets me play the same game without the need of following what the meta is. One of my biggest issues with MOBA"s is that other playercs dictate to you what you should be doing in the order in how you should be doing it when you play. I think this ruins the game to a certain extent. MMORPG's have this issue as well which tends to make me land in a more casual guild.
To the people that are talking about specialization vs utility: If everyone can be a healer, if everyone can be a warrior, how do I make my real niche and stand out?
Georgeson:
So, um-
um--
[pause]
We'd -
We're not getting rid of the old roles
[pause]
um --
there are still
--uhb--
[sigh]
[pause]
-- how to put this.
Every situation is going to need different kinds of roles to participate in it.
You are going to want people that caaan
[pause]
stand in front of
--uh
[pause]
in -
uh-
stand in fr--
in-
stand in front of the group and shield them against damage.
You're gonna want to find people that are willing to support other people by
-- uhm
--iee
-uhhya-
throwing up buffs on them or being able to
uh--
eh-- or by
uh--
occasionally heal and do different things...
Your looking less for specific classes and more for people who are good at specific roles.
This was actually a really good interview and cleared up a lot of the confusion from the earlier interviews.
No instances, moving boss npc spawn points, large scale player challanges. More information on consequences.
They need to put this in text form put it on the main page and list it as features.
edit: Actually the last part of this interview on templates and wireframes and moving from eqnext from landmark was the most we have gotten about how the crafting may work to date in this game and honestly it sounds nice.
From what I understood you would build an item in EQLandmark, with its easier more free form style, move the template to eqnext and try and build it in the game by collecting all the resources neccesary for construction....not sure how that will mesh with the "norrath" filter but it sounds good as long as crazy startships and large testicles are not getting moved over to the actual game. (might be too much sandbox there)
Comments
If they would have said what you just said the moment they announced EQNext then I would be with you 100%
Survivor of the great MMORPG Famine of 2011
Well, the amount of abilities you can have slotted on your action bar is similar to other popular MMOs as well, so you can drop that flag. And, per other statements made at SOE Live, the combat format developed is to combat the improved AI. If that appeals to a different crowd, so be it.
Like I said, real EQ fans are still playing EQ (Myself included). There are plenty of MMOs that offer the gameplay you are looking for, why slam a game for doing something different?
SWTOR Referral Bonus!
Referral link
7 day subscriber level access
Returning players get 1 free server transfer
Leveling assistance items given to new player!
See all perks Here
EQ (pre-luclin) is not EQ (post luclin). Every expac they added more solo, more convenient, more fast travel, more instance.
We hoped EQN would bring the old EQ back. Of course we also knew this was wishful thinking as it's highly unlikely it will happend.
That's also why I want to give them a chance. Maybe they will do something cool and new that I like. But I'm also worried they will just not make it that great.
And well there are a lot of things they could do cool. I just hope they get back to their ivory tower and throw out the welcome to our world and not this everyone can go into this ride newer games support, dumbing down content.
I just think this was a bad decision on their part. The whole game is not doomed because of one feature, but I find it disappointing that they seemed to choose something that is problematic for fans of the franchise. And the other contemporary games with a small number of buttons have pretty much sucked too. The only one that has been decent is GW2, but many people couldn't hang with the combat and horizontal progression and left early.
Flag not dropped. Planted. 8 buttons sucks ass
Survivor of the great MMORPG Famine of 2011
Project 1999 has what you are looking for then.
I have faith SOE can provide a fun and fufilling experience, as I enjoy and regularly play 4 of their MMOs and am an all access subscriber. I am not a fanboy, I just feel they can produce some solid MMOs (After wroking through the heavy bugs they tend to release with).
SWTOR Referral Bonus!
Referral link
7 day subscriber level access
Returning players get 1 free server transfer
Leveling assistance items given to new player!
See all perks Here
Then just accept that the game may not be for you. I understand your dislike for the system. My only qualm is why are people asking for more of the same when there is already a countless number of MMOs doing that?
No one is going to out-WoW World of Warcraft, it is propably the pinacle of that style of MMO. Sure people say it is bleeding tons of subs, but it still has more than any of it's competition. The fact that it has lost more subs than most games ever had says something.
SWTOR Referral Bonus!
Referral link
7 day subscriber level access
Returning players get 1 free server transfer
Leveling assistance items given to new player!
See all perks Here
Exactly, SOE cannot compete with Blizzard making same kind of game again even if its better. They have to do something new. The sandbox is going to be new to most mmo players and most players have played or are playing WoW.
That's true. Project 1999 is a good alternative, but just not enough players to play the games with.
And you might not be a SOE fanboy, but I am
. I really liked some of their games and still believe they are the best company in the industry. That's also they only reason I'm giving them a chance. They are the only ones I believe that are able to make it. Any other company I would abandon until release and then see what they did, but as it's SOE I will follow them and hope they amaze me.
And the problem was never 8 buttons. TSW did a great job with only 7 buttons, GW1 did a good job with 8 buttons, GW2 did a good job with 10 buttons. The buttons aren't the problem. The problem is what you do with those 8 buttons. GW2 turned it into a dps fight, so they failed, they turned it into what do you think looks best grind, because if you want sparkles, you have to grind this boss. And GW2 failed because it did not add roles at all. Everyone can do everything and you just run in and spank the boss. Really GW2 showed us why roles are important. I really wonder if SOE can make the roles good, even if it's not the classic trinity
*repost of my earlier response (#18)*
I wouldn't say he gave a confirmation of MOBA inspired combat in this interview. He wasn't even describing the combat when he mentions MOBA. The question was asked, "What is your target market and how do they interact?" In regard to the numerous game styles offered in EQN, Georgeson responded in part, "...what we are doing with the classes is actually kind of similar to the way that classes are handled in MOBA games." He makes the connection to MOBA players in describing how they will recognize the similarity to classes; in hopes that this will be a factor in attracting them to EQN.
edit: (...starting at about 2:18 of the interview)
...So, no...he does not say anything where the combat is concerned that it was used to attract the MOBA crowd.
I can see it working.
Let's say they use the following roles:
Carry = glass cannon huge dps
Ganker = dps that can take out side mobs real quick, but can't melt major mobs
Diasabler = CC/debuffs
Nuker = Big spells that can change the course of a battle (think big AoE vs carry melting things)
Initiator = Tanky class that goes in first and might have some cc/debuff, but not to the degree that the disabler does.
Jungler = Really good are self sufficiency and taking on smaller adds (aka off tank with some dps)
Pusher = Hmm, not sure about this, usually a class that takes down towers really well, sometimes can summon or control minions.
Support = heals/buff/cc/utility
So a fight would start with the Initiator going in to draw early fire, the jungler and ganker looking for stragglers the whole time, the Carry and nuker start burning down mobs, and the disablers CC anything that looks like it might get to the carry/nuker. And support is there to help whoever needs help.
Truth be told, I personally find the old systems pretty boring (EQ2, WoW). I tried Neverwinter with it's one-weapon, 6 button setup (That's how I remember it anyway) which to me is an awful system, and though GW2 has ten primary buttons (plus F keys) it still gets a bit stale at times. I don't know why the idea is lately always more restriction. If you want to offer a default 8-button setup then cool, but allow for enough flexibility that players can run more buttons if they want. Even if those are essentially just consumable, or non-combat buttons.
But 7 or 8 is just using what the average person can store in short-term memory. If you don't have to access long-term or intermediate memory then you are doing something by habit or at least with very little cognition. When people say Dumbing it Down, they are quite literally right.
Survivor of the great MMORPG Famine of 2011
And there lies the problem. With games being as big as a production as they are nowadays you need to make a game that attracts a large audience. Unfortunately there isn't really room for niche games anymore. It sucks for sure.
But I must say out of all the games that have come in recent years I feel EQN has the most potential to be something different and keep players coming back for more. If they can pull off a dynamic world that changes as much as they claim then this game will truly be something special.
I did say the same about GW2, and although it is a good game, it just wasn't what I expected it to be.
And the A.I will be using their own tactics, so the pve is going to be very much like pvp, where you have to switch tactics on the fly and time your abilities well.
Also people can switch roles if people leave the group or if the group needs more dps , healing or defensive walls.
Oh please enough of your crap.
When you play Chess how many distinct moves are there?
Pawn can move 1 forward.
Bishop can move diagonal.
Castle can move in a striaght line.
Knight can move in an L formation.
King can move 1 space in any direction.
Queen can move in any direction.
6 total moves. Is Chess a dumbed down game?
Look back at the first streetfighter games, they only had 4 buttons.
The number of buttons to press has nothing to do with complexity, memory retention or any of the rest of the crap you mention.
How you can use the skills available and how they interact with the environment, other friendly players, enemy mons, enemy players...that is where the complexity comes in.
If you think the number of buttons to mash equates to how good the combat will be then you have a very limited mix of intelligence and experience.
I would have approached it a little less agressively, but this is a good way to look at the combat setup.
SWTOR Referral Bonus!
Referral link
7 day subscriber level access
Returning players get 1 free server transfer
Leveling assistance items given to new player!
See all perks Here
Meh I've posted harmless stuff and got banned for it so why should I bother trying to censor myself, they will ban me either way. The point is, he is constantly talking crap (or lying, or not telling the truth, or hinding the facts....take your pick as to which one you think is PC enough) and he is either doing it to troll people or believes it. If he is a troll then he should get more of a ban then me. if he is not a troll and believes what he writes then he is just dense.
Exactly right, JLP.
Chances are, SOE isn't making EQ:N for anyone who is reading this. The traditional MMORPG player isn't the target audience for EQ:N. SOE is trying to expand its customer base, not move revenue from EQ1/EQ2/Vanguard/FR/Planetside/etc. games into a new game. They want to grab new money from new customers, and making a new game for existing customers doesn't accomplish their business goal.
Logic, my dear, merely enables one to be wrong with great authority.
I can only make a personal comment on this but I totally disagree. The idea's they are taling about are idea's I have been discussing with friends for a very long time. Hell I remember back when Doom first came out and I had arguments with friends over how you could make the idea of an FPS into a multiplayer game of D&D. They were talking about D&D being too complex and I was talking about mapping spells to keys, exploring dongeons and having raps and all sorts of stuff.
I think the traditional MMORPG players are the EXACT target of this game. The problems is, they have been stuck playing the most recent batch of games they have forgotten why MMO's were so exciting to beging with...a WORLD full of other players where you can live out fantastical stories in an ever changing environment.
I personally think it is a 100% match...but it might take a while for people to actually get their heads around what these changes are going to do for the genre.
MOBAs are pure PVP. So if SOE wants to attract those players they're going to have to go for open-world PVP. Which is acceptable if they are focusing on a new audience as you said.
I had to comment on this. I really don't think this means what most people seem to be taking from it, that there will be some kind of PvP in the EQ:NL game. Since the primary aim of Landmark is building, I think the ability to 'destroy another player's creation' is much more likely to involve the DEL key than any kind of combat. If someone wishes to call that PvP, fine. But it is using the 'PvP' label in a possibly misleading way.
Logic, my dear, merely enables one to be wrong with great authority.
You could be right, Bidwood. I've no problem with MMOFPS or MMORTS or MOBAs; they are all about a PvP experience. It's when the PvP is wedged into an MMORPG that I have issues.
And let's not forget we might both be wrong, and SOE is after a market that is completely outside the typical MMO or MOBA player. Maybe they've convinced themselves they can attract the Tetris market with EQ:N.
Logic, my dear, merely enables one to be wrong with great authority.
Bingo. I've been saying since the "reveal" that it looked like MOBA combat. All the spinning (hi garen), flash, etc. Meh. I LOVE MOBAs, and play a lot of LoL, but this is not what I want in my MMORPG.
MOBA's by design are focused towards PVP, however and I say this with a grain of salt. There are cases where players go into some MOBA's for the co op aspect. League of Legends sports a CO OP VS AI mode which I find great. It lets me play the same game without the need of following what the meta is. One of my biggest issues with MOBA"s is that other playercs dictate to you what you should be doing in the order in how you should be doing it when you play. I think this ruins the game to a certain extent. MMORPG's have this issue as well which tends to make me land in a more casual guild.
Your looking less for specific classes and more for people who are good at specific roles.
This was actually a really good interview and cleared up a lot of the confusion from the earlier interviews.
No instances, moving boss npc spawn points, large scale player challanges. More information on consequences.
They need to put this in text form put it on the main page and list it as features.
edit: Actually the last part of this interview on templates and wireframes and moving from eqnext from landmark was the most we have gotten about how the crafting may work to date in this game and honestly it sounds nice.
From what I understood you would build an item in EQLandmark, with its easier more free form style, move the template to eqnext and try and build it in the game by collecting all the resources neccesary for construction....not sure how that will mesh with the "norrath" filter but it sounds good as long as crazy startships and large testicles are not getting moved over to the actual game. (might be too much sandbox there)