Howdy, Stranger!
It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!
Quick Links
EverQuest = Old school ?
delete5230
Member EpicPosts: 7,081
OK,
My brain is wired to associate EverQuest to Old school.
Just like I assumed FF14 would. Now before getting into the FF14 Open Bata everything pointed to have nothing to do with an mmo that would release with enough continent to list for years,even right out of the gate. Nothing made me think that the game would be a non instanced world, that would be full of harsh danger and I better team up with a good guild and have friends. However, Just by associating the game to Square Enix, I put all my feelings aside and trusted the developers and got disappointed after just 20 days !
What I see here with Everquest Next, My wiring is doing the same. I MUST open my mind and think realistically "what do we have here ?"
- A possible Theme park ( like ff14 )
- Heavy instanced game ( like FF14 )
- A destructible world ( this makes me say, are they for real ? ). Is this the new that everyone was longing for ?
- A good possibility that you would not need a social structure. This is only based on what we had been given by developers in the last few years.
- A short game. But will give you a nice patch six months from now 
NOW, I ask you......Do you really Like the game with all it's features, or are you putting all your hope in SOE, expecting a quality mmo that you can finally call home for a few years ?
Maybe Old school is not a good word. Maybe quality would be better......No......I'll keep it Old School.
Comments
It's not going to be "Old School" by any stretch. That horse left the SOE stable many, many years ago. Even the original EQ has suffered under the hands of new management and modernization.
Unfortunately, the game is a couple of years away from a release. At this point it is just ideas and theorycrafting. Wait and See seems to be the better course of action.
http://www.mmorpg.com/blogs/PerfArt
good advice
EQN won't be any closer to EQ1 than the other 2 games were --- EQ2 and the console EQOA
EQ2 fan sites
I also would not. OP is completely in left field on this topic.
Different as in not a short game, themepark, and easy, and instanced ?
OP, Themepark, this game is not. This is all about sandbox. Procedurally generated content, random rewards, mostly player made "everything". This game will be as good as the imagination of the people that join it... which just means, there will be an initial rush... they will see a huge empty "beach" with lots of sand... most of the population will move away, while the devs try desperately to change things to attract more people, as the ones that remain, make the niche game much more to their liking, and make a permanent home... then the second wave of gamers will join, because they will hear how great the game is now that it has tons of player made content, and awesome looking landscapes and cityes, some of which will be phallic themed... yada yada...
TL;DR - Its a sandbox, not a themepark.
Hmmm interesting as I have seen next to no sandbox features in regards to EQN but rather EQL. Sorry but world destruction alone isn't enough to be a sandbox on its own.
Until proven otherwise,
EQN - possible themepark
EQL- Sandbox
I have a strong suspicion that "the largest sandbox the world has ever seen" is the combination of both EQN and EQL plus clever marketing. This may all play out to not be what everyone expected as "sandbox features".
Your problem with FFXIV is ONLY because how EVERYONE is playing games,you still have the option in FFXIV to see massive danger and yes need your friends,most games do NOT deliver that,they are 99% linear questing games.
As for Next,nobody knows the game is not out ,however if you look at SOE's track record,they are as generic as they come,where do you think everyone got the current ideas from?Wow was built from an EQ template and everything after was EQ2 and Wow copies.
The real question is what does somebody call old school,Dungeons and Dragons?Even DnD's have changed their entire design several times over the years.I am going to assume old school means grouping/camping ?When i played FFXI that is old school,no hand holding at all,not even 1% no yellow markers,grouping and lots of tough fights everywhere,no need for finding a dungeon to find a tough fight.Also quests did not give you xp either,so that is what i call old school BEFORE all this hand holding and linear game play came along.
Never forget 3 mile Island and never trust a government official or company spokesman.
To everyone thinking EQN is themepark....read.
It's sandbox in every aspect. The class system is so far sandbox it's not funny. The crafting, the gathering. Yes EQNL is very sandboxy, just because of it's nature, it is a creation oriented game where EQN is the adventure and action oriented game. Never-the-less, they are both VERY sandboxy. People just keep saying themepark because EQNL is sandbox so the idiocy of people associate EQN as themepark because for some reason SOE can't make two sandbox games, in their mind.
If I want a world in which people can purchase success and power with cash, I'll play Real Life. Keep Virtual Worlds Virtual!
^This
As much as I wanted another EQ, this game is not it. Doesnt mean it wont be a great game though...
Really? You know that? I think it has less to do with the "idiocy of people" and much more to do with limited information on EQN and how it's all going to work exactly. If you have actual information showing otherwise (that isn't marketing hype) please do provide it.
To the OP..EQN is going to be the opposite of "old school". They have said as much with their comments on the trinity. They don't want players to worry about anything just run around and do whatever they want without restriction (except maybe cash shop purchases). No tanks or healers or strategy..just a big chaotic zergfest! Weeeeee!
In fact, I don't think you could classify any F2P game as "old school". Whatever you had to grind/work towards/endure in an old school game can now be bought from the cash shop. Not too old school if you ask me.
I presume different in the sense that it won't be a WoW quest hub themepark mmo. We already know about the voxel tech, there will be player housing, lack of charater levels, multiclassing and produraly generated content. It seems to me EQNL will be more Minecraftish while EQN will be more like SWG. As for being easy who knows, we'll have to play it to find out.
Might want to provide that actual information yourself. Guess I missed the "we are making EQN as easymode as possible" video.
It doesn't take much to extrapolate that information. Name one old school game that allowed you to be all classes at once or didn't use the holy trinity or allowed for things to be purchased through a cash shop. I didn't say "easymode as possible". GW2 isn't necessarily easy but it certainly is a chaotic zergfest clusterfuck because it lacks the structure and strategy that comes with the trinity.
I did not find the old-school MMOS all that hard either, so that part of EQN does not really bother me that much. If people know what they are doing, they will figure out the fastest way to get something .... remember the first level 50 players in EQ came within 5 months of release (Rogue first Cleric second I believe). I would guess that EQN will end up somewhere around what EQ2 is, but since there is no official word on very much, we will just have to wait and see.
Very true, it is easy to take little info and use it to fit any point of view, all of which are personal and rarely based on actual facts.
I extrapolated that your "Weeeee!" means easymode as I'm reading that "old school" = hard and "new school" = not hard.
GW2 is a zergfest because it was designed that way. They made every class a solo machine. GW2 is a dps/support game. They didn't promise it to be a healers dream come true. If you like to DPS like a mad man, it is quite fun. I don't find it very challenging and don't play it anymore. Same is true of DAoC, EQ, WoW, etc.
Old school and most newer games are all very limiting in what a player can do with a character, after a time, it is just a grind. I want to play one character for 10 years without feeling like I am missing out on something. Juggling a mass of alts is not my idea of fun.
The trinity is great for games designed with it in mind. Personally, using a little assuming, I see no reason that EQN won't have a trinity of sorts. Tanks, healers, dps, cc will all be there. There is no reason a person that likes tanking can't play one. There is no reason a group of diverse play styles can't group up and adventure together. Maybe you can't spam taunt or stand in the back spamming heals the entire time, but I find that very boring. Having to actually engage in the fight seems much more enjoyable.
They have said that you can "attempt" to take on challenges with any class/build/team makeup, but if you fail, you'll have to adjust. To me this reads as strategy, communication, and actual thought needed. Not rush in and spam keys with all the other zerglings.
I'm assuming EQN will require a multitude of different styles to overcome challenges. One battle may require 4 DPS 1 Healer, another 3 CC and 2 Tanks, next needs 4 Healers 1 DPS, etc. Allowing players to figure out what is required and then actually be able to attempt it without having to track down XYZ class/build because your buddies don't play them is a huge boon to me.
Again, we've seen very little and it is easy to assume one thing or another, but I have a feeling EQN will bring enough challenge for everyone. If people go in expecting the same old ideas that have been going on for 20 years, they will probably not enjoy themselves. If they approach EQN as a new take on mmos, maybe they will have a blast. Time will tell.
I've been doing this for over 17 years and am more than ready for something different. Old school belongs in our hearts and memories, not in today's gaming market.
EQOA was amazing, and i still consider it far better than Eq Pc, we can only hope EQN is developed with EQOA in mind.
EQN won't have a trinity. They have already said that a "tank" won't be required even though they will apparently have classes that are tanks. That makes little sense and sounds like marketing mumbo jumbo to me but that's what they said. I'm assuming this is to keep the pro-trinity crowd (you know..the loyal EQ and EQ2 people) from flipping out.
So with that said we can do a couple thought experiments. First, if they have "tanks" but they are not required then why would you need a tank? If a group can operate without your role you are not a needed role and every old school MMO *needed* tanks.
Secondly, let's define what a tank is. A tank in every sense of the word means a role that absorbs the brunt of the dmg in a fight. That's why they call the role "tank". If there will be no taunt mechanic (which they have also stated) there is no way to force mobs to attack you so there is no way to absorb the brunt of damage in a tank role.
Now you might say something like they will come up with some creative alternative to traditional tanking like a buff that reduces dmg or something like that but that is not a tank. That's not a role. That's not the trinity. You don't get to change what it means to be a tank and still call it by the same name. I'm sorry but substituting a buff or some other gimmick for a traditional MMO role isn't the same thing.
Lastly, I'll concede that the game might still be good despite these concerns. Maybe they will really come up with a trinity alternative that works but let's not kid ourselves that we can have traditional roles without actually having them (which is the marketing doublespeak they are spewing and some are believing). That just doesn't pass the smell test.
If a particular event doesn't require X class, then they aren't required. Multi-classing allows players to play something else in that case. If you limit yourself to one class or play style, that kind of defeats the point of EQN to me.
At no point have they said DPS is all that is needed or that a tank is never needed, I believe they have actually said that zerging won't be a smart idea. Dave gave an example where you could attempt a fight with whatever class/build you like, but you aren't given the win for showing up. You might die horribly and have to switch skills or even classes to be successful.
I don't believe every class will be right for every encounter. You might have a 10% chance of winning with 5 warriors, but a 90% chance of winning with 1 warrior, cleric, rogue, mage, necro etc. The challenge is to figure out what is needed or what gets the job done more effectively. But if your group of friends all have their preferred class, why should you be unable to complete a certain challenge if none of you picked the 1 class required?
While most mmos focus on tank and spank, there are many encounters in WoW and other games that require very specific classes, builds, gear. I see this be the norm instead of the exception in EQN. With variety of challenges requiring a large tool-set, they are strongly encouraging players to explore and learn multiple classes as they adventure. But if you only want to play a Bard for the rest of your days, then that is an option, just a very limited one.
I've been gaming for a very long time and spent a great deal of it in PVP. Maybe this is why the concept of the trinity always seemed dumb to me.
Big guy in front spamming taunt, healers off a ways spamming heals, further back you got casters spamming dps with some melee dps going in and out as needed. Fairly static and boring to me.
Now look at PVP, there are tanks, healers, dps, cc etc and everyone is able to play their role as intended.
No a tank can't taunt a player, but they sure can knock them down, snare, disarm, absorb/share damage intended for another, or simply stand in the way. They are protecting their team and preventing the enemy from getting through, they are a Tank. Taunt is a dumb skill in my eyes. DAoC had some of the best PVP I've ever experienced and tanks were vital to every fight. They were upfront and chasing down the squishy players that didn't get away soon enough or didn't have a tank to protect them.
I see this idea crossing over into PVE with the enhanced AI and action combat in EQN. As shown in the demo, a warrior can shield bash a mob away from friendlies. If they wiff, that mob is going straight for the less armored (most likely higher damaging) classes right behind the warrior and will pay the price for that wiff.
EQN is not promising traditional roles and I can't wait for a fresh take on the tired genre. If you can't see any alternative beyond tank = taunt, then EQN is probably not going to be fun. But if you are able to see the limitless options with multi-classing and dynamic combat, it should be entertaining for a long time.
Just a few examples:
2 Caster, 1 Healer, 2 Melee DPS try to take on an Orc Warlord. Unfortunately, every few seconds his attack hits like a truck and will drop anyone that gets hit, oh and it's AOE. 1 melee switches to a tank that can disarm and knock down the Orc right before the big swing.
5 Warriors approach a Necro in a graveyard. It casts a dot that drains 10% life every 10 seconds, without a healer or someone to cure it, they are going down. Easily fixed with one switching to healer.
5 Rogues come across a Water Elemental that is immune to melee damage, they are screwed. Everyone switches to caster.
3 Casters 2 Healers try to take on a Giant that is resistant to magic. Casters switch to Rangers and have target practice.
Traditionally, either these types of things wouldn't be possible as they aren't "fair" to everyone or would require waiting around for XYZ player to pass by to assist. Multi-classing removes this barrier and makes it up to players to figure out and overcome what is in front of them.
With all that, I still hope that multi-classing requires a lot of effort and time investment. Learning new classes shouldn't be painful, but it shouldn't be as easy as talking to a random Wizard in the woods and instantly becoming a Wizard with every skill unlocked. There should be class development and gearing up, just on a much grander scale. Everyone should have the option to learn everything, but they need to put in the work. Especially don't want cash shop class purchasing. So when a player comes across a mob that is known to drop an item they want, but they don't have the class/skills required, they have incentive to go out and learn them.
Sorry but "chasing down squishy targets" doesn't sound like tanking to me. Sounds more like a job for DPS. I get the multi-classing argument but there is no reason you can't have multi-classing while maintaining a trinity foundation. Nobody said tank *only* equals a warrior with a taunt but if a tank can't do that basic function they are more utility than tank.
Tanking doesn't have to be one dimensional. EQ had many forms of it and that could be expanded on and extended to a multitude of EQN classes. I still maintain that all forms of tank need a way to keep the targets attention and absorb damage.
Some ideas on extending the trinity to a multi-class system could be a mage tank that uses roots to immobilze and a magic shield to absorb damage. A traditional warrior tank that just absorbs dmg but only excels at single targets. An AE tank that excels at lots of mobs and holds aggro with stuns. A healer tank that can use heals/shields to absorb dmg but can't heal others during that time. I could go on but you get the idea. Doing something like that would maintain the trinity but expand it out and give flexibility as well as choices for how to tackle given scenarios.
I totally forgot that this game is F2P cash shop......If I remembered that I wouldn't have put any effort in to a topic here.
Sorry I'll delete this game from my favorites list.
SOE really went down hill !
thats a big one to overlook
EQ2 fan sites
The chasing down example was more for PVP as all players are on offense, regardless of their role which can include "tanking" or protection the team, healing, dps, etc.
I think you are right on the money with your examples of how many (all) classes could "tank" to some degree depending on the situation. Traditionally, warriors and a few other classes are the tanks, but depending on build or encounter specifics, any class could fall into the role of keeping a target occupied by being the main target and mob's focus and or by protecting the team by keeping the mob from reaching them. To me, a meat shield absorbing hit after hit isn't a huge difference from a rogue running around a mob keeping it confused as it is killed. One does it with high armor and hps and the other with dodge and other tools.
The options with 40+ classes is fairly large and I think the only limitation is on dev and player imagination. I think the trinity will still be around in some form or another. As long as the tools are available, players will play what they are attracted too. If no one wants to heal or tank and just want to DPS, that is a possibility, but I find that players fall into their roles regardless of what they are playing and take advantage of what is available to them.
Even in GW2 with all the classes being self contained and no real trinity, players try to make "healers" and "tanks" from classes that aren't exactly designed that way.
Wish we had more info to actually have a better idea of what will be in EQN, but so far it looks to at least be a change of pace from what has been copy and pasted over and over for so many years.