Search results

As do I, but I'm thinking it's where they are heading. Your character isn't going to be tied to a server; you can choose a different server every time that you log in. The server list is going to look like the list of WCIII games on B.net (EQ DOTA!!1 JOIN NOW!!!111231). Rather than be its own...

Game. Set. Match.

Triple kick actually. That whole line about "so you can help us out" is probably a reference to player created content in the worst kind of way. I didn't think they would, but that makes it sound like they'll release something similar to Dungeon Maker and then just tell the players to make all...

This never made sense to me, and it was absolutely horrible being a warrior. Especially in my noob years when I was trying to run across the Karanas all the time. I had no SoW, no invisibility, no benefits to traveling, AND I couldn't bind myself unless it was in a city. If anything, casters...

Don't know if there are any lore geeks here, but one prediction I've been seeing lately is that the EQN world is going to spawn as a result of a fight with Kerafyrm in EQ2. I guess he is going to be the last fight in the Ages End story arc that has been going on for the last two years. Not...

Wow, surprised he wrote that after signing the NDA. I think he gives away more than he thinks. Of course people were suspecting this stuff, but he basically confirmed it: Crafting is a*HUGE*part of the gamePlayer Studio and SoEmote are in, but Dungeon Maker is outIn-game art isnotthe same as...

They'll release it with a slightly updated version of Dungeon Maker and a re-skinned Player Studio. Then Smedley will say, "See, players make ALL the content. Biggest sandbox EVER!" No, there will be a decently long beta. They'll release a few beta keys and then charge $40 for people to get in...

I'm not thrilled about it. I'm even more concerned about the connection to Free Realms. Of the six main players on the EQN team, four of them came straight from Free Realms. I can see it now: the hype from Vanguard meets the gameplay of Free Realms.

So competitors won't have a chance to copy? Or before people realize it's all hype? And speaking of hype, I just realized the two guys in charge of game design for EQN had the pleasure of being partially responsible for Vanguard. Awesome.

I'd say just take the quest completely out and give the goblins in the area an X% chance to drop whatever reward the quest was going to give. Or if it's a really good reward, then an X% chance that a goblin chief/king/leader will spawn with its own loot table instead of one of the goblin...

Of course it's not as sophisticated, but it doesn't have to be. A year ago it could read movements 10 feet away from the camera, and they were continuing to improve it. As was pointed out earlier, I'm sure they were using these things in EQ2 as a beta for EQN. It doesn't actually need to be a...

Yeah, that's what I'm afraid of. I've never played or followed EQ2, so I just learned about the dungeon creator tonight. This is going to be a mashup of The Sims, Second Life, Kinectimals, and the Aurora toolset from Neverwinter Nights. I'm suddenly not excited about EQN. Edit Leaked video...

The cameras don't need Kinect technology. Look at how SoEmote works right now; you can use it with a regular webcam.

Speaking of ways they could ruin this game... Wtf doesthatmean? Please don't tell me motion capture will be a substantive part of the game.

I hope you're wrong about this. The only thing worse than having instances in the game would be having player-made instances in the game. Barf.

I see what you did there

I realize developers are usually blowing smoke with this kind of talk, but when people start throwing around "open-mind" it makes me worry. I can't help but recall the "EQ invades Farmville" rumor.

The relationship SoE has with Storybricks makes me excited to see the faction system in EQN. I think it's safe to assume, based on the timing of it all, that after SoE hit the reset button on EQN they decided to build the game from the ground up using Storybrick's AI. From the limited...

I still put power leveling on the list of XP gimmicks; it's pretty far down on the list, but it's still on there. At the top of the list is paying for XP potions, then XP potions acquired in game, then equipment that adds +XP, then quick quests that give lots of XP, then probably power leveling...

I'd be fine with quests not giving any XP or with the bonus XP when your quest log is empty. Both have similar effects, but the latter would keep the people who love questing happy. I'd have to know more about the game to guess how much content they will launch with. If PvP is a big part of...

I think I agree, but what's the difference? I assume "get X number of Y objects and bring them back" would be considered a task. What's a good example of a quest?

It might be dumb to argue over the semantics, but the substantive debate is worth having. An MMO that uses WoW instances is going to be a different experience than an MMO that only spawns a copy of a dungeon once there are 5-10 groups inside of it. Then there is the related discussion of...

I know next to nothing about Eve (assuming that's where "shard" comes from). Is this where a copy of a zone is created when the first zone becomes too crowded? Isn't this similar to what ESO is doing?

Smedley might be the President of SOE, but he is less credible than the guy in the mailroom. Besides, I don't think he was announcing anything, and neither does Georgeson: We can go back and forth all day with ambiguous tweets. My prediction is that open PvP--defined as any player being...

The second part of the response wasn't "it'll be fine," it was "we avoid bad design decisions." On their face they have similar meanings, but in context of the question the implication is obviously that he considers non-consent PvP a bad design decision. It still leaves plenty of options on the...

I hope you're right about the PvP. I know there was something from Smedley about PvP being in the design from the ground-up, but that was before they reset the game. The most recent credible thing I have seen is an indication that the PvP won't be open.

Open PvP fixes every single one of these issues. Also, servers are capable of holding a lot more people today then in EQs time, but that doesn't mean they have to. For example, instead of making enough content for a server with 10,000 people, have 10 servers with enough content for 1000 people...

You don't necessarily have to train to fight for a camp in PvE, but it was difficult otherwise. This is another reason why there should just be open PvP. It adds a lot to the immersion and it keeps GMs or developers from having to intervene because somebody broke a "play nice" policy. The less...

True, but it's more fun if you do.

Like I said, don't throw all of the good loot in 2-3 dungeons. Besides, if this game is really going to be the biggest sandbox ever, then it should have open PvP. If you want a camp someone else has, then fight them for it.

Yeah, I can't get on board with level-wide loot tables for this reason. It destroys immersion, dungeons are less unique, and having that piece of loot doesn't mean the same thing--namely, that you killed a specific mob. I'm not saying throw all of the good loot in 2-3 dungeons for each group of...

And it was a bad idea for EQ too.

This isn't "dated" content. These are conscious design decisions that are still usable today. I'm not saying EQ got all of these things right, but I would argue it was much closer than WoW. I have my own list of complaints for "modern" MMOs: Content that everyone has access to regardless of...

I would be perfectly happy if they just throw up a PvP server with little or no thought into how the balancing would work out, a la EQ. MMOs that try to capitalize on PvP always seem to do more harm than good. The rock-paper-scissor system of WoW is an absolute joke. WAR focused so much on the...

I completely agree. As I posted earlier, I think instances are a poor design decision even in the PvE context. What I am saying is that there will be instancing because more people enjoy PvE than PvP. If they do throw up a couple of PvP servers, they aren't going to take the instancing out just...

I can understand using instances in the PvE context. I still think it's a poor design choice, but I can at least understand it. I'm hoping that "the largest sandbox ever made" means PvP (as it should), but I realize the chances of that are none to none.

I think this is the way most MMO developers today assess the "problem," and that's why they end up using instances. I played on PvP servers in EQ, so this wasn't a problem in my mind. Part of the fun was fighting for the content that you want. If you lose the fight, then there are consequences...

Absolutely loved this in EQ; it added to the continuity of the world. It was especially great because I played on PvP servers. Nothing was more fun than two guilds trying to take down the same raid mob. Instances are a deal breaker for me with EQN.

This is a great example of how some of the more painful elements of EQ actually made it a great game. At least it made it really fun to be an enchanter that everyone wanted in their group.

I wouldn't want to see downtime in Next that is the same as EQ, but I wouldn't mind heading back in that direction. As has been pointed out, a lot of that downtime was just because of spawn timers rather than waiting for mana and health. I much prefer sitting at a spawn point and waiting for a...