EQ Never
- Thread starter Convo
- Start date
My eyes after reading that thread. Bleeding. There's always a few out there. The GCD argument was just silly.
I think EQ2 would've been far more successful if they had upset the few who liked their bloatware system and fixed it to be more streamlined and less tedious.
Mr Creed
Too old for this shit
- 2,381
- 276
I would love if some company found a way to do this. Raid caps really changed my game experience in EQ for the worse, especially with the changing numbers and content tuned around them. With the player tendency to take the zerg approach over taking on a challenge, it is probably a design problem that no developer considers worth tackling.
I hated arguing about starting a raid with "not enough", although some of those raids made for the best fights. Some raid mob spawning late at night and just "taking what you have and giving it a try" made for really fun nights. And on the other side of the coin I hated telling guild members they cant play with the rest of the guild today even more. Today it seems people shifted to scheduling everything in advance to at least avoid turning people away, but back then most of our guild didnt play like that. Sure you had the "always on" crowd but plenty didnt plan their life around gaming and would just show up.
I loved taking a smaller group of people to kill a raid target. We did this on many targets in Velious. Was fun shit!
Pancreas
Vyemm Raider
- 1,125
- 3,818
Climbing around on a giant creature could be one way of handling that kind of combat. I think most large monsters would be able to scrape a player off without much issue though, so it would be a risky move to try solo. However, if you get a group that disables a creature to the point where someone can hop on and finish it off, that could work.
In a traditional raid setting every player has a role. In wow, you only get three generic roles; healer, tank, dps. But with some fights you get fight specific roles or sub roles; if there is a switch that needs to be flipped, adds that need to be taken care of, a weird mechanic that requires someone to stand RIGHT here and not move ect. Whatever it is, only one or a few people can fill that role for that fight. So if you treat performing the killing strike on a large beast as another one of those roles, then not letting everyone do it doesn't seem like such a big deal.
But I think the biggest difference from scripted raiding would be that the players are essentially dictating what kind of a fight it develops into based on the strategies they decide to use. In a scripted fight, the actions of the creature are immutable and dictate how the players need to respond. In a more free form fight, the players initiate the process, and the creature responds to them or continues doing what it was doing, depending on how effective the players' actions were.
Real basic example would be the dragon fights in Skyrim. After you do enough damage the dragon either crashes out of the sky or stays grounded. This changes the fight. I think this can be expanded upon with more refined criteria for changing the fight and a greater variety of responses from the creatures.
We have scripted phases in fights now, so that's not new. I guess I am saying the next step would be to have multiple possible phases for each creature that branched out instead of being linear; and which phases were activated would depend on the actions of the players.
Yeah, I don't tend to hold back when I am thinking of possibilities. That's the nice thing about not actually following through on any of these ideas, they can be as out there as I want them to be. But I think there is some real benefit to just starting a dialogue about possibilities. Otherwise, we get stuck thinking that the only way to do something is the way it has been done, and that leads to stale boring crap.
The style of gameplay that has been well represented in MMO's so far is one that focuses on a sort of flashy, over the top, exaggerated experience. It wants to give the player a roller coaster ride; fast, exciting, and over pretty quick. There is nothing wrong with this style, and done right it can be extremely fun.
There is however, another style of gameplay that is a bit slower paced, and strives to approximate a sense of reality within the game world. It draws the player in by presenting a world that tries to hide all of it's systems behind natural looking mechanisms and presentations. The rules will be different from the real world, but the more real world logic you can apply to the game, the stronger it's illusion.
Now before you say, well that's just the themepark/sandbox debate. It isn't really. Themepark/ sandbox really refers to the amount of freedom a player has to change the world or how to explore it. What I am describing is a difference in how the world is presented to the player, which is Arcade versus Simulation. My Ideal game would be a simulation sandbox style game. I realize that isn't everyone's style, but right now, there hasn't really been a true sandbox simulation andI think it should definitely be given a shot. So maybe some of my ideas sound out there for the arcade themepark mmo's, but I see them working in a different context.
Grabbit Allworth
Ahn'Qiraj Raider
- 1,394
- 5,910
Believe me I'm no stranger to big raids, NToV, KD, Tunare.. all that ridiculous stuff was AWESOME with 50+ people in attendance. And it is super cool to see THE WHOLE DAMN GUILD in one spot working for the same thing. I've also done WoW raiding and it's heroic versions and while cool at the time, I haven't once looked back and thought 'man I wish I could go back to those days..'. With EQ that's pretty much a mental note I make on a daily basis. Wake up, pee, eat breakfast, wish I were back in Norrath circa 1999-2001, go to work depressed.
Randin
Trakanon Raider
- 1,926
- 881
-it's Everquest
-it's a sandbox
-we'll be getting a full reveal in August
-it will have destructible environments
-they've talked a lot about the idea of 'emergent gameplay'
-they've recently hinted at some sort of class changing or multiclass system
-in terms of numbers, classes are going to be more like eq1 than eq2 ( assuming that info is still relevant)
-there's a bunch of concept art and a few screenshots floating around, but again, we don't know if they're relevant to the game in its current form
-story-wise, EQN is supposed to be more of a reimagining of the EQ setting, rather than a sequel or prequel
That's about it.
Can't wait. Love me some EQ. They need to put Brad McQuaid on it to spice up the hype.
That just means to me that they are going to add the diplomacy sphere to the game the same thing thats in Vanguard. Which is a pretty good idea it truely was a well designed idea.
Grabbit Allworth
Ahn'Qiraj Raider
- 1,394
- 5,910
I just installed EQII because I literally have never played it. I have zero aspirations of raiding, with that in mind, what's the best class to experience the largest amount of non raid content with just myself and possibly one other friend?
Royal
Connoisseur of Exotic Pictures
- 15,077
- 10,641
They've decided they would be better served with him spicing up the hype on their 14 year old Everquest title.
Rezz
Mr. Poopybutthole
- 4,486
- 3,531
Raid caps are stupid and I agree with the mentality that regrets that they were ever implemented. Create content that makes it prohibitive to have more than x players if they are undergeared/zergable. Let people bring who they want when they want and let the strategy dictate the fight. If 120 rogues trivialize an encounter, well fuck yeah it is nice having 120 rogues. If it takes a guild 40 people to beat it using non-zerg/class stacking strats, then Ok as well. That's 3-10 loot divided amongst 40 instead of 120+.
Don't penalize people for having friends.
Dandai
<WoW Guild Officer>
- 5,909
- 4,483
There's an EQ2 thread that will probably give you more exposure to people better equipped to answer this question.
http://www.rerolled.org/showthread.php?435-Everquest-2
- 11,080
- 2,272
I hope they add a trading card game diplomacy like one of the versions vanguard had(I know they redid diplomacy a few times), that shit was cool. They could even monetize it and have it being played on mobiles/ipad so you could lvl diplomacy while not on a pc for your char. Kinda like the Hearthstone wow blizzard stuff, but actually well implemented.
Kinda expect disapointment though, while a lot of people on these forums would say there were a ton of good things about Vanguard that you could implement into a new and shiny mmo, I feel a lot of people in the industry might see Vanguard as a total failure and nothing worth copying.
