EQ Never

Those are all fine and workable points. Another thing that is missed in the discussion but is very important is the artistic look and feel of the game. One of the reasons EQ, EQII, and Lotro are more popular with older players and women is because of the more "realistic fantasy" look. Games that are all bright colors and cartoon looks will always be more attractive to the younger set.

Being too realistic isn't the answer, nobody wants to look at a latrine. But it has to be realistic enough to draw a more discerning eye into the fantasy world being presented. Suspension of disbelief and immersion should be high priorities for any game that wants to call itself EQNext.

One of the things you suggested earlier is a more close to the shoulder perspective. That would also help the immersion factor. EQ was a first person game in many ways, and first person is one of the best ways to create a feeling of immersion.

Debating over art is something I can't do. It's too subjective. All I can say is that the only MMO that turned me off due to it's graphics was EQ2 and VG. I thought both looked pretty bad; too shiny and plasticy.

Also: Vanguard's font was downright awful.

The game with the best art/graphics, imo, right now is GW2. But there is no right answer really. I'd be interested in reading a study if there is any differentiation between graphic style (real vs. caroon vs. artistic) preference when it comes to gender. I never really heard anyone claim there was any.

Draegan_sl said:

Debating over art is something I can't do. It's too subjective. All I can say is that the only MMO that turned me off due to it's graphics was EQ2 and VG. I thought both looked pretty bad; too shiny and plasticy.

Also: Vanguard's font was downright awful.

The game with the best art/graphics, imo, right now is GW2. But there is no right answer really. I'd be interested in reading a study if there is any differentiation between graphic style (real vs. caroon vs. artistic) preference when it comes to gender. I never really heard anyone claim there was any.

Click to expand...

This proves you are actually a chick, you know.

Don't be surprised when the site 404s the next time you come back to this thread.

Draegan_sl said:

Depends on what you mean by success (a huge success would be, for me, 2-3 million boxes sold with a 40-60% retention rate in the first 6 months then steady growth over time); most people think Rift is a failure. What I am saying is that if you want to reach critical mass market success you will have to incorporate a lot of what current games have. That means you can't base your game off of forced grouping and open world dungeons that are only full of static spawning mobs.

You will need some modern grouping tools. If your game has instancing, you need a LFD tool. If your game has zero instancing (which I now tend towards) you will need some soft grouping, public grouping, or some sort of no-group-needed like GW2 because beneficial effects hit all friendlys.

You can't have forced grouping as the only method of progression unless your game has the above tools. You can have content the requires multiple people doing different jobs, but it has to be organic for the most part. I have to, as a solo player, be able to wander in and take part and benefit from it most of the time. That's not to say you can't have instances or you can't have hard group content.

You also can't design content around the idea of building a cool looking dungeon and filling it with mobs that spawn and just stand there blocking your way to a mob with more hps and some special abilities that drop loot. You need to create dynamic, changing content. The dungeon design can be static (hopefully it's not a fucking hallway) but you need to put in events like in GW2 or random shit like in Rift. The dungeon needs to breath. You want to farm an event or a series of events all day? Fine with me. It's kind of fun (see: Kessex Hills in GW2).

You need to take the current technology of dynamic texture layering and event spawning systems and place it in your EQ world. It needs to be updated.

That is what I'm saying. WOW's current design is garbage. WOTLK turned it into a dungeon running game where you collect tokens for gear. THen points to upgrade the gear. It's a shitty game in my opinion, especially for $15/mo. But it's easy so it has broad appeal.

As to your social life, that's cool. People have all sorts of backgrounds and play styles. My original point is that you had fewer options in social media/gaming 10-15 years ago that allowed the average user to focus more on a single game. Obviously there are variations and exceptions to this rule. Games just have to try harder these days to try to recreate that. It's either got to be a completely new and ground breaking game, or it's got to be your first.

Click to expand...

when george lucas made "star wars" almost everyone in hollywood thought it was going to be a colossal flop. no movie had been made that was anything like it, no other movie had been so ambitious so obviously it was going to fail, right? i mean, why try anything new when you're 100% sure no one will like it because it's not like everything else that's out at the time? if people like you ran the world, it would still be flat and the earth would still be at the center of the universe and only 5,000 years old. you are a coward. the world is changed by those who go against what is accepted and are constantly daring to be different; whether it's in science, math and technology or even something as simple as a video game.

Draegan_sl said:

Don't be surprised when the site 404s the next time you come back to this thread.

Click to expand...

Hey, it's not like I accused you of being Tuco or anything...

I think SWTOR and GW2 both are very good. WOW never looked that good to me, but the animations went very well with the game. I liked EQ2's graphics much better than it.

When do we get to the point where game graphics look as good as the CGI trailer movies?

Gecko_sl said:

When do we get to the point where game graphics look as good as the CGI trailer movies?

Click to expand...

Closest I've seen in an MMO is FF14.

etchazz_sl said:

when george lucas made "star wars" almost everyone in hollywood thought it was going to be a colossal flop. no movie had been made that was anything like it, no other movie had been so ambitious so obviously it was going to fail, right? i mean, why try anything new when you're 100% sure no one will like it because it's not like everything else that's out at the time? if people like you ran the world, it would still be flat and the earth would still be at the center of the universe and only 5,000 years old. you are a coward. the world is changed by those who go against what is accepted and are constantly daring to be different; whether it's in science, math and technology or even something as simple as a video game.

Click to expand...

I have no idea what you're talking about. What "new" are you referring to? I've always said that trying something new, as long as there is quality production value, is worth the price of a box to me.

So far no one has come up with a new type of game or gaming style. Everyone is rehashing EQ from a decade ago and wants to bring that sort of game style back. My argument is that you can't simply port it into modern day gaming and treat it like a AAA title. You would have to adapt it to some degree.

My question is how would you adapt EQ circa 2000 with modern day gaming technology?

Draegan_sl said:

Debating over art is something I can't do. It's too subjective. All I can say is that the only MMO that turned me off due to it's graphics was EQ2 and VG. I thought both looked pretty bad; too shiny and plasticy.

Also: Vanguard's font was downright awful.

The game with the best art/graphics, imo, right now is GW2. But there is no right answer really. I'd be interested in reading a study if there is any differentiation between graphic style (real vs. caroon vs. artistic) preference when it comes to gender. I never really heard anyone claim there was any.

Click to expand...

It mainly has to do with cartoon (WoW) vs more realistic (EQ1, etc). Girls in general develop socially at an earlier age than boys do. Thus the cartoon style that is so popular in the early teens is something girls tend to grow out of and reject at an earlier age (generally). EQ and EQ2 were more popular with women for other reasons though, not just the art style. And most people grow out of the cartoon look eventually.

WoW's art style is just too juvenile to attract a more mature crowd, although some players can look past it. WoW does have other gameplay features that no other mmo can match.

The shading that EQ2 and Vanguard had, I agree was a mistake. It was popular back then in 3D rendering circles, but hasn't aged well. I also don't like EQ2 character art in general. Vanguard actually had very good character art originally, but when SoE took over they came in and decided to make them more "heroic". But they used low talent artists and proceeded to hack the character look into garbage. The actual world art in EQII and VG is good though, and lends itself to the "realistic fantasy" setting that I feel is important to include in EQNext. GW2 is beautiful, can't say anything bad about it's art style.

The point is that the EQ franchise, Lotro, and some other games with a more "realistic fantasy" look tend to attract the kind of players that lend themselves to more social gameplay. It isn't just the look that is important, other factors like gameplay mechanics, etc are important, but look has a lot to do with it.

The point is that the EQ franchise, Lotro, and some other games with a more "realistic fantasy" look tend to attract the kind of players that lend themselves to more social gameplay.

Click to expand...

This statement just rings all sorts of false to me. Is this supported by anything other than anecdotal evidence? That seems like an awful large assumption. I mean there are tons of people in WOW that are social as fuck. I mean look at Blizzcon. Those people love this shit out of their Warcraft, and in groups.

Graphics and good games go hand in hand though.Mostof the time if you have a game that is worth playing, put out by a good studio with a AAA budget you're going to have some decent graphics. Most of the time when the graphics are shit the game is shit. There are exceptions for indie titles etc., but this typically holds up.

Now don't start naming 2D sprite games and getting your jimmys rustled. There is shitty graphics and then there are low res/low budget graphics that can be very stylized because the artists working within certain design parameters were very good.

Draegan_sl said:

My question is how would you adapt EQ circa 2000 with modern day gaming technology?

Click to expand...

Start with EQ1 classic (up to Velious) as a base point.

Add an auction house and group finder, but never add instances. Get rid of zoning between areas except when accessing other planes (or shards if a mega-server). Add GW2's deleveling feature (but harsher) and keep unique items (jboots, shrink wand) that are useful and found in different areas of all levels all across the world. Give the world more life (orc highway x10000...) with dynamic content. Get rid of overhead quest icons and as many other things as possible to increase the immersion factor. Have the NPC's engage you in the world to start a quest. Make the ui as simple as possible, one small row of abilities (6 to 10 max) and a chat window. A very limited 3rd person perspective and first person that actully works. Do NOT allow addons or access to the basic game mechanics. Keep the mystery.

Throw out 99 percent of the useless quests. Make the few quests that exist very involved and last for many, many levels (think epic weapon quest in EQ1). All quests give very useful items, gear or abilities, and very little xp for completion. The xp is earned crossing the world while killing the mobs in the way of the quest's objectives. Make some of the quest's objectives ONLY doable with a group or a very, very skilled / geared solo player. Make the most important quests open ended, with room to be added on to with expansions. Think of cliff hangers at the end of a story. This is what the "Ever" in EverQuest should mean.

Make leveling not so important by including multiple horzontal progression paths (abilities, stats, unique items, crafting, LDoN's AA levels, faction, etc) that also improve your character. So that somebody who has ignored horizontal progression and raced to max level is gimped and easily outperformed by a lower level toon who has covered all the bases. This slows down leveling and creates a more dynamic leveling experience.

Separate the world into casual and hardcore play. The casual areas have fast travel (once discovered), easy gear, low death penalties, and other modern conveniences. Access to everything needed (but not desired) is possible without leaving the safety of the core zones. Make the outer zones dangerous, hard to get to and lucrative (but not necessary) for those willing to take the risks. The border zones would have corpse recovery and harsh death xp penalties. And in the most dangerous areas, the possibility of losing it all. Make sure the playerbase undertands the concept and consequences of Risk vs Reward.

Add PvP but with multiple soft factions and only in specific border zones. Some of these pvp areas can be easily reached though and have more simplifed objectives, like battlegrounds, but not instanced. The more adventurous PvP areas would have resource control, like EvE. In PvE areas away from cities, anyone can group with anyone else. It is only in cities and pvp areas that faction is important (or when running into certain NPCs in the wild).

Add world building / changing tools that allow cities to be built and maintained in some dangerous zones. Somewhat similar to GW2's WvW where improvements are made to taken objectives. But start from scratch and include crafters, adventurers, etc (VG diplo?) to the required mix. Completed settlements would have housing, fast travel, vendors, new quests, etc. Clearing forests, digging real mines into mountains, building roads and tunnels could all be part of these world changing abilities.

That's pretty much what I've been saying for a few days now. I'm glad we agree. I just hate the idea of AAs though if it's a standard run out levels, here's another bar to fill up type of system.

Grizzlebeard_sl said:

Closest I've seen in an MMO is FF14.

Click to expand...

I always thought that EQ2's graphics were the best out there after EQ ran its course but as Draegen said, it's such a subjective area of discussion. Though honestly it was the graphics that ultimately turned me away from Wow and forced me to choose EQ2. I liked the realism vs comic book/cartoon but to each his own.

I say all that because I stopped myself from saying that really graphics do not or did not matter but they apparently do in my case. Especially when I have choices...

FFXIV are about the best I've seen and they have any moved the bar up a bit. Meaning that in comparison, games may look aged and potentially less appealing to someone wanting to play the "next generation" MMO. Ultimately it comes down to the core components of the game.

Archeage, assuming their engine works, should have the best graphics on the market.

Some aspects of DDO are a good addition to any upcoming game. Make dungeons feel like dungeons and not a badly lit walmart aisle where you scoop loot into your cart. Pit traps, invisible walls, confusing layouts, pressure plates, dangerous ledge jumps etc. Make the world seem more worn and less plastic. More star wars and less star trek if you know what I mean.

Also, make it huge, then double it. With proper development tools it should be fairly cheap/intern-job/easy to add the much requested public dungeons to any game, regardless of what other content you include. Hell you can fire up D2 for random layouts if you cant imagine them yourself. GW2 has very tiny spots that are like that. Why not have whole dungeons behind that crypt entrance. What GW2 lacks is any kind of interesting itemization. Assuming your game has continuing advancement like AAs or simply a skill point based system, just sprinkle the place with a few nice skins, a mini pet and a mount and call it a day. Aside from the art assets used as rewards I bet 90% of stuff like that can use exisiting art and assets anyway. Hell WoW got away with using the same 2(?) mini caves in the whole world.

Draegan_sl said:

That's pretty much what I've been saying for a few days now. I'm glad we agree. I just hate the idea of AAs though if it's a standard run out levels, here's another bar to fill up type of system.

Click to expand...

Your emphasis has been on the easy play mechanics I have included in core casual areas. The real gameplay in my proposal actually takes place in the border zones that have much of the harsh penalties and systems EQ1 had, but that you have thrown away as unworkable.

As for AA, "running out of levels" should be deemphisized in favor of horizontal progression. Somebody who races to max level without stopping to do other things important to character progression, should be seriously gimped and penalized. So much so that a low level toon who has worked on all the horizontal paths at the expense of leveling, should be able to cut the high level toon down at the knees and outperform him in groups / raids. In that sense, AA's are just another form of horizontal progression.

I love horizontal progression designs, as long as they don't come with xp grinds, I'm good with them. I prefer they come with some kind of achievement score or something. I'd much rather bash my head over a dungeon speed trial than killing 10000 npcs.

As for ease of play, you misunderstand me. A game needs to be easy to get into. A game needs to be fun. Do not equate ease of play with challenge. Games need challenging and difficult content. It needs to be easy to get into a group, it needs to be easy to find content, it needs to be easy to play the game. I love Dark Souls, but I would not love playing Dark Souls if I had to run around a low level area for 10 hours to grind skills before going to the next.

The challenge and frustration have to come from not overcoming an encounter based on gameplay or your readyness (level or gear wise). Not artificial cockblocks.

The borderlands idea is a great idea and seriously should be discussed. I've been asking for ideas, and you delivered. Much like EVE it would be a great idea. You would have to develop it such that it's radial where you can add content behind it as the game grows. Perhaps giving players the ability to create or build safe areas via dynamic type of content over a longer period of time.

Where I disagree is in penalties. This borderland content should be the "end game" whatever that is. If we're taking the EQ approach to gear, then a full gear loss is too harsh. I'm a believer in losing time as a penalty rather than anything else.

However, let's discuss death penalty as it relates to combat and character durability. I'm of the opinion that the more durable your character, the more harsh your death penalties can be. If a character can die easily like old WOW where if they snag an add or two it's auto death. Then you can't have a harsh death penalty. However if a character is much more durable where a hard fight leads to a stalemate rather than a death, you can have a harsher penalty. Build combat and character development where death is more rare then you will have something more interesting I think.

Assuming a character is not going up against a super tough bad guy, then a character shouldn't be able to get two shot or run over by a few normal mobs. If you get over run, then you should have ample opportunity to run away (unless you run into like 30 mobs like a dope).

If you want death to mean something, make it more rare on average. Average out player skill across a large player base, how many times does a person die in Rift, WoW or any other game? If you can create a system that reduces player death in half then you're on to something.

A side-affect of a system like this is that combat would most like be more strategic than twitch. I don't know how that combat system would work though, but I'd start somewhere with traditional FF games.