EQ Never

Teekey

Mr. Poopybutthole
3,644
-6,335
That's my point though, Valve are pretty much printing money with DOTA2. Roguelike-likes such as FTL have sold insanely well. It's so clear that there is a market for games that are hardcore, so why is it just the MMO industry that ignores this fact?
Here's the thing - Games like DotA and LoL are still very accessible for asstastic casual gamers. That's exactly the approach they should have with EverQuest Next, easy to learn - hard to master. People make fun of the 'denial of service' comment they made, but it's absolutely true. Why would you want to put a brand new player into a world, nearly completely blind? Why isn't it a better option to make a deep scary cave VERY dark, instead of the noob starting area?

Why is it all or nothing? Why can't the casual noobs kills the Crushbone Orc scouting parties, while the hardcore take down Emperor Crush?
 

Jais

Trakanon Raider
1,895
532
It's going to be a different world, with some throwbacks to old locations and lore. I think they have a good chance at make a pretty immersive world, however. Their whole design is based around going out and exploring, without anyone holding your hand or telling you where to go. I don't see how any old EQ players could diminish that.
The idea of off the rails exploring in a new EQish world with my group of friends does make my dick stir. "So what do we want to do tonight?" "Umm, lets just head north east for awhile and see what we can find."
 

Lithose

Buzzfeed Editor
25,946
113,035
As far as EQ HD. Whenever I go over and talk about different things in EQ that worked, I'm never advocating for a return of "just EQ". I, personally, do think EQ:HD would fail. What I'd like to see is someone sit down, like Blizzard did, and really look at what made EQ work, what made it fun, and interesting (As well as looking at the MUDS it would derived from). But then instead of going in with the philosophy of just increasing access, instead take a different route to emphasize. Revolutionize another underused aspect of EQ that kind of got left in the dust by the "access" revolution. And do that without giving upeverythingfrom WoW's design either (But maybe dialing back a few changes that would interfere with the new design).

Kind of vague, I know. But it feels like there is a lot left unexplored in terms of design mechanics--because everyone assumed increased access was a silver bullet, given how it grew the industry. Like as if the rest of the "formula" for MMO's was perfect and as long as it was easier to get into, more people would play--but that's obviously not the case, the rest of the formula has been neglected. One of the reasons why I'm excited about EQN, even though it's not really what I wanted, is because they seem to be doing that. They went in a different direction than I would have, if I could go back and focus on a little aspect that made WoW/EQ great, but the point is, they focused on an aspect OTHER than that drive to increase access--and I think that's a big step.

I think we've run the access well dry. Decreasing time and social interaction has hit a kind of inverse curve now--where the more WoW tries to reduce them, the worse it makes the game. That doesn't mean we reset back to EQ, but maybe it means we dial it back a little and look at what other levers can be pulled.
 

Teekey

Mr. Poopybutthole
3,644
-6,335
As far as EQ HD. Whenever I go over and talk about different things in EQ that worked, I'm never advocating for a return of "just EQ". I, personally, do think EQ:HD would fail. What I'd like to see is someone sit down, like Blizzard did, and really look at what made EQ work, what made it fun, and interesting (As well as looking at the MUDS it would derived from).
Like I've been saying, I don't think there's much chance of an EverQuest HD ever being made. Hell, I don't think even if EverQuest HD came out, that it would have the same magic the Original did.

The best we can hope for is a game that is within the spirit of what the original EverQuest was for usat the time: something new, something immersive, something social, something challenging, and something fun. I think there's hope that EverQuest Next can be those things, but there's still a lot of question marks over many of their systems, and how well they can be implemented. I don't think the solution is to just shoehorn original EverQuest mechanics into a game that wasn't designed around them.
 

Siliconemelons

Avatar of War Slayer
10,862
15,310
after reinstalling eq2, I am more excited.. Nektulos is so well done in that game, ferrot and ct are perfect.... I do think they dun goofed by not showing some action in a known classic zone.
 

Lithose

Buzzfeed Editor
25,946
113,035
Like I've been saying, I don't think there's much chance of an EverQuest HD ever being made. Hell, I don't think even if EverQuest HD came out, that it would have the same magic the Original did.

The best we can hope for is a game that is within the spirit of what the original EverQuest was: something new, something immersive, something social, something challenging, and something fun. I think there's hope that EverQuest Next can be those things, but there's still a lot of question marks over make of their systems.
Yeah, there are certain mechanics, that I think, really need to be explored. Like how EQ's levels and AA's formed a kind of soft cap in terms of personal gain. For 90% of the player base, content wasn't done for the items, but to get that next level. Getting an item was like landing the big fish. Maybe a company could go back and look at that separation, and what made loot so exciting, and develop that mechanic more. There are just tons of little things that made EQ good--but they were in a dated game. Don't resurrect the dinosaur but go back and see what got left behind, and explore those mechanics in the same way WoW did with increased access (Which lead to a lot of neat innovations).

Problem is, the only viable way to explore them is to make sure the engineering is on the same level as WoW's--easier said than done.
 

Dumar_sl

shitlord
3,712
4
Yes, and that's what most people miss or ignore. WoW's success is due to engineering expertise, not game design talent.
 

supertouch_sl

shitlord
1,858
3
Things like poor night vision improve the atmosphere of a game. People want to remove every little "annoyance" and make the blandest experiences possible. My god, when soccer mom Sally and baby Billy played EQ they didn't quit because of that bullshit and now we're worried about the opinions of people who shouldn't even be playing games?
 

Lithose

Buzzfeed Editor
25,946
113,035
Negative reinforcement is generally the least effective manner to encourage learning. In essence, you're telling someone that they've done something wrong without giving them direct path to ameliorate their behavior.
I don't think that's totally what Erron was saying. More like there has to be draughts and infrequency in rewards to create operant conditioning. When WoW streamlined everything, they kind of turned "jack pot treasure" into a pay check. They turned "DING!" into clocking in for your shift. The reason these things used to feel exhilarating was because their nature was inconsistent.

But it's a VERY fine line to walk, as Erron said. Too inconsistent and people are just going to go "why the fuck am I playing this game."--I hink WoW's too far over the line now, but that doesn't mean going back to zero, either.
 

Mr Creed

Too old for this shit
2,380
276
there is no way that all items will be "free". I just started playing EQ2 for shiggles while i have nothing else to play right now, and a chest dropped and in it was a legendary ring... which i can't wear because i need to upgrade my subscription, you really think this train of thought will not be around for EQN? Especially when it seems that abilities will be based on your weapons.
I'm entirely sure that wont be a thing in EQN. It's a common way to monetize old subscription games that are "over the hill" so to speak. See EQ1, EQ2, TOR (well some get there faster then others). EQN is probably closer to the convenience cash shops like EQN or PS2 that mostly save you time. And you can bet it'll come with an optional sub that acts as a permanent "xp boost" (not sure what it'll actually boost since there's no xp?).
 

Teekey

Mr. Poopybutthole
3,644
-6,335
Things like poor night vision improve the atmosphere of a game. People want to remove every little "annoyance" and make the blandest experiences possible. My god, when soccer mom Sally and baby Billy played EQ they didn't quit because of that bullshit and now we're worried about the opinions of people who shouldn't even be playing games?
Exploring a pitch black cave with a torch to just to be able to see adds atmosphere. Having to turn the gamma on your monitor to max as soon as you log into the game with little explanation, is just bad game design.
 

Great Ogre Dictator

Golden Knight of the Realm
191
245
It is a little petty to hold what this game could be up to my ideals, to be sure, but the lack of a playable ogre in any of the previews really peeves me.

Until I see a playable ogre, EQN shall remain dict.-less.
 

Binkles_sl

shitlord
515
3
I don't think that's totally what Erron was saying.
Which is why I didn't quote Erron
smile.png
Negative reinforcement is crap for encouraging learning. A glut of reward losses it's appetitive value. If you want an ideal reinforcement schedule, go with something like a variable-ratio schedule.
 

Teekey

Mr. Poopybutthole
3,644
-6,335
I don't think that's totally what Erron was saying. More like there has to be draughts and infrequency in rewards to create operant conditioning. When WoW streamlined everything, they kind of turned "jack pot treasure" into a pay check. They turned "DING!" into clocking in for your shift. The reason these things used to feel exhilarating was because their nature was inconsistent.

But it's a VERY fine line to walk, as Erron said. Too inconsistent and people are just going to go "why the fuck am I playing this game."--I hink WoW's too far over the line now, but that doesn't mean going back to zero, either.
Basically: Negative consequences are required to make risk meaningful.

However, it can be overdone when people would just rather not play your game than feel like they're being punished.
 

supertouch_sl

shitlord
1,858
3
Exploring a pitch black cave with a torch to just to be able to see adds atmosphere. Having to turn the gamma on your monitor to max as soon as you log into the game with little explanation, is just bad game design.
So not getting a pop-up window telling you that humans have poor night vision is bad design? Gotcha.
 

Lithose

Buzzfeed Editor
25,946
113,035
Which is why I didn't quote Erron
smile.png
Negative reinforcement is crap for encouraging learning. A glut of reward losses it's appetitive value. If you want an ideal reinforcement schedule, go with something like a variable-ratio schedule.
Doh, haha, my bad. I saw Erron's post with that in it and thought you were replying to him.
 

tad10

Elisha Dushku
5,518
583
Full Avatar huh? SoEmote huh?

Well, best of luck. I'm out.

Dat younger demographic.
You don't have to use it - but I'm pretty sure that's the goal otherwise why the emphasis at the reveal. I sure as hell am not using soemote.