EQ Never

Salshun_sl

shitlord
1,003
0
Everquest to World of Warcraft: The death of the online RPG community.

It's been a long time since I wrote an essay, but I really want to rock this shit now. All of the EQ memories are flooding back because of this, and while I don't think they would care, as much as I'd like to hope, the new kids in WoW need to know what was, and would could be again.

I don't believe for one second the community changed. The rules, mechanics, and structure of the games changed, and that's what created this, but the mentality is still there. I believe 100% the desire to know pain and failure is worth knowing the success.

Fuck I suddenly hate WoW, and I play weekly.
 

Convo

Ahn'Qiraj Raider
8,765
617
I don't have a ton of VG experience but one thing that's always stressed about VG is the community. I played a bit during FTP and I did notice it some. So I disagree it can't be replicated. I think in part it's just the design of the game and possibly the type of player that is attracted to that design.. It seems like this thread is split on who would play an updated EQ/VG. those who would more likely would participate socially in the mmo as we are all for features that require cooperation from other players.
 

Pancreas

Vyemm Raider
1,131
3,819
The community in EQ came about largely through necessity. You needed to talk to other players in order to progress for the most part. Soloing was not completely viable in many spots without being a specific class or out gearing the area.

The reason people spoke to one another is because that was the primary medium through which player to player interaction occurred. Now you have buttons that achieve all of the same results as those hand written requests. No need to type anything out. Such convenience reduces the chances of people having even cursory interactions with one another.

Also a big factor for the EQ community was the fact that new players came into a world where people were simply talking to each other, a lot. This set the stage for what was considered normal, and each new player pretty much followed suit. Whatever your first wave of players ends up doing in terms of organization and social structure is going to be replicated by subsequent players to a large extent, until drastic changes to the game are made.

Guilds foster communication between members, but tend to isolate and segregate those members from the rest of the population. If the game were to automatically group people into guild like structures based on certain aspects such as class, race, faction ect. That could help foster a sense of community between members of those groups.

So everyone who joined a particular warrior guild would be able to see a roster of the other members, see who was online, access a board posting trades or requests, have a chat channel and have special content designed for the group members to participate in on behalf of the group. Like a tournament between rival class guilds. Players can still have their own personal groups, but the game should be providing lots of opportunity and incentive for players to interact with each other.

Players should also be able to alter their position within a community, to make it their own. A new player comes into town and is actually denied entry of access to many of the areas. It is only through winning favor and increasing reputation that they can start opening up the NPC's a bit. The key to getting in with these groups should really be other players. A person can solo their way into any group, but with help from an already established player, things go much much easier.

That's enough for now.
 

Aaron

Goonsquad Officer
<Bronze Donator>
8,660
20,180
Nothing like that happens anymore because MMO's and the internet in general got popular. Have you ever been to a crowded mall or a walmart on the weekend? A fair amount of the population and I mean any population are not very bright people. Nature used to help with this problem with natural selection by killing off the very dumb people when they did stupid things out in the world but the double edged sword to technology means more and more of these retards can do even more stupid things and survive. Not only that they can do stupid things with no chance of death in the safety of their own home in a virtual world.

Back when EQ started unless you were tech savvy the average person didnt have internet and if they did it was not to play games or the games they did play were lans or shit like Case's ladder with C&C, etc. Now any dumb fuck can go out and get that shitty roadrunner yahoo DSL or the basic cable for like 20 bucks in most areas. Hell it was unheard of back then to actually pay money every month for a game so the ones that did were just a better class of people. Not to say there were not jackasses and dumb people playing but they were a minority where now you have to wade through 5 miles of really shitty DNA to find one person who remember to breath and "get out of the fire" without someone yelling at them.

For me thats why you will never be able to replicate that social element from EQ's hay day in any meaningful way.
The only thing that I would add to that excellent comment of yours Bocephus, is that most of the people who did play EQ back in the day are what? 10-15 years older now? No longer carefree teenagers or early 20'ers who can spend all night sock-pooping spawns and what not, but grown adults with full time work and other commitments. And let's not forget that back in the EQ day if there were a few things that bugged you about the game, where else where you going to go? UO? Now if there is something you don't like about a game you /ragequit and download the client to one of the countless other MMOs out there.

Now I never played EQ, but I did play both Eve and WoW at launch when both those games were much tougher then they are now and much less "user-friendly" (or dumbed down as others might call it). Man, the times I had back then and the friends I made, in fact most of my online buddies back then are my RL friends now. But as you say, those times are gone and they'll never come back - at least not for us. Maybe when our children or grandchildren are in their late teens and someone invents the holodeck or whatever then they will have such memories from the first brand new types of games made up for those things, but we'll be too busy doing our 9-5, caring for them and bitching about the good old times to take part.
 

Tolan

Member of the Year 2016
<Banned>
7,249
2,038
You can't make a game where people are forced to care about being their avatar... You're living in dream time until you can start making holodecks or some sort of Otherland type of shit.
That's really defeatist, and I disagree with it. EQ, as primitive in features and tech as it was, was more of an escape from reality than anything else I've experienced. While playing, I could focus on something literally fantastic for a few hours.

It can be done again. No holodeck or aligned planets required.
 

Draegan_sl

2 Minutes Hate
10,034
3
Draegan, you are doing it again. I know you want something more than WoW and it's clones, and yet many times your arguments lead to an excuse for what we already have and are bored with.

EQ was more than a game in many ways. It was a living, breathing social structure that happened because of many reasons. Game mechanics and lack of voice chat were a huge part of that, but they were not the only reasons. And just because mmo's have evolved into this souless button mashing zombie experience where nobody interacts with the people you group with in any meaningful way, doesn't mean that is the way it has to be.

Mmos use to be more than just another twitch game. And they can be again. There is a huge market for a game that taps into that basic human need to interact with the people we are around. Having a game that includes modern twitch mechanics and promotes more meaningful interactions between players is not mutually exclusive.
I'm not doing anything again. If everyone wants to pine for the good ole days and talk about their feelings that's great. I'll step away because I don't need to relive the days of the internet in 1999. What I'm attempting to is to discuss how to create a game, if it's possible, that creates a more social environment. The more people are tied to your game, the more successful it's going to be. However I'm not hearing anything other than philosphy and abstract ideas and not concrete game design ideas that are fun to play around with.

Less platitudes, more ideas.

I agree with you that EQ was more than a game. It was your whole social sphere and I get that. When people flippantly say it was a 3D chat box with a game inside of it, they are kinda right. Now here is the challenge: When you have shit like Facebook, Skype/Vent/Mumble, Multimonitor setups, Forums, Youtube and other shit, how do you make a game that keeps your attention away from all of that? Since you don't like twitch games apparently, you are then talking about some sort of game design that gives you 5-10(?) minutes of down time or at least a combat system (assuming you have combat) that is not action intensive so that your actions per minute, on average, allow you to chat during it.

How are you building that game? What's the combat like? What's the downtime like? Why is there downtime? What's happening during it?

What does meaningful interaction mean? Is that not putting in an AH so people have to engage in trade individually to sell stuff? If this is the case, is gear not as accessible as it is in modern MMOs? Are you not creating any Public, or Automated grouping systems so players have to actively reach out to a list of players? I would like to discuss how you go about doing this rather than just saying "less twitch, more meaningful interaction". Because that ultimately means nothing.
 

Lammy_sl

shitlord
43
0
I would agree with Bochepus and Aaron, which is why we can expect another pile of shit. We just aren't the target demographic for MMOs anymore.

And while I like to sit here and pretend I'd love another well made EQ, the reality of it is I have a business to run, and a life outside of gaming that leaves me no time to invest it another immersive MMO.
 

Draegan_sl

2 Minutes Hate
10,034
3
Both of those things can be true, and yet what I'm saying can also be true. If your future post is just going to attempt to take my position to extremes in order to show that it fails on some level, then there is no need to respond. Yes, if you look at any extreme it's going to be bad (Whether you try to emulate real life too much or don't attempt it at all because you believe you can't translate enough sensory input from RL)....Again, my entire post screams subtleties, melting it down to extremes is going to miss the point.

However, if you get the point that this is an untapped sphere of gaming, then you should also understand that of course it's philosophical. EQ and other games scratched it's surface and since then, nothing has grown in this sphere, in fact as I've explained it's systematically been diminished--so it's never been tested properly (Except in games that literally weren't functional). It will take some iterating and adjusting to find a sweet spot. Just like it took some imagination to go from Pac-man to Wolfenstien, it's going to take viewing thesocial sphere as an exploitable dimension, rather than an after effect of simply being online.





And yet I've watched people have little melt downs over getting hacked in some games. So, obviously you can. (Sorry to chop, I just wanted to respond to this point directly...It seems so absurd coming on a board where people were brought together 10 years ago by their avatar in a game.)...But on that note, no, you can't "force" this. If you have to 'force" anything, you're doing it wrong. You CAN make people addicted to their avatar--that's pretty obvious. And that should absolutely be the goal.
First point: I'm not disagreeing with you that it could be done with some sort of brilliant game design. If you can some how create a game people are attached to and also create a larger sense of "world" then you're going to have a hit. Super. My whole point is that how do you build that game? I'm not taking your point to extremes, but your posts hardly have any points to them because they're pretty damn nebulous.

EQ did nothing that MUDs weren't doing for the prior decade. If you played SojournMUD, which is the game Brad played pior to creating EQ, you'd understand it was a complete copy in almost every single way except it had graphics. People sat in town all day just chatting and looking for something to do. Leveling to max took 3-4 months of intense play. There were auctions run by players every day. Gear wasn't bound. You camped zones waiting for "repops". It was just text based, and I lived in that world and created friends. I raided the Planes of Fire and killed Tiamat. I didn't do much of anything else because my computer in 1995 couldn't handle VOIP or web browsers. Fuck I was on a 14.4kbps modem. So when you played that game, thats what you did. The only difference was that you played the game via a BBS telnet connect and played in tintin++ in a unix shell. The only outside shit you had was a global BBS chat channel.

The game was incredibly inclusive because there weren't many people playing at the higher levels and I think the max number of people online allowed was 200.

Here is your homework: Can you analyze why that was? What made the 90s better in terms of online RPGs? Was it the lack of the larger internet? Was it because the population playing was distilled to the point where almost everyone playing was similar (versus today where there are older folks, kids, and house wives that might never of heard of D&D and never knew that nice had more than 6 sides)? Was it because less people were playing? It wasn't just EQ that was like that, so EQ wasn't unique. Was it a lack of tools that made these games better? Was it perspective of a game world? Is it world design? Is it all of it? Why?

To your second point: Yes, people rage when their shit gets ruined, it can happen with anything. My greater point is that most people view gaming as transient. If you can find out what made the above successful, then you can create a way you're connected to your character. I just see that as incredibly difficult and I have a few ideas on how you can do it, but it's a vaunting task in today's internet of transient gamers and 100s of different ways to spend your time. If you can get people to follow a community of a game for 10+ years, then you have a success on your hands much like EQ did and WOW currently still has.
 

supertouch_sl

shitlord
1,858
3
I'm not doing anything again. If everyone wants to pine for the good ole days and talk about their feelings that's great. I'll step away because I don't need to relive the days of the internet in 1999. What I'm attempting to is to discuss how to create a game, if it's possible, that creates a more social environment. The more people are tied to your game, the more successful it's going to be. However I'm not hearing anything other than philosphy and abstract ideas and not concrete game design ideas that are fun to play around with.

Less platitudes, more ideas.

I agree with you that EQ was more than a game. It was your whole social sphere and I get that. When people flippantly say it was a 3D chat box with a game inside of it, they are kinda right. Now here is the challenge: When you have shit like Facebook, Skype/Vent/Mumble, Multimonitor setups, Forums, Youtube and other shit, how do you make a game that keeps your attention away from all of that? Since you don't like twitch games apparently, you are then talking about some sort of game design that gives you 5-10(?) minutes of down time or at least a combat system (assuming you have combat) that is not action intensive so that your actions per minute, on average, allow you to chat during it.

How are you building that game? What's the combat like? What's the downtime like? Why is there downtime? What's happening during it?

What does meaningful interaction mean? Is that not putting in an AH so people have to engage in trade individually to sell stuff? If this is the case, is gear not as accessible as it is in modern MMOs? Are you not creating any Public, or Automated grouping systems so players have to actively reach out to a list of players? I would like to discuss how you go about doing this rather than just saying "less twitch, more meaningful interaction". Because that ultimately means nothing.
games have the ability to become fantasy worlds. that's ultimately what people want but modern games fail in that regard because they do everything they can to remind the player of all the restrictions imposed on him before ushering him through. instead of being sucked into the game world people think "i'm an autonomous person who can travel to a dungeon with the click of a button!" that's why pacing and tone are important. people are always complaining that mmos have no long-term appeal, so don't you think it's counterproductive (and even counterintuitive) for developers to make games that are designed with convenience in mind?

also, if someone's argument is that they don't have time to devote, maybe they should do what normal gamers do and play when they have enough free time.
 

Draegan_sl

2 Minutes Hate
10,034
3
That's really defeatist, and I disagree with it. EQ, as primitive in features and tech as it was, was more of an escape from reality than anything else I've experienced. While playing, I could focus on something literally fantastic for a few hours.

It can be done again. No holodeck or aligned planets required.
Perhaps you can, it's not impossible. But the attachment people have to their character comes mostly with their first time playing in a virtual world. Once the shiny wears off on that notion, you begin to have less of an attachment to your characters in other games.

Here is a good exercise that was helped along by aaron. Can you name me a game outside EQ where you felt that much attachment to you character? For aaron that was WOW. For you that was EQ. For me it was SojournMUD, hell I quit EQ to go back and play SojournMUD. I still fondly remember my teenage years playing my Grey Elf Sorcerer Tykre Viesille. The argument you have with how WOW ruined the genre because everything was perfect with EQ (even if it was a simpler game with less polish) is the same argument I could have with SojournMUD to EQ (even if Sojourn was a simpler game and just text).

The only way it can probably happen a second time is with large change to technology or a huge change to the way the game is played so that the whole experience is new and not just "another MMORPG".

@supertouch:
I was busy playing video games last time, which is why I didn't devote time to the argument, and I've just spent 40 minutes responding this morning. See my responses above.
 

mkopec

<Gold Donor>
26,113
39,383
I agree with you that EQ was more than a game. It was your whole social sphere and I get that. When people flippantly say it was a 3D chat box with a game inside of it, they are kinda right. Now here is the challenge: When you have shit like Facebook, Skype/Vent/Mumble, Multimonitor setups, Forums, Youtube and other shit, how do you make a game that keeps your attention away from all of that? Since you don't like twitch games apparently, you are then talking about some sort of game design that gives you 5-10(?) minutes of down time or at least a combat system (assuming you have combat) that is not action intensive so that your actions per minute, on average, allow you to chat during it.
LOL, umm, how bout adding some strategy back into fights thats more than how fast you can whack a mole, or how fast you can skip around the boss while hitting all 1-9 keys in a specific order. Is this where the gameplay needs to go in order to amuse the ADD kids from going back to twitch? Come on Draegen, is this really the game you are advocating for?

How bout adding resource management back into fights? How bout having that other bar, you know the one below your HP? Mean something. Having played WoW mop now for a month or so, running a fresh panda from 1-90 in dungeon finder (first time since 2008), most fights are over before I can even unleash all my potential. Trash mobs die so quick that now you have to pull 10+ of them to be even remotely in danger. Gather them up all in a circle and everyone AoE, rinse and repeat. And when done, everyone's bars are all full, ready for the next pull.... Really? Is this your awesome no downtime, exciting gameplay that you want to continue into the next generation of MMOS? Sure, the dungeon finder is great. Im beginning to see whay people like it, but the experience of running those dungeons is boring and worse than having that 5 min downtime in old school EQ. Because at least in EQ you knew that when the downtime was over, there was a chance you might die the next pull. And dying sucked!

Why does gameplay need to be so dumbbed down that nothing really matters anymore unless you are the bleeding edge top 1% doing progression raids? And even then its still the same bullshit but you just have to skip around a bit harder and push the 1-9 keys a bit faster?

How bout slowing it down, just a tad. Having those bars below your name mean something again. So that maybe when you get an add, or overpull they actually start going down. Introducing some danger back into the game thats more than pulling 1/2 the dungeon.

This has nothing to do with twitch, facebook or any other social media. Trust me, you build a game that adds immersion, danger and fun back to the table and people will be too busy playing to care about twitch or facebook, or any of the other bullshit you are spewing here.
 

Draegan_sl

2 Minutes Hate
10,034
3
You're making too many assumptions. I'm not advocating for anything in any of these posts, just asking people to stop being ambiguous. As a caveat, I have not played WOW for more than a few hours since WOTLK. My highest level toon is still 80.

Strategy is something that should be in every game, but managing a mana bar is not my idea of strategy. As Zehn loves to attest, Mana Management is retarded.

If I were building a game based on end game raiding, I would do a few things differently.
1) No hardcap on the number of players that can attend. The less people you have, the better the rewards. Give the fight achievements and have some kick ass rewards from them.

2) Raids should not always require military precision in the way you run the fight. Allow for accidents, lag and fuck ups. Allow for better recovery. Raids are scripted wait too tight these days. I would also create fights (maybe not all of them) that if you wipe in phase 5 you are reset to phase 4.

Then you can create more interesting mechanics than beating on a big boss. What about a raid where you suddently have to split up into 4 tunnels and race through to the end, fighting your way through or you wipe? There are a lot of things you could probably do with some dynamic scaling and other shit.

As to your point about dungeons, WOW dungeons are fucking awful. Trash sucks. Whether you have to carefully pull and CC trash packs for 1-2 hours like in TBC heroics, or if you blow through them like in WOTLK or your experience in MOP, it's both shitty. At least when you blow through them you get to the shiny faster, fucking killing trivial mobs for 30 minutes in between bosses. That shit isn't fun. Give me some DDO dungeons please. Those shits were amazing. Death traps and secret passageways please. That shit was really dangerous.

I don't mind slow combat. I hate hotbar combat the way it is these days which is why I like GW2's combat so much where many builds don't have you spam 30 abilities a second.

You should really go try DDO in your spare time. Some of the things they did were really well made. You want strategy and mana management? Try limiting the amount of times you can cast a spell in between rest points. That's one way to do it.
 

Muligan

Trakanon Raider
3,231
901
When I think of the way I want dungeons to be, I think of Sol A/Sol B and UGuk/LGuk. Open progression, camps, and stuff just everywhere. I think it added to the game. Upon entering the zone, you had a purpose to attempt to get to camp x,y, or z to try to get item whatever. It may seem bland and dry to sit in the same camp, killing the same mobs, in hopes for just one thing but I had much more fun than queuing up in dungeon finder, being thrown into group noob, running the same dungeon, getting ALL names/camps, and then gating back to my city again. I just think what EQ made more sense in regards to a MMO. I shouldn't have access to an entire dungeon, there's other people to account for and that's why I play a MMO. There are so many dynamics playing dungeons back in the day added to the game as a whole. That's just the way I see it and its possible that nostalgia may be playing on my desire for a change.
 

Grim1

Ahn'Qiraj Raider
4,903
6,889
I'm not doing anything again. If everyone wants to pine for the good ole days and talk about their feelings that's great. I'll step away because I don't need to relive the days of the internet in 1999. What I'm attempting to is to discuss how to create a game, if it's possible, that creates a more social environment. The more people are tied to your game, the more successful it's going to be. However I'm not hearing anything other than philosphy and abstract ideas and not concrete game design ideas that are fun to play around with.

Less platitudes, more ideas.

I agree with you that EQ was more than a game. It was your whole social sphere and I get that. When people flippantly say it was a 3D chat box with a game inside of it, they are kinda right. Now here is the challenge: When you have shit like Facebook, Skype/Vent/Mumble, Multimonitor setups, Forums, Youtube and other shit, how do you make a game that keeps your attention away from all of that? Since you don't like twitch games apparently, you are then talking about some sort of game design that gives you 5-10(?) minutes of down time or at least a combat system (assuming you have combat) that is not action intensive so that your actions per minute, on average, allow you to chat during it.

How are you building that game? What's the combat like? What's the downtime like? Why is there downtime? What's happening during it?

What does meaningful interaction mean? Is that not putting in an AH so people have to engage in trade individually to sell stuff? If this is the case, is gear not as accessible as it is in modern MMOs? Are you not creating any Public, or Automated grouping systems so players have to actively reach out to a list of players? I would like to discuss how you go about doing this rather than just saying "less twitch, more meaningful interaction". Because that ultimately means nothing.
Oh come on, trying to backhand belittle me by stating it was my whole "social sphere" implies that you think you are above us mere mortals. And it also makes assumptions about me and my life that you have no knowledge of. Knock it off.

And, it isn't about pining for the good old days. It's about reintroducing game elements that have been thrown out for the fast and simple drive through mentality of todays' games. I'll back hand you back. You seem to only want McDonalds. While there are many of us who also enjoy steak. You have stated many times that all you want to do is punch a button and mindlessly play your game. Well you have that game... it's WoW. You don't really want anything else, in spite of your protestations otherwise.

Yes, EQ was a 3D chat box. Most mmos are if done right. WoW even has that element with Barrens chat. Barrens chat in it's own way represents WoW's community in more ways than one. It is puerile and vapid, but it is a community. The difference with EQ was that much of the playerbase was older, more mature, experienced and more comfortable with interacting with people in ways that young people haven't developed the skills for yet.

... most of the people who did play EQ back in the day are what? 10-15 years older now? No longer carefree teenagers or early 20'ers who can spend all night sock-pooping spawns and what not, but grown adults with full time work and other commitments.

Now I never played EQ,.... etc.
You are wrong and you even stated why. Yes we were younger but many of us were already adults with established real lives and real life "social spheres" when we played EQ. I remember one of our best healers was a grandmother, with a bazillion grandchildren. She loved EQ and was very good at it, but she also had a real life. Many of us did, we didn't have to poopsock to be good at EQ, or to be in the best guilds. All while still maintaing our real lives and real life friendships.

And I met a lot of older people while leveling up. EQ was welcome to all generations. WoW and most of it's clones are built strictly for the teen set. WoW has very little attraction to people who have grown up and out of saturday morning cartoons. Poop socking is the preferred strategy of children, as you grow up you have learn how to succeed without losing your real life.

There are mmos that have healthier communities. Lotro has some very fine players. The RP server Laurelin (sp?) is amazing for it's depth of community and maturity. And it is one of the most popular servers. One of the reasons it has maintained such a high standard is the RP rule set is much stricter than usual. It was a EU server so when Turbine took it back over, they kept the rule set the euros had in place. The NA RP server isn't so strict.

So there are easy ways to create community but one of the first things you have to do is not specialize for children. Children are not capable of interacting in any other way than with fart and Chuck Norris jokes. When your game caters to children then it is no wonder that the people who like the type of interactions EQ fostered, don't play.
 
  • 1Like
Reactions: 1 user

the_professor_sl

shitlord
5
0
I have not read this entire thread beginning to end so I may be reiterating points others have made, but:

One of the things I think MMOs should start exploring is unlocking level-based content. For example, in WoW's current progression, it would be ludicrous for a level 20 to attempt Mogu'shan Vaults or even the Lich King events. I think areas and zones should alter to one's current level, so that all content is accessible to all levels.

That being said, an argument for level locked areas would also be appropriate, but I do not think it should be the primary motivator. It seems that level-locking content creates the theme park feeling of the modern MMO, and I think it unnecessary. Give players the option where to start their leveling journey, almost anywhere. Granted, I do not know how difficult it would be to implement, as I am sure there would be difficulty if say a level 10 were attempting to explore/level in the same area as a level 32, on the same mobs. But it's just a thought.

I also sincerely hope EQN brings back special and rare items which are useable even at maximum level (in the event of expansions) such as clicky illusion masks. I still have gear on my EQ characters from 10 years ago that I will presumably keep until the game shuts down, because it is special and memorable. WoW had some of this in weird little toys and trinkets and what have you, but some were altered later in the game, or removed entirely, on a much more regular basis than in EQ.

Anyway, my two cents. Cheers.

edit - I also agree modern MMOs lack social motivators. I still keep in touch with many people I gamed in EQ with...I wish I could say the same about WoW.
frown.png
 

Draegan_sl

2 Minutes Hate
10,034
3
Dude, I'm not belittling you, I'm agreeing with you for fuck sake. When I played SojournMUD as a teenager it was my whole nerd world. I did nothing but play that game like every single day for fucking years. Jesus christ. Don't get so damn defensive.

The rest of your post is just a perspective that didn't see much of anything else. I remember playing EQ where it was full of stoners and dumbfuck chatter. It also had adults and fun people as well. Same as WOW. You had stoners and idiots talking about Chuck Norris every day. However, I also was part of a family style guild full of mature adult people that had associates with other guilds of similar people. We raided, had great fun. Shit someone of them still pop off and wish my a happy birthday on facebook after not talking to them for years.

In any large group of people you're going to have good and bad. To say EQ had more adults and more mature people playing is retarded. WOW just has more people and more kids that spend time on forums and saying stupid shit. The more there are, the louder they become, but I very much doubt the ratio is vastly different.

Plus I don't think you even read what I'm saying, or you're so fucking blind that you think I'm just a WOW loving whore.

It's about reintroducing game elements that have been thrown out for the fast and simple drive through mentality of todays' games. I'll back hand you back. You seem to only want McDonalds. While there are many of us who also enjoy steak. You have stated many times that all you want to do is punch a button and mindlessly play your game. Well you have that game and play it quite a bit... it's WoW.
Come the fuck on, I've already said I haven't played WOW for more than a few hours in like 4 years, my highest level character is still 80. Scroll the fuck up and read some of my other posts.

I'm not fucking attacking your fucking ideas, I'm trying to get you to articulate them better and in detail. If you can't do that, fine. But stop being a pussy and pay attention.
 

Grim1

Ahn'Qiraj Raider
4,903
6,889
Well the difference is that EQ was never my whole world. I joined the game as an adult, with a wife, successful career, social sphere and real life commitments that I still love to this day. Many of us in EQ were the same. EQ took a ton of our time and we enjoyed that time, but it never excluded the rest of our lives. And we were able to succeed at a high level without poopsocking.

I did read what you said, but your tendency is to always head back to the same argument that nothing will succeed unless it is WoW. Even while saying you want something different.

edit: Your ratio argument comes from your blinders on mindset. EQ and EQII were much more popular with females then other mmos. The same is true of older players. The reason you didn't notice the difference between EQ and other games is because you were young (and probably stoned) when you played EQ. Young people don't see beyond their own age, that's natural. After playing EQ, and then playing other games (WoW etc), the difference in the playerbase was night and day.
 

Chancellor Alkorin

Part-Time Sith
<Granularity Engineer>
6,051
6,036
I don't think that was an age thing, Grim1. That was more of a personality type thing. EQ wasn't as "cool" as games are today. Hell, the entire internet did a shift in popularity between then and now, and all kinds of people are introducing their friends and kids and parents and dogs to games like WoW, so there will naturally be a larger community. With growth comes diversity, and diversity will inevitably mean that people you don't like are going to come along and do whatever they please in your vicinity.

The thing with EQ in particular is that a lot of this expansion and diversity happened while we were still playing EQ. People migrated to WoW, sure, but a great many (in fact, the majority of) people played WoW without ever having seen EQ. Those are primarily the people that don't understand our outlook on things. We can't ever hope to make them do so, because they weren't part of the game/social space/what have you that was EQ in the first place, and that space is gone now.
 

Draegan_sl

2 Minutes Hate
10,034
3
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.