EQ Never

Mr Creed_sl said:

Dont get me wrong, I'm all for rare, hard to obtain items. Just playing devils advocate here, and in todays market making a choice that gives you negative customer backlash is not made lightly, especially when the upsides are fairly limited. EQ dealt with a very diffferent market and customer base so it was less of a problem (the "moar for me fuck everyone else" attitude was there less so because in EQ you needed those other players to advance). WoW got away with it because it was, or is(?), the only game that mattered to the market at the time. Where would a disgruntled MMO junkie go when he was pissed about someone getting a uique mount he cant get?

On the other hand, make a decision that pisses of the unwashed masses in another MMO and watch them scuttle back to WoW. This isnt what I do or support, but it's something the company will consider, so implementing something a good part of the player base will be in uproar about has to have some pretty good upsides. I dont see unique items handed out by GMs (guaranteed bias claims, no matter how false, along with a badly researched kotaku news entry) as having enough upside. At least not in a game that wants to be a success on the scale a SOE project will be expecting. Some small indie company could do it I guess? Dont expect it for EQN.

Click to expand...

To that I so eloquently retort: fuck that noise.

I remember when a huge part of the appeal in an MMO was that it was a living, breathing world outside of our own. Crazy, unexpected shit could go down at any time, and people didn't really care that they couldn't 'get' that one item/server, because it was there for them to admire. It was there as a reminder; 'this is why we give our phone numbers to guildmates, this is why we put all the effort into the game to reach a certain level...this is why we play this game, and this genre.'

Crying, bitching, and moaning because of cookie cutter 'HE'S NOT ALLOWED TO HAVE THAT IF I CAN'T TOO' isn't okay. Yeah, you can't have that too. Because you blow.

Mr Creed_sl said:

On the other hand, make a decision that pisses of the unwashed masses in another MMO and watch them scuttle back to WoW. This isnt what I do or support, but it's something the company will consider, so implementing something a good part of the player base will be in uproar about has to have some pretty good upsides. I dont see unique items handed out by GMs (guaranteed bias claims, no matter how false, along with a badly researched kotaku news entry) as having enough upside. At least not in a game that wants to be a success on the scale a SOE project will be expecting. Some small indie company could do it I guess? Dont expect it for EQN.

Click to expand...

People run back to WOW because it's familiar, streamlined, and social. Demented and sad, yes, but social. The WOW of today has enough hooks for older MMOers, but is tuned for casuals and console people. The problem is most other MMOs try to target that exact same demographic missing the simple point that even Blizzard didn't target that group, but initially made the game their EQ playing team wanted in 2004. I'm sick of MMOs designed for Blizzard's current huge audience instead of creating their own game.

My hope is SOE have learned their lesson and are creating a game that *some* people want to play, and that isn't aimed at a huge target demographic. That's why both EQ and WOW thrived. As much as we rag on the Vision?, it's what really made these games in my opinion.

Whatever EQN, for the love of god please don't let anyone who worked, designed, or implemented EQ2s combat system anywhere near the project. The simplest thing they could have done to fix that game was to scrap it's complete ass combat system and drop EQ1s on top.

Rift was a pretty great experiment, with a good dev team, what made WOW successful and what people put up with in WOW but only stuck with it because it was WOW.

1. Quest grinds: No one likes them and people only did it with WOW because it was the only way to do anything. In Rift people PVP, IA, Dungeon, Onslaught etc. for levels.
2. Two Factions: Useless and they realized their mistake and got rid of it.
3. Dungeon Finder: Figured out a game needs one. Then figured out it can't be single server.

Those are the big ones. Rift class design is terrible these days, in my opinion, because everything is now top heavy. Originally it was all about customization and figuring out amazing builds. Now all the good shit is at the top of these really tall trees giving you less points to spread around. Rift should of built out horizontally instead of vertically. Shame.

Random thoughts this post is.

Definitely. Rift over compacted the class structure to the point where they are meaningless and lack real distinction. Then they took the DAOC approach to balance instead of worrying more about fun. On top of that, their soul talents and abilities were boring as fuck and designed by a bean counter more than an MMO Vet. Huzzah, I gained a level and can reduce the cost of my AOE spells by 1.25%! Yes, they have improved but on release they were idiotic and boring, and remain very mediocre. That's fine for an established game like WOW, but it really wasn't much of a draw for a new MMO.

What Rift did do right is their combat and releasing a stable game. Sadly, that's better than 99% of the MMOs of the last decade.

The problem these days with MMOs and dynamic events is the entire mentality of "gogogogo gotta get max level to start playing the game." What you always end up with a month after release are these ghost towns and either A) the events no longer spawn or B) events are just depressing because you're the only one there if you missed the mad dash when the game was released. This problem of ghost towns didn't seem to happen much to WoW until maybe Wrath, and it wasn't a problem in EQ for a few good years. Now, like mentioned, these "living, breathing" worlds are 80-90% lifeless and abandoned in a month. So... you also have to focus on how to stop that from happening.

Well Vonador and Gecko I honestly hope you're right and SOE makes an EQ many in this thread want (me included). I guess I'm too old and bitter to keep up the hope for a real EQ successor that doesnt make concessions to the modern gaming population. One question though: Is not catering to the masses what you honestly expect or just what you wish for?

Saladus_sl said:

The problem these days with MMOs and dynamic events is the entire mentality of "gogogogo gotta get max level to start playing the game." What you always end up with a month after release are these ghost towns and either A) the events no longer spawn or B) events are just depressing because you're the only one there if you missed the mad dash when the game was released. This problem of ghost towns didn't seem to happen much to WoW until maybe Wrath, and it wasn't a problem in EQ for a few good years. Now, like mentioned, these "living, breathing" worlds are 80-90% lifeless and abandoned in a month. So... you also have to focus on how to stop that from happening.

Click to expand...

I doubt you can get that mentality out of MMO gamers at this point, so tackle the problem from another angle: Design the game without player levels.

Saladus_sl said:

The problem these days with MMOs and dynamic events is the entire mentality of "gogogogo gotta get max level to start playing the game." What you always end up with a month after release are these ghost towns and either A) the events no longer spawn or B) events are just depressing because you're the only one there if you missed the mad dash when the game was released. This problem of ghost towns didn't seem to happen much to WoW until maybe Wrath, and it wasn't a problem in EQ for a few good years. Now, like mentioned, these "living, breathing" worlds are 80-90% lifeless and abandoned in a month. So... you also have to focus on how to stop that from happening.

Click to expand...

One thing that would help is some form of reward for the player to explore and do more in each level. Right now there is a rush to the top because each new level means new capabilities. There needs to be something to entice players to stay within a level longer.

One idea I had to promote exploration was to have a player-enhancing modifier called Knowledge. The more Knowledge you have, the stronger you are (more DPS, more AC, etc). Each level would have a certain amount of Knowledge points. If you leveled up before getting all that level's points, those points are lost forever. For example, say a game had 100 levels and each level had 10 Knowledge points. If you level fast and only got 2 points per level, you would have 200 points at max level and would not be able to fill in the other 800 points. But someone who levels slowly and gets 10 points per level would have 1000 points at max level.

You gain Knowledge by doing things like fighting in new zones, doing quests, etc. Anything that encourages the player to explore the world. Since there is a tangible benefit to the character, the player is encouraged to fully experience the content for each level. This way you can entice players to explore the world at each level rather than racing to the top.

Players can still race to the top if they want, but they will have permanently low Knowledge. They won't be able to max it because the only way would have been to max it as they were leveling up. But the player who takes the time to fully explore the world at each level will be much stronger once he reaches the max level. The player has to make a choice between racing to the top and being weak or take his time and be strong.

Elbas_sl said:

One thing that would help is some form of reward for the player to explore and do more in each level. Right now there is a rush to the top because each new level means new capabilities. There needs to be something to entice players to stay within a level longer.

One idea I had to promote exploration was to have a player-enhancing modifier called Knowledge. The more Knowledge you have, the stronger you are (more DPS, more AC, etc). Each level would have a certain amount of Knowledge points. If you leveled up before getting all that level's points, those points are lost forever. For example, say a game had 100 levels and each level had 10 Knowledge points. If you level fast and only got 2 points per level, you would have 200 points at max level and would not be able to fill in the other 800 points. But someone who levels slowly and gets 10 points per level would have 1000 points at max level.

You gain Knowledge by doing things like fighting in new zones, doing quests, etc. Anything that encourages the player to explore the world. Since there is a tangible benefit to the character, the player is encouraged to fully experience the content for each level. This way you can entice players to explore the world at each level rather than racing to the top.

Players can still race to the top if they want, but they will have permanently low Knowledge. They won't be able to max it because the only way would have been to max it as they were leveling up. But the player who takes the time to fully explore the world at each level will be much stronger once he reaches the max level. The player has to make a choice between racing to the top and being weak or take his time and be strong.

Click to expand...

I wouldn't play a game with a system like that. You shouldn't be forcing someone to play a certain way during their level experience and if they don't... completely gimp their character. Also, it would make me NEVER want to make an Alt, which is bad for a game's longevity and replayability.

If you want to slow down the levelling process just... make it take longer to level.

If you want someone to explore your world just... make it interesting to explore (rare items, better currency drops, faster respawns, good AE areas, harder mobs with higher exp modifiers, lower hp but higher damage areas, etc etc etc. Depending on your group make up certain areas will be better suited for exp gain)

This goes back to designing a game based on a vision, and not appealing to the widest demographic of MMO gamer possible.

In my game I'd personally get rid of most of the level process.. and alts.. and static zones of level X to Y.

I'd make character progression skill based and everything competitive. I'd also change the composition of the world based on the average 'capability' of players in the world, with a few at the top, a few at the bottom, but the vast majority at their average. It seems a huge waste to me to have 2/3 of an MMO world for level 1-40 when 1% of the population is at those levels.

I absolutely do not want a game with more levels. I think for me I can't look at max level 50 and not try to get there as soon as possible, due to prior MMO addiction and E-peen. I want less levels and lemming characters, and more changing things to do with social, political, and world consequences.

Gecko_sl said:

This goes back to designing a game based on a vision, and not appealing to the widest demographic of MMO gamer possible.

In my game I'd personally get rid of most of the level process.. and alts.. and static zones of level X to Y.

I'd make character progression skill based and everything competitive. I'd also change the composition of the world based on the average 'capability' of players in the world, with a few at the top, a few at the bottom, but the vast majority at their average. It seems a huge waste to me to have 2/3 of an MMO world for level 1-40 when 1% of the population is at those levels.

I absolutely do not want a game with more levels. I think for me I can't look at max level 50 and not try to get there as soon as possible, due to prior MMO addiction and E-peen. I want less levels and lemming characters, and more changing things to do with social, political, and world consequences.

Click to expand...

How would you do this?

I definitely disagree with getting rid of the idea of alts. A large part of the charm and appeal of an alternate "class" (to me anyway) is going through the "levelling" process (whatever it may be) with stronger hand me down gear from my main and ripping through stuff I used to find difficult. Already being at max level and just trying out some new skills is not nearly as fun to me. And playing the same character with just new skills is tiring. I want to pick a new race... I want a completely different experience and that includes having a completely separate character.

I agree with a lot of what is being said here and disagree with plenty more but it seems a major consensus (if there is anything remotely resembling that in this thread) is we want freedom to play the game how we see fit. We don't want an on rails experience. I don't get as much time to play these days as I used to so I sure as shit don't want the kind of game where I log in, and can only progress so far on the one or two days I get to play because... "You can only do that once per day"

Mr Creed_sl said:

Well Vonador and Gecko I honestly hope you're right and SOE makes an EQ many in this thread want (me included). I guess I'm too old and bitter to keep up the hope for a real EQ successor that doesnt make concessions to the modern gaming population. One question though: Is not catering to the masses what you honestly expect or just what you wish for?



I doubt you can get that mentality out of MMO gamers at this point, so tackle the problem from another angle: Design the game without player levels.

Click to expand...

It's really not even about "not catering to the masses". Really where the gamer designers lost their way is they stopped making THEIR world and we are just players in it. They have basically been trying to cater their world to everyone and their grandma, and the end result is a bland, homogenous experience. I am not advocatining a return to the stone ages. Use the new technology that is available if it fits within their worlds framework.

Basically, they should dictate to us how their game world is. If its brutal and unforgiving, so be it. If its easy and flowers and sunshine, so be it. But letting every group have their say and trying to please everybody usually pleases nobody.

EQ2 for all its bad stuff, did a couple things right. Their mentoring feature was great for higher level characters to delevel and help their new buddies. They also added chronomentoring, where you paid a fee and had your level reduced without a need for another character, great for farming items or getting certain drops that mobs had to con for. also helped with killing named mobs for AA that you may have never killed before. Stuff like this is good for the lower end of the game, IMO.

Dunno I can see a game with levels working for me. The problem with the level process in recent games is, that it is so fucking fast, the quest based shit and BoE gear. Its fast and not fun. No chance to optimize before maxlevel, no thought involved.
In games that are slow paced in terms of leveling, you have more reason to get gear and find better spots in lower levels. In WoW classic even, taking out maybe levels 55-60, there was no reason to look for better spots. If I look for another spot for 3 hours, I can easily make a level in that time, maybe more. Same for gear, apart maybe from weapons. I did the dungeons as long as I had quests for them, afterwards it was just a waste of time. XP was meh and the items I got were often good, but outleveled by the next day. Same with AH stuff, everything BoE, so buy stuff, money gone two days later when you replace that stuff with one of the 1000 greens that drop.

A game that would have a slower pace, more open world and leveling and itemisation would probably easily encourage me again to explore, both world, items and builds.

Or, they could just do away with leveling completely. So many of these games are designed with the thought of the "real" game not starting until max level. If that is the case, why waste all that dev time on the leveling treadmill content and force me to waste my time getting through that shit to do the stuff that I want to do? Make character progression either 100% gear based, or some combination of gear/skill based. I have no idea what percentage of dev time is spent crafting that wonderful low level experience that all of us just want to get through as quickly as possible, but if that time was spent making actual endgame content instead, you would end up with a much more robust endgame right from the start.

So lets start by asking a few questions:

1. Why did the devs take long travel out of the equation?

2. Why did the devs go to a BoE loot system?

3. Why did the devs speed up the leveling process?

Answers to these questions could shed some insight as a lot of us on these forums disagree with all three changes.

I'd entirely replace most or even all leveling with a system like AA/certs/EVE skills where you can choose how to advance your character but the costs blooms up quickly if you want to focus something very hard. So maybe with fictional numbers +10 strength costs 1 point, the next +10 strength costs 2, then 4, then 8 and so on. There doesnt necessarily need to be a cap even. But at some point everyone is gonna be like "hmm over 1k points for another 10 strength, maybe those other stats I neglected arent so bad".

I mean look at the usual level in pretty much every MMO: you get some stats like str/dex/int/hp/mana. Your defenses relative to equal level mobs actually stays similar when leveling but you are stronger vs weaker mobs. Your new spells use more mana. the higher mobs have more hp so the extra strength just keeps you at status quo. I suggest you minimize all this keeping up with the joneses part of leveling and just focus on actual improvements. Have no levels or only 10 levels but each as long as old EQ levels. The side effect is content can again be designed for longer use because it stays viable for a given character for maybe 50 hours of play instead of 5 hours. Paying attention to your items again makes sense because you wont outlevel them within an hour. A level range of 10 still allows for 10 distinct power tiers, from newbie to godslayer, but opens up alot of the content design options and itemization older games like EQ had. There's a point to investing some time into getting that rare drop from a dungeon boss now, you can use it for a while.


And on the topic of itemization, I think less No Drop and instead having a deep salvage/disenchant/recycle system build into your crafting could be a solution to item inflation. Maybe again keep it open ended with by having increasing cost but linear improvements like D3 gem upgrades. If players can burn ever increasing amounts of rubies/gold for the same linear +2 strength they will, so inflation will at least be slowed. Plus. any system without an actual cap is less attackable by the whiners that always claim its too expensive to max so-and-so. In my example you simply cannot max it, but its also not realistic to continue after some point (but some will anyway, and good for them). Such a permanent item/money sink can fuel all kinds of crafting and economy designs, and all you as designer have to do is plot the diminished gains per resource in such a way that the average is in line with expected player power. The rare outliers that blow 20 hours/day for a week on another .005% feel rewarded but in the big picture its negligible.