EQ Never

Sidian

Lord Nagafen Raider
1,279
7
I ocassionally read this thread but sometimes I have to skip through pages because of how fast it goes, so sorry if some of these have already been mentioned / discussed. Just throwing out some thoughts.

Dungeons:

So thinking about dungeons I think having a partly non-instanced and partly instanced would be best for MMOs now a day. What about having the major outline of the dungeon non-instanced, with many different camps that you can group up and just grind if you wanted. Also having say mini-bosses at certain camps that some might have a faster respawn but have a lower chance of getting good loot and maybe some having a longer respawn. Obviously having both have a random spawn factor of maybe one being +/- 30 minutes and some of the stronger mini-bosses being up to +/- 6 hours. Now, there could be random camps you could grind for xp and some "uncommon" loots but if you wanted to do a non-raid, group you could fight at these certain camps that have the random chance of spawning a mini-boss that would basically require you to have 5 or so people in a group to kill it off.

Also in these dungeon layouts, where the big bad ass boss is, you'd have it instanced so therefore if you are progressed far enough in the game you can work your way through the non-instanced dungeon (probably be fairly easy assuming there are tons of other people there clearing their camps) to get to an instanced portal or whatever for just the lone boss fight. (or even maybe just 1 corridor with a few really tough trash pulls followed by the boss)

You now have a cool looking outdoor dungeon area that you can look for groups to camp certain mini-bosses for the chance to get some neat loot, but you can also be in your raid with however many people and clear through the non-instanced area (if needed) to easily be able to get yourself instanced into the boss fight.

Even having a random mini-boss that could take up to 10-15 people that wanders the non-instanced part would be pretty awesome. If you're group of 5 is sitting around farming a camp, then all of a sudden the General of X comes walking towards you camp like he is making his rounds. Well shit, you better back up a bit, or ask for another group to come help you because he's for sure going to crush you.

I also think one of the things you could do is have a lot of these mini bosses drop loot that just makes your character aesthetically different. Maybe this mini bosses only rare loot is a cool looking hat that has no stats but you can equip it to look like a badass while you sit in the main city. I remember never setting foot in Lower Guk at all, until I found out about the Guise of the Deceiver. I then proceeded to figure out how the hell to get to lower guk, then spamming chat on my bard trying to get someone to help me get to the storeroom area, to sit around waiting for the group that was there, hoping the assassin (or whatever the hell it was called) to spawn just because I wanted the chance to be able to turn into a Dark Elf.

Although, I guess the problem at this point is the whole level / power grind because unless it's a max level dungeon area you'll have people being able to solo these camps eventually.

Questing:

One Idea I had, that I noticed was kind of mentioned was what about having some very long, class specific quests that start while you're a low level and maybe even go all the way til you're maxed. Maybe a quest where once you get level 10, it asks you to go to a certain low level dungeon and get a rare Orb from the end boss of it. With that orb it opens up another quest at level 15 which then you have to farm a mini-boss spawn in a random part of the world in attempts to get his Golden Locket, etc etc.

Eventually if you do this quest all the way to max level you'll get a final part which then unlocks a very good weapon/mount/item/whatever. It would make you want to explore all around and slowly do this quest because of the uber item it'll give you when you're finished. It would be kind of like a guide for the newer players because it could kind of show you where to go as you level, but it'll also reward you in the long run assuming you keep it up. Sure you could just wait til you're maxed level before going back and doing these quests, but at that point you're exploring through everything you already went through, especially if it's a long enough quest. It's be easier to do it the first time around, but if you really wanted to skip it, you were able to.

Travel:

A mix between portals, flight paths & mounts are good imo. I don't believe flying mounts should be allowed for players to own, it's a dumb idea imo especially when you have nothing to worry about while flying for the most part. Easily allows flying to the top of the world and afk auto flying to your destination. If there are 30 zones in the whole world, have say 10 of those zones have flight paths. The others you have to fly to your closests destination and run. Of those 20 zones left that don't have flight paths, put maybe 5-10 of them have druid/wizard rings. Now you can fly and run a little farther, or get a port.

Unlocking flight paths, at least the first time, should be a lot more then just finding the flight merchant, clicking on him and grats, flight point unlocked! Maybe some of them require certain keys from dungeons, or some of the won't open up their path until you do something for them, etc etc. I also think making it account wide would be awesome. You do it once, it's always unlocked, but the option is still there to do the "quest" to unlock it if you want, but you don't have to.

In WoW, I remember it turned into, okay run to org, get flight path, run to barrens, get flight path, run to thunder bluff, get flight path, then I'd slowly do some quests and shit because then I could fly where needed. But if the first time playing, you weren't able to unlock the flight path at xroads without doing something first means you actually have to explore the world / level up before being able to unlock it. Although, then when you decide to play an alt, you don't have to worry about doing all those again because it'll be unlocked.

Zones:

Call me crazy but I think it'd be a great idea to mix in high level and low level monsters in the same area sometimes. We just entered the Tundra Plains! The east side is levels 20-35, yet the Tundra Castle is a little on the west side that is level 50. It's boring for me to say, okay start at the noob zone, eventually you outlevel the noob zone and the next zone to the north is the one you go to, then the next one to the north, etc etc. Now, if you're a lower level maybe you take the risk of exploring the high level areas in the Tundra Plains! Or you just say screw it and come back in 15 levels when you'll be even with the monsters on the western half. Or maybe you're class quest has you trying to pick up an item on the ground that's dropped in the high level 1/2 of the zone.

Having higher level mini-bosses that wander roads or camps could be fun too. They drop an item you can hand into the main city to get xp/gold/loot. It's fun to find the random "named" guy and pick up a quest item and be like, fuck yeah.

---

Anyway, just sharing my thoughts. Also, sorry if these have already been mentioned hundreds of times earlier in the thread lol.
 

Balin

Bronze Knight of the Realm
38
0
The hitching.... I have played games that made the hard drive work with hitching here and there but holy fuck the hitching in VG was legendary. Unless you had a raptor or raid you were in trouble.
I had RAID 1 Raptors at launch and it still hitched like hell. I tried again recently on the exact same 6 year old machine, except with an SSD, and it's STILL bad.
 

Balin

Bronze Knight of the Realm
38
0
Call me crazy but I think it'd be a great idea to mix in high level and low level monsters in the same area sometimes.
This. Watching high level players kill Meldrath and the Mino Hero when my main was a runt in Steamfont definitely contributed to my subsequent multi-year addiction.
 

etchazz

Trakanon Raider
2,707
1,056
VG failed for far more reasons than just being buggy. It shipped with effectively zero 40+ content minus bugged tradeskill stuff and insta-respawning "rare" resource nodes that people exploited to make the best gear in the game at the time. Like the content wasn't itemized and wasn't there. The hitching was not it being buggy, it was a design feature from the "chunk" loading that ran terribly on modern systems at the time. The ease of entry stuff that was added would have only helped people stay involved in the game; it was the fact that it simply wasn't even finished when it released or months later that people left in droves.

Also, to the crackhead up there who thinks that -anyone- wants the shitty collect 10 bear asses quests: I am positive nobody likes those or wants those in future games. Be they EQ:N or WoW2:The WoWening. It's the simple idea that having -any- quest content in a game immediately rustles the shit out of the EQ hipsters' jimmies that most of the sane people are disagreeing with and saying that you can have both quest and grind friendly content. I mean every modern MMO out there has grind friendly content, it just isn't the only content available in the game.

The majority of sane people in the thread want a middle ground that takes from the new while respecting the old. The nutjobs want EQ reskinned and go absolutely bonkers when anyone says that instancing/questing/any modern advance can be done in a way that isn't a direct copy of WoW. *shrug* The gap in ideologies isn't really apparent when you look at the sane people. It's the hardcore extreme outliers that claim all of us have no idea what made EQ fun and that we all want super dumbed down WoW-clones that really bring up the difference in sanity.
the fact that every single post you make includes you using the terms "neck beards" or "hipsters" invalidates just about everything you have to say. either find a way to increase your lexicon or stop posting because at this point you just sound like a parrot.
 

Denaut

Trump's Staff
2,739
1,279
Sigh........reading comprehension is critical here:


The original relationship with Microsoft was working and mutual. When they changed management is when things started to go downhill initially. Now this isn't giving Brad a free pass for his moronic decisions, it does however point to the first change in how Vanguard was being developed, which led to players leaving. And why Vanguard wasn't successful at launch WAS the original discussion.
Take what Brad said with a large grain of salt, like horse salt lick sized. The changes that were made that you complained about were decided upon internally by us, the low level content and code monkey developers, and before the rift with Microsoft. My memory is a bit fuzzy, and I wasn't privy to any business information, but the events he was referring to happened close to the end of the development cycle when we were already in panic, oh my god, shit our pants mode.

Like I said before, those changes did not cause anyone to leave the Beta as there was no one to leave, they caused people to actually play long enough for us to get some feedback.
 

Convo

Ahn'Qiraj Raider
8,761
613
My whole guild planned to play VG until some of us tried the beta and watched the drama. VG was hugely anticipated until the beta/firings. Anyone saying otherwise is downright crazy.
 

Ukerric

Bearded Ape
<Silver Donator>
7,980
9,697
They complain, but do they really quit?
There is another aspect we've not touched here, and it's the shape of the market. Subscription-based games are really, really hard to do today. Because they're not just competing with the handful of remaining sub-based games, but with the free-to-play.

If you want a modernized EQ, that's the first question you need to ask: are you going to be sub-based, or not. Because if you're sub-based, you will not only have fewer people trying your game, you will have a lower % of them sticking around. And you aren't competing on quality for people's play time, you're competing on quality AND price.
 

etchazz

Trakanon Raider
2,707
1,056
There is another aspect we've not touched here, and it's the shape of the market. Subscription-based games are really, really hard to do today. Because they're not just competing with the handful of remaining sub-based games, but with the free-to-play.

If you want a modernized EQ, that's the first question you need to ask: are you going to be sub-based, or not. Because if you're sub-based, you will not only have fewer people trying your game, you will have a lower % of them sticking around. And you aren't competing on quality for people's play time, you're competing on quality AND price.
i'd gladly pay $10 or $15 (hell even $20) a month over having a free to play game with a cash shop. if the game is actually worth playing and i'm having fun, then literally 50 cents a day is no sweat off my back. i don't live in an impoverished country where that is a big deal to me and i'd prefer it to a cash shop where every time i log in or talk to a vendor i'm reminded that there is a cash shop i can visit atwww.suckmedry.comthe way SOE runs their cash shop, it's more pay to win anyway, which i hate.
 

Convo

Ahn'Qiraj Raider
8,761
613
EQN will be a failure if players can can pay to win. I will not play a game that players can buy their way past me.
 

Tolan

Member of the Year 2016
<Banned>
7,249
2,038
If you want a modernized EQ, that's the first question you need to ask: are you going to be sub-based, or not. Because if you're sub-based, you will not only have fewer people trying your game, you will have a lower % of them sticking around.
Not necessarily. A newly launched game could be completely free to play for the first 15-20 levels, then subscription required to continue. And if it's good enough, people will pay the sub and stick around. How many people, do you think, play a game beyond the noob levels solely because it's free?

The whole "market has changed" philosophy is a myth. Players will continue to invest in a game if the play experience is good enough. If an mmo's design and quality is top notch, people will Pay2Stay after trying it.
 

Grim1

Ahn'Qiraj Raider
4,867
6,822
EQN will be a failure if players can can pay to win. I will not play a game that players can buy their way past me.
It depends on what you define as pay to win. For some people, just having a cash shop of any sort is considered to be pay to win.

The rage that players had for GW2's cash shop before the game even came out was kind of funny. And some people still say it is a pay to win game. I just don't understand that attitude. I'm fine with xp potions etc. I generally dislike SoE's version of cash shops in their games, but don't consider them to be pay to win.
 

Mr Creed

Too old for this shit
2,383
276
Seems to me the thread is going in circles again. The new eq is going to be f2p, theres no point in repeating that topic really.
 

Grim1

Ahn'Qiraj Raider
4,867
6,822
F2P does not equal P2W though. Two different subjects, although they do overlap a bit.

Otherwise you are correct. I believe Smed said all their future games will be F2P.
 

Merlin_sl

shitlord
2,329
1
Take what Brad said with a large grain of salt, like horse salt lick sized. The changes that were made that you complained about were decided upon internally by us, the low level content and code monkey developers, and before the rift with Microsoft. My memory is a bit fuzzy, and I wasn't privy to any business information, but the events he was referring to happened close to the end of the development cycle when we were already in panic, oh my god, shit our pants mode.

Like I said before, those changes did not cause anyone to leave the Beta as there was no one to leave, they caused people to actually play long enough for us to get some feedback.
Haha, fair enough however the decision to "WOWify" Vanguard was not met with open arms. There was a considerable amount of anger, at least on my side as a beta player and reading the forums. The players that were there, were there for "the vision", the difficulty, the uniqueness etc...When it started to get watered down it made many people leave. Yes however, I realize it was a factor of other issues as well like the hitching etc...but I was referring in this case specifically to whoever decided to make the game easier at the last minute after telling us this was going to be more in line with original EQ then WOW.
 

EmiliaEQ_sl

shitlord
110
0
F2P does not equal P2W though. Two different subjects, although they do overlap a bit.
Otherwise you are correct. I believe Smed said all their future games will be F2P.
League of Legends is a great example of F2P, there is absolutely no reason to pay $$$$ unless you want skins.
Even the few things that MUST be bought with Riot Points (mastery pages) end up being free because once in a while you get free RP.
"Free2Play" with "PayforCosmetics" or something with "Free2Start" then "SubtoContinue" wouldn't be that bad.

The number or TF2 Hats and LOL Skins sold are testament that players are more than happy to play for "cosmetic stuff"...
 

Convo

Ahn'Qiraj Raider
8,761
613
I've always said cosmetic cash shops are fine with me. I understand its a business first. I just don't want players to buy Gear/XP bonuses, etc. these games do have competitive players to them.
 

Kreugen

Vyemm Raider
6,599
793
The main change in VG was abandoning the original combat system where you watched icons slide across the screen and pushed the proper button to react to those icons. Like EQ2 crafting, only all the time.

It sucked.
 

Convo

Ahn'Qiraj Raider
8,761
613
The main change in VG was abandoning the original combat system where you watched icons slide across the screen and pushed the proper button to react to those icons. Like EQ2 crafting, only all the time.

It sucked.
MY memory is a bit foggy with all this but wasn't a big part of the contention with the change is that instead of tweaking it, they completely changed it?