EQ Never
- Thread starter Convo
- Start date
People claim that those with these competitive spirits are in the minority. They claim that the majority of the people would log off and QQ in some corner then play some game that gives them everything they want until they realize the game sucks and they never know why. lol.
Agraza
Registered Hutt
- 6,890
- 521
That is indeed the point of PvP servers. Everything becomes something to control and fight for. PvE servers shouldn't focus on this PvP oriented competition.
Convo
Ahn'Qiraj Raider
- 8,792
- 664
Not being able to bat gave me a better appreciation of being in the lineup...
But lets be real here for a second. Did it suck when I didn't go hit a zone I really wanted to do? Yea..but I went and did something else. It really didnt make or break my experience. It just left me something to do down the road or next character. This really isn't that big of a deal if there is enough content in the game. Several scaling dungeons, outdoor areas, solo stuff, etc..
Grim1
Ahn'Qiraj Raider
- 4,918
- 6,929
I can understand using instances in the PvE context. I still think it's a poor design choice, but I can at least understand it. I'm hoping that "the largest sandbox ever made" means PvP (as it should), but I realize the chances of that are none to none.
I don't want instances at all. They totally kill the game for me. Instances make farming and botting way easier and in PVP they suck. TBH you don't have to do much to include PVP in a sandbox game. Just stick with EQ1 Rule sets and people will popular your servers PVE and PVP. Keep the basis on grouping and interacting and while people may bitch, they will start to enjoy it after a while and it allows them to create enough content. Obviously you can't have obnoxious levels like EQ1 but something in between EQ1 and 2 would be fine. Anyways, I am eager to see if this game will be a steaming pile of crap or not. I don't have my hopes up after so many let downs.
I completely agree. As I posted earlier, I think instances are a poor design decision even in the PvE context. What I am saying is that there will be instancing because more people enjoy PvE than PvP. If they do throw up a couple of PvP servers, they aren't going to take the instancing out just for those few servers.
zzeris
The Real Benny Johnson
- 21,269
- 93,058
I'm almost on the opposite side of the spectrum. I have no problem with instances at the bottom of a non-instanced dungeon(as mentioned earlier). Having very rare loot is of a secondary concern for me and I'd rather PVP be a very minor detail with little effort used. PVP destroys games just as easily as quick leveling does. I'd rather see slow leveling so that the world is seen and appreciated. Why design so much for so little to be experienced? Farming is just as easy for a select few in EQ and the fight for every resource needs to stay on a few Zek based servers. Sure, make it so that getting everything is impossible without massive time spent but guaranteeing something is unavailable because you aren't on the game all the time is asinine.
Make the game very hard and grouping will be a primary goal of people. Make the game slower to level and the world becomes important not the endgame. Make the game about unique, emergent gameplay and gear and ilevels start to lose their importance. There are ways to get the game we want yet still give the kiddies some carrots. Make the game(not endgame) great and people will find reasons to come back.
tad10
Elisha Dushku
- 5,534
- 601
Don't kid yourself. It's about giving them the game with a forfeit. Instances are mostly bullshit - there are a few special cases where they're appropriate (such as the class specific quests in LOTRO).
The only "instance" that should exist is the server instance: that's division enough. As long as servers are reasonably populated (whatever that # is for EQN) then there should be no need for dungeon instancing beyond a few special exceptions. If a server is getting too populated: split it. If it isn't populated enough: merge it.
Convo
Ahn'Qiraj Raider
- 8,792
- 664
I would be perfectly happy if they just throw up a PvP server with little or no thought into how the balancing would work out, a la EQ. MMOs that try to capitalize on PvP always seem to do more harm than good. The rock-paper-scissor system of WoW is an absolute joke. WAR focused so much on the PvP, they forgot the PvE aspect has to be fun as well. So long as EQN is a fun PvE game and they give me the option of a PvP server, I'll be happy. Take instances out of it, and I'll be ecstatic.
Can't see that happening somehow. All the talk about Eve, I have a feeling there are going to be DAOC style outlands areas where you fight for resources, defend towns, and defend access to certain dungeons - all against mobs and players of various factions. I think there will be no racial things, just factions galore. Anyone can join the Freeport faction and be at war with the Oggok faction etc.
I just want a damn game to capture the spirit of freedom where at least the illusion exists of freedom from a rail and not everything is given to everybody. Rare loot should be *gasp* rare, not everyone should have everything. Gear should be unique and provide at least a few multiple paths (to be successful also dependent on class/combat design). Give us proc's, give us gear that makes certain spells/abilities borderline OP...fuck give us OP. So sick of bland gear stats and strict formulas to ensure 99% of everyone is the same. Give us unique classes that bring different things to the table like EQ & VG did. Its sad after 13 years of gaming the only two games that came remotely close to what I personally enjoy are EQ1 and Vanguard with just a sprinkle of Rift. Granted my "dream" game isn't going to sell 10M copies but god damnit look at the community and retention of the core EQ and Vanguard games which is derived from the fact their is a community and alot of hard work is required to succeed. If they could just simulate that with a broader appeal they could still be successful; not 10M copies but at least profitable for the long haul.
Real life doesn't treat everyone fair, quit trying to make the god damn games fair. If everyone drove a damn Shelby GT they wouldnt be special, EQ at least got this aspect right. Sony just needs to modernize that line of thought without quiet the harsh restrictions/cockblocks. Lastly, when is the last time you played a game where the content was hard enough that people still actively raided the past expansions raids actively. I know from alot of peoples perspectives that is just horrible design and we should have gear resets and all that jazz but fuck....i loved that fact about EQ. Casuals still could be fucking casuals, they just progressed at slower rates due to having to wait for additional power gains to make up for lack of organized raiding skills etc. I'm 31,manage a department and spend 70+ hours a week between travel and work, play basketball and box routinely and I can honstely say if an updated combo of EQ & Vanguard came out I'd still dedicate every free second I had to it because I truly enjoy that style of game. How many others out there think similarly....i don't know but I sure as hell wish there was more of us.
Real life doesn't treat everyone fair, quit trying to make the god damn games fair. If everyone drove a damn Shelby GT they wouldnt be special, EQ at least got this aspect right. Sony just needs to modernize that line of thought without quiet the harsh restrictions/cockblocks. Lastly, when is the last time you played a game where the content was hard enough that people still actively raided the past expansions raids actively. I know from alot of peoples perspectives that is just horrible design and we should have gear resets and all that jazz but fuck....i loved that fact about EQ. Casuals still could be fucking casuals, they just progressed at slower rates due to having to wait for additional power gains to make up for lack of organized raiding skills etc. I'm 31,manage a department and spend 70+ hours a week between travel and work, play basketball and box routinely and I can honstely say if an updated combo of EQ & Vanguard came out I'd still dedicate every free second I had to it because I truly enjoy that style of game. How many others out there think similarly....i don't know but I sure as hell wish there was more of us.
I feel this way. As I said above, give me PVE thats hard and challenging and a few pvp rulsets ala Zeks and I'd play for years.
Rezz
Mr. Poopybutthole
- 4,488
- 3,531
It's ok to feel that way. Nobody is saying you are wrong for feeling that way. Just don't expect a triple A game being designed to "change the market" to recycle dated mechanics from a 14 year old game that rose to prominence under extremely specific circumstances. I wouldn't expect a WoW-anything either, but EQ:Reskinned it will not be.
I'll extrapolate before a hipster attempts to do it for me. EQ was around when the internet and online persistent gaming were pretty new, with 3d online persistent gaming being super new. It was the only game in town for a couple of years, and it was the only working PVE friendly game that wasn't FFXI for longer.
Lots of those memorable players that we ran into during our EQ careers wouldn't have played EQ (at least not very long) had the casual, solo friendly option been available. But it wasn't, so being the only horse in town lead to the very specific circumstances that was the forced "community" that existed in EQ during the early years. It was also much more difficult to box in the early days, as it was a combination of cost and technology prohibitive. Dialup was still the primary internet connection speed during those years, so the average person was not boxing his entire group. From velious+, it was quite easy to box all the necessary classes to effectively group with yourself, which is what many many many people did. Especially at the high end. So yeah, ignorance and newness of the genre, the type of connections available, and the fact that it was the only PVE focused game on the market that worked, all contributed to EQ being what EQ was. The problem arises that those circumstances are all marked false right now, so you have to be a little out of touch to think that the same thing could exist again in the same way.
There is nothing wrong with liking and appreciating that style of gameplay. But EQ:N isn't going to be the same as EQ and even hoping for it is to really just pretend that the last 13 years of technological/mechanical/thematic/social changes didn't happen. The guys at SOE may love their baby "EQ," but they are first and foremost a business. They -know- what has changed in the world and marketplace at large, so seeing a repeat of an idea that flourished under extremely specific circumstances is probably simply not going to happen from any triple A company in their headline products.
I'll extrapolate before a hipster attempts to do it for me. EQ was around when the internet and online persistent gaming were pretty new, with 3d online persistent gaming being super new. It was the only game in town for a couple of years, and it was the only working PVE friendly game that wasn't FFXI for longer.
Lots of those memorable players that we ran into during our EQ careers wouldn't have played EQ (at least not very long) had the casual, solo friendly option been available. But it wasn't, so being the only horse in town lead to the very specific circumstances that was the forced "community" that existed in EQ during the early years. It was also much more difficult to box in the early days, as it was a combination of cost and technology prohibitive. Dialup was still the primary internet connection speed during those years, so the average person was not boxing his entire group. From velious+, it was quite easy to box all the necessary classes to effectively group with yourself, which is what many many many people did. Especially at the high end. So yeah, ignorance and newness of the genre, the type of connections available, and the fact that it was the only PVE focused game on the market that worked, all contributed to EQ being what EQ was. The problem arises that those circumstances are all marked false right now, so you have to be a little out of touch to think that the same thing could exist again in the same way.
There is nothing wrong with liking and appreciating that style of gameplay. But EQ:N isn't going to be the same as EQ and even hoping for it is to really just pretend that the last 13 years of technological/mechanical/thematic/social changes didn't happen. The guys at SOE may love their baby "EQ," but they are first and foremost a business. They -know- what has changed in the world and marketplace at large, so seeing a repeat of an idea that flourished under extremely specific circumstances is probably simply not going to happen from any triple A company in their headline products.
Nirgon
Log Wizard
- 15,218
- 25,002
Right so lets hope everyone doesn't lose their mind when something like that exists for a while
tad10
Elisha Dushku
- 5,534
- 601
Ambiturner
Ssraeszha Raider
- 16,159
- 19,761
Not sure why people think nostalgia is an insult. It's not saying you don't know what you want, only that it explains WHY you want it. What we're saying is that without that nostalgia, a lot of those features would be huge turn offs. SOE would be limiting themselves to a very limited market if they only aimed for former EQ players.
As for instancing, if you have enough content to where you don't have instancing and don't have hour long lists to get into camps then I'm all for non instanced. Not sure how practical that is, though.