I enjoyed wars public quests more than any other game's. I haven't done raid rifts and hunt rifts are kinda meh.
EQ Never
- Thread starter Convo
- Start date
xzi
Mouthbreather
- 7,526
- 6,763
Valve could very easily fund an MMO with their TF2 and dota shop put together, there isn't much reason Sony couldn't either. I don't necessarily hope that they will sell a billion hats and paints.. but hey it works for every other retard under the sun that want a new hat, it could work for every retard in MMOs as well.
Cash shop isn't too much of a threat to me anymore, I'd imagine they will have a pay-to-play method as well as F2P like they do with Planetside, and if the game is good enough most people will just pay for an upgraded account.
Yes indeed.... Me thinking that mmos today have gone towards catering to children rather than a more mature audience is me being childish, a 32 year old just trying to grow up.
I know you are not exactly known for constructive feedback, but do you have any disagreements with what I said in the post?
Do you not agree that wow has no darkness? That is your favorite mmo right? Have you ever been outside in nature (away from lights) and have full clear 20/20 vision? Do you not agree that EQ having actual nights, with spells or racial abilities to fix it, did in fact add an element to the world as a whole? Or do you feel that game mechanics that can be countered 100% of the time at a later stage/end game (worn items), might as well be removed as a whole, because they are pointless after a while? Because personally I remember that experience of being afraid of the dark in an mmo, and think that others would enjoy that too. It was a subtle character progression that gave the world flavor that is outright removed in any mmo past EQ.
Do you not agree that the current trend of graphics style from WoW and after caters to a demographic that is certainly not adult/mature. Not saying the WoW art style is not good, it is incredibly well done. However, the artistic style is that of a cartoon. In my life experience, some grownups enjoy that too, but very, very, very, rarely have I been in a room with a group of people my age, discussing a movie we would like to see, and a cartoon has been the suggestion. I love Pixar movies and South Park. Cannot wait for the South Park game, but in an mmo, which is (hopefully) a long term game, I do not wish to run around feeling like I am in a Disney movie. I do not connect to that. You obviously like it, which is fine. I just do not, and think there is room for a game not catering to the same crowd. EQ was realistic for its time, copying the current trend of cartoons just seems so.... sellout. I want EQ:N, not WOW:N.
However, that is probably what we will end up seeing, as I can assume the meetings required to get funding would go much smoother if they pitched Norrath in a WoW world. Less development time as Norrath has an established lore, would draw from the EQ and EQ2 crowd, and the style of WoW would draw in the many, many, many millions of people who tried WoW as their first mmo, but is bored with that and want something new after so many years. Most features that are in both games would then be catered to the WoW crowd as there are more of them.
Art style - EQ: realistic, WoW: cartoonish - EQN: cartoonish
Night - EQ: Dark, WoW: Light - EQN: Light
Overworld - EQ: zones, WoW: open world/seamless - EQN: open world/seamless
PvP - EQ: separate servers, WoW: separate servers, PvE also has instanced PvP content - EQN: Guessing separate servers, PvE will have player created PvP instanced content.
Death penalty - EQ: harsh, WoW: minimal - EQN: guessing minimal
And so on. There might be new features in EQN, but from what has been seen and confirmed so far, it seems outside of the lore I think that people coming from WoW will feel more at home in EQN than people from EQ. Which would be a shame (to us few old EQ players who liked EQ better than WoW). It makes perfect sense too. Nintendo just released the statement that most people today would not be able to finish the original Super Mario. Catering to the people who enjoyed the difficulty and danger of an actual Game Over, in today's market of press X to win in a QTE, would be madness. The ones of us who wanted Smed to put on war paint when talking to the investors and say, "Madness? THIS IS EQ!" will be very disappointed. Like Tad said, I am in line to have my hype level drop -110%. EDIT: For some reason now, my hype level is really high and I hope I am wrong about everything and that I owe Smed a beer for kicking over an investor suggesting EQ lite.
But, to bring this back to what has been discussed in the last few pages. The SOE Live conference, are they really going the way of streaming the first bit, where they present themselves, what they have (powerpoint/screenshot/small video clip at best), then only show the actual game to the people there + press at 5pm?
tad10
Elisha Dushku
- 5,518
- 583
1. . Don't give up hope yet. EQ:N should be somewhere between EQ and WoW in terms of death penalty & etc. The 110% to -110% was more about combat mechanics than anything else.
2. They have to show some gameplay at the reveal. It's 90 freaking minutes.
1) Edited post.
2) Do they though? They also were supposed to show a black box video that was delayed until after the conference. Doing it this way would give them the ability to give the press extra tidbits that will increase hype under a much more controlled environment. Would also make people more interested in the black box video (companies love to try to force things to go viral from hype, this never works though). It might be a good thing if they do it as well. My hype would certainly increase if they took the streamed part to introduce the people behind it. Showing extreme confidence in the product. This is who made it, this is who we are, this is what we have done before, now you will experience a world unlike no other! It is not like information shown there will not eventually leak on every mmo site, so it would not be them hiding something. Just hyping it even more.
Rezz
Mr. Poopybutthole
- 4,486
- 3,531
The term is "stylized" not "cartoon." EQ2 tried to go heavily in the realistic look, after the stylized look of original EQ and not the shitty wannabe reality of Luclin Models. Community had a huge backlash against the luclin models because they took the -most- stylized races and turned them borderline realistic (trolls/ogres/gnomes) and made them look f'n terrible/terrible/pedophilish in the process. They continued this trend with EQ2, by making the default as all models are realistic (which people complained heavily about) and there was a huge outcry. Then the Soga models (korean/animeish style) came out and lots of people switched to using those.
The point being, that EQ already tried going realistic twice, and both times it was met with tons of fan outcry of them losing the "feel" of EQ, as perceived through the stylized graphics of Classic-Velious. Granted, the new art guy is nowhere fucking -close- to as good as parkinson, but the old models were nowhere close to how they were presented in the paintings either. Specifically, Ogres and Trolls, two of the most stylized character models in the game. If anything, EQ:N is returning to the original art style of EQ if they go the more stylized route, not less EQ by going realistic.
SOE probably doesn't need to argue much in the financial area as Smed has kept them in the black for years now, I believe. They just look at it as an investment in making even more money. Probably not WoW-Money, but not terrible money either. Also, since they have repeatedly stated that they dodged making a WoW-clone, I would imagine that they are leaning towards more of a balance of the things you brought up, not wholesale taking WoW-isms and just EQing them up. But that's the thing. If it is even reminiscent of WoW (which, at the time it released, had a harsher death penalty comparatively than contemporary EQ) people start talking about catering to casuals and yada yada yada. There really is no pleasing some people unless it -is- a direct copy of 1999 EQ style features.
The point being, that EQ already tried going realistic twice, and both times it was met with tons of fan outcry of them losing the "feel" of EQ, as perceived through the stylized graphics of Classic-Velious. Granted, the new art guy is nowhere fucking -close- to as good as parkinson, but the old models were nowhere close to how they were presented in the paintings either. Specifically, Ogres and Trolls, two of the most stylized character models in the game. If anything, EQ:N is returning to the original art style of EQ if they go the more stylized route, not less EQ by going realistic.
SOE probably doesn't need to argue much in the financial area as Smed has kept them in the black for years now, I believe. They just look at it as an investment in making even more money. Probably not WoW-Money, but not terrible money either. Also, since they have repeatedly stated that they dodged making a WoW-clone, I would imagine that they are leaning towards more of a balance of the things you brought up, not wholesale taking WoW-isms and just EQing them up. But that's the thing. If it is even reminiscent of WoW (which, at the time it released, had a harsher death penalty comparatively than contemporary EQ) people start talking about catering to casuals and yada yada yada. There really is no pleasing some people unless it -is- a direct copy of 1999 EQ style features.
Mr Creed
Too old for this shit
- 2,380
- 276
I'm counting on it. Matter of fact I have the money right here and am willing to throw it at the screen as soon as possible.
PS2 alpha squad was a pretty nice deal imo, it was $40 iirc for $40 in station cash plus a camo, 6-month boost and an additional gun for each class, and beta access ofc. I didnt actually play beta because I didnt have time then but didnt mind the expense because it was a good deal even without the beta. SOE also reset the 6 month boost 2 months later when because there were some issues with replacing it with bought boosts, and then upgraded it from 10% to 50% boost for those fresh 6 months (because ultimately suspending used boosts wasnt going to work out). I didnt expect that at all and its one of the little things they've done in PS2 that gives me hope that they actually treat their new crop of games in a different way then current EQ1/2/VG (which are just being used for tests and milking cash according to you guys).
You are right (constructive critizism of a post, you are doing things wrong I think). The word I should have used is stylized and not cartoon. Though I think WoW has a cartoon style, I also do think that the style is close to perfected. And you are right, I enjoyed the old EQ Ogre, troll and gnome graphics. I am from Norway, and Trolls in original EQ looked like "realistic" trolls that I grew up with. Ogres looked right too (without knowing what an ogre should look like). Original gnomes were just too adorable to ever change. So I guess I want back to a realistic style where characters can be ugly and they all do not have the same body structure. Though I think this was brought up in Vanguard as well, and the reason the bodies were humanoid was due to the motion capture and the difficulty in putting the more fancy animations into different skeletons. EQs animations were not motion capture I think. Not sure if they have released how they do the animations in EQ:N? That might give a clue as to what to expect in terms of different looking races/characters.
Also, RIP Parkinson
This obviously has no bearing on the game whatsoever.. but, I can't get over how derpy FV looks in the new box art. Her eyes aren't pointing in the same direction..
Miele
Lord Nagafen Raider
- 916
- 48
Just saying, EQ2 had some very well done thunderstorms back in the days: I remember Antonica being dark, couldn't see shit more than 20 meters away and it was loud thunder after loud thunder, with lightnings brightening up the landscape. It felt fucking real and I remember being very impressed by it. I can't remember if it was everywhere or which limitations were in place, but I'm 100% sure it was well done and for being 2004-2005 stuff, that speaks volumes.
Found this on the tube and it gives an idea:http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XL9c8VLtqhA
P.S.: Seeing that video reminded me that Fae were an awesome fun race to play, gliding never got old.
... Did you photoshop in the white stuff on the corner of her mouth?This obviously has no bearing on the game whatsoever.. but, I can't get over how derpy FV looks in the new box art. Her eyes aren't pointing in the same direction..
Rezz
Mr. Poopybutthole
- 4,486
- 3,531
Probably due to compression of the file giving the sense that the iris on the left (your right) eye is fully visible instead of partially obscured by the perspective, which is how it should be. This gives the derp look. Granted, I don't particularly like this specific piece of artwork, but the guy seems a bit too technically talented to mess that up even if I dislike his version of the subject matter.
Unrelated to anything that has been posted lately, but since the other thread asking questions has been locked I will ask here.
What about EQ:N being tied to your station account? Will there be bonuses for it? ie: you have X level character in EQ or EQ2, or your account is X amount of years old. Reason I ask is because I have forgotten my original sony account password. I tried a few different things, but nope. Then tried to reset, but requires the answer to a question I apparently forgot how I answered. What my favorite book or something is. Not sure how I spelled it, or even what it was when I created it. Sent an email to soe, who replied that they would require the credit card number I used when I created the account. Being over a decade ago, I do not have it. Called the bank, and the latest card they had expired in 07, which means it is still too old to be the card number they wanted. Just wondering if it will be worth calling Visa or something over. I do not like missing free things.
What about EQ:N being tied to your station account? Will there be bonuses for it? ie: you have X level character in EQ or EQ2, or your account is X amount of years old. Reason I ask is because I have forgotten my original sony account password. I tried a few different things, but nope. Then tried to reset, but requires the answer to a question I apparently forgot how I answered. What my favorite book or something is. Not sure how I spelled it, or even what it was when I created it. Sent an email to soe, who replied that they would require the credit card number I used when I created the account. Being over a decade ago, I do not have it. Called the bank, and the latest card they had expired in 07, which means it is still too old to be the card number they wanted. Just wondering if it will be worth calling Visa or something over. I do not like missing free things.
concept concept art. i prefer it and i feel like this tells me that my main issue is with the coloration.
Denaut
Trump's Staff
- 2,739
- 1,279
On Developers Posting:
The basic reason developers don't post here openly is that, other than the few people in charge, most of us don't make many important or large scale decisions. I wouldn't, and I assume most of my colleagues wouldn't, want to have to defend bad decisions or game-play choices they don't agree with. Nothing could be more demoralizing then coming here and catching a shit-storm for something that isn't your fault and you can't do anything about. I post here because I work at a small studio now and the stuff I work on is well below the RADAR of people that post here, and no one cares enough to berate my work. Not to mention I am also an absolute nobody so I don't catch personal attacks for past work other people might.
On Free-to-Play Monetization:
Here is the thing about monetizing on what I'll callgame-play enhancementsfor the sake of argument. For the most part, comparing monetization in the average game to something like League of Legends or even TF2 is a false comparison. If you are one of those handful of games you are pretty much set, and you can do whatever the hell you want and it will print money for you.Somany people play that even the poorest converting monetization feature will generate a ridiculous revenue stream that can pay for any number of coke-fueled hooker parties your drug-addled brain can imagine.
Unfortunately most of us don't have such sore penises (or vaginas), and our septa remain woefully intact. So now here you are with a game that isn't making enough money, maybe not even covering costs. Your MAU (Monthly Active Users) is growing about as fast as you can reasonably afford to grow it and your conversion rate is good, but unfortunately people just aren't spending that much money. At this point you have to do something, and quickly, or you'll have to stop splurging on those fancy store-brand potatoes and move down to generic.
Generally speaking, those most bang for your buck (that is development time to revenue) is to boost your ARPPU (Average Revenue Per Paying User), and the fastest/easiest way to do that is to addgame-play enhancements. The data has shown over and over again that your paying users areverywilling to part with their money for an advantage. By concentrating development time on getting more money from people that have demonstrated they are already willing to play can by you enough time to hopefully fix some of the larger and more systemic issues that are bogging your game down.
Thisisrisky, as it can possibly damage the long-term health of your game, but when you really have no choice you do it anyway.
The basic reason developers don't post here openly is that, other than the few people in charge, most of us don't make many important or large scale decisions. I wouldn't, and I assume most of my colleagues wouldn't, want to have to defend bad decisions or game-play choices they don't agree with. Nothing could be more demoralizing then coming here and catching a shit-storm for something that isn't your fault and you can't do anything about. I post here because I work at a small studio now and the stuff I work on is well below the RADAR of people that post here, and no one cares enough to berate my work. Not to mention I am also an absolute nobody so I don't catch personal attacks for past work other people might.
On Free-to-Play Monetization:
Here is the thing about monetizing on what I'll callgame-play enhancementsfor the sake of argument. For the most part, comparing monetization in the average game to something like League of Legends or even TF2 is a false comparison. If you are one of those handful of games you are pretty much set, and you can do whatever the hell you want and it will print money for you.Somany people play that even the poorest converting monetization feature will generate a ridiculous revenue stream that can pay for any number of coke-fueled hooker parties your drug-addled brain can imagine.
Unfortunately most of us don't have such sore penises (or vaginas), and our septa remain woefully intact. So now here you are with a game that isn't making enough money, maybe not even covering costs. Your MAU (Monthly Active Users) is growing about as fast as you can reasonably afford to grow it and your conversion rate is good, but unfortunately people just aren't spending that much money. At this point you have to do something, and quickly, or you'll have to stop splurging on those fancy store-brand potatoes and move down to generic.
Generally speaking, those most bang for your buck (that is development time to revenue) is to boost your ARPPU (Average Revenue Per Paying User), and the fastest/easiest way to do that is to addgame-play enhancements. The data has shown over and over again that your paying users areverywilling to part with their money for an advantage. By concentrating development time on getting more money from people that have demonstrated they are already willing to play can by you enough time to hopefully fix some of the larger and more systemic issues that are bogging your game down.
Thisisrisky, as it can possibly damage the long-term health of your game, but when you really have no choice you do it anyway.
After seeing the beautiful daylight - nighttime in PS2, I can only imagine EQ:N will be as beatiful. They have the engine for it.
People trying to convince themselves it'll be a WoW-clone in this or any other regard simply haven't been paying attention. SoE has made multiple announcements that they had a WoW clone, and they threw it out because it simply wasn't innovative enough. I understand they don't deserve to be trusted, but there's almost no way they'd stake their reputation on such an easily-refuted statement once the reveal hits.
If there are two facts we can go on as of now, it's that the game will not copy WoW's more generic concepts, and that it'll use the Forgelight engine. Everything from Flip's post feels like it'll be accurate, but we'll have no certainty until Friday.
"This is dildos." Can't unsee/un-read
On a more serious note, though, public quests were the start of a positive move toward open/uncommitted grouping which had its good and bad points. Now if only traditional grouping, short- and long-term, would be rewarded a little more extensively.
Lol fuck I didn't even notice that. I thought some of GW 2's more complex "Public quests" were great. I think games need to realise less is more. Instead of having 20 different quests per area have 1-3 in depth/long quests with short intervals that have a story for each zone. People who don't wanna read can fly through it while others can enjoy the zone and it's story."This is dildos." Can't unsee/un-read
On a more serious note, though, public quests were the start of a positive move toward open/uncommitted grouping which had its good and bad points. Now if only traditional grouping, short- and long-term, would be rewarded a little more extensively.