EQ Never

Mughal

Bronze Knight of the Realm
279
39
It also sounds akin to the virtual ecology that UO attempted to have. If players killed off too many wolves then the population of things like rabbits would begin to grow because their natural predators were too few to keep them in check. If the population of deer dropped off, then a dragon might attack one of the towns looking for food because there was no longer enough in it's normal territory to keep it feeding there. They ended up scrapping the whole thing because players kept the entire ecology so wiped out the system wouldn't work.
http://www.gamasutra.com/view/news/1...p#.UOcRkImLIh1
 

LennyLenard_sl

shitlord
195
1
I know this isn't directed at me but I don't see why anything really needs to change. Why can't it be a $50 box with a $15 monthy sub. I'd imagine if the world was large/sandbox enough it would hold a large enough population to turn a profit.
Turning a profit is the big question. Unfortunately, these games are made by businesses which are ultimately run by guys in suits. Some might be fond or even eager for the game, but in the end, they care about their returns on investment above all else. Targeting that niche might be successful, but most don't want success, they want GREAT success.

I think in the coming years you'll see some attempts at targeting that niche, but it's going to come at a cost, either in terms of crappier/highly abstracted art, or increased player monthly fee.
 

Mughal

Bronze Knight of the Realm
279
39
I know this isn't directed at me but I don't see why anything really needs to change. Why can't it be a $50 box with a $15 monthy sub. I'd imagine if the world was large/sandbox enough it would hold a large enough population to turn a profit.
F2P is just a way to have variable pricing and let people who could not afford a $15 to play anyway (since the cost of hw and hosting is now lower than what it was 10 years ago). For serious endgame you will always have some for of sub or sub-like deal.
 

Convo

Ahn'Qiraj Raider
8,761
613
Turning a profit is the big question. Unfortunately, these games are made by businesses which are ultimately run by guys in suits. Some might be fond or even eager for the game, but in the end, they care about their returns on investment above all else. Targeting that niche might be successful, but most don't want success, they want GREAT success.

I think in the coming years you'll see some attempts at targeting that niche, but it's going to come at a cost, either in terms of crappier/highly abstracted art, or increased player monthly fee.
Seems like most games will net over 500K in box sales at this point. I get the vibe if a company specializes in niche they could make a boat load of cash running 2 or 3 games. Especially in the sandbox department. Just my opinion lol.. I really don't know the whole inter working of the gaming industry. If I had the finances that would be my game plan. No more of the jack of all trades MMO's
 

etchazz

Trakanon Raider
2,707
1,056
i know this has been discussed to death as well, but i absolutely would rather pay a monthly sub and play the game i want and have full access to it than the pay to play model. even free to play with micro transactions is something i hate because eventually they will add more and more pay to win stuff to get people's money and churn a bigger profit. i just don't see what the big fucking deal is with paying $15 a month to play a video game that you enjoy? i spend more than that on a few beers at the bar. as long as they are churning out new content at a frequent enough pace, i'd much rather just pay a monthly sub. i sure as shit am not going to start doing any micro transactions. it's too much of a slippery slope.
 

Convo

Ahn'Qiraj Raider
8,761
613
i know this has been discussed to death as well, but i absolutely would rather pay a monthly sub and play the game i want and have full access to it than the pay to play model. even free to play with micro transactions is something i hate because eventually they will add more and more pay to win stuff to get people's money and churn a bigger profit. i just don't see what the big fucking deal is with paying $15 a month to play a video game that you enjoy? i spend more than that on a few beers at the bar. as long as they are churning out new content at a frequent enough pace, i'd much rather just pay a monthly sub. i sure as shit am not going to start doing any micro transactions. it's too much of a slippery slope.
I read a while back SoE did a lot of polling when originally deciding what direction to go in with regards to EQN. Be interesting to see if they asked a question regarding subs. I don't know why these companies don't poll more actually.
 

Muligan

Trakanon Raider
3,216
898
Turning a profit is the big question. Unfortunately, these games are made by businesses which are ultimately run by guys in suits. Some might be fond or even eager for the game, but in the end, they care about their returns on investment above all else. Targeting that niche might be successful, but most don't want success, they want GREAT success.

I think in the coming years you'll see some attempts at targeting that niche, but it's going to come at a cost, either in terms of crappier/highly abstracted art, or increased player monthly fee.
This is it in a nutshell. Ultimately it will come down to some kind of market and consumer research reports and bunch of suits around a table. Just as previously stated, it's not profit anyone is looking for it is maximizing profits. Right now they like the bigger barrel. The preference is to get all the free players they can and then micro transaction them to death.

250,000 subs at 14.99 = 3.7 million per month
500,000 subs at an average of $5 of micro transactions is 2.5 million per month.

You think about playerbase retention and consumer opportunity. As long as the game is free, anyone with a box copy has an opportunity to buy something. With monthly fees, if the subscription is closed, the opportunity is dead. I don't mind either way really but I think subscription players are more committed and you get less casual morons but from a business perspective, I get.

I'm teaching an e-business class this year and you wouldn't believe just how much in our new text includes online gamin from Xbox to Wow and in game shopping. It definitely has the world's attention.
 

jello_sl

shitlord
24
0
It has probably been discussed before but would any of you game play aficionados care to explain what made original EQ combat pacing different from games we are seeing today? Of course it had to do with the bare amount of skills/buttons to be employed, but the timing of skills and length of fights seemed to build more uncertainty and satisfaction when it was all said and done. Was it simply because the longer the fight the more chance for a screw up to happen which made it more satisfying when it was over?

Maybe I am just getting old but this pew-pew, over in seconds combat is very unappealing. Perhaps its just a personal preference that I lean toward a slower paced game and less of twitch based one.
 

Burren

Ahn'Qiraj Raider
4,113
5,425
It has probably been discussed before but would any of you game play aficionados care to explain what made original EQ combat pacing different from games we are seeing today? Of course it had to do with the bare amount of skills/buttons to be employed, but the timing of skills and length of fights seemed to build more uncertainty and satisfaction when it was all said and done. Was it simply because the longer the fight the more chance for a screw up to happen which made it more satisfying when it was over?

Maybe I am just getting old but this pew-pew, over in seconds combat is very unappealing. Perhaps its just a personal preference that I lean toward a slower paced game and less of twitch based one.
You pretty much answered your own questions. EQ was slower paced because of the lack of actions/spells that could be used in a given time frame and the relative HPs of a mob. For melee, it was auto-attack and one, maybe two other buttons (taunt, kick, backstab) and some hybrid spells that pulled aggro and not much else, so they weren't cast over and over. Wow set the pace for a shit-ton of stuff to do at any give point.

I don't think you're alone though, in wanting a return to a slower paced game. However, even though I would like that, I think that also incorporating more actions would be good; just not 40, with abilities being replaced or upgraded every 2 levels.
 
1,678
149
It has probably been discussed before but would any of you game play aficionados care to explain what made original EQ combat pacing different from games we are seeing today?
How interested are you?
smile.png
Because I'm the biggest EQ combat geek you'll ever find. (Proof below). There are a lot of things that make EQ's combat unique. I could probably ramble about it for hours but I'll try to bullet point just several that come to mind:

1) There are a lot of spells at your disposal but you can only memorize several of them to use in battle. So the classes are as deep as any other game, but unlike WoW you can't just do anything at any time. You have to pick what to use for a battle, and if something unexpected happens and you don't happen to have a spell suitable for that, you are shit outta luck.

2) It's just simply balanced to be hard. For example in WoW (or Vanguard or whatever else), with some mobs you can just engage auto attack and win. With harder mobs you would maybe need to add one or two spells to win. But in reality you have 15 spells and you can spam them all a second apart, so you smackdown the living shit out of mobs with ease. EQ just isn't like that. If you engage auto attack and stand by a mob, it will eat you in no time. In fact, big tough tanks are the only ones who can stand near mobs for any length of time, the other classes just get munched to death in seconds. And of the several spells you have, some will be utility, some will be for specific situations (root / snare etc), and leaving only a few to actually fight back. And they have long cast times, so casting something is a commitment and an important decision.

3) Shit happens, a lot. - Spells sometimes fizzle meaning you use the mana but the spell doesn't fire. Sometimes a spell fires and lands but then gets resisted, again using the mana and using the long cast time, and achieving absolutely nothing. There's also combat mechanics like rogue mobs do massive backstab damage so if one sneaks up behind your group, it could be catastrophic. Or mobs running away when they get injured which can aggro all nearby mobs. In some dungeons, if you fail to kill a mob that runs away, you can end up with 15 mobs coming to get you a moment later, and they will happily just wipe out your entire group. There are no ez mode ways out. There are no one click AoE taunts like Vanguard, and huge healing ability, and turning things in to sheep with ease etc. You play on a knife edge even when you are fighting just a few mobs. If you get 10 then you will likely just die no matter what.

4) Everything matters more and everything is more significant. Mana is a really big deal. Big spells can use about a fifth or sixth of your mana. In other words, you can only cast that spell 6 times max. Maybe one resists, one fizzles, and then another mob attacks your healer so you need to blow a bit of mana casting Root to lock it down. That means by the time you are even ready to start casting your nukes, you only have enough mana left to cast a few of them. Not only that, but it regenerates insanely slowly. This has a huge effect on the game in more ways than one. In other games you just unload like a psycho on every mob, because mana is not important. Not only do you get to shoot dozens of nukes without fear of running out of mana, but even if you do get low, it regenerates moments later. In EQ, getting out of mana is a serious problem, because you only get it back by sitting down for a good 5 minutes or so. And when shit constantly happens like mobs showing up out of the blue, it means you desperately want to use as little as possible in every fight. Because one fight can easily turn in to a second fight with no rest, leaving you totally out of mana. If another mob shows up at that time.. you are in big trouble. Also, when mobs hit you while you try to cast a spell, they interrupt the spell casting. You can occasionally slip a spell through, but generally if you end up with a mob hitting you, there's a good chance you'll die. So aggro management is vitally important and again, when some spells take several seconds to cast and a squishy caster can die in 5 seconds, it's very important that you think about consequences BEFORE they happen so that you snare or root mobs or do whatever you need to do to make sure nothing ends up hitting you in the face.

5) The length of the fights is significant too, not just because it makes the battle itself very tactical, but because it commits you. I noticed in other games that you do a dungeon, you start fighting some roamer mob, and another roamer mob shows up at the same time, nobody really gives a shit. All that happens is that people spam their 1,2,3,4,4,4,4,4,4 routine a bit faster and the first mob dies several seconds later. Then they can kill the second one. EQ's not like that, especially in the higher levels as mobs get more HP. When a big bad mob attacks, or a few of them, you can be locked in to that fight for a minute or more. Maybe you don't have a wizard, or maybe the wiz is low on mana from a previous fight or something, the reality is that you have 3 or 4 mobs to kill and it's going to take you a good 3 or 4 minutes to kill them. And there is no other option, you have to kill them or you are all dead. Now say another 2 or 3 mobs are wandering nearby, if those join the fight, you are locked in to maybe several minutes of constant fighting and you probably just don't have the mana to fight that long. So for this reason, groups tend to huddle very tight in the corners, scared shitless of being attacked. You don't just go charging through a dungeon like a bunch of modern MMO'ers, you hide in the corner and think about self preservation. Then one person goes and looks for mobs to bring to the group, but only after they have memorized patrol routes to make sure they only come back with a manageable amount and no chance of extras.

6) Like I mentioned, there are no over powered abilities in EQ. In Vanguard there are guaranteed taunts, there are ways for spell casters to recover ALL their mana mid fight.... there are potions and all kinds of other noob shit that mean that you really have very little to fear. You have none of that in EQ, but there are some 'ok' spells and abilities and they become vitally important, especially to a skilled player. For example the Root spell locks something in place, but if you cast nukes on it the root will break, and if the mob is a spell caster, then it will do more harm than good because the mob will just stand there and nuke the shit out of everyone. But in the right hands it can save a battle. For example all hell breaks loose (which happens often), the tank is fighting 3 mobs at once and struggling to hold aggro on all of them. The healer is frantically trying to keep the tank alive. The dps are desperately trying to kill one of those so that it's 2 instead of 3. And the crowd control has his hands full with a 4th and maybe 5th mob. It's scary but you might just pull this off. Now say a 6th mob shows up, that could easily turn the tables and make you all die. But a clever dps might think fast, nuke the new mob in the face and make it chase him, then run away from the group and then root the mob in place. Then he can return to the fight and continue as before. The group will still need to handle the 6th mob eventually but at least for now it's not doing any harm. Fear works in a similar way, but in a dungeon it's too dangerous.

7) Ok last one. This is an extension of point number 2. The game was just fucking hard. For example, in modern games when an extra mob shows up, the crowd control turns it in to a sheep, and job done, ez. In EQ, there were only a couple of classes who could do crowd control and it was an artform. For a start, the mez spell tended to get resisted a LOT, so often the caster would have to cast a magic resistance debuff on the mob first. But this spell REALLY annoyed mobs and caused them to attack the extremely squishy crowd control guy. So first he had to stun the mob, then magic resist debuff it, and then finally do the mez spell. But even now, the mez spell doesn't change the mob in to anything or cause it to lay down or anything, it just makes the mob stop still. The mez is also broken by any damage at all, so if someone else in the group doesn't notice that a mob got mezzed, and then hits it... the mob will wake up and go straight for the squishy guy who mezzed it and likely kill him. So not only does the crowd control have a tough job, but everyone in the group needs to be constantly aware of what is going on around them. If you accidentally do an AoE or something and you wake up a mezzed mob, it can easily wipe the entire group. It happens a lot. Not only that but even spells cast before you mez the mob, can wake it up. So if you cast a DoT on something and then it gets mezzed, the dot will wake it up right away. So mezzers need to be very carefully which mobs they mez, and dps classes need to be careful not to do any DoTs on any mobs that might end up needing to be crowd controlled.



There is even more than this but I'll leave it there or nobody will read this post. Also bear in mind that there is no way of knowing ANY of this stuff. There was no tooltips in EQ, even spells didn't tell you what they did etc. There are also NO addons, so there is no aggro meter, dps meter, or any other ez mode shit like that. People learned all this stuff by going to a dungeon in a group and everyone dies horribly. They tried to work out what happened and they will have learned one of these things. These catastrophes happened again and again and again, and that was just part of EQ. Only after a long time and massive perseverance did people learn all these things for themselves. In other games it's all about getting experience to level up your character, but in EQ, the players themselves earned very important experience by playing the game too. You could give the same level 50 character to a newbie and to someone who had made it to 50 the hard way, and the difference between the two players would be gigantic.

smile.png
 
922
3
Slower paced game with a variety of faster paced high end challenges would be best imo.

There should still be some slower paced puzzle / strategy aspects involved though.

My vagueness is unchallengeable!!
 

Plaid_sl

shitlord
230
0
How would project m solve any AI problem? Player monsters would zerg anything they see and get bored after a couple days, which is what they did in EQ. What rewards could come to those who are playing monsters? It was a fun vanity feature at one point. If it was enabled, people would get bored of it (on both sides) and stop. It's a dumbed down version of PvP and has no real place in an mmo as a long term AI solution.
 

Dashiva_sl

shitlord
50
0
If anyone is expecting EQNext to be some sort of sandbox gaming nirvana then they must be living in cloud cuckoo land. Anyone who played EQ2 over the last few years could tell you that SOE doesn't give two shits about the actual game or the community, the only thing they care about is the bottom line. Yes they are a business, but I was blown away by the shear disdain shown to the playerbase of EQ2 over the last few years. The shear greed was blatantly obvious, they employed 'Dave Georgeson' and it was obvious from the get go that EQ2 was going to be some sort of trial ground for EQNext along with implementing micro transactions at every opportunity.

Literally every feature we got had some sort of micro transaction hook built in it. It was completely bizarre, they released a 'feature' expansion where you could create your own dungeon. It was mind blowingly bad, the feedback in beta was appalling. Everyone hated it and couldn't understand what SOE was doing. They released it and then of course started adding items to the marketplace so you could decorate your dungeon. There was a entire year without ANY new content, each month SOE would add new costumes to the marketplace along with new mounts etc but zero new content.

This was the time when Dave Georgeson was producer, I think he is now in charge of the entire EQ franchise, which basically means EQNext is going to be appallingly bad in terms of milking the players for every single cent. I would be excited about EQNext but I just know it's going to be littered with stupid features such as the SOEmote that they trialed in EQ2 (Fucking awful btw), and the actual game itself is going to be dumbed down to infantile levels to incorporate as many people as possible who are willing to spend $100 on a new furniture set for their online home. I swear when I left EQ2 the only people left playing were stay at home moms who spent their entire time creating some sort of virtual barbie home online, actual people who played the game were gone.
 
922
3
If anyone is expecting EQNext to be some sort of sandbox gaming nirvana then they must be living in cloud cuckoo land. Anyone who played EQ2 over the last few years could tell you that SOE doesn't give two shits about the actual game or the community, the only thing they care about is the bottom line. Yes they are a business, but I was blown away by the shear disdain shown to the playerbase of EQ2 over the last few years. The shear greed was blatantly obvious, they employed 'Dave Georgeson' and it was obvious from the get go that EQ2 was going to be some sort of trial ground for EQNext along with implementing micro transactions at every opportunity.

Literally every feature we got had some sort of micro transaction hook built in it. It was completely bizarre, they released a 'feature' expansion where you could create your own dungeon. It was mind blowingly bad, the feedback in beta was appalling. Everyone hated it and couldn't understand what SOE was doing. They released it and then of course started adding items to the marketplace so you could decorate your dungeon. There was a entire year without ANY new content, each month SOE would add new costumes to the marketplace along with new mounts etc but zero new content.

This was the time when Dave Georgeson was producer, I think he is now in charge of the entire EQ franchise, which basically means EQNext is going to be appallingly bad in terms of milking the players for every single cent. I would be excited about EQNext but I just know it's going to be littered with stupid features such as the SOEmote that they trialed in EQ2 (Fucking awful btw), and the actual game itself is going to be dumbed down to infantile levels to incorporate as many people as possible who are willing to spend $100 on a new furniture set for their online home. I swear when I left EQ2 the only people left playing were stay at home moms who spent their entire time creating some sort of virtual barbie home online, actual people who played the game were gone.
That really is a hard thing to balance imo. The company needs to make money on a game but at the same time if they go all overboard with driving profit it ruins the fun of the game.

I don't know how others feel about FTP games with item shops, but if there was a game I really enjoyed, I'd be willing to pay a larger monthly subscription for access if it was required to keep microtransactions out.

subscriptions might not be the most profitable business model, but I find it the most fun.

I agree with you entirely that EQNext will be full of microtransactions.