Abefroman
Naxxramas 1.0 Raider
- 12,588
- 11,904
Eq took a huge nose dive as soon as WoW was released. Those Eq sub numbers were with no competition. As soon as there was something else to play people couldn't wait to leave.
Pan'Theon: Rise' of th'e Fal'Len - #1 Thread in MMO
- Thread starter gogojira_sl
- Start date
Are you seriously having a hard time comprehending that people play what is available to them and migrate to better things eventually
Quineloe
Ahn'Qiraj Raider
- 6,978
- 4,463
you people act like EQ was the only MMORPG in existance back then. The only online game at all.
WOW was a pretty good game before the suits took over. Now, it's basically like EQ live is today, with more polish.
Did you really play a game with core mechanics you strongly disliked because you didn't know what else to do with your free time? That's pretty insulting to yourself.
Interest idea, it's like shards online mixed with EQ:N Landmark... How does this only have 47 backers but B-Rad was able to pull in 1500 backers showing nothing near what this concept has shown?
- 2,363
- 695
iannis
Musty Nester
- 31,351
- 17,656
The pithy answer is, "That's the power of rerolled, bitches!"
The real answer is name recognition and one of the very few things that Brad -did- do was he made the rounds to what remain of the EQ/Vanguard fansites to pitch that he was going to be doing a thing and to make your wallets ready. And of course Brad still has people willing to do free fansite/word of mouth advertising for him.
He probably STILL has a couple, even after this.
Targeted advertising does matter.
The real answer is name recognition and one of the very few things that Brad -did- do was he made the rounds to what remain of the EQ/Vanguard fansites to pitch that he was going to be doing a thing and to make your wallets ready. And of course Brad still has people willing to do free fansite/word of mouth advertising for him.
He probably STILL has a couple, even after this.
Targeted advertising does matter.
Louis
Trakanon Raider
- 2,836
- 1,105
Hyped where? other than here and very vauge tweets on twitter? A majority of people had no idea how a kickstarter worked much less actively supported projects involving it. Then Brad dumps this shitpile of ks on our porch and doesn't get 4-5k instant supporters? Holy shit! that's surprising.
I don't venture out much for gaming information, so I couldn't tell you if there's any interest in an actual mmorpg these days outside of here. Nor do I want broken mechanics. I want a game that somewhat resembles what an mmorpg originally was. Not a game that gives you a level 90, instantly ports me to a dungeon with an automatically generated group, gear that gets used like toilet paper, and almost no possibility of danger. I haven't played every mmorpg so maybe I'm missing a game that actually offers a living world instead of a glorified, graphical lobby?
Imo the real mmorpg industrsy is in fact dead at this point.
Whether or not there may actually be enough interest for a game like Pantheon, getting 1500 people to actually pony up money isn't going to drive any publishers crazy with excitement. Despite the fact that I'd personally love to play a game that's challenging, doesn't hold my hand every step of the way, and requires actual skill to survive (think MMO Dark Souls), I'm not sure there are enough people like me who'd want to play it. Worse, I'm not sure you could convince a publisher that there's enough interest for them to invest millions of dollars in the idea. If I had money coming out of my ears, I'd just make the game anyway and see what happens. But I'm not, sadly.
Good question. I LOVED DAoC. The Realm vs Realm combat was awesome. Easily one of the best and often overlooked games around.
I also really enjoyed Asheron's Call. Their idea of world events that completely changed the world really made it feel alive, and not just some stage play where things happened exactly the same forever.
iannis
Musty Nester
- 31,351
- 17,656
I think because the people that enjoyed DAoC so much (many of us on this board have great memories of that game) are forced to admit that the pve was terribad, it was the RvR that made that game the great thing that it was. So unless you're talking about an EQ-Zek it makes more sense to compare apples to apples. EQ and WoW were both primarily pve games, DAoC just wasn't.
Convo
Ahn'Qiraj Raider
- 8,761
- 613
Being someone who championed this game on forums. there were a ton of people who liked the idea of it but would not support it for XYZ reason. I'm assuming you have marketing data that we are not privy to, but my overall impression from all of this was, if the game was made, there would be at least a lot of people interested in trying it out..
Kirun
Buzzfeed Editor
- 18,750
- 34,958
You Luddites had your day in the sun. Vanguard crashed and burned. You guys keep attempting to make your argument infallible by saying, "Yeah, well...that was a clusterfuck! No TRUE Scotsman("hardcore" game)would fail!", anytime numerous examples of "hardcore, niche" games failing are cited. You'll always point to theoneexample that succeeded(EVE), even though it took them years to build that base, and you'll use that against the numerous failures. It's also funny how very few(none)of you play the one example you can cite. If that's the case, is itreallya hardcore game that you're clamoring to play, or are you just hoping to get one more taste of the "glory years"? I'm betting it's the latter.
Now, I've had the same circular debate on this with Lithose. It doesn't mean thatsomeof the systems present in EQ shouldn't be explored and wouldn't work for today's gamers. However, this "EQ 1.5" nonsense is ludicrous. A game that is "EQ with better graphics!" will fail miserably.
Because it did so at a time when your other options were: DAoC(mostly PvP focused), UO(mostly PvP focused and nearing the end of it's "reign"), or Asheron's Call(mostly PvP focused). You then compound that with the fact that nobody wanted to leave their "friends". Those are all the ingredients SoE needed for 500k(430k were the last numbers released by Sony, so I'm not sure where 500k comes from)subscribers. Once a viable alternative came out(WoW), EQ was dismantled very quickly.
It's not comparable because it was nearly adecadeago. Alotchanges in 10 years, especially in the world of technology and consumers of said technology.
DaoC was largely PvP and released unitemized from lvl 20 up.
The number of people who actually want to play a largely PvP game is far smaller than the vocal minority who champion it often claim.
Yet last I checked, it is still going and still releasing expansions right? Its numbers may be low, but that's damn impressive for a 15 year old game.
EverQuest releases 20th expansion, Call of the Forsaken | Massively
Valderen
Space Pirate
- 4,469
- 2,636
There's probably room for a game similar to EQ1.
I know that while I may enjoy modern MMO, I'd like something more challenging, more group focused, and that is not entirely about instant-gratification...and more a long term investment.
Having said that, I wouldn't go back to an EQ1 type game without some modern updates and quality of life improvement. But I seriously would like something that was more challenging than most modern games.
I know that while I may enjoy modern MMO, I'd like something more challenging, more group focused, and that is not entirely about instant-gratification...and more a long term investment.
Having said that, I wouldn't go back to an EQ1 type game without some modern updates and quality of life improvement. But I seriously would like something that was more challenging than most modern games.
Louis
Trakanon Raider
- 2,836
- 1,105
Are you making the argument that Vanguard and Pantheon weren't clusterfucks and were DoA?
And glory years? wtf are you even talking about? I want a game that's fun while still able to be somewhat challenging. Not faceroll easy.
zzeris
King Turd of Shit Hill
- 18,949
- 74,018
This post touches on the issues a EQ 1.5 would have. Many people want a harder game with more group focus. First, that doesn't mean it has to be like EQ at all. Second, beyond that point, there is a lot of different parts of EQ that some like and some don't. There are a vocal minority that wouldn't like much beyond a graphical update. What kind of PvP rules? Leveling speed? Leveling experience? Death and the drawbacks? No drops? Etc, etc, etc.
Here is a concept with a small audience to begin with. Then the developers have to try and see which group will keep the ship afloat? I don't see it. Garriott gets his crowd back and the game is very approachable. Jacobs is taking back PvP with ESO keeping some of the crowd. There are accessible hard games out there already. Very niche market and a fragmented fan base. No wonder SOE has stayed away.
Kirun
Buzzfeed Editor
- 18,750
- 34,958
No, I'm making the argument that anytime a hardocre MMO fails and is cited as evidence for a smaller market of players existing than a publisher/investor is willing to take on, many of the EQ die-hards invoke the, "No true Scotsman" trope, in some sort of attempt to prove that it just hasn't been "done right". It's an attempt to make your argument infallible, I get it. The problem is, numerous attempts to target a hardcore audiencehavebeen tried, and they keep failing. Whether it's because their bugged, mismanaged, or too difficult/expensive to implement, all that matters to the people funding these games areresults.
The one example of "success" that exists, none of the die-hards play. Why is that? The die-hards love citing it as an example of a hardcore game "done right", why aren't they playing it? I'd venture to guess it's because what theyreallywant is just a reskinned EQ, in some vague attempt to relive the past. They don't havegenuineinterest in a "hardcore" game, or even a game with an EQ-esque penalty/reward system. Their interest lies not in the hardcore, but simply in reliving the glory days - the way things used to be!
That's the point I keep driving at in these debates. You die-hards aren't arguing for hardcore - which becomes very apparent once you extrapolate your points out far enough. What you're arguing for simply comes down to nostalgia.
iannis
Musty Nester
- 31,351
- 17,656
I honestly think that EQ in a browser would sell.
I also honestly think that Sony would charge too much for the name and you'd be better off making EQ-ish in a browser, instead.
And I don't think you'll make jillions of dollars. But for fucks sake, Runescape did just fine for what it was.
I also honestly think that Sony would charge too much for the name and you'd be better off making EQ-ish in a browser, instead.
And I don't think you'll make jillions of dollars. But for fucks sake, Runescape did just fine for what it was.