Everquest Next announcement coming 2 August in Vegas

[Malladine]

...I'd love to think someone will do a big, gorgeous, open world where you can just get tossed in and explore, fight, loot, and die, but I have no actual hope it will happen. I think it's over.

Wasn't that Darkfall??

 

[Craig234]

I don't see the connection. Vanguard wasn't exactly hard core compared to EQ and it had so many other issues technically and on the management side that I think it's dicey to try and draw a conclusion.

Massively said in a review of ESO recently that they predicted it will flop because people are tired of "story-driven theme-park MMOs." I thought that was an interesting statement. I would certainly be in that category of players, but I don't know if it's the majority. I like online fantasy RPGs in some ways more than single-player, even though the latter are richer in story, but they have become just such utter trash that I don't even consider the possibility that one will be good anymore. They've become literally the archetype of boring. Just follow little pointers around the map and click shit. It's nuts. I'd love to think someone will do a big, gorgeous, open world where you can just get tossed in and explore, fight, loot, and die, but I have no actual hope it will happen. I think it's over.

Well, the comparison is that that's what Vanguard was supposed to be, and so it sends a message to people who decide what to make.

I played EQ vanilla, and I remember the experience was filled with the game having so many nasty things it strengthened the community that needed to cooperate, and I remember thinking that the frustrations were so high that people would tolerate it because it was the only great game of the type, but I felt when someone made an alternative that was less frustrating, people would often prefer it and competition would force mmo's to get less and less hard. Wow closely fit what I had predicted and the rest is history.

Despite the name, questing wasn't the main gameplay in the original Everquest - it did have a lot of 'pick your own gameplay'. But that also did lend itself to players quickly feeling they were 'done' with an area other than grinding in it. For example, farming giants for plat, or spots for experience.

I did notice that left to their own playing, players could find a new place, run around, kill a few things, and in a half hour feel 'they did it, done with that'. While questing has a way of extending content use greatly - suddenly it's kill 12 of this and 10 of that, collect 15 of those, and all the stuff in the area is used for up to hours and hours. And it can help players re-use content and feel less 'done' so quickly. And the story side of the quests helps with that even more.

In EQ, players made the convention that the East Commons Tunnel was for player auctions, while current MMO's have the far more functional Auction House. Each has its pros and cons. But my sense is that most players don't prefer the sandbox atmosphere, even if it was accepted when it was the only game you could get of the type (of course it was just 'more' sandbox, not really sandbox).

A lot of the MMO conventions now in use - or overuse - I think are because they work pretty well for players, despite the things you don't like about them.

Part of it does come down to the players. It's like a game naming a server the role-playing server - what the players use it for has a lot to do with whether that means much.

MMO's seem originally to have been more about 'provide a world to explore and spend time with players in', while that's gradually evolved to 'provide a world to have players follow story quests and get advancement in'. EQ offered some huge challenges that seem mostly rewarding just for beating them, while now it's more rewards for completing things that don't take as much nearly to get done. But players mostly seem to prefer that. EQ was amazing but it can be pleasant to have the softer gameplay.

An example I use of the craziness of some EQ design was a man and wife couple who took 2 weeks vacation to take turns sleeping and camp her cleric 24 hours a day for over a week for an epic quest piece. Some things could demand staying up for over 24 hours. Another example is the original zone where you couldn't leave without fighting out, and if you didn't, you permanently lost the equipment you had spent months to obtain, and if you got killed, you had little way to have the equipment to go back in and get back to your body.

That's too nasty, I only remember one guild trying it, so I think it didn't get used much until they relaxed that.

Anyway, I'm not sure how much market there is for the more 'sandbox' you mention, and players don't seem to be used to that idea anymore.

Player tastes change. I met the guy who co-wrote Zork in EQ, and asked him, doesn't he think more games like Infocom did could be made? I was more optimistic there was a market than he was, he flat out said there's no way for that sort of game to sell anymore. Despite how many say how much they liked them, apparently it's not what people buy.

The whole 'free to play' design similarly is a case where 'the market has spoken', despite all the criticisms we can make of that design over subscription games.

 

[maniacalpha1-1]

I don't see the connection. Vanguard wasn't exactly hard core compared to EQ and it had so many other issues technically and on the management side that I think it's dicey to try and draw a conclusion.

Massively said in a review of ESO recently that they predicted it will flop because people are tired of "story-driven theme-park MMOs." I thought that was an interesting statement. I would certainly be in that category of players, but I don't know if it's the majority. I like online fantasy RPGs in some ways more than single-player, even though the latter are richer in story, but they have become just such utter trash that I don't even consider the possibility that one will be good anymore. They've become literally the archetype of boring. Just follow little pointers around the map and click shit. It's nuts. I'd love to think someone will do a big, gorgeous, open world where you can just get tossed in and explore, fight, loot, and die, but I have no actual hope it will happen. I think it's over.

I really wish there could be a standardized definition of hardcore. Is hardcore raiding? What if a game was super-easy, you almost never died, but it took forever to reach the next level; would that be hardcore?

For the most part, I don't consider EQ that hardcore. A lot of people, I think, do just because you couldn't solo kill everything and be max level in 4 weeks tops.

Eh, I'll give it a try either way given the chance. I didn't enjoy the gameplay of Landmark but I did enjoy the style at least which I would imagine will not be terribly far off from EQN's.

I guess I can reserve judgement until seeing EQN itself in action, but it seems to be based on third person (EQ1 was good for first person), so that's a strike. I will say, the water in Landmark is unbelievably good.

 

[Fanatical Meat]

Yeah I always want a hardcore figure it out unforgiving open world. The I remember why I quit EQ1. Impossible to group with higher levels, it could take over 1 hour to meet up with a friend, falling off the fucking boat, not very effective solo play.

 

[zokudu]

I don't see the connection. Vanguard wasn't exactly hard core compared to EQ and it had so many other issues technically and on the management side that I think it's dicey to try and draw a conclusion.

Massively said in a review of ESO recently that they predicted it will flop because people are tired of "story-driven theme-park MMOs." I thought that was an interesting statement. I would certainly be in that category of players, but I don't know if it's the majority. I like online fantasy RPGs in some ways more than single-player, even though the latter are richer in story, but they have become just such utter trash that I don't even consider the possibility that one will be good anymore. They've become literally the archetype of boring. Just follow little pointers around the map and click shit. It's nuts. I'd love to think someone will do a big, gorgeous, open world where you can just get tossed in and explore, fight, loot, and die, but I have no actual hope it will happen. I think it's over.

I don't know how much the story driven theme park MMO genre has died but rather the majority of players that like it are still in WoW with a smattering of users staying in every new game of this kind that comes along.

Nothing in the MMO space will reach what WoW was or likely what it is even now. The question then becomes, is the current model sustainable? Can these MMOs operate profitably and be enjoyable for the players with 500k-1m players? Who knows. That could be a gross overestimation on the size of these playerbases too.

 

[Markbnj]

Wasn't that Darkfall??

I was going to try to work Darkfall into the response. I played it for a few months. It definitely has some of those elements, and the world was probably the most fun to explore of any game I've played in a while, not least because of the danger.

Buuuuuut... the game world was very flat just because they don't have any money and not much of a team. No fauna in most zones, no weather, a limited selection of ambient sounds, etc. They just don't have the capacity to flesh it out.

But probably it's biggest flaw is that most people just don't want to play a full-loot open-world PVP game, or play with the personality types that seem to be attracted to that genre. For me pvp/rvr should be a part of the world's attraction, but not the sole reason for its being there.

 

[Markbnj]

I played EQ vanilla, and I remember the experience was filled with the game having so many nasty things it strengthened the community that needed to cooperate, and I remember thinking that the frustrations were so high that people would tolerate it because it was the only great game of the type, but I felt when someone made an alternative that was less frustrating, people would often prefer it and competition would force mmo's to get less and less hard. Wow closely fit what I had predicted and the rest is history.

See, I didn't feel that way at all in EQ. The game was scary, invigorating, inspiring, and just fun. It was a game. I didn't get frustrated if I got killed in Lower Guk near the king with some good stuff on my corpse. That was part of the thrill. I didn't even mind falling off the ship and having to swim through an ocean full of purple mobs. I played it early, and the early players were too busy being thrilled that the game world even existed to get frustrated when bad things happened.

 

[Clemenza]

See, I didn't feel that way at all in EQ. The game was scary, invigorating, inspiring, and just fun. It was a game. I didn't get frustrated if I got killed in Lower Guk near the king with some good stuff on my corpse. That was part of the thrill. I didn't even mind falling off the ship and having to swim through an ocean full of purple mobs. I played it early, and the early players were too busy being thrilled that the game world even existed to get frustrated when bad things happened.

This is how I feel about my EQ experience as well. I remember getting stuck in the tunnel between Qeynos and the Druid place that was down the the road all because I didn't have a light or nightvision. I couldn't tell where the tunnel turned.

Also, Fippy Darkpaw.

 

[MeldarthX]

Loved EQ; though I started late; I got a month's free with the first three expansions; it was just before Planes of Power Came out. I fully used old school zones for my paladins; played for several years. I was one of the top 10 paladins on tunare server.....if I'd actually stayed or moved into the top two raiding guilds I most likely would of become top paladin.

I was one of the very few paladins that was on the tank rotation for the dragon in HoH....that biotch was a nightmare and hit hard...😀 I used to go and tank crap I really shouldn't of; but being told I can't do that..well just made me want to prove them wrong which I normally did 😀

EQ was exciting; dangerous......I came over from UO; which I also loved. I don't have nearly the time as I did back then but a solid game that I can build my paladin again...I'd love.....😀

 

[desura]

I've tried the landmark beta. It was...meh. Very meh. People just didn't know what to do so they built random designs. It's like a sprawling suburban town with no central vision.

 

[Fanatical Meat]

Choo Choo TRAIN!

Yes I was that guy.

When did they add horses?

 

[Markbnj]

Choo Choo TRAIN!

Yes I was that guy.

When did they add horses?

Haha. TRAAAAIIIIIINNNNN!!

I remember logging in once to reminisce and seeing horses... must have been sometime in the late 2000's.

 

[Gibsons]

When did they add horses?

Luclin? I managed to snag that awesome horse that dropped from the emperor (?) in Ssra.

 

[Gibsons]

Another example is the original zone where you couldn't leave without fighting out, and if you didn't, you permanently lost the equipment you had spent months to obtain, and if you got killed, you had little way to have the equipment to go back in and get back to your body.

That's too nasty, I only remember one guild trying it, so I think it didn't get used much until they relaxed that.

What zone was that?

 

[Markbnj]

What zone was that?

Well if you didn't have a wizard (could another class port?) that could have been the back of any dungeon or area like Mistmoore, right?

 

[Gibsons]

Well if you didn't have a wizard (could another class port?) that could have been the back of any dungeon or area like Mistmoore, right?

Druids could group port. And yeah, most dungeons were like that, if you didn't have a wiz or druid, the non-casters would need to fight out somehow. Lower Guk had a neat little teleport gate near the king though.

But when you said only one guild did it... couldn't figure out what zone only one guild ever did.

I'm not sure if any guild ever finished Sky (FoH maybe?). It was a royal pain to do and the loot was shit.

 

[Markbnj]

But when you said only one guild did it... couldn't figure out what zone only one guild ever did.

That was Craig234 I believe, and yeah I missed that part. Lots of guilds fought in and out of all the main dungeons I tackled.

 

[Craig234]

What zone was that?

I don't remember for sure, but I think it might have been 'Veeshan's Peak', in the middle of a lava type area, I forget zone names.

When I say only one guild, I'm referring to the original period when I think you were blocked from getting out with things like ports. I only recall one guild trying to do it - and rightly so.

 

[Craig234]

Ya, it was Veeshan's Peak. Here is a web page on it:

http://wiki.project1999.com/Veeshan's_Peak

Note it game with a special warning form the game (what happened to Gordon?):

We recommend that only the most advanced and organized players in the game even attempt to enter this zone.
The customer service staff (GMs and Guides) will not assist players in any way in regards to this zone.
This includes help for issues such as unrecoverable corpses (see your local Necromancer),
or characters finding themselves stuck (see your local Magician), bugs, etc.
- Gordon

The web page mentions:

Given that the only escape is to fight them and make it out the other side alive, you'd better be capable of taking on level 65 dragons that fight the way dragons do in this zone.

 

[Craig234]

See, I didn't feel that way at all in EQ. The game was scary, invigorating, inspiring, and just fun. It was a game. I didn't get frustrated if I got killed in Lower Guk near the king with some good stuff on my corpse. That was part of the thrill. I didn't even mind falling off the ship and having to swim through an ocean full of purple mobs. I played it early, and the early players were too busy being thrilled that the game world even existed to get frustrated when bad things happened.

I think you misunderstood what I was saying, because I do relate to your post. What I'm saying is that at the same time as what you say, I felt that a game that came along that was also good but more 'friendly' would have a big competitive advantage and force pretty much all MMO's to get more 'friendly' and I think that did happen.

There were thrills it's hard for players who didn't play then to understand.

You mention Guk - what an amazing adventure to try that, full of mystery and huge danger, I think it was years before I saw a lot of it.

People would go in just enough to get to a camp they wanted, but most did not see a lot of it for a long time. It took memorizing the way to certain camps.

I think you said it well at the end of your comment - and is the same point I was trying to make that people would put up with a lot just thrilled at the game.

 

[xantub]

Speaking of EQ1, I left when the game turned from 'party' to 'raid' oriented. I loved going with my group to places, spend a few hours killing mobs and spawns, chat a bit during downtime (back when downtime wasn't a cuss word in MMOs). But I think between the 2nd and 3rd expansion I felt the game was shifting its focusing too much on raids. It was specially bad for me as a cleric as I started to feel like someone else was playing my character. I couldn't just play, I had to do exactly what they said I had to do at exactly which time and in exactly this place, or there would be a wipe. Some people may like that raid-play, but I hated it with a passion.

 

[Markbnj]

I think you misunderstood what I was saying, because I do relate to your post. What I'm saying is that at the same time as what you say, I felt that a game that came along that was also good but more 'friendly' would have a big competitive advantage and force pretty much all MMO's to get more 'friendly' and I think that did happen.

Yeah I think you were obviously right about that, and xantub's post below yours is relevant too. The market changed.

 

[maniacalpha1-1]

Ya, it was Veeshan's Peak. Here is a web page on it:

http://wiki.project1999.com/Veeshan's_Peak

Note it game with a special warning form the game (what happened to Gordon?):



The web page mentions:

Veeshan's Peak was a hell of a hard zone. Try something like that now and its very existence will draw criticism, how dare they put something in the game that the average player with average equipment and preparation can't dominate!

Nowadays everyone wants every bit of content easily accessible to them. The question that remains to be seen is which dev teams will cave and which won't.

Hell, I think the very fact that raids exist causes people to think that just because they can't dominate them, that grouping is somehow diminished solely for that and that there's something more that they can't do.

 

[Craig234]

Speaking of EQ1, I left when the game turned from 'party' to 'raid' oriented. I loved going with my group to places, spend a few hours killing mobs and spawns, chat a bit during downtime (back when downtime wasn't a cuss word in MMOs). But I think between the 2nd and 3rd expansion I felt the game was shifting its focusing too much on raids. It was specially bad for me as a cleric as I started to feel like someone else was playing my character. I couldn't just play, I had to do exactly what they said I had to do at exactly which time and in exactly this place, or there would be a wipe. Some people may like that raid-play, but I hated it with a passion.

Downtime... there used to be a lot of that. I don't remember just how long but it might have been as long as minutes sometimes to get back mana and health. There was a reason mages were sought for free food and water to help with that (I think they had to be done one at a time?)

But the downtime thing we haven't seen since is that casters had to 'open the book' to recover mana in downtime - they couldn't see the game at all during that period. That was a restriction that eventually went away with level - where you got the benefit of seeing around you like a monster coming while you had downtime.

I know what you mean about raiding, but that's true in every mmo I can think of.

What MMO doesn't have an end game that involves the biggest number of players and activities requiring more careful and coordinated playing, raiding?

 

[Craig234]

Veeshan's Peak was a hell of a hard zone. Try something like that now and its very existence will draw criticism, how dare they put something in the game that the average player with average equipment and preparation can't dominate!

Nowadays everyone wants every bit of content easily accessible to them. The question that remains to be seen is which dev teams will cave and which won't.

Hell, I think the very fact that raids exist causes people to think that just because they can't dominate them, that grouping is somehow diminished solely for that and that there's something more that they can't do.

Well, I always felts Veeshan's Peak went too far, and while I don't think everyone should get all content, I draw the bar lower than some, that everyone should only have to do so much.

I'm against the catering to a few 'uber guilds' that only they get to do things, except at first.

That culture led to things like in EQ where the devs had chars in our top guild, and surprise surprise, NPC's got added to the game with the look and name of some of the guild members. That's a nice privilege not anyone else got. They ran a utility called 'showeq' with impunity others could get banned for that helped them do better, since the GM who enforced the rule was affiliated with the guild.

Another incident happened that isn't relevant to that general point, but once a GM took the server down to block the second-top guild from doing a raid.

The poster who referred to enjoying the risk of losing his gear, I think that's too much - players spent months and years to get geared, and losing that would have made most want to quit the game. It's too much punishment. I think Eve gets away with pretty big losses, but it's a bit different situation at pvp culture and being able to get stuff again. There were times players would take off their good gear expecting to lose their worn items, and that was fine. In fact mages could summon basic gear for that sort of thing.

One that was a lot more punishing that now in MMO's was exp loss. I don't remember the exact examples but I think you could lose from maybe a half hour to a couple hours' worth of experience if you got killed, without a good res (and I think more than a rare 50% was only added later), and you could lose levels you had obtained.

Talking about whether you lost your level - and the new spells that had come with it - when you got killed was a common discussion if you got killed. You'd take less chances in the game if you were close to losing your level.