|
On August 06 2013 07:10 Masq wrote:http://www.eqnexus.com/2013/08/soe-live-day-3-everquest-next-class-system/The Class Q&A was the worst Q&A I've ever seen. They literally dodge like 30% of the questions and they seem to know how YOU want to play their game (when people even say that don't want to do 'x'). The more and more I read/watch regarding this game makes me dislike it even more.
Yeah, after watching it i am quite cynical towards the game. It feels like they want to do a LoL MMORPG.
|
No healer class.... Why are they doing GW2, I like GW2 However I LOVE healing, so i dont play it because of that reason. GDI i had so much hope for this game now it looks like i can forget it unless they changes some things.
|
Everything they claim to want to and are going to be doing feels just, so out of reach. I'd really like to get beta access and see how this stuff actually works and what it will evolve into for release before speculating that they are terrible people on the small snippets of information we have been given.
|
Nobody said there wouldn't be healers. They said they aren't moving entirely away from roles, just that they want their content to be solvable by group permutations that lie outside of the holy trinity
|
On August 06 2013 07:10 Masq wrote:http://www.eqnexus.com/2013/08/soe-live-day-3-everquest-next-class-system/The Class Q&A was the worst Q&A I've ever seen. They literally dodge like 30% of the questions and they seem to know how YOU want to play their game (when people even say that don't want to do 'x'). The more and more I read/watch regarding this game makes me dislike it even more.
Eh, they're probably just not entirely sure on the direction they want to go in. It sounds like they have a general plan laid out with the whole cross class design, but the details they probably just aren't ready to explain yet.
|
On August 06 2013 08:36 AnomalySC2 wrote:Eh, they're probably just not entirely sure on the direction they want to go in. It sounds like they have a general plan laid out with the whole cross class design, but the details they probably just aren't ready to explain yet.
The whole EQ:Next debut stuff was to please the stockholders anyway, this was very very early to show things.
Unless they wanted to get EQ:N Landmark going so they don't have to do all the creative terrain work later.
|
So, is the game really going to be called EverQuest: Next? Although, it was only the reveal, it seems like they have solidified the name with the game and Landmark.
But honestly, EQ3 would have sufficed.
+ Show Spoiler +If the game turns out to not be like EverQuest at all in the slightest ("but it's reimagined!"), it shouldn't deserve the label.
|
On August 06 2013 13:24 Madder wrote:So, is the game really going to be called EverQuest: Next? Although, it was only the reveal, it seems like they have solidified the name with the game and Landmark. But honestly, EQ3 would have sufficed. + Show Spoiler +If the game turns out to not be like EverQuest at all in the slightest ("but it's reimagined!"), it shouldn't deserve the label.
Think the main reason they didnt pick EQ3 was to make sure everyone know it is not a sequel to EQ and EQ2. From the info of the Lore panel, I wouldnt be suprise of Venril Sathir isn't evil anymore (well not as evil lol).
|
On August 06 2013 13:24 Madder wrote:So, is the game really going to be called EverQuest: Next? Although, it was only the reveal, it seems like they have solidified the name with the game and Landmark. But honestly, EQ3 would have sufficed. + Show Spoiler +If the game turns out to not be like EverQuest at all in the slightest ("but it's reimagined!"), it shouldn't deserve the label.
Just because they're attempting at changing the direction of the series, it doesn't mean it doesn't 'deserve' the EQ name. I really didn't get your point there.
|
On August 06 2013 13:24 Madder wrote:So, is the game really going to be called EverQuest: Next? Although, it was only the reveal, it seems like they have solidified the name with the game and Landmark. But honestly, EQ3 would have sufficed. + Show Spoiler +If the game turns out to not be like EverQuest at all in the slightest ("but it's reimagined!"), it shouldn't deserve the label.
They own the IP, they can call it whatever they want.
Do you really believe people making games care about the legacy of a name ?
|
I wonder how many of the people calling for eq classic with HD really understand what they are asking for, some classes literally had 2 abilities at level cap(monk/warrior), the extremely long downtimes(does no one remember the 'buffing' break, where you had to wait probably 10-12 minutes after buffs just to mana up), the class hatred, I mean back then if you were a druid you could still find a group naive enough to take you, if you tried that now, every group would be the same: Warrior shaman rogue enc/bard cleric.
Remember trying to do dungeons at 50 in classic? it was /who all cleric 46 50 and systematically trying to bribe barter convince one of them to come with you, if you couldn't find one you literally sat in whatever area you were until one joined, because you could not solo any content(druids/necros could, but found derision and hate in groups), you couldn't duo trio quad or anything without a primary healing class. A tricked out warrior with the best gear could kill maybe 1 mob that was 14 levels below him at a time, if that mob was a running type he would die trying to chase it 100% of the time.
The min maxing elitism of players these days would make everything else obsolete. Go watch some twitch streams of project1999 if you doubt it.
The IP has more to do with the lore and the world than the gameplay style anyways, it is clearly an everquest game, same gods same cities same world, races, classes.
|
On August 06 2013 07:10 Masq wrote:http://www.eqnexus.com/2013/08/soe-live-day-3-everquest-next-class-system/The Class Q&A was the worst Q&A I've ever seen. They literally dodge like 30% of the questions and they seem to know how YOU want to play their game (when people even say that don't want to do 'x'). The more and more I read/watch regarding this game makes me dislike it even more.
Which is the same thing blizzard did with D3 (You don't know what is fun, WE KNOW), and well, that turned out all right..
|
On August 06 2013 22:35 marcjpb wrote:
Think the main reason they didnt pick EQ3 was to make sure everyone know it is not a sequel to EQ and EQ2. From the info of the Lore panel, I wouldnt be suprise of Venril Sathir isn't evil anymore (well not as evil lol).
That's true enough! The re-imagined setting gives leeway to any changes/retcons to the lore.
On August 06 2013 23:15 cozzE wrote:
Just because they're attempting at changing the direction of the series, it doesn't mean it doesn't 'deserve' the EQ name. I really didn't get your point there.
Honestly, this new direction could very well hold it's own without the 'EQ' label to guarantee success.
On August 06 2013 23:50 Noocta wrote:
They own the IP, they can call it whatever they want.
Do you really believe people making games care about the legacy of a name ?
You're right, they don't care.
|
Im in the middle on this one, I am a big victim of taking the MMO bait with games like Warhammer/SWTOR/GW2
Its starting to feel like the MMO job now a days is "how can we say were going to do a bunch of shit that we can make it look like were going to develop so people will buy on release. Then once the game is out the feature really is just half-assed.
A great example of this is GW2, they really were hell-bent on the idea of "Everything you do will change the game and have major consequences!" When the trolls burn the house down.... They burn the house down! I loved that and I instantly bought the game for that idea of an MMO only to end up that my consequences were not game breaking at all and usually respawned next time I came back on the game, there really wasnt anything dynamic about it the company totally overplayed an idea like that to market the game.
Thats where I begin to fear this game, the second they brought up the "Oh well the orcs are going to go where they like and yada yada, That sounds really good on paper, but when it comes down to playing it I just know this is not going to work in an MMO game, it will still feel like just killing another spawn of said monster.
Same thing with the rally call, All of these public quests just dont feel right to me, it always feels overplayed and cheesy and not real because the devs are forcing a situation on you rather than something happening naturally.
The destructibilty thing/parkour thing is a huge YES, that is some good development there IMO. These are minor hings that will add way more realism to the game and make the MMO feel more vibrant, I was pretty blown away by those things.
Did anyone else get really excited when he said the first holy grail, I thought he had some ridiclous idea that would somehow blow my mind, and then he killed it instantly going, You can be more than one class! ............... Theres so many games that have done that now, not a holy grail.
All in all, I have the same worry about these games now a days and this one I am just as skeptical. They promise these huge things that is going to make the MMO be a true living world!!! And then 2 weeks in, you realize your playing WoW with a differant name.....
I think the problem with all these MMO's that are coming out is that there is to much restriction in these games. You get all these companys trying really hard to make a living world where your choices matter, but end up with games that are way to Your char will experience A>>>>>>>B. Devs need to make games that stop babysitting the players and instead let the players create there own experience.
I didnt play EQ, but instead played Asheron's Call at the time of EQ's prime. Asheron's Call really drove home the idea of an MMO as there was so much freedom in the game, a true sandbox MMO. But it went past that, there were no factions, so you know what happened? People began forming there own factions/guilds. There were no cheeesy quests like "kill 10 rabbits," you popped into the world and you had to discover everything and meet people and change. When I died in Asheron's Call in PvP, I could lose that amazing piece of armor I found the other day. Death hurt in that game. To the point where the factions in the game were actually man made because the trolls/bad guys formed guilds that would loot on kill everytime, so I became part of the guilds that made a pact to never loot. So we were always in constant struggle. And better yet it wasnt in some damn Keep that the devs thought "oh hai they could have a cool battle in a castle, so lets have 100 guys zerg a door down. No, these battles were all over the world, we began to hunt these guilds and find them in the world an eradicate them from places. It was an online culture created battle, that blew any "dynamic" MMO out of the water simply because the devs of AC realized the players can create all the reality and drama a MMO could ever need.
Thats what MMO's are missing now a days, that sense of wonder has been killed by "kill ten rabbits, but hey! now that you killed the ten rabbits the grass is going to grow really high!!! See what we did there ???!!? YOUR IN A REAL WORLD now(until you log off and the rabbits are back). Theres to much of okay you go to this zone, then this zone, then this zone blah blah blah. Level this class up! Oh we dont want you to drop loot when you die in PvP because then dieing would actually have a consequence.
|
+ Show Spoiler +On August 07 2013 16:52 XXXSmOke wrote:
Im in the middle on this one, I am a big victim of taking the MMO bait with games like Warhammer/SWTOR/GW2
Its starting to feel like the MMO job now a days is "how can we say were going to do a bunch of shit that we can make it look like were going to develop so people will buy on release. Then once the game is out the feature really is just half-assed.
A great example of this is GW2, they really were hell-bent on the idea of "Everything you do will change the game and have major consequences!" When the trolls burn the house down.... They burn the house down! I loved that and I instantly bought the game for that idea of an MMO only to end up that my consequences were not game breaking at all and usually respawned next time I came back on the game, there really wasnt anything dynamic about it the company totally overplayed an idea like that to market the game.
Thats where I begin to fear this game, the second they brought up the "Oh well the orcs are going to go where they like and yada yada, That sounds really good on paper, but when it comes down to playing it I just know this is not going to work in an MMO game, it will still feel like just killing another spawn of said monster.
Same thing with the rally call, All of these public quests just dont feel right to me, it always feels overplayed and cheesy and not real because the devs are forcing a situation on you rather than something happening naturally.
The destructibilty thing/parkour thing is a huge YES, that is some good development there IMO. These are minor hings that will add way more realism to the game and make the MMO feel more vibrant, I was pretty blown away by those things.
Did anyone else get really excited when he said the first holy grail, I thought he had some ridiclous idea that would somehow blow my mind, and then he killed it instantly going, You can be more than one class! ............... Theres so many games that have done that now, not a holy grail.
All in all, I have the same worry about these games now a days and this one I am just as skeptical. They promise these huge things that is going to make the MMO be a true living world!!! And then 2 weeks in, you realize your playing WoW with a differant name.....
I think the problem with all these MMO's that are coming out is that there is to much restriction in these games. You get all these companys trying really hard to make a living world where your choices matter, but end up with games that are way to Your char will experience A>>>>>>>B. Devs need to make games that stop babysitting the players and instead let the players create there own experience.
I didnt play EQ, but instead played Asheron's Call at the time of EQ's prime. Asheron's Call really drove home the idea of an MMO as there was so much freedom in the game, a true sandbox MMO. But it went past that, there were no factions, so you know what happened? People began forming there own factions/guilds. There were no cheeesy quests like "kill 10 rabbits," you popped into the world and you had to discover everything and meet people and change. When I died in Asheron's Call in PvP, I could lose that amazing piece of armor I found the other day. Death hurt in that game. To the point where the factions in the game were actually man made because the trolls/bad guys formed guilds that would loot on kill everytime, so I became part of the guilds that made a pact to never loot. So we were always in constant struggle. And better yet it wasnt in some damn Keep that the devs thought "oh hai they could have a cool battle in a castle, so lets have 100 guys zerg a door down. No, these battles were all over the world, we began to hunt these guilds and find them in the world an eradicate them from places. It was an online culture created battle, that blew any "dynamic" MMO out of the water simply because the devs of AC realized the players can create all the reality and drama a MMO could ever need.
Thats what MMO's are missing now a days, that sense of wonder has been killed by "kill ten rabbits, but hey! now that you killed the ten rabbits the grass is going to grow really high!!! See what we did there ???!!? YOUR IN A REAL WORLD now(until you log off and the rabbits are back). Theres to much of okay you go to this zone, then this zone, then this zone blah blah blah. Level this class up! Oh we dont want you to drop loot when you die in PvP because then dieing would actually have a consequence.
I really like how you worded some of this stuff, and I share some of your sentiments. Every time a new MMO promising big things comes out, I hope they can pull it off, but so far, I've only been disappointed. So, EQnext, forgive our scepticism.
|
When I hear about EQ: next it's always "Hey check out this future great MMO!" but after looking at videos, panels and presentation I'm really not buying the hype. Yes it looks goods compared to MMO now availablethat was being made 4-5years ago but it's really not that impressive compared to other game being designed right now on Cry engine 3 or Unreal engine 4 like destiny, Star Citizen, Archeage but in the end graphics are not the most important afterall.
Dynamic event/public quest are nice but they really need to stop overhyping it like it's the discovery of electricity. It was well done in Guild Wars 2, but it should be completed with story/class/race specific campaign or it just feels like not enough or atleast not diversified enough.
The multiclass is not a bad thing and having choices and possibiliites in character customization is always good and has already been done succefully in Runes of Magic or The secret world for example. What killed GW2 in the end I feel is the simplified skill/class system that restrict how you play mainly by your weapons choice and their rejection of the trinity roles in traditionnal MMORPG for PvE group play that just made everything weird and probably complicated their design process of balancing anything PvE wise.
The environment destruction possibility is the lamest most hyped feature for new generation games. I mean it's been some times that game engines allow destruction of superficial layers of building/texture and I don't see how good it'll be in the end after the "oh this is funny" feeling fades.
I'm played too much, seen too much, read too much feature presentation, pure hype build and then see that the final product just fall short as a whole to be optimistic for this.
|
global shadows and destructable terrain is pretty sick for immersion
i didnt like the look of that desert-like environment that they walked through. environments should be big broad fields, not narrow channels that you walk down the middle of like in a single player fps.
anyway no word on pvp? i thought ff14 might be pretty cool until i heard there is no pvp lol. whats the point?
and the elder scrolls mmo has "you can teleport from anywhere, to anyone, at any time" going for it..(nice feature)
|
The skills system is a mix of GW and TSW. 8 skills slots, 4 weapons slots that will depend on the class and weapon equipped like GW2 you then have 4 character skills slots that will depend on the class equipped(example 2 movement, 1 offensive 1 utility or 1movement, 1utility 1 defensive 1 offensive etc). You can choose to put in the character skill slots any character skill you learned previously that match the slot type.
|
On August 08 2013 00:21 FFGenerations wrote:
global shadows and destructable terrain is pretty sick for immersion
i didnt like the look of that desert-like environment that they walked through. environments should be big broad fields, not narrow channels that you walk down the middle of like in a single player fps.
anyway no word on pvp? i thought ff14 might be pretty cool until i heard there is no pvp lol. whats the point?
and the elder scrolls mmo has "you can teleport from anywhere, to anyone, at any time" going for it..(nice feature)
No news for PvP yet afaik.
Although I'm with you. I really want another MMO where you can world PvP. Wildstar seems to have it apparently.
I know world pvp is often ganking on poor PvE players doing their stuff, making them whine and thus the feature is not popular, but I had my best times pre flying mount in WoW because of that.
|
World PvP in WoW before battlegrounds was a golden era for MMO's. Some of my best memories are the huge battles that took place in between crossroads and ashenvale and Tarren Mill. Once PvP was instanced it sucked the life out of it. To this day I can't get over the fact that there's capture the flag or other stupid objectives in every game.
I personally think the standard trinity for dungeon crawling is the best way to go. A lot of games tried to copy the success of WoW and failed but it wasn't because of the features. The problem in my eyes with MMO's these days is how well they're made. Half of the games I've tried I can't even run straight without me thinking it looks horrible. Companies that don't have tip-top talent shouldn't be developing MMO's, because the most popular games just feel right. Seriously, if I were directing game development I would fund smoothness and polish as top priority over anything else.
I loved raiding in WoW but it just got boring. Not the design and features of the game, though. FPS games are still going strong with the same basic features. Personally, all I want is the next great EQ/WoW raiding game with fresh classes, graphics, talent trees, items, etc.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
