|31 posts found|
EverQuest: The Making of a Classic
News & Features Discussion « General Discussion
1/04/12 9:21:37 AM
I still have to see another MMORPG creating so many memorable moments, at least I can tell for myself. Was a different time and a different approach to gaming.
I can still enjoy today's modern MMOs, but nothing could even come close to what EQ was for me personally. I am aware that I am sort of glorifying the past here, but well...
There should be no doubt that this game was the reference title of its time.
Didn't read all the eight pages, however the players and the focus of players in MMOs (letting out the RPG here, because the last MMORPG was release quite a while ago) has changed as well.
We went from times where you actually met another player in the wilds and were happy about it as you receive some help in your adventures to times where people just perceive other people they meet by chance as a nuisance and competition. The mentality of players in the genre has changed, however I tend to believe it is not the mentality that has changed, as this is more or less founded and based in the character of a person. It is just that the player base has changed by a lot and players who come into the genre have a different focus for their gaming experience. They don't play games to socialize, they play games for other reasons. This is fine. Nobody can be blamed for playing a game like they desire, the main problem is that this way of playing doesn't fit the way of playing the OP desires, nor is it fitting the way I like to play MMOs.
I found lately that the community in Lord of the Rings Online is pretty sound, so from 10 times I met other players in the wilds, 8 times we formed a group, had a chat, killed our mobs for the quest together and advanced. But then again, this can't be considered representative, it is merely an example of a positive gaming exprience.
All in all there is no solution and no perfect game. You just have to check the market and pick what floats your boat the most. Making compromises is not easy, but unavoidable.
So all in all I agree with the OP and had the same experiences with WoW, but I am trying to see things a bit more objective and tend to believe that people make different experiences and adore the game therefore. It is somehow true however, that the game caters to the fact that socializing is less needed through it's game mechanics, but this is the way MMOs go these days and nobody will stop it, as long as those games create such huge revenue.
Originally posted by Acidon
I clearly noticed I loved this game at heart, when I had to smile reading this post with every new bullet point. I could add a few things to the list, but I guess this would get too long.
It is amazing how many details players remember when it comes to EQ. I am not sure if this is the same with other games, for me it is for sure not and I played many titles over all those years.
So here is what's great about EQ for me:
- That the game has left stuff to the player to decide and the game didn't decide for the player of where and when to progress, like most modern games do. Shows in many details, but this is more or less sums it up for me.
The Poll: MMOGS getting better or worse?
The Pub at MMORPG.COM « General Discussion
10/22/09 7:12:11 AM
Originally posted by altairzq
So how would you explain that FPS, RTS, Simulators, platforms, and what not, are in general much better now than 10 years ago?
For me it is a matter percepton. When I started MMORPGs I came from playing MUDs, so for me EQ was a MUD becoming even more alive and colorful. Needless to say that I had a blast and so did any other MUD player who tried out EQ back then, at least the ones I have talked to.
However nowadays you compare MMORPGs to video games in general and if you want to reach the mainstream (aka sell a whole lot of copies and subs) you have to make them user friendly and easy to get into, but the same way you remove the challenge bit by bit. Nobody really has to "learn" the game anymore, not saying that you don't need to master it, however.
But if you look deeper into the matter it is the new features making it easier for new players, that destroy the fun and immersion of an ever decreasing group of players, which has played MMORPGs when the genre was young. The wheel is not going to be turned back, so looking at it objectively you can't say that MMOPRGs got worse, because as a matter of fact they didn't. They just evolved into "something" else, which can't be appreciated anymore by the group of people who played the genre already when it was young. So maybe they got worse for some people, but I would not say they got worse, when looking at it objectively.
I finally figured out what I PERSONALLY believe newer MMO's are missing these days.
The Pub at MMORPG.COM « General Discussion
7/10/09 4:11:49 AM
Originally posted by leshtricity
Well, I agree with the OP, but what I don't understand is why you call creative ways of killing mobs actually "using" what the game mechanics have to offer in a more creative way than others an exploit.
Feign Death was never planned by the devs to splitpull mobs, it was meant as a method of escaping a dangerous and deadly situation, however players discovered the possibilities that FD offered and made FD pulling an art form over time. It was not easy to do it properly - in some places - and it was never addressed by devs to be adjusted, hence it was not an exploit, so from what "smelled" like an exploit in the first place we had the evolution to an important part of strategy for game progression.
Kiting was a hard thing to do and, by all means, even though you could have been a kickass kiter, you still had the chance to get killed by a mob, being able to drop you in one or two swings. Kiting was all about risk and reward in my eyes. You took the high risk of being slaughtered by a baddie, but if you dropped him you felt rewarded and probably got some good stuff from it as well.
I never understood why devs of more recent games tried to remove kiting from the game. It just felt and still feels wrong that it is not possible anymore.
If you want games where all ppl run around like robots and do the same stuff over and over using the same mechanics, well then fine, because that is what is called boring. In the end there are always those creative players who will analyze and optimize their character to the max and find "unique" ways to do things more efficiently or even on their own. And I don't mean exploits, that is a different story. I am just talking about using the game mechanics offered to their maximum and if other people think that this and that is an exploit, then they maybe should try harder in some cases and work on their gameplay to achieve the same. I am aware that there is a thin line to an exploit,. however the things like kiting and FD pulling are no exploits.
Originally posted by John.A.Zoid
I understand your point, but the scenario you create is just the case when a game freshly launches. EQ2 has now been around for quite a while and people have almost exclusively highly advanced characters. Guild halls adding to the ghost town feeling, but the game is that way. Maybe I go a bit over the top there, but EQ2 has become a game for raiders and people who like challenging high end group content. In my opinion there is no healthy line of progression from Level 1 to 80 anymore. As people pointed out, leveling is so easy now, most people just PL their alts to 60+ and there is not enough influx of new subs.
I can tell that first hand as I myself took the adventure of starting with EQ2 again rolling a new char. I was lucky I had a bunch of friends joining as well, so we all started from zero and reached Level 80 a few weeks ago and dig into more serious stuff. I couldn't actually believe how quick exp floats in now.
So in a nutshell, I think you need to look for another game, because the scenario you created in your post will never happen in EQ2 again, server merges or not. If you merge servers today you will just have a combined load of highly advanced characters who then will clutter up on the high end raid mobs, which are contested. It is just the way the game went, if it is good or bad everyone can decide for themselves. I am saying that totally unbiased, but I like the game as I can pick many activities I wanna do each day, as there might be no game around with that much content to offer. But again, if I wouldn't have had my friends joining with me and do the 1-80 Journey together, I prolly would have quit already.
If you're thinking of playing there is only one person you should listen to
General Discussion « Vanguard: Saga of Heroes
9/16/08 3:54:07 AM
Originally posted by Rekindle
Quoted for truth. I will never understand how people make comments on an MMO they haven't played for a long time. Like no other genre, MMOs are always caught in the flow, as I would call it, so you might be talking about a totally different game if you still transport your opinion from a year ago.
I agree on the trial, it is pretty comprehensive and shows about everything the game has to offer in "low level" state naturally. All those features play out differently in the end game.
I have been quitting back in the days due to the mass of bugs, returned and gave it a second look. Been playing ever since and still like it, but there is still a lack of content noticeable, especially for people in hardcore guilds which work through content a lot faster than the casual gamers.
I wanted to quote the OP for truth for every word he wrote, but the post is too long :)
No seriously, I monitored the same thing over quite a few years in every game I played. The social factor decreased and decreased. Nowadays you have games like AoC and to some extent WoW that play like "checklists". People in those games are socializing just if they have to and for their own motives.
Please don't confuse socializing with grouping, because grouping in AoC and WoW is mostly just for a few minutes to kill a mob which needs more than a solo player to be defeated.
While it is true that the community is made by the people, it is also true that different aspects in the newer generation of games is creating the problems the OP mentioned.
You have to look at the history this genre has gone through and where MMORPGs have their roots. On the computer based side the originate from MUDs, text based adventure games. For the first generation of played MMORPGs were such a fascinating experience, because their beloved MUDs came now with a graphical representation, but in their core they still were MUDs. Games, which were open and with freedom of where to face next. World immersion was the main focus. Due to that fact people had to interact with each other, because as a single character you would not get very far in games like EQ or DAoC, or any other title of this generation.
Nowadays, those games are designed as "video games" and are attractive to a different audience as well. The combination of game features and that audience make today's gaming communities. So yes, communities are a design choice, because with the game you create you know more or less before which audience you will attract. I mean you don't open a restaurant with "haute cuisine", planning to attract people who enjoy hot dogs. When a project like an MMORPG is planned developers are well aware of the fact that they will attract this and that type of player.
I would go for Vanguard as the best PvE game out there right now. That said it is not for the light-hearted even thought they adjusted the drop rates and the overall tedious aspect of the game a lot. What I like best is that you can head any direction at any time and you don't have to follow a certain route to progress.
If you are strictly into PvE, VG is worth a try for sure.
I have to say Funcom, because in the end SOE is not so bad if you look at the issue objectively.
SOE still has the most high nosed and at the same time incompetent customer support, however they make their games stay and are not hasty in decisions, which means a lot nowadays, where games are dying left and right.
It would have been a very easy move to close VG for example, as they have another fantasy MMORPG in EQ II, which is doing quite well. Instead they kept it alive and today VG can at least survive on it's own. SOE realized that there is a huge difference between EQ II and VG and the communities of players. So both games can co-exist.
I can't comment on who is responsible for dumbing down SWG, SOE or LucasArts or both, but money makes the world go round, so I guess if they made it commercially more successful they are right, aren't they? I agree that for us gamers this is not always the best, but we kind of have to accept that it is first and foremost the monetary aspect which leads companies to decisions they make. We accept it for everything else, so why do we complain when it comes to games?
I'm one of the "comebackers" as well and I have to admit that this game turned into a real gem. Played a rogue to 50 after release, kept on going despite all bugs, but quit in the end as it just has been grind after grind to keep people busy until APW was ready. So I decided to not pay anymore and return when the game is properly fixed.
Nowadays I can say that it is without a doubt the best and most fun MMORPG on the market for my likings. It has transported much of the old EQ mixed up with some fresh ideas and a complete new approach with the diplomacy sphere, which is totally unique to the genre.
Vanguard does not open to you during the first hours of play, which is like it should be actually. If I don't feel limited in the first hours of gameplay, how much fun could I expect from the rest of teh game. VG is not for the ligh hearted and today's generation of MMO players like to get things catered to them without feeling the urge to explore themselves. VG has a different apporach and requires the player to be pro-active to achieve things. Definately the number one choice for old school MMO-players who have a focus on PvE. If you are PvP-based, VG is not really for you, but for PvE and complex raid encounters there is nothing better at the moment.
Went from AoC to Vanguard. /moved
General Discussion « Vanguard: Saga of Heroes
8/11/08 5:29:39 AM
Originally posted by AveBethos
Comical to me is when people just browse a forum and try to make a semi objective comment on something they have no clue about.
Seriously, why are people always posting untrue facts like this, with maybe haven seen the game 6 months ago for the last time or something similar. Nobody forces you to like the game, but if you state hard facts like this you should be able to back them up with something. I don't talk about rocket science as well, as I have no clue about it.
On top you foresee the future of the game as well based on your wrong facts from above. It is fine to post your opinion and that you don't like the game, but if you judge it and first foremost judge the people who post about it you should bring something more to the table than saying what you say.
Trying to give a reason for each, and could possibly rant on forver, but trying to keep it simple.
World of Warcraft - for having no soul and being just a patchwork of former ideas, combining them into one (commercially successful) package. The good part is that it keeps the communities of other games sort of clean...
Age of Conan - for wasting this great license. There is so much great lore in Howard's world but the game plays like a "checklist" with no challenges at all. Everything is dull and gets repetitive as hell. Graphics aint enough, to make it a good game, still aren't...
All other games I played were fun in one or the other way so for really bad games which totally were no fun to me, personally I only have those two.
I only wanna rate games where I have reached the endgame and experience the high end content, therefore I can't judge a few, as it would be not fair.
Originally posted by ethion
Maybe some people will but I think it will be less then you might expect from Vanguard. Now Wow I'm expecting will see a lot of people at least trying the game unless it gets some bad reviews etc. If it is decent I'd expect a big chunk of Wow's player base to jump and the same for AoC. The vanguard/eq2 communities I believe will be far less affected.
True facts. I even think that for some players the game is not the most important component, but the community is. For my likings VG and EQ2 are by far the best around community wise. Mature, respect- and helpful people. Sure there are exceptions, but by far less than in any other game I've played and I've played quite a few...
For the community reason I think Vg and EQ2 players mostly know exactly what they want from a game, so they can't be attracted that easily by new titles. There is a very strong core of subscribers in VG for example which stuck with the game through all bugs and bad times, no matter what.
Originally posted by page
I think I have to disagree, because in my opinion the targetted audience of Warhammer and Vanguard don't match. People who enjoy Vanguard will most likely not enjoy Warhammer and vice versa. So the drop in subscriptions will be temporarily, if there will be one at all.
As another poster in this thread said already, the fubared release of AoC made VG stronger and not weaker. The very same could happen when Warhammer will launch.
I played Vanguard from release and quit it due to running out of content for my char after 2 months. Returned now and am impressed of how the game improved. Still not brillant but a lot better than it used to be.
Originally posted by Kaylin
I know Darguns Tomb for instance and it is a very good place, apart form the usual level tracks. That's what makes it attractive. Why not convince your group of going there? Sometimes people just need a little push, etc...
Darguns Tomb can be nasty with a pick up group though and I think that is what most people think and they don't even consider crawling a vast and deep dungeon like Darguns Tomb with a pick up group. All I can say is that most ppl I met so far were really decent.
On the other hand: Of what use are games like AoC where you can solo 75% of the crap and servers are corwded, but actually nobody os socializing at all? Ever noticed the difference between an AoC and WoW group compared to a group in VG? VG groups are generaly more commited. Its not only baout groups, its about quality of groups. VG isnt doing that bad for that matter, even though a small infusion of population would be good. The soon to be release trial island might bring a new rush of players combined with resubcribers form the old days.
It's a classy game, would be too bad to see it go downhill. At this moment, teh richest and deepest "non-linear" MMORPG on the market.
Originally posted by Waterlily
No, I was looking or an honest answer. It's obvious that there is too much 'noise' and consequently I can't find an honest answer.
And you're right, I should't ask something like this on a forum because people apparently can't be honest one way or the other.
But pretending the game is doing great and recommending people resub when it's a forgotton wasteland is kinda messed up imo.
It is low you are right and objective people like me already admitted that, but it is far from a wasteland. Hell, what do you want? WoW-situation, with people piling up everywhere and you wait 30 mins to kill a quest mob? In VG you actually are happy to meet people passing by. That's immersion in some way. In a vast fantasy world "central station"-like places are not fitting...
Finding groups is about intiative as well. I play on Halgar (Euro PvE) and as I said, one line in regionsay is enough and I have a group 5-10 minutes after I log in, if I want to and try for it that is. This goes true for 38 lvls of gameplay so far.
Originally posted by Waterlily
That is strange. I came back as well due to the free month, giving the game another chance after putting my lvl 50 rogue to the shelf about 8 months ago. Started a new char and never had any problems finding a group to tackle content. Reached LvL 38 with a new toon and there were always people. I don't want to break a lance for this game as I really was angry at what it was after launch, but I really have to say I enjoy what it is now.
The pop seems a bit low, that's true, but not anywhere close to not find someone. Mostly one line in regionsay is enough and you get like 4-5 replies almost immediatly. So no, my expereince after returning was the total opposite of what the OP witnessed. On top, most people I met were really decent folks and knew how to play their toons, with the one or the other exception. But really not as bad as in other games where you find tons of greedy and clueless people. The community just rocks in VG. And sometimes it is even good to be the only group in the chunk, as you can tackle the stuff as you wish and dont have to compete.
Bullet Guide to Quick Leveling and still get the Loot
General Discussion « Vanguard: Saga of Heroes
7/18/08 4:23:28 AM
Originally posted by Zorgo
I agree. Different people have different approaches on games and if one want to take the fast level route, he will have reasons for it as the OP does obviously. On top APW is very rich content and needs quite some time to finish. So yes, the game has one raid zone, but it's rich in content. And yes, therefore the game has endgame content.
On topic: With the free month I started a new toon myself, coming back from a very long break. I did the HL and I would say to finish it including the weapon you ill need a very good group of lvl 20s to do so. It is not easy at late teens, early 20s I would say. Therefore I would put the HL rather in the range of 15-24. 10-20 seems a bit too early, especially a level 10 would have no dice there I guess. I duoed everything but the weapon quest with a bard friend, myself being a cleric. We did it around lvl 22-23 iirc. The weapon quest seems harsh though if you are lvl 20 (untwinked of ocurse, how it should be), fighting lvl 25 4dots.
POLL: When do you read Quest text?
The Pub at MMORPG.COM « General Discussion
7/16/08 8:38:31 AM
I am reading the quest text always, as depending on the game it will have valuable information. Quests, which can be done successfully without reading the text are a result of bad game design. Mostly of the character "Kill 20 moles", etc...
Mind numbing and very uncreative. I like games which put some effort into thoughtful stories and quests that unfold in a more epic scenario and where the quest text is actually worth to be read.
Those are role playing games and they are about a stories, legends and epic battles, but sadly many developers don't care anymore, which originates from players not caring, because if players would care, most likely devs would care.