its rather obvious that the people who "tested" the game signed an NDA, which allows the devs to "remove" or "edit" certain parts of the articles. Here's the result, a biased opinion.

Its downright impossible no one has anything bad to say about an Pre-alpha version of the game.

Originally posted by nate1980

Originally posted by pvpirl

Now, I never played SWG, what was it about that game, from those that played it, that made it such a good game? such a good sandbox? What elements would you like to see in EQN?

1. Being able to build the character you wanted, since it had a skill-based system.

2. Playermade cities governed by player Mayors

3. Being able to own your own house

4. Player made economy, complete with full-time crafting professions. Almost everything you wore was player crafted. It wasn't a loot based game.

5. Clothing, lots and lots of different kinds of clothing, so you could look unique.

6. Flag yourself PvP system.

7. The community. Very helpful, and almost everyone RPed every once in a while. Image Designers, Interior Decorators, Crafters, and Entertainers all acted the way you'd expect one in their respective professions to act. Some people, encouraged by the freedom the world offered, RPed 100% of the time. 

8. Entertainers and other non-combat full-time professions. 

There's the part that made me originally unsub from SWG, /flag PvP restricts a player too much. Some of you fulltime crafters may not want it. But all the real good stuff (thievery! banditry! mercenary work! assassinations! piracy! warfare involving politics!) are out once flagged PvP happens. The world may turn into a more grim state, but a sandbox requires the option to be the villain, as there is always the bully to smash your sand castle into bits, but its up to you whether to call forth your big brother, or grab that shover and stick it up the ass of the one who broke your castle.

And none believed me when I made a thread of EQ next tackling sandbox & possibly PvP to the Rumor room.

In your face, doubters.

And I ain't getting on the wagon, I'll be riding with the vanguard on a... Horse?

General : EverQuest Next Reworked, Playable Next Year

Posted Oct 18, 2012 by Michael Bitton

Fans expecting new information on 'EverQuest Next' during this year's SOELive came away tonight with a bittersweet announcement from SOE president John Smedley.

During tonight's SOELive keynote address, Smedley explained that everything we've seen on EverQuest Next thus far has been scrapped and the game is in the process of being reworked. Given the turn of events, SOE will not be showing off EverQuest Next during this year's SOELive. However, Mr. Smedley did promise attendees that not only would EverQuest Next make an appearance at SOELive next year, it will also be playable.

Why'd SOE scrap the work done up to this point? Smedley noted that the team ultimately wasn't happy with the game. EQ Next felt too 'evolutionary', more like an EverQuest 3 than what SOE was going for. According to Smed, SOE 'changed the world' with the launch of the original EverQuest, and they want the launch of EverQuest Next to be an equally monumental moment in the MMO genre.

To that end, Smedley promised that EverQuest Next would be the "world's largest sandbox", with content delivered to players in an entirely new way. The team is being lead by EverQuest staples such as Terry Michaels and Dave Georgeson and fans were assured that they are intending on remaking Norrath into something unlike anything players have seen before.

I guess one could call it "Confirmed?"

Originally posted by Geeves

-snip-

• There are more skillshots
• There are more active abilities (every champion bar one has 4 active ablities)
• There are more position manipulation abilities
• Cooldowns and mana costs are lower meaning those abilities are used more often
• Most abilities that are interesting and engaging for both player and opponent
• All of the above combines for dynamic, satisfying combat. The slower snowballs make that combat more interesting for longer periods

Much of that is true for DotA as well of course, but then one could say the same about last hitting in LoL. It's an element that's more important in DotA than LoL (and there are others, repeated often and loudly by DotA fans). The bullet points are the things that LoL excels at. After that it just becomes the type of depth you prefer. In other words, it's just an opinion.

I usually won't touch this argument, as its based on player preferences, but what I completely disagree with is that abilities that cost less mana and have shorter cool downs make the game more interesting or engaging. To me, it removes the strategy part of the game, for example, missing a skill shot is less penalized if the cool downs are short or that they do not cost that much mana.

And I personally voted for Dota 2. I couldn't really get interested in LoL, even though I had friends playing the game, because after all the years in Dota 1, LoL felt like dumped down version of Dota, really.

As for "LoL being the largest", we will have to see how the market shifts when Dota 2 is out (Its not even released yet, and it will be a free-to-play game as well).

Typically the carebears of any MMORPG, who fail to see any other sides to MMORPG gaming, and everything else than their safe PvE questing experience is bad.

There's Mortal Online, with its features you could call MO UO's carbon copy, but with Unreal Engine and first person view. However, the gameplay itself is rather, let's say buggy. But if you are willing to take a shot:

https://account.mortalonline.com/

14-days free trial.

People are so angry it makes me all warm and fuzzy inside.

You guys are literally assaulting a company based on a soccer console game, on an MMORPG forum. Then there's the flip side of the coin. Take Finnish NHL players on PS3. Newest NHL released with fucked up rosters for SM-Liiga (Finnish Elite Hockey Leaque) and what did the players do? Instead of "boycotting" a major publisher due to a mistake, they modded the rosters to be more accurate, the beta versions are available through PS3's downloadable content. Now, I do not own Fifa, but if such feature exists in that game, I advice you do that to Fifa 13 next year. If  not, send some email requesting such feature for the next Fifa game. I'm sure those who are making the Fifa series enjoy football themselves, but gosh, do you think a major publisher lets them to kill the profits of a game for updating the rosters for free? Do you have absolutely any idea about the license costs? Don't blame EA, blame the demand to satisfy and think of the best of the stockholders, not the company.

I'm pretty darn sure that WarZ =/= DayZ, WarZ is just some assholes riding on DayZ's name.

Can't support freeloaders.

I gotta say I must agree to op. Why do people want MMORPG's to be repetetive grinding games for virtual items that will have absolutely no value since a new expansion with "updates to the gear" will be pushed in within 8 months?

Also, instanced PvP or arena PvP for virtual currency that can be converted into items? That's freaking grind, and instanced PvP ain't fun. If I want to play CTF, I go for a real CTF game.

Originally posted by ShenjShimpo

combine BRINK art style with assassins creed in first persion view and u have dishonored

nothing AMAZING just a well made game but the 60 bucks for a 5-6hours campaign wont do...i will wait for price cut

The duration of the game is completely based on how difficult you make it for yourself. Perfect example are the quest markers; without them you have to seriously think, explore and find your way to the targets, you need to carefully read through the quest clues and stuff. Also turning the game to very hard increases the detection of the NPC's, so sneaking around will be a lot more difficult, not to mention that when so called "dead locks" arrive, dissambling these locks take time, as you need to first check how the enemies patrol and so forth. It's really enjoyable game that can challenge you, what bothers me is the fact that everytime you are caught, you just automatically press F9.

Originally posted by DOGMA1138

Not bad, too easy has some major issues like the lack of exploration(sorry but when you get a skill that shows where the "secrets" are located on the map, and if you are near one it will actually tell you to use the skill), enemies are way too stupid, the "rats" have like a single mechanic(dispose of bodies) in the game would be nice if they had more(e.g. make an opponent bleed so he will run to his team mates and bring those rats with him to nom nom nom on them), and the chaos mechanic besides givving you some different sound bites is so far meaningless.

And the story is weak, really weak i mean after the first mission they dump tons of stuff on you and apparently you have to be an assassin, not only that you are the only one that can be that kick ass assassin... this is all done with 0 explanation, 0 player involvement, and really turned me off from wanting to play the game more. BioShock had at least some char development even if it wasn't a classical RPG style of development you still felt that the char is developing and growing during the game and you could actually affect it some what, M&M also gave you a similar experience.

Dishonored just feels like a parody with out actually trying to be one.

 

May contain various small spoilers, I attempted to keep it as spoiler free as possible, but minor spoilers related to game mechanics may be included.

Too easy = Game difficulty not set to the most difficult one, obvious at todays game standards, as they are designed for monkeys with low iq. But I agree, it could be more difficult. 

Lack of exploration = Well, those "secrets" aren't secrets, they are power ups that are pretty much a "must" to collect in order to actually be capable of playing the game to its proper extend. The thing that's horrible is the fact that all quest markers and stuff are enabled by default, so if one wants to get something out of the game, those need to be disabled. (The heart mechanic is actually really awesome, listening to peoples thoughts & history of areas)

Rats, well, there are multiple ways to have fun with them, I'll keep this spoiler free.

The story evolves around you being an assassin by trade. Yet you can just choose not to assassinate, and show yourself to every enemy and kicking their ass, causing the chaos meter to go overdrive.

The exploration mechanic becomes in the game with the multitude of ways to complete the missions. The game itself is an stealth-action game, not an RPG as Bioshock, for example is. The player involvement comes with the choices you make (they actually impact the game world, as one of the very first loading screen tool tips says; The more you go on "rampage", the more chaotic the world becomes.).

The world well, it isn't that open, but its not a necessity really either, this game isn't an RPG, as I previously mentioned, it feels like sci-fi tenchu, with larger maps.

GOTY material, if not the GOTY.

Gotta say, today's games standards are so low that if you don't put the difficulty to Very Hard, remove the quest markers etc. The game isn't as immersive as when you attempt to set it to a brutal experience. With you removing all the quest markers etc, it reminds me of the old good Tenchu series.

Originally posted by Purutzil

Theme park = MMO preference

Sandbox = Online Seperate server preference.

 

Issue with sandbox is it tends to reflect capitalism where the players on top always will be on top and the players below are practically unable to get up to the top. This can be through skills or through wealth and its just a horrible experience, particularly with open pvp leading to griefing of players, the person focusing on those who stand no chance which to me, is just pathetic. If you gank someone, gank someone who is your level with your potential at the very least.  Games like minecraft (I know, why that game) show a good example of how sandbox can work, providing the ability for servers to be made and created and the playing field given an easier time for players to catch up or simply move servers and find newer places to have a shot at the top.

 

Sandbox can be fun, its just so much of it tends to be quite flawed. Theres a reason why sandboxes haven't taken off. Its not that they haven't been created, they simply lose interest quickly as people who call for certain things quickly leave when its not 100% what they wanted or they realize they won't ever hit the top.

In my eyes, those below me will be below me, when it comes to MMORPG gaming. Why would I not abuse such power in an MMORPG environment? What truly pathetic is to me is the players who are afraid of competitive experience. Everything should be a non-challenging joyride. People give up way too easily these days, that's the issue.

So, you aren't the top dog on the server? Well, strife to be, if not, why play multiplayer games at all?

I congratulate you for such insight without any proper arguments towards it.

SOE has said to from now on favor F2P & Player vs. player models. They even acquired Wizardy online.

 The game's engine is actually designed to handle grand battles with teams consisting of as many as 100 members apiece, though it's possible that such numbers will change ahead of the game's eventual release.

Unfortunately, due to online latency, the combat system will not be the same real time combat the Elder Scrolls games are known for. The Stamina Bar will be the main focus in battles. Use the Stamina Bar to Sprint, Block, Interrupt, and break Incapacitating Effects. All these effects will vary by class.

Meanwhile: Planetside 2.

Originally posted by gekkothegrey

Originally posted by GwapoJosh
Rule #1 when dealing with SOE:  Don't believe a damn thing Smed says..  He very rarely tells the truth or follows through with something he tells the community.  I can't believe people still even listen to him.. 

I love SOE and can not wait for EQ Next or 3 whatever you want to call it, but he is right on this do not listen to Smedy in all truth Sony should have done something about him years ago. EQ3 will be a sandbox of some sort imo as that is the way they are taking EQ2 which I am sure they are testing things for EQ3 just like they did with EQ for EQ2 if that makes sence lol.

Smedley, among others at SOE have done extraordinary well at Planetside 2, no matter how much of an false PR person he is, he seems to take the newest projects very seriously, and is closely part of the community of PS2 beta, which is surprising from a person of his status at larger company.

Ever seen a CEO of Blizzard arguing about stuff on Blizzard forums?

Don't lose your hair when I'm saying this, but he has been quite frankly, an honest person when it comes to Planetside 2.

People change, especially when we talk about MMO developers, usually its for the worse though.

"When asked about it, Smedley indicated that EverQuest Next would hew to F2P as well. He also said players shouldn't worry that they haven't heard much about this new title because the secrecy is intentional. "We want to get it right," Smedley said. "That's the pillar of our company and we are going to get it right. We're also making the next generation of MMOs, not an evolution -- and everyone says that, but in this case, we're zigging every other company's zag. Everybody's making WoW 1.5. We're doing something else."

"For the creative director of the entire EverQuest line, Dave Georgeson, the real benefit of Forge Light will be in roleplaying your EQ toon."

""We wanted to make the next EverQuest be something that still keeps the flavor the original and the lore and core tenants of it, but we wanted to make something that is truly next generation," said SOE president John Smedley of the game's direction. Smedley also said that SOE plans to provide a wide range of scalability for the game, noting that EverQuest Next will accommodate cutting-edge tech right down to minimalist laptops."

"The report states the new game will be a "reimagining" of the EverQuest series rather than a direct progression of EverQuest 1 and 2. The game will also be developed with Player Vs Player features in mind and with "more engaging" combat."

---

That certainly makes it sound like EQ next will just use the EQ IP to go for something different than typical themepark or RvRvR game.

Sources are from Massively, Giantbomb, Tenton & other gaming news sites. Mostly all the information is gathered from Fan faires.

Originally posted by jungleninja

Well why did D3 'sell' so many copies? Well first off, they gave 6 million away. I got mine for free with a sub to a magazine. Others got it, when they took a year sub on WOW. So, actually they cheated the system to make many fony sales. Who thinks that 10 million play d3 is crazy. Only a fraction of those still actually play d3 anymore. Including me. I checked it out, played it and havent been online for 2 months or so. So, see for yourself.

And about those saying I only played a few mmo's. Your wrong. I played many mmo's and have been playing computer games since the atari 2600 in 1979. So.....

 

Single-player games or games without monthly fee have served their purpose once they have been purchased. What you fail to understand that Blizzard just sold you a Diablo 3 virtual copy + 12 months of free wow game time for 100 bucks. Since World of Warcraft is in decline, now they got more WoW users (potentially increasing the purchases of Mists of Pandarai, since now 6 million people have 12 months of WoW game time). They didn't lose anything, they only gained increased sales in a declning game, a new game and potentially newly released explansion set. Do you honestly believe Blizzard, business wise cares if people play Diablo 3 for 3 months and quit? All they need to do is to release the next expansion and at least half of those people will return by purchasing the expansion set for D3.