Originally posted by Chieftan

 

Originally posted by Neanderthal

 And beyond the dictates of all common sense the people at SOE decided to continue down the "chore" path as they cranked out expansions and eventually people just gave up on it.  Except for the people with subservient masochistic mindsets who enjoy being pushed around and tortured. 

 

Haha that last statement is exactly what I thought of people who drank a little too much of the EQ kool aid.  The offline community was full of people who treated raiding as a status symbol when in truth they were being bullied, plain and simple.

I thought the concept and execution of grouping in EQ was carried out almost flawlessly but at the same time I thought most classes were too weak on their own.

I liked that classes were mostly weak on their own, it formed a great community of players. I played both WoW and EQ and EQ by far had a better gaming audience and that is what MMORPGs are about. If I wanted to play a single player game, I would do so offline.

WoW takes too little time to reach the finish line and it encourages anti social behaviour because there is no consequences to being a jerk. In EQ you couldn't find groups if you were a jerk. It would be hard to do in WoW considering most you run into fit this category. I personally feel WoW has taken MMORPGs backwards in advancement. They turned MMORPGs into shallow games rather than living worlds. Same thing happened with all single player games in the past and now is making it's way to MMORPGs.

Look at how stupid and easy single player games are now, when they use to be great in the past. Turn base rpgs are gone in place of mindless diablo type games .... oh wait never thought about this but Blizzard has had it's hand in ruining both markets .

Enough rambling what killed EQ was time and Sony ruining the game with expansion after expansion ruining the original vision and ruining the game with so many mistakes starting at luclin. That is what killed EQ. EQ was a wonderful game and no not every game has to look like the shallow instant gratification that WoW is to be successful.

Originally posted by Shoal

For me, any server that can make it to PoP is dead for me.

Not even slightly interested.

I can live with Luclin (but would rather not).

But PoP is out of the question.
Not at all interested in ANY kind of progression server.

Just launch the Server with what it is going to have forever, a 'Classic' server to Velious or Luclin.
Nothing beyond that.

Like SoE cares if my one puny subscription comes back.

I have to agree with this poster but I would change it to any server that has Luclin and up is dead to me. I want to play a classic server .. not the crapped up mess EQ is today. I do not want to be grouped with Beastmasters, Bezerkers, Frogs, and Cats. I do not want a Bazaar in my game nor do I want to see the Books in each zone. I don't care to have instances in my game, I care for a game that builds community not isolation.

If I wanted all this garbage I would go play WoW where they have all this garbage designed in already .. not a 9 year old game that frankenstein's it in. Why turn a good game in it's own to an ugly old version of WoW with game mechanics that don't fit that type of game? That should illegal.

Give me old EQ to when it was really EQ.

I don't know why MMORPGs have to be about "end game" to most people. I wish game designers would get away from making "end games" and concentrate on all levels of the game. The game at a point should start to slow considerably around a certain level probably half way to the almighty finish line to the point you are barely moving in levels so people will stop looking for that stopping point. These are online persistant worlds we don't need finish lines. About at that point dungeons should start being more plentiful and as well as other big baddies should be floating around at different levels. Do we need a "end level"? Are you not still spending time in the game either way, why not gain a level a month while you do your "end game" stuff and the devs could keep adding more and more content as you go at a month a level speed or whatever it should be.  I think the instant gratification of WoW is a cheap worthless thrill that wears off quick. Having X gear or X level means nothing, it isn't an accomplishment. When in EQ it may have taken longer or was more difficult to obtain that neat item but once you had it, you felt an accomplishment. EQ could really hold you alot longer than WoW, that is why you play for a little while in WoW and get bored and then come back to see if it can grab you again for a few months, it wasn't a world like EQ.

WoW pushed the concept of "why even have leveling, just get to the end" even further. I am starting to think anymore with the recent change to WoW that a read they basically increased leveling so fast now it is trivial. Why not just go one step further and take out any game progression of leveling? Just do away with it, if it is such a pain or doesn't deserve anytime spent doing it. That is what WoW should have done since they don't believe that part of the game is "part of the game" anyhow. The next big MMORPG after WoW will probably have no levels you just log in and make a raid and start collecting equipment.

Enjoyed the read. : ) I love skill based games in general.

Originally posted by gestalt11

 

Originally posted by qombi

So far different than I expected. I always unfairly stereotype younger players wanting easier games.

That is because you are laboring under the false assumption that harsh = hard.

 

Is Boxing harder than Chess?  In Chess you just lose, in Boxing you lose and risk a broken jaw or nose etc.

By your definition Boxing is much "harder" and more "challenging" than Chess.

Hopefully this illustrates how wrong headed the whole idea is. 

Penalties are simply a part of the reward paradigm they have nothing, absolutely nothing, to do with challenge.  They simply apply consequences.  And frankly many games with harsh penalties apply stupid poorly thought out consequences in relation to their game structure.

I don't mind harsh penalties when they fit in with the game.  Losing a ship and getting salavaged is fine in Eve. Losing a major item in WoW is not fine because of the way their reward system works.  Adding item loss would not be challenging it would stupid on a fundamental pyschological level.  Especially WoW is designed to kill you.  You are not supposed to go into a high level raid instance and survive your first few times.  Causing people to lose items in that situation would simply cause anger and depression especially considering the crazy farm casino setup of WoW.  Which is the exact opposite of what you want.

In the end most death penalties meant to make a game "hard" are simply failed reward mechanisms.  They have no value added and detract from the attraction of the game.  A smart penalty can add value since it can add novel consequences and alter behavior.  The problem is most harsh death penalties work to simply sabotage whatever reward mechanism is already in place and add no real challenge, just busy work.

Xp loss is busy work.  Item loss is busy work.  You are simply working to recover what you already had through grinding mobs or bosses for xp or drops.  That isn't a challenge that is a timesink.

You need to seriously ask yourself "How does this potential penalty make a fight harder to win?".  Because if it does make a fight harder to win then it is challenging you.  None of these things do that.  They simply make it hurt more when you lose.  Therefore they are all REWARD (or anti-reward) mechanisms.  They are meant to put fear into you to alter your behavior not challenge you. 

Now Guild Wars has  a death penalty that adds challenge.  But very very few RPG games have one that actually does.  Dying in Guild Wars makes your next fight harder and more challenging and gives you a chance to rise above your performance penalty.

Technically LOTRO has a performance hit and adds dread on death, which i think is interesting.  But I am not really a fan of timed de-buffs for death penalties.  Mainly because i just get up and get a drink and wait it out.  Whereas in Guild Wars you either restart the instance or fight off your DP.  Which strikes me as more of a real challenge.  LOTRO or Tabula Rasa ones I don't consider real challenges just downtime. 

In fact the contrast between GW vs LOTRO DP paradigms is a very informative way of analyzing DP in general.  LOTRO winds up being downtime for many people.  EQ and old MUD style DP with moderate to huge XP loss (huge in the case of MUDs) is again downtime.  Downtime from progression.  Whether its downtime because you are sitting around or downtime because you have to make up for lost time(xp) isn't that important.  In the end its all down time.  Whereas the GW paradigm basically implements a system where you either win by never dying or win fighting through a performance set back and allows nothing else.

It may be that the GW system was designed with PvP in mind as the DP a team down can be very effective and it make rez rushing a bad strat.  But if so it is interesting that in the end it is also a superior PvE paradigm for those who wish a true challenge rather than mistaking behavioral influencing as challenge.

I don't know about that. A lot of people still want some penalties for doing stupid things in games. It makes for a deeper more satisfying experience to a lot of us that games don't provide anymore. Sometimes when making things easier to obtain by faster leveling or no penalties for your actions, the accomplishment just isn't there.

Everquest to me felt like a World. WoW is good too but it just feels like a game. The difference is how long one kept me entertained and how much more caught up I was in one than the other. Unfortunately some gamers that started on WoW may never get the feeling of playing a World rather than a action game online. Hopefully WoW with it's success will do one thing and open the eyes of the market and we start getting many different flavors of MMORPGs for different types of players. I think that is already happening to some degree, they are being made faster and alot more of them I guess I am optimistic that niche markets will come around to get different type of folks.

Edit: One other thing I would like to add. Why is some so caught up with "timesinks"? These are suppose to be persistant lasting games not games you just "win". I think people consider long dedicated character progression a "time sink" for silly reasons, as someone might be higher level than you.

On an online world you actually want progression to go slow so it is an accomplishment and the people playing have a persistent world not just a race to the finish line like a single player game. I think there should be interested content at every level, dungeons etc and it should be a long long process. What is the difference than a long level than setting at the end really? You just hit a wall and start collecting gear like in WoW. Either way you do it you are still online and collecting gear and playing.

Why not make each level last maybe a month? Have dragons, big baddies at each level .. isn't that the same as sitting at the finish line for a month, but this way you know in a month you get to level and get more skill points/talents/skills ..etc etc how ever the system wants to do it. This could be done with a system without levels as well, doesn't matter these games should last a while and have alot of content at each level, that is a persistant online experience, not WoW's rush to the finish line then experience the game approach.

I was going to purchase it as well but after reading the SOE's newsletter of the "great" new changes coming, I decided not to. If I wanted EQ2 I would just buy it. I don't need another easy game.

Originally posted by Jenuviel

I really don't miss the hardcore days of yesteryear. I just don't. Would I mind if new games were made following the old example? No, there's room for all sorts of games and players in the genre. I wouldn't play it, though. I rank the original EQ (circa 1999) among the worst MMO experiences I've ever had. Anytime a game has to put a version of Tetris into the client just so you have something to do during the 5-10 minutes of downtime following a fight, it has problems.

I do feel a bit bad for the people who enjoy that sort of thing, though. Vanguard was supposed to be their salvation, and we all know how that worked out. It would be interesting to see if a game with similar qualities but better implementation and far less technical issues could support a large enough playerbase to keep it going. I tend to think it'd be a pretty small game, really. While there are those who enjoy "extreme gaming," I think the average gamer is looking for a far more laid-back experience.

Same as the poster above thank you for not just shooting down what we want. I think there is a free money making opportunity for a small company to come along and provide this game for people that want a hardcore experience in today's gaming market place. The easy accessible game MMORPG is saturated, it would be silly as a smaller company to try to make a place in that market. Why not tap into this smaller market that has no competition right now except for a game made about 9 years ago that has taken a different direction anyhow? The market is there, Vanguard just had too many bugs and bad performance. Now SOE is turning it into another EQ2 or WoW like they needed more competition in that market.

Originally posted by Buccaneer

I do agree they should be harsh penalities in PvP, but I dislike the loot all option.

 

Edit: I don't like instances in general, but I did enjoy them in LOTRO.  If instances are there to promote the feeling of immersion by telling a story and provide greater interaction with the game worlds npc's I'm fine with that.

You make good points, I guess choose the closest option to what you believe in general. Thanks for participating!

I do like UO's PvP system as well. I agree with what you said. I would consider UO's PvP system to fall in the harsh category. Thanks for participating. I forgot one poll.

One more poll after this one!

Next

Next question

So far different than I expected. I always unfairly stereotype younger players wanting easier games.

I love polls and I have been lately curious to if some of these stereotypes that get thrown around are true or not. You hear some such as "You are X years of age if you play X game" "That game is grind only X year old player would be interested in that". Let's see if one of the stereotypes hold true to what you thought it would or if you are really surprised about what age of gamer actually likes in this feature in a game.

There was some questions without answers I would like but anyhow I am crazy about polls!

WoW is a shallow easy game to play.  Don't  make fun of the only thing it brought new to MMORPGs ...and that is a horrible gaming community.

Originally posted by Runefan101

tl;dr

People that don't even have time to read a post is the future of MMORPGs unfortunately.

Originally posted by taxguy

There are several things that would bring not just me back but others as well.

 

1. MORE SOLO content. Players want this. Just check out WOW and EQ2. Players want more casual friendly. Solo is important for casual players.

2. Faster leveling especially at pre level 70. Casual players need faster leveling. I didn't say fast,just faster. Also, if this can be put in pre level 70, we can start to catch up with the existing player base.

3. Less time sinks: EQ, from what I have read, has implemented this a bit ,but it needs to get better. Eliminate need to run through zones and corpse recovery. DEFINITELY eliminate the experience loss on death. I can't emphasize this enough. Maybe they should adopt what is found in WOW or EQ2,which is damage to armor that requires repairs or some small amount of experience debt,which can be eliminated over time.

Are you serious? Why not just go play Wow then? I think they should bring it back to it's original state when the game opened. I don't want to play a progression server with all the garbage that is new still floating around in the game. In the progressive server we still had to see those stupid POK books. I think one of the  best ideas I have read came from the guy above me in another post, if you play on a classic server you can transfer over to another server at the end if you don't want to stay on the classic server. That way everyone is happy. People like me can stay where we feel the game was best. The should revert the graphics back as well and the UI and game mechanics though. The XP level should be back to the original as well, I think the screwed with it some.

Okay kids I am going to write down below a game design for all of you that don't like the "grind" and want it removed.

Game starts then game ends. There you have it. Not a bit of grind ..was it fun?

I think PvP has the potential to hold a customer's attention longer than static dungeons IMO. I am a big big EQ fan but that doesn't make me blinded to the fact PvP is a dynamic activity between players (not AI) that keeps people coming back.

I think they have to be very very careful with how they reward PvP though, if it is done like WoW is now, the fun will be sucked out completely. WoW in my opinion didn't have much going for it to begin with considering how shallow and easy it is then they made the honor system and ruined the only thing good about the game it had going for it, open pvp fights that players chose where and when to do.

The more control they put in a game, the less fun it is. EQ had alot of freedoms, and most games today have too many boundaries, instances.