Originally posted by tank017
I could have sworn I read somewhere that they were harkening back to EQ1 for inspiration.But if they were to make an actual EQ1 with updated technologies and a couple tweaks here and there? I would literally cry with joy.

If they go back to the mob grind, hardcore, camping route, i am sure they wont get much business.

The world has changed. EQ1 design is antiquated.

Originally posted by vesavius

SOE say a lot of things, usually what they think will keep their players quiet in the short term, and usually not all that true.

In fact, the reason I won't play SOE games anymore isn't their actual product (I love EQ, loved PS, have respect for EQ2, and even though they didn't make it I love VG), it is them.

It is their insatiable greed and lies.

I personally think EQnext will dissapoint many many players that have a lot of good will for the EQ name... I fully expect, whatever SOE say, to see a pay to achieve Free Realms with a fantasy skin delivered.

This is almost certainly true.  Smokejumper has said over and over again that they love the Freemium  + Cash Shop business model.  There is no way they can make a classic EQ game design under that model.  You can't offer a complete game via subscription and have a free play aspect and a cash shop all in one.  They don't mix and that is why I think the F2P developers (SoE, Turbine, PWI, Frogster, etc) push and prmote "F2P" so heavily.

SoE is greedy.  They don't just want to make a reasonable profit with a sustainable revenue model.  They want to milk their customers for every penny they can.

Originally posted by MMOExposed

Originally posted by Axehilt 

Why would you think you can't copy a copy?

Because you are still copying the original

No, you're copying the copy.

If I copy the Mona Lisa and add a funny hat, and you copy my copy, you're going to create a very different picture than if you copied the original.

WOW clearly has many such differences from EQ1, and all the "WOW clones" have plenty of differences from WOW.

Originally posted by Axehilt

Originally posted by MMOExposed

Originally posted by Axehilt 

Why would you think you can't copy a copy?

Because you are still copying the original

No, you're copying the copy.

If I copy the Mona Lisa and add a funny hat, and you copy my copy, you're going to create a very different picture than if you copied the original.

WOW clearly has many such differences from EQ1, and all the "WOW clones" have plenty of differences from WOW.

Agreed.  There is an evolution to design.  I've listened to interviews with the designers of ArcheAge and they talk about bringing game design to a new level and a new generation.  They are adding features that may not have been possible in previous generations while including, polishing, and improving existing features from existing games.

The world isn't so black and white that one can say "everything is an exact clone of that thing".  While some development studios do seem to try and parrot existing games, some, like RIFT, have taken an existing model and polished it.  There is certainly nothing wrong with that.  It would be sad if themeparks still played exactly like EQ and haven't improved and polished features or removed mistakes.  It would be boring if all of our combat strategy sims were still like the very first version of Command and Conquer.

Does the OP read the same mystery book over and over and over again because every mystery book is the same?  Do they watch the same movie over and over and over again because every movie is about a protagonist and antagonist?  Do they listen to only one song because they all use the same notes?  Methinks they do protest too much.

wow really isn't anything like everquest 1, the only thing they have in common is they are both mmo's..aion. rift and swtor have alot more in common with wow than they have with everquest. wow is more like asherons call 2 not everquest.

Originally posted by ste2000

Of those you listed none is an AAA to start with, which is my point.

There is no AAA MMO released in the last 7 years which is somehow different from the WoW concept.

So let's see here.  Your basic method seems to be:

1)  Make an absurd claim.

2)  Be given lots of counterexamples.

3)  Narrow your absurd claim while ignoring the counterexample(s) to your newer claim that have already been given.

Come on.  Read your own thread, at least.

In what universe is Tecmo-Koei not an AAA developer?  It's a merger of Tecmo and Koei, each of which had been making games for about 30 years, and each of which had dozens of released titles to their credit, some of which were very good.  The combined company has several hundred million dollars per year in annual revenue, and that pays for an awful lot of game development.

If that's not an AAA developer, then who is?  That's a very short step from claiming that there hasn't been an AAA MMO released in the last 7 years, whether similar to WoW or otherwise.

People have to remember EQ had downsides too.

The "say the right thing" to get a response was lame.  I remember it just came down to using the right word... that's not hard... that's just stupid.

Personally, I think a lot of the older MMO's could use a little reinvestment from the parent companies. Sure, EQ upgraded it's graphics with each expansion, but the engine itself had limits. Same goes for Funcom's Anarchy Online, which was a great game in itself, but because of a poor engine design, combat and visuals were lacking.

I guess the question is, how much does it cost to do a complete overhaul of a classic MMO? Think about EQ2 which was suppose to be just that, but for some odd reason, SOE, with it's insane team basically remade the entire game into something different. EQ2 when it came out had a familiarity to it, but not to the degree I'm sure a lot of EQ vets were looking for. Why is it so hard to believe if something isn't broke, don't fix it. It's like gaming companies get the balls to try something new, but they waste it on completely meaningless areas of the game.

For instance, take SWG's crafting and resource gathering, SWG's sandbox and city building features, DAoC's 3 realm competitive feel and AoC's character customization and you'ld have one hell of an MMO. Ever wonder why no one ever tries to do that? I've been wondering ever since those games have been around.

WoW truly is a boring game when compared to games of old, yet someone somewhere seems to think it's the only way to go. Marketing analysts need to go back to school, because WoW isn't popular because it's fun. It's popular because 8 year olds can play it. That doesn't mean we should forget the first generation of MMO players who have been around the block. I have nothing against WoW, I just really don't see why it's so popular, I really don't. Most of the time, I think it's because I'm not 8 years old, but whatever. Gaming companies rarely listen to old time vets anyways, so I'll just wait for someone to make that perfect MMO, until I win the lottery and make it myself.

Originally posted by Rhoklaw

WoW truly is a boring game when compared to games of old, yet someone somewhere seems to think it's the only way to go. Marketing analysts need to go back to school, because WoW isn't popular because it's fun. It's popular because 8 year olds can play it. That doesn't mean we should forget the first generation of MMO players who have been around the block. I have nothing against WoW, I just really don't see why it's so popular, I really don't. Most of the time, I think it's because I'm not 8 years old, but whatever. Gaming companies rarely listen to old time vets anyways, so I'll just wait for someone to make that perfect MMO, until I win the lottery and make it myself.

That is only your OPINION. I played EQ for since start to Kunark. It is a MUCH MORE BORING game compared to WOW.

And you need to do some web search. The median age of WOW players is like 27-28. All of my guildies are adults. I do not know what you are smoking.

It is popular because it is a GOOD GAME. Very simple.

Originally posted by Angier2758

People have to remember EQ had downsides too.

The "say the right thing" to get a response was lame.  I remember it just came down to using the right word... that's not hard... that's just stupid.

Imagine how dumb that'd be nowadays, when a wiki (or EQHead) site would list all the right responses.

Hopefully EQNext avoids that mistake (although I'm not sure I care, if their attitude is "We're going to make a super hardcore MMORPG that's tedious and punishing," then they're making a game for masochists not gamers.)

I'd love a hard MMORPG.  I'd hate an abnormally inconvenient MMORPG.  Big difference.

Originally posted by Moaky07

Even though EQ had a bit of a sandbox feel to it, it was the Grand Dad of all 3D themepark MMOs.

 

The land wasnt reserved for building on, folks couldnt create their own mob encounters/content, nor ws PVP forced upon folks. 

Most of all, Owen was told to sit down and STFU. His role was to support PVE, and not pass out loot. Nor were there manginas shaking their ass, and folks watching them, all cause a forced dependancy was thrown in to a non combatant class.

 

I dont know where the guy writing that article come up with the idea that EQ was a sandbox, but that is wrong. The 4 PVP servers accounted for roughly 8 or 10% of subs(either 40 or 50 servers). PVE combined with no forced PVP caused EQ to top the charts back then.

EQ was sandbox because your were not lead down a path with a series of quests to perform.  What you did with yourself to level up, grind crafting skills, etc. was entirely up to you.  The was a wide range of zones you could go to for content within a certain level range so you bascially wrote your own story.

Originally posted by Ozivois

EQ was sandbox because your were not lead down a path with a series of quests to perform.  What you did with yourself to level up, grind crafting skills, etc. was entirely up to you.  The was a wide range of zones you could go to for content within a certain level range so you bascially wrote your own story.

Exactly.

I always said EQ was a sandbox, because i compare it with linear today's mmorpgs. There was no quest grinding, there were loads of huge interesting open zones or dungeons with very different mobs, there were lots of places to go for exp at given level - it was your choice.

Originally posted by Axehilt

Originally posted by Angier2758

People have to remember EQ had downsides too.

The "say the right thing" to get a response was lame.  I remember it just came down to using the right word... that's not hard... that's just stupid.

Imagine how dumb that'd be nowadays, when a wiki (or EQHead) site would list all the right responses.

Hopefully EQNext avoids that mistake (although I'm not sure I care, if their attitude is "We're going to make a super hardcore MMORPG that's tedious and punishing," then they're making a game for masochists not gamers.)

I'd love a hard MMORPG.  I'd hate an abnormally inconvenient MMORPG.  Big difference.

That would depend on your definition of masochistic. A WoW player's definition would be something like, actually having to play the game to progress and not just be sent random purples in the mail everyday. While a real gamer's definition would be much different.

Personally, I would have no problem with death penalties, corpse runs, long experience grinds, as long as the world is huge, diverse and awesome. A sandbox experience, like EQ1 would be fantastic. And I want longetivity to the game, I don't want to be max level in a week and a half.

I find it funny that people don't think people want this, when games like EQ are STILL around and making money. Meanwhile, all the PoS games they compare it too have already gone free to play because they suck balls. Longetivity to a game holds subscribers, there haven't been many games to have this lately, besides some of the Asian games.

All I know, is a dynamically changing world, based heavily on the EQ1 universe? With re-vamped classes and UI/etc. It sounds like it could be completely amazing. Though, knowing SOE, it probably won't be. If I was the lead designer, i am sure I could make it amazing, but we will see how it turns out :P

Originally posted by tixylix

WoW when it came out was great and I played everquest back in the day but just thought WoW was the better game. It made a better world which was seamless and the instances from level 20 were amazing, unlike anything you'd see in any other MMO. It hit the spot with the combat, best combat of any MMO ever IMO and the world PVP was fun but just needed something to fight over. Basically what blizzard made was a better version of Everquest and they introduced things like quest leveling instead of grinding that you saw in every MMO before it. The other thing it did was let you progress on your own but still had a lot of group content, Everquest 2 came out with mostly gorup quests and you couldn't progress on your own after level 10 and the quests dried out a lot of the time. So I found myself with Everquest 2 soloing the small amount of soloable mobs while my friends were offline. 

I won't say you're wrong, because that would just be arguing my opinion against yours which would be completely pointless...but I will tell you why I disagree.

To call WoW a seamless world is a gross misstatement. Instances =/= seamless. WoW's environments dont mesh well from one zone to the next either. You don't walk across a line and suddenly go from forest to snow.  The sky shouldn't suddenly change colors because you step across a border. The obcene use of mountains to block areas off from one another save for a single small opening is just shamefull.

The "quest leveling" in WoW is easily one of its worst features in my opinion. A never ending onslaught of kill x number of creature y is horribly boring and gets old very fast. It gets to the point where you dont even need, or care to to read the inane story behind each quest you do. Not to mention the fact that the majority of these "quests" are nothing but petty errands that really feel beneath your character.

The problem with WoW's group content (at least the last time I played it) was that it was not only entirely unnecessary, but any benefit from equipment you got from it was obsolete after a day of leveling because leveling happens so quickly. I personally liked how Everquest made you get out there and meet people to advance. Not just playing with people you already know.

Everquest 2 was a bit of a disaster at launch. It alienated fans of the original by not only throwing out half the lore that EQ was known for, but also by dumbing the game down in an attempt to capture the casual market. They had a fanbase already frothing at the mouth for this sequel, and they went and ignored them. There's definitely room for casual MMOs, but that audience that liked EQ's old style of play have been left out in the cold for a long time now.

Originally posted by Ozivois

Originally posted by Moaky07

Even though EQ had a bit of a sandbox feel to it, it was the Grand Dad of all 3D themepark MMOs.

 

The land wasnt reserved for building on, folks couldnt create their own mob encounters/content, nor ws PVP forced upon folks. 

Most of all, Owen was told to sit down and STFU. His role was to support PVE, and not pass out loot. Nor were there manginas shaking their ass, and folks watching them, all cause a forced dependancy was thrown in to a non combatant class.

 

I dont know where the guy writing that article come up with the idea that EQ was a sandbox, but that is wrong. The 4 PVP servers accounted for roughly 8 or 10% of subs(either 40 or 50 servers). PVE combined with no forced PVP caused EQ to top the charts back then.

EQ was sandbox because your were not lead down a path with a series of quests to perform.  What you did with yourself to level up, grind crafting skills, etc. was entirely up to you.  The was a wide range of zones you could go to for content within a certain level range so you bascially wrote your own story.

How can you call it a Sandbox when you have this "wide range of zones you could go to for content within a certain level range" designed in?

Originally posted by FrostWyrm

To call WoW a seamless world is a gross misstatement. Instances =/= seamless. WoW's environments dont mesh well from one zone to the next either. You don't walk across a line and suddenly go from forest to snow.  The sky shouldn't suddenly change colors because you step across a border. The obcene use of mountains to block areas off from one another save for a single small opening is just shamefull.

I would say Everquest's world wasn't entirely seemless either.  Its zones were basically rectangular maps surrounded by impassable terrain with a small road/bridge leading to an adjacent zone.  A true seemless world in my opinion would be Asheron's Call, huge world, no instances, and no zoning or artificial barriers.

I'm a little scared to see what Everquest Next is going to be.  EQ was my first MMO and  I have some pretty good memories.  If you ask what set it apart from a modern MMO, you'll get a list that looks like this:

• XP received from grinding mobs and not from quests(except in very specific cases)
• Chatbox based "quest system"
• Non-linear dungeon designs / camping a spot instead of moving beginning to end
• Downtime between combat
• Trains
• Limited spell slots / choosing spells depending on situation
• Autoattack with (arguably optional) cooldown skills on the side
• Determining mob difficulty with /con
• Itemization (being proud of a full set of armor with no stats besides AC and high weight)
• Travel / waiting for boats / depending on other players to teleport
• Binding / depending on other players to bind
• No auction house or mass trading system
• No maps
• Class balance issues
• Risk vs reward tuning (death penalties or failing to craft your reward at the end of a long quest)

You won't find these in a modern MMO and if EQ was released a generation or two later, it wouldn't have these differences, either.  EQ was like this because the developers didn't have anything similar to look back on.  Everybody can claim the game is hardcore and original, but it's this way because it was one of the first of its kind.  It wasn't designed to be hardcore -- it was designed to be an online RPG game and this is just how those features turned out.

In fact, if EQ was released a generation or two later (with the generation-appropriate features and graphics, etc) it may not have survived.

What will make EQNext the experience that calls back to EQ?  Things on this list?  (I never understood exactly what "the vision" was...)  What does it mean when all the things listed are outdated designs or technologically obsolete?  It seems like picking a old NES game and asking why current Xbox 360 and PS3 games aren't as fun/hard/original.

Yes, EQ is a linear design, it's just harder to recognize after playing a newer generation MMO.  Instead of moving to the next tier zone to get XP from quests, you move to a higher tier zone to get XP from grinding mobs.

EQ is somewhere between a sandbox and a themepark I think.

It's certainly not a themepark by today's standards, EverQuest had surprisingly few quests and the few quests there were weren't even easy to understand at time, the quest itself gave you very little direction and you relied on the community to give you pointers on drops and locations.

It's also not 100% sandbox I feel, there was some direction on where to hunt I guess, later on there were some better armor quests and more quests.

But early EQ is pretty close to a sandbox to me, it had very few themepark elements.

Everquest was a world, not a sandbox or themepark.Velious was the peek for me. You could ally yourself with factions, giants, dragons, dwarfs. Western Wastes an entire zone full of dragons. Open world uninstanced dungeons, corpse retrevial, and camping rare spawns are what EQ was about. Raiding in EQ was a full time job these people played 8 hours a day min. It was a huge grind.

There are things in EQ that are forever left in the past and you could only have done while being there to play it. Printing off a book with all the maps in it from Alakazam. Waiting 5 minutes for it to load up on my pentium. Going from a 14k modem to a 56k!!

The core design of Everquest needs to live on and designers need to make a world. Not quests hubs, not instanced hallway syndrome dungeons. Explore it, fear it, defeat it! Lord Nagafen and Lady Vox! A vast selection of races not just human body 1-3. Home towns for every race, oceans, continents, world bosses. The epic quest for your class weapon. Todays tech should be shooting for an open seemless world.

Originally posted by endeavors

I'm a little scared to see what Everquest Next is going to be.  EQ was my first MMO and  I have some pretty good memories.  If you ask what set it apart from a modern MMO, you'll get a list that looks like this:

• XP received from grinding mobs and not from quests(except in very specific cases)
• Chatbox based "quest system"
• Non-linear dungeon designs / camping a spot instead of moving beginning to end
• Downtime between combat
• Trains
• Limited spell slots / choosing spells depending on situation
• Autoattack with (arguably optional) cooldown skills on the side
• Determining mob difficulty with /con
• Itemization (being proud of a full set of armor with no stats besides AC and high weight)
• Travel / waiting for boats / depending on other players to teleport
• Binding / depending on other players to bind
• No auction house or mass trading system
• No maps
• Class balance issues
• Risk vs reward tuning (death penalties or failing to craft your reward at the end of a long quest)

You won't find these in a modern MMO and if EQ was released a generation or two later, it wouldn't have these differences, either.  EQ was like this because the developers didn't have anything similar to look back on.  Everybody can claim the game is hardcore and original, but it's this way because it was one of the first of its kind.  It wasn't designed to be hardcore -- it was designed to be an online RPG game and this is just how those features turned out.

In fact, if EQ was released a generation or two later (with the generation-appropriate features and graphics, etc) it may not have survived.

What will make EQNext the experience that calls back to EQ?  Things on this list?  (I never understood exactly what "the vision" was...)  What does it mean when all the things listed are outdated designs or technologically obsolete?  It seems like picking a old NES game and asking why current Xbox 360 and PS3 games aren't as fun/hard/original.

 

Originally posted by Amaranthar

Originally posted by Ozivois

EQ was sandbox because your were not lead down a path with a series of quests to perform.  What you did with yourself to level up, grind crafting skills, etc. was entirely up to you.  The was a wide range of zones you could go to for content within a certain level range so you bascially wrote your own story.

How can you call it a Sandbox when you have this "wide range of zones you could go to for content within a certain level range" designed in?

Yes, EQ is a linear design, it's just harder to recognize after playing a newer generation MMO.  Instead of moving to the next tier zone to get XP from quests, you move to a higher tier zone to get XP from grinding mobs.

Thus the old saying, which has died off in recent years, that "they" are giving us less and less. But to the point, EQ was every bit the Themepark, what with going from zoned to level content to the next. But it did try to maintain that world feel. While it wasn't a Sandbox, it had a more Sandboxy feel in that respect. But that brought on issues with waiting to get to your level's content for other players to use it and move on, and that's why WoW went to the purely quest driven style of Themepark (which was innevitable in the genre of Themepark MMORPGs).

In a sense, Themepark is like a cancer. You still want to live but you have to go through the Chemo and/or there's going to be some surgury involved.