Trending Games | WildStar | World of Warcraft | ArcheAge | Elder Scrolls Online

  Network:  FPSguru RTSguru
Login:  Password:   Remember?  
Show Quick Gamelist Jump to Random Game
Members:2,736,524 Users Online:0
Games:713  Posts:6,174,711
Sony Online Entertainment | Official Site
MMORPG | Genre:Fantasy | Status:Development  (est.rel 2014)  | Pub:Sony Online Entertainment
PVP:Yes | Distribution:Retail | Retail Price:n/a | Pay Type:Free | Monthly Fee:n/a
System Req: PC | Out of date info? Let us know!

EverQuest Next Forum » General Discussion » Everquest Next: Immersion Server Proposed Ruleset Poll

4 Pages « 1 2 3 4 Search
80 posts found
  Justsomenoob

Novice Member

Joined: 10/20/10
Posts: 869

10/22/13 12:52:41 PM#61

Might mess around on it on an alt.

 

Probably not full time play on it though.  Not because "it'd be too hard" but because the game clearly wouldn't have been designed with these restrictions in mind.

 

It'd be like having a GW2 server with no waypoints.   Just walk everywhere.   It'd be silly though as it'd truly just be a waste of time.   It's not like there'd be any danger.   You wouldn't be talking to friends in the zones on the way since there's no reason for anyone to be in any of them.  

In games today, if you play for an evening, you've probably already outleveled where you're at and have to move.  

 

Lack of fast travel worked in EQ because you really didn't have to travel much.   Funny enough, when you did (max level), you had 10 guild druids and wizards right there to port you close enough to where you were going anyway.

Designing a game with a certain setup in mind, then just having this one server where everything is slower and tedious just for the sake of being slow and tedious doesn't really sound like any fun at all.

  goldtoof

Novice Member

Joined: 10/18/13
Posts: 338

10/22/13 12:55:12 PM#62
Well hopefully they design the game they envision, rather than let a bunch of amateurs do design by comitee.

What we need is devs putting out a variety of different games, if devs just listen to vested gamers interests or start using focus groups all you get is a mushy mess of a game that trys to please everyone and ends up pleading no one.
  Nanfoodle

Elite Member

Joined: 5/23/06
Posts: 3359

10/22/13 12:57:41 PM#63
Originally posted by Ender4

 


I 100% disagree. Many more people will vote what they want but only a smaller number of people stick around to argue for what they want. Most people dont have time to spends days and days posting on forums about games. The numbers are way more important then the loudest group wins

 

Not at all. It isn't about the loudest group, it is about the group that makes the most important points. I voted race restricted by lore to this poll and by the time I got through the forum discussion I now prefer no restrictions. There were no real compelling arguments for restrictions other than 'I like it'. There were tons of compelling arguments for no restrictions.

But again this is a POLL not a vote. This is getting an idea of what the players want not making the game exactly what the players want. Also I think you missed the final 90 seconds of the video where they state that originally they were going to have restrictions but the discussion itself changed their minds. Early in the video they said they were going to try to avoid making people feel their characters weren't viable but it wasn't until the discussion that they realized this is exactly what they were doing with the restrictions. The poll DID change the direction of the game, it just did it through the discussion.

They said very simple that players would have an input. Listening to the round table feedback from the devs. You can hear very clearly player feed back had nothing to do with the direction they picked. They talk about the direction and planing that brings them to picking to go with option x,y,z. Again I say its a farce. They have been working on this game now for many many years. They had hoped to have the working game at SoE live. What ticks me off if the false stance of players have input. We have very little as it stands. If they started this process 4 years ago this would be a different story. What I dont stand for is someone trying to fool me and thats what SoE is doing here to make hype. I am fine liking or not liking their creative direction. If you are not honest with me, well thats a different story.

  User Deleted
10/22/13 12:58:54 PM#64
Originally posted by Ender4

 


Originally posted by grimgryphon

Originally posted by goldtoof Isn't it too early for all this petitioning when no one knows what the actual ruleset will be for the game.
Besides the fact the SOE cares nothing for the opinions of the community. If anyone thinks the feature-set and game mechanics are not completely mapped out and set in stone, then I have some swamp land in Florida to sell you.

 

I guess it gives some people comfort in thinking they have a voice.


 


Anyone who thinks the game mechanics are completely mapped out is a complete fool. I don't know how much our feedback will help them but from everything I've seen they don't know exactly what they are going to do yet either. Most games change heavily from pre-alpha to release and this one will be no different.

You can delude yourself all you want but after 30 years working in the software industry I can tell you for a fact that no product development project -- with the exception of projects in startups -- gets funded by execs if they cannot produce a well-defined plan, feature set, and milestones. You can pretend EQN development is different, but it's just another software project and SOE is no startup.

 

  lumiya

Novice Member

Joined: 9/09/09
Posts: 6

10/22/13 1:07:01 PM#65

I would absolutely LOVE a server of this type to be put into effect.  It would be the place that myself and almost all of my buddies from EQ1 would call home.  

 

Meaningful death and travel, making the game more social and having you reputation follow you around in the community are all things that I want to see.

  Ender4

Advanced Member

Joined: 5/18/08
Posts: 2044

10/22/13 1:16:56 PM#66


You can hear very clearly player feed back had nothing to do with the direction they picked

You can hear very clearly that it did change the direction~ I just watched the video again. They discuss why they went against the poll but they also mention that they went against their original design plan as well.


Omeed: It blows my mind that we actually started thinking about this while this discussion was happening, that when we put up the poll, we were seeing these results come in and we were happy. "Oh, that's where we're going, that's what we're thinking". And then as we went through and we're reading arguments and discussing it internally, we said wait a second...this isn't gonna work with our game.

You seem to be caught up in the early part of the video which was them explaining why they were going against the majority and then ignored the end which talks about how they went against their own design plan as well. The discussion is the important part of the round table, if you aren't having a part in that you aren't going to help them.

  sgtalon

Apprentice Member

Joined: 7/30/04
Posts: 109

10/22/13 1:24:50 PM#67
Originally posted by grimgryphon
Originally posted by goldtoof
Isn't it too early for all this petitioning when no one knows what the actual ruleset will be for the game.

Besides the fact the SOE cares nothing for the opinions of the community. If anyone thinks the feature-set and game mechanics are not completely mapped out and set in stone, then I have some swamp land in Florida to sell you.

I guess it gives some people comfort in thinking they have a voice.

I don't think you have been following SOE games lately. If you are unaware, just watch a couple Planetside 2 Command Center Videos. Matt Higby the Creative Director and Trammel Isaac the Art Director not only care a lot about the community, they are involved with them and play it all the time. 

You are probably confused because you believe the cry babies.

I have been a part of the PS2 community since they announced the game and it was called Planetside:Next. I was playing the game from Late Alpha/Very Early Beta. I can attest, without a doubt that they listen to the community. 

Not only do they listen, but they are part of the community. One of the really big community members for Planetside 1 was a guy named Malorn (forget his real name) he was a guy that seriously was into the game and was deeply involved in nearly every discussion on PSU and Reddit. Well a few people started telling Matt Higby and the other SOE devs that they need to give him a job and they did! He was hired to help with overall Meta-Game design and Level Design. 

If that is not listening to the community and caring about them, then i don't know what is. 

I get the impression that Dave Georgeson and Terry Michaels are similarly involved leaders of the game. They love EQ, have played it, understand it, and know games. They are not just a couple of guys that were hired for a project. They live the game and are not going to put something out that is not good.

John Smedley (head of SOE) is a guy that also plays the games and understands them and has learned enough about how to make games that the person you put in charge of a game has to love it and live it.

I mean seriously, do you really think they would have scrapped years of work and started over if they didn't care about what they were making?

  User Deleted
10/22/13 1:43:12 PM#68
Originally posted by sgtalon
Originally posted by grimgryphon
Originally posted by goldtoof
Isn't it too early for all this petitioning when no one knows what the actual ruleset will be for the game.

Besides the fact the SOE cares nothing for the opinions of the community. If anyone thinks the feature-set and game mechanics are not completely mapped out and set in stone, then I have some swamp land in Florida to sell you.

I guess it gives some people comfort in thinking they have a voice.

I don't think you have been following SOE games lately. If you are unaware, just watch a couple Planetside 2 Command Center Videos. Matt Higby the Creative Director and Trammel Isaac the Art Director not only care a lot about the community, they are involved with them and play it all the time. 

You are probably confused because you believe the cry babies.

I have been a part of the PS2 community since they announced the game and it was called Planetside:Next. I was playing the game from Late Alpha/Very Early Beta. I can attest, without a doubt that they listen to the community. 

Not only do they listen, but they are part of the community. One of the really big community members for Planetside 1 was a guy named Malorn (forget his real name) he was a guy that seriously was into the game and was deeply involved in nearly every discussion on PSU and Reddit. Well a few people started telling Matt Higby and the other SOE devs that they need to give him a job and they did! He was hired to help with overall Meta-Game design and Level Design. 

If that is not listening to the community and caring about them, then i don't know what is. 

I get the impression that Dave Georgeson and Terry Michaels are similarly involved leaders of the game. They love EQ, have played it, understand it, and know games. They are not just a couple of guys that were hired for a project. They live the game and are not going to put something out that is not good.

And the best part of it is that John Smedley is a guy that also plays the games and understands them and has learned enough about how to make games that the person you put in charge of a game has to love it and live it.

I mean seriously, do you really think they would have scrapped years of work and started over if they didn't care about what they were making?

"And the best part of it is that John Smedley is a guy that also plays the games and understands them and has learned enough about how to make games that the person you put in charge of a game has to love it and live it."

Maybe he had a near-death experience and changed his ways? Nah...

  azzamasin

Elite Member

Joined: 6/06/12
Posts: 2622

We live in a fantasy world, a world of illusion. The great task in life is to find reality.

10/23/13 5:11:15 AM#69
Would not play because it would be too reminiscent of EQ of which I thought was a horrible game.  What this game has in it is something I have been looking for since I quit WoW almost 3 years ago.

If your idea of a Sandbox is open FFA Full Loot PvP, full crafted world with minimal support for anything combat then your sandbox ideas are bad! Sandbox means open world, non-linear gaming PERIOD!

  vzerov

Novice Member

Joined: 2/26/09
Posts: 118

10/23/13 8:30:38 PM#70

Sounds good, except for the "No auctioneers or auction houses" part, player driven economy has nothing to do with this. EVE has the best player driven economy and it also has auction houses, you can even place "want to buy" deals on brokers which makes the auction system more convient than normal ones. Its somewhat restricted by areas, yes, but the auction system is still there. Removing the autction system does nothing but forcing you to spend more time on buying and selling things.

 

 

  FinalFikus

Hard Core Member

Joined: 3/01/13
Posts: 910

"We're up all night to get lucky"

10/23/13 8:37:20 PM#71
Originally posted by vzerov

Sounds good, except for the "No auctioneers or auction houses" part, player driven economy has nothing to do with this. EVE has the best player driven economy and it also has auction houses, you can even place "want to buy" deals on brokers which makes the auction system more convient than normal ones. Its somewhat restricted by areas, yes, but the auction system is still there. Removing the autction system does nothing but forcing you to spend more time on buying and selling things.

 

 

Does Eve send the item to your mailbox or do you have to go and pick it up from where you bought it?

"If the Damned gave you a roadmap, then you'd know just where to go"

  vzerov

Novice Member

Joined: 2/26/09
Posts: 118

10/23/13 8:57:09 PM#72
Originally posted by FinalFikus
Originally posted by vzerov

Sounds good, except for the "No auctioneers or auction houses" part, player driven economy has nothing to do with this. EVE has the best player driven economy and it also has auction houses, you can even place "want to buy" deals on brokers which makes the auction system more convient than normal ones. Its somewhat restricted by areas, yes, but the auction system is still there. Removing the autction system does nothing but forcing you to spend more time on buying and selling things.

 

 

Does Eve send the item to your mailbox or do you have to go and pick it up from where you bought it?

You have to pick it up yourself.Which is good for building the player driven economy, instead of removing the auction system.

  FinalFikus

Hard Core Member

Joined: 3/01/13
Posts: 910

"We're up all night to get lucky"

10/23/13 9:06:06 PM#73
Originally posted by vzerov
Originally posted by FinalFikus
Originally posted by vzerov

Sounds good, except for the "No auctioneers or auction houses" part, player driven economy has nothing to do with this. EVE has the best player driven economy and it also has auction houses, you can even place "want to buy" deals on brokers which makes the auction system more convient than normal ones. Its somewhat restricted by areas, yes, but the auction system is still there. Removing the autction system does nothing but forcing you to spend more time on buying and selling things.

 

 

Does Eve send the item to your mailbox or do you have to go and pick it up from where you bought it?

You have to pick it up yourself.Which is good for building the player driven economy, instead of removing the auction system.

Ya, that's a compromise we could all get along with, even the crafters. what about everyone else? Can we compromise on this detail or is it all or nothing?

"If the Damned gave you a roadmap, then you'd know just where to go"

  Bivin

Apprentice Member

Joined: 10/07/13
Posts: 4

Convenience corrupts; absolute convenience corrupts absolutely.

 
OP  10/24/13 4:28:47 PM#74

The omission of auction house is not set in stone.  It's more of a "want" than a "need."

To those wondering if this was put up by SOE, I wish it were.

I was only one of several who collaborated on the ruleset description.

We debated whether to keep the list short with only the most basic needs for encouraging group play, or to include the major "wants"  as well.

Obviously, the omission of  auction houses is a want.

Also, mounts with hitpoints would probably be dropped from the list, because several software developers have pointed out how very complex and difficult it would be.  ( I would be happy to see that, but its probably too much to ask for...unless, of course our poll tops 1000 and keeps moving to 1500...which would mean our poll is as close to a Gallup poll as any internet poll can be.  No internet poll is scientific or random in its sampling.)

 

Currently, the poll topped 778 votes total.   I know Sony doesn't have to listen to us.

But these numbers *seem* to indicate that *if* they truly intend to make a harder, more challenging game, then they are on the right track.

If they are chasing the WoW crowd by trying to out-WoW WoW -- perhaps they should invest in a little professional market research.

If not, well, we are only asking for one server.    Gripe all you want about how its not cost efficient, or not possible, yeah, we already know some of the points are unlikely to be met, even if they do ever make a separate ruleset for Immersion, or Hardcore, or whatever those opposed want to label it.

They don't have to listen.    Still, some of the interview videos tell me maybe they already have, or they had something along the same spirit or same purpose, in mind all along.

It will be interesting to see how this unfolds.

 

 

In EQN, would an Immersion server (high risk) interest you?
Vote here:
http://www.wepolls.com/p/20521024/Would-you-create-a-character-on-an-Immersion-Server-in-Everquest-Next-%2C-EQ-Next-%28See-Blurb-below-for-proposed-server-rules.

  jtcgs

Advanced Member

Joined: 9/28/04
Posts: 1843

10/24/13 4:32:24 PM#75

I would rather you roleplay those rules are in tact than have them create an entire server that has to be maintained separately from the rest.

The time and resources are better spent on other things.

“I hope we shall crush...in its birth the aristocracy of our moneyed corporations, which dare already to challenge our government to a trial of strength and bid defiance to the laws of our country." ~Thomes Jefferson

  FinalFikus

Hard Core Member

Joined: 3/01/13
Posts: 910

"We're up all night to get lucky"

10/24/13 5:42:14 PM#76
Originally posted by jtcgs

I would rather you roleplay those rules are in tact than have them create an entire server that has to be maintained separately from the rest.

The time and resources are better spent on other things.

Can SOE do those "other things" better than their competition? Have they been able to in the past? Why go in a different direction to make a U-turn?

Or you could define other things a little better. I and others may agree with you. If you're talking about LFG tools and such, I'll probably just pass and let the usual suspects have game number 500 to abandon in a week.

"If the Damned gave you a roadmap, then you'd know just where to go"

  Metrobius

Novice Member

Joined: 6/16/05
Posts: 93

10/24/13 6:03:48 PM#77
Originally posted by FinalFikus
Originally posted by jtcgs

I would rather you roleplay those rules are in tact than have them create an entire server that has to be maintained separately from the rest.

The time and resources are better spent on other things.

Can SOE do those "other things" better than their competition? Have they been able to in the past? Why go in a different direction to make a U-turn?

Or you could define other things a little better. I and others may agree with you. If you're talking about LFG tools and such, I'll probably just pass and let the usual suspects have game number 500 to abandon in a week.

I agree with you here, FinalFikus.  I'd rather not see lfg tools in game.  More than any thing else I think they contribute to the silent, and sometimes rude behavior of many players by constantly giving them a new set of people to abuse with no consequence.  

One thing I miss about EQ was the fact that if you were a jerk, people would remember it and eventually no one would gorup with you.

  Ender4

Advanced Member

Joined: 5/18/08
Posts: 2044

10/24/13 9:05:57 PM#78

If you have instanced dungeons you pretty much have to have a LFG tool. If you go with public dungeons you don't need one.

Instanced dungeons are tuned for a perfect full group and sitting around typing LFG constantly until you find one is just dreadful. Public dungeons you can group up with 1 or 2 and do some of the easier parts of the dungeon while you wait for someone to show up that lets you go deeper. I never sat endlessly LFG in EQ because I could grab one other person and at least do part of the dungeon. Instances are what really drive the need for a dungeon finder.

  ZaiDenTsu

Novice Member

Joined: 8/02/13
Posts: 11

10/29/13 6:03:43 PM#79
shit idea for a server ... it never be implemented because nobody wuld play on a server that gimp players. You can always on a nomrla server tu walk on foot in all maps  ,and dont use auciton houses ?!
  xeniar

Advanced Member

Joined: 11/09/06
Posts: 788

10/29/13 6:12:22 PM#80
Originally posted by ZaiDenTsu
shit idea for a server ... it never be implemented because nobody wuld play on a server that gimp players. You can always on a nomrla server tu walk on foot in all maps  ,and dont use auciton houses ?!

where is gimping the player? there is no gimping. It is for people who like something diffrent. Why would anyone play a game on hardmode? it gimps your character as you say... or better jet why play on normal lets play on an easy server normal gimps your character right?

Its about preference and there quite a few people who would like a chalange troughout the entire game not just a tiny part of it.

4 Pages « 1 2 3 4 Search