tad10
Elisha Dushku
- 5,533
- 595
Sad to hear. But I guess most of the uberguilds are gone when I think about it.Conquest is dead bro
Sad to hear. But I guess most of the uberguilds are gone when I think about it.Conquest is dead bro
He still has a point though - they can put the hours required to make EQHD work into EQN (obviously for different stuff, just talking time invested). Using Tad's napkin math of 250k players and assuming its a good 100k that drop EQ1/2 for it, you get 150k new subs. I would be surprised if those additional hours do not get 150k more people into EQN just as well, with the bonus of also providing more stuff for the other 2 mill people in EQN.it's sad that you never heard of a game called dark souls which makes your statement completely obsolete.
Did you just...God, I'd forgotten how many buttons there were in EQ2. It never bothered me that much, because if you've ever taken a combart art in real life, there are hundreds of moves on a lot of them. Think how many moves there might be in MMA, for instance. Thousands probably.
All I'm saying is that there has to be a happy medium between seven and ten rows of skills.Did you just...
Ahh ok.All I'm saying is that there has to be a happy medium between seven and ten rows of skills.
Point wasn't whether Wow was original, it was that their choice of ogre models was a cut and paste of orc models in other games. You can give whomever you want credit for that model but that sir is an orc not an ogre!Ya guys cuz WoW invented orcs amirite?
That's kinda the problem - I would say Tad's 250k are way on the low end. My own made-up estimate is 500k. But those 500k do not want the same EQHD, instead there's a half-dozen subgroups that would belittle the image of EQHD that the other players hold. if they make it their subs will spike to a mill or two out of sheer public curiosity, drop to those 500k within a few months, and past the 6 months mark they are at 150k or less with the other splinter groups back on EQmac and P99 and VG each calling EQHD a failure.I'm still not even sure what EverQuest HD people want. Static Camps? Forced grouping to max level? Terribly boring combat? Long down time?
Why not just go play Project 1999? That's what I'm playing at the moment, and it scratches that itch just fine. I don't see why we need a game to copy that.
You can't be fucking serious, dude. Your argument is literally "death was aggravating, therefore it was bad design and not useful."
That shouldn't be asking too much; many of us have talked about similar games for a long time now but I'm not going to get my hopes up about seeing anything like that in the near future. I'd love to see a game without raiding as we know it,more negative reinforcement instead of"push button, receive bacon"design, fully player crafted economy and less predication on dropped loot (though dropped clicky or unique items would be fun, along with crafting mats), player created society on a level past EVE, removal of character levels, etc etc etc.
What I want to see is operant conditioning, specifically negative reinforcement, used in a fashion that encourages players to band together (social aspect) in order to remove a (potential) negative stimulus such as a KOS dragon. Death penalties are often a punishment and things like that can and do cause reactions that run counter to desired behavior. I actually didn't really mind XP penalties and even de-leveling, but some other things I think were a bit much. CRs for example, I didn't mind the system on paper, but the possibility of having your corpse be non-recoverable for an extended period of time if you weren't a class that could summon, couldn't find someone to summon, or had to wait for a long time before friends/guildies logged on to help....that was just bad.This is why I mention operant conditioning and negative reinforcement.The way I think traditional raid mobs/bosses should work (dragons, giants, deities, etc) is that instead of killing them repeatedly every week for loot, they should be nigh unstoppable and rare, and used specifically to destroy the things that players create.
I think hours would actually work but you have to adjust your perspective in order to consider it. If it took hours to get to a raid, but everything else was like WoW, then yes that would be really bad. The idea of raid members all spending hours coming from scattered locations to a specific raid sounds awful.If you look at what Elurin originally posted, one thing mentioned was travel time and the potential for it to take someone "hours" to get to a raid. Now, we've all debated "meaningful" travel time before but you can't be serious if it should take someone "hours" to get to a raid. We'll all have different opinions for how long is reasonable in an online game, but hours? Really?
For a month? Sure... it might do well for a month. It might to passably well for 2-3. Are you forgetting EQ attrition rates though? If you're one of the guys that stuck through till the bitter end that's a perfectly understandable thing to gloss over. If you weren't in a position in your guild where you were facefucked with attrition problems daily it's also a perfectly understandable thing to gloss over. Honestly, it is. But their account retention was like 15% or something?I don't understand why the general consensus is that an EQ3 title wouldn't draw a large player base? We played it, for a long ass time, and 13 years later we still sit here cock in hand following everything about it. I'm sure there's an equivalent fan base for EQ3 in the newer generation of gamers as well.
Negative reinforcement is generally the least effective manner to encourage learning. In essence, you're telling someone that they've done something wrong without giving them direct path to ameliorate their behavior.If someone doesn't see the positive value in some of that "negative reinforcement" then he's probably not very smart.
You cite "bleeding edge raiding" in WoW to illustrate that WoW presents more risks then EQ did? I didnt actually do VP when it was fresh but I think it would've been a contender on the risks/logistics of CR alone. That aside, a game isnt considered difficult and challenging or hardcore if a tiny bit of the content fits those criteria. I also think raiding is a bad comparison in when it comes to EQ1 because the game go easier the more you advanced through it and not harder. For example I was at risk of actually losing my corpse like a half-dozen times before lvl20, and *once* in the 4 years after lvl20.That's their strategy. Make statements without any factual backing, then call everyone else a casual pussy.
Bleeding edge World of Warcraft raiding is more difficult than EverQuest raiding ever was. To say you can't have hardcore in an MMO with modern features is just a joke.
Money. Money money money.I've said this before but the MMO genre is pretty much the only gaming genre that does not have a solid hardcore representation, which is odd considering how hardcore the original MMOs were (and how hardcore many people play relatively casual MMOs). In a world where DOTA 2 is rapidly becoming the most popular online game around, where Dark Souls was hugely popular, where Roguelikes are a constant inspiration for new games, and where hardcore mode is loved in games like path of exile and diablo... It boggles the mind that there has been no effort to do the same in the MMO world, outside of some really rough around the edges under-funded under-produced games.
Everything I've read so far seems to indicate there is no autoattack. Judging from my admittedly short stint in TOR, that is probably going to suck. Not even being able to finish something off with autoattacks in order to write something in group or guild because you have to keep pushing attacks to actually deal those last few hits was annoying.You've brought up lack of downtime a few times here, but have they actually said anything about what downtime will look like? I don't recall it coming up in any of the panel videos.
Wouldn't be terribly surprised if it turns out to be short downtime, and we're certainly not going back to the five+ minute downtimes of EQ, but I'm just not aware of any definitive statements about it.
During what period was their retention rate 15%?For a month? Sure... it might do well for a month. It might to passably well for 2-3. Are you forgetting EQ attrition rates though? If you're one of the guys that stuck through till the bitter end that's a perfectly understandable thing to gloss over. If you weren't in a position in your guild where you were facefucked with attrition problems daily it's also a perfectly understandable thing to gloss over. Honestly, it is. But their account retention was like 15% or something?