Miele
Lord Nagafen Raider
- 916
- 48
EQ Never
- Thread starter Convo
- Start date
I think cinge got a lil more experience in mmo's than you, think twice before quoting someone.
Here's why you're a retard
1)MMO experience has nothing to do with subscription numbers.
2) How the fuck would you know my MMO experience.
3) You're actually embarrassing Cinge by defending him in such a retarded way
4) You're not even a funny troll.
5) You are a retard.
1)MMO experience has nothing to do with subscription numbers.
2) How the fuck would you know my MMO experience.
3) You're actually embarrassing Cinge by defending him in such a retarded way
4) You're not even a funny troll.
5) You are a retard.
The entire game is a competiton; you are always going to compare the state of your character to those above and below you. Whether you can fight other people directly to this end is irrelevant.
Even if it wasn't a "competition" people still compare themselves to others within their social group to identify status within their chose group. That's why having armour that is instantly recognizable is such an important factor in any MMO. It gives people reasons to actually work hard for loot other then the +5 to kill the next monster. If everyone had dull looking armor that wasn't easily identifiable but still had the +X stat to be better. It would be less appealing for people to work hard for loot.
The main draw in getting loot is to show off either what that loot can get you by being stronger or to show off that you have got that loot. Not because it helps you kill a certain monster faster. That's why I've always thought that hard achievements should always come with a material object. (mount hat armour dye etc) A truly fleshed out achievement system is what Devs should be making for the solo players. Even an achievement system with levels ability trees etc. It should be the end game for solo players. Raiding for grouping players PvP for everyone and Achievment system for Solo. That's how you retain soloers.
The main draw in getting loot is to show off either what that loot can get you by being stronger or to show off that you have got that loot. Not because it helps you kill a certain monster faster. That's why I've always thought that hard achievements should always come with a material object. (mount hat armour dye etc) A truly fleshed out achievement system is what Devs should be making for the solo players. Even an achievement system with levels ability trees etc. It should be the end game for solo players. Raiding for grouping players PvP for everyone and Achievment system for Solo. That's how you retain soloers.
I'd argue UO was a gateway to EQ. I played UO which prepped me for EQ. Basically, any of my friends without a 3dfx card played UO. Those with one, played Everquest. A lot of people played both.
It'd be nice if all new MMOs coming out were designed as differently from their predecessors as EQ and UO had been. Instead, every game coming out is a fucking clone with 'mild improvements'.
- 1,777
- 5,240
shabushabu
Molten Core Raider
- 1,410
- 186
I think you are making some invalid assumptions here. I can name several MMOs that don't seem to fit your model that had content that was challenging and not everyone could beat. Eq, eq2, Vanguard, ddo to name a few. However the difference seems to be the need to group to enter the "challenging" part. Well to me this is how it should be, the cool thing about an MMO is not only its persistent nature but the ability to group at will... as a result encounters can be more interesting if the classes are diverse. I mean isn't that the point ? To play in a persistent world where you interact with people playing as avatars ?
If you want a solo centric twitchy experience with "active" game play doesn't GW2 / neverwinter solve your problem or satisfy your desire ? All new games do not need to be ARPGs... there are a bunch of them out there now ( and more coming ).. Personally i think there is room for both types.
I firmly believe that an MMO should take place in dangerous worlds where travelling alone is not a very viable option outside of perhaps a couple classes... Soloing should be a side game to do when you are group-less ( also crafting and other things like that fit that bill ). The main focus of the game should be group based or you are again playing a watered down RPG that is worse than single player RPGs.
I agree with this almost... I want travel but i want it DANGEROUS... worlds need to be dangerous again... that more than anything i feel has destroyed MMOs... otherwise its just diablo loot pinata crap..
- 27,019
- 41,355
I know most of us here have been advocating for non- instanced dungeons, but one thing that really was shitty back in EQ was how all the good items in the game were all camped 24/7. And Im afraid that this is what we will get with non-instanced if they go that route.
I really liked AO system better. They were still social dungeons but with a soft cap which then spawned an entire new dungeon instance.
I really liked AO system better. They were still social dungeons but with a soft cap which then spawned an entire new dungeon instance.
Thing about EQ and UO is that they were basically developed concurrently. There was enough of a gap between EQ and UO that some lessons could be learned about launching an MMO, but it's not as if they could have ever gone back to the drawing board. Also, the basic mechanics of EQ weren't drastically different from its DIKU predecessors. The major difference was that the 3D world required space to be modeled differently (which obviously made a huge impact). I'm with you though. There should be more innovation than refinement of established systems. It's just too risky.
On the topic of numbers, we have to remember that the market was still exploding when DAoC was around. One game didn't necessarily steal from another as its subscription base grew. UO subscriptions continued to climb for years after EQ released. FromMMOData, whose numbers aren't always great, but trends should be reasonably accurate:
WoW released at the end of 2004. The point where it started to rape everyone is pretty obvious.
Well ofcourse it was a gateway for EQ. They are the same genre. People that enjoyed UO were most like going to enjoy EQ. I played UO exclusively and barely touched EQ because I loved UO A LOT more. To say UO had zero impact on EQ subs tho is so retarded. It's just a straight up load of shit. Such a niche genre at the time people playing EQ would most likely enjoy UO and vice versa. A lot of people would have chosen which they enjoyed more. I for example chose UO. Which already disproves the statement it had zero effect because it stopped me from playing UO.
Just like COD and BF eat into eachother so did UO and EQ. Not dramatically but definitely effects each other.
It's also amazing that you can't see I typed the word correct 2-3 times straight after it. Therefore making it a typo and no relevance in regards to my intelligence. Which you are implying.
Convo
Ahn'Qiraj Raider
- 8,792
- 664
Looks like we did our circle again..
So basically if EQN has an abundance of Outdoor dungeons but also has some instance stuff(because it probably will) What if the better gear is found in the outdoor stuff.. Is that considered bad design because not every player can access it whenever they want?
So basically if EQN has an abundance of Outdoor dungeons but also has some instance stuff(because it probably will) What if the better gear is found in the outdoor stuff.. Is that considered bad design because not every player can access it whenever they want?
Quaid
Trump's Staff
- 11,859
- 8,265
You do realize I called your mistake a typo... and did not mention your intelligence. I was not insulting your intelligence.
Some loot could be shared. But some loot would kill flavor. Golden efreeti boots have to drop off the efreeti lord djarn, otherwise it feels pretty lame.
I'd say that is bad design because it means instances will go largely unused. Wasted design = bad design.
I think it is all or nothing when it comes to instanced dungeons honestly. Instancing/phasing can be great for lots of stuff, but when it comes to dungeons they need to decide what kind of game they are making. If instances have the best or equal gear to open dungeons then the open dungeons will get ignored by most of the population because it is easier to get geared up in private instances. If open dungeons have the best gear people will ignore the instances because who intentionally goes for the shit gear when better options are available with the same group setup. You turn instances into the consolation prize for people who can't find a spot in a open dungeon that way. So instances only get used when there is absolutely no choice.
Personally I'd prefer developers to work on making more/better content instead of trying to please two very different types of players. Go all in or go home. It is impossible to please the EQ brigade and the WoW fanboys at the same time. If Sony thinks they can then the chances are we are going to get a game that doesn't please either and turns to shit in a year.