EQ Never

D

DMK_sl

shitlord
1,600
0
Ambiturner_sl said:
The problem goes back to not having enough places to go. EQ already limited xp based on the number of players in a zone just because the exp was split more ways. But you just had Lower Guk and Sol B to choose from so you were forced to deal with it.

If you make more dungeons with comparable loot, you'll solve the overcrowding problem. But then you'll get hardcore Eq fans complaining that dungeons and loot are meaningless if you can go somewhere else and get something similar.
Click to expand...
Why don't we have enough places to go? We have the tech today to create massive randomly genereated areas. If you don't want randomly generated we still have the tech to make massive outdoor areas and underground dungeons. The top tier stuff would still be only attainable to the hardcore ofcourse. It would be the same as going to a dungeon and getting it but instead you go to elite zones and fight ANY kind of monster on that tier for a chance to get a drop. Also the system would make sure stuff doesn't drop all the time only that that tier of monster drops that level of stuff each time. It may be 1k diamond ore or a special dye on some occasions and gear on the other.

I say make the world HUGE then make it so each server has a cap that suits the size of each world to fill it out properly..
 
B

Bellringer_sl

shitlord
387
0
So you are being specific to raid encounters? It would be bland because it would remove boss specific loot. See my golden efreeti boots comment above if you missed it. People look forward to the mob that will drop the piece they are looking for. If all the dragons in ntov had the same loot table, people would skip dragons that weren't worth the effort. Sounds awful. Rewards skipping content, removes named mob specific loot, and removes the uniqueness of a mob, because who cares? They all drop the se loot!

I already stated that a partially shared loot table is okay, but not complete.
 
Sylas

Sylas

<Gold Donor>
4,244
5,579
Nirgon_sl said:
Going on EQ not being mainstream...

Here are my hopes for it regarding their success, and not game play expectations.

#1 - 500k-700k static subs of people dying for a spiritual successor to EQ much in the same way the new XCOM was a successor to the original game of old. I think that's a fair middle ground and what they are likely to do if they're gearing this right.
#2 - 3 expansions (this is where your sub rise should come from and hopefully they don't slant the game towards the Timmy-type bitchings of game play elements / dumb down difficulty)

Here's my expectations game play wise
#1 - slower rise to max level with heavy internal beta testing of any unfinished while players hit the treadmills.
#2 - combat not based on complex ability rotations. Pretty much everyone here has proved they can do this at the highest levels and god is it stale.
#3 - SEPARATE PvP server based on PvE values and then abilities removed from PvP use or healing/damage numbers scaled to adjust. No separate PvP earned gear AT ALL, ESPECIALLY with resilience/pvp power stats. PvP based on level range.
#4 - Epic quests for each class.
#5 - AA's that you can work on at lvl 10, max level, or in between. This is good for the PvP crowd too as it encourages "low lvl pvp brackets" where people can dedicate their time to certain level ranges. This was really popular EQ2 and I proudly yet shamefully admit at the same time to maxxing the AA's out of a lvl 40 wizard. If PvP is broken or sucks at max level, the pvp crowd finds its way there.
#6 - xp loss on death (hinted @ oh so strongly)
#7 - no factions but there will be religion / good / evil races
Click to expand...
God I can't wait until the 2nd to hear the lamentation and gnashing of teeth from this thread.

My expectations are based on; What little information they've actually released and not on EQ1 nostalgia wish lists and dream scenarios, so they're quite the opposite of yours. lets do a little compare and contrast:
#1- slower levels, yes probably. I doubt levels will "matter" in the sense that most people think of levels. I see levels as lateral power increases and gaining utility rather than raw power curve. Something like AA with either rift souls or more likely a FFXI job type system where more exp/more levels translates into more class unlock options available to you, but you can only be playing the role of 1 class at a time, based on gear you're outfitted with.
#2- Simpler combat. Yes probably. some form of auto-attack with a handful of situational use abilities. no DDR, no whack-a-mole, no CD/animation based rotations. This isn't to appease the "I wanna AFK and go take a shower in the middle of my 9 hour dungeon camp" crowd, this is due to #3
#3- Separate PVP servers? Nope. Every server will be PVP as PVP will be the primary form of content of the game.
#4- Epic quests? Eh not so sure. I don't think loot will be anything like what everyone expects thus I find all these arguments over dungeons/etc silly. I expect full loot drop on death (lootable by other players as well), with maybe a few exceptions for ultra-hard-to-acquire items which are bound to a character, so if they did have it, something like an Epic weapon would persist through death.
#5 - AA's, yeah, or something similiar as mentioned above.
#6 - xp loss on death. maybe. full item loss on death is probably harsh enough.
#7 - Factions. The game will have a highly complex faction system and faction standings will matter, but PVP will not be based on hard-coded factions, no. PVP will be ffa, outside of safe area's like main towns.

additionally, I expect all gear to be crafted by players. I expect crafted items to be unique based on racial areas, ie elvish longbows are crafted in the elvish capital, cloak of invisibility crafted by dark elves, etc. I expect most basic pieces of gear (ie banded armor) to be crafted from readily available materials commonly found in or near "safe" areas and players to have armories/stockpiles full of these to replace what they lose from dying, with better stuff (mithril armor, magic weapons,e tc) being crafted by materials in less safe and unsafe territories controlled by players.
 
D

DMK_sl

shitlord
1,600
0
Obviously there would be a few legendary items etc that were specific to a boss. I'm talking in generalities here. You are also assuming the loot tables are as small as they are in today's MMO. The loot tables would be huge. I'd even consider some randomly generated loot within the tier level like my UO server had.

Let's say the top tier is level 75. Simply have a few monsters throughout the world that randomly spawn in the high level zones at the end of a bunch of tuff monsters at level 75. Once a person/group/guild has X amount of attemps that person/guild/group can't kill that mob for x amount of hours. With randomly generated loot they aren't guarantee everything therefore making loot harder to find. There would only be a few of these mobs in the world and their loot wouldn't be better statistically only a specific named drop with a special animation/proc. This makes the people that want unique loot happy without making the loot any better where guilds try to camp the mob even though they can't due to being locked from attacking it after 4-5 attempts that day.

I really think with today's technology instancing can be gone. Devs are just too lazy to implement it.
 
B

belfast_sl

shitlord
65
0
shabushabu_sl said:
I would like to see loot tables grow based on death... in other words a penalty for dying to an encounter can be the monster gets your items or an item or something.. i mean that is the way this is supposed to work anyway... you find loot in dungeons mostly from other adventurers that died there... that would be cool as hell.
Click to expand...
That would be some hardcore "The Realm" shit. People would be begging for an exp-loss-only death penalty if this were the case.

@ Sylas: that sounds quite palatable.
 
G

Gecko_sl

shitlord
1,482
0
DMK, that's just a clusterfuck of rules. I'm of the 'keep it simple', make it fun school of armchair game design.

I also like instancing. I think there should be a balance of instances and non instances in a sandbox MMO, with sprinkled in PVP in a Frontiers like setting. Also, class balance should be about groups. Group power should be a combination of time invested, gear, and earned experience.

I don't want an open world supply and demand random gear funnel aimed at creating a top 1% of high end raiders/players, or with open warfare at dungeon entrances that appeals to the psycho few.

My hope for EQN is they take the best combat system out there <WOW>, integrate social functions and a good economy<EVE, Privateer>, use a hybrid of skills and levels, make the world an open sandbox, have it be gritty and gothic a la Dark Souls and not shiny and kiddy, and make it class based and promote interdependency.

I have little hope the game will be anything like the open world leveraged class based sandbox I want, but hopefully it'll be something a bit different and amusing for at least a few months.
 
Ambiturner

Ambiturner

Ssraeszha Raider
16,154
19,743
DMK_sl said:
Why don't we have enough places to go? We have the tech today to create massive randomly genereated areas. If you don't want randomly generated we still have the tech to make massive outdoor areas and underground dungeons. The top tier stuff would still be only attainable to the hardcore ofcourse. It would be the same as going to a dungeon and getting it but instead you go to elite zones and fight ANY kind of monster on that tier for a chance to get a drop. Also the system would make sure stuff doesn't drop all the time only that that tier of monster drops that level of stuff each time. It may be 1k diamond ore or a special dye on some occasions and gear on the other.

I say make the world HUGE then make it so each server has a cap that suits the size of each world to fill it out properly..
Click to expand...
I have no problem with it, but like the Eq fanboy who only wants GEBs dropping off one specific boss on one specific place proved, they are completely unrealistic with their retarded ideas.
 
D

DMK_sl

shitlord
1,600
0
Gecko_sl said:
DMK, that's just a clusterfuck of rules. I'm of the 'keep it simple', make it fun school of armchair game design.

I also like instancing. I think there should be a balance of instances and non instances in a sandbox MMO, with sprinkled in PVP in a Frontiers like setting. Also, class balance should be about groups. Group power should be a combination of time invested, gear, and earned experience.

I don't want an open world supply and demand random gear funnel aimed at creating a top 1% of high end raiders/players, or with open warfare at dungeon entrances that appeals to the psycho few.

My hope for EQN is they take the best combat system out there <WOW>, integrate social functions and a good economy<EVE, Privateer>, use a hybrid of skills and levels, make the world an open sandbox, have it be gritty and gothic a la Dark Souls and not shiny and kiddy, and make it class based and promote interdependency.

I have little hope the game will be anything like the open world leveraged class based sandbox I want, but hopefully it'll be something a bit different and amusing for at least a few months.
Click to expand...
The only rules would be not being able to attempt the world bosses for X amount of hours. The rest is under the hood working without anyone even seeing it. Also anyone that thinks that item progression isn't needed in an MMO with PvE only needs to look at GW 2 and see how that slowly died due to there no real feeling of progression at end game.

PvP should be over world resources that are needed to progress in wealth and power within the realm.
PVE should be item/gear progression.
 
Grim1

Grim1

Ahn'Qiraj Raider
4,918
6,929
DMK_sl said:
Also anyone that thinks that item progression isn't needed in an MMO with PvE only needs to look at GW 2 and see how that slowly died due to there no real feeling of progression at end game.
Click to expand...
Many people left GW2 because it does have progression and GW1 didn't. In GW2 players do endless instanced fractal dungeons for +1 gooder loot. While GW1 didn't have progression and was hugely successful. So your contentions are false.

Also GW2 is doing very, very well. So well that they have scrapped plans for an expansion since they are making boat loads of cash from game / cash shop sales. All content for will be free for now and they pump it out faster than any other mmo. That may change but it won't be anytime soon.

I have plenty of issues with GW2 and don't play it much myself anymore, but still I recognize that it is a very, very successful game to this day.
 
B

Bellringer_sl

shitlord
387
0
Ambiturner_sl said:
I have no problem with it, but like the Eq fanboy who only wants GEBs dropping off one specific boss on one specific place proved, they are completely unrealistic with their retarded ideas.
Click to expand...
Yes I am retarded because having baroque half mask of Solusek Ro dropping off Xegony would be great for immersion.
 
Greyform

Greyform

Bronze Knight of the Realm
431
17
What I would like to see done with loot and mudflation is to make every dropped item BoP and every crafted item BoE but with the ability to unbind any of those items with a stat loss. Each time an item is unbound from a player it loses more stats to the point of making it only worth the salvaged components in it. What you would do is ensure all items rot but could still have some use for each person as they pass it down or sell it off. But also ensure the best gear is only worn by the person who looted it. High end items would just lose more stats making them more mundane. Maybe slightly above or near high end crafted gear.

I enjoyed twinking my characters. There could be some fun formulas you could work with here.

I don't mind instancing I think it's a good way to ensure everyone has access to content. I think if the EQ expansion PoP would have introduced instancing over the cluster fuck flagging for Time became they would have really entrenched themselves in the market. I would hope overland and instancing would both be available. I would not want to have either style be exclusive of the other.

Adventuring, what I hate more then anything is overland structures that give no reason to explore them other than to say you've been there or a quick quest express run. LotRO was terrible about that. They had a lot of fortresses and ruins that gave you no reason to explore unless you were just looking for a grind spot. Camping can be as easy to fix as flagging people who loot. You loot a random boss you're flagged you're done for that day at that camp. Possibly even the whole group I'm just spitballing. But those ruins and fortresses should have random bosses and interesting loot tables. Sometimes interesting loot can be as cool as a unique armor skin.
 
Miele

Miele

Lord Nagafen Raider
916
48
Lost Ranger_sl said:
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.
Click to expand...
In instances you learn new skills (GW1 style?) and basic gear, in open dungeons you collect pretty dresses, maybe it could work, until most players will find every place worth a damn camped and move to play WoW2 or something.
P.S.: Non instanced content could work (barely) 12 years ago, today gamers would't ever allow it, despite what nostalgic people may think. I'd like an EQ2 approach, very well done and enjoyable for both styles.
 
Ambiturner

Ambiturner

Ssraeszha Raider
16,154
19,743
Bellringer_sl said:
Yes I am retarded because having baroque half mask of Solusek Ro dropping off Xegony would be great for immersion.
Click to expand...
It could have a different name, but be essentially the same item with the same stats. The point is, you can't have a game where people aren't allowed to play. You either need the same items spread out over many places, or instancing
 
D

Dizzam_sl

shitlord
247
0
Bellringer_sl said:
Yes I am retarded because having baroque half mask of Solusek Ro dropping off Xegony would be great for immersion.
Click to expand...
Yeah, I can't get on board with level-wide loot tables for this reason. It destroys immersion, dungeons are less unique, and having that piece of loot doesn't mean the same thing--namely, that you killed a specific mob. I'm not saying throw all of the good loot in 2-3 dungeons for each group of 10 levels, but don't half-ass it by making one loot table for every dungeon in a specific level set.

Ambiturner_sl said:
It could have a different name, but be essentially the same item with the same stats. The point is, you can't have a game where people aren't allowed to play. You either need the same items spread out over many places, or instancing
Click to expand...
We already debunked this fallacy a few pages back. Just because you can't camp the exact item you want doesn't mean you "aren't allowed to play."
 
Nirgon

Nirgon

Log Wizard
15,064
24,765
You get to camp the SMR if its available or the geboots, or the runed cowl... you get to camp things depending on what is open. Or you camp something you can sell to buy one.

Wondering if some of you played EQ and geared a character 1999-2001.

PS: it worked for me and many others

For most "good" camps (efreeti in classic) you need an appropriate, balanced, group or a player of such skill could solo it for high risk / reward (read: doesn't have to roll). If he dies, he loses the camp.
 
G

Gecko_sl

shitlord
1,482
0
DMK_sl said:
The only rules would be not being able to attempt the world bosses for X amount of hours. The rest is under the hood working without anyone even seeing it. Also anyone that thinks that item progression isn't needed in an MMO with PvE only needs to look at GW 2 and see how that slowly died due to there no real feeling of progression at end game.

PvP should be over world resources that are needed to progress in wealth and power within the realm.
PVE should be item/gear progression.
Click to expand...
GW2 straddled the fence between PVE and PVP too closely and essentially missed the boat on both of them. They had some interesting ideas but at the end of the day they sold their game as a PVP one, but it lacked objectives, real progression, and anything of real ownership. Their PVE actually was better than their PVP, sadly. I didn't like the grouping mechanism that much, which was the big negative I personally had with their PVE.

PVP should be over player owned things, and not necessarily 'static' resources. Fighting over a random mine or +10% bonus is one thing. Investing and defending your own keep with things you've won via raids is another entirely.

Anyways, fuck PVP. I hope they make EQN about hardcore PVE and tack on PVP as an afterthought in an area designed for ganking and high risk/low reward. Every game that does both ends up fucking up their PVE in the name of 'balance' for some shit instanced areas that are meaningless.
 
mkopec

mkopec

<Gold Donor>
27,019
41,355
Yeah the best fun Ive had PvP wise was in Shadowbane. I wonder why no one tried to copy some of their shit. I understand the game was a buggy mess and some of the shit was not balanced perfect, but man, what fun it was to take a mine or attack a player owned city, or just defend one. I especially liked the Chinese vs US fights we had. Fuck, even leveling up was fun in that game and trying different builds and shit.
 
Mr Creed

Mr Creed

Too old for this shit
2,394
287
Grim1_sl said:
Many people left GW2 because it does have progression and GW1 didn't. In GW2 players do endless instanced fractal dungeons for +1 gooder loot. While GW1 didn't have progression and was hugely successful. So your contentions are false.

Also GW2 is doing very, very well. So well that they have scrapped plans for an expansion since they are making boat loads of cash from game / cash shop sales. All content for will be free for now and they pump it out faster than any other mmo. That may change but it won't be anytime soon.

I have plenty of issues with GW2 and don't play it much myself anymore, but still I recognize that it is a very, very successful game to this day.
Click to expand...
That's a reasonable opinion about the state of GW2, cant really provide facts that counter it. However as someone that still does play, my impression is quite the opposite. The whole item treadmill outcry was way back in november, and wether it kept more of the +gooder players then it cost them GW1 players that disliked it is anyone's guess. Below is some offtopic GW2 ranting if you care. I would still call it the best MMO since WoW, but they certainly didnt live up to my expectations.

Let me let me describe how I see the current state of the game. Rumor has it the vast majority of their likely huge gem shop revenue is going to their publisher, which would explain why they have to struggle despite their success. They seem to not have the manpower or finances to do what they set out to do and are forced to push busywork updates that bring in money while they scramble to find a new long term plan after their initial one tanked. At the release the expectation was sorta-reasonable that people would be sticking with the two PVP modes longterm, and the release PVE content lasts for half a year to a year. Instead all of PVE was old news within 6-10 weeks and people demanded updates, WvW got stale and the unregulated free server transfers sped that up too, and sPVP never really got off the ground and into an E-sport like they wanted.

As a solution they formulated this living story concept which on paper is kinda neat, but so far its mostly just temporary monthly instanced minigames and gem shop skins, with a minimum of permanent content to keep people hooked. Essentially, classic F2P monetization, paired with some really stupid decisions from a player perspective (but they make sense if all you want out of your product is "money, now"). Their publisher commented on possible expansion plans a few months back, and it did sound like at the time they arent willing to fund one for whatever reason. That's obviously not something Anet can come out and say, hence the silence or slightly positive spin on it. Because honestly, when you're making boatloads of cash you do not forgo investments (expansions) that will secure your playerbase and bring in more new and returning players. Being in bed with Nexon/NCsoft is probably something the Anet team regrets dearly
 
Mr Creed

Mr Creed

Too old for this shit
2,394
287
Sylas_sl said:
God I can't wait until the 2nd to hear the lamentation and gnashing of teeth from this thread.

My expectations are based on; What little information they've actually released and not on EQ1 nostalgia wish lists and dream scenarios, so they're quite the opposite of yours. lets do a little compare and contrast:
#1- slower levels, yes probably. I doubt levels will "matter" in the sense that most people think of levels. I see levels as lateral power increases and gaining utility rather than raw power curve. Something like AA with either rift souls or more likely a FFXI job type system where more exp/more levels translates into more class unlock options available to you, but you can only be playing the role of 1 class at a time, based on gear you're outfitted with.
#2- Simpler combat. Yes probably. some form of auto-attack with a handful of situational use abilities. no DDR, no whack-a-mole, no CD/animation based rotations. This isn't to appease the "I wanna AFK and go take a shower in the middle of my 9 hour dungeon camp" crowd, this is due to #3
#3- Separate PVP servers? Nope. Every server will be PVP as PVP will be the primary form of content of the game.
#4- Epic quests? Eh not so sure. I don't think loot will be anything like what everyone expects thus I find all these arguments over dungeons/etc silly. I expect full loot drop on death (lootable by other players as well), with maybe a few exceptions for ultra-hard-to-acquire items which are bound to a character, so if they did have it, something like an Epic weapon would persist through death.
#5 - AA's, yeah, or something similiar as mentioned above.
#6 - xp loss on death. maybe. full item loss on death is probably harsh enough.
#7 - Factions. The game will have a highly complex faction system and faction standings will matter, but PVP will not be based on hard-coded factions, no. PVP will be ffa, outside of safe area's like main towns.

additionally, I expect all gear to be crafted by players. I expect crafted items to be unique based on racial areas, ie elvish longbows are crafted in the elvish capital, cloak of invisibility crafted by dark elves, etc. I expect most basic pieces of gear (ie banded armor) to be crafted from readily available materials commonly found in or near "safe" areas and players to have armories/stockpiles full of these to replace what they lose from dying, with better stuff (mithril armor, magic weapons,e tc) being crafted by materials in less safe and unsafe territories controlled by players.
Click to expand...
I like alot of that, sounds pretty close to EVE/UO in many regards. It also radically throws away most things WoW and EQ brought to the genre. Given what little hints there are and that some are even contradicted later, this is still grasping at straws. Much more like then the EQ1'13 wishlist from Nirgon though.

I expect them to take more features that work from PS2. The cert system for example, I expect that to be EQN's version of AA. I think you'll be able to massively augment each of your abilities/spells that way, its a great xp drain. Even more so if they dont go with unlimited hotbars, because players will still sink hundreds of levels worth of points into niche and rarely slotted abilities. Also keeps the power discrepancy more flat. Also regular smaller content updates instead of expanions to keep people engaged (in PS2 thats guns and vehicles, not sure how they want to apprach an RPG like EQN with that though).
 
Ambiturner

Ambiturner

Ssraeszha Raider
16,154
19,743
Dizzam_sl said:
Yeah, I can't get on board with level-wide loot tables for this reason. It destroys immersion, dungeons are less unique, and having that piece of loot doesn't mean the same thing--namely, that you killed a specific mob. I'm not saying throw all of the good loot in 2-3 dungeons for each group of 10 levels, but don't half-ass it by making one loot table for every dungeon in a specific level set.



We already debunked this fallacy a few pages back. Just because you can't camp the exact item you want doesn't mean you "aren't allowed to play."
Click to expand...
Someone saying you don't always get what you want isn't "debunking" anything. In clssic EQ, if you played during prime time hours, there would be no open camps in Lower Guk or Sol B. So you really can't do anything. I spent many nights sitting at the entrance to Lower Guk looking for groups for hours and then logging off. It's ridiculous to expect people to put up with that when there's other options out there.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.