WTF? Everquest... 3?

  • Guest, it's time once again for the massively important and exciting FoH Asshat Tournament!



    Go here and give us your nominations!
    Who's been the biggest Asshat in the last year? Give us your worst ones!
Siliconemelons

Siliconemelons

Naxxramas 1.0 Raider
12,125
18,226
It's not double its generally 30%-40% depending on your benefit programs.

Yeah that's why I just added +2m on a 4m base...

The point is- someone could do it... target mild success, nothing wrong with that.

Heck, I dare say on this board we have the people to do it if we owned EQ IP or licence to use the IP.
 
  • 1Seriously?
Reactions: 1 user
Neranja

Neranja

<Bronze Donator>
2,653
4,269
iannis said:
I thought it was sojurn.
Click to expand...
Since you didn't click the link:

Kris Kortright, a developer from the MUD Black Knights Realm, founded Sojourn,[2] set in the Forgotten Realms campaign setting for the Dungeons & Dragons role-playing game,[3] in 1993, along with Tim Devlin and John Bashaw. Sojourn was based on the Sequent codebase, the Epic spell system, and areas from Black Knights Realm. The City of Waterdeep was the first zone built entirely for Sojourn. Brad McQuaid was an avid player of Sojourn. Seeing the commercial potential of virtual worlds in the course of his MUD career, he went on to create EverQuest.[4] With Kris’ permission, used it as the model for the city of Freeport in EverQuest.[5] In 1996, due to creative differences between developers, Sojourn was forked into two projects, TorilMUD and Duris: Land of Bloodlust.[3]
 
  • 3Like
Reactions: 2 users
Sadre Spinegnawer

Sadre Spinegnawer

<Banned>
4,107
4,043
min/maxing is the norm. But, the game idea in question is supposed to be "persistent" which does not make sense unless there is some payout for persisting.

Back in the day, we persisted because it was pioneer days. Those days are over.

So how to induce maximum online times?

I can think of one sneaky way. Each hour your character is on, the mathematical model that determines whether you will find / mine / gather / etc. a rare item increases.

The Skinner Box is real. Work it.
 
Ukerric

Ukerric

Bearded Ape
<Silver Donator>
8,372
10,409
Sadre Spinegnawer said:
So how to induce maximum online times?

I can think of one sneaky way. Each hour your character is on, the mathematical model that determines whether you will find / mine / gather / etc. a rare item increases.

The Skinner Box is real. Work it.
Click to expand...
Sounds like Afkquest.
 
E

Elidroth

Trakanon Raider
539
1,246
Sadre Spinegnawer said:
min/maxing is the norm. But, the game idea in question is supposed to be "persistent" which does not make sense unless there is some payout for persisting.

Back in the day, we persisted because it was pioneer days. Those days are over.

So how to induce maximum online times?

I can think of one sneaky way. Each hour your character is on, the mathematical model that determines whether you will find / mine / gather / etc. a rare item increases.

The Skinner Box is real. Work it.
Click to expand...

Wrong in every way. The way you induce people to be online as much as possible, is to make a great game that's fun to play, with lots of content..
 
  • 2Like
Reactions: 1 users
Ravishing

Ravishing

Uninspiring Title
<Bronze Donator>
8,456
3,577
Elidroth said:
Wrong in every way. The way you induce people to be online as much as possible, is to make a great game that's fun to play, with lots of content..
Click to expand...

I know you're the pro here, but seems to me if your aim is a multiplayer online game, you're focus should be on quality emergent/strategy gameplay rather than "lots of content".
If it's a single player RPG or story-driven game, then "lots of content" is probably a correct path.
For MMO, the next big thing will be more immersion & social content.. ie: VR + Facebook/Instagram integration, etc.
 
  • 1Like
Reactions: 1 user
E

Elidroth

Trakanon Raider
539
1,246
It depends upon the kind of game you're making. Emergent content is great IF it doesn't turn into "grief the fuck out of other players", unless you're specifically making a PVP world. Personally, I don't give a damn about social integration.. I'm making the game for people playing, not the people who are watching other people playing. I definitely think VR has a place, but the control schema still needs a lot of design and iteration to find the right setup. Right now, UI is a major limiting factor for VR games.
 
  • 1Like
Reactions: 1 user
Flobee

Flobee

Vyemm Raider
2,686
3,094
I would guess in this context 'lots of content' is likely just lots of stuff for the player to spend meaningful time engaging with. In the past that has just been lots of content largely but I think that you're right in saying that that is likely a less efficient path. I think something like straight up social media integration is an oversimplification. Generating meaningful communities using in game systems on the other hand would likely be a good step in the right direction. Not that I have the silver bullet regarding how though.
 
Sadre Spinegnawer

Sadre Spinegnawer

<Banned>
4,107
4,043
Ravishing said:
I know you're the pro here, but seems to me if your aim is a multiplayer online game, you're focus should be on quality emergent/strategy gameplay rather than "lots of content".
If it's a single player RPG or story-driven game, then "lots of content" is probably a correct path.
For MMO, the next big thing will be more immersion & social content.. ie: VR + Facebook/Instagram integration, etc.
Click to expand...

I agree. Inducing online time is a means not an end. But it can't always be pointed at "high quality content." So much of an MMORPG used to depend on just "running chores," so to speak. Raids and dominating contested was the capstone of good char / roster / guild engagement. Which requires some kind of maintenance aspect. I remember running to a vendor to recharge my shroom potions (shrink instacast).

It was a simply task, but it wa part of how you did well in the game. Char / roster / guild maintenance.
everquest.allakhazam.com

Vial of Shrieker Essence

Everquest Item Information for Vial of Shrieker Essence
everquest.allakhazam.com everquest.allakhazam.com
 
Ravishing

Ravishing

Uninspiring Title
<Bronze Donator>
8,456
3,577
Elidroth said:
It depends upon the kind of game you're making. Emergent content is great IF it doesn't turn into "grief the fuck out of other players", unless you're specifically making a PVP world. Personally, I don't give a damn about social integration.. I'm making the game for people playing, not the people who are watching other people playing. I definitely think VR has a place, but the control schema still needs a lot of design and iteration to find the right setup. Right now, UI is a major limiting factor for VR games.
Click to expand...

If we're talking an MMO game, and we want to keep away from PvP, then emergent gameplay would be "building" stuff, which is hard to do right, and is already cornered by Minecraft. Beyond that, we could try other "player controlled" systems, such as politics, trade, crafting, etc. But usually the best emergent gameplay involves freedom for players to choose infinite paths and outcomes that effect other players, so politics is a very likely candidate. Trade is tough since materials come from PvE content, out of player control and can be "solved".

Building the world, player housing, guild halls, etc, are appealing, but need to be simplified enough to be fun for a majority.

So imo, an MMO has very limited paths to incorporate "emergent gameplay" and should instead focus on social & immersion paths.

Other online games like Battle Royales, Auto Chess, MOBAs, etc... obviously the emergent gameplay is PvP/strategy centric.

Just depends on the type of game, but imo your content should be focused/specialized and NOT try to be "everywhere". I think MMOs fell out of favor when they tried to do literally everything.
 
Pharone

Pharone

Trakanon Raider
1,258
1,116
Ravishing said:
If we're talking an MMO game, and we want to keep away from PvP, then emergent gameplay would be "building" stuff, which is hard to do right, and is already cornered by Minecraft. Beyond that, we could try other "player controlled" systems, such as politics, trade, crafting, etc. But usually the best emergent gameplay involves freedom for players to choose infinite paths and outcomes that effect other players, so politics is a very likely candidate. Trade is tough since materials come from PvE content, out of player control and can be "solved".

Building the world, player housing, guild halls, etc, are appealing, but need to be simplified enough to be fun for a majority.

So imo, an MMO has very limited paths to incorporate "emergent gameplay" and should instead focus on social & immersion paths.

Other online games like Battle Royales, Auto Chess, MOBAs, etc... obviously the emergent gameplay is PvP/strategy centric.

Just depends on the type of game, but imo your content should be focused/specialized and NOT try to be "everywhere". I think MMOs fell out of favor when they tried to do literally everything.
Click to expand...
You missed one very important thing the player is building in a MMORPG (or should be building although modern MMORPGs have thrown it away). That is they should be building their character.

Cookie cutter MMORPGs with "balanced" classes-on-rails are the bane of a "RPG".

The player should be allowed to build the character they want over time via some combination of systems like stats, skills, equipment, spells, etc.

Class balance ruins great games. Modern World of Warcraft is proof of that. People prefer making choices to build the character they want rather than choosing between a few premade classes unless it's a pvp game, and honestly, fuck pvp if it's going to ruin pve.

You want the player to have something to build? There you go. Build a character by playing the character and making choices along the way.

If you can make someone instantly max level, and you can't tell a difference between their max level character and someone else's max level character that leveled up the hard way, then there is a problem with your game design.
 
  • 4Like
Reactions: 3 users
Ravishing

Ravishing

Uninspiring Title
<Bronze Donator>
8,456
3,577
True that. A part of MMOs that I loved in the beginning was inspecting a higher-up player and seeing items I could only ever dream of.... then the loot pinatas came out and it seems like everyone is entitled to everything.

But to my point, it's very hard to "build a character" that isn't just a single-player RPG. You can grind for xp, skill points, gear... team up to acquire these things, but it's very hard to be creative with it (emergent), since EVERYTHING that involves the character needs to be on rails. There aren't "infinite paths".

If there is a way to add creative elements to character progression... something players have full control over & can show off, I'd love to hear those ideas - & without opening up your entire game to modding communities (second life) where people need to learn external programs to create clothing / housing / etc.
 
Siliconemelons

Siliconemelons

Naxxramas 1.0 Raider
12,125
18,226
How do people explain the MMO Emu community? in terms of "lots of content"

Modern EQ and modern WOW and any of the now hundreds of alternatives offer multitudes of "more content" - yet we have thousands - perhaps tens of thousands of people that play "classic level" wow and EQ with what would equate to essentially "no content"

Why?

I have played Project1999 for YEARS and see the people that just like EQ or just like to go massive hard core I 200% pwned this old elf pixle game lulzulzulzulz - but 90% of the rest of the population are "normal" MMO players...

There must be some "quality" and "community" over just pure "MOAR CONTRANT! RHRHWWA!"

Also I honestly thing "slower" games such as EQ appeal to us/now older gamers... I just do not have the time/energy to keep up with modern MMO "RPGs" ..can they even be called RPGs? they are action games with elf pixles.
 
  • 1Solidarity
Reactions: 1 user
Flobee

Flobee

Vyemm Raider
2,686
3,094
I would think that the content that is generated in older games comes from, as you alluded, the social aspect of the game. Slower combat combined with group interdependence. We're social creatures and older MMO's just do that better imo.
 
iannis

iannis

Musty Nester
31,351
17,657
Resource scarcity and the fact that it's a game. In a game there are winners and losers. I think enough of us came from PK muds that we were well used to the concept and were wliling to take turns being the winner and the loser. The trick is always to win more than you lose. Not to win all the time, that just makes you insufferable.

Wow's approach of all winners expanded the market without any doubt. A lot of men made their fortune with that. I think they did it at the expense of the game. And that's fine, it really is. I never played it past a few months in beta.

But I did play CoH for a very long time instead. That game also tried to avoid the concept of winners and losers. Successfully I think. Their approach was far more entertaining to me. They also had to sacrifice aspects of the community to accomplish it. FoH railed against the game for the sin of... it ended. The game was too meta for EQ grognards.
 
  • 1Like
Reactions: 1 user
Punko

Punko

Macho Ma'am
<Gold Donor>
8,007
12,836
Elidroth said:
It depends upon the kind of game you're making. Emergent content is great IF it doesn't turn into "grief the fuck out of other players", unless you're specifically making a PVP world.
Click to expand...

Did you play original EQ?

I played on xegony, and I can assure you griefing the fuck out of other players is what made the people remember each other for at least 10 years.

Its a lot like a movie, more evil the bad guy is, more united the good team feels. You aren't logging in because you want to do Venril Sathir for the 39th time, you are logging in because you don't want the opposing guild to get it.
 
  • 1Like
  • 1Solidarity
Reactions: 1 users
You must log in or register to reply here.