In terms of D&D as I pointed out the intention was to group up and go out on an adventure with some friends. You weren't supposed to get all the loot. It wasn't about the loot. It was about the adventure with friends. A lot of people just made it about the loot and the leveling.
You don't remember how EQ was played?
What adventure? There is none in EQ. 99% of the gameplay is to camp and kill some stuff.
And it does not matter what you think the game is "about". Most players at that time, including myself, play the camping style ... because that is all the game is offering.
There is no NPCs to tell you anything interesting. There is no scripting of any event. All you have are static spawns (or wandering spawns .. which is more rare) waiting to be killed.
I am glad there are better (for me) choices for games today. I will quit gaming if that is the only thing gaming offers.
I don't think you get the concept of an adventure into the unknown. It's exciting when you are venturing off into dangerous unknown territory and you don't know what is going to happen. To me that is an adventure. Following a scripted story is not an adventure to me. It feels rather hallow. There is usually some boring dialogue to listen to and then you are told to go to point b to clear out some orcs and then return to point a. In EQ you could choose to go to fight the Orcs and earn accolades with the people of Kelethin. You could fight the Gnolls of blackburrow and endear yourself with the people of Qeynos. You could venture into the dangerous depths of befallen full of necromances, traps, pitfalls, and locked doors.
Now I'm not saying that EQ didn't have grind or camps. What I'm saying is it was what you made of it. If you had little imagination then that's all it was I suppose. It was also easy to get caught up in the grind to be more powerful.
What adventure into the unknown? You play in EQ zones for so long that you know where every static spawn is. EQ is the furthest from what "adventure into the unknown" means.
And imagination? Games are entertainment products .. if i want to use my imagination, i will read a novel.
And there is less imagination in EQ than new modern games when all you do is kill static spawns.
This "killing Gnolls of blackburrow and endear yourself with people of Qeynos" is just silly. I killed lots of gnolls .. there is no endearing .. there is no adventure .. there is only .. "hey that static mob spawned .. let me hit it before other campers do"
Have you ever camped in L Guk for SMR? What danger ... i don't consider lining up behind 50 people who will "help" you kill the boss in 5 second "dangerous" .. .it is more easy mode than WoW and D3 .. because at least you get to kill the stuff yourself without 50 people "offering help".
EQ had a longer leveling time then probably was needed. None the less there were lots of different zones and dungeons you could explore. Enough to get you through most tears of levels I believe. You never had to camp unless you wanted to level quickly or get a specific item. None of that was intended.
The imagination doesn't come from the game it comes from the player. Isn't that the essence of sandboxy/D&D. The players are the ones who create the adventure. The tools are there for you to do it. All you need is to get together, go out, and explore.
The static spawns weren't really detracting for me. They were generally in groups and challenging to break apart. Many people were running for their lives to the safety of town. In most games today there is a very boring story you have no control of and you just follow a GPS from point A to point B. You don't do anything that requires any thought or imagination. The mobs are usually easy to kill and give you a good reward for little effort.
There were times in dungeons where there was an overflow of people, but that generally wasn't the case. You may have gone into a dungeon like Lower Guk and there was a guild or bored high level players helping to low levels to get an item. There may have been just a bunch of people looking for the same item. Generally that wasn't the case. If you tried going into somewhere like lower guk on your own and you weren't way above the allotted level you had a good chance of dying. Even in a small group it was difficult to go through dungeons. Heck even when there was large groups of people in the dungeons you might get a train of mobs hitting you. Regardless it wasn't really how the game was meant to be played. It was how a lot of players played it. That is why it wasn't a themepark IMO. It had a lot of freedom of choice. You could play it how you wanted to play it.
I believe you play games like a movie and that's fine, but those who played D&D or those who like fantasy in general (true fans) would rather come up with their own adventures then to have something simple and generic force their way. If you don't see that EQ had this kind of freedom I don't know what to say that can convince you. You seem to look at EQ as just camp and kill. Thats all. You obviously weren't able to appreciate the freedoms given in the game and also the good things the community brought about. You only seem to see the bad things the community brought about.
Originally posted by Flyte27 Originally posted by VengeSunsoarEq was absolutely a theme park through and through. Class based trivial creating vs drops zones that got progressively harder the further you were fun the starting area and absolutely no impact on the world. Total theme park and yes they were called theme park back then. 2000 wad when I first heard the term in relation to games.
I don't really agree with this assessment. EQ had no tutorials and didn't string you along with quests to make sure you are going the right way. Many of the zones were out of order in terms of how difficult the mobs were. Even individual zones had parts where the mobs were far above the level of what the lower ones were. The only thing that made it like a theme park is that there was no real way to change the environment. There were a lot of tools to roleplay D&D style with, but nothing to construct buildings. The game was never about that. It was always about D&D style questing, but in a more open world.
Yes exactly. Themepark my butt. I spent my first few levels around freeport, then branched off, taking dangerous expeditions to Guk, Split Paw, and the like. Quite easy to die along the way, but treasure and experience were grande if you made it there. Nothing themepark about EQ (circa 2000) at all. I think this business about 'theme park' or 'sand box' needs to be replaced by, instead, 'quest hub' or 'non quest hub.'
Originally posted by epoq The risk/reward factor that EQ had is something that has really not been replicated in MMO's since. Everyone has gotten so used to the carebear entitled mentality that they should be able to attempt to anything in the game with little to no consequences of doing so. This, in my opinion, is one of the biggest reasons games don't hold players like myself very long like EQ did.The way people QQ on forums nowadays developers are more or less at the mercy of the people who pay to play their games. Also they think the best way to make the most amount of money (which is the overall plan, it is a business after all) is to cater to the widest audience possible. Back in the days of EQ, their weren't all these different "audience types" to deal with. They were on the forefront of online gameplay innovation and were able to do as they pleased.On top of that, sense of community has been lost in online games. Having content that is 90% solo-able destroys the need to reach out and make friends. How often were things solo-friendly back in vanilla EQ? Past the first few levels of the game you were pretty much grouped up no matter what you were doing until you got pretty high up in the game, and then, and only then, if you were one of a few choice classes (druid, wizard) you gained the ability to kite chains of mobs (at a HUGE risk mind you). But if you were a cleric...warrior....amongst many other classes, you weren't out there trying to do these types of things. Class balance in WoW is what started this downward trend. I never really gave a shit about class balance and I don't to this day. I think certain classes should require teaming up to really shine. Not every class should have the ability to take down another class in a 1v1 situation. If I'm a lone healer and I see a decked out warrior running towards me I should be shitting my pants and immediately get the hell out of there.Unfortunately we can only hope some developers moving forward will eventually get super nostalgic like a lot of us and make a more niche game that appeals to the hardcore. I get sick of playing Project 1999 because I have maxed characters in EQ more times than I care to count at this point, and it's STILL the best game out there in terms of challenge.
Very excellent post Epoq, you need to post a lot more!
Luckily, i don't need you to like me to enjoy video games. -nariusseldon. In F2P I think it's more a case of the game's trying to play the player's. -laserit
I went back recently and joined that private server that simulates the "old" game and zones of EQ. I leveled up quite a few classes I never played back in the day, and some of them quite high (made 49 with my druid).
I can tell you now, that game was incredible! Yes, there was some very bad issues:
1. Elitist guilds hogging all the good camps
2. Elitist guilds forcing prices on gear to be insanely expensive (since they were the only people allowed to camp them)
3. With lower populations, it was sometimes difficult to find a group, or others to fill your group.
4. Due to number 3, many zones were very empty (this can also be a good thing though - depending on what you want to do)
5. Poor melee classes were just boring as hell. Click auto-attack, then bash, etc. Wait for refresh while standing there.
I'm sure there were more, but those are the big things that stick out in my mind.
But the pros definitely outweigh the cons.....vastly!
1. Each class is TOTALLY different.
2. The dynamics of the game played into the classes abilities, whether it was designed that way or not (kiting, etc.)
3. The risk/reward is oh so sweet. Yes it was dangerous to go to Runnyeye, but damn that was some good XP.
4. People want to say that the only reason we talked back in the day while grouping was because chat rooms were all the rage, and because this whole internet thing was very new to a lot of us. I can assure you, that's a load of crap. Talking still is happening on "that private server". Had MANY great conversations while in groups with my "re-visit".
5. The zones all had a "feeling" to them. No, it wasn't well done (why's that house there? who's that named guy roaming around?, etc.) But each and every one was distinct.
6. No maps! Having to guide people through zones was incredibly rewarding, because you had the experience of knowing where you were, and where to go memorized, because that was the only way.
7. Buffs and spells. Probably one of the single-most important aspects of EQ was the social buffing. Want to log on and play but only have about 30 minutes? Then head to a noobie zone and start tossing out some buffs. You instantly become a hero, and people are so appreciative for them. Because they mattered. They were so powerful and helped so much.
8. Death Penalty - Yep, I'm putting this in the pros list. Love it or hate it, it was what kept you on your toes. It made you learn your class, and not be a douche in the group that let you in. For if you failed in your job, or others did the same, then you are all going to feel the pain (can't say that much anymore about mmo's can we?). So yes it hurt to die without a rez. But it made you a better player, a more careful player. And it made the victory actually feel like something achieved. And of course, it's an entirely other adventure to getting your crap back (enlisting the help of others -- which makes them feel good).
9. Power Leveling - Yes it gets boring after a while, but wow. When you are doing it right, there is nothing like it. On the receiving end, or the giving end. It's awesome.
10. Twinking. Don't tell me that WoW has twinking. Any game that has level reqs for gear is impossible to twink properly. EQ made you want to keep those valuable items such as Fungi tunics and manastones. They were just so powerful for a lower level character. But you didn't have to use powerful gear like that. Just a simple set of HP rings on a level 1 character and they were a GOD when it came to killing rats and bats lol. Game breaking? Perhaps. But who cares, it was insanely fun, because they benefit wore off as you leveled up.
So yes, I entirely agree. I would absolutely LOVE another game like EQ. But it has to be just like EQ. The system dynamics that EQ had, like enabling you to kite mobs, or buff other players with powerful, long lasting buffs. Twinking, powerleveling. It was the system that allowed us to do these things. There were slight holes or cracks, that could be exploited to enable you to have a lot of fun. Nothing too crazy, as it was still difficult. Example: the system has an aggroed mob chase you endlessly until you either kill it, or zone. Most mobs ran faster than players. Snaring a mob would make them run slower. While SoW would make you run faster. Add all of these together, and you now have KITING. Realistic? Doesn't matter, you're playing a freaking game. But it was fun still.
Give me a game JUST like EQ with newer graphics and added technology, while still retaining all I said above, and I'll be a happy man.
Originally posted by VengeSunsoarEq was absolutely a theme park through and through. Class based trivial creating vs drops zones that got progressively harder the further you were fun the starting area and absolutely no impact on the world. Total theme park and yes they were called theme park back then. 2000 wad when I first heard the term in relation to games.
I don't really agree with this assessment. EQ had no tutorials and didn't string you along with quests to make sure you are going the right way. Many of the zones were out of order in terms of how difficult the mobs were. Even individual zones had parts where the mobs were far above the level of what the lower ones were. The only thing that made it like a theme park is that there was no real way to change the environment. There were a lot of tools to roleplay D&D style with, but nothing to construct buildings. The game was never about that. It was always about D&D style questing, but in a more open world.
Yes exactly. Themepark my butt. I spent my first few levels around freeport, then branched off, taking dangerous expeditions to Guk, Split Paw, and the like. Quite easy to die along the way, but treasure and experience were grande if you made it there. Nothing themepark about EQ (circa 2000) at all. I think this business about 'theme park' or 'sand box' needs to be replaced by, instead, 'quest hub' or 'non quest hub.'
I remember my first trip from Qeynos to Freeport. It was quite a nerve racking journey. In fact anywhere in the game I went that I hadn't been before and even many that I had already were fairly dangerous. Going the path that took you past RunnyEye to Misty Thicket was the safest bet, but very dangerous with all those Minotaurs, Evil Eyes, and Goblins. Then there was the Highpass Hold. That place was a nightmare for low level players to get through IMO. The Karana's and Commonlands were even dangerous with Giants, Lions, Griffins, the one Shadow Knight in east Common Lands, and then another Shadow Knight in west Common Lands (both high level). I never much went to Lower Guk because I had to faction with the Trolls or Ogres. Sometimes I went to North and South Ro. I mostly hung around anywhere else. I killed lots of Giants at the Giant Hill. I killed lots of Orcs in the Lesser Faydark. I turned into a wolf and visited the Brownies in Lesser Faydark. I remember getting lost in Greater Faydark and West Karana's a lot of times. It's hard to remember, but I think there were actually four Karana's when I think about it. I believe there was North, South, East, and West. West was near Qeynos I believe. North was near Beholder Maze and HighPass? There was a nice camp spot somewhere in the East or West I think. It's difficult to remember now. There were a lot of Aviaks (Bird People) there.
I went back recently and joined that private server that simulates the "old" game and zones of EQ. I leveled up quite a few classes I never played back in the day, and some of them quite high (made 49 with my druid).
I can tell you now, that game was incredible! Yes, there was some very bad issues:
1. Elitist guilds hogging all the good camps
2. Elitist guilds forcing prices on gear to be insanely expensive (since they were the only people allowed to camp them)
3. With lower populations, it was sometimes difficult to find a group, or others to fill your group.
4. Due to number 3, many zones were very empty (this can also be a good thing though - depending on what you want to do)
5. Poor melee classes were just boring as hell. Click auto-attack, then bash, etc. Wait for refresh while standing there.
I'm sure there were more, but those are the big things that stick out in my mind.
But the pros definitely outweigh the cons.....vastly!
1. Each class is TOTALLY different.
2. The dynamics of the game played into the classes abilities, whether it was designed that way or not (kiting, etc.)
3. The risk/reward is oh so sweet. Yes it was dangerous to go to Runnyeye, but damn that was some good XP.
4. People want to say that the only reason we talked back in the day while grouping was because chat rooms were all the rage, and because this whole internet thing was very new to a lot of us. I can assure you, that's a load of crap. Talking still is happening on "that private server". Had MANY great conversations while in groups with my "re-visit".
5. The zones all had a "feeling" to them. No, it wasn't well done (why's that house there? who's that named guy roaming around?, etc.) But each and every one was distinct.
6. No maps! Having to guide people through zones was incredibly rewarding, because you had the experience of knowing where you were, and where to go memorized, because that was the only way.
7. Buffs and spells. Probably one of the single-most important aspects of EQ was the social buffing. Want to log on and play but only have about 30 minutes? Then head to a noobie zone and start tossing out some buffs. You instantly become a hero, and people are so appreciative for them. Because they mattered. They were so powerful and helped so much.
8. Death Penalty - Yep, I'm putting this in the pros list. Love it or hate it, it was what kept you on your toes. It made you learn your class, and not be a douche in the group that let you in. For if you failed in your job, or others did the same, then you are all going to feel the pain (can't say that much anymore about mmo's can we?). So yes it hurt to die without a rez. But it made you a better player, a more careful player. And it made the victory actually feel like something achieved. And of course, it's an entirely other adventure to getting your crap back (enlisting the help of others -- which makes them feel good).
9. Power Leveling - Yes it gets boring after a while, but wow. When you are doing it right, there is nothing like it. On the receiving end, or the giving end. It's awesome.
10. Twinking. Don't tell me that WoW has twinking. Any game that has level reqs for gear is impossible to twink properly. EQ made you want to keep those valuable items such as Fungi tunics and manastones. They were just so powerful for a lower level character. But you didn't have to use powerful gear like that. Just a simple set of HP rings on a level 1 character and they were a GOD when it came to killing rats and bats lol. Game breaking? Perhaps. But who cares, it was insanely fun, because they benefit wore off as you leveled up.
So yes, I entirely agree. I would absolutely LOVE another game like EQ. But it has to be just like EQ. The system dynamics that EQ had, like enabling you to kite mobs, or buff other players with powerful, long lasting buffs. Twinking, powerleveling. It was the system that allowed us to do these things. There were slight holes or cracks, that could be exploited to enable you to have a lot of fun. Nothing too crazy, as it was still difficult. Example: the system has an aggroed mob chase you endlessly until you either kill it, or zone. Most mobs ran faster than players. Snaring a mob would make them run slower. While SoW would make you run faster. Add all of these together, and you now have KITING. Realistic? Doesn't matter, you're playing a freaking game. But it was fun still.
Give me a game JUST like EQ with newer graphics and added technology, while still retaining all I said above, and I'll be a happy man.
I generally agree with all of this. The melee classes were fairly boring to play. They were almost the same as D&D 2nd edition. Try playing Baldur's Gate 2 (uses the same ruleset). You get bonus attacks per round at certain levels. It's a little different as they also have things like dodge and parry in EQ. Those are the things that gave melee classes a huge edge at tacking damage though. The best way to take damage was to avoid get hit as much as possible and to hit as often as possible. The system works well if you are controlling multiple characters at once, but if you are controlling one character it isn't so fun.
I believe most of the good things in EQ were born solely of player interaction. Some of them were not so good things. As I mentioned the trade areas were born simply from player interaction. Teleports for cash were born of player interaction. Buffs for cash and players giving lower level players free buffs and items were player interaction.
What good things? Just camp drama alone outweight all the "good things". I am glad games are now instanced, and there is no more camp drams. I am glad LFR and D3 roll your own loot so there is no loot drama.
The only "good" (to me, of course) thing about EQ is that no one is going to make a game like that anymore.
A game is actually a good place for Drama. It's like Drama class in acting. No one really gets hurt, but it's fun because it's emotional. If there is no emotion then there can't be fun. One thing EQ can't be accused of is not provoking emotions in people one way or another. I generally hated Drama in EQ, but have come to realize it actually adds something to the game. Then again I think most people who played EQ (including myself) missed the point of the game. I believe grinding was probably a bit overboard, but again you didn't have to grind for max level or camp certain spots for loot. You didn't have to look up on message boards where the best camp spots were. The could have easily been played like a D&D game if you wanted to do so. That is why it was kind of sandboxish. It had a lot of freedom of choice.
camp drama and loot drama .. yeah emotoinal but no fun ..i would much prefer a SP game with good scripting.
And people always talks about the "point" of a game .. there is none ... they are entertainment products .. and i use it as I see fit .. and i don't like it, i quit.
Yes, i don't have to grind .. but that will be even less fun .. i don't play a game to milling around doing nothing or talking to people.
And how are you going to play EQ like a D&D game when all the game allows you to do is kill mobs? If i want to play D&D, i play PnP AD&D, not EQ. And choosing one static spawn over another is not a fun interesting choice to me. I would much rather play an entertaining SP game like Wolfenstein.
camp drama and loot drama .. yeah emotoinal but no fun ..i would much prefer a SP game with good scripting.
And people always talks about the "point" of a game .. there is none ... they are entertainment products .. and i use it as I see fit .. and i don't like it, i quit.
Yes, i don't have to grind .. but that will be even less fun .. i don't play a game to milling around doing nothing or talking to people.
And how are you going to play EQ like a D&D game when all the game allows you to do is kill mobs? If i want to play D&D, i play PnP AD&D, not EQ. And choosing one static spawn over another is not a fun interesting choice to me. I would much rather play an entertaining SP game like Wolfenstein.
How do you play D&D? You get a group of people together. You walk out the door. You go on an adventure. Do you really need someone to tell you where to go and what to do? Can't you come up with a point yourself? That is the whole point of D&D and the whole point of freedom. Traveling with a group of friends is the cusp of adventure if you ask me. An adventure is not going through a static situation. It has to be spontaneous. Going out into the wilds, perhaps running across some Orcs to slay is an adventure. I'm not sure why I bother typing this because you don't seem to understand what an adventure is. An adventure can't be scripted IMO. There was a whole world in EQ you could do anything you wanted to in. You just had to use your imagination a little. I understand if you didn't want to play with anyone. I soloed a lot in EQ as well. Sometimes it was a grind. It didn't have to be though. I made it a grind. The game wasn't inherently a grind. When I first started playing I had lots of fun just wandering around slaying evil monsters, traveling to new places, finding hidden treasures, watching other people do crazy things, helping people, getting help, pretending to be a Ranger traveling in the wilds, wondering what certain NPCs were doing in certain places. There was a lot of fun things to do. You seem to just not be able to see it. You can only see something if someone creates it for you it appears. It's not a wonder you don't like sandbox games.
"Adventure"
"An unusual and exciting, typically hazardous, experience or activity"
"Engage in hazardous or exciting activity, especially the exploration of unknown territory."
How do you play D&D? You get a group of people together. You walk out the door. You go on an adventure. Do you really need someone to tell you where to go and what to do? Can't you come up with a point yourself? That is the whole point of D&D and the whole point of freedom.
Yes, I can and I did.
It is not as much fun (to me) as a well scripted SP game. Hence, I play SP games now, and NOT pnp D&D.
It is not about whether i am able to do certain things (heck, i can map on grid paper too when I played might & magic 1 long long time ago). it is about what is more entertaining.
How do you play D&D? You get a group of people together. You walk out the door. You go on an adventure. Do you really need someone to tell you where to go and what to do? Can't you come up with a point yourself? That is the whole point of D&D and the whole point of freedom.
Yes, I can and I did.
It is not as much fun (to me) as a well scripted SP game. Hence, I play SP games now, and NOT pnp D&D.
It is not about whether i am able to do certain things (heck, i can map on grid paper too when I played might & magic 1 long long time ago). it is about what is more entertaining.
we are talking about entertainment products here.
D&D was an entertainment product. I didn't play D&D that much. I'm not disputing the point that you can have fun with a scripted content if it's good. The point is you don't seem to have any imagination of your own. It has nothing to do with making a map or writing something down. It is just pure adventure and excitement born of imagination. I put the definition of adventure at the end of my last post for your to read.
D&D was an entertainment product. I didn't play D&D that much. I'm not disputing the point that you can have fun with a scripted content if it's good. The point is you don't seem to have any imagination of your own. It has nothing to do with making a map or writing something down. It is just pure adventure and excitement born of imagination. I put the definition of adventure at the end of my last post for your to read.
Do i need to have imagination to use an entertainment product and be entertained?
May be i need to imagine scenes when i read a novel (which i do regularly), but a video game? If it is not on screen and entertaining, i will pass.
D&D was an entertainment product. I didn't play D&D that much. I'm not disputing the point that you can have fun with a scripted content if it's good. The point is you don't seem to have any imagination of your own. It has nothing to do with making a map or writing something down. It is just pure adventure and excitement born of imagination. I put the definition of adventure at the end of my last post for your to read.
Do i need to have imagination to use an entertainment product and be entertained?
May be i need to imagine scenes when i read a novel (which i do regularly), but a video game? If it is not on screen and entertaining, i will pass.
You don't need imagination to see the monsters. They are already there. You just need use you imagination to make believe you are on an adventure into the unknown and not know what awaits you. You don't even need a group of friends for that (even though it helps). That is the heart of gaming and fantasy RPG IMO. If people had no imagination there wouldn't be any "entertainment" products and people wouldn't buy them I'd imagine. None of fantasy, mythology, theatre, or any form of entertainment would have started without imagination.
"Imagination"
"The faculty of action of forming new ideas, or images, or concepts, of external objects not present to the senses."
"The ability of the mind to be creative or resourceful."
"The part of the mind that imagines things."
Why play games if you have no imagination or do you play games because you have no imagination?
You don't need imagination to see the monsters. They are already there. You just need use you imagination to make believe you are on an adventure into the unknown and not know what awaits you.
well that is not happening in EQ because I KNOW what is awaits me .. static spawns and camps.
If by imagination, you mean "pretend" the camps are not there .. well, that is not going to happen. How can i "imagine" anything else when the horrible camps are right in my face?
Quest hub vs non-quest hub? Really? Are people that desperate to do revisionist history now? EQ was the beginning of the current generation of WoW Clones, it may not have spawned them directly but it did serve as the direct inspiration for WoW and try to backpeddle all day long as you wish vanilla WoW was as much of a pain in the ass as EQ though far less hostile ( DP wasn't the same, quests were structured around hubs in WoW sure but what in the christ hell is the difference? do both games have quests? are both games PVE centric with PVP and crafting tacked on as an afterthought? Are both games grind to level cap and then do gear grind and/or "epic" encounters? are both utterly hostile to gamers who didn't want to do "adventures" but instead may have wanted to be a blacksmith or something else? yes? themepark, both of em, try and sugar coat it but shit does not change even if EQ was squeezing you so hard by the balls you were hitting opera levels).
What the world needs isn't another vessel of the Antichrist which will bring another decade of clones, what it needs is an MMO that is not afraid to have the best parts of EQ with the best parts of games like EVE-Online... have the dangerous trek from city x to city y be due to bandits as well as hostile creatures, make city z a city controlled by players which you can visit if you are on friendly terms with the people of the nation the city originally belonged to, visit player owned stalls, buy food, buy drink for a journey into the great desert to the south in search of the mythical mithril route where both NPC merchants and player merchants can be found navigating from the dwarven kingdoms in the far frozen south to the player owned zones in the east and the lush NPC kingdoms of the north west... have something for everyone, go like Repopulation and have multiple DP-type servers but have every server be a blend of everything from 99.9% safe zones (like in any good adventure story the hero can still get jumped in a back alley by some thugs) to wild areas where players try to stake claims and build villages, cities, Hell even have NPC try to do that from time to time and players could earn rep with the respective faction if they help the settlers or gain rep with their enemies by attacking the settlers, and by implication the players defending them. Do not have name plates above players so when attacking you have no clue if it is a NPC or a player...etc...etc...
A game needs to be emergent but offer enough possibility of safety and a home to return to, let it be wild and sharp on the edges but with a safe spot in the center where noobs and maybe even tired veterans can hang out at and learn from one another. Such a game would have a spot for the PVPer and the PVEer and I have hopes that such games are on the horizon.
You don't need imagination to see the monsters. They are already there. You just need use you imagination to make believe you are on an adventure into the unknown and not know what awaits you.
well that is not happening in EQ because I KNOW what is awaits me .. static spawns and camps.
If by imagination, you mean "pretend" the camps are not there .. well, that is not going to happen. How can i "imagine" anything else when the horrible camps are right in my face?
The camps are not there because you don't have to camp. That camp happens to be a band of hostile Orcs waiting to kill lost travelers. I must be wary in engaging them fore it could mean my life. See it's not that hard.
Camps are all in your head. You only see what you want to see. Not what could be in an open world.
If the game is hard then you will have to innovate, DP or no DP. You might HAVE to travel from one city to another and it might be very dangerous. Some people will die on the way and suffer the harsh death penalty. Other people will hear about this and look for ways to avoid dying on the journey. People will spread word about how they completed the journey and maybe even help those who still need to do it. This creates community. I hate 99% of online communities, because they aren't communities, but MMOs used to have communities.
No you don't. You can just keep grind that safe single static spawn .. as many do in EQ.
And i don't play games for communities. I play games for fun.
It's starting to be very clear you NEVER played EQ1 from 1999 to WoW era.. or ever have.. There were some easy mobs to abuse, but that doesn't mean we all did it.. I personally loved the challenge quad kiting wyverns had for me.. Nothing easy there.. It amazes me how so many like you claim that the game is too easy and boring, but then complain about death penalties.. Do you not see the hypocracy in that? If it so easy why are people dying? LOL
If the game is hard then you will have to innovate, DP or no DP. You might HAVE to travel from one city to another and it might be very dangerous. Some people will die on the way and suffer the harsh death penalty. Other people will hear about this and look for ways to avoid dying on the journey. People will spread word about how they completed the journey and maybe even help those who still need to do it. This creates community. I hate 99% of online communities, because they aren't communities, but MMOs used to have communities.
No you don't. You can just keep grind that safe single static spawn .. as many do in EQ.
And i don't play games for communities. I play games for fun.
It's starting to be very clear you NEVER played EQ1 from 1999 to WoW era.. or ever have.. There were some easy mobs to abuse, but that doesn't mean we all did it.. I personally loved the challenge quad kiting wyverns had for me.. Nothing easy there.. It amazes me how so many like you claim that the game is too easy and boring, but then complain about death penalties.. Do you not see the hypocracy in that? If it so easy why are people dying? LOL
Quad Kiting in Plane of Tactics (last time I actually played my Wizard..) FTW!
Raquelis in various games Played: Everything Playing: Nioh 2, Civ6 Wants: The World Anticipating:Everquest NextCrowfall, Pantheon, Elden Ring
I did some reverse kiting in plane of fear. That was pretty nerve racking. I never was a wizard kind of guy. They didn't have enough utility. I preferred Necro and Druid for soloing. From a roleplaying point of view I liked the Ranger.
Originally posted by Flyte27 I did some reverse kiting in plane of fear. That was pretty nerve racking. I never was a wizard kind of guy. They didn't have enough utility. I preferred Necro and Druid for soloing. From a roleplaying point of view I liked the Ranger.
I wasn't much of a Necro guy, or Mages and Beastlords for that matter. I loved my Druid, but all I did was SOLO. Rangers weren't bad, but they weren't my thing. In terms of melee dps, I like Monks, Rogues, and Bards; with Bards being my all time favorite. So much utility.
Bards were fun...are fun. Debuffs, insane self buffs, decent DPS. Crowd Control, Charms. Ect. Swarm Kiting was fun...and dangerous. So much utility. By far my most favorite class (well, right behind my Paladin fetish)
Speaking of utility. ENCHANTERS! OMG, I miss them. Seriously. I hate the fact that games have moved away from what I view as the "real" Holy Trinity. Tank, Healer, Support. The rest of the slots were for good DPSers. Back in those days, you could take an encounter without a good DPS, but in most cases; you couldn't do it without the a tank, healer, enchanter/bard.
You had to manage mobs, debuffs, buffs. Substantially more fun (for me) than standing there and mashing my kick button (or in terms of newer games, my "rotation")
Raquelis in various games Played: Everything Playing: Nioh 2, Civ6 Wants: The World Anticipating:Everquest NextCrowfall, Pantheon, Elden Ring
Originally posted by Flyte27 I did some reverse kiting in plane of fear. That was pretty nerve racking. I never was a wizard kind of guy. They didn't have enough utility. I preferred Necro and Druid for soloing. From a roleplaying point of view I liked the Ranger.
I wasn't much of a Necro guy, or Mages and Beastlords for that matter. I loved my Druid, but all I did was SOLO. Rangers weren't bad, but they weren't my thing. In terms of melee dps, I like Monks, Rogues, and Bards; with Bards being my all time favorite. So much utility.
Bards were fun...are fun. Debuffs, insane self buffs, decent DPS. Crowd Control, Charms. Ect. Swarm Kiting was fun...and dangerous. So much utility. By far my most favorite class (well, right behind my Paladin fetish)
Speaking of utility. ENCHANTERS! OMG, I miss them. Seriously. I hate the fact that games have moved away from what I view as the "real" Holy Trinity. Tank, Healer, Support. The rest of the slots were for good DPSers. Back in those days, you could take an encounter without a good DPS, but in most cases; you couldn't do it without the a tank, healer, enchanter/bard.
You had to manage mobs, debuffs, buffs. Substantially more fun (for me) than standing there and mashing my kick button (or in terms of newer games, my "rotation")
My friend was a Enchanter. He used to get all the groups and raids while I grinded away solo. He leveled a lot faster then I did. He would sit at the Giant Hill, and later the Nexus and sell KEI. His last name was crackdealer "they made him change it to something else". He used to shout selling crack since everyone wanted KEI like it was crack. I used to get a kick out of that. Some people gave him a lot of money. He would also work with Druids he knew to charm kite mobs. I still prefer being a Druid or Necro in terms of pure soloing fun. In a group I'm not sure. Bard was kind of fun for pulling. Rangers were good for roleplay, but got all their spells way to late to be of much use. They were probably the worst class in terms of being good at anything. I just like the idea of being a Ranger.
You don't need imagination to see the monsters. They are already there. You just need use you imagination to make believe you are on an adventure into the unknown and not know what awaits you.
well that is not happening in EQ because I KNOW what is awaits me .. static spawns and camps.
If by imagination, you mean "pretend" the camps are not there .. well, that is not going to happen. How can i "imagine" anything else when the horrible camps are right in my face?
Furthermore.. Most zones didn't have that many camps as you like to portray EQ as having.. Indoor zones had mostly static spawns, but then what game DOESN'T? They ALL do.. you can't have 200 mobs walking around randomly inside a fort.. However the outdoor zones, were mostly roaming mobs...... "SG to docks" And just because players learned to pull mobs to safe areas to fight, doesn't make it a camp.. it's called smart play, because the last thing you needed in a Hill Giant fight was adds .. Adds in EQ would easily KILL you.. hence "TRAINSSSSSSSSS".. Stuff happens..
You don't need imagination to see the monsters. They are already there. You just need use you imagination to make believe you are on an adventure into the unknown and not know what awaits you.
well that is not happening in EQ because I KNOW what is awaits me .. static spawns and camps.
If by imagination, you mean "pretend" the camps are not there .. well, that is not going to happen. How can i "imagine" anything else when the horrible camps are right in my face?
Furthermore.. Most zones didn't have that many camps as you like to portray EQ as having.. Indoor zones had mostly static spawns, but then what game DOESN'T? They ALL do.. you can't have 200 mobs walking around randomly inside a fort.. However the outdoor zones, were mostly roaming mobs...... "SG to docks" And just because players learned to pull mobs to safe areas to fight, doesn't make it a camp.. it's called smart play, because the last thing you needed in a Hill Giant fight was adds .. Adds in EQ would easily KILL you.. hence "TRAINSSSSSSSSS".. Stuff happens..
By what I know only themeparks have static spawns... in sandboxes they either fluctuate (spawns are active for a few days/weeks then vanish), are temporary (set number of spawns) or flat out don't exist with mobs spawning in one location then going walkabout. There's a reason I call EQ a themepark afterall (it is due to the predictability of the game sans personal level drama).
Quest hub vs non-quest hub? Really? Are people that desperate to do revisionist history now? EQ was the beginning of the current generation of WoW Clones, it may not have spawned them directly but it did serve as the direct inspiration for WoW and try to backpeddle all day long as you wish vanilla WoW was as much of a pain in the ass as EQ though far less hostile ( DP wasn't the same, quests were structured around hubs in WoW sure but what in the christ hell is the difference? do both games have quests? are both games PVE centric with PVP and crafting tacked on as an afterthought?
Woah woah, now as much as the system's for PvP reward were not installed into WoW till patch 1.3, they defiently had Open World PvP planned from the start, launched with several PvP servers, and allowed dueling and other instances of PVP straight out of the box. Hell I was in 40 man raids in WoW within the first month of game time.
I think when your having a discussion like this its very important to seperate fact from conjecture, and im sorry but planned PVP servers and Open World PVP content defiently doesnt define WoW's PvP as an "Afterthought".
EQ I would defiently agree, PVP was not inigrated into the game properly, but WoW defiently not, they had systems in place from the get go, and despite the lack of pure advancement and reward with PVP it had its own value in territory control and end game raid content.
Quest hub vs non-quest hub? Really? Are people that desperate to do revisionist history now? EQ was the beginning of the current generation of WoW Clones, it may not have spawned them directly but it did serve as the direct inspiration for WoW and try to backpeddle all day long as you wish vanilla WoW was as much of a pain in the ass as EQ though far less hostile ( DP wasn't the same, quests were structured around hubs in WoW sure but what in the christ hell is the difference? do both games have quests? are both games PVE centric with PVP and crafting tacked on as an afterthought?
Woah woah, now as much as the system's for PvP reward were not installed into WoW till patch 1.3, they defiently had Open World PvP planned from the start, launched with several PvP servers, and allowed dueling and other instances of PVP straight out of the box. Hell I was in 40 man raids in WoW within the first month of game time.
I think when your having a discussion like this its very important to seperate fact from conjecture, and im sorry but planned PVP servers and Open World PVP content defiently doesnt define WoW's PvP as an "Afterthought".
EQ I would defiently agree, PVP was not inigrated into the game properly, but WoW defiently not, they had systems in place from the get go, and despite the lack of pure advancement and reward with PVP it had its own value in territory control and end game raid content.
The fact they had to reward you for PVP tells you how much thought was given to it as a standalone system and the fact that they were afraid to balance things on both sides of the spectrum with the same gear (PVE and PVP) that the inevitably went the way they did with it? (what was that extra stat they gave PVP armor again?)
PVP servers were also not balanced at all, they did not feature integrated PVP they merely flipped the switch enabling PVP server-wide, learn the difference there because it will make you look less rose-tinted.
Good to see you didn't challenge the crafting part though you did underline it for some inane reason as well.
Have People already forgotten about how EverQuest 2 was just that at launch?
- Massive Death XP penalties, including shared debt XP when running in Groups/Dungeons.
- Forced grouping all over. There was very little solo content. Most was Group oriented.
- High Level of Challenge / difficulty.
All stuff that worked against EQ2 right off the bat and made them loose subs faster than you can count.
Especially the Whole shared debt XP turned into a debacle that was extremely toxic against the community.
It was terrible. One unlucky PUG Group and you spend several hours grinding your debt XP away afterwards. An entire night gaming wasted.
The result was that People ended up on blacklists left and right for making a mistake. People scared to Group. And with the vast majority of content being Group content, this created a CATCH22 situation that frustrated people into unsubbing.
People just don't want these kind of games anymore today. They want to play games for fun, not as second job with fetish like punishment systems.
I am all for more Challenge and Group oriented content. But Challenge / difficulty doesn't have to translate in heavy punishment systems.
Quest hub vs non-quest hub? Really? Are people that desperate to do revisionist history now? EQ was the beginning of the current generation of WoW Clones, it may not have spawned them directly but it did serve as the direct inspiration for WoW and try to backpeddle all day long as you wish vanilla WoW was as much of a pain in the ass as EQ though far less hostile ( DP wasn't the same, quests were structured around hubs in WoW sure but what in the christ hell is the difference? do both games have quests? are both games PVE centric with PVP and crafting tacked on as an afterthought?
Woah woah, now as much as the system's for PvP reward were not installed into WoW till patch 1.3, they defiently had Open World PvP planned from the start, launched with several PvP servers, and allowed dueling and other instances of PVP straight out of the box. Hell I was in 40 man raids in WoW within the first month of game time.
I think when your having a discussion like this its very important to seperate fact from conjecture, and im sorry but planned PVP servers and Open World PVP content defiently doesnt define WoW's PvP as an "Afterthought".
EQ I would defiently agree, PVP was not inigrated into the game properly, but WoW defiently not, they had systems in place from the get go, and despite the lack of pure advancement and reward with PVP it had its own value in territory control and end game raid content.
The fact they had to reward you for PVP tells you how much thought was given to it as a standalone system and the fact that they were afraid to balance things on both sides of the spectrum with the same gear (PVE and PVP) that the inevitably went the way they did with it? (what was that extra stat they gave PVP armor again?)
PVP servers were also not balanced at all, they did not feature integrated PVP they merely flipped the switch enabling PVP server-wide, learn the difference there because it will make you look less rose-tinted.
Good to see you didn't challenge the crafting part though you did underline it for some inane reason as well.
Your distinction wasnt that PvP in World of Warcraft was poorly implimented, but rather an "afterthought".
Clearly in WoW, PvP wasnt added later on, it was part of the game from the start, just because it was unbalanced doesnt make it an afterthought.
Im directly challenging the example you gave in regards to a parallel with EQ, a game which had a much more Restricted PVP system.
Also I dont really know what your trying to claim on either end of the spectrum with EQ and WoW's crafting. Both games had crafting in from the start, again it wasnt added later on, and both crafting systems supported the game as intended. Neither game was intended as a building and resource simulator like we saw in later Sandbox titles, so I dont know why them having a working as intended model for crafting is a negative in the first place.
Again, your entitled to your opinion, as much as I am entitled to disagree, I have no underhanded tactics in terms of posting and wasnt trying to avoid the subject of crafting I just couldnt understand its relevance in comparing EQ to WoW, because again both games provided a system and worked as intended for each game.
Comments
EQ had a longer leveling time then probably was needed. None the less there were lots of different zones and dungeons you could explore. Enough to get you through most tears of levels I believe. You never had to camp unless you wanted to level quickly or get a specific item. None of that was intended.
The imagination doesn't come from the game it comes from the player. Isn't that the essence of sandboxy/D&D. The players are the ones who create the adventure. The tools are there for you to do it. All you need is to get together, go out, and explore.
The static spawns weren't really detracting for me. They were generally in groups and challenging to break apart. Many people were running for their lives to the safety of town. In most games today there is a very boring story you have no control of and you just follow a GPS from point A to point B. You don't do anything that requires any thought or imagination. The mobs are usually easy to kill and give you a good reward for little effort.
There were times in dungeons where there was an overflow of people, but that generally wasn't the case. You may have gone into a dungeon like Lower Guk and there was a guild or bored high level players helping to low levels to get an item. There may have been just a bunch of people looking for the same item. Generally that wasn't the case. If you tried going into somewhere like lower guk on your own and you weren't way above the allotted level you had a good chance of dying. Even in a small group it was difficult to go through dungeons. Heck even when there was large groups of people in the dungeons you might get a train of mobs hitting you. Regardless it wasn't really how the game was meant to be played. It was how a lot of players played it. That is why it wasn't a themepark IMO. It had a lot of freedom of choice. You could play it how you wanted to play it.
I believe you play games like a movie and that's fine, but those who played D&D or those who like fantasy in general (true fans) would rather come up with their own adventures then to have something simple and generic force their way. If you don't see that EQ had this kind of freedom I don't know what to say that can convince you. You seem to look at EQ as just camp and kill. Thats all. You obviously weren't able to appreciate the freedoms given in the game and also the good things the community brought about. You only seem to see the bad things the community brought about.
Yes exactly. Themepark my butt. I spent my first few levels around freeport, then branched off, taking dangerous expeditions to Guk, Split Paw, and the like. Quite easy to die along the way, but treasure and experience were grande if you made it there. Nothing themepark about EQ (circa 2000) at all. I think this business about 'theme park' or 'sand box' needs to be replaced by, instead, 'quest hub' or 'non quest hub.'
Very excellent post Epoq, you need to post a lot more!
Luckily, i don't need you to like me to enjoy video games. -nariusseldon.
In F2P I think it's more a case of the game's trying to play the player's. -laserit
I went back recently and joined that private server that simulates the "old" game and zones of EQ. I leveled up quite a few classes I never played back in the day, and some of them quite high (made 49 with my druid).
I can tell you now, that game was incredible! Yes, there was some very bad issues:
1. Elitist guilds hogging all the good camps
2. Elitist guilds forcing prices on gear to be insanely expensive (since they were the only people allowed to camp them)
3. With lower populations, it was sometimes difficult to find a group, or others to fill your group.
4. Due to number 3, many zones were very empty (this can also be a good thing though - depending on what you want to do)
5. Poor melee classes were just boring as hell. Click auto-attack, then bash, etc. Wait for refresh while standing there.
I'm sure there were more, but those are the big things that stick out in my mind.
But the pros definitely outweigh the cons.....vastly!
1. Each class is TOTALLY different.
2. The dynamics of the game played into the classes abilities, whether it was designed that way or not (kiting, etc.)
3. The risk/reward is oh so sweet. Yes it was dangerous to go to Runnyeye, but damn that was some good XP.
4. People want to say that the only reason we talked back in the day while grouping was because chat rooms were all the rage, and because this whole internet thing was very new to a lot of us. I can assure you, that's a load of crap. Talking still is happening on "that private server". Had MANY great conversations while in groups with my "re-visit".
5. The zones all had a "feeling" to them. No, it wasn't well done (why's that house there? who's that named guy roaming around?, etc.) But each and every one was distinct.
6. No maps! Having to guide people through zones was incredibly rewarding, because you had the experience of knowing where you were, and where to go memorized, because that was the only way.
7. Buffs and spells. Probably one of the single-most important aspects of EQ was the social buffing. Want to log on and play but only have about 30 minutes? Then head to a noobie zone and start tossing out some buffs. You instantly become a hero, and people are so appreciative for them. Because they mattered. They were so powerful and helped so much.
8. Death Penalty - Yep, I'm putting this in the pros list. Love it or hate it, it was what kept you on your toes. It made you learn your class, and not be a douche in the group that let you in. For if you failed in your job, or others did the same, then you are all going to feel the pain (can't say that much anymore about mmo's can we?). So yes it hurt to die without a rez. But it made you a better player, a more careful player. And it made the victory actually feel like something achieved. And of course, it's an entirely other adventure to getting your crap back (enlisting the help of others -- which makes them feel good).
9. Power Leveling - Yes it gets boring after a while, but wow. When you are doing it right, there is nothing like it. On the receiving end, or the giving end. It's awesome.
10. Twinking. Don't tell me that WoW has twinking. Any game that has level reqs for gear is impossible to twink properly. EQ made you want to keep those valuable items such as Fungi tunics and manastones. They were just so powerful for a lower level character. But you didn't have to use powerful gear like that. Just a simple set of HP rings on a level 1 character and they were a GOD when it came to killing rats and bats lol. Game breaking? Perhaps. But who cares, it was insanely fun, because they benefit wore off as you leveled up.
So yes, I entirely agree. I would absolutely LOVE another game like EQ. But it has to be just like EQ. The system dynamics that EQ had, like enabling you to kite mobs, or buff other players with powerful, long lasting buffs. Twinking, powerleveling. It was the system that allowed us to do these things. There were slight holes or cracks, that could be exploited to enable you to have a lot of fun. Nothing too crazy, as it was still difficult. Example: the system has an aggroed mob chase you endlessly until you either kill it, or zone. Most mobs ran faster than players. Snaring a mob would make them run slower. While SoW would make you run faster. Add all of these together, and you now have KITING. Realistic? Doesn't matter, you're playing a freaking game. But it was fun still.
Give me a game JUST like EQ with newer graphics and added technology, while still retaining all I said above, and I'll be a happy man.
I remember my first trip from Qeynos to Freeport. It was quite a nerve racking journey. In fact anywhere in the game I went that I hadn't been before and even many that I had already were fairly dangerous. Going the path that took you past RunnyEye to Misty Thicket was the safest bet, but very dangerous with all those Minotaurs, Evil Eyes, and Goblins. Then there was the Highpass Hold. That place was a nightmare for low level players to get through IMO. The Karana's and Commonlands were even dangerous with Giants, Lions, Griffins, the one Shadow Knight in east Common Lands, and then another Shadow Knight in west Common Lands (both high level). I never much went to Lower Guk because I had to faction with the Trolls or Ogres. Sometimes I went to North and South Ro. I mostly hung around anywhere else. I killed lots of Giants at the Giant Hill. I killed lots of Orcs in the Lesser Faydark. I turned into a wolf and visited the Brownies in Lesser Faydark. I remember getting lost in Greater Faydark and West Karana's a lot of times. It's hard to remember, but I think there were actually four Karana's when I think about it. I believe there was North, South, East, and West. West was near Qeynos I believe. North was near Beholder Maze and HighPass? There was a nice camp spot somewhere in the East or West I think. It's difficult to remember now. There were a lot of Aviaks (Bird People) there.
I generally agree with all of this. The melee classes were fairly boring to play. They were almost the same as D&D 2nd edition. Try playing Baldur's Gate 2 (uses the same ruleset). You get bonus attacks per round at certain levels. It's a little different as they also have things like dodge and parry in EQ. Those are the things that gave melee classes a huge edge at tacking damage though. The best way to take damage was to avoid get hit as much as possible and to hit as often as possible. The system works well if you are controlling multiple characters at once, but if you are controlling one character it isn't so fun.
camp drama and loot drama .. yeah emotoinal but no fun ..i would much prefer a SP game with good scripting.
And people always talks about the "point" of a game .. there is none ... they are entertainment products .. and i use it as I see fit .. and i don't like it, i quit.
Yes, i don't have to grind .. but that will be even less fun .. i don't play a game to milling around doing nothing or talking to people.
And how are you going to play EQ like a D&D game when all the game allows you to do is kill mobs? If i want to play D&D, i play PnP AD&D, not EQ. And choosing one static spawn over another is not a fun interesting choice to me. I would much rather play an entertaining SP game like Wolfenstein.
How do you play D&D? You get a group of people together. You walk out the door. You go on an adventure. Do you really need someone to tell you where to go and what to do? Can't you come up with a point yourself? That is the whole point of D&D and the whole point of freedom. Traveling with a group of friends is the cusp of adventure if you ask me. An adventure is not going through a static situation. It has to be spontaneous. Going out into the wilds, perhaps running across some Orcs to slay is an adventure. I'm not sure why I bother typing this because you don't seem to understand what an adventure is. An adventure can't be scripted IMO. There was a whole world in EQ you could do anything you wanted to in. You just had to use your imagination a little. I understand if you didn't want to play with anyone. I soloed a lot in EQ as well. Sometimes it was a grind. It didn't have to be though. I made it a grind. The game wasn't inherently a grind. When I first started playing I had lots of fun just wandering around slaying evil monsters, traveling to new places, finding hidden treasures, watching other people do crazy things, helping people, getting help, pretending to be a Ranger traveling in the wilds, wondering what certain NPCs were doing in certain places. There was a lot of fun things to do. You seem to just not be able to see it. You can only see something if someone creates it for you it appears. It's not a wonder you don't like sandbox games.
"Adventure"
"An unusual and exciting, typically hazardous, experience or activity"
"Engage in hazardous or exciting activity, especially the exploration of unknown territory."
Yes, I can and I did.
It is not as much fun (to me) as a well scripted SP game. Hence, I play SP games now, and NOT pnp D&D.
It is not about whether i am able to do certain things (heck, i can map on grid paper too when I played might & magic 1 long long time ago). it is about what is more entertaining.
we are talking about entertainment products here.
D&D was an entertainment product. I didn't play D&D that much. I'm not disputing the point that you can have fun with a scripted content if it's good. The point is you don't seem to have any imagination of your own. It has nothing to do with making a map or writing something down. It is just pure adventure and excitement born of imagination. I put the definition of adventure at the end of my last post for your to read.
Do i need to have imagination to use an entertainment product and be entertained?
May be i need to imagine scenes when i read a novel (which i do regularly), but a video game? If it is not on screen and entertaining, i will pass.
You don't need imagination to see the monsters. They are already there. You just need use you imagination to make believe you are on an adventure into the unknown and not know what awaits you. You don't even need a group of friends for that (even though it helps). That is the heart of gaming and fantasy RPG IMO. If people had no imagination there wouldn't be any "entertainment" products and people wouldn't buy them I'd imagine. None of fantasy, mythology, theatre, or any form of entertainment would have started without imagination.
"Imagination"
"The faculty of action of forming new ideas, or images, or concepts, of external objects not present to the senses."
"The ability of the mind to be creative or resourceful."
"The part of the mind that imagines things."
Why play games if you have no imagination or do you play games because you have no imagination?
well that is not happening in EQ because I KNOW what is awaits me .. static spawns and camps.
If by imagination, you mean "pretend" the camps are not there .. well, that is not going to happen. How can i "imagine" anything else when the horrible camps are right in my face?
Quest hub vs non-quest hub? Really? Are people that desperate to do revisionist history now? EQ was the beginning of the current generation of WoW Clones, it may not have spawned them directly but it did serve as the direct inspiration for WoW and try to backpeddle all day long as you wish vanilla WoW was as much of a pain in the ass as EQ though far less hostile ( DP wasn't the same, quests were structured around hubs in WoW sure but what in the christ hell is the difference? do both games have quests? are both games PVE centric with PVP and crafting tacked on as an afterthought? Are both games grind to level cap and then do gear grind and/or "epic" encounters? are both utterly hostile to gamers who didn't want to do "adventures" but instead may have wanted to be a blacksmith or something else? yes? themepark, both of em, try and sugar coat it but shit does not change even if EQ was squeezing you so hard by the balls you were hitting opera levels).
What the world needs isn't another vessel of the Antichrist which will bring another decade of clones, what it needs is an MMO that is not afraid to have the best parts of EQ with the best parts of games like EVE-Online... have the dangerous trek from city x to city y be due to bandits as well as hostile creatures, make city z a city controlled by players which you can visit if you are on friendly terms with the people of the nation the city originally belonged to, visit player owned stalls, buy food, buy drink for a journey into the great desert to the south in search of the mythical mithril route where both NPC merchants and player merchants can be found navigating from the dwarven kingdoms in the far frozen south to the player owned zones in the east and the lush NPC kingdoms of the north west... have something for everyone, go like Repopulation and have multiple DP-type servers but have every server be a blend of everything from 99.9% safe zones (like in any good adventure story the hero can still get jumped in a back alley by some thugs) to wild areas where players try to stake claims and build villages, cities, Hell even have NPC try to do that from time to time and players could earn rep with the respective faction if they help the settlers or gain rep with their enemies by attacking the settlers, and by implication the players defending them. Do not have name plates above players so when attacking you have no clue if it is a NPC or a player...etc...etc...
A game needs to be emergent but offer enough possibility of safety and a home to return to, let it be wild and sharp on the edges but with a safe spot in the center where noobs and maybe even tired veterans can hang out at and learn from one another. Such a game would have a spot for the PVPer and the PVEer and I have hopes that such games are on the horizon.
The camps are not there because you don't have to camp. That camp happens to be a band of hostile Orcs waiting to kill lost travelers. I must be wary in engaging them fore it could mean my life. See it's not that hard.
Camps are all in your head. You only see what you want to see. Not what could be in an open world.
It's starting to be very clear you NEVER played EQ1 from 1999 to WoW era.. or ever have.. There were some easy mobs to abuse, but that doesn't mean we all did it.. I personally loved the challenge quad kiting wyverns had for me.. Nothing easy there.. It amazes me how so many like you claim that the game is too easy and boring, but then complain about death penalties.. Do you not see the hypocracy in that? If it so easy why are people dying? LOL
Quad Kiting in Plane of Tactics (last time I actually played my Wizard..) FTW!
Raquelis in various games
Played: Everything
Playing: Nioh 2, Civ6
Wants: The World
Anticipating: Everquest Next Crowfall, Pantheon, Elden Ring
I wasn't much of a Necro guy, or Mages and Beastlords for that matter. I loved my Druid, but all I did was SOLO. Rangers weren't bad, but they weren't my thing. In terms of melee dps, I like Monks, Rogues, and Bards; with Bards being my all time favorite. So much utility.
Bards were fun...are fun. Debuffs, insane self buffs, decent DPS. Crowd Control, Charms. Ect. Swarm Kiting was fun...and dangerous. So much utility. By far my most favorite class (well, right behind my Paladin fetish)
Speaking of utility. ENCHANTERS! OMG, I miss them. Seriously. I hate the fact that games have moved away from what I view as the "real" Holy Trinity. Tank, Healer, Support. The rest of the slots were for good DPSers. Back in those days, you could take an encounter without a good DPS, but in most cases; you couldn't do it without the a tank, healer, enchanter/bard.
You had to manage mobs, debuffs, buffs. Substantially more fun (for me) than standing there and mashing my kick button (or in terms of newer games, my "rotation")
Raquelis in various games
Played: Everything
Playing: Nioh 2, Civ6
Wants: The World
Anticipating: Everquest Next Crowfall, Pantheon, Elden Ring
My friend was a Enchanter. He used to get all the groups and raids while I grinded away solo. He leveled a lot faster then I did. He would sit at the Giant Hill, and later the Nexus and sell KEI. His last name was crackdealer "they made him change it to something else". He used to shout selling crack since everyone wanted KEI like it was crack. I used to get a kick out of that. Some people gave him a lot of money. He would also work with Druids he knew to charm kite mobs. I still prefer being a Druid or Necro in terms of pure soloing fun. In a group I'm not sure. Bard was kind of fun for pulling. Rangers were good for roleplay, but got all their spells way to late to be of much use. They were probably the worst class in terms of being good at anything. I just like the idea of being a Ranger.
Furthermore.. Most zones didn't have that many camps as you like to portray EQ as having.. Indoor zones had mostly static spawns, but then what game DOESN'T? They ALL do.. you can't have 200 mobs walking around randomly inside a fort.. However the outdoor zones, were mostly roaming mobs...... "SG to docks" And just because players learned to pull mobs to safe areas to fight, doesn't make it a camp.. it's called smart play, because the last thing you needed in a Hill Giant fight was adds .. Adds in EQ would easily KILL you.. hence "TRAINSSSSSSSSS".. Stuff happens..
By what I know only themeparks have static spawns... in sandboxes they either fluctuate (spawns are active for a few days/weeks then vanish), are temporary (set number of spawns) or flat out don't exist with mobs spawning in one location then going walkabout. There's a reason I call EQ a themepark afterall (it is due to the predictability of the game sans personal level drama).
Woah woah, now as much as the system's for PvP reward were not installed into WoW till patch 1.3, they defiently had Open World PvP planned from the start, launched with several PvP servers, and allowed dueling and other instances of PVP straight out of the box. Hell I was in 40 man raids in WoW within the first month of game time.
I think when your having a discussion like this its very important to seperate fact from conjecture, and im sorry but planned PVP servers and Open World PVP content defiently doesnt define WoW's PvP as an "Afterthought".
EQ I would defiently agree, PVP was not inigrated into the game properly, but WoW defiently not, they had systems in place from the get go, and despite the lack of pure advancement and reward with PVP it had its own value in territory control and end game raid content.
The fact they had to reward you for PVP tells you how much thought was given to it as a standalone system and the fact that they were afraid to balance things on both sides of the spectrum with the same gear (PVE and PVP) that the inevitably went the way they did with it? (what was that extra stat they gave PVP armor again?)
PVP servers were also not balanced at all, they did not feature integrated PVP they merely flipped the switch enabling PVP server-wide, learn the difference there because it will make you look less rose-tinted.
Good to see you didn't challenge the crafting part though you did underline it for some inane reason as well.
Have People already forgotten about how EverQuest 2 was just that at launch?
- Massive Death XP penalties, including shared debt XP when running in Groups/Dungeons.
- Forced grouping all over. There was very little solo content. Most was Group oriented.
- High Level of Challenge / difficulty.
All stuff that worked against EQ2 right off the bat and made them loose subs faster than you can count.
Especially the Whole shared debt XP turned into a debacle that was extremely toxic against the community.
It was terrible. One unlucky PUG Group and you spend several hours grinding your debt XP away afterwards. An entire night gaming wasted.
The result was that People ended up on blacklists left and right for making a mistake. People scared to Group. And with the vast majority of content being Group content, this created a CATCH22 situation that frustrated people into unsubbing.
People just don't want these kind of games anymore today. They want to play games for fun, not as second job with fetish like punishment systems.
I am all for more Challenge and Group oriented content. But Challenge / difficulty doesn't have to translate in heavy punishment systems.
Your distinction wasnt that PvP in World of Warcraft was poorly implimented, but rather an "afterthought".
Clearly in WoW, PvP wasnt added later on, it was part of the game from the start, just because it was unbalanced doesnt make it an afterthought.
Im directly challenging the example you gave in regards to a parallel with EQ, a game which had a much more Restricted PVP system.
Also I dont really know what your trying to claim on either end of the spectrum with EQ and WoW's crafting. Both games had crafting in from the start, again it wasnt added later on, and both crafting systems supported the game as intended. Neither game was intended as a building and resource simulator like we saw in later Sandbox titles, so I dont know why them having a working as intended model for crafting is a negative in the first place.
Again, your entitled to your opinion, as much as I am entitled to disagree, I have no underhanded tactics in terms of posting and wasnt trying to avoid the subject of crafting I just couldnt understand its relevance in comparing EQ to WoW, because again both games provided a system and worked as intended for each game.