Howdy, Stranger!
It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!
Quick Links
I'm actually glad EQN is unlikely to be released
Hrimnir
Member RarePosts: 2,415
The game was a huge middle finger to everything EQ. It didn't deserve to see the light of day. I can only hope it gets completely canned so at least what was once a magnificent IP doesn't get essentially pissed on.
"The surest way to corrupt a youth is to instruct him to hold in higher esteem those who think alike than those who think differently."
- Friedrich Nietzsche
This discussion has been closed.
Comments
I agree. SOE botched EverQuest Next. Everything about it was a slap in the face to EQ veterans and the great legacy of EQ.
The SOE Live event in 2013 was a clever bait and switch scheme that lured EQ vets to show up and then once we got there we were let down when we saw the design of EQ Next. They gutted the lore, they removed levels, the removed the classic class system and pretty much everything that we loved about EQ...all gone.
All of the things that made EQ great were completely IGNORED and instead we got Minecraft and an ugly looking world with cartoonish avatars.
I remember being at SOE Live in 2013 and my heart sank as I watched some of the demos.
The only good thing about it was the introduction of dynamic content and smart NPCs. That would really help a future version of EQ if the new company is smart enough to take what was good about the proposed EQ Next and combine it with what was good about EQ.
The fact that John Smedley is still there after years without any success in the MMO world is mind boggling.
This, i actually took work off that day cus i was excited, and then, it was disneyquest
"The surest way to corrupt a youth is to instruct him to hold in higher esteem those who think alike than those who think differently."
- Friedrich Nietzsche
EQN seems to have something of an identity crisis though, EQ2 post launch is probably the best example of how they keep trying to 'reinvent' or 'reimagine' the game, i think the most likely way of EQN launching, is probably to 'merge' existing, what there is of it at least, features with the current iteration of Landmark, otherwise i doubt the game will see the light of day. Of all the titles in SOE/Daybreaks catalogue, EQN is probably the furthest from completion and also the one with the most detractors, more likely they will be concentrating on H1Z1 and Planetside 2, rather than investing man power and money into a game with so much required to complete.
EQ:N? Just wait for EQ:M - Everquest Mobile. With non-stop in game adverts and flashing cash shop triggers galore.
Well just throwing darts in the dark here, but something tells me this investment company may have bought out the SOE clowns just for the sake of the IPs and their dreams of making it big in the mobile/app gaming scene - the next best thing for the greedy banker suits.
---
A proud User of [[Adblock Plus]], to block out all the bullshit paid advertisements (also read as "game reviews") spam on mmorpg.com.
----
Now after release, repeating the very same words from back then would be like preaching to the choir on this site.
Agreed. Nobody knows how far advanced in development EQN actually is, so whether it progresses or is killed in the womb is just guess work. Some aspects sounded interesting but other parts of it had me struggling to maintain interest. Whether it lives or dies I just don't care tbh.
But if it's still in its embryonic stage (as I suspect it is), I believe it will be stopped and resources diverted elsewhere.
No matter which EQ you like, or all of them for that matter, you want EQN to succeed as long as DGC holds the EQ IP. Would EQN's demise be a catalyst for the "real" successor to EQ? Um, no, not unless one of the first two iterations they scrapped was far enough along to finish on the cheap.
For fans of the franchise that are disappointed by what EQN is you should still be in it's corner. If, hypothetically, EQN is a hit and infuses DGC with gobs of revenue then maybe they would consider an EQ3 or take one of the first two and revitalize it with Forgelight, Storybricks, etc. I believe there is zero chance of that happening if EQN fails.
Another BitterVettm that believes their prayers have finally been answered ?
Hold on there...
If you think EQ:N was a disgrace to the legacy of the EQ franchise, you will probably be appalled at what's coming when Daybreak Gaming start to leverage the IP to the full...
I believe the opposite to be true, on the 'extremely remote' chance that EQN somehow releases, and is successful, which probably counts as 2 of the 3 impossible things to believe before breakfast
, i don't think it would in any way help the Everquest 'brand' as it diverges so significantly far from the IP that they could have called it anything they liked and none would have been the wiser. Fans of the franchise would probably be far happier with EQ1 + Modern graphics, end of the day, i know i would be.
Death is nothing to us, since when we are, Death has not come, and when death has come, we are not.
I was going to suggest EQ Farmville, but i think Archeage might have beaten them to it
Clearly, EQ Next is too ambitious and there is too much about it that is unproven. Given the poor track record of SOE and now Daybreak Games, they would need a miracle to be able to execute their promises and another miracle if what they create actually has traction with the MMO community.
Landmark is a big let down. Nobody even talks about it anymore. Even the MMO press and the EQ fansites have grown silent. So if Landmark is any indication of what the current team can produce, they are in big big trouble.
The EverQuest IP? What is that really except a few city names, races and a bit of lore? The original EQ lore was bare bones and that's the way it should have been. It was all about providing a foundation for the players to create their own lore, memories and experiences --- something impossible in a heavily scripted narrative MMO like WoW.
The true legacy of EverQuest is its design philosophy and the features and mechanics that come from it. That is what the new company should be leveraging. An updated EverQuest with sufficient polish combined with dynamic content is all that is needed. People are hungering for a challenging MMORPG instead of the kiddie fare that Blizzard has been producing of late.
The status quo is no longer acceptable. I predict that EQ Next will be re-imagined. I hope they bring someone with some vision and talent on to the team to set the ship right again.
Unlikely to happen under Daybreak, if the IP was sold off (distinctly possible) then it might, but chances are any buyer would just run existing games until closure.
I really don't understand such stance... had EQ been a continuation of EQ proper, it would mean yet again, more of the same rehash of old systems (that which we bemoan daily around these parts, and hold as proof the genre is stagnated and/or dead). How would that be good at all for anyone to do at this point, no matter the franchise? Whatever it turned out to be it would have to be a deviation from what came before (aka a slap in the face..)
I also have to ask why people consider landmark = EQN (minecraft reference)? I don't even care about either iteration of the franchise and I know that's not accurate...
For every minute you are angry , you lose 60 seconds of happiness."-Emerson
We can only hope that EQN is redefined into a "new" EQ.. EQN is nowhere near the point of no return in the dev cycle.. It would be easy as pie to make a U-turn, especially now that Jeff and Georgie and others are gone that were pushing niche market.. I agree the safer route and in my opinion the more attractive route would be to remake vanilla EQ into the 21st century, with some minor tweaks.. Add in some dynamic events along with "sandpark" gameplay and you have a winner..
Examples of a dynamic event would be Highkeep Hold.. For those of us that remember it from the vanilla days, you had the lookout room, guard room, "the ledge", raider room.. What I would of done with a new Highkeep Hold is make it bigger, so it accommodates more players (both solo areas and group areas).. Periodically on a random timer (every 4 - 6 hours), a crushing wave of goblins come through the one basement room, to attack and take over ALL of Highkeep Hold.. This would be very similar to Rift's zone wide invasion.. Unless there is ample player defense to stop it, Highkeep will be lost.. If Highkeep is lost, the goblin forces will weaken over time (2 hours) until enough players or NPC retake the Hold again..
Using vanilla EQ as the base, adding in some Rift invasions, and some GW2 local dynamic events, I believe you could have a game world that is static enough to count on, but variable enough to keep you wanting to play and not get bored too quickly.. There should be static camps, and for the LOVE OF THE GAME, bring back roaming mobs.. I would also love to see some contested areas like what WoW did in Nagrand as well.. Maybe an outpost village in Rathe Mountains is contested regularly between the two factions..
WHile the rest of the gaming space labels it yet again a step toward greater stagnation...
For every minute you are angry , you lose 60 seconds of happiness."-Emerson
I'm glad too because everything they showed was meh and al the good stuff was just a dev speak not to be taken seriously. Disney art style alone dropped my interest almost to zero. They should have named it something different instead of EQ.
Would like to play a new Everquest game though.
The Abomination they showed us and labeled EverquestNext is nothing like Everquest. I think we can all agree on that, it is obvious enough.
Not to say EQN would not appeal to some people. Maybe even a lot of people. But saying it is a game for EQ lovers is a HUGE slap in the face. All i saw from EQN is exactly the OPPOSITE i remember my EQ and the OPPOSITE of what i want from a sequel.
Yes i DO want old and "stagnant" mechanics. I joined the MMO genre because i liked those. I left because they removed them from modern games. Staying with stuff that was fun is not exactly bad you know. You can label it stagnation all you want. All the "evolution" we got was and is crap.
MMOs finally replaced social interaction, forced grouping and standing in a line while talking to eachother.
Now we have forced soloing, forced questing and everyone is the hero, without ever having to talk to anyone else. The evolution of multiplayer is here! We won,... right?
It's not I that cares about such things, I wouldn't play it either way personally, I have no interest in EQ or anything to do with it. That doesn't change that this is the reality with MMORPGs right now. Like it or not it is what it is.... I don't like it much either, but hey few games are truly dead in the MMO world..
EQ's real spirit died when it became a major IP in the gaming space, it became whatever may make money at that point..That was long ago.
For every minute you are angry , you lose 60 seconds of happiness."-Emerson
I think all games can make money, even the smaller ones.. But yeah I agree with the drift of what you're saying, when the focus comes down to maximum return on investment, games change.. Businesses today are all about min/max profits.. It doesn't matter to them that 100 employees can generate 10 million in profits, it comes down to " can we use that same 100 people making 12 million instead by changing the business".. I think that is why we see so many short lived games..
Played the older Everquest games and I'm still excited for EQN. And I'm going to stay this way until there is either an official announcement about game development being stopped or I get my hands on the finished product and I don't like what I play.
It still baffles me that everyone is complaining about the stagnation of MMO games, yet when a game tries to be different from its predecessor its called a slap in the face of the one and only "true" fans.
And yet ironically, over 10 million people are still more than willing to play World of Warcraft, but the problem really is that you assume there is stagnation, because so many games are 'dying' particularly the more recent ones, when really its just a sign that players are less likely to put up with 'half baked' or 'shoddy' games etc, than before. There is a difference between stagnation and a 'glut' a rather important one i feel