I'm a huge fan of vanilla EQ, but not so much modern EQ due to all the changes.. EQ2 I was never a fan of, because it's just a poor copy of World of Warcraft.. In fact the original EQ2 that came out of the box was horrid.. I was one of the original players on launch day that LEFT EQ2 rather quickly along with thousands of others..
EQ2 Release date: 9.11.2004
WOW release date: 23.11.2004
Please explain how EQ2 could be a poor copy of WoW...
Easy.. (take notes).. Current EQ2 is "nothing" like the original EQ2 that was launched.. I think you confused my comment about WoW as meaning that original EQ2 was like WoW.. But lets not fool ourselves that the patches and changes in EQ2 over the years is to mirror that of WoW..
I fool myself then. Could be true if you look at just a few aspects of the game (f.i. BGs, planned x-server dungeon finder), and perhaps if comparing to a very early version of WoW. EQ2 has trivialized some complexity, WoW has wiped all complexity off the table. But; EQ2 as it stands today is probably more different from WoW anno 2015 than ever.
Please note (literally) that the biggest added EQ2 patches/features like dungeon maker, true housing/decorating/guild halls and mercenaries are features that have never been in WoW. It's pretty fun (had to check) that even reforging (which is removed from WoW in the latest expansion) came to EQ2 (Age of Discovery) a day or two before WoW got it (Cataclysm) Now WoW implements level downscaling to old dungeons. I wonder where that idea came from...
Sorry for the off-topic, but just couldn't let a "EQ2 = WoW-copy" comment pass by quietly. It's just too plain wrong
I'm a huge fan of vanilla EQ, but not so much modern EQ due to all the changes.. EQ2 I was never a fan of, because it's just a poor copy of World of Warcraft.. In fact the original EQ2 that came out of the box was horrid.. I was one of the original players on launch day that LEFT EQ2 rather quickly along with thousands of others..
EQ2 Release date: 9.11.2004
WOW release date: 23.11.2004
Please explain how EQ2 could be a poor copy of WoW...
Easy.. (take notes).. Current EQ2 is "nothing" like the original EQ2 that was launched.. I think you confused my comment about WoW as meaning that original EQ2 was like WoW.. But lets not fool ourselves that the patches and changes in EQ2 over the years is to mirror that of WoW..
What's your point? Sorry I haven't followed the thread all that much. If eq2 borrowed from WoW then WoW borrowed from the original EQ. Mmos do that. They take from each game. I think people forget that EQ is basically the god father of mmos... Some will say ultimate online but I strongly disagree. UO was a Diablo esque style game with some open ended features. I played it for awhile. EQ IS the father of mmos. Am I excited for eqnext? I was until I saw the combat. The graphics I can get by. The gameplay however is nothing short of disappointing . As well as the lack of any trinity and action oriented combat . No group structure.
I'm a huge fan of vanilla EQ, but not so much modern EQ due to all the changes.. EQ2 I was never a fan of, because it's just a poor copy of World of Warcraft.. In fact the original EQ2 that came out of the box was horrid.. I was one of the original players on launch day that LEFT EQ2 rather quickly along with thousands of others..
EQ2 Release date: 9.11.2004
WOW release date: 23.11.2004
Please explain how EQ2 could be a poor copy of WoW...
Easy.. (take notes).. Current EQ2 is "nothing" like the original EQ2 that was launched.. I think you confused my comment about WoW as meaning that original EQ2 was like WoW.. But lets not fool ourselves that the patches and changes in EQ2 over the years is to mirror that of WoW..
I fool myself then. Could be true if you look at just a few aspects of the game (f.i. BGs, planned x-server dungeon finder), and perhaps if comparing to a very early version of WoW. EQ2 has trivialized some complexity, WoW has wiped all complexity off the table. But; EQ2 as it stands today is probably more different from WoW anno 2015 than ever.
Please note (literally) that the biggest added EQ2 patches/features like dungeon maker, true housing/decorating/guild halls and mercenaries are features that have never been in WoW. It's pretty fun (had to check) that even reforging (which is removed from WoW in the latest expansion) came to EQ2 (Age of Discovery) a day or two before WoW got it (Cataclysm) Now WoW implements level downscaling to old dungeons. I wonder where that idea came from...
Sorry for the off-topic, but just couldn't let a "EQ2 = WoW-copy" comment pass by quietly. It's just too plain wrong
The point wasn't that EQ2 at release was a WoW clone, but over time SOE removed many of the things that were special about EQ2 and replaced or added things that were directly from WoW. They were certainly trying to make EQ2 more like WoW in order to attract WoW players to EQ2.
The irony is that not only did EQ2 not attract WoW players, but the "wowification" of EQ2 actually drove their current base away.
Obviously all games borrow ideas from each other and a few specific examples can be pointed to for any two games, but SOE really put effort into changing EQ2 to be more like WoW. You will find this same theme echoed from EQ2 players past and present about SOE trying to make EQ2 into WoW and not doing a good job of it.
Lastly, there is a reason WoW doesn't have instanced housing or guild halls. Both of those take players out of the living world and hide them in private areas and make the capital cities look like ghost towns. Both are great ideas in concept, but when implemented poorly they actually do harm to the game.
I'm a huge fan of vanilla EQ, but not so much modern EQ due to all the changes.. EQ2 I was never a fan of, because it's just a poor copy of World of Warcraft.. In fact the original EQ2 that came out of the box was horrid.. I was one of the original players on launch day that LEFT EQ2 rather quickly along with thousands of others..
EQ2 Release date: 9.11.2004
WOW release date: 23.11.2004
Please explain how EQ2 could be a poor copy of WoW...
Easy.. (take notes).. Current EQ2 is "nothing" like the original EQ2 that was launched.. I think you confused my comment about WoW as meaning that original EQ2 was like WoW.. But lets not fool ourselves that the patches and changes in EQ2 over the years is to mirror that of WoW..
I fool myself then. Could be true if you look at just a few aspects of the game (f.i. BGs, planned x-server dungeon finder), and perhaps if comparing to a very early version of WoW. EQ2 has trivialized some complexity, WoW has wiped all complexity off the table. But; EQ2 as it stands today is probably more different from WoW anno 2015 than ever.
Please note (literally) that the biggest added EQ2 patches/features like dungeon maker, true housing/decorating/guild halls and mercenaries are features that have never been in WoW. It's pretty fun (had to check) that even reforging (which is removed from WoW in the latest expansion) came to EQ2 (Age of Discovery) a day or two before WoW got it (Cataclysm) Now WoW implements level downscaling to old dungeons. I wonder where that idea came from...
Sorry for the off-topic, but just couldn't let a "EQ2 = WoW-copy" comment pass by quietly. It's just too plain wrong
The point wasn't that EQ2 at release was a WoW clone, but over time SOE removed many of the things that were special about EQ2 and replaced or added things that were directly from WoW. They were certainly trying to make EQ2 more like WoW in order to attract WoW players to EQ2.
The irony is that not only did EQ2 not attract WoW players, but the "wowification" of EQ2 actually drove their current base away.
Obviously all games borrow ideas from each other and a few specific examples can be pointed to for any two games, but SOE really put effort into changing EQ2 to be more like WoW. You will find this same theme echoed from EQ2 players past and present about SOE trying to make EQ2 into WoW and not doing a good job of it.
Lastly, there is a reason WoW doesn't have instanced housing or guild halls. Both of those take players out of the living world and hide them in private areas and make the capital cities look like ghost towns. Both are great ideas in concept, but when implemented poorly they actually do harm to the game.
I got the point. As I said, correct for a few things, but the "stealing" goes both ways and the WoW copycat accuses are blown out of proportions.
Blizzard don't care about keeping a living world. If so, they would never created Garrisons and killed gathering by doing tradeskillers self sufficient in a single player instance. At max level WoW is mostly a lobby game, which is a pity since it got such an interesting, seamless and beautifully crafted world.
On topic: I am not hyped about EQN, as it appearantly takes a direction away from my favorite type of mmos - Vanguard style. Mmo action combat was refreshing the first time I tried it (Tera), but since it became the standard for most new games, I have found it to be 'meh' and not my thing. I am still interested, though. I give almost all new mmo games a chance, and since I love Norrath and eq lore I will certainly play it for a while just for the IP
Wow has its own problems, but none of them are due to trying to be like EQ2 in some attempt to lire its players away. Reading EQ2 fan sites you will see how often the actual players (current and former) reference how often SOE changes EQ2 to be like WOW. Maybe it is blown put of proportion some, but it has been a central theme players have complained and even left the game about.
This really has impact on this topic in some way. Considering how some of the fans say that EQN isn't being developed for EQ fans, but instead players who play other games or something to that effect.
It feels like history repeating itself as SOE has done this several times already and it has never worked out. If the EQ property can't even interest the EQ fans, then who exactly is it supposed to draw in?
It feels like history repeating itself as SOE has done this several times already and it has never worked out. If the EQ property can't even interest the EQ fans, then who exactly is it supposed to draw in?
This assumes that "EQ fans" are all against what EQN is, or is supposed to be just because EQN is not going to be exactly like the previous EQs. I don't see EQN as trying to be like WoW, the features and gameplay are completely different on paper. In fact, other than subjective connections to the art style what is similar? Maybe it's the want to provide features they think a large majority will want to play? If so, what is wrong with that? Since when is wanting to provide something people want to play bad? Because one group doesn't feel they are getting exclusive attention?
When EQ released it offered something that was not already available in the same form. If DGC continues with what they've previously said they will do that again with EQN. They may completely fall flat on their face but IMO coming with something fresh that provides critical end results is better than following the same ruts with tweaks here and there.
Wow has its own problems, but none of them are due to trying to be like EQ2 in some attempt to lire its players away. Reading EQ2 fan sites you will see how often the actual players (current and former) reference how often SOE changes EQ2 to be like WOW. Maybe it is blown put of proportion some, but it has been a central theme players have complained and even left the game about.
This really has impact on this topic in some way. Considering how some of the fans say that EQN isn't being developed for EQ fans, but instead players who play other games or something to that effect.
It feels like history repeating itself as SOE has done this several times already and it has never worked out. If the EQ property can't even interest the EQ fans, then who exactly is it supposed to draw in?
This does have a certain amount of Deja Vu, the whole SWG debacle was due to SOE/LA trying to remodel the game to try and 'catch' some of the WoW effect, they failed, and it seems like since then they have continued to try and chase after that WoW dream with everything they have tried to create since, and probably was a significant factor in EQ2's multiple 'rewrites'.
Even the earlier failures associated with EQN where they have had to 'do over' several times, indicates a lack of clear direction, and now that they have reduced their dev teams in size by a considerable amount, i find it hard to believe that continued game design is even within the scope of their current resources, it would not surprise me at all to find that EQN has been shelved while manpower/resources are perhaps diverted into other money making activities, such as expansions or DLC's for existing games, costly undertakings such as game design for a game so many years away from even alpha state, are probably beyond their means.
It feels like history repeating itself as SOE has done this several times already and it has never worked out. If the EQ property can't even interest the EQ fans, then who exactly is it supposed to draw in?
This assumes that "EQ fans" are all against what EQN is, or is supposed to be just because EQN is not going to be exactly like the previous EQs. I don't see EQN as trying to be like WoW, the features and gameplay are completely different on paper. In fact, other than subjective connections to the art style what is similar? Maybe it's the want to provide features they think a large majority will want to play? If so, what is wrong with that? Since when is wanting to provide something people want to play bad? Because one group doesn't feel they are getting exclusive attention?
When EQ released it offered something that was not already available in the same form. If DGC continues with what they've previously said they will do that again with EQN. They may completely fall flat on their face but IMO coming with something fresh that provides critical end results is better than following the same ruts with tweaks here and there.
I'm not really sure what you are addressing.
The point wasn't that EQN looks like WoW or it is going to be another WoW clone. The point was that SOE (now daybreak) has a history of designing their games aimed at people who are not their customer, while at the same time making changes that go against the interests of their current customers. The end result has always been they never get the potential customers and alienate many of their existing.
This isn't about EQ fans getting "exclusive" attention. Comments like that and "EQN isn't for EQ players" seems like reactionary defensive comments to be honest. Though I do think that the poor reception of the EQN reveals came as a surprise to many, especially SOE. It was shortly after that where they went totally dark about the games development, which honeslty has me worried they are going through yet more changes.
I can certainly see how some fans of the franchise were surprised at the reveal because of expectations. The "model" of "EverQuest" is the only within the first too titles and on some points they are different than EQN. My main focus is on the meta gameplay aspects. Does the world feel vast and full of adventure? Is the world actually "dangerous"? Do you have a reason to group and does gameplay require some mastery?
If EQN fails at answering these basic questions as a yes then I'll agree it's not "EverQuest." These are points left unknown currently though so I told out hope.
As I've said before I'd play a graphical reboot of EQ with new tech in a heartbeat. In fact my cousin and I are patiently awaiting the release of the new progression server.
Yeah, if SOE has also shown some hint of those goals during the reveals I think more would have remained interested. Especially in the aspects you note.
The graphics do look a lot like Free Realms and the combat like DCU. While not deal breakers for me personally, they do not look like much to be excited about.
The better aspects of the game seem to be all on paper at this point, which also isn't very reassuring.
1. Really the only thing IMO that EQ2 did to make itself more like WoW when I played was making the game more casual / solo friendly. At the beginning EQ2 probably had more quests than WoW did but at the same time you could skip them and just camp mobs but many required help.
2. SWG was going to die with or without the NGE.
3. EQN - Really no idea what they are shooting for.. They have nearly nothing extra to show since the reveal. I dont really care anymore. I always likened it to them trying to remake Free Realms instead of EverQuest. The EQ name just has far more pull than a previous failed kid game.
They also need to start firing the know nothings starting with Rosie.
I have a feeling it won't be the kind of game I want to play by the time it releases. My hunch is the game will taste like "2017's casual grab bag mmo"... or whatever year the game is released in.
Originally posted by Aelious Rosie a know-nothing that should be fired?
Bahahahaha!
No seriously, the art lead on almost every DGC title is a know-nothing? We have reached epicness here.
Yes. A know nothing. What exactly has she done? All she does is critique in an non constructive way all the while not showing anything she has ever done. She knows nothing about EQ.
There are many people that hold positions that really have no idea about anything. Quite sad really.
You do realize she was the art lead for EQ, from the very beginning, no? And other titles after? Also, you only see what she's done with the critiques on LL but are not there at work, right? I know we all think highly of ourselves but to assume just because we don't see it, it doesn't happen. Which isn't really true since we have seen art on the style guides, past reveals from Lives, etc. I get that the art style for EQN is controversial here but when you say she holds a position where she has no idea about anything? There's simply no grounds for it, sorry.
You do realize she was the art lead for EQ, from the very beginning, no? And other titles after? Also, you only see what she's done with the critiques on LL but are not there at work, right? I know we all think highly of ourselves but to assume just because we don't see it, it doesn't happen. Which isn't really true since we have seen art on the style guides, past reveals from Lives, etc. I get that the art style for EQN is controversial here but when you say she holds a position where she has no idea about anything? There's simply no grounds for it, sorry.
Pretty much this. Although I found her using the "Uncanny Valley" video from "Extra Credits" as justification a bit problematic.
My own feel is that much of the art style was determined by the ''need''' to provide a better face for the SOE Emote stuff to actually work. This was very much a Dave Georgeson driven technology. My problem with it (and the resultant art style) is what game purpose does the mapping of my expression on to the Avatar I am currently playing actually have?
BTW the art style such as it is would have been chosen by a group of folks including Gerogeson from a range of alternatives. It may not have been her preferred style at all.
You do realize she was the art lead for EQ, from the very beginning, no? And other titles after? Also, you only see what she's done with the critiques on LL but are not there at work, right? I know we all think highly of ourselves but to assume just because we don't see it, it doesn't happen. Which isn't really true since we have seen art on the style guides, past reveals from Lives, etc. I get that the art style for EQN is controversial here but when you say she holds a position where she has no idea about anything? There's simply no grounds for it, sorry.
Pretty much this. Although I found her using the "Uncanny Valley" video from "Extra Credits" as justification a bit problematic.
My own feel is that much of the art style was determined by the ''need''' to provide a better face for the SOE Emote stuff to actually work. This was very much a Dave Georgeson driven technology. My problem with it (and the resultant art style) is what game purpose does the mapping of my expression on to the Avatar I am currently playing actually have?
BTW the art style such as it is would have been chosen by a group of folks including Gerogeson from a range of alternatives. It may not have been her preferred style at all.
I'm sure there were many points considered for the art style but you are correct in that we don't know what influences there were and how strong each was. When weighing the options I can see why they went with the more cartoony stylized look.
SoEMote is fantastic from a gameplay standpoint IMO but I have concerns. The first is it's inclusion in LM/EQN. It was in an early "blueprint" for LM but has since gone away. It's a proprietary technology by Vivox so there could be license expiration issues. The second is performance. In EQ2 it gave a pretty big hit to performance and I'm not sure how much more work has been put in to optimize it.
That aside it's inclusion would be great from a social standpoint. SoEMote combined with the already implemented proximity chat would mean being able to walk up to people and "talk" to them with our avatars. Although in EQ2 the mouths looked strange at times EQN characters may give a more natural look. I hope they include it.
Originally posted by Aelious Rosie a know-nothing that should be fired?
Bahahahaha!
No seriously, the art lead on almost every DGC title is a know-nothing? We have reached epicness here.
Yes. A know nothing. What exactly has she done? All she does is critique in an non constructive way all the while not showing anything she has ever done. She knows nothing about EQ.
There are many people that hold positions that really have no idea about anything. Quite sad really.
Exactly. Keeping her was one of several big mistakes that sent EQN down the drains from the start.
I was waiting for EQN for years and was all excited about it until the reveal and it broke my heart to see what they had done to the EQ. fancies.
Graphics,combat style and classes balances are totally wrong for what EQ ment to a lot of its fans. Making it free to play also total killed this game for me.
I am looking forward to the new progression server and will be playing that for the next few years in EQ. So DBG are doinging something right and maybe they will sort out what a mess SOE did with EQN.
I was waiting for EQN for years and was all excited about it until the reveal and it broke my heart to see what they had done to the EQ. fancies.
Graphics,combat style and classes balances are totally wrong for what EQ ment to a lot of its fans. Making it free to play also total killed this game for me.
I am looking forward to the new progression server and will be playing that for the next few years in EQ. So DBG are doinging something right and maybe they will sort out what a mess SOE did with EQN.
I may have to make a return to the ole game then if there is a retro server starting.. I have some friend currently playing EQ, and some others that have never played EQ but enjoy RPG gaming.. Sounds like a good reason to go back to old school
Originally posted by Aelious Rosie a know-nothing that should be fired?
Bahahahaha!
No seriously, the art lead on almost every DGC title is a know-nothing? We have reached epicness here.
Yes. A know nothing. What exactly has she done? All she does is critique in an non constructive way all the while not showing anything she has ever done. She knows nothing about EQ.
There are many people that hold positions that really have no idea about anything. Quite sad really.
Exactly. Keeping her was one of several big mistakes that sent EQN down the drains from the start.
I was waiting for EQN for years and was all excited about it until the reveal and it broke my heart to see what they had done to the EQ. fancies.
Graphics,combat style and classes balances are totally wrong for what EQ ment to a lot of its fans. Making it free to play also total killed this game for me.
I am looking forward to the new progression server and will be playing that for the next few years in EQ. So DBG are doinging something right and maybe they will sort out what a mess SOE did with EQN.
EQ1 or EQ2 is doing a new progression server and when?!?! I may have to hop on this!
I was waiting for EQN for years and was all excited about it until the reveal and it broke my heart to see what they had done to the EQ. fancies.
Graphics,combat style and classes balances are totally wrong for what EQ ment to a lot of its fans. Making it free to play also total killed this game for me.
I am looking forward to the new progression server and will be playing that for the next few years in EQ. So DBG are doinging something right and maybe they will sort out what a mess SOE did with EQN.
EQ1 or EQ2 is doing a new progression server and when?!?! I may have to hop on this!
EQ1 and it is planned to come out "soon". Summer or early fall, but I dont recall their estimate, so take that with lumps of salt.
However I do think it is going to have all the modern EQ additions that turned EQ from a social grouping game into some Frankenstein multiboxing mercenary single player game.
Hopefully I'm wrong, but there are other options for a real classic everquest experience available.
They have polls up too I think to ask players how they think the progression server should go. It is going to have some modern features but hopefully the difficulty and level progression time is "older."
Comments
I fool myself then. Could be true if you look at just a few aspects of the game (f.i. BGs, planned x-server dungeon finder), and perhaps if comparing to a very early version of WoW. EQ2 has trivialized some complexity, WoW has wiped all complexity off the table. But; EQ2 as it stands today is probably more different from WoW anno 2015 than ever.
Please note (literally) that the biggest added EQ2 patches/features like dungeon maker, true housing/decorating/guild halls and mercenaries are features that have never been in WoW. It's pretty fun (had to check) that even reforging (which is removed from WoW in the latest expansion) came to EQ2 (Age of Discovery) a day or two before WoW got it (Cataclysm)
Now WoW implements level downscaling to old dungeons. I wonder where that idea came from...
Sorry for the off-topic, but just couldn't let a "EQ2 = WoW-copy" comment pass by quietly. It's just too plain wrong
What's your point? Sorry I haven't followed the thread all that much. If eq2 borrowed from WoW then WoW borrowed from the original EQ. Mmos do that. They take from each game. I think people forget that EQ is basically the god father of mmos... Some will say ultimate online but I strongly disagree. UO was a Diablo esque style game with some open ended features. I played it for awhile. EQ IS the father of mmos. Am I excited for eqnext? I was until I saw the combat. The graphics I can get by. The gameplay however is nothing short of disappointing . As well as the lack of any trinity and action oriented combat . No group structure.
The point wasn't that EQ2 at release was a WoW clone, but over time SOE removed many of the things that were special about EQ2 and replaced or added things that were directly from WoW. They were certainly trying to make EQ2 more like WoW in order to attract WoW players to EQ2.
The irony is that not only did EQ2 not attract WoW players, but the "wowification" of EQ2 actually drove their current base away.
Obviously all games borrow ideas from each other and a few specific examples can be pointed to for any two games, but SOE really put effort into changing EQ2 to be more like WoW. You will find this same theme echoed from EQ2 players past and present about SOE trying to make EQ2 into WoW and not doing a good job of it.
Lastly, there is a reason WoW doesn't have instanced housing or guild halls. Both of those take players out of the living world and hide them in private areas and make the capital cities look like ghost towns. Both are great ideas in concept, but when implemented poorly they actually do harm to the game.
I got the point. As I said, correct for a few things, but the "stealing" goes both ways and the WoW copycat accuses are blown out of proportions.
Blizzard don't care about keeping a living world. If so, they would never created Garrisons and killed gathering by doing tradeskillers self sufficient in a single player instance. At max level WoW is mostly a lobby game, which is a pity since it got such an interesting, seamless and beautifully crafted world.
On topic: I am not hyped about EQN, as it appearantly takes a direction away from my favorite type of mmos - Vanguard style. Mmo action combat was refreshing the first time I tried it (Tera), but since it became the standard for most new games, I have found it to be 'meh' and not my thing. I am still interested, though. I give almost all new mmo games a chance, and since I love Norrath and eq lore I will certainly play it for a while just for the IP
Wow has its own problems, but none of them are due to trying to be like EQ2 in some attempt to lire its players away. Reading EQ2 fan sites you will see how often the actual players (current and former) reference how often SOE changes EQ2 to be like WOW. Maybe it is blown put of proportion some, but it has been a central theme players have complained and even left the game about.
This really has impact on this topic in some way. Considering how some of the fans say that EQN isn't being developed for EQ fans, but instead players who play other games or something to that effect.
It feels like history repeating itself as SOE has done this several times already and it has never worked out. If the EQ property can't even interest the EQ fans, then who exactly is it supposed to draw in?
This assumes that "EQ fans" are all against what EQN is, or is supposed to be just because EQN is not going to be exactly like the previous EQs. I don't see EQN as trying to be like WoW, the features and gameplay are completely different on paper. In fact, other than subjective connections to the art style what is similar? Maybe it's the want to provide features they think a large majority will want to play? If so, what is wrong with that? Since when is wanting to provide something people want to play bad? Because one group doesn't feel they are getting exclusive attention?
When EQ released it offered something that was not already available in the same form. If DGC continues with what they've previously said they will do that again with EQN. They may completely fall flat on their face but IMO coming with something fresh that provides critical end results is better than following the same ruts with tweaks here and there.
This does have a certain amount of Deja Vu, the whole SWG debacle was due to SOE/LA trying to remodel the game to try and 'catch' some of the WoW effect, they failed, and it seems like since then they have continued to try and chase after that WoW dream with everything they have tried to create since, and probably was a significant factor in EQ2's multiple 'rewrites'.
Even the earlier failures associated with EQN where they have had to 'do over' several times, indicates a lack of clear direction, and now that they have reduced their dev teams in size by a considerable amount, i find it hard to believe that continued game design is even within the scope of their current resources, it would not surprise me at all to find that EQN has been shelved while manpower/resources are perhaps diverted into other money making activities, such as expansions or DLC's for existing games, costly undertakings such as game design for a game so many years away from even alpha state, are probably beyond their means.
I'm not really sure what you are addressing.
The point wasn't that EQN looks like WoW or it is going to be another WoW clone. The point was that SOE (now daybreak) has a history of designing their games aimed at people who are not their customer, while at the same time making changes that go against the interests of their current customers. The end result has always been they never get the potential customers and alienate many of their existing.
This isn't about EQ fans getting "exclusive" attention. Comments like that and "EQN isn't for EQ players" seems like reactionary defensive comments to be honest. Though I do think that the poor reception of the EQN reveals came as a surprise to many, especially SOE. It was shortly after that where they went totally dark about the games development, which honeslty has me worried they are going through yet more changes.
I can certainly see how some fans of the franchise were surprised at the reveal because of expectations. The "model" of "EverQuest" is the only within the first too titles and on some points they are different than EQN. My main focus is on the meta gameplay aspects. Does the world feel vast and full of adventure? Is the world actually "dangerous"? Do you have a reason to group and does gameplay require some mastery?
If EQN fails at answering these basic questions as a yes then I'll agree it's not "EverQuest." These are points left unknown currently though so I told out hope.
As I've said before I'd play a graphical reboot of EQ with new tech in a heartbeat. In fact my cousin and I are patiently awaiting the release of the new progression server.
Yeah, if SOE has also shown some hint of those goals during the reveals I think more would have remained interested. Especially in the aspects you note.
The graphics do look a lot like Free Realms and the combat like DCU. While not deal breakers for me personally, they do not look like much to be excited about.
The better aspects of the game seem to be all on paper at this point, which also isn't very reassuring.
1. Really the only thing IMO that EQ2 did to make itself more like WoW when I played was making the game more casual / solo friendly. At the beginning EQ2 probably had more quests than WoW did but at the same time you could skip them and just camp mobs but many required help.
2. SWG was going to die with or without the NGE.
3. EQN - Really no idea what they are shooting for.. They have nearly nothing extra to show since the reveal. I dont really care anymore. I always likened it to them trying to remake Free Realms instead of EverQuest. The EQ name just has far more pull than a previous failed kid game.
They also need to start firing the know nothings starting with Rosie.
As per the poll..
Yes - 22.8
No - 56.2
Bahahahaha!
No seriously, the art lead on almost every DGC title is a know-nothing? We have reached epicness here.
Yes. A know nothing. What exactly has she done? All she does is critique in an non constructive way all the while not showing anything she has ever done. She knows nothing about EQ.
There are many people that hold positions that really have no idea about anything. Quite sad really.
You do realize she was the art lead for EQ, from the very beginning, no? And other titles after? Also, you only see what she's done with the critiques on LL but are not there at work, right? I know we all think highly of ourselves but to assume just because we don't see it, it doesn't happen. Which isn't really true since we have seen art on the style guides, past reveals from Lives, etc. I get that the art style for EQN is controversial here but when you say she holds a position where she has no idea about anything? There's simply no grounds for it, sorry.
Pretty much this. Although I found her using the "Uncanny Valley" video from "Extra Credits" as justification a bit problematic.
My own feel is that much of the art style was determined by the ''need''' to provide a better face for the SOE Emote stuff to actually work. This was very much a Dave Georgeson driven technology. My problem with it (and the resultant art style) is what game purpose does the mapping of my expression on to the Avatar I am currently playing actually have?
BTW the art style such as it is would have been chosen by a group of folks including Gerogeson from a range of alternatives. It may not have been her preferred style at all.
I'm sure there were many points considered for the art style but you are correct in that we don't know what influences there were and how strong each was. When weighing the options I can see why they went with the more cartoony stylized look.
SoEMote is fantastic from a gameplay standpoint IMO but I have concerns. The first is it's inclusion in LM/EQN. It was in an early "blueprint" for LM but has since gone away. It's a proprietary technology by Vivox so there could be license expiration issues. The second is performance. In EQ2 it gave a pretty big hit to performance and I'm not sure how much more work has been put in to optimize it.
That aside it's inclusion would be great from a social standpoint. SoEMote combined with the already implemented proximity chat would mean being able to walk up to people and "talk" to them with our avatars. Although in EQ2 the mouths looked strange at times EQN characters may give a more natural look. I hope they include it.
Exactly. Keeping her was one of several big mistakes that sent EQN down the drains from the start.
I was waiting for EQN for years and was all excited about it until the reveal and it broke my heart to see what they had done to the EQ. fancies.
Graphics,combat style and classes balances are totally wrong for what EQ ment to a lot of its fans. Making it free to play also total killed this game for me.
I am looking forward to the new progression server and will be playing that for the next few years in EQ. So DBG are doinging something right and maybe they will sort out what a mess SOE did with EQN.
I may have to make a return to the ole game then if there is a retro server starting.. I have some friend currently playing EQ, and some others that have never played EQ but enjoy RPG gaming.. Sounds like a good reason to go back to old school
EQ1 or EQ2 is doing a new progression server and when?!?! I may have to hop on this!
EQ1 and it is planned to come out "soon". Summer or early fall, but I dont recall their estimate, so take that with lumps of salt.
However I do think it is going to have all the modern EQ additions that turned EQ from a social grouping game into some Frankenstein multiboxing mercenary single player game.
Hopefully I'm wrong, but there are other options for a real classic everquest experience available.
no, i am not.