Howdy, Stranger!
It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!
Quick Links
EQ3?
achellis
Member Posts: 542
they need to take aspects of both EQ2 and Vanguard and make EQ3 but not under SOE.
Comments
Never happening.
|Mortal Online|Gnostaria|
Would be a pitty imo if they didn't at least give it one more effort to continue such a lore rich universe such as Norath. I think they owe it to their fan base considering how much EQ2 differed from EQ1, maybe they could consolidate some of the ideas and come up with something both the fans of 2 and original would love.
first off not gonna happen, when EQ1 and EQ2 is going strong, and second SOE will never give up the rights.
Then who pray tell would, considering both are owned by SOE.
Bring it on- as long as it's not like Everquest 2..
Playing the original one today and I still see what makes it good- rich fantasy, interesting dungeons with desirable loot, rpg- it's night when it's night, factions- that add to it being a believable fantasy world, straight-forward and inherently fantasy abilities(SoW is simple- run speed), and a surprising mention that I noted today- Everquest did actually have a core solo element - zones like Karana were various class' playing grounds in the original world.
EQ2 has rich fantasy, intersting dungeons with desirable loot, straight-forward fantasy abilities (SoW), and solo elements.
/my $0.02
EQ2 has rich fantasy, intersting dungeons with desirable loot, straight-forward fantasy abilities (SoW), and solo elements.
/my $0.02
Hehe. Yeah.
EQ2 has all of this in abundance. I think spades07 means Vanguard.
EQ2 has rich fantasy, intersting dungeons with desirable loot, straight-forward fantasy abilities (SoW), and solo elements.
/my $0.02
Hehe. Yeah.
EQ2 has all of this in abundance. I think spades07 means Vanguard.
Read his first line
"Originally posted by spades07
Bring it on- as long as it's not like Everquest 2.."
EQ2 has rich fantasy, intersting dungeons with desirable loot, straight-forward fantasy abilities (SoW), and solo elements.
/my $0.02
Hehe. Yeah.
EQ2 has all of this in abundance. I think spades07 means Vanguard.
Read his first line
"Originally posted by spades07
Bring it on- as long as it's not like Everquest 2.."
I did.
Like I said, I think spades07 means Vanguard.
EQ2 has rich fantasy, intersting dungeons with desirable loot, straight-forward fantasy abilities (SoW), and solo elements.
/my $0.02
Hehe. Yeah.
EQ2 has all of this in abundance. I think spades07 means Vanguard.
Read his first line
"Originally posted by spades07
Bring it on- as long as it's not like Everquest 2.."
I did.
Like I said, I think spades07 means Vanguard.
Ah, I get it now!
Theres no need to put the number three at the end of the EverQuest name.
Just redo the first EverQuest game with a modern 3D engine.
They could call it EverQuest: The New Origin or something.
Exactly! I have always wondered why developers make a "sequel" when the original is going just a strong. What they should have done was take the money to develop EQ2 and put it into EQ1 with graphical updates and such.
_______
|___
\_______/
=
|X| \*........*/ |X|
|X|_________|X|
You wouldn't understand
Exactly! I have always wondered why developers make a "sequel" when the original is going just a strong. What they should have done was take the money to develop EQ2 and put it into EQ1 with graphical updates and such.
I meant making a new game from scratch but making it as close to the original EverQuest as possible.
But do steal the UI from WoW because that is a good one.
I find it funny people are looking back on EQ 1 as one of the best MMORPG's ever.
Yet they forget how everybody and their grandmother complained about
Guilds kill stealing raid mobs
People perma camping great xp spots
Over camped areas with long lists
Mob trains
Griefing caused by people training
Ridiculous time sinks on everything
The list goes on.
This was my first MMORPG experience starting in april 99'. I thought the game was awesome back then but today i have much higher standards.
If there are things that i miss, it's the old non instanced dungeons where you could run into other players and assist them with bad pulls or resurrections if some of them wiped. Instances has effectivly killed a great aspect of meeting new people in the new MMORPGS today.
Second would be the number of classes you chould choose from and buffs that had a great impact on combat. I maybe be the only one but i have always prefered the holy trinity in my MMORPG of choice. Tank, Healer, Crowd controller etc. Today games are trying to make any group setup work. Some may love the fact they don't have to search for certain classes to do stuff but me personally, i always loved making a class that was needed or make one that could solo in a group driven game.
Vanguard came close to nailing what i wanted from a MMORPG. Too bad the game was nearly unplayable and now on the way out.
EQ2 sucked donkey b***s. I played from the beginning and had a hard time getting over the fact you couldn't help others in encounters unless they /help and forfitted the right to xp and loot. Let alone the constant changes to gear one day making everything bind on equip only to change it back shortly after. Then making it bind on equip again. Then the mount speed nerfs came just as i had bought my new mount. I would never want a MMORPG be anything like EQ2 if i were to play it.
I'm all for EQ3 but i don't miss all the bad from EQ1 and EQ2
I wish they would come up with an entirely new fantasy IP. Everquest had its day and its gone baby gone.
I would actually like to see something that mixes the beautiful anime/manga art style and character models with western gameplay.
throw in some decent PvP and RvR and I'm all for it.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Guys! I'm hopelessly lost in a mountain of mole hills! Them damn moles!
i only wish that they could set their corporate differences aside and create better EQ for us.
They'll have large monetary return for sure.
[quote]Originally posted by Fibsdk
[b]I find it funny people are looking back on EQ 1 as one of the best MMORPG's ever.
Yet they forget how everybody and their grandmother complained about
Guilds kill stealing raid mobs
People perma camping great xp spots
Over camped areas with long lists
Mob trains
Griefing caused by people training
Ridiculous time sinks on everything
The list goes on.
[/quote]
There's no doubt Everquest had it's flaws. (Trains wasn't one of them (cough))
To be fair it did fix some of those annoyances you mention from Beta- shared xp debt(worst idea ever in a grouping mmo) but you can say that again- it does suck donkey balls.
As to:
To me it was a cardboard cutout of a mmorpg. I didn't find it's dungeons interesting, the abilities in EQ and EQ2 were very different. Combos? The abilities were more like WoW than that of Everquest to be honest.
Exactly! I have always wondered why developers make a "sequel" when the original is going just a strong. What they should have done was take the money to develop EQ2 and put it into EQ1 with graphical updates and such.
SOE wanted a more solo friendly EQ and focus EQ for raiding.
Agreed. It is rare enough to see sequels in the MMORPG market. To see a third EQ would be very counter productive, as most the subs would come from the previous 2 EQs. I never got into EQ 1 because I loved UO and I never got into EQ 2 because it just wasn't my thing, but a 3rd would be enticing. Buy hey, what wouldn't be enticing at this stage in the MMO market with all the crap that is out there?
EQ2: A game that had a massive core revision of its basic design elements might not be a good candidate.
Vanguard: A game that is down to 4 servers is definitely not a good candidate.
EQ3: Wonderful idea. I think this would be magnificient if they sold the IP to Blizzard (for polish), with the latter adding in a stinging death penalty, an open world, and trains, trains, trains....
The EQ 3 concept is appealing but would, most-likely, be an enormous "flop."
The reason is that EQ 3 would be competing with itself; it would be ocmpeting with EQ 1 and EQ 2 customers, and those games as a result would drain players.
The old EQ 1 people would want an EQ 3 created in EQ 1's image, and EQ 2 people, especially those who never experienced EQ 1, would expect an EQ 2-like game. The devastating consequence, even if EQ 3 were superior to EQ 1 and 2 combined, is that no one would be satisfied. And, attempting to appeal to both runs the risk of totally alienating non-EQ 1 and non-EQ 2 players. And trying to appeal to all (EQ 1, EQ 2, and non-EQ people) runs the deeply devastating risk of not appealing to any of them.
Yes. WE Want World Immersion, Character Customization, Challenge, Inter Alia - But Do Not Title It "EQ 3" - That Would Only Invite Drama, Dissatisfaction, and Worse (Total Alienation of Old EQ 1/2 Players and New Non-EQ Players)
An EQ 3 Would Never Be Judged On Its Own "Merits"
eq3 is out its called Vanguard......I know it had a horrible launch and they dont have many subs...but this game is as close eq3 as we will ever likely see.
Sequels are the antithesis of persistent worlds.
Too bad I can't think of any MMOs off the top of my head that have a true persistent world.