I'll wait till I have a complete list of thoroughly explained features before I'd answer a question like this.Right now all we have is "can't talk about this now" and promises.
trinity games last longer too - EQ - 14 years, EQ2 - 9 years, WoW - 9 years.
(i am not against faction btw, i actually want faction in, i'm just using it as an example).
Yes, trinity has been done for a long time. But that's because it works and STILL creates amazing gameplay experiences.
Every game out there seems to be doing action combat these days - TSW, NW, GW2, Tera, FE, Wildstar - does that mean that we should move away from it because it's overdone or move towards it because it's done a lot? /shrug. Personally, I can take it or leave it. I've seen well-designed action combat encounters (TSW), so i'm sold on being able to do them.
Ultimately, that's what i most care about, that when me and 20 of my friends log into EQN on the weekend, that we have a challenging, fine-tuned encounter that requires us all to play at our best to beat it. If they can do it without the trinity, i'll be thrilled with the game having no trinity. I don't need the trinity itself, i need the gameplay that i KNOW trinity can provide and that i DO NOT know that the other system can provide.
I've said this elsewhere, but will repeat it here (about trinity, action combat, limited hotbars, all that stuff):
It is entirely possible that for EQN SOE has built a UI that is SO good that it is able to ascertain the group makeup, size and strength and then build - on the fly - fine tune and test the ideal challenging encounter for that group. It's entirely possible. I just find it unlikely. Prove it and i'll buy your game and be happy with it. Until then, i'll prefer what my experience and logic tell me actually works.
"Id rather work on something with great potential than on fulfilling a promise of mediocrity."
- Raph Koster
Tried: AO,EQ,EQ2,DAoC,SWG,AA,SB,HZ,CoX,PS,GA,TR,IV,GnH,EVE, PP,DnL,WAR,MxO,SWG,FE,VG,AoC,DDO,LoTRO,Rift,TOR,Aion,Tera,TSW,GW2,DCUO,CO,STO Favourites: AO,SWG,EVE,TR,LoTRO,TSW,EQ2, Firefall Currently Playing: ESO
I want a healer, not the trinity healer, but the GW1 healer. GW1 was a multi class game with PvP and healers were a part. You can't tell me AI are smarter than players, if the AI only attack a healer then a healer will be the perfect puller and tank.
I liked the trinity, but I understand the down side, but a healer, like in GW1 wasn't the trinity or anything like it. It still was a viable class, and a very important class. You could play without one, lots did especially in HoH, but it was there and important.
Class roles will change the game from complete action combat to a hybrid system. Class roles bring back aggro, and would sort of necessitate a few more abilities as well to make the classes distinct and able to fill their class role.
Originally posted by ragz45 You can have action based combat, and still have defined roles in groups. TSW & Tera proved that. We're about to see wildstar prove it also.
Yep, TSW had action combat, wide open class system and the classic trinity roles in group. Worked great and created lots of great group encounters - without feeling at all stale on the combat front.
"Id rather work on something with great potential than on fulfilling a promise of mediocrity."
- Raph Koster
Tried: AO,EQ,EQ2,DAoC,SWG,AA,SB,HZ,CoX,PS,GA,TR,IV,GnH,EVE, PP,DnL,WAR,MxO,SWG,FE,VG,AoC,DDO,LoTRO,Rift,TOR,Aion,Tera,TSW,GW2,DCUO,CO,STO Favourites: AO,SWG,EVE,TR,LoTRO,TSW,EQ2, Firefall Currently Playing: ESO
If you could change one, and only one, feature about the game. What would you change? I'll put up a poll of the most common things people are complaining about, and then we'll see if there are a few other uncommon things people would like to change. The only thing I ask is that we keep things within the realm of possibility. i.e. at this point they are not going to scrap the entire art direction for the world.
Take out the name bait "Everquest". Expectation from the EQ1/EQ2 fans will have dropped significantly and they may actually be happy that there is a new game created by SOE, no matter what technology, graphic, gameplay and advertisement SOE put into the game.
Put a "Everquest" name there, and EQ players expect, at the minimum, Firiona Vie looks like as she is, and not some Bratz doll.
The possibility of the universe collapsing into a singularity is higher than the birth of a perfect MMORPG.
F2P model is the only thing that disappoints me in this game. I hate F2P model with a passion.
Everything else looks great. Art style is awesome and combat is awesome. Lack of trinity is not a deal breaker because they said they have a new system and what is it we still don't know.
Originally posted by Nadili None currently because there is not enough information based on what they have shown so far to know what I would want changed.
There simply isn't enough information out there to make any sort of informed response. I'll wait until I know more first.
I'll go along with the 'not enough infomation to make an informed decision'.
But, for an semi-informed WAG, I'd suggest that the voxel engine might cause many more headaches for SOE and customers. The technology is notorious for being very math heavy. Does this technology that SOE plans to use scale to a typical home computer / console? I don't think many players would like to go backwards to graphics that are far more squared off than original EQ graphics, or a view distance of only a couple of hundred feet or so. The chance of regular customer (non-existing MMORPG gamers) having the hardware to play this is problematic, and makes the voxel technology itself a pretty high risk factor.
Logic, my dear, merely enables one to be wrong with great authority.
With 120 votes at the time of this post 28% of poll respondents (the overwhelmingly largest group) wish for a change to the class system with a larger emphasis on roles and character identity. I fall into that group myself. All these pokemon collectible classes look to make characters into toolkits rather than a role you invest in. The second largest group at 18% are people who desire more flexible character art. Put those two together and I come away thinking that people want a game avatar with a role they can adopt, a purpose they can be known for in the community, and the ability to craft a unique identity for themselves online. This has been true in most games I have played yet it seems development teams are trending in another direction (the toolkit you level once) and it has me wondering why?
Comments
EQ2 had Alternate Appearance options. Maybe they'll allow players to choose between EQ:N models or their "realistic" counter-parts. Wishful thinking.
Played - M59, EQOA, EQ, EQ2, PS, SWG[Favorite], DAoC, UO, RS, MXO, CoH/CoV, TR, FFXI, FoM, WoW, Eve, Rift, SWTOR, TSW.
Playing - PS2, AoW, GW2
trinity games last longer too - EQ - 14 years, EQ2 - 9 years, WoW - 9 years.
(i am not against faction btw, i actually want faction in, i'm just using it as an example).
Yes, trinity has been done for a long time. But that's because it works and STILL creates amazing gameplay experiences.
Every game out there seems to be doing action combat these days - TSW, NW, GW2, Tera, FE, Wildstar - does that mean that we should move away from it because it's overdone or move towards it because it's done a lot? /shrug. Personally, I can take it or leave it. I've seen well-designed action combat encounters (TSW), so i'm sold on being able to do them.
Ultimately, that's what i most care about, that when me and 20 of my friends log into EQN on the weekend, that we have a challenging, fine-tuned encounter that requires us all to play at our best to beat it. If they can do it without the trinity, i'll be thrilled with the game having no trinity. I don't need the trinity itself, i need the gameplay that i KNOW trinity can provide and that i DO NOT know that the other system can provide.
I've said this elsewhere, but will repeat it here (about trinity, action combat, limited hotbars, all that stuff):
It is entirely possible that for EQN SOE has built a UI that is SO good that it is able to ascertain the group makeup, size and strength and then build - on the fly - fine tune and test the ideal challenging encounter for that group. It's entirely possible. I just find it unlikely. Prove it and i'll buy your game and be happy with it. Until then, i'll prefer what my experience and logic tell me actually works.
"Id rather work on something with great potential than on fulfilling a promise of mediocrity."
- Raph Koster
Tried: AO,EQ,EQ2,DAoC,SWG,AA,SB,HZ,CoX,PS,GA,TR,IV,GnH,EVE, PP,DnL,WAR,MxO,SWG,FE,VG,AoC,DDO,LoTRO,Rift,TOR,Aion,Tera,TSW,GW2,DCUO,CO,STO
Favourites: AO,SWG,EVE,TR,LoTRO,TSW,EQ2, Firefall
Currently Playing: ESO
I want a healer, not the trinity healer, but the GW1 healer. GW1 was a multi class game with PvP and healers were a part. You can't tell me AI are smarter than players, if the AI only attack a healer then a healer will be the perfect puller and tank.
I liked the trinity, but I understand the down side, but a healer, like in GW1 wasn't the trinity or anything like it. It still was a viable class, and a very important class. You could play without one, lots did especially in HoH, but it was there and important.
Asdar
Lot of these overlap.
Class roles will change the game from complete action combat to a hybrid system. Class roles bring back aggro, and would sort of necessitate a few more abilities as well to make the classes distinct and able to fill their class role.
People don't ask questions to get answers - they ask questions to show how smart they are. - Dogbert
Yep, TSW had action combat, wide open class system and the classic trinity roles in group. Worked great and created lots of great group encounters - without feeling at all stale on the combat front.
"Id rather work on something with great potential than on fulfilling a promise of mediocrity."
- Raph Koster
Tried: AO,EQ,EQ2,DAoC,SWG,AA,SB,HZ,CoX,PS,GA,TR,IV,GnH,EVE, PP,DnL,WAR,MxO,SWG,FE,VG,AoC,DDO,LoTRO,Rift,TOR,Aion,Tera,TSW,GW2,DCUO,CO,STO
Favourites: AO,SWG,EVE,TR,LoTRO,TSW,EQ2, Firefall
Currently Playing: ESO
Take out the name bait "Everquest". Expectation from the EQ1/EQ2 fans will have dropped significantly and they may actually be happy that there is a new game created by SOE, no matter what technology, graphic, gameplay and advertisement SOE put into the game.
Put a "Everquest" name there, and EQ players expect, at the minimum, Firiona Vie looks like as she is, and not some Bratz doll.
The possibility of the universe collapsing into a singularity is higher than the birth of a perfect MMORPG.
My blog:
http://www.mmorpg.com/blogs/Strayfe/
Poll results are obviously telling.
Character Art Direction. From stylized & cartoonist to realistic - 17.8%
Combat. From directional, action oriented, to a more traditional MMO feel with tab targeting etc. - 10.3%
Class roles. From the current GW2'ish system to something with strict class roles (WoW, EQ1 & 2, etc) - 28.0%
F2P model is the only thing that disappoints me in this game. I hate F2P model with a passion.
Everything else looks great. Art style is awesome and combat is awesome. Lack of trinity is not a deal breaker because they said they have a new system and what is it we still don't know.
Other
I don't care. I just want to play it as is before attempting to ruin because of my personal preference.
There simply isn't enough information out there to make any sort of informed response. I'll wait until I know more first.
Maybe I would like to change the weapon skills system.. instead of 4 skills I would make it so you can pick 4 skills from a pool of 20 per weapon.
BUT.. I don't know the details of the system yet so maybe it is fine as it is.
I'll go along with the 'not enough infomation to make an informed decision'.
But, for an semi-informed WAG, I'd suggest that the voxel engine might cause many more headaches for SOE and customers. The technology is notorious for being very math heavy. Does this technology that SOE plans to use scale to a typical home computer / console? I don't think many players would like to go backwards to graphics that are far more squared off than original EQ graphics, or a view distance of only a couple of hundred feet or so. The chance of regular customer (non-existing MMORPG gamers) having the hardware to play this is problematic, and makes the voxel technology itself a pretty high risk factor.
Logic, my dear, merely enables one to be wrong with great authority.
With 120 votes at the time of this post 28% of poll respondents (the overwhelmingly largest group) wish for a change to the class system with a larger emphasis on roles and character identity. I fall into that group myself. All these pokemon collectible classes look to make characters into toolkits rather than a role you invest in. The second largest group at 18% are people who desire more flexible character art. Put those two together and I come away thinking that people want a game avatar with a role they can adopt, a purpose they can be known for in the community, and the ability to craft a unique identity for themselves online. This has been true in most games I have played yet it seems development teams are trending in another direction (the toolkit you level once) and it has me wondering why?