On the Wings of Dragons
by Loral on February 28, 2005
There was a lot of interesting news this week, so lets cut out the metaphorical introductions and cut straight into the news:
On Thursday of last week, a few folks from the EQ design team, along with Brenlo, the EQLive Community Manager, gathered over on the EQ Stratics chat server for a moderated and informal chat with players. Here are some tidbits:
Some of the designers work on developing missions using the new Dragons mission system both to learn how it works and to develop new missions. We will hopefully see this system used a lot in the future. Cultural armor can currently not be turned in for tribute. There are no plans for a new player character race and there are no plans to release new PC models anytime soon. There are plans to add functions to the in-game email system.
Let me spend a moment to talk about PC models. At the Guild Summit a year ago, SOE announced that they planned to release new player models by the end of the year. The plan, at the time, was to outsource the creation of these models to an outside company. As the year grew on and no new announcement came forth, it became less and less likely that this plan would happen. By the end of the year, it was clear that no new models would be released.
Now we can shout out, raising our fists in the air and crying foul, but little good will come from it. SOE wants new models for EQ as much as we do. They have heard our requests for new models and, unlike us, they know the cost. There is little use in poking a sore topic clearly addressed and understood by both us and SOE. Hopefully we will see models some day, but for now, we have what we have.
During the release of Dragons of Norrath, Brenlo began "Brenlo's World", a weblog-style set of articles over on his own private corner of the EQLive forums. The first set of these included a lot of pictures of the EQLive development team and a wacky yarn of the loss of his coffee cup. A few days later, Brenlo posted a controversial piece on the evolving world of Everquest and the reaction from old-school players as new features were added to ease the burden of travel for newer players. The article spawned a lot of heated conversation. More recent articles revealed another wacky yarn of Brenlo's top ten things he doesn't like about his job. These articles give us an interesting look on the insides of the shining building to the west and the people building our world within it.
Last week, SOE announced plans to migrate the first set of blue servers. On March 22nd, Antonius Bayle will merge with Kane Bayle retaining the name Antonius Bayle and on March 23rd, Bristlebane will merge with Solusek Ro retaining the name Bristlebane. It's a tough call on whether to keep the names of one of the servers or offer up a new name instead. While keeping one name makes the migrating server feel like a bunch of traveling hobos, it helps half of the players maintain their server identity. I don't expect this to be the last server migration we see in the next few months.
There has been so much talk about server mergers and server population over the last few months that I don't think such server mergers come as much of a surprise. Originally I felt that the discussion of mergers at all might create a mass exodus of people who feel that such mergers show that the game is on its way out. However, merging servers after the release of an expansion helps people realize that server consolidation doesn't mean the game is dead. Dying games don't release new expansions. Merging now is probably as good a time as any.
A lot of conversation surrounding the new bazaar layout hit the EQLive boards over the past couple of weeks. Most of the players commenting on the new layout don't like it. Universally, people understand that the new layout helps with lag and allows a lot more players to sell without getting in the way of one another. The complex layout of the two hubs and the webwork of corridors is a lot different from the familiar large warehouse style of the original bazaar. In the old bazaar, however, the only way I could ever find a trader was to hide traders and use "Find". In the new bazaar, I still have to use "Find" but now I don't have to hide the rest.
People don't always react well to change. Most of the criticism of the new bazaar will fall away once people get to know the new layout. Many people with whom I speak outside of the EQLive boards don't mind the new bazaar and enjoy the absence of video lag.
A few posters on EQ Live also mentioned the puzzling decision to separate the bazaar and barter zones into two separate zones. The barter zone over on Quellious sees little use. Brenlo stated that the reason to keep the two zones separate had to do with server load. I don't really understand how adding a new window into an existing zones would effect load, but I trust that SOE spent a lot more time thinking about this than I have.
Brenlo started two new threads on the EQLive forums asking for what they like and don't like about Dragons of Norrath. This is a good chance for players to offer their direct feedback on the expansion from their keyboard to the developers' eyes.
Three of the five new dragons of Norrath, Terranun, Rikkukin, and Yar'Lir, fell under the blades of powerful guilds. Blades of Wrath over on Torvonnilous defeated Yar'Lir and was the first guild to open up the Nest. Once open, the Nest becomes available as an open zone and as a new zone for single-group missions for all players. Guilds desiring raids in the Nest, must go through the rest of the progression including the deaths of Terranun, Rikkukin, and Yar'Lir.
Deep in his citadel of Anguish, the Overlord Mata Muram still rests easy on his throne.
Over on the Everquest 2 boards, SOE announced the new Mentor system. This system lets higher level players temporarily reduce their level to that of a friend or companion with whom they wish to hunt. This reduced-level character earns experience at the rate they would at the lower level, making it profitable to earn experience while still hunting with other friends. This is a huge and powerful advantage for gamers, and meets one of the biggest problems in MMOGs: friends out-progressing other friends. This Penny Arcade comic covers it better than I ever could.
So this raises the big question: how can we get this in Everquest? I argue that EQ, with its huge spread of level ranges, needs this feature a lot more than EQ2 at this point. No doubt with all of the percentage modifiers, multipliers, zone modifiers, and other mutations of level and experience over the past few years, it is much harder to add such a system to EQ, but such a system would do much to improve this game and bring in new players. As hard is it might be, SOE would do well to apply resources to it. Expect to see this on future evil agendas.
Loral Ciriclight
28 February 2005
loral@loralciriclight.com
Comment Posted by: Melkor on February 28, 2005 10:21 AM
Hmmm, one of the things that happens with Everquest 2's new Mentor system is the scaling down/back of all equipment to the level of the person being mentored, and blocking the abilities of the higher level person again... how would this affect EQ1? Procs and all that I mean, also regarding "Dying games don't release new expansions" Well, I have to agree with you there, but new expansions continuing in development without new character models WILL result in it becoming a dying game. Which brings me to my big question for the day... any news if the Asian models for EQ2 will be available for the American players? If so I think my glee would only be topped by the volume of my shout for joy. ^_^ Also, if EQ2 can have outsourced models ALREADY, what in the heck is stopping EQ1? Am I missing something here...? *shrug*
Comment Posted by: Melkor on February 28, 2005 10:40 AM
Actually, I have yet to see a developer respond to the thread involving the Asian version, so I don't know if it's true or not, however, I personally prefer the hope of change, even though it might not happen to knowing for certain that change is not coming.
http://eqiiforums.station.sony.com/eq2/board/message?board.id=grph&message.id=6899&no_redir=true
http://www.4gamer.net/news.php?url=/news/history/2005.02/20050221223759detail.html
Draw your own conclusions... me, I prefer the optomistic one =)
Comment Posted by: Solistic on February 28, 2005 06:04 PM
This is just an observation. Is it a requirement that people from SOE, speak like politicians. I noticed that the answers to almost every question that was asked, there was not a precise answer. They skirtted the subject a lot. I read both the moderated and the other chat conversation.
I admit there was a lot of questions I did not understand. Such as the faction thing. I have not figured that one out yet. I guess my time to investigate what the factions are is limited, because as of right now, the only fighting I have done in DoN, are the funny looking (rather cool looking) monsters. I went on one mission and had absolutely no idea what faction I was getting, only that we died horribly to DarkBlue mobs and called it quits. In Velious you knew ahead of time what faction you wanted to follow. In DoN, so far I have no idea.
Comment Posted by: Teremar on February 28, 2005 07:01 PM
Mentoring sounds like a very good thing, and I like that you end up at the new player's level rather than the veteran's like in CoH with sidekicking. New players need to do content designed for them, not the high-end stuff right off.
But I wouldn't hold your breath hoping to see this in EQ. It's a "bring in new people" feature, not a "keep old people" feature, and thus I don't think it fits SOE's current strategy.
And speaking of things that don't fit SOE's current strategy, SOE dumped making new PC models and there's not a peep of complaint? The reasons they gave are valid, but they were just as valid at the time of the summit when they said they were going to do it anyway.
And once again there's not even a hint that this is a change. No recognition whatsoever that they once said they were going make new models and now they're reneging. Apparently they're hoping we forgot. Solistic is on to something.
Of course they probably don't want to give the real reason: having another company make new models would have involved spending a large chunk of cash. Cash they've apparently decided not to invest in EQ.
Comment Posted by: Naladini on February 28, 2005 11:43 PM
"Of course they probably don't want to give the real reason: having another company make new models would have involved spending a large chunk of cash. Cash they've apparently decided not to invest in EQ."
Bingo!
Loral, I realize your point about it not doing much good to complain about the lack of character models, but I think a lot of us take this as a sign that SOE is not willing to invest real money in EQ1. The whole premise behind outsourcing the project was to keep SOE's designers and artists focused on their core work.
To me, SOE's deciding not to take on the project seems like a money driven decision more than anything else.
I would counter your statement by saying "I don't think it does the game much good for the players to give SOE a free pass on such an important design decision."
Comment Posted by: Seduca on March 1, 2005 02:00 AM
What is starting to get on my nerves (as an EQ2 player now) is that with SoEs lack of focus on EQ 1 indicates to me that with in a few years, and as technology gets better, this is what will become of EQ 2 as well. I really want to see EQ 1 grow and become more succsessful than ever, but that just doesnt seem to be happening at all.
From a business stand point they are failing to bring in new customers, and they are losing market share to other games. After playing both games i really dont see an incentive, as a new customer who is looking to buy EQ 1 or EQ 2, to play EQ 1 at all.
If EQ 1 is to survive there needs to be a lot of changes to the business model of how EQ 1 and 2 can work together... other than that EQ 1 is just gonna be slowly phased out, as will EQ 2 10 years down the road as technology gets better.
You are definatly going to see more of SoE not investing in EQ 1.
my 2 cp
~ Sed
Comment Posted by: Loral on March 1, 2005 06:54 AM
The decision not to invest in new models is certainly about money. Even if they did choose to invest in new models there is nothing to say that it will have the effect of bringing in new players. Look how many people complain about the EQ2 models. Look how many people still use the old EQ models instead of the Luclin ones. SOE could spend an expansion's worth of money (a complete guess on my part) on a set of new models and have a significant amount of players hate them, ignore them, or simply not use them for performance reasons. It isn't about abandoning EQ, they already proved they aren't doing that or they wouldn't continue to bring out new expansions, it's about deciding where best to invest their money.
As much as I would like to see new models, none of us can guarentee that new models would bring in new players.
On the developer chat and political speech, I tend to agree that there is a lot of wishy washy talk, but I can understand why. Anything that they can announce in the dev chat has already been announced. Anything they haven't announced, they cannot announce.
Many times topics will sit under the "when we have time we'd like to look at that" and sometimes they come back. Remember, a while back with the release of Omens I asked about the return of a LDON point-based loot system and a corpse summoner guy. Now we have both.
SOE gets flack for a lack of communication, but I'd argue that their communication is so good that we already know everything we possibly can know until they decide that its time to release new information previously unreleasable (like new expansion information).
A way to solve this is to hold back information specifically for dev chats, but SOE doesn't schedule these, Stratics does.
A better way to ask questions of the dev team is to dig into the details of the game instead of the more general questions I asked. When I asked the questions I asked, I knew what the answers were going to be. It's almost better to quibble about things like the point costs of items in DoN or the balancing of content around equipment types than it is to ask about things like a tiered loot system; something I've already talked to Rashere at length about.
I think SOE is interested in bringing in new people, but the cost has to be worth the gamble. If some sort of mentoring system can be added into EQ1 without a huge cost of development, I am sure SOE would be interested in doing it. Either way, it is something I plan to champion as much as I can until someone proves to me it isn't worth the effort.
Comment Posted by: Glamdrigg on March 1, 2005 10:59 AM
DON is great so far. Lots of really great features. One question though... why after investing all this effort into the new map system (nice feature BTW) would they not just give us the maps for the zones not already included in our inventory. I know we can go to map fiend etc. but why dont they just give em to us in a patch and be done with it. We can already zero in from space to a zone by clicking on the atlas so why not fill in these lines?
Another question concerning player models. How graphics intensive would a new player models system be? Many of the people I know didn't go on to EQ 2 because they refused to get a new computer to play it.Would a revamp of this type hit these people in their GE-Force Jarassics?
Comment Posted by: Teremar on March 1, 2005 11:23 AM
Again, every reason the devs gave for not developing new models, and every reason you give, Loral, was also true as of the last summit. I think people were even complaining about the EQ2 model screenshots at that point. Given all that, SOE announced then that they were redoing the models. Now they say they won't.
This isn't a debate about whether new models are a good idea or not (personally I think I'd be satisfied if they redid the animations). But it does illustrate two issues:
1) SOE continues to renege on past promises without explanation or even acknowledging that they have done so. I don't mind so much that they change their minds, but I personally find it infuriating that they don't think we remember what they've said in the past.
2) SOE appears to reducing their investment in EQ.
Maybe #1 is just a personal pet peeve. But #2 is a concern for anyone who cares about EQ's future. I'm not saying the game is dying--it is not. But I think players will have to adjust their expectations. This is especially important at a site like Mobhunter where so much of the discussion is about what SOE should do next. There are many things SOE can do to improve the game relatively cheaply. We'll need to focus on those, because realistically those are the only ones that are going to happen.
Comment Posted by: Loral on March 1, 2005 02:44 PM
Teremar, while I think some of your points are overly negative, I agree with your end assessment and that is why I think getting past the topic of new models and focusing on what we think SOE can fix without breaking the bank is much more useful than whining about models. Remember that new models were never officially announced; this came from a single verbal statement.
This also doesn't say that they won't ever do models, but right now the cost is too high. Perhaps they will find a new method to make new models more cost effective.
Glamdrigg, PC models are far far more complex than creature models. PC models have far more animations including sitting, standing, all forms of attack, horse and drogmar riding, all the emotes, and a lot stuff like that that we easily forget. PC Models also have not only four types of armor but all variations of that armor as well. Add in hair, eyes, faces, woudes, beards, and all of that jazz and you have quite a complex system. The point is, its a lot more expensive to make them and also a lot more system intensive to display them. While things like bump mapping and glowing colors would add a lot of depth to EQ's models, it would cost a lot and require a lot more system power.
SOE understands that some of us want new models. Our feedback is given. Its time to move on and consider other feedback we can offer.
So, with that aside, let us cover another topic.
Now that dragons is out and many of our (my) requests have been met, what sorts of things would we like to see SOE working on in the future?
Comment Posted by: on March 1, 2005 03:42 PM
Just because you say its time to move on, does not mean it is. I dont want to move on. They said they would outsource new player models and we would get them by christmas.
They did not do this, they also did not inform us that they were not going to do this. I want an appology from SOE, i personally stayed with EQ because of statements like this, that made me believe they were going to continue upgrading this game both graphically and game playwise, if i had know they were going to pull a bait and switch situation, i would have not payed the money i have to them over the past half year, they have basically stolen that money from my, by offering something they obviously did not seriously intend to deliver. SONY APPOLOGIZE FOR MISLEADING US. or get those new models made pronto.
Comment Posted by: Solistic on March 1, 2005 03:59 PM
You know I kinda like the models we have, what I would like to see is a variety of armor graphics. I get tired of every Barbarian wearring the exact same breast plate, just a different color. A slow but complete upgrade on armor and clothes should not be intensive or costly. After all I know a lot of people, including myself, that design 3d clothes for 3d models on a very limited computer. If nothing else have the new armor as it comes out be different. They do it for weapons and items.
Comment Posted by: Seduca on March 1, 2005 04:15 PM
As a retired EQ 1 vet and currently an EQ 2 player now, I would love to see SoE give incentives for EQ 2 players to try EQ 1, and vice versa. This would keep a steady flow of new players to both games, and perhaps help some of the population problems on EQ 1.
Comment Posted by: Blakyce on March 1, 2005 04:33 PM
Loral you talk about everquest as if it is a game losing money. To be more accurate it is a game that was rolling in the revenue but for the future will probably see a diminishing amount of income. EQ still has a huge player base, in comparison to the rest of the mmorpg market and they collect a monthly fee equivalent to one third of the cost of a new game. Additionally, every expansion is purchased by the majority of the player base every six months. I am not saying that Sony ever owes us anything, it is a product that we can continue to purchase or go elsewhere. But let's not allow them to trick us into believing they are too poor to support EQ properly
Comment Posted by: on March 1, 2005 04:42 PM
I would like to see group and raid members show up on the map and atlas.
You could also go as far as any online guild member showing up on map (unless of course they are /anon).
I would like to see /invite work anywhere in the game and not have to have the invitee targeted and in the same zone.
Planetside does the above 2 things very well, its not a new technology or idea.
Comment Posted by: birder on March 1, 2005 04:43 PM
It's the EQ1 Luclin animations that are so awful. That and the limited armour sets. Velious textures were great and they got wiped out in an 'upgrade' to crap. The only reason I kept my model on was for horses. I'm positive some true professional modelers could make new models with few polys and look and animate much better than the amateur SOE crew. Sorry, if anyone takes offense to that but it's true and I have the Luclin models to prove it.
My subscription ran out the end of Feb and I did not renew. One of my main reasons was the model/animation lie. They pulled me along for almost 2 years with it. Remember the new animations that lasted about a day.
Comment Posted by: on March 1, 2005 04:45 PM
I'd like to be upgraded to the half life 2 engine.
with all new player models and armor of course.
Comment Posted by: on March 1, 2005 05:19 PM
In case you haven't seen this our loving SOE has come through again.
"You can now only train to 20 with the Guild Masters. However there is currently a bug that Guild Masters are not allowing you to train in research at all..
*************************************************
Ashlanne Barefoot
Sony Online Entertainment
Bare Foot and Flame Resistant since 2000"
ROFLMAO and people wonder why some of us that are not in denial think the game is dying.
Comment Posted by: Loral on March 1, 2005 05:19 PM
Here's some good news:
>>>>>>
The Bazaar and barter zones are being combined. Yes Klonn there will now be a portal from POK to the Bazaar. The Bazaar will also be available to everyone whether you have purchased Luclin or not. A portal is being added to POK to take you to the arena. Symbols are being placed in all of the Bazaar halls to help better identify them. Right clicking on a traders name will now execute find rather than just facing you towards the merchant. For now half of the Bazaar will be for bartering and the other half for standard bazaar stuff.
Sound good?
Brenlo Bixiebopper
Community Relations Manager
<<<<<<<<<<<<
Comment Posted by: on March 1, 2005 08:15 PM
it does sound better, and it only happened because enough people complained about it, if people had just accepted things as they were, they would not have changed, let that be a lesson to the people who complain about complainers, you have them to thank for this change.
i hope they make it so that the old bazaar is available from nexus shadowhaven entries, but is only for selling and that this new upgraded bazaar is available from POK for selling and bartering, that would satisfy all camps.
Comment Posted by: Loral on March 1, 2005 08:37 PM
Perhaps it was the constructive feedback they received and the low number of people who actually used the Barter zone (two on Quellious for the last week).
Comment Posted by: Falwear on March 2, 2005 10:35 AM
"However, merging servers after the release of an expansion helps people realize that server consolidation doesn't mean the game is dead. Dying games don't release new expansions. Merging now is probably as good a time as any."
LOL this sounds like the propagandaminister of Irak during the war.
to funny yo be real.
Comment Posted by: Tobalus on March 2, 2005 11:18 AM
I think the mentoring system sounds great. Could it be adapted to eq1? I doubt, they did more scalability in eq2 from the ground floor.
Could another system similar to it be used? Perhaps, although I can't think how. EQ1 seems like spaghetti code to me. Maybe it is planned and documented. My (limited) experience with coding is that real code is usually an unreadable undocumented mix of quick fixes. (I miss pascal!)
Could EQ1 use it to expand their playerbase? yes, i believe if they made it viable for eq1 AND they marketed to gaming magazines (give eq2 players a month free on eq1, or something similar).
p.s. craftsman xp is soo easy. I'm working on levelling my 2nd character to 20 via food alone... the fuel is 1 cp, the brokers sell the items for 2 cp, and they are orange recipes... drool!
Comment Posted by: Redcloud on March 2, 2005 11:21 AM
Loral, I'm afraid it's not your decision to decide what people are to expect or complain about. If they want new graphics to keep playing, they want new graphics. Period.
Please please stop sounding like the propaganda minister of the politicaly correct line of thought to have with SoE.
Comment Posted by: Jahvah on March 2, 2005 11:41 AM
"what sorts of things would we like to see SOE working on in the future?"
A KEI bot in PoK that dispenses minimum duration KEI for 25pp a shot.
All the shouting for KEI gets on my nerves, and it would give some annoyed enchanters a break.
Those that still want to make pp selling KEI wouldn't be affected because they generally ask for less, and have longer duration KEI to offer.
...and new armor graphics.
Comment Posted by: Loral on March 2, 2005 12:00 PM
Redcloud,
Everyone is free to complain however they wish on whatever topic they wish. What I suggest, however, is that we focus our feedback on the areas we are most likely to change.
Here is an unrealistic suggestion: I think all of the starting cities in EQ should be completely rebuilt with new starter quests, new tradeskill paths, mid-level quests, high-level quests, portals to guild halls, and all of the new graphical elements we now see in Omens and Dragons. However, I understand that the cost of such a change is huge and it may not end up bringing new players to the game anyway. So what can we offer instead?
Here is a more realistic suggestion: Rebuild the Plane of Knowledge. Rebuild each of the three neighborhoods so they resemble the style and architecture of the original cities they represent. Add in quests for all levels in this new uber-city. Use the graphic techniques we've seen in Omens and Dragons to make it really pretty. Recommend to new players that they start in this new uber-city but still allow them to go back to the original if they want. Tie this city in with the tutorial or perhaps build a new tutorial around this city.
Even this is a huge undertaking but at least it only requires rebuilding one zone, not sixteen. This also helps consolidate things so the low-end game can be easily updated with new content. If newer graphic changes come about in five years, they can rebuild this city again.
So there's my big thought for the day.
Comment Posted by: Solistic on March 2, 2005 01:02 PM
Again I would really like to see armor graphics upgrade. I has nothing to do with annimation, nor socials. Not if the continue to to create them as dynamic clothing.
Last night my 65 warrior was lumberring around West Karrana, beating up Zombies and Bandits, and trying to pull the tail off of lions. I started the DON tradeskill quests. OH MY, I love it. You get to work from a new newbie style armor all the way up to High level armor. I know not much has been found out about what is going on, but so far I am really enjoying it. This going to be my way of getting decent armor. It may take a while, but I think this is one of the better things they have added since Luclin.
It is a way that you can have the pride of making your own armor starting around level 20 (seems like the right level to start and not die). Once you have completed the first quest, you can be working on your trade skill levels and doing the tasks to get the upgraded versions of the main skill you are working on.
Again, not much information has been found out about these, but so far it is fun and looks great. Now here is something that new players can cut their teeth into and enjoy. This one of the best things that they have done to get new and old players into the game.
Comment Posted by: Horzek on March 2, 2005 03:41 PM
This past weekend I logged in my 66 warrior and decided I would see what I could do solo. I entered the Plane of Nightmares and took on a tree. Those trees are many levels below 66 but still blue so I had hopes I could take one down. With every trick I had, I was able to take the tree down to about half while I of course died to the effort. I mention this because as a result of dieing I lost my level, I lost the ability to wear my pants, and I couldnt get a ress. Eventually I had to log till I found a friend playing WoW and persuaded them to come in and ress me. Even with the ress I did not regain my level and now IM stuck with no pants till I can rummage up some experience somewhere.
The reason I had this insane idea that a warrior could actually hope to kill something many levels below was because of my recent play in WoW. Even my druid can solo creatures up to 3 levels higher that my current level.
I mention all this because I believe the death penalties need to go away. You dont see level loss to death in EQ2, you dont see it in WoW and you dont see it in City of Heroes. Dieing and losing the ability to use your skills, your spells, and even your equipment is just silly. It is not fun and the whole idea is just annoying.
I can see how valuable the ress ability is for clerics and it certainly helps with corpse runs and quicker recovery but having to actually quit playing the game because one can not get ressed is just bad.
Tonight I am going to sit at my computer and drive my mouse across the screen and decide what game I will play, do I want to spend time redoing something I spent hours on just to lose or do I want to do something new? The choice is not so hard.
I would also like to address server and game population. Since Bristlebane has been my home for the pasts 6 years it was quite the surprise to see that we are to be merged. On the other hand the past few times I logged in and walked around in the PoK bank area it was a virtual ghost town.
I can not back up my ideas with figures partly because no one is releasing the data but my suspician is that EQ has lost about 1/3 of its players. It could be more as subscriptions expire but the fact remains, EQ is past its prime and will never again be what it once was. I keep seeing people in this forum talk about attracting new players. I just dont see this happening. I believe the only viable way for EQ to extend its duration is by finding ways to keep the existing player base. The game is in decline now, it will continue to decline. I dont want to go so far as to say the game is dead because even in decline there probably over 200,000 folks who are playing and having a good time. I am of the opinion that even as the population drops back down to a meager quarter million players there is still a profit to be made.
Back to my earlier idea, lets see the death penalties reworked somehow. Lets see my poor little warrior get his pants back.
Comment Posted by: on March 2, 2005 06:16 PM
I'm sorry, but if you've played this game for 6 years and decided to go attempt to solo a tree (knowing you will probably fail) with insufficient exp to keep your level, then you deserve to not be able to wear your pants.
Some people learn from their mistakes, but obviously not many.
Comment Posted by: Teremar on March 2, 2005 06:54 PM
I'm with Loral on this one: new models aren't going to happen, so might as well talk about something else. Of course a PoK revamp with new quests for low level people isn't going to happen either. DoN is 45+ for a reason. Lots of reasons actually.
I have to say it: if you're playing a game because you think it's going to get better in the future, and not because you're enjoying it now, well, you're making a mistake. I'd say any improvements you don't expect to see in three weeks to a month should not be relied on at all. This particularly applies to SOE games, but if anyone's grinding up to 60 in WoW, hating every minute of it, but sure that Battlegrounds will be the greatest thing since sliced bread, well, that's a mistake too.
Comment Posted by: Amphitryon on March 2, 2005 07:10 PM
not to sound negative but I dont think the mentoring system would be of any use in EQ now because with 90% of the reamining polayerbase being lvl 60 or higher, just who are they supposed to mentor?
Real EQ noobs are rarer than Fungi drops these days, and I dont really care to give people working on their 23 alt on their 6th account an even easier way to power level.
3-4 years ago this feature may have had value, but now it really has little value. Its to help new players group with veteran players but all thats left in EQ are veteran players (you do NOT consolidate servers when you have lots of new, incoming players)
When a new player has a friend who already plays (and thats how most get intoduced to EQ), they get access to gear and funds they would not have already and in most cases get powerlevelling as well.
Mentoring is for games that have real noobs and are trying to keep them. Noobs are extinct in EQ1
Comment Posted by: Loral on March 2, 2005 07:12 PM
"you deserve to not be able to wear your pants."
I think that is almost a personal attack...
Amphitryon, see comment guideline #2
Comment Posted by: on March 2, 2005 07:41 PM
check this movie out, its from mystr burnz, guy that did the video competition winner MY IMMORTAL, go to this http://camelotvault.ign.com/?dir=videos&content=videos site to download both my immortal and Catacombs preview, its from last year, but shows daoc's new graphics engine, which blows away eq1s, for us mages, also not, the caster, who has fireballs that actually come from his hands, im sooooooo jealous.
specifically check out catacombs preview the graphics and character models blow away eq1 and equal eq2 and this is an expansion for DAOC which as a much much much lower population than eq1 if they can do this, why cant sony.
Comment Posted by: Naladini on March 2, 2005 10:12 PM
"specifically check out catacombs preview the graphics and character models blow away eq1 and equal eq2 and this is an expansion for DAOC which as a much much much lower population than eq1 if they can do this, why cant sony."
My fear is that SOE is going to rely on the All Access subscription to subsidize most of its games from here on out. Encouraging players to hop between games as expansions get released, but aside from EQ2, not put a lot of money in major overhauls.
Let's face facts, in a corporate world, products that produce solid and measurable revenue are the products that get the most attention. The station access subscription will disrupt the clarity of EQ1's revenue stream, lessening the chance that they will see additional major investments. Unless of course, that investment is something they can turn around and sell.
Comment Posted by: on March 3, 2005 10:49 AM
they can tell how many people using an all access pass are playing eq2 or 1 etc, the main point being though, even now eq1 has at least 4 times the userbase as DAOC but DAOC was able to update its models and graphic engine way better than sony have been able to do with eq1, in the my immortal video check out the water in daoc, that was before the graphics update and it was better back then, than eq1 water is now, reflecting the enviroment etc. and no im not a DAOC fanboy, i have never played that game, and dont intend too, i play eq1 and want it to survive and prosper.
Comment Posted by: Naladini on March 3, 2005 02:21 PM
I realize they can see who is active in what game. My point is that the income streams for EQ1, EQ2, SWG and Planetside are now somewhat polluted. There will be a large focus from SOE on staggering release dates for expansions between the games, as it increases the likelihood that you will purchase an expansion for another game that you already have a subscription to.
Without the direct, dedicated revenue stream, it becomes more difficult to cost justify major improvements in an aging product that don't directly generate revenue.
If you're an all access subcriber, why would you go to DaoC if you don't like EQ1's graphics? Odds are, you wouldn't, you'd switch to one of the other games included in your subscription.
Comment Posted by: on March 3, 2005 02:39 PM
there is no way that eq1 does not directly generate revenue, this game makes more each month for sony than most full blown single player games make in there lifetime, they used to make 4 million a month from it, that is 48 million a year, even if they only make 10 million a year from it, there is no way you can say that is not a lot of money.
Comment Posted by: Horzek on March 3, 2005 03:33 PM
" "you deserve to not be able to wear your pants."
I think that is almost a personal attack...
Amphitryon, see comment guideline #2 "
Thanks for your idea there Loral. While my main point is that the death penalty system needs drastic over hauling the above comment also deserves some examination.
I see a lot of comments here about wanting to bring more new players into the EQ world. I have to ask why new players would want to come into a world where elitist attitudes exist by the current player population. Not only does SoE need to examine some of their game policies, EQ players need to examine their attitudes as well.
There is nothing wrong with being new or not knowing every single bit of info out there about this game world. The day has long gone when attitudes towards the less fortunate for what ever reason should be shown such discrimination. It is not healthy for this game world.
My ideas about the death penalty were reinforced last night as I dusted off my old druid and sent him into the Plane of Nightmare for some mob bashing. Mind you my 63 druid can solo creatures there that my 66 warrior can not touch. I managed to find a way to get the druid killed when things went sour as they can easily do and found myself at my bind point. In this case I had last bound out at the entrance to the Temple of Veeshan where I had a lot of experience as a fairly safe place to bind. It was handy for raid help and transporting folks. Somehow a wurm was sitting there with his jaws open and next thing I know I not only have a ress to worry about, now I have a bind death loop in progress. Eventually I was able to scramble over and dive into ToV but not before two new corpses. I dont need to go into deep description of the troubles I had getting resses but I can say that I was fortunate to have some good friends who were kind to me.
The point of all this is that naked corpse runs are just not fun. The system needs rework and the death penalty needs to go away. It just doesnt work and is a giant time waster for both the unfortunate player, and also for who ever he is able to persuade to assist him / her in recovery.
I am hoping to see someone answer my ideas and either support my arguments or help me understand why it is so important to spend time running naked or begging in PoK for a ress. Even with the resses for my deaths last night I still ended up with less experience than I started with for the evening.
If you are able to give a good explanation of why we need death penalties, please do so.
Comment Posted by: on March 3, 2005 06:43 PM
The same reason that fire has to burn.
So you learn not to stick your hand in it.
Most people learn this early and quickly.
Some have to lose a finger or worse, cause harm to someone else.
Comment Posted by: Horzek on March 3, 2005 08:31 PM
"The same reason that fire has to burn.
So you learn not to stick your hand in it.
Most people learn this early and quickly.
Some have to lose a finger or worse, cause harm to someone else."
IM sorry, the link between burning my fingers and playing a game that is fun really escapes me. This is of course if I can believe that your comments were an attempt to reply to my request. Just so you can understand this, there are some really useful things about fires and cooking comes to mind as well as warmth for my home. Wasting time running around naked as a comparison is such a leap of logic as to boggle the mind.
What I am saying is that most modern games which have learned and evolved from the mistakes of the EQ developers have learned that death penalties are not too much fun and do not attract people. This is why while you may see some sort of spirit run and a brief slowing of experience gained, you dont actually lose your levels nor your knowledge, equipment or skills.
The mentality that demands that only the old tried and tested ways can be used went out when it was learned that wars and battles were not very successful when fought with swords and bows and arrows.
It is no stretch to say Evolve or Die.
Comment Posted by: Loral on March 3, 2005 08:46 PM
Naked corpse runs in hostile zones are a think of the past. The new corpse summoning alter drastically reduces the pain of nasty corpse recoveries. Sure, you might not want to spend the cash, and you don't have to, but the option is just there.
I just had to recover two shards in EQ2 under the feet of big nasty giants. That was hard. I still have 15% exp debt from the experience.
Comment Posted by: Redcloud on March 4, 2005 04:25 AM
Some people decide to be dense on purpose it seems. Learning that if you put your hand in a fire you will ge burned is like any other experience that will get chiseled in your mind. You won't do that mistake again. That's a learning process. You get more experience. Let's not split hairs about the utility of fire like it mattered...
By the same logic that death penalty should be 0 everything that requires attention or effort should be erased. Like ski slopes should have no pumps because it's harder. Huho. It so happens that they are fun for beginners and not for better skiers.
Same goes with death penalty and everything that may be unfun in game. It's there to balance out the reward. To give some kind of satisfaction if you achieve it. If the whole game is a succession of very little difficulty encounters stringed with one another, the game has no lasting interest whatsoever. That's actually one of the root of disagreement on these threads. People asking to be pampered are the very reason that older players will HAVE to quit because the game becomes just too trivial and unfun.
I'm not defending the old system but the principle. There has to be some painful retribution for mistakes or the game will be some irrelevant junk like any other junk out there. I paid for almost 6 yeas because it cattered to adults with some semblance of skill and learning ability.
It's not about the old ways should remain the old ways. It can be any shape or form but rewards requires risk or there's no point in it.
Comment Posted by: Horzek on March 4, 2005 09:25 AM
A few years ago there was a giant in the world of office programs and their flagship was called Word Perfect. It was hard to use and required a college semester just to be able navigate it well. Those who had put in the time and learned it would swear by it no matter how obviously cumbersome it was.
Along comes Microsoft Word / Office which is so much more user friendly and vastly superior in ease of use. Today the Microsoft product is "The" program to use and in comparison I picked up a copy of Word Perfect for $10 from a surplus salvage company.
Like I said before, evolve or die. There is no point at all to making things stupidly hard unless you wish to discourage people. There is also no value in this condescending attitude I keep seeing from long time players. You may stick to your Word Perfect with all those silly hot key macros and I will stick with my Word program.
Risk versus reward is fine if you are going to be taking on a good challange and there is some valuable reward in sight. This is different than bind death loops and losing many hours of work and experience. I really dont mind the death experience in WoW much although I do have to visit the equipment vendors once in a while for repairs which can in the end be a bit expensive. I dont end up begging my friends and strangers to help me because of some unforseen circumstance.
It is about fun. Is it fun is the question I keep asking. If it isnt fun and somewhere else is a superior product that is much more fun and yet still finds ways to present respectable risks and corresponding rewards there is not much choice as to where I am most attracted to go.
Comment Posted by: Redcloud on March 4, 2005 10:06 AM
Then go play WoW. That really boils down to that.
If the social aspect of the game is too much of a burden to you, go play a game that isn't or much less.
Unless a GM binds you in VP, it doesn't happen often that you end up into a bind loop anyway or you aren't very carefull with your bind spot...
We can keep using every amount of cliches from RL till hell freezes over without bringing one inch of valid point to the discussion...
Portraiting a part of the playerbase as soon-to-be extinct is maybe ok talking to toddlers, maybe fanbois, not normal people that don't particularly enjoy having their game spoonfed or its challenge removed because x or y find it more microsofish to iron out any kind of brain activity from the game.
I'm grossly exagerating at times but the message is "easier, faster, lazier" isn't automatically better. Not for entertainments like EQ imho.
That said, what is the shape of risk that will be acceptable for the average player WHILE playing a progression game. We're talking about EQ after all.
If not losing any amount of experience or time, what's left as risk? If someone looses versus content and it doesn't matter. Why care at all.
Comment Posted by: Teremar on March 4, 2005 10:33 AM
There absolutely have to be death penalties. No question about that. But I do think it's time for game designers to get beyond "the penalty is that you have to do something that isn't fun for half an hour." We are talking about games here, and the goal should be to make them fun all the time.
That doesn't mean the penalties can't be as severe as the game designer wants them to be. You can take away xp, money, gear, you name it. Yes, some people are still going to complain "You just took away everything I accomplished in the last two hours!" But the difference is you hopefully had fun in those two hours, and the things you'll do to regain what you accomplished in those two hours will hopefully be fun as well. Yes, losing something is frustrating. But it should be, or death is meaningless.
Of course if you're not having fun that just means there are bigger problems with the game than the death penalty.
Comment Posted by: on March 4, 2005 11:25 AM
Horzek, to use your example...
Stop trying to make my WORDPERFECT into your MICROSOFT WORD.
Comment Posted by: Loral on March 4, 2005 12:13 PM
Maybe I've lost the point. SOE put in a corpse summoning alter in DoN. They aren't about to take it back out and they'd catch holy hell if they tried to up the cost in either cash or experience.
There is certainly a fine line between convenience and too-easy. A lot of old timers who remember running across Karana with three pumas on your arse at level 10 without bind, gate, port, and a blinking SoW hoping to reach a boat that may or may not dump you in the ocean think the game is too easy now. However, I'd bet quite a few of them would complain if the knowledge stones turned into dust.
Newer games offered less severe death penalties than EQ1. Level 50 hunts in Plane of Fear still often resulted in four or five hour chain rescue attempts. Now we have a corpse summoner with reasonable plat prices and a return to your bind spot. You can argue if you want that the cost is too low, but I bet new players won't think so, and a lot of us will grow used to it in the mean time. I've already used it to get out of some CRs that would have taken me an hour or two. Regardless, it is there now, just like the knowledge stones, and it isn't going to be removed. Like the bazaar, the nexus, the wayfarer magi, Knowledge, the PoP graveyards, and the soulbinders, new features get added to reduce the more painful parts of the game.
Within reason, MMORPG manufacturers should seek the fastest path to get a group together, get them hunting, give them a challenge, and reward them for their effort in as short amount a time as reasonably possible. Many of the items in past and future evil agendas focus on this theory.
Comment Posted by: Naladini on March 4, 2005 01:40 PM
"Within reason, MMORPG manufacturers should seek the fastest path to get a group together, get them hunting, give them a challenge, and reward them for their effort in as short amount a time as reasonably possible. Many of the items in past and future evil agendas focus on this theory."
While at the same time, allowing players to be as productive as possible if the grouping opportunity doesn't present itself in fairly short order.
Comment Posted by: Redcloud on March 4, 2005 01:56 PM
You both are exactly point out why I'm saying.
Neither of you described a practical way to have risk if you consider that the penalty has to be the same level of fun... Why care then?
See my point?
Comment Posted by: Solistic on March 4, 2005 04:17 PM
Horzek states:
"A few years ago there was a giant in the world of office programs and their flagship was called Word Perfect. It was hard to use and required a college semester just to be able navigate it well. Those who had put in the time and learned it would swear by it no matter how obviously cumbersome it was."
Actually it was several years ago that Wordperfect sold their corperation. Wordperfect was the largest selling software in the world when it sold to Novell. They had the best customer service and refused to change that. Since they could not afford the customer service that is the reason they sold. Novell then sold it to Corel and it is still way better than MicroSoft Word. Word was designed so that anyone (I mean anyone) would be able to use it with in a couple hours. Word Perfect was designed for the Professionals and the people that wanted to take time to create professional like docuements.
Two things can be seen from that.
One, WordPerfect Corp. had the best ethics in the computer world and got out of it when they would have had to compromise their ethics, even though they were still the best seller in the world.
Two, WordPerfect was the best seller because it had a truely complete product (take it from a graphic designer that had to use the old glass disk and cantainer wordprocessors), and gave the customer support for the people that had questions or problems with the product.
Hmmm I could extract both good and bad from this, when compared to EQ. I guess Sony is just like everyother corperation.
Comment Posted by: on March 4, 2005 04:29 PM
All I gotta say is, if I paid for word, then I want word.
If I paid for wordperfect, then I better get wordperfect.
I sure as hell ain't trying to change *your* word to wordperfect or vice versa, and I sure as hell ain't gonna let you change *mine* without a fight.
Comment Posted by: on March 4, 2005 06:10 PM
I'll take the word vs wordperfect analogy farther and most of you are too young to remember what I am going to talk about.
Wordperfect died due to refusal to change in the face of a changing computer world. Microsoft refused to embrace the web for years and suffered for it themselves. Well long before word was Wordstar it died because they refused to change and become more like Wordperfect, Wordstar was arcane with commands like ctrl-s to save, ctrl-k to exit, etc...but Wordstar superceeded Electric Pencil which was more arcane and refused to change.
Now how does all this lead to modern MMORPGS? Simple the older products were painful to use but we didn't realize it at the time and stayed in a state of denial until the public voted with their pocketbooks and drove out the old stodgy imitator to the throne.
Well lets replace some of those word processors with text muds, EQ1, EQ2, AO, UO, WoW whatever and take a look at the numbers.
I loved my 70 Camaro SS but you know what I love my 2004 Corvette with AC, CD player, Bose Stereo, Cruise Control, Heated Recarro seats, electronic FI and more HP with better gas mileage much more.
Same with games you evolve or die.
Comment Posted by: Horzek on March 4, 2005 06:41 PM
I keep pounding on evolving game worlds, in particular death penalties as you have seen. Let me review my experiences with on line games and death penalties.
My first on line game was Ultima Online. I played for a year and death was horrible there. Any time you went out of a safe area with guards to hunt or mine or forage you were always at some risk from both players and from the monsters. If you happened to die, very often all your equipment would be rummaged through and by the time you got back you would be lucky if your sash was still there. There were many exploits and the game engine would permit you to log out safely then come back on later to find yourself placed in some dungeon or on the steps of a Player Killers door step.
By the time EQ came along, the UO death was very old and annoying. At the time, and my first look at EQ was back in Beta phase 1 in August of 1998. During my first month of play I made it all the way to level 6 with a magician. By todays standards that may seem quite amazing but in those days even at level 6 a single death would cost a full yellow bubble of experience or 20% of your experience. The game was very very tough and for this amount of risk I was getting fire beetle eyes. AS the game progressed the experience penalty was greatly reduced so that eventually up to level 1o there was no real death penalty at all. Even at very high levels these days the death penalty is quite a lot less. EQ has definately evolved and the game I once played back in 1998 with my over clocked celeron 300a and 16 meg video card now takes up a whole lot more processing power and video performance.
I was on line one night back then when there was a server wide message that the total on line population of EQ had just hit 200 people. It was a very different world. I bet you cant even imagine what it must have been like to look up to level 20 and call those folks the high levels.
I cant say EQ has not evolved because it clearly has. The evolution was based on player demand, and on improving the fun factor for people playing. What I am saying is that I would like to see further improvements with the death penalties. I suppose the other night when I managed to get my druid killed and in a brief death loop I could have taken steps to ress myself using my cleric account. The cost for that would have been a bit since I have not yet purchased DoN.. I am now leaning towards the purchase though because I am getting all I have ask for. People are telling me it is fun and the rewards are very nice. Not having DoN at the time though made corpse recovery much tougher.
I wish to applaud the developers on the concept behind the graveyards in the PoP zones. This was an idea that was very well received and without doubt appreciated. You all will remember the Fear raids with the rediculuous death and recovery requirements and even the hate wipes that kept you up hours past your bed time. For these there is some validity to the risk versus reward idea although not many people today would tell you that the purple grape breastplate I got from hate is worth much today.
Do you remember the early days of Sol A when upon going into the dungeon you could fall between the steps and burn to death? Not only would you die, but your corpse was not recoverable because no one could get close enough to ress or pull you out. Because of a simple game mechanic bug you could die and lose not only your corpse and experience but also all your gear as well. I remember once going into that zone and seeing one lady there who was in tears and several of her friends who had all died just trying to help her recover her missing body. At the time the rules were such that a petition to the GMs would not even help because they were not permitted to assist in that sort of corpse recovery. This could not only ruin a night of play, it could also ruin a persons experience enough to send them packing.
Yes, EQ has evolved, not always for the best, but it has evolved. I am merely suggesting another step in this evolution. For those die hards who can not handle evolution I can only warn you to stay away from tar pits.
Comment Posted by: on March 4, 2005 06:46 PM
////////////
I loved my 70 Camaro SS but you know what I love my 2004 Corvette with AC, CD player, Bose Stereo, Cruise Control, Heated Recarro seats, electronic FI and more HP with better gas mileage much more.
///////////
Yes but your 70 camaro is still a 70 camaro (excepting any personal modifications you've done to it), and you '04 vette is still an '04 vette.
If your 70 camaro slowly evolved into an '04 vette, I doubt you would have many complaints...
However if your 70 camaro evolved (or devolved) into a '04 yugo, someone would be raising hell.
Comment Posted by: on March 4, 2005 06:50 PM
And to finish the comment,
One man's vette, is another man's yugo.
Comment Posted by: Solistic on March 4, 2005 07:53 PM
Extremely well put Horzek. I agree with you, but I actually think Loral is right also. In this situation SOE is listenning, as the examples of the summoner in the Guild Lobby, where everyone has access to, even if they do not have DoN. Now SOE is listenning, I believe, because they have to either "evolve" with the rest of the gaming industry or die. To me this is a good sign in the fact that they must think the EQ is still a viable product and they can still make a proffit from it. Or another way to rephrase it, EQ is not dead yet.
Comment Posted by: Teremar on March 5, 2005 01:24 AM
Redcloud: "Neither of you described a practical way to have risk if you consider that the penalty has to be the same level of fun... Why care then?"
Okay, how about permadeath? Presumably it's fun to create a character and play them. Then you die and that character is deleted. Do you care? Absolutely. So you make a new character, and presumably you have fun playing them. Do you wish you hadn't died? Yes. Did you have to spend any time doing something you don't like? No. Maybe doing the same things again won't be as fun as the first time, but it's not a designated period of misery like a CR (okay, misery is hopefully an exaggeration, but you get the idea).
Or take any amount of xp penalty you want. A whole level if that makes you happy. That will make people care about dying, even if they just reappear at the safe spot of the zone they're in fully equippend and ready to resume adventuring.
I'm not saying either of these are a good death system. But people do care about the attributes of their character--xp, cash, gear, etc. You can make them care about death by assessing a penalty against those in-game things people care about without making them do anything other than play the game they enjoy.
Comment Posted by: Seduca on March 5, 2005 02:31 AM
In EQ 2 no matter how many times you die you do not lose exp(or gear), but you gain an exp debt that you need to make up, and your stats are a bit lower until you recover your spirit shard. Maybe EQ 1 could use something like this.
Also in EQ 2 if you choose not to physicly get your shard.., you automaticly get it back in 3 days anyway.
Comment Posted by: heybirder on March 5, 2005 07:08 AM
When I talk to people about EQ, our most vidid and worthwhile tales to listen to are the ones where things went bad and how we recovered. That risk we were willing to take is what made the raids so exciting. Sometimes things went bad. I've had my share of Fear/Hate/Trak/ToV wipes. But we always went back, well we had to =p and moved forward. People learned quickly how to play properly.
Comment Posted by: Loral on March 5, 2005 09:32 AM
You guys and your metaphors...
"as the examples of the summoner in the Guild Lobby, where everyone has access to, even if they do not have DoN. "
I don't think anyone but DON subscribers have access to the Guild Lobby and the corpse summoner. It is a feature of the expansion pack, not a freebie like the new bazaar, email, or lavastorm.
Ugly corpse recovery was the last death penalty I thought was too severe. I like the way EQOA, WoW, and EQ2 handle death and now, with an ability to summon your body to a safe zone with many clerics usually right outside, that severe penalty has been removed. I am happy with the current state of death and recovery in EQ.
Comment Posted by: on March 5, 2005 08:45 PM
Loral is correct, you can not access lobby without a DON purchase.
Comment Posted by: Redcloud on March 6, 2005 09:28 AM
And I will keep pounding on some PR/VP pitch that what is good for the company is good for the player. Sony's interest isn't ours.
Afterall the wordperfect and word analogy has some good in it. WP was good for the professionals and for the user. Word first and foremost for the pocket of Microsoft.
That's the whole problem with blind fanboism.
Still, if one playstyle needs to be extinct to please every single bozo with a keyboard just maybe EQ existing playerbase will bleed even faster than it has. I repeat. You cannot remove risk without replacing it with some other form of risk. Or the reward has no meaning. Sony hasn't done that and someone a little less blindly fanboyish could aknowledge that.
Comment Posted by: Loral on March 6, 2005 11:55 PM
What do you suggest, Redcloud?
Comment Posted by: Redcloud on March 7, 2005 04:30 AM
That's SoE's job to find out, Loral. They have the tools, the time, the people to balance out content vs risk after removing part of that risk.
There are really only 2 things you can loose in-game: time or gear. If you throw the second half of the equation, either you have to make the first twice as ugly and it probably won't be very popular (nor with me) or you have to find something different. Actually if people like you wanted to have CRs removed from game, you are the ones who should have come up with ideas to replace it, not me. Or you break the balance and ultimately do your own short term interest but not any good for the health and longevity of the game.
Comment Posted by: Utziel on March 7, 2005 07:43 AM
It's just a few who complain about the changes. Frankly, I am sick of the complaining. If you dont like whats going on with the game then by all means leave. I mean really it's a GAME. SOE is a corperation and if they chose to listen to people then great if not oh well, its there right not ours. THEY own the company, not everyone else. I play the game because i like it, not to pick apart everything SOE does! Sorry for the rant but had too.
Comment Posted by: Loral on March 7, 2005 08:57 AM
"If you throw the second half of the equation, either you have to make the first twice as ugly and it probably won't be very popular (nor with me) or you have to find something different. Actually if people like you wanted to have CRs removed from game, you are the ones who should have come up with ideas to replace it, not me. Or you break the balance and ultimately do your own short term interest but not any good for the health and longevity of the game."
What if SOE decided that corpse recovery in its previous form was simply too hard? What if it was overly balanced in the wrong direction all this time? It was obvious that corpse recovery was painful enough that they already came up with alternatives in LDON, PoP, Gates, and Omens. It never made sense to me that newer zones recived easier CRs than older zones at lower levels where it is needed most. There are more see-invis mobs in Solusek B than there are in Muramite Proving Grounds.
If SOE has the tools, the time, and the people to research the problem and come up with the solution, why do you not accept the solution they came up with?
I will be honest. When I saw how it operated in beta, I suggested that they change the corpse summoning alter to a higher cost (about 300 plat a body) and remove any chance of a resurrection. If you want your body, you pay for it in future time regaining experience and plat. That would off-set the lack of CR. However, that isn't much of a marketable feature. It might have been a nice addition to Shadowrest, but you can't sell the opportunity to pay 300 plat and lose a res on the back of the box.
Even with the corpse alter, it's not like I want to die. 150 plat is 150 plat. If I fail in a hunt so badly that I have to use the corpse alter, I already suffered a pretty substantial penaltiy. The solution they added here includes a greater penalty than PoP did. When people are on missions or experience hunts or raids, they suffer a penalty when the group wipes out. They suffer the time it takes to recover the bodies. They suffer the financial hit of summoning bodies at 150 plat each. They suffer the penalty of having to go back to their hunt. Right now the penalty, even with the corpse summoner, is higher than most single-player RPGs. Most single-player RPGs let you save right before each encounter so if you fail, you start right over before you fought with no real loss. Yet we played those games for 20 years.
Again, I question the use in this discussion (I wish I questioned it before writing 500 more words about it). SOE added in the corpse summoner. It's there now. They cannot remove it or modify it just like they cannot remove or modify the Knowledge stones. It is now a part of our game.
So what do we want now?
Comment Posted by: Redcloud on March 7, 2005 09:54 AM
Utziel if you have nothing to add to the topic do yourself a favor and don't post. Loral got a clue, you apparently missed it.
Loral, what if EQ is WoW. We can do a lot of what ifs but the game as hard as it was attracted the current playerbase, not the one of diablo or Daoc or any other MMO or game out there.
Corpse recovery isn't the same in solb as in the bottom of some very remote zone like DN or ToV or some luclin dungeon. Not all CRs are born equal for a reason.
LDON CR: doesn't count. It's merely instanced content. Corpses are bound to pop at ZI.
POP: raiding for the masses. Everything, not just CRs was bloated. And they came back from it. If it was such a good solution, why didn't we get corpses at ZI in every single zone since then?
Gates: as far as I recall no easy option and probably a too harsh expansion which was exagerated on the punitive. Not fun, just pain. In that it was very wrong.
Omens: A lot better expansion but still no easy CRs. Frankly it wasn't too bad in spite of the way too random invis fading on miles and miles of zones to cross.
Sol B was high end when it came out. Lower levels are only lower because they got 9 expansions on top of it but people in solb weren't newbies. Now they might be. But not then.
I don't agree with the current solution because it isn't one. It's just removing one layer of risk or complexity to the game without much effort. Cross-zone CR is just the poor man option in terms of ideas. The least effort if you will, economical for SoE but that's pretty much it.
"you can't sell the opportunity to pay 300 plat and lose a res on the back of the box."
When I read that paragraph it makes me think that you got the point. A feature like that needs to be balanced for the good of the game, not just the short term interest of the player. I wouldn't have found shocking to pay 300pp and have no rez. At least you would think twice before using it. Now you don't.
Loral, for many 150pp is a lot. For many 150 is an hour group drop. One task / mission in DON. Frankly since it doesn't happen that often, 150pp is nothing.
Noone should want to die, Loral, c'mon P)
Loosing a little time, maybe 10min to run back to a zone isn't a very disuasive penalty.
With altar: time to recover bodies: minimal.
PP cost, covered above.
Run back: 10-20min tops IN SPITE of screwing up. The least that could happen.
Single player RPGs aren't 6 year old MMOs, Loral. You know that. EQ shines when it is easy to start but hard to master. We're talking of raiding or dangerous single group content. There's lots of safe and easy single group content. It's not like anyone is putting a gun on your head to go there.
Those single player game don't have the social aspect, the longevity, the learning curve, the complexity, the variety, that EQ has. In many ways EQ goes a lot farther and is a lot better to me than them, for these reasons.
To answer your last question: something to make up for the loss of risk that CRs represented. To their choosing.
Comment Posted by: Loral on March 7, 2005 11:22 AM
I think the point still stands.
Many people, myself included, felt that the previous implementation of corpse recovery was too difficult, too punishing, too time consuming. SOE aparently agreed. I think this is one of the best changes to the game in a long time. I asked for it since I started writing for this site and I am very glad to see it.
Comment Posted by: Redcloud on March 7, 2005 12:22 PM
That's highly subjective, Loral. You will always find lazier people than you to applaud any dumping down of the game. Does that mean that it's a good thing?
No.
There's a difference between designing an expansion with that aspect in mind and removing it entirely from the game.
Comment Posted by: Perc on March 7, 2005 12:25 PM
I have an idea if you want more "risk for reward." Everytime you die, hit yourself in the foot with a baseball bat. It'll take you a while to again concentrate on the game and also sway you to NOT want to die again. That way, it'll make both camps happy. Easier CRs and more risk/reward. /shrug Just an idea. My nachos and I will remain here chilling and enjoying the show.
Comment Posted by: Loral on March 7, 2005 01:08 PM
Of course my opinion is subjective. So is the view that the game should be more painful. You want the game to appeal to hardcore gamers who grit their teeth and spend two hours on painful CRs. I want a game that appeals to more people who don't have two hours to spend on CR. I am happy to see the game going in the direction it is. We simply disagree.
Comment Posted by: Tuppet on March 7, 2005 02:52 PM
>>I want a game that appeals to more people who don't have two hours to spend on CR.
it's a game and should be fun. i want to kill mobs, quest, etc and NOT be on a CR for the next 2 hours! I've had my share of nights that were "ruined" (no progress made) because I died and had to spend my ENTIRE NIGHT(wtf?) trying to get a corpse back.
there's a lot of pressure in doing a CR:
1. experience - not only can you lose exp, you can lose a level, spell, pants, etc. also you only have 3 hours to get that corpse and wait/beg/log alt for a rez.
2. time - first, you lose time that it took you to grind that experience in the first place. second, you "lose" an amount experience while on your CR - time that could have been spent killing mobs!
third, what if you have someone waiting for you or you are waiting for someone else? sry - i can't grp, I'm on a CR! =(
how lame is that?
3. actually performing the CR.
a)how quickly can you get back to where you died? a port isn't always available.
b)you made it to the zone where you died, now how to get that corpse without creating another one? lemme see, I died WITH my equipment/buffs now I have to get it WITHOUT my equipment/buffs.
c)what about hazards within the zone? not only see-invis mobs but cliffs/lava/traps/ice...
---
Should CR be a part of the game? sure.
If so, what % of the game? I think it should be minimal. I shouldn't feel punished; they shouldn't be an exercise in masochism. Honestly, I've had a few CR's that were extremely difficult and aggravating: in the lava of sol A/B? plane of fear? top of velk's? the Hole?
simplifying this aspect of the game, I think, will help in the long run.
I've had plenty of help with CR's throughout my EQ career. and honestly, i'm grateful for every one because some of them were a serious pain. however, perhaps the time spent on a CR could have been put to better use...??
Comment Posted by: on March 7, 2005 04:00 PM
CR sucks, maybe you should learn not to die.
Comment Posted by: on March 7, 2005 05:28 PM
"Yes but your 70 camaro is still a 70 camaro (excepting any personal modifications you've done to it), and you '04 vette is still an '04 vette."
Absolutely correct my 70 Camaro was and always will be old dated clunky technology. The Vette is modern technology and so much more fun.
See that is the key word that the "ubers" and SoE seem to have forgotten. FUN that is what is driving EQ2 and WoW sales. As people have grown up and matured they realize that EQ is a time sink designed to make you play the game longer so that Sony gets more money from you over time. The game wasn't designed to be fun, never really was and never will be.
I am sorry that some of you like to sit and wait, while the world passes you by. If you spend your RL time like you do your in game time you must be a very bored lonely person.
Comment Posted by: on March 7, 2005 05:39 PM
70 camaro is and was more fun at a better price than a corvette has or will ever be.
of course thats my opinion, which of course like my opinion on the fun in eq, differs from yours.
Comment Posted by: Loral on March 7, 2005 05:43 PM
"simplifying this aspect of the game, I think, will help in the long run."
That's what I'm confused about. Since the release of Dragons of Norrath, CR HAS been simplified. No matter how far out you are, you can pay a fee and have your body returned to you one click away from the Plane of Knowledge.
"See that is the key word that the "ubers" and SoE seem to have forgotten. FUN that is what is driving EQ2 and WoW sales. As people have grown up and matured they realize that EQ is a time sink designed to make you play the game longer so that Sony gets more money from you over time. The game wasn't designed to be fun, never really was and never will be."
I agree with part of this. Fun is the determining factor in all of this. Corpse recovery and death shouldn't be fun, but it shouldn't dominate a game session either. I disagree with another part. You mention that SOE lost track of what fun is but then say that EQ2 has it. SOE knows whats fun and the EQ1 developers know whats fun as well. Dragons of Norrath missions are great fun and very few days have gone by that I didn't enjoy my time in EQ.
Comment Posted by: on March 7, 2005 08:26 PM
It is a different online gaming world now. I can't say that the ways of EQ 1 would work today even for me. I enjoyed it as I enjoyed mapping out dungeons on graph paper playing rpg's years ago which is to say a lot.
However, I would never expect to map dungeons on graph paper these days but would expect a nice friendly auto mapper. Funny thing is, I have never completed a single computer rpg in the last 15 years. They had better graphics, more features, easier to play than the games of old but they never held my interest past a few hours.
EQ2 and WoW may have much improved game mechanics and ease of use but I really wonder they can hold the interest of people for even half as long as EQ 1 did. When everything is handed to you the satisfaction of it is far less than when you worked hard for it. Short term, WoW will get big numbers but they will need to work incredibly hard to keep them as the boredom of having everything the game can offer in a matter of a couple months of causal play will have people leaving.
Comment Posted by: Redcloud on March 8, 2005 03:28 AM
Exactly. Loral, if you feel better at seeing EQ belong to very lonely underachievers too afraid to take any risk, so that they take only very small risk, and get pampered and spoonfed in ldon-like pointbased mini-missions, more power to you.
But it's a disgrace for the game. It is and was much more than a mediocre nowit noguts magnet. It sure will line SoE's pockets, but for how long? That kind of gamer has any chance to last? I wonder.
Comment Posted by: Redcloud on March 8, 2005 04:31 AM
That said, I agree about the streamlining the access to what is doable in game by the player. There 3 dozen combination of keys to do 3 dozen different things you don't have a readily access to but matter.
The default UI needs some streamlining badly. That already would benefit the new player greatly.
Comment Posted by: Loral on March 8, 2005 07:04 AM
I swear two different people are posting under the name Redcloud =)
"Exactly. Loral, if you feel better at seeing EQ belong to very lonely underachievers too afraid to take any risk, so that they take only very small risk, and get pampered and spoonfed in ldon-like pointbased mini-missions, more power to you."
You must have played a different game than I did five years ago. Five years ago people hunted the same mobs over and over again for days to sell for cash. Then they'd buy all their gear in the east commons tunnel. Plat is the first point-based loot system and people used that since the game came out.
People also sought the lowest risk for the highest gain since the days of Lower Guk. Groups hung out right at the zone in to every zone because actually going deep in meant a lengthy corpse recovery at best.
I don't know how anyone can argue for static six hour long camps for rare drops on rare mobs after trying out the 90 minute plot-based missions and the point system. I spent five days camping Ragefire in Solusek B and I never want to do anything like that again. No one should have to go through that.
"But it's a disgrace for the game. It is and was much more than a mediocre nowit noguts magnet. It sure will line SoE's pockets, but for how long? That kind of gamer has any chance to last? I wonder."
A disgrace? That's a bit melodramatic. There weren't any nognuts in this game back five years ago? I don't buy the idea that the difficulty of the game filtered out asshats. We had asshats in EQ as long as the game was out and I've known many asshats who are fully able to do corpse recovery and find a teleport when they needed to.
This is the same argument for flagging; that PoP flagging somehow kept all the jerks out of the best zones when I knew guild leaders willing to train anyone to save their own skin in Tactics and Fire.
Difficulty isn't a filter for jerks, it's a filter for people in general. The more overly difficult the game is, the less likely it is to draw in more people. Today more than ever it is important that EQ maximizes fun (including risk, yes) and minimizing downtime. The Knowledge Stones, Soulbinders, The Nexus, the Wayfarer Magi, the Bazaar, and the Corpse Alter improved this game a lot from the game it was five years ago.
"That said, I agree about the streamlining the access to what is doable in game by the player. There 3 dozen combination of keys to do 3 dozen different things you don't have a readily access to but matter. The default UI needs some streamlining badly. That already would benefit the new player greatly."
I agree with that completely. It's something I brought up in a few past evil agendas and in my six steps to one million subscribers article. SOE should always look for new ways to simplify the UI. At least with Missions we didn't gain a new window, they just modified the task window to handle quests and missions and it does a superb job.
Comment Posted by: Redcloud on March 8, 2005 08:01 AM
Hehe no Loral but sometimes I have hard time to make myself cleare so I have to exagerate a bit P)
You forget to mention that drops like PPs are random. Drops on mobs are random. It's NOT like LDON at all. And secondly the people who didn't or couldn't go head to head against the king in lower guk could persue safer means to gear up at the East Common or West Freeport "bazaar".
But that's all I'm saying. There was a CHOICE. To do or not something dangerous. That's the one thing I care. Not all people sought the low risk, safe way to do things. (Wiping in lower guk was ugly, not too long, but ugly).
Why do you keep taking as example the failures of SoE or Verant instead of the successes. Having a good group going that would help each other in spite random drops meant something. I know it can be frustrating. It happened to me then. It happened to still recently, loosing about every single aumgent for days in RS. Yet I still prefer that to a point system. There's no fun in it, just greed.
I happen to have camped Ragefire the old way for days and tens of hours too. Do I miss it? No. Does it have anything to do with any of the content since Velious? Neither. Try to pick meaningful representative situations, not the absolute worst SoE/VI came up with. Of course it shouldn't exist. Like it shouldn't have existed to need to camp 60 hours for a paw of oppola at the time or certain epic parts for weeks.
Yes the game difficulty does filter unskilled players by large. At least at a guild level, you just don't take them. That simple. People unable to function together just don't pass the skill test if they are unwilling to learn and adapt. But the game needs to have a learning curve and some complexity to filter them out. Or it won't just happen. You allways have inept players around forever. It doesn't meant that they represent a significant percentage of the playerbase if the game doesn't catter to them.
"Guild leaders training anyone.." That's melodramatic P)
As if the POP expansion was what raiders would want in the first place (ever did the same flag up to 30 times multiplied by ... 30 different flags? No thanks). POP in many aspects, as I aknowledge repeatedly, could/should have been the last expansion the way it was setup. Some choices were just terribly wrong in my opinion, but that's a whole other topic.
Yes, EQ needs to maximize fun. Agreed. But NOT by dumping it down its risk factor. Gameplay, UI, humour, immersion, originality, looks, sure go for it, ask for a new UI and new models, more immersion and creativity. Any day.
But not features that detract what I stated above. It still needs to be easy to apprehend but hard to master or it has no point whatsoever.
Task window is huge improvement. Timers on shared tasks are missing and ultimately it's demented to have 2 or 3 different places to check lockout timers. We need a single window for all.
Comment Posted by: on March 8, 2005 10:44 AM
^Difficulty isn't a filter for jerks, it's a filter for people in general.^
Very True.
^The more overly difficult the game is, the less likely it is to draw in more people.^
WRONG!
The correct answer is, the less likely it is to draw in LAZY people who want SPOONFED EASINESS.
^Today more than ever it is important that EQ maximizes fun (including risk, yes) and minimizing downtime. The Knowledge Stones, Soulbinders, The Nexus, the Wayfarer Magi, the Bazaar, and the Corpse Alter improved this game a lot from the game it was five years ago.^
I agree that games should be about fun, however I disagree that all of those things are an improvement. Easier? yeah. Improvement? no.
As was commented above, wow, eq2, and any other forthcoming 'next generation' game will have an incredibly difficult time retaining players with the extreme 'ease of play' style.
Of course, if thats what they want, a large and constant turn over of new players, then that could possibly work too.
Comment Posted by: on March 8, 2005 10:46 AM
Here, I think the core difference between players is where and how they find the difference between challenge and fun and entertainment.
TV is entertainment, everquest is not.
Stop trying to turn EQ into TV.
Comment Posted by: Buddy on March 8, 2005 03:05 PM
I've been following EQ, especially on Mobhunter, even though I quit years ago. Seeing MMORPGs like Shadowbane and Dragon Empires try and fail, and seeing a shallow game like WoW have such success, I knew the original EQ would have to evolve in some way or ultimately fold. I was fascinated to see how that evolution would take place, even though as I say I haven't played in years.
Then I read the above-linked post from Brenlo about nostalgia. It seems to me that there must be a better way to react to persistent feedback from players who wish for a more immersive game than to write a condescending post that essentially tells them they have no rational reason for wanting what they want. Much better to have just ignored their pleadings. Instead, Brenlo chose to insult them. Now the thread is locked and I can't even post a response. Just as well, EQ just lost me as an audience forever.
Comment Posted by: Loral on March 8, 2005 03:43 PM
It was persistant feedback from a small number of people and I didn't read it so much as an insult as a call to consider the reasons behind it. We all read things the way we wish, however.
Comment Posted by: Redcloud on March 9, 2005 06:14 AM
Loral, I don't think they can get away with the current game graphics. Doing better in Omens and DoN for sure but it's "poor" compared to the other current games. In that I mean what they do with it. I don't know if it's graphic limitations or designer skill, but EQ needs more.
I much appreciated the animations of Tirranum. It shows that they can do better than what we see usually. That's what I miss badly. Some originality, customization, etc to make it more lively.
Comment Posted by: wombat on March 9, 2005 07:40 AM
There may be a niche for a thinking mans game that will keep a long term player base while other games go for lowest common denominator mass markets. Difficulty should not equal running through an unchanging WK for years though, thats just a timesink.
Well EQ may get some returning off peak players.
EQ2 is royally screwing Oz players by changing reboot/patch times EVERYNIGHT to the middle of Oz primetime which will make it impossible for Oz Guilds to do anything. A riot has broken out about it as its aim is to not patch in USA mornings which affects afk merchants and no USA Guild events at all. You may see some coming back from this but I suspect most refugees will go to WoW unless Sony comes up with a peace package fast.
Its important to point out this isnt what was asked by USA players there was no request to destroy Oz Guilds viability. Sony decided it was what US players wanted after complaints by people having to relog their afk merchants due to everynight reboots.
Just a blast from the past with news from another world. ;)
Wombat
Comment Posted by: Glamdrigg on March 9, 2005 01:35 PM
This has overall been a great thread. I love the give and take I have seen here on CRs etc. And, while I enjoy reading many of Redcloud's posts (as he posts a lot and usually adds to the discussion very well) I have been biting my tongue this entire thread. I dont disagree in priciple with your arguments Redcloud. However, its the down your nose attitude that I find discouraging. Its the same old Raiders vs. Cansual player crap we have been hearing for a long time. It all comes from the same place.
The game is just that: a game. If you truly beleive that your play style makes you a superior individual then perhaps you should read Niche and his theory of the Superman.
I am a causual player and I actually have no problem with difficult CRs and losing exp. It makes me plan ahead for my game time. I map out what I'm going to do during my day so that when I do squeeze in that precious window of play time I can execute my plan. This can be very enjoyable or it can all fall apart and I go back to the drawing table and figure out what to do next.
The new summoning improvements have really taken the headache out of this. And, lets not complain about why it is only available to those who bought the DON expansion or not. Everyone keeps saying the game needs to evolve... well when an evolutionary expansion comes out perhaps you should evolve with the game and buy it. If not don't whine about the new options you can't do. I'm no advocate for SOE, but they are running a business. UNICEF is not in the On-line game biz as far as I Know.
I would think this would be fairly common sense stuff.
Comment Posted by: Glamdrigg on March 9, 2005 03:26 PM
Woah bad typing,
Sigh,
Nietzsche's Superman........
sigh,
Comment Posted by: wombat on March 9, 2005 07:32 PM
What doesnt destroy us makes us stronger....
Heh you can always tell the hardcore raiders by the way they thump the podium and launch into the "World in Flames" speech LOL ;)
Of mensch and ubermensch...
Comment Posted by: Redcloud on March 10, 2005 04:27 AM
Glamdrigg, I guess I will move on when EQ won't support my playstyle. We aren't there yet, not quite.
The "down your nose attitude" is merely my way to make fun and feed the raiders' hatemongering while I cut into comments like "take this raiders" or "glad you're going extinct" or "we're know better since we're the silent majority that pays" or "if SoE does it it must be good for us" attitude of a number of posts or editorials. I usually take the illogical, partisan, prejudiced or superficial part of those posts and mirror it on purpose. That's my form of sarcasm.
What I truelly think of the raider/casual relation:
A janitor will feel superior beating a doc at poker. Do I want to be the janitor? (nothing wrong about being a janitor, just using that to illustrate my point).
I hope that answers your question.
Comment Posted by: Glamdrigg on March 10, 2005 04:43 PM
Do I want to be the janitor?
It depends on how much he took the Doc for in poker...
If you haven't spotted the sucker in your first 20 mins at the table then the sucker is you.
LOL
Comment Posted by: Loral on March 12, 2005 08:37 AM
Fewer metaphors vex me more than the ones that paint raiders as doctors and single-group hunters as janitors. Not only is it insulting but also highly inaccurate. How about if we compare single-group hunters to a Mom and Pop shoe repare store and raiders to the Walmart that comes in and steals all their business?
Comment Posted by: Buddy on March 13, 2005 04:25 PM
"It was persistant feedback from a small number of people..." - Loral
Well, I imagine it's persistant feedback from a small number of people because the majority of people who feel immersion and distance have been trivialized in EQ no longer play. Persons such as myself who keep up with a game they no longer play are rare. One of the laws of online game design is that the best feedback you can get, but the hardest to obtain, is feedback from players who are leaving your game. SOE can find that feedback here:
http://vanguardsoh.com/forums/showthread.php?threadid=10699&mode=linear&perpage=40&pagenumber=1
One of the dominant themes of that thread is that people quit EQ because immersion and distance were trivialized.
Buddy
Comment Posted by: Redcloud on March 14, 2005 06:40 AM
The janitor/doc comparison isn't from me but I got it while you, Loral, evidently didn't.
Try reverse the roles and see what it means...
I could clue you in but I won't. Use your brains.
Comment Posted by: Glamdrigg on March 14, 2005 02:43 PM
Funny...I thought this was a role playing game not a validation of my self worth...
Comment Posted by: Redcloud on March 15, 2005 05:22 AM
It indeed isn't. That the analogy was about. It's supposed to put in perspective the subjectivity and narrow validity of someone feeling superior at beating someone in a.... game.
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons License. Email Mike at mike@mikeshea.net for more questions or comments.