Interview with Maddoc on Live Events
by Loral on November 11, 2005
This week I had the opportunity to sit down (well, email) Jason Mash, senior designer for Everquest and the brain behind some of the more recent Live events including the War of Antonica event we saw recently. Let's dig right in.
Loral: What is your general philosophy, doctrine, and purpose behind live events? Why do you do them? With what questions do you begin?
Maddoc: One of my most fond memories of EverQuest, especially in the early days, were the random events that would occur throughout the world in various zones. For instance, in Qeynos Hills, a skeleton army would spawn occasionally and GM's (who played some much larger, meaner skeletons) would participate in the event. I remember a feeling sense of wonder and awe that I was participating in this event, helping to rid the world of these terrible undead minions.
The overall purpose behind the design of live events is basically to invoke the same sense of awe and wonder. Typically, we want to create an event that the players can interact with, influence in some cases, enjoy participating in, and ultimately have a lot of fond memories of. We also want to expand on existing lore, sometimes in very subtle ways, which adds a layer of community coherence by giving them something to collectively try and figure out and discuss. For those who are interested in the lore, that's always an aspect that they enjoy, and I like to help foster that as much as possible.
Loral: What goes into the design of a live event? How long does it take?
Maddoc: A live event goes through a number of phases, the first (and probably most important) of which is the planning stage. We figure out what our goals are for the particular event, what lore we want to present to the players, how we want them to interact with the event, how we want them to influence the event, and ultimately the sequence of events that the players will encounter as the event progresses.
A live event doesn't have a standard amount of time that it takes to build since it's very tightly and directly tied to the scale of the event. I (along with Prathun, Absor, and Keridon) had roughly 6 weeks to design and implement the Retake of Grobb live event. That particular event was very large scale, spanning an unprecedented 90% of the old-world EverQuest zones, which was able to be done due to the amount of time we had to work on it.
Loral: What sorts of things did you learn when doing the War of Antonica events leading to the retake of Grobb?
Maddoc: The Retake of Grobb event was a learning experience for everyone involved, giving us an opportunity to do something that had never been done in EverQuest before, while at the same time giving the player's something global to participate in and affect to a certain extent.
There were only a couple things that I would like to change about the event progress, the most notable of which being the presentation of some of the more subtle lore points. Some of them were a little too obscure or dependant on players being in the right place at the right time, so I'd make them a little more obvious.
Loral: How do live events fit into the release of a new expansion? Tell us a little about the design and story of the Depths of Darkhollow release event.
Maddoc: In conjunction with the ongoing storyline in EQLive, we incorporated the events that would lead Norrathians into Darkhollow. The storyline had been planned months in advance when we first conceived of the expansion.
The turning point began when Lanys T'Vyl, child of the Prince of Hate, entered Neriak, the dark elf city, and demanded the help of Queen Cristanos Thex in the way of a sacrifice for the greater good of dark elves. Lanys had a plan, specifically magic knowledge, which could elevate their evil race above all in Norrath. Cristanos obliged and offered up her very own husband, King Naythox Thex, as the sacrifice for Lanys' designs.
By deceiving and drugging Naythox, Cristanos made her husband ready for the ritual Lanys had planned and there was a procession from the dark elf city into the nearby Nektulos Forest. There was a decision to conduct the ritual outside the city should anything go terribly wrong.
For many days, Cristanos' necromancers of her Dead guild chanted in a circle around Naythox Thex as they worked the magic of the curse Lanys mapped out for them. There were many interruptions as the army of the light and good in the world, Norrath's Keepers, attempted to thwart the queen's and Lens's efforts. Skirmishes took place across the forest until, one night, Lanys, the leader of the Dark Reign army, and Firiona Vie, leader of Norrath's Keepers, met on the battlefield.
As the battle reached a fever pitch, the curse upon Naythox was almost complete and was seemingly fed by the chaos around it. While all in the forest focused on the clashing blades of war, Cristanos saw her opportunity to withdraw her husband to act in her own scheme and teleported them both back to Neriak, the dark elf city, with the aid of her wizardly handmaiden.
The removal of Naythox also removed the focus of the curse and the discordant energy in the air created an explosion that few have seen before. And when the dust cleared, the armies of both sides, including their leaders and commanders, had disappeared and a passage to a dark underground world appeared the path to Darkhollow.
And while Norrathians discovered Darkhollow, no one yet knows where Lanys, Firiona, or their allies have gone.
Loral: Where do you see live events going into the future? Do you see monster missions playing any part?
Maddoc: I foresee monster missions becoming more and more integral to live events in the future. On that front specifically, we've currently got a Halloween event that's in progress that makes use of the monster mission system, and it seems to be going over really well with the players. It's very likely that they'll continue to make an appearance.
Loral: What are some of the main complaints you hear in regards to live events and how do you address them?
Maddoc: The most common complaint I've heard recently is that there's sometimes not enough notice that an event is going to happen, which I think we'll work into the next event, perhaps giving a day or two warning before big events or battles.
Loral: What was your favorite event or piece of an event?
Maddoc: I'm very partial to the armies in the Retake of Grobb event (mostly because I spent a lot of time developing it for the RTG events), specifically the technology that manipulated their movement across Norrath. I'd like to develop that technology further, adding in a lot more flavor to them, such as training sessions, night-time activity, and other events of the same nature. There's so much potential for this new technology that I believe we could put to use in many other places in EverQuest besides live events.
How awesome would it be to see small patrols of guards gather together, fall into formation, and begin a training session in their home city? After which, they could go on a march throughout the lands, patrolling for and exterminating any immediate threats to their culture? Maybe they are occasionally given orders to escort an Emissary of the Court to another, distant city. It's all part of an interactive and dynamic world that I'd love to expand on and add into EverQuest at any chance.
Loral: How much did you love those most excellent Reports of the Wilds?
Maddoc: Reports of the Wilds? What are these mysterious relics of which you speak? All friendly jokes aside, they were very well written and I enjoyed them thoroughly. :)
Notes: With luck, we will have more such interviews with other members of the Everquest Live staff. I thank Jason for spending the time to answer these questions and hope to talk to him again soon.
Loral Ciriclight
14 November 2005
loral@loralciriclight
Comment Posted by: Aarkan on November 14, 2005 12:29 AM
I always miss everything but the aftermath, all of this sounds great though. EQ is the only game that really does stuff like this and it's awesome. I really hope that more of it shows up in the future.
Comment Posted by: Glormane on November 14, 2005 09:55 AM
The Kidnapping of Fiorna Vie: TOFS for Qvic people only.
The war: Killstealers show themselves when trying to get the gear from the patrolling armies.
I'm not that keen on Live events, as their is a finiate amount of people able to participate and ultimately its the better geared that win the day.
I did enjoy the Haloween quests, but even then, parts for the food quest were selling for 10k by unscrupulous players.
Comment Posted by: Naladini on November 14, 2005 03:23 PM
Which is why an environment like Legends tends to excel at providing a better event experience. Its not 100% about your gear and guild, there is a bit more order to the events, requiring cooperation between attendees.
That being said, anything that can be done to make Norrath more dynamic is a good thing, on any server.
Comment Posted by: mac173 on November 14, 2005 03:41 PM
My only request for future events, it to make them accessable to EVERYONE. The war events looked great, but you could not fight alongside the NPC's without getting killed by them. I wanted to fight in the war. I did not care if I got any loot, and was not interested in hanging in the wings looking to KS or knock off random wandering mobs like a rogue. In the next event, just let me fight.
Comment Posted by: wormy on November 14, 2005 03:43 PM
(Naladini)Which is why an environment like Legends tends to excel at providing a better event experience. Its not 100% about your gear and guild, there is a bit more order to the events, requiring cooperation between attendees.
------------
It's more about a much smaller population on this high-price server *g*
On the third world servers, there have been problems with greedy high levels since the start of those 'events'.
If events are for players around level 40, they need to keep out any players to high for it!
Why not use instanced event zones, one zone per event?
Should be easy to program the allowed level range to enter it.
Comment Posted by: xsi on November 14, 2005 04:52 PM
"The Retake of Grobb event was a learning experience for everyone involved, giving us an opportunity to do something that had never been done in EverQuest before, while at the same time giving the player's something global to participate in and affect to a certain extent.
There were only a couple things that I would like to change about the event progress, the most notable of which being the presentation of some of the more subtle lore points. Some of them were a little too obscure or dependant on players being in the right place at the right time, so I'd make them a little more obvious."
So, other than some of the lore points being too obscure, he was happy with the way the war went???? WTF?!?! Endless, pointless trains, loot clicking fests, extremely buggy army prep quests (that seemed to have very little bonus for those who did them), and almost nothing for the lower levels to do...
Luckily, after the war, I had already resolved to avoid any and all future events. I say "luckily" because it sounds like Maddoc and I are of entirely different mindsets on what constitutes a fun event.
Comment Posted by: Buddy on November 14, 2005 05:54 PM
Off Topic:
Loral, I once exchanged emails with you to ask if you would support an EQ Classic Server with only the expansions through Velious enabled. You called me an "EQ luddite" and claimed to see no value in rolling back the game to a previous state. But it just occurred to me. WoW has been going strong for a year now with NO EXPANSIONS. The newbie areas are always packed because people level one character to max, then start over and level another character. Casual players like it because they don't feel left behind by the uber players who have invested hundreds more days /played than they have. IF EQ were to launch a server with content capped at Velious, I have no doubt that it would lead to the reactivation of hundreds of accounts. I don't see how you can seriously call yourself an advocate of seeing EQ appeal to a broader base of people and recapture some of its lost population when you won't support an idea that people have been persistently screaming for.
Comment Posted by: Loral on November 14, 2005 06:25 PM
Actually, I didn't call YOU a luddite. I called those who desire to roll back Everquest to respark the golden days luddites.
I am actually a luddite about a great many things. I handwrite stories with a fountain pen in little snobby black Moleskine notebooks (http://www.moleskineus.com/). I wrote my summit article by hand with this same fountain pen, a Pilot Vanishing Point with Noodler's black ink from a bottle, not those cartridges that the kids are all about these days. Take a look at the design of this website - it drips of luddite. In any case, I didn't direct it at you, my quote was:
"The Everquest luddites have been around for a very long time. This group complains every time a new expansion is released. They complain whenever the dev team adds a feature like the [Knowledge] Stones, the corpse alter, or higher level caps. They look back fondly on the game they cursed only a few years ago. If Everquest went back to the days of Luclin or earlier, without any of the features or enhancements we've seen with LDON, PoP, or Dragons, it wouldn't be able to compete at all with current MMORPGs."
I still don't think that reverting Everquest back four years and removing every new feature that has helped keep Everquest competitive will bring any players back for very long. The way to improve Everquest is to look forward, not backward.
By the way, I noticed when I googled "Luddite" in my gmail account that I never replied to your third email. I apologise. I am always up to debate the issue =)
Comment Posted by: Armarant on November 14, 2005 08:18 PM
Buddy Wrote:I don't see how you can seriously call yourself an advocate of seeing EQ appeal to a broader base of people and recapture some of its lost population when you won't support an idea that people have been persistently screaming for
yep. if you call less then 5 percent of the EQ population who know how to whine a broad base.. (Maybe less then that) : ontop of possibly not having alot of people on such a server. it would also require developer time to produce such a server because they would need to "Cleanse" the old world zones off any NPCs they put in with expansions after velious or (Insert your verant expansion here)
Comment Posted by: Buddy on November 14, 2005 08:53 PM
"Recapturing the golden age of EQ" is not something I'm interested in. The circumstances could never be duplicated. But neither of you addressed the central point of my post. WoW has TWO MILLION SUBSCRIBERS in large part because of the approach they took to the jealousy factor. They created a game where nothing is out of reach of even the most casual player. The result is that players are constantly recycling the content, making it possible to get a group at any level on any server at any time of day.
Thing is, WoW completely blows compared to EQ before it was dumbed down with insta ports and instancing. But in about 10 minutes SOE could bring up a server on test with only Classic, Kunark and Velious enabled (no other modifications needed... leave in all the zone conversions and quests that were added later... doesn't matter... all that matters is that there be no Bazzar, no Nexus, no Pok, no instancing, just a single world for players to interact and compete in). If they put that server up on test to see how popular the idea was, we'd know pretty quick if the thousands upon thousands of posts begging for such a server were the work of a few hands, or evidence of a desire for the type of game play which WoW delivered, and which still maintains TWO MILLION SUBSCRIBERS.
Or they can just keep making high end raid content for the few thousand people who still play this game, the type of players who frequent Mobhunter.
Comment Posted by: menleniel on November 14, 2005 09:39 PM
They might well flock to such a server but how long would it last? People know too much. It would be very fast before people did the appropriate trade skills to gear up as best as can be done. You still would have people concentrated in small areas, after all eveyone knows where the good drops and xp areas are already. You'd have guilds fighting over ntov in two months time and then what would they do? I think it would be fun for a short while, but I don't think it would stand the test of time.
As for live events, I don't care how much ks'ing, training etc goes on (though maybe there is something they can do to lessen it) I want to see more of them.
Comment Posted by: Loral on November 14, 2005 11:36 PM
"WoW has TWO MILLION SUBSCRIBERS in large part because of the approach they took to the jealousy factor. They created a game where nothing is out of reach of even the most casual player. The result is that players are constantly recycling the content, making it possible to get a group at any level on any server at any time of day."
Actually, I think they have over four million subscribers now, maybe more, according to the propaganda.
I think you make a big assumption to say that the exact reason they have that many has more to do with game balance or focus than it has to marketing or worldwide distribution techniques. We don't know for sure why WOW has had as much success as it has. Solo content, lower system requirements, easier interfaces, excellent newbie games, high PVP focus; all of those are factors as well. Who can say why one matters more than another.
"They created a game where nothing is out of reach of even the most casual player."
Take a look at the 19th patch and all of the talk about 20 and 40 man raids. Look over previous patches to see how many new raid zones, raid instances, and pieces of epic equipment they put in. Much of Warcraft is far outside the grasp of the casual player (whatever that is).
"The result is that players are constantly recycling the content, making it possible to get a group at any level on any server at any time of day."
Earlier tonight I logged into WOW and played my level 30 hunter. I wasn't able to get a group in either Crimson Monastary or Gnomer. One of the great failings I see with WOW is the heavy focus on soloing from level 1 to 60. With four million players, I should never have trouble finding a group and I do. I could talk all day about why and what it's missing.
By the way, some breaking news. We received initial information on the Depths of Darkhollow loot upgrade. You can read about it on Caster's Realm:
http://eq.crgaming.com/viewarticle.asp?Article=9920
Comment Posted by: Aarkan on November 15, 2005 01:01 AM
At least EQ isn't being completely overhauled for the second time in a year...
Comment Posted by: Armarant on November 15, 2005 01:28 AM
Loral Write:Earlier tonight I logged into WOW and played my level 30 hunter. I wasn't able to get a group in either Crimson Monastary or Gnomer. One of the great failings I see with WOW is the heavy focus on soloing from level 1 to 60. With four million players, I should never have trouble finding a group and I do. I could talk all day about why and what it's missing.
could say the same thing about everquest. looking for group is not just a WoW specific problem. and doesnt get easier if a game requires grouping.
Comment Posted by: Elemer on November 15, 2005 08:52 AM
Loral & Armarant,
2cp on the issue of "groups" in a MMO.
If you logged in and couldn't get a group for a specific event/raid/instance in either EQ or WoW, in a set time frame, I'd say it was luck working against you.
Both games suffer from a /lfg issue that has existed since the first moment both games went live.
You have two choices, either bring your own group if what your looking to do is a specific event/raid/instance, or toss out some tell/whispers to your friends/family/guildies to see what they are up to and go join them.
That's been the way of it for ages, and will no doubt remain the way of it.
Gregarious, social people will always find they get groups easier, it is after all a microcosm reflecting the real world social interactions.
To the point Loral, odds are good Loral you simply don't have an active enough circle of friends in WoW to support the thing you want to do for you in the game.
WoW and EQ both have the same issues with getting a group for 99.9% of the content. It would be 100% if not for the current drive people have to do 15 minute groups in EQ for MM's. One can look over the last 6 years and project that as soon as the next round of nerfs kill off MM's, that it will go back to 100%.
Comment Posted by: Simkine on November 15, 2005 05:36 PM
I think the desire to play "classic" server is that back then there wasn't such as big a gap as there is now. A very casual player could join a group with a ntov geared person and not feel useless or be unable to contribute.
If we take off our rose covered glasses, there were issues with the game back then; some classes like paladins and enchanters really needed work. And let's not forget the brutal hell levels. So I wouldn't want to play the game like it was back then, but playing a server that has the class tweaks and the exp gains of today would make it interesting.
My druid has 680AA, 8k hp, and 9k mana, full elemental, time, qvic, txevu flags. Before PoP, it was very easy and fun to create an alt and level it up. This is very much like WoW is now.
However, during PoP flagging and onward (GoD, etc) it simply became impossible to play more than 1 character and progrss easily. Levels, gear, AA, and flagging requirements simply put it out of reach. The amount of time require to play another character at an equivilent level is daunting to say the least. When I stopped wanting to play my druid I left EQ because the work involved in trying to make another toon to play with people I knew wasn't possible.
Comment Posted by: RosesAreRedEQ on November 15, 2005 06:26 PM
The old fashioned triggered events, like the GD Ring Wars, were a lot of fun.... all those cute little archers lined up in defense of Thurg, and they demanded organization and knowledge.
The special anniversary exp quest and the halloween mask quest were very popular. But most of the "events" are not well publicised. Either we find out after the fact and miss them, they are way too high level for the zones they are in or they result in death for those who wander into them accidentally. I still see /ooc from people wondering where the spell merchants from FV are now! And mostly, the prizes aren't that terrific.
Tentatively, I like the idea of the dynamic events if they don't shut out lower levels and make travel near them (for non participants) possible with reasonable care... like Kith used to be safe daytime only.
Comment Posted by: Armarant on November 15, 2005 08:52 PM
Elemer Wrote:To the point Loral, odds are good Loral you simply don't have an active enough circle of friends in WoW to support the thing you want to do for you in the game.
That is pretty much what happens in every MMO that you cant get a group. your active circle of friends != amount of friends your able to group with..
Pick up groups are effectively dead for the most part. no matter what MMO you goto.
Comment Posted by: Maeven on November 15, 2005 08:53 PM
The problem with these events is they are extremely buggy. Look at the wars...people had to kill their supposed ALLIES if they wanted any good loot! And while the Halloween quests were great WHEN THEY WERE WORKING...half the time, they weren't...workin, that is. First it was the issue with no flags being received for 4 of teh 5 tasks, then it was that the West Commons zone not working properly (was supposed to have lots of scarecrows for teh pumpkin bits but they kept despawning)...and then they ended the extension early on the 13th instead of teh morning of the 14th as they had stated....and all they can do now about that little fiasco is make excuses and say "Oh, we meant GMT, not PST...sorry, too late, you lose"...I feel sorry for everyone who thought it was PST (I already completed my quests so I am nor affceted). SOE makes these stupid mistakes, and then what's worse is they refuse to acknowledge them and/or apologize. As far as teh Halloween Quest is concerned, I give then an A+ for the CONCEPT (as I said, the quests were very enjoyable when they worked), but a D- for implementation.
Comment Posted by: Buddy on November 16, 2005 04:02 AM
"They might well flock to such a server but how long would it last? People know too much."
Same problem in WoW but people are content to blast through the same content over and over. That's the argument against a Classic Server that I could never answer before now. People said, "Yeah it would be fun at first, but people know all the content and would quickly get bored." My response to this was to propose that the server be given a limited lifespan or required to maintain a certain subscriber base or be merged into another standard server.
I played the Beta for WoW and have played a char in retail to 27 before becoming completely bored... Early EQ is such a better game that's why I'm begging people like Loral, who have some degree of influence, to get behind the idea. I don't want to play on the current EQ servers because I'll never play to the high end game and the areas I play in whenever I reactivate an account are empty. I recently activated 4 to do a boxing experiment and figured out it's bad for you if you have carpal tunnel.
But now that I see that WoW has something in excess of two million subscribers, or at least four times the number of subscribers that EQ ever had, I realize that a server with limited content CAN have staying power. WoW is so popular because anyone can reach the end game, there's no reason to be jealous against the power gamers because you can take your time and go just as far in the game as they can, and it's a way easier game than EQ.
SOE could do an experiment to see if creating a similar set of circumstances would regain some subscribers. Put a Classic-through-Velious server up on test and see how many people start playing it. If the response is large, take it to live and make sure everyone knows this is an experimental server and it will be merged into a standard server in six months unless it maintains a certain population standard set by Sony. You cap the content at Velious, level at 60, no AAs. Just like WoW, there's no reason to be jealous against the power gamers because although they can get to NtoV faster, you know you can get there eventually.
As far as there not being enough space, we're clamoring for a Classic Server precisely because in the current EQ there is TOO MUCH SPACE. There are too many zones, and then you factor in instancing and it just makes the world feel small. We want to play a game where if you want to buy an item you don't go to the Bazaar, you go looking for wherever the players gather to trade. This creates a sense of community. Fighting over NtoV is better for us than the luxury of waiting for an instance group. We'd rather fight over territory and have our reputations mean something than always be getting into pickup groups with people that we don't care about and may never talk to again. We want to share a single game space with no instances, no Bazaar, no Nexus, no PoK. Those things have made the game better for other people but it destroyed the game for us. You've got those things on your server. Could we please have ONE SERVER where those things don't exist, so all the likeminded people could congregate there? And if our server is a failure, it gets rolled into a standard server and you NEVER have to hear these arguments EVER again.
Comment Posted by: Buddy on November 16, 2005 04:17 AM
"I think the desire to play "classic" server is that back then there wasn't such as big a gap as there is now. A very casual player could join a group with a ntov geared person and not feel useless or be unable to contribute."
Exactly. What I termed the "jealousy factor" could just as easily be termed the "feeling useless factor." It may be that not everyone can do all the 40-man raids in WoW but if I have a level 60, I don't think I would feel embarrassed to group with people who do go on those raids. Highest level I ever attained in EQ was 53. If there was a Classic-through-Velious server I would probably level to 60 and go to NtoV for the first time.
"I think you make a big assumption to say that the exact reason they have that many has more to do with game balance or focus than it has to marketing or worldwide distribution techniques. We don't know for sure why WOW has had as much success as it has."
Sure enough. But Loral, if you're serious about wanting to see EQ regain some of its lost subscribers, shouldn't you be analyzing why it is that WoW has eclipsed EQ in subscribers? If it was a simple question of marketing techniques, why isn't SOE engaging in them now to close the gap with WoW? No, it's something about the fundamental structures of the games. Can I say for certain that it's a casual-versus-willing to put in 600 days /played question that makes all the difference? No. But that's the most obvious difference between EQ and WoW. The people who are still playing EQ are part of a niche audience who want to spend extraordinary amounts of time working their way through massive amounts of content. WoW has proven beyond a doubt that there is a larger audience for a game with less content than EQ.
Comment Posted by: RosesAreRed on November 16, 2005 11:13 AM
The extravagant exp in the post Velious zones vs the old, fun zones where we learned to play our classes is the real problem, I think.
Just one example, LOIO was THE stepping stone zone for all races once they hit level 20 and there was a lot of content there... both solo & group. It was common for players to spend 6 months or 10 levels there. Even making it to FV or Cablis to bank and shop was a challenge.
It was easy to get groups - there were often more than 100 players in the zone. But once PC offered twice the exp for the same time investment, the old zones were quickly abandoned in favor of the overcrowded & not very interesting new zones.
Comment Posted by: Teremar on November 16, 2005 01:03 PM
A bit of truth in advertising!
If you visit the WoW forums, you'll find that one of the most perisistant topics is...casual players vs. raiders. Yep, Blizzard has managed to open a new front in the Bloodwar. Levels 1-59 WoW really is the anti-EQ: plenty of content for soloing, interesting and fun dungeons for single groups. But at 60 the solo content quickly dries up, then the single group content, and eventually all that's left is raiding or PvP. At this point there is less scope for a top-level non-raider to advance in WoW than in EQ (no AA's for one thing, so just killing mobs does nothing for you). Blizzard has said there will be a lot of high-end single group content in the expansion, but that's a long way off (and their credibility on subject is limited too). Many people blame the influence of Furor and Tigole, former EQ raiders who are now WoW designers. Certainly Blizzard is repeating a lot of SOE's mistakes.
People do make alts, more than in EQ, but alts are more likely to have established social networks and less likely to play in pick-up groups. And while leveling up is a lot of fun, you can only do the same quests so many times before they get old. So to say people just level up alt after alt after alt in WoW is inacurate in my experience.
To claim WoW's success shows a "Classic" EQ server would succeed is quite a stretch in my opinion.
Yes, WoW does have problems with finding groups, though no worse in my experience than EQ. Leveling is quick, so part of it is a shortage of low level players--you'll notice far more UBRS raids forming than Gnomeregan groups, for example.
Level 30 is a particularly bad level just because of issues with the instances at that level. Gnomeregan is harder than most, so a lot of people avoid it, and the others are far away from the centers of population. Consider visiting Stranglethorn Vale Loral, where people do form a lot of groups for outdoor quests, and leveling to about 35. At that point you'll be able to get groups for Scarlet Monastery (NOT at 30) which is very popular. In the meantime monitor the IF LFG channel and be on the lookout for groups going to the Stockades, Blackfathom Deep (excellent dungeon), Stonefang Keep, and Razorfen Kraul as well as Gnomeregan.
If there's a lesson for EQ in that, it's the colossal failure of the "Meeting Stones" which try to form groups automatically. Most people choose not to use them rather than give up control of the make-up of their groups, which makes the stones nearly useless even for the people like me who do use them (my attitude is that the infinite variety of incompetence you find in pick-up groups makes them a never-ending tactical challenge). People end up using the unexpected ability to join the LFG channels of distant zones instead, even if that corrupts their chat channels on a regular basis. WoW players would kill for EQ's LFG tool--it's a shame more EQ players don't realize just how useful it is.
Comment Posted by: Maitreya on November 16, 2005 01:05 PM
There's already a nice, long thread about a classic server on the EQ forums where I've made my feelings known, so I'm not going to discuss that here. I'd rather talk about classic servers there, and the Maddoc interview here. So, here's my attempt to get back on topic:
"Maddoc: I'm very partial to the armies in the Retake of Grobb event (mostly because I spent a lot of time developing it for the RTG events), specifically the technology that manipulated their movement across Norrath. I'd like to develop that technology further, adding in a lot more flavor to them, such as training sessions, night-time activity, and other events of the same nature. There's so much potential for this new technology that I believe we could put to use in many other places in EverQuest besides live events."
This is my favorite part of the whole interview. This does sound very cool, and I really hope he can put in some armies like this. That would make Mait a happy elf.
Comment Posted by: Fatguynlilcoat on November 17, 2005 02:57 AM
I agree with RosesAreRed. I'd like to see a revamp of LOIO or even a MM out of there. That'd be alot of fun, kinda like the mission that takes place in Lguk.
Comment Posted by: Buddy on November 17, 2005 03:59 AM
"To claim WoW's success shows a "Classic" EQ server would succeed is quite a stretch in my opinion."
Not a claim I ever made, since my proposal includes contingency plans in case the idea doesn't get off the ground. My prediction is that such a server would be wildly popular, but I could be wrong. What does it cost SOE to find out, as compared with what they might gain in reactivated subscriptions, if only for 6 months before the server was merged into an existing standard server? My point about WoW is that it proves there is a very large audience for a game with capped and accessible content. Seems like it would make financial sense for SOE to do an experiment and see if some of that audience could be lured back to their game.
Comment Posted by: Teremar on November 17, 2005 08:22 AM
But that was my point: "capped and accessible" does not describe WoW. Yes, for maybe the first six months after release there was no major difference between the raiders and the non-raiders, but only because the raiders hadn't had time to run Molten Core much. Now that you're seeing people in all MC gear or better, the gap is obvious. Especially when raiders and non-raiders meet in the Battlegrounds.
Comment Posted by: sunshadow on November 17, 2005 05:23 PM
The problem is that EQ is too big. Those people who ache for a "Classic" server see this and long for when the world was smaller and the game was actually more fun.
It would probably ease this feeling if instead of just adding zones with each expansion, SOE started replacing them. Making the zones themselves dynamic. Events that take place in the world change the world not make the world bigger.
Note I am not talking about zone revamps here I am talking total new zone designs, with new NPC's, monsters and difficulties.
Something Like a meteor chashes into to North Karanas so all those zones are radically changed/revamped. This keeps the game dynamic, the only problem is how SOE would sell it as an expansion.
Comment Posted by: Naladini on November 17, 2005 09:59 PM
"Something Like a meteor chashes into to North Karanas so all those zones are radically changed/revamped. This keeps the game dynamic, the only problem is how SOE would sell it as an expansion."
Change the word Meteor to Moon and you've got the premise for EQ2 =P
Comment Posted by: sunshadow on November 20, 2005 07:29 PM
The premise is a good one, you cannot keep making the world bigger while not being able to increase the population to fill the voids.
While I love a lot of the old zones and the sentimental value to me, they are dead. If the Moon did crash and we lost all of Luclin and the Karanas would the current game be impacted much. Probably not. The bazaar could be moved elsewhere as if it was a true "market". The Val Sha would become like the Frogloks, homeless for a while and off cource you would lose PC (this would be a good thing) but the rest is rarely used.
The problems with however is that people naturally resist change. If EQ had started out this way then it would be the norm and people would accept it. You only need to look at the recent 'war event' complaints to see how people felt at the low level zones becoming dangerous for a few weeks. So a change as big as the loss of seveal zones or the whole moon would probably inspire a whole lot of account cancellations even if they were replaced by a new expansion set of zones.
The yearning for a classic server is probably because at that point the zone count was probably about right for the server population size. Nearly every zone had something going on in it, now most are empty. Then if you add instances and MM's the whole thing is really out of control.
Comment Posted by: Teremar on November 21, 2005 12:44 AM
My main objection to any proposal to replace old zones with new ones has always been that the old zones are generally better than the new ones. But nuking the Karanas and Luclin I could live with. :)
Still, empty zones, by definition, don't hurt anyone. Almost empty zones...well, if the people who want groups know where to go to get them, that means the people who are in those almost empty zones are there by choice, like having those zones there, and would presumably object to them being removed.
Wasn't the whole idea of hot spots to tell people where to go if they want to find groups and be with lots of people? Aren't they working?
Comment Posted by: Maitreya on November 21, 2005 01:07 AM
"The premise is a good one, you cannot keep making the world bigger while not being able to increase the population to fill the voids."
They do have a way to increase population to fill the voids. It's called merging servers.
Comment Posted by: sunshadow on November 21, 2005 01:33 AM
It's a matter of population density. A vast majority of players are apathetic towards grouping at any particular time. Which is why people are using general chat to announce their LFG as well as using the LFG tool. If you make the population more dense then you increase the chance people will look for groups cause their fav solo spots will be taken.
I mean the designers are limiting the amount of solo spots in new expansions but really that dosn't help because all the old solo spots still exist and some should always exist otherwise all the classes that love to solo would quit. It is a fine line to walk.
However I agree that zone revamps as a whole suck. For the recent NF one they should have just combinded it and CC together and thereby create a new and different zone.
If they did something like make the Karanas into one zone it would be new and would have to be fundametally different so I feel less people would complain.
Again it really all comes down to what you condition you player base to accept. If you make dynamic world changes periodically from "day 1" then the players will accept them. I mean you only have to look at how players accept the bugs and patches in EQ now to realise what we will put up with. If up to DoDH EQ had been bug free, everone would have cancelled their account after a week of release.
Comment Posted by: Teremar on November 21, 2005 11:08 AM
Ah, now I understand. It's not those almost empty zones that bother you, it's the people soloing in those almost empty zones who should be grouping with you!
I support strong incentives for grouping. I can see arguing that SOE should put all their effort into content for groups rather than soloists. But do you really want to advocate taking away something people like to do just so they'll have no choice but to come help you with what you like to do instead? Seems to me that's crossing over to the dark side.
As a practical matter, I often have time available in small chunks, or where I'm free but have to be "interruptible" on short notice. If I can't solo during those times I won't log on at all. So I suspect you could decree that you must be in a group to get any xp or loot at all and still get far fewer additional people to group with than you imagine.
Before you start with the "MMORPG's are a social game" bit, let me remind you that raiders use it to justify why raiding is the only true way to play a MMORPG as well. I doubt anyone plays EQ purely to solo (let's face it: EQ is a very poor single-player game). But if people can't or don't want to group on a given night, it's in the best interest of the game to keep them playing anyway. Trying to ensure that "their fav solo spots will be taken" is wrong on several levels.
Don't get me wrong: SOE shouldn't encourage soloing. Any time soloing becomes more rewarding than grouping the nerf bat should be ready. But excluding certain playstyles is what kept EQ a niche game--though a large niche--as opposed to WoW.
(Which is why it dumbfounds me that WoW has made their endgame more exclusive than EQ's. If they don't turn that around before all the non-raiders who loved levels 1-59 burn up the little content available to them at 60, expect the next big game to scoop up a lot of people from WoW.)
Comment Posted by: Sunshadow on November 21, 2005 06:49 PM
How easy it is to be misunderstood. Note: I play a Necro so solo is a large part of my style. However the fact that I can go to any one of 50 zones and be the only person in the zones is Bad. Increase population density does not reduce soloing unless the content is designed to stop it. Which, by the way a lot of new content does.
If you think back however to the first 3 expansions you could actually pack 3 or 4 groups and 3 or 4 soloers into the same zone with very few probs.
This is what I mean by increasing population density. If you have zones that promote multiple group but also have solo options then all of a sudden you have a vibrant zone. People chat, groups become more dynamic as the need for a time commitment reduces, why because there are already replacements in the zone. This is what todays game has lost.
In todays game non-soloers are forced to sit in POK with LFG until something comes along. Rather than saying ok I'll duck over to zone x and see whats happening as I know there might be a group spot open or I might be able to set up a duo with someone who will be soloing there or solo myself until a spot does open up.
Comment Posted by: Teremar on November 22, 2005 12:56 PM
I'll just repeat an observation I made earlier: what makes the game feel vibrant is the number of people talking in the channels you can hear, not the number of people actually in the zone. And SOE added some new chat channels shortly thereafter. How that's working in practice I can't say, but it seems like a much better solution than actually removing content.
Comment Posted by: sunshadow on November 22, 2005 04:30 PM
Like I said, people naturally resist change!!
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons License. Email Mike at mike@mikeshea.net for more questions or comments.