Next Everquest installment: Everquest "Next". - Page 5

Gecko · 08-14-2009, 02:25 PM

EQ2 sold in a mediocre fashion due to WOW being a better designed game with less hardware requirements.

The problem with SOE is they need to market to a demographic, not attempt to be everything to everyone.

They have a stable of games already. If some are seriously underperforming, why not shut them down, fix them, and re-release them geared towards a specific demographic? Instead of three half baked mediocre, dated Fantasy level based MMOs, why not redesign two of them to see if you can hit the jackpot or at least double their subscriptions?

Dalate · 08-14-2009, 02:26 PM

damn right..grab the best things from eq, eq2 and VG and smash em together...

Combat from VG was pretty good overall but could still do better in the animations department. Still, comes the closes to what I would like to see around.

Freedom that was in EQ!..camping mobs...quests that arent fkin smashing you in your face..have the new mmo age of "follow the crumbs to your next quest hub n00b" but also have npc's out in the middle of fkin now where that DOESNT have some sort of bat signal over his head start you on some crazy ass quest..

some sort of fkin modifier to spells and gear when players are engaged in PVP...although honestly..no class should be "equal" to all others...lets face it..alot of MMo's go down hill trying to rebuild in the name of "Balance".

Attack guards /enabled, trains enabled...wow this one pisses me off till this day...target is immune, target is immune...let me pull some mobs from the train if I want..wtf

END GAME#######

Dont release the game until you have an end game thats actually going to entertain people for a long time. People are going to buy this without a doubt, level up as fast as we can because we want to see the "cool" stuff and dont plan on sitting on our asses while development catches up...Sony already has enough points against them.

Itzena · 08-14-2009, 02:27 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Tortfeasor

Copy/paste Vanguard classes, make combat less spammy and have encounters be more strategic/script based, be focused on group content. Have 20% solo content with maybe 20% raid content.

/profit

Only if '/profit' is retard-speak for 'bankruptcy'

Daezuel · 08-14-2009, 02:32 PM

To chime in, design from the top down, make sure your end game is fun FIRST, screw designing an entire world full of leveling quests if your game isn't fun at max level.

I have max characters in 7-8 mmo's at least gathering dust. I am truly sick of playing at least a semi entertaining leveling process only to find out a month or two later the end game is complete shit.

Whatever your plan for end game, do it right, do it first.

Tortfeasor · 08-14-2009, 02:36 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Itzena

Only if '/profit' is retard-speak for 'bankruptcy'

Nice constructive post there.

One of the biggest gripes about eq2 is the 50-60 unnecessary abilities that every class has. But even so, eq2 is one of the better mmos made in the last 5 years. The TSO expansion focusing on 12-15 single group dungeons is a ton of fun and has kept non-raiders quite happy.

And if you think that VG class design was not amazing, you're simply wrong.

Gecko · 08-14-2009, 02:46 PM

I agree totally, Tort.

Keep it simple, make it fun should be the mantra for all MMOs.

At high levels you can add in infinite variety and depth, but to start it should be easy and enjoyable.

Tide · 08-14-2009, 03:00 PM

there's reason to hope: Free Realms shows they know how to build to a demographic. More rational game decision making, less sandy vision.

Itzena · 08-14-2009, 03:05 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Tortfeasor

Nice constructive post there.

Somebody who thinks "20% solo/60% group = profit" doesn't get constructive replies.

AlekseiFL · 08-14-2009, 03:15 PM

Everquest Next Sounds Fucking stupid.

It Reminds of Next with Nicklas Cage that movie sucked balls as most of Cages latest movies have.

Only reason to See Next was Bootylicious Jessica Biel

fumata · 08-14-2009, 03:19 PM

20/60 im not so sure about... personally anymore i refuse to do 'pick up' groups because there are just too many idiots out there that either spam you to death with nonsense or play like shit.

Static group works sometimes but sometimes hard to dedicate specific times to play (alot of us from eq are adults now with responsibilities and such lol)

i do a lot of my gaming with my wife and uncle - so usually just 2 or 3 of us. Rest of the time is solo other than when the guild raids.

AlekseiFL · 08-14-2009, 03:20 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Convo

Wonder how long before Brad is involved?

Think Brad was Involved he Picked the Name Next.

Cause that is what happend when They Fired his Ass they Said NEXT.

Bongk · 08-14-2009, 03:23 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Itzena

Somebody who thinks "20% solo/60% group = profit" doesn't get constructive replies.

yes because obviously every game made based on grouping has failed horribly while every game based on soloing has been a smashing success! right?

And please, don't even fucking say "but they won;t top wow subs" who the fuck cares. I mean really, since when do you have to be the #1 company in ANY industry to be successful. Imagine if every restaruant just said, well we cant beat McDonalds, lets just shut it down.

I know everyone around here likes to toss niche around like its a bad word, but read McQuaids latest blog, they were hoping for 500k subs, not 12 million and would have been a great success and satisfied with 500k subs. And they were not working with a shoestring budget.

Tortfeasor · 08-14-2009, 03:26 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Itzena

Somebody who thinks "20% solo/60% group = profit" doesn't get constructive replies.

See, this post is way better than the other one. here you actually say something other than "nuh-uh" and thereby contribute to the conversation. So despite your disavowal of constructive posts you managed to nail down your beef with my idea. You are welcome for the help. So you want raid content to be more than 20% I presume? Cool.

Lost Ranger · 08-14-2009, 03:28 PM

It's just the project code name. It is a fairly common practice. Microsoft does it all the time. For example...

Windows XP = Whistler
Window Vista = Longhorn
Windows 7 = Blackcomb

If they don't have a name yet, or at least are not willing to release it they just code name things. Then again they really could mean to call the game Everquest: Next. As in Everquest: The Next Failure.

Bongk · 08-14-2009, 03:29 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Tortfeasor

See, this post is way better than the other one. here you actually say something other than "nuh-uh" and thereby contribute to the conversation. So despite your disavowal of constructive posts you managed to nail down your beef with my idea. You are welcome for the help. So you want raid content to be more than 20% I presume? Cool.

No game will ever please everyone, the problem is everyone on this forum seems to think that they way they want to play or the way wow did everything is the only way to be successful. They also seem to think you need wow sub numbers to be successful.

They could not be any farther from correct on either point. I love how idiots like the one above me call games that are highly profitable failures.

08-14-2009, 02:26 PM	#62 (permalink)
Dalate Registered User Join Date: Jun 2003 Location: Florida Posts: 73 -17 Internets	.. damn right..grab the best things from eq, eq2 and VG and smash em together... Combat from VG was pretty good overall but could still do better in the animations department. Still, comes the closes to what I would like to see around. Freedom that was in EQ!..camping mobs...quests that arent fkin smashing you in your face..have the new mmo age of "follow the crumbs to your next quest hub n00b" but also have npc's out in the middle of fkin now where that DOESNT have some sort of bat signal over his head start you on some crazy ass quest.. some sort of fkin modifier to spells and gear when players are engaged in PVP...although honestly..no class should be "equal" to all others...lets face it..alot of MMo's go down hill trying to rebuild in the name of "Balance". Attack guards /enabled, trains enabled...wow this one pisses me off till this day...target is immune, target is immune...let me pull some mobs from the train if I want..wtf END GAME####### Dont release the game until you have an end game thats actually going to entertain people for a long time. People are going to buy this without a doubt, level up as fast as we can because we want to see the "cool" stuff and dont plan on sitting on our asses while development catches up...Sony already has enough points against them.

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Email this Page
Display Modes	Rate This Thread
Linear Mode Switch to Hybrid Mode Switch to Threaded Mode	Rate This Thread:

08-14-2009, 02:25 PM	#61 (permalink)
Gecko Registered User Join Date: Oct 2003 Location: Cleveland Posts: 625	EQ2 sold in a mediocre fashion due to WOW being a better designed game with less hardware requirements. The problem with SOE is they need to market to a demographic, not attempt to be everything to everyone. They have a stable of games already. If some are seriously underperforming, why not shut them down, fix them, and re-release them geared towards a specific demographic? Instead of three half baked mediocre, dated Fantasy level based MMOs, why not redesign two of them to see if you can hit the jackpot or at least double their subscriptions?

08-14-2009, 02:32 PM	#64 (permalink)
Daezuel Registered User Join Date: May 2007 Posts: 592 -7 Internets	To chime in, design from the top down, make sure your end game is fun FIRST, screw designing an entire world full of leveling quests if your game isn't fun at max level. I have max characters in 7-8 mmo's at least gathering dust. I am truly sick of playing at least a semi entertaining leveling process only to find out a month or two later the end game is complete shit. Whatever your plan for end game, do it right, do it first.

08-14-2009, 02:46 PM	#66 (permalink)
Gecko Registered User Join Date: Oct 2003 Location: Cleveland Posts: 625	I agree totally, Tort. Keep it simple, make it fun should be the mantra for all MMOs. At high levels you can add in infinite variety and depth, but to start it should be easy and enjoyable.

08-14-2009, 03:00 PM	#67 (permalink)
Tide grindlexic Join Date: Mar 2006 Location: darkest Seattle Posts: 81 +0 Internets	there's reason to hope: Free Realms shows they know how to build to a demographic. More rational game decision making, less sandy vision.

08-14-2009, 03:15 PM	#69 (permalink)
AlekseiFL Registered User Join Date: Oct 2004 Location: Florida Posts: 283	Everquest Next Sounds Fucking stupid. It Reminds of Next with Nicklas Cage that movie sucked balls as most of Cages latest movies have. Only reason to See Next was Bootylicious Jessica Biel

08-14-2009, 03:19 PM	#70 (permalink)
fumata Registered User Join Date: Apr 2004 Posts: 23 -4 Internets	20/60 im not so sure about... personally anymore i refuse to do 'pick up' groups because there are just too many idiots out there that either spam you to death with nonsense or play like shit. Static group works sometimes but sometimes hard to dedicate specific times to play (alot of us from eq are adults now with responsibilities and such lol) i do a lot of my gaming with my wife and uncle - so usually just 2 or 3 of us. Rest of the time is solo other than when the guild raids.

08-14-2009, 03:28 PM	#74 (permalink)
Lost Ranger Registered User Join Date: Jul 2002 Posts: 3,001 -4 Internets	It's just the project code name. It is a fairly common practice. Microsoft does it all the time. For example... Windows XP = Whistler Window Vista = Longhorn Windows 7 = Blackcomb If they don't have a name yet, or at least are not willing to release it they just code name things. Then again they really could mean to call the game Everquest: Next. As in Everquest: The Next Failure.