Hi everyone!
First off, let me preface this by saying that I loved Everquest (yes, I realize this isn't EQ). Played a cleric all the way up into Gates of War. It was my first MMO and have been playing them since.
I watched the livestream the other day, and I have some concerns - perhaps a dev, or other players can help with it. I am keeping an open mind. And I subscribed just so I could post this.
All I could think about while watching that stream was it felt like Everquest, with better graphics.
And if that is all the game is going to be, great! I'll probably end up passing, however.
If there's more to it that I am not seeing, here is where I am asking for help.
1.) The naming conventions of the mobs were exactly the same.
2.) The classes seemed exactly the same. Even down to the spells the cleric was casting, to the familiar golden shield buff and it gave me nightmares of having to carry around gemstones to be able to cast them from EQ.
3.) Pulling and combat seemed exactly the same.
4.) Everquest had very boring cities, with NPC's just milling or standing about without saying or doing anything. And it looked like it was going to be much the case here. And yes, I realize this game isn't Everquest, but it's following it pretty closely.
My question is, is this what the game is supposed to be? Everquest with better graphics? Is it the same standing in a corner, pulling mobs to you (aka, camping), and gaining levels that way? Or is there going to be, or plans that will come in, much more involvement in cities and the world around us?
Please, don't take this post like I am ragging on anything. If that is what the game is meant to be, fantastic and I'm happy for those wanting it. I suppose I'm looking for the challenge of Everquest, but far more in depth nature to it than that game offered. Maybe it's too early to even be asking this, who knows. I am excited to try the game out and I appreciate comments from those helping me past some of this. Thank you all!
Jarretyn said:My question is, is this what the game is supposed to be? Everquest with better graphics? Is it the same standing in a corner, pulling mobs to you (aka, camping), and gaining levels that way? Or is there going to be, or plans that will come in, much more involvement in cities and the world around us?
This game is being designed as a 'spiritual successor' to EQ and Vanguard, so yes it's suppose to look a lot like Everquest. Its goal is to capture a targeted audience who very much enjoyed that style of play, and to give people new to MMOs the opportunity to try out such a game. Brad has hinted that he has further plans for development that he didn't have a chance to implement in the previous games, so I'd encourage you to surf the boards and maybe listen to the developers podcasts to get an idea of where they're going with things.
Jarretyn said:Hi everyone!
First off, let me preface this by saying that I loved Everquest (yes, I realize this isn't EQ). Played a cleric all the way up into Gates of War. It was my first MMO and have been playing them since.
I watched the livestream the other day, and I have some concerns - perhaps a dev, or other players can help with it. I am keeping an open mind. And I subscribed just so I could post this.
All I could think about while watching that stream was it felt like Everquest, with better graphics.
And if that is all the game is going to be, great! I'll probably end up passing, however.
If there's more to it that I am not seeing, here is where I am asking for help.
1.) The naming conventions of the mobs were exactly the same.
2.) The classes seemed exactly the same. Even down to the spells the cleric was casting, to the familiar golden shield buff and it gave me nightmares of having to carry around gemstones to be able to cast them from EQ.
3.) Pulling and combat seemed exactly the same.
4.) Everquest had very boring cities, with NPC's just milling or standing about without saying or doing anything. And it looked like it was going to be much the case here. And yes, I realize this game isn't Everquest, but it's following it pretty closely.
My question is, is this what the game is supposed to be? Everquest with better graphics? Is it the same standing in a corner, pulling mobs to you (aka, camping), and gaining levels that way? Or is there going to be, or plans that will come in, much more involvement in cities and the world around us?
Please, don't take this post like I am ragging on anything. If that is what the game is meant to be, fantastic and I'm happy for those wanting it. I suppose I'm looking for the challenge of Everquest, but far more in depth nature to it than that game offered. Maybe it's too early to even be asking this, who knows. I am excited to try the game out and I appreciate comments from those helping me past some of this. Thank you all!
There is a lot of inspiration taken from EQ and Vanguard because those are the games that Brad worked on in the past and also a large amount of the fan base are fans of those games as well.
But I expect there to be quite a lot of original ideas in Pantheon as well. Just check out the Pantheon difference on this very website for some of the ideas that are going to be new to the game.
https://www.pantheonmmo.com/game/pantheon_difference/
Of course there will be some things that are similar to EQ because that is what a lot of the fan base want. But I get the impression that they are not trying to copy it exactly. Just take some of the good ideas and evolve them into something new.
You want more in depth than Everquest? Hmm... wouldn't that be something. Since I consider Everquest to be the most in-depth MMORPG ever developed, with the highest skill gap between a seasoned player and a new player in any MMORPG to date.
Would love to see a game be more in depth than what I consider the most in depth game ever, however consider that this is not a AAA studio, we may have to step back our expectations.
I guess we all have different meanings of depth.
I personally thought Everquest was a very simple game. Get a group. Park at a spot. Pull mobs to you. Rinse and repeat. I raided in Everquest as well. All I did was sat facing a wall, doing complete heal chains the entire time. Not sure how that qualifies as "deep".
I suppose by depth I mean other things to do in game beyond just that. Everquest 2 had a variety of things to do in game, and whether people thought it was a good game or not, I enjoyed that depth of play. Whether it was questing, raiding, collections, crafting, working on my house or guild hall, etc. I really don't care to rehash the past, and just log in to pull mobs to me as I sit immobile.
But as I said, if that is what this game is meant to be, so be it. Not my cup of tea anymore.
To those that replied politely, thank you.
Jarretyn...
Since you are now subscribed, check out the website and really read the section The Pantheon Difference and I think that will let you know what the game will really be like. Those core values are what most of us are desiring and cannot wait to experience again. If you do not line up to that, you are probably right in that you will be playing something else.
This is pretty early in developement. I think the environemtn will look simple and maybe cookie cutter for atime to get a baseline of direction.
I was a good question to ask though. I am seeing the same thing but we have a long way to go. That too is part of the adventure.
Ox
I would say I understand ultimately what i think your getting at is that EQ gameplay is old..... which in truth it is.... BUT the core principle of stratgy group play is alive and well. What this game will do it bring back the VALUE of group play and Group strategy while introducing a uptodate gameplay.
Most the classes are the same as many of us love those, many of hte spells will prob be cross over as well as we love those.... HOW you use those with much better AI these days will be much more valuable now then the days of EQ's Peak.
You see as I think about EQ the things that drove me to leave at the release of WoW and what they are attempting to do with Pantheon is remove all that not neede stuff but still capture the aura and strategy and group play that EQ did offer. All I can tell you is if you DID NOT LIKE EQ you probably will not Like Pantheon as most of us feel this is the REAL EQ2.
So much more they can do these days with Mobs AI, graphics, animations, collision and so on that will make group strategy play at a whole new level.
Xanier
Jarretyn said:I guess we all have different meanings of depth.
I personally thought Everquest was a very simple game. Get a group. Park at a spot. Pull mobs to you. Rinse and repeat. I raided in Everquest as well. All I did was sat facing a wall, doing complete heal chains the entire time. Not sure how that qualifies as "deep".
I suppose by depth I mean other things to do in game beyond just that. Everquest 2 had a variety of things to do in game, and whether people thought it was a good game or not, I enjoyed that depth of play. Whether it was questing, raiding, collections, crafting, working on my house or guild hall, etc. I really don't care to rehash the past, and just log in to pull mobs to me as I sit immobile.
But as I said, if that is what this game is meant to be, so be it. Not my cup of tea anymore.
To those that replied politely, thank you.
I guess the easiest way to put it is, a games simplicity will depend on how much you put into it. If all you did was group and grind in EQ then that's all you're going to get? There was much more depending on what era you were in, obviously. Quests, Epics, Raids, Housing, Crafting, Bargaining (auction-wise), Farming gear/augs, AA, Collectibles, etc. Forgive me if I'm coming off rude (I'm honestly not meaning to be if that's what it seems like), I just really don't dont what you mean by depth if none of that is depth to you. The game is heavily inspired by EQ/VG, so much of it will be similar. As Pyye stated, check out their tenets for the game and that will give you an idea of what it's going to be like. Also, keep in mind this game is still in Pre Pre-Alpha, so we're barely scratching the surface on what's going to be available. As far as I know, VG was even more in depth than EQ (I only played it very briefly, just what I've heard). The best thing to do is just keep track of development, because we only know so much thus far and what appeals to our own interests. Everyone has different tastes!
Jarretyn said:I suppose by depth I mean other things to do in game beyond just that. Everquest 2 had a variety of things to do in game, and whether people thought it was a good game or not, I enjoyed that depth of play. Whether it was questing, raiding, collections, crafting, working on my house or guild hall, etc. I really don't care to rehash the past, and just log in to pull mobs to me as I sit immobile.
I might advise you try a class other than a cleric. ;)
Brad has said before that they are not just simply making Everquest with updated graphics. They are taking things that worked in EQ/VG, but they are making a new, modern mmo with new features. It's not going to be exactly the same thing.
Yes, the combat looked exactly like old EQ combat style, but that's what a lot of us want. At the same time, it is still early in development. There will be more things added as time goes on, and I'm sure there will be differences between the EQ cleric and the Pantheon cleric. Personally, even if the classes are basically the same, I would still be happy.
I think this thread is troll bait.
Any cleric that "just sat facing a wall using CH" wouldn't be regarded as a very good cleric. If you were camping only low risk areas with single pulls, perhaps, but that was an uncommon scenario.
While I don't feel compelled to respond to the OP, it is a good chance to point out the inherent flaw in complete heal and the detrimental effect it had on the healer role in EQ. The fact that it was ever a valid strat to play a character that way, and that such an ability made a single class mandatory for every efficient group, was not a good thing.
To the OP, ya the game is like EQ, but judging its potential by a single pre-alpha stream is probably not wise. There is plenty of info on the site to chew on. When you're done with that I'd recommend reading Aradune's posts on these forums and listening to the round table discussions from last year. If you still feel like its not a game you'd want to play, then chances are its not.
Pyye said:Jarretyn...
Since you are now subscribed, check out the website and really read the section The Pantheon Difference and I think that will let you know what the game will really be like. Those core values are what most of us are desiring and cannot wait to experience again. If you do not line up to that, you are probably right in that you will be playing something else.
This is a great bit of advice.
To the OP, ya the game is like EQ, but judging its potential by a single pre-alpha stream is probably not wise. There is plenty of info on the site to chew on. When you're done with that I'd recommend reading Aradune's posts on these forums and listening to the round table discussions from last year. If you still feel like its not a game you'd want to play, then chances are its not.
Great words.
Dullahan said:I think this thread is troll bait.
Any cleric that "just sat facing a wall using CH" wouldn't be regarded as a very good cleric. If you were camping only low risk areas with single pulls, perhaps, but that was an uncommon scenario.
While I don't feel compelled to respond to the OP, it is a good chance to point out the inherent flaw in complete heal and the detrimental effect it had on the healer role in EQ. The fact that it was ever a valid strat to play a character that way, and that such an ability made a single class mandatory for every efficient group, was not a good thing.
To the OP, ya the game is like EQ, but judging its potential by a single pre-alpha stream is probably not wise. There is plenty of info on the site to chew on. When you're done with that I'd recommend reading Aradune's posts on these forums and listening to the round table discussions from last year. If you still feel like its not a game you'd want to play, then chances are its not.
We need more cleric
Jarretyn said:I guess we all have different meanings of depth.
I personally thought Everquest was a very simple game. Get a group. Park at a spot. Pull mobs to you. Rinse and repeat. I raided in Everquest as well. All I did was sat facing a wall, doing complete heal chains the entire time. Not sure how that qualifies as "deep".
I suppose by depth I mean other things to do in game beyond just that. Everquest 2 had a variety of things to do in game, and whether people thought it was a good game or not, I enjoyed that depth of play. Whether it was questing, raiding, collections, crafting, working on my house or guild hall, etc. I really don't care to rehash the past, and just log in to pull mobs to me as I sit immobile.
But as I said, if that is what this game is meant to be, so be it. Not my cup of tea anymore.
To those that replied politely, thank you.
This might not be your game, i dont know any mmorpg that doesnt have some of the concepts you hated, or felt it was easy. EQ was not easy, in the beginning when it was pre 50 levels. After that the team changed the game and now trying to rechange it back, but it is too late for making it harder. You cant expect those changes to go over too well either. When a game is being handled after the fact, and the same team is hashing out copy and paste, you need a fresh look at it.
Either way, i suggest doing some sandbox games that has loads of quests, and mindcraft type building. Maybe survival with single player features. MMorpg's maybe too easy for you
You sound bored with the games.
Niien said:I feel everyone just got trolled. :)
@OP Please rewatch and listen to the stream. Similar yes, the same, no not really other than group based fantasy adventures with friends. :)
Your probally right, either way, it does show we are sticking this one out. If people dont want to join in F em, we will hog all the good loot for ourselves HAHA
EQ wasnt just about fighting, which many people forget It is about the social aspects too, we make the game, we create our own enviroment. EQ was the bases for one of the first wide open social games there was. Not just a few players but hundreds at once across the world.
I enjoyed my days in EQ, it was fun as hell. I went nuts and had 12 accounts towards the end. It was all family accounts within the house. I ended up playing from beta till last year. With the odd break. Recently i returned to the forums to say hi to those i still remembered back then.
I wont lie, you do have hickups over the years, but you still return to what you enjoy.
I will never forget the people i met in EQ over all the years i played. It was well worth every penny, and i plan to do it again.
I kinda feel bad for Jarretyn, but I did advise perhaps trying something other than a Cleric if all you really did was look at a wall and cast heals. The Clerics I ran with were always pretty active, sometimes participating in melee itself within group content.
Do note though there's a good deal of diehards here who want more of the old versus the new because, hey, some of that old stuff was really fun that has been lost with time. It will be interesting where VR takes things, with the general idea to bring a different sort of new to the old that works, versus gutting out what made things work to begin with.
Jarretyn said:I guess we all have different meanings of depth.
I personally thought Everquest was a very simple game. Get a group. Park at a spot. Pull mobs to you. Rinse and repeat. I raided in Everquest as well. All I did was sat facing a wall, doing complete heal chains the entire time. Not sure how that qualifies as "deep".
I suppose by depth I mean other things to do in game beyond just that...
For sure: gameplay as you described here would make me feel very, very tired. If I had to raid like this, my attention would be divided through the raid and the television. That's the opposite extreme to the "action" MMOs out here, were you are constantly dodging out of gooey stuff and don't have a damn minute were you can just stand still. Extremes are bad, at least for me. Maybe there are people who would enjoy a healbot-healer exactly like the one you describe.
But actually I don't think that we have to fear that, healer (clerics included) turned into dull healbots. This was early level gameplay, with players having (probably) weak generic armor, weak spells, insane mana costs because early levels, so you have to take care what to cast et cetera. That means the mobs need to have very limited abilities also. I think later on we will have more interesting encounters.
But I didn't thought the gameplay so bad at all. We were shown nice things already, like mobs using cc on players at low levels. I thought it quite nice that you didn't have to run around avoiding bad stuff on the ground all the time. Mobs died quite fast but so were the player. I liked the constant fear of 'watch were you go, watch mobs, the oh god they come all, player going *splash*'. Don't judge the whole class or game based on early, pre-pre Alpha :)