Dullahan said:
EverQuest was a true mmorpg in the spirit of its mud and tabletop predecessors. That means your achievements were less about how perfectly you aimed your mouse or executed a series of hotkeys, and more about stats and dice rolls; how well you worked with others and the time you spent learning the game and preparing/progressing your character had a greater bearing on the outcome of events
Its sounds to me like that is what you are trying to get away from. Thats good news for you, because there are a dozen active MMOs out there that offer just that!
Dullahan has it right, also EQ had a feeling of danger that made it actually scary. The time you had invested made you think before you took a chance because you could be punished for making a wrong move. Even traveling alone was not safe. When you did well and made it to your destination or finished something the accomplishment was real , the feeling was strong.
Of course Pantheon will be modern in some ways , but after spending countless hours playing dozens of MMO's, Nothing even comes close to the community, the real feeling of danger, the real feeling of accomplishment that was Everquest. I will not apologize for that never, it was something to be there, and if you were not then you cannot know how it was.
Raive said:And this is what I and I can imagine alot of folks (especially ex-VGers) fear. Given this kind of game is aimed at a very niche market, it had to strike the right chord and do it pretty dam well. But when you read some of these threads, can't help but get the ide that some people would be ok if this game had only 1k players and 1 server but they got everything on their wishlist. Just doesn't seem too practical. Folks give off the impression where its either full-EQ or its easy-mode carebear and any feature from a modern-day mmo is tarnishing our beloved EQ.
I'm sure that there are some people that really give no consideration at all to how many people actually want to play the game, and want only the game they themselves want to play. But just as its unfair to assume that anyone that likes coming up with crazy new stuff must then insist all the crazy fluffiest crap get added, its just as unfair to assume that a person that rejects an idea must then auto-reject all new ideas. I can honestly think of 1 or 2 people I've ever seen on these forums who auto-rejects everything, and they hardly ever post anymore. I know I've certainly rejected ideas, but if you're concious of who is posting you'll note that many people like me accept or even embrace some new mechanics ideas. Hell I've offered up a few of my own.
I was the first to really enter the fray here because I felt that the thread was an indictment of anyone that has ever been vocally against a notion that was proposed. Thats just as stupid as being vocally opposed to every notion. And the wording of the OP left considerable room to interpret that those who really want an MMO that hasnt been attempted in a very long time (harsh death penalty, difficult time-consuming travel, long level curves, etc.etc.) better face reality and just accept that they aint gettin' it.
If that's indeed the OP's stance, then that's crap, IMO.
No one has addressed my repeated position here that there are 100s of titles already made and proposed that deliberately mean to build the games that dont have those old EQ trademarks. Why not follow those titles? Why must you come to the one place most likely to finally for the love of Pete, give a single solitary alternative to the easier gameplay? Why do you insist that in the one place we might have something different that we must conform to what everyone else has? How is it intellectually honest in the least to look someone in the eye and tell them they are the ones that must bend, when you are demanding that they never get what they want from any game, whereas the notions you mean to force upon us are available literally everywhere else?
"But when you read some of these threads, can't help but get the ide that some people would be ok if this game had only 1k players and 1 server but they got everything on their wishlist. Just doesn't seem too practical. Folks give off the impression where its either full-EQ or its easy-mode carebear and any feature from a modern-day mmo is tarnishing our beloved EQ."
bingo, @Raive
werzul said:"But when you read some of these threads, can't help but get the ide that some people would be ok if this game had only 1k players and 1 server but they got everything on their wishlist. Just doesn't seem too practical. Folks give off the impression where its either full-EQ or its easy-mode carebear and any feature from a modern-day mmo is tarnishing our beloved EQ."
bingo, @Raive
There are 1700 people online nightly on an emulator of a game version from 15 years ago simply because they dont have any other options.
I think it's incredibly unfair (or outright dishonest) to portray the choice as either; A) Compromise and move at least in the direction of all the other middle-of-the-road games, or B) Have 1k users.
Feyshtey said:werzul said:"But when you read some of these threads, can't help but get the ide that some people would be ok if this game had only 1k players and 1 server but they got everything on their wishlist. Just doesn't seem too practical. Folks give off the impression where its either full-EQ or its easy-mode carebear and any feature from a modern-day mmo is tarnishing our beloved EQ."
bingo, @Raive
There are 1700 people online nightly on an emulator of a game version from 15 years ago simply because they dont have any other options.
I think it's incredibly unfair (or outright dishonest) to portray the choice as either; A) Compromise and move at least in the direction of all the other middle-of-the-road games, or B) Have 1k users.
Yeah - it is an unfair dismissive argument to indicate older mechanics are obsolete and wouldn't work in the current era MMOs - much like the rose tinted glasses argument.
Pantheon Rise of the Fallen Facebook currently has 13,610 likes & the Kickstarter which showed nothing besides Brad McQuaid's name and a few chicken scratch ideas had 3,157 backers with just the suggestion that it was a return to the MMO roots. While neither is positive indication of population, I'd argue that it's much more likely that the number would reach well above 10k than remain at 1.
Fist time making it through Kith forrest at night = Amazing :)
first time making it to the front door of Caste Mistmoor = Amazing :)
Fist time making it through lesser Fay without getting killed by a brownie = Amazing :)
I can go on and on.....
These feelings you just don't get anymore from any other game for some reason. I know pantheon isn't going to be an exact of EQ and I am happy about that, I can understand every great thing has it's time and I am happy to have been a part of that old EQ crowd. Cheers *
Land said:Dullahan said:Thats just it -- Just as the tension and excitement in combat exists because of a severe death penalty...
So, let's change paradigms. Take a system like corpse runs and reinvent it. If it's not broken fine, but the reasons for continuity must be prevalent.
How about making combat performance (usually includes death) equate to loot reward? Not necessarily hard modes where mob skills are just increased in strength, but more general statistics of player deaths, being hit by mechanics, ...
I view corpse runs as a more frustrating mechanic with little reward other than don't die; increased loot level based on performance is a more positive reiniforcement for don't die.
That system already exists. The riskier the content, the greater the reward. Usually better loot is off of harder or higher level mobs.
Raidan said:Yeah - it is an unfair dismissive argument to indicate older mechanics are obsolete and wouldn't work in the current era MMOs - much like the rose tinted glasses argument.
Pantheon Rise of the Fallen Facebook currently has 13,610 likes & the Kickstarter which showed nothing besides Brad McQuaid's name and a few chicken scratch ideas had 3,157 backers with just the suggestion that it was a return to the MMO roots. While neither is positive indication of population, I'd argue that it's much more likely that the number would reach well above 10k than remain at 1.
As someone who has followed mmorpg.com for many years, I can tell you EQ is the most referenced, most fondly remembered game in the history of mmos. Not exactly science, as I don't have data, but a "real" EQ sequel is by far the most requested remake since the site launched nearly 15 years ago (rivaled only by SWG). In fact, when EQ Next was announced, the common thread running through every topic was how disappointed people were that it wasn't going to be like the original. For over a year it was discussed on a daily basis, and I was suprised how many new accounts and people I was unfamiliar with popped in to talk about it each day.
There was actually a thread about people's top 5 favorite mmos a few weeks back and only WoW was mentioned more often. EQ also appeared as the number 1 favorite game more than any other game in the thread.
Oh, and another small thing. There are over 200k accounts created on eqemu to date. This mostly for an emu run by a ghost crew that haven't created a new server in nearly a decade.
and I'll just leave this here. It was one of my favorite threads on mmorpg in recent years, though its a reoccuring topic every few months. EQ fans will enjoy reading it.
http://forums.mmorpg.com/discussion/427602/say-its-nostalgia-all-you-want/p1
There are a lot of people waiting for a game like Pantheon.
Raidan said:Feyshtey said:werzul said:"But when you read some of these threads, can't help but get the ide that some people would be ok if this game had only 1k players and 1 server but they got everything on their wishlist. Just doesn't seem too practical. Folks give off the impression where its either full-EQ or its easy-mode carebear and any feature from a modern-day mmo is tarnishing our beloved EQ."
bingo, @Raive
There are 1700 people online nightly on an emulator of a game version from 15 years ago simply because they dont have any other options.
I think it's incredibly unfair (or outright dishonest) to portray the choice as either; A) Compromise and move at least in the direction of all the other middle-of-the-road games, or B) Have 1k users.
Yeah - it is an unfair dismissive argument to indicate older mechanics are obsolete and wouldn't work in the current era MMOs - much like the rose tinted glasses argument.
Pantheon Rise of the Fallen Facebook currently has 13,610 likes & the Kickstarter which showed nothing besides Brad McQuaid's name and a few chicken scratch ideas had 3,157 backers with just the suggestion that it was a return to the MMO roots. While neither is positive indication of population, I'd argue that it's much more likely that the number would reach well above 10k than remain at 1.
i never said old mechanics are obselete. wouldnt have donated or lurked here if i wasnt interested in an oldschool style game. never said the game would have 1k players if it didnt 'compromise', the post i failed at quoting said some people would be fine if pantheon had 1k subs if it was exactly as they want. and i agree.
what i was referring to was the responders that begin every post with 'back in EQ' and others that say 'this is how it was in EQ,' any mechanic that wasnt in EQ/VG gets auto dismissed.. frankly the people that want EQ redux will probably be the first to leave, and go back to their emulator. .
their is a segment that isnt interested in pantheon being its own thing, that is what im saying.
@Werzul
Fair enough. I agree that it shouldn't be an EQ clone.
@Dullahan
Thanks for the MMORPG link - I hadn't read that. Reminds me a lot of Krixus's first post here.
http://www.pantheonmmo.com/content/forums/topic/2419/defining-the-magic-of-eq
EQ was not "hard', pre se, but it had a number of factors that contributed to make it "hard" to play.
#4) MoBs often did not behave in logical ways, and could be very difficult for the level. The first part was the most complicated in that many MoBs/Pets defied the laws of physics, pathed strangely, were bugged, or in some circumstances had exceptional programming. The odd behavior made the game "hard" for new-er players.
#3) There was no hand holding. No in game map, no exclamation points, no question marks or quest hubs. If you found an "orc jaw bone", you had no clue what it was for. I remember sketching hand made maps on graph player the first year I was playing in 2000.
#2) Grouping and Socializing were very, very helpful in the game, yet there were few things to aid you in doing them. Just say 'No" to the acution house!
#1) The game required a very large amount of patience. Much beyond other video games. And for a player under the age of 25, this could be "hard" to come by. Hence, why the game was "hard".
Personally, I am very reminiscent of EQs mechanics, lore, and High Fantasy setting. I liked the factions, and that nowhere was truly safe. That said, do people really want the game to be "hard", or just require patience. And I am all for some help with #2 up there and some work on #4.
Just my 2cp.
Feyshtey said:Dullahan said:werzul said:any mechanic that wasnt in EQ/VG gets auto dismissed..
I see this red herring get thrown around a lot here, yet in two years I haven't actually witnessed it happen.
*DING!*
Except that it kind of is true when you pour through threads like this one and many others. Ill agree it has been a very very rare case that it was out and out said (but it has been thrown out a time or 2). But its the manner in which topics get turned down that always reference EQ as the Bible in which all things must be judged against that can upset folks. That and sometimes the feeling like your being ganged up on because your idea or a feature from your favorite game isnt in line and is basically crap. Either one of these things has occured to me numerous times on this site. Now there is a difference in the way some folks come across (some are nicer and more diplomatic and some are well assholes). Now I can also say that it goes the other way too sometimes. People that arent from EQ or VG telling others that certain mechaincs from those games are crap. So I would say at the very least it goes both ways. Ultimately there are some things many of us will never agree on and I can accept that. What frustates me lately more than anything else is the lack of acknowledgement in an almost condescending way of what is or isnt considered old school or hardcore and the idea that any compromise will completely ruin an idea or concept to such a degree that it would instantly turn Pantheon into WoW. Its an awfully extremist point of view, and I do see that idea get thrown around a lot in one form or another.
So people from EQ/VG should not act like asses to people that arent.
And people From other games (WoW, XI, DaoC, etc) should not act like asses to the EQ/VG folks.
But dont call it a Red Herring. This thread (and other occurences) wouldnt exist if there wasnt some truth to it. Because if we are going to call it a red herring, then we might as well say that no one has been insulting or condescending in this entire forum ever.
As I said before oldschool and preferences are different from one person to the next so we wont all agree on everything. But there are 2 (for lack of a better phrase) extremist factions on this site:
1. EQ or its WoW
2. Convenience or it Fails
Yes I know, over-simplification. And Id say most folks arent this way. But arguments always seem to break down into one or the other at their worst. Both of these groups need to dial it down a notch. Both of these groups will need to compromise because as Kilsin recently pointed out, this is not EQ nor VG but its own game. And also the game features and tenents have been known for months and months: no instances, interdependent gameplay, etc. etc. Dont paint Pantheon in too narrow a definition of what it should be, and dont ask for stuff thats clearly not part of the Pantheon plan. Lastly both sides will probably need to brace for some small disappointment, but dont let this ruin the overall game for you. No instances is not the end of the game. Having Caravans in not the end of the game. The game will come out and it will be awesome and we will all play it.
My worry, you see, is time.
To have played 'original flavour EQ' meant you had to have been playing it by 2001-2002 (Before the dreaded PoP expansion).
If you were a mere youngster (15-17) at the time, this would now make you upwards of 32-35 now.
If you were working at the time (22-32) this would put you at 39-51 now.
So, when Pantheon releases, you will likely fall into an age bracket of 34-52. It has been YEARS since the last iteration of a non 'MOBA-esque' or 'Theme-Park' game. It may be upwards of 6-10 years before there will be another one. This would put the the likely age group of people who *actually* played early EQ at 44-52 (with a mean of about 48) for this 'next' iteration.
Thus, I return to my worry....
CURRENTLY there is still a 'large minority' of players and developers who played early EQ. They later moved on to other games, where each new game replaced an aspect or two in the hopes of 'improving experience' or, in some cases, 'appealing to the masses'. I say this last because when EQ was released, MMOs were an amazingly narrow niche market. Later, this changed.... but so did MMOs.
CURRENTLY there are only 2 games in development where the driving force behind the game was actually part of MMO development in 1999-2001. Pantheon is one of these... and arguably the closest to the spiritual successor EQ deserves.
CURRENTLY therefore, it is my duty as one who fought in the trenches of High Pass, embraced insanity and skinned Quillmane, raided the very sky above and swam through lava ... to tell another generation about our exeperiences of challenge, of risk vs reward, of sustained immersion and sociability in overcoming failures and joining in common goals.
... my worry that at some point there wil be no EQ veterans, the then nerds who immersed themselves in the game and its mechanics, to give the counter arguement to a tidal wave of modern-day MMO conveniences designed to 'ease challenge' at a potential cost to the unique experience as a whole.
SUMMARY:
Don't change things for the sake of changing things, or at the expense of core tenets.
Where changes are merited, consider the options and let some EQ vets play devil's advocate. They will likely be motivated to find any flaws and nerdy enough to think of imaginative alternatives that improve the player experience without watering down these tenets.
Amsai said:But dont call it a Red Herring. This thread (and other occurences) wouldnt exist if there wasnt some truth to it. Because if we are going to call it a red herring, then we might as well say that no one has been insulting or condescending in this entire forum ever.
No offense, but I'm going to continue calling it a red herring until people back it up with citations.
Expanding it to include any insult or condescension is blurring the lines. We're talking about instances of people outright dismissing something on grounds that it "wasn't in EQ or Vanguard", and I'm telling you that doesn't happen.
What does happen is that people provide extensive reasoning as to why they dislike something, and sometimes do so while referencing EQ. Then it gets written off a "dismissing" an idea merely because it wasn't in EQ while ignoring said reasoning.
Evoras said:My worry, you see, is time.
To have played 'original flavour EQ' meant you had to have been playing it by 2001-2002 (Before the dreaded PoP expansion).
If you were a mere youngster (15-17) at the time, this would now make you upwards of 32-35 now.
If you were working at the time (22-32) this would put you at 39-51 now.
So, when Pantheon releases, you will likely fall into an age bracket of 34-52. It has been YEARS since the last iteration of a non 'MOBA-esque' or 'Theme-Park' game. It may be upwards of 6-10 years before there will be another one. This would put the the likely age group of people who *actually* played early EQ at 44-52 (with a mean of about 48) for this 'next' iteration.
Thus, I return to my worry....
CURRENTLY there is still a 'large minority' of players and developers who played early EQ. They later moved on to other games, where each new game replaced an aspect or two in the hopes of 'improving experience' or, in some cases, 'appealing to the masses'. I say this last because when EQ was released, MMOs were an amazingly narrow niche market. Later, this changed.... but so did MMOs.
CURRENTLY there are only 2 games in development where the driving force behind the game was actually part of MMO development in 1999-2001. Pantheon is one of these... and arguably the closest to the spiritual successor EQ deserves.
CURRENTLY therefore, it is my duty as one who fought in the trenches of High Pass, embraced insanity and skinned Quillmane, raided the very sky above and swam through lava ... to tell another generation about our exeperiences of challenge, of risk vs reward, of sustained immersion and sociability in overcoming failures and joining in common goals.
... my worry that at some point there wil be no EQ veterans, the then nerds who immersed themselves in the game and its mechanics, to give the counter arguement to a tidal wave of modern-day MMO conveniences designed to 'ease challenge' at a potential cost to the unique experience as a whole.
SUMMARY:
Don't change things for the sake of changing things, or at the expense of core tenets.
Where changes are merited, consider the options and let some EQ vets play devil's advocate. They will likely be motivated to find any flaws and nerdy enough to think of imaginative alternatives that improve the player experience without watering down these tenets.
Right on my brother ! :) * cheers * We are a dying breed :( ... still hope though for those who are willing to give a listening ear.
Larirawiel said:Kalgore said:Now.
The forums are made up of the same crap every day people argue for this or that soloey because EQ had it or Vanguard had it. Or they didnt want something because WOW had it etc etc etc. People are refusing to even listen to what could be a better version of an old idea and with that comes a lack of thoughtfulness the Devs need to make this game great.
+1
I hope, the developers will make a new fresh game and not just a copy of Everquest 1 with better graphics.
Kalgore said:This game CAN NOT survive witha handful or "hardcore MMO players" Nor can it survive with the newest version of MMO players looking for instant gratification. The game needs a healthy mix. It needs those hardcore players to open there eyes and realize certain things just cant be in the game. It also means the newest player needs to learn the joys of dedicating your time to one game and only one game not 30 different ones a year. Without this type of thinking Pantheon will be doomed and all the work Brad and CO has put into it will be wasted as bad as Daybreak games wastes an amazing IP.I'm sure, the EQ-fanboys will whine very loud when the game is going free to play with a cash shop attached.
Greetings
Pantheon is not EQ 1 with better graphics -- check out the FAQ, tenets, differentiators, etc.
Cash shop? Not going to happen.
Aradune said:Pantheon is not EQ 1 with better graphics -- check out the FAQ, tenets, differentiators, etc.
Cash shop? Not going to happen.
And on the fourth page Brad created a post; and we saw that it was good.
The God's have spoken ! Now can we move on with more productive conversation :) You guys all have wonderful ideas, you bring some very tough arguments to the table. If we can focus all of that energy in a positive direction then there is nothing that can stand in the way of making this game the new standard in MMORPG's. We can do this ! :)
