What happened with the poppulation

[Rhyltran]

Originally Posted by Tilien [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

I'm shocked most people here think it is a good game, especially compared to title's released these days. EQ is a poorly designed game by most current standards. I play because I enjoy the lore, the people, the nostalgia.

The game being difficult (it's not) doesn't make it good: TMNT being difficult does not make it a good game.

The game requiring many hours of sitting at the same spawn for minimal payout doesn't make it good: "Watching the paint dry" has still not surpassed video games in popularity.

EQ was and is a chat room with a game running in the background, putting much effort into saying it's a *good game* is silly. That being said, I love it all the same.

Even with todays standards I think it is a good game because Everquest has a series of things that make me like it over modern mmorpgs. To me it captures that nearly sandbox (not saying it is a sandbox) feeling of being an actual world as opposed to just a game. Most mmorpgs are third person only, you have multiple hotbars of skills, and really over the top flashy effects and techniques. From charging across the map, super leaps, etc. Everquest feels far more "low magic" in comparison. You also aren't some chosen one surrounded by other chosen ones in their story and aren't praised every second of every day session even for killing rats or being told you are the greatest while thousands of others are told the same thing. To me Everquest is a better game because it is more immersive than its modern contenders. Don't get me started on various fast travel options in said games or instant jumps to far away locations. I actually like EQ's long boat rides. POP instant travel books is the main contributor to me leaving back then.

[Tilien]

Originally Posted by Rhyltran [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

Even with todays standards I think it is a good game because Everquest has a series of things that make me like it over modern mmorpgs. To me it captures that nearly sandbox (not saying it is a sandbox) feeling of being an actual world as opposed to just a game. Most mmorpgs are third person only, you have multiple hotbars of skills, and really over the top flashy effects and techniques. From charging across the map, super leaps, etc. Everquest feels far more "low magic" in comparison. You also aren't some chosen one surrounded by other chosen ones in their story and aren't praised every second of every day session even for killing rats or being told you are the greatest while thousands of others are told the same thing. To me Everquest is a better game because it is more immersive than its modern contenders. Don't get me started on various fast travel options in said games or instant jumps to far away locations. I actually like EQ's long boat rides. POP instant travel books is the main contributor to me leaving back then.

Immersion would go along with what I was saying about lore, but also goes back to what I said about it being a chat room with a game: Sitting on a boat is not game play. Sure, it can be fun and entertaining to watch the scenery and chat with people, even exciting but that's not game play.

We can argue about fast travel etc. but I'd say it's a little hard to argue that EQ is so immersive when if you're trying to get a specific drop and sit in the same room of a castle for 4 hours with a group of friends waiting for a named to pop. Interesting story, lore, and set pieces don't define good gameplay design. You can get immersion and lore at a renn faire, doesn't make renn faires good games (you know... cause they're not games), and it doesn't mean they aren't fun.

Other than "immersion" what game play mechanics do you enjoy about the game and feel are superior to other games? If its "player interactions" I'm gonna go back to my comment about eq being a chat room with a game attached.

[Danth]

Originally Posted by Tilien [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

Other than "immersion" what game play mechanics do you enjoy about the game and feel are superior to other games? If its "player interactions" I'm gonna go back to my comment about eq being a chat room with a game attached.

Game lets player characters develop and enjoy some real power. That alone stands out from a lot of other games operated under the mantra of "nerf anything the developers didn't anticipate!" On top of that EQ's a nice game for older gamers. General tuning is nice--hard enough to keep interest, easy enough to allow for laid back gameplay. Combat pace suits me well--abilities are used when needed and not merely on mindless busywork rotations. Most character classes aren't particularly button-spammy** and there's a good variety of distinct play styles available. Perhaps most surprisingly I find myself appreciating even the much-derided medidate mechanic now that I'm well into middle age--the constant activity with few to no breaks for hours on end that I encounter in newer games has long since worn thin. Built-in rest breaks (or opportunities to get up and do other chores around the house) have become appreciated where they were once a nuisance.

EQ's not a perfect game by any means and there's plenty wrong with it--I often describe it as a case of taking the bad with the good. However, the good is very much real, and it's a well-suited game to a certain audience. I haven't spent ten years here merely due to nostalgia; EQ works for what I want out of an online game at this stage of my life.

Danth

** I actually had to quit Vanguard--a game I basically liked--because the rate of button-spam was so high it was threatening long-term RSI-type injury. No thanks.

[Tilien]

Originally Posted by Danth [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

Game lets player characters develop and enjoy some real power. That alone stands out from a lot of other games operated under the mantra of "nerf anything the developers didn't anticipate!" On top of that EQ's a nice game for older gamers. General tuning is nice--hard enough to keep interest, easy enough to allow for laid back gameplay. Combat pace suits me well--abilities are used when needed and not merely on mindless busywork rotations. Most character classes aren't particularly button-spammy** and there's a good variety of distinct play styles available. Perhaps most surprisingly I find myself appreciating even the much-derided medidate mechanic now that I'm well into middle age--the constant activity with few to no breaks for hours on end that I encounter in newer games has long since worn thin. Built-in rest breaks (or opportunities to get up and do other chores around the house) have become appreciated where they were once a nuisance.

EQ's not a perfect game by any means and there's plenty wrong with it--I often describe it as a case of taking the bad with the good. However, the good is very much real, and it's a well-suited game to a certain audience. I haven't spent ten years here merely due to nostalgia; EQ works for what I want out of an online game at this stage of my life.

Danth

** I actually had to quit Vanguard--a game I basically liked--because the rate of button-spam was so high it was threatening long-term RSI-type injury. No thanks.

I never argued against playing EQ or that it's fun: I enjoy it and play on both Teal and Blue currently.

For your first point: I think a lot of developers anticipate and build for emergent game play, emergent gameplay is a good element that a lot of games try to promote. In fact, the amount of emergent game play/flexibility in classes in EQ seems a lot more limited than many other games IMO. That being said: EQ did nerf things, and not just emergent elements. And because we're playing in a specific time line we don't see all the nerfs and balances that the developers took.

And I would agree EQ tends to be simpler than modern MMORPGs, allowing it to be a little easier to play casually while advancing (even without a tutorial) and a more relaxed pace for an MMORPG, but many games in general you can simply set your own pace no matter what. That being said: I would argue that content pacing is *very* slow compared to other games. You can spend hours (days) sitting in one spot waiting for access to a specific monster or piece of loot, and generally you do this at a point where combat against the target is easy or totally trivialized making the waiting, not the fighting, the task that is being rewarded. Sure high end items/raid bosses etc. drop loot without being easy fights but generally rare drops from monsters leveled 20-40 will be camped by people who can farm them with little to no risk, which brings up the slow pacing again: not only can it take hours or days of camping your monster but that can be camped by an individual or rotation of individuals which locks out content to you.

Is it the worst game? No, not even in the same dumpster fire ballpark as ET.

Overall I'd say it's about average in terms of mechanics and gameplay, and there's nothing wrong with liking a game that isn't the best of the best... but arguing it's significantly above average seems a bit wonky. There are reasons EQ died out and WoW went on strong beyond just SOE's internal politics. And what one person (or 2500 people) enjoy does not dictate what good, general gameplay principles are. Feel free to enjoy games with bad design principles, not everything you enjoy has to be the best type of that thing.

[Roth]

Originally Posted by Tilien [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

I never argued against playing EQ or that it's fun: I enjoy it and play on both Teal and Blue currently.

For your first point: I think a lot of developers anticipate and build for emergent game play, emergent gameplay is a good element that a lot of games try to promote. In fact, the amount of emergent game play/flexibility in classes in EQ seems a lot more limited than many other games IMO. That being said: EQ did nerf things, and not just emergent elements. And because we're playing in a specific time line we don't see all the nerfs and balances that the developers took.

And I would agree EQ tends to be simpler than modern MMORPGs, allowing it to be a little easier to play casually while advancing (even without a tutorial) and a more relaxed pace for an MMORPG, but many games in general you can simply set your own pace no matter what. That being said: I would argue that content pacing is *very* slow compared to other games. You can spend hours (days) sitting in one spot waiting for access to a specific monster or piece of loot, and generally you do this at a point where combat against the target is easy or totally trivialized making the waiting, not the fighting, the task that is being rewarded. Sure high end items/raid bosses etc. drop loot without being easy fights but generally rare drops from monsters leveled 20-40 will be camped by people who can farm them with little to no risk, which brings up the slow pacing again: not only can it take hours or days of camping your monster but that can be camped by an individual or rotation of individuals which locks out content to you.

Is it the worst game? No, not even in the same dumpster fire ballpark as ET.

Overall I'd say it's about average in terms of mechanics and gameplay, and there's nothing wrong with liking a game that isn't the best of the best... but arguing it's significantly above average seems a bit wonky. There are reasons EQ died out and WoW went on strong beyond just SOE's internal politics. And what one person (or 2500 people) enjoy does not dictate what good, general gameplay principles are. Feel free to enjoy games with bad design principles, not everything you enjoy has to be the best type of that thing.

The reality is there aren't better alternatives to eq. Wow is not even remotely the same experience as eq. Elder scrolls online isn't even playable. You're using a fake metric of good or bad as in "more advanced, easier, more fluid" = better when in reality whether something is good or bad is based on the value of the entire experience. Based on your metrics all the transformer movies would be the "best" movies since they spend money on known actors and special effects.

[Tilien]

Originally Posted by Roth [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

The reality is there aren't better alternatives to eq. Wow is not even remotely the same experience as eq. Elder scrolls online isn't even playable. You're using a fake metric of good or bad as in "more advanced, easier, more fluid" = better when in reality whether something is good or bad is based on the value of the entire experience. Based on your metrics all the transformer movies would be the "best" movies since they spend money on known actors and special effects.

No, all transformer movies are the best because they capitalize on cinematic techniques that maximize enjoyment... as demonstrated by their commercial success.

WoW has clearly been a more enjoyable game because it is still a commercial success.

I don't think games being easier makes them better, in fact EQ is very easy and simply imo. The hardest part is waiting.

Question: Why does your personal enjoyment define what is good more than the enjoyment of millions of people? How are you an expert? Maybe, just maybe, we both enjoy something that is subpar, unusual, or generally not graded on the same scale as other things. And that's okay.

[Mblake81]

Originally Posted by Roth [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

The reality is there aren't better alternatives to eq. Wow is not even remotely the same experience as eq. Elder scrolls online isn't even playable. You're using a fake metric of good or bad as in "more advanced, easier, more fluid" = better when in reality whether something is good or bad is based on the value of the entire experience. Based on your metrics all the transformer movies would be the "best" movies since they spend money on known actors and special effects.

Fucking A.

[You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

[TripSin]

Originally Posted by Roth [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

The reality is there aren't better alternatives to eq. Wow is not even remotely the same experience as eq. Elder scrolls online isn't even playable. You're using a fake metric of good or bad as in "more advanced, easier, more fluid" = better when in reality whether something is good or bad is based on the value of the entire experience. Based on your metrics all the transformer movies would be the "best" movies since they spend money on known actors and special effects.

OK boomer. EverQuest is the best game of all time and the best game that will ever be. All the games these young kids are playing these days are absolute trash. Only your warped, ridiculous subjective opinion matters.

[Mblake81]

Originally Posted by TripSin [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

Ok boomer. EverQuest is the best game of all time and the best game that will ever be. All the games these young kids are playing these days are absolute trash. Only your warped, ridiculous subjective opinion matters.

Correct.

[Danth]

Originally Posted by Tilien [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

Overall I'd say it's about average in terms of mechanics and gameplay, and there's nothing wrong with liking a game that isn't the best of the best... but arguing it's significantly above average seems a bit wonky. .

I agree with this assessment. You no doubt notice I'm not nor have ever been one of the folks claiming EQ to be one of the greatest games ever or any similar sentiments (it isn't)--it's simply a game I like, out of many, and one which synchs with my current middle-age needs fairly well.

I had ET for the Atari VCS by the way. It was bad, but I've seen worse. It was at least playable with out too many glitches standing in the way. I had other atari games that I felt were worse.

Danth