Greens sounds so pleasant

[DMN]

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

These people trying to argue for/against things regarding their state of classicness is so tedious. The server staff doesn't need to convince people to agree with their viewpoint. The server staff will do whatever they like to the server, whether anyone agrees or not.

Of course the staff is going to decide what gets put in or not, but that doesn't mean they are not amenable, especially if it's a good suggestion and/or can reduce staff intervention. And the only way to make the suggestion is to post here (or perhaps in discord or something). Not talking about would be the dumb thing.

[NegaStoat]

The big thing to keep in mind is that if the P1999 staff goes with their original plan or something like it, the server will launch with classic, then enter kunark and velious according to the correct time frame of patch releases. And then at the end it's flushed and reset. And if they go with that still, asking the player base to accept that for 2/3's of the server's life that hybrid experience penalty will be present seems like a bit much. It's a hell of a lot to ask, really. If I were a betting man I'd bet that several changes will happen to keep the server fair for working within the frame of the patch cycle with the ending reset.

[Tethler]

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

Of course the staff is going to decide what gets put in or not, but that doesn't mean they are not amenable, especially if it's a good suggestion and/or can reduce staff intervention. And the only way to make the suggestion is to post here (or perhaps in discord or something). Not talking about would be the dumb thing.

The next line in my quote that you did not include is what I was referring to. People that make arguements like: "Dragons are rooted, so it's already not classic. You may as well just add in the Bazaar."

Not that I've seen that specific arguement, but that line of reasoning will go nowhere, and is as pointless as the subjective comments about "the original intent of Everquest", as if any of these people can speak on behalf of EQ devs from 20 years ago.

[Osprey39]

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

The next line in my quote that you did not include is what I was referring to. People that make arguements like: "Dragons are rooted, so it's already not classic. You may as well just add in the Bazaar."

Not that I've seen that specific arguement, but that line of reasoning will go nowhere, and is as pointless as the subjective comments about "the original intent of Everquest", as if any of these people can speak on behalf of EQ devs from 20 years ago.

That's a strawman argument. Even according to your own observations, nobody has suggested something like that. It's a also quite a leap from that to asking that something like race/class xp penalties, that were a demonstrably horrible idea that even Verant realized after a certain point, be removed.

[Worry]

Why would anyone be against a few non-classic changes? The game is far from perfect and much like the rooting of the Dragons some changes drastically help the server as a whole.

They could make small changes for the next 10 years and still not ruin the classic feel imo because the original game is that flawed. You could argue that ruins some of the charm of it, but it really depends on what you change and I really don't think Nilbog/Rogean (who seem to be staunchly against Luclin because of how goofy they perceive it to be) would want to add in changes that hurt the feel of the game.

They've worked on this for over 10 years.

[Osprey39]

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

Why would anyone be against a few non-classic changes? The game is far from perfect and much like the rooting of the Dragons some changes drastically help the server as a whole.

They could make small changes for the next 10 years and still not ruin the classic feel imo because the original game is that flawed. You could argue that ruins some of the charm of it, but it really depends on what you change and I really don't think Nilbog/Rogean (who seem to be staunchly against Luclin because of how goofy they perceive it to be) would want to add in changes that hurt the feel of the game.

They've worked on this for over 10 years.

I ask myself the same question. I think it boils down to what is classic Everquest to you? I'm sure it's different to everyone but a few things come to mind for me right away:

• Meaningful death penalties
• Non-trivial travel making the world seem larger
• No progression by simply doing quests in quest hubs
• Slower progression that makes progress feel earned
• Grouping encouraged to overcome challenges
• Social interaction and relationships formed via grouping with others

I could go on and on but that last one is pretty important to me because to me it's the essence of what made this game special. You actually interacted with other players and built friendships as opposed to modern MMOs where people are randomly thrown into groups and often don't even say "hi" at the start of a dungeon that they will race through as fast as possible to get the loot box at the end. EQ is just different in that aspect and there's nothing out there in modern MMOs like it. That is why I am staunchly against leaving in the hybrid xp penalties that are punitive and encourage people to not interact with someone just because they chose to play a pally instead of a warrior.

[elwing]

You missed the tradeskill and "active" bazaar...

[HippoNipple]

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

The original vision of the game does not equate to the original game code. Everquest was constantly changing. It changed in response to the players and the developer's own understanding of mechanics. It was always meant to change in relation to what the players were doing. Everquest would have been a lot more dynamic if the developers were capable of making it so (they specifically said they didn't like how people ended up constantly sitting in one room of a dungeon, for example), but they lacked the awareness and/or means of knowing how to code the game to best fulfill their vision.

That initial game code back from the early days was merely the developer's attempt at bringing their vision to life. It doesn't mean they were entirely successful in every regard, much less in relation to what players are doing these days. Again, the entire point of "Everquest" is that it is supposed to be fluid and a real adventure - a living, breathing world.

You are getting the spirit of what EQ was meant to be mixed up with what EQ actually was. This project is not to interpret what they think the vision was and adapt to that, it is simply to recreate what it was.

Different goals, they are simply trying to recreate the code. Like I said, there might be some monetary benefit from getting it done. They have been working on it for 10 years, I hope they get something out of it.

[Zuranthium]

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

You are getting the spirit of what EQ was meant to be mixed up with what EQ actually was. This project is not to interpret what they think the vision was and adapt to that, it is simply to recreate what it was.

You're wrong on both points, LOL. This project can certainly be an attempt to interpret what the vision of EQ was, and create a server for that purpose. There's nothing that says the devs wouldn't be interested in having that kind of server, in addition to running the "museum" kind of server too. Their first priority was replicating the exact classic code, but that doesn't mean it needs to end there.

It's not even just about what EQ was "meant" to be though, rather how it actually played in 1999. If the game doesn't play like it did in 1999, then it is NOT "classic Everquest". Copying the exact code from 1999 does not create a game that plays the same, since the players already know everything. It's like the difference between playing Poker when you can't see your opponent's hand, vs playing Poker when you can see their hand. It's not the same game.

For example, back in 1999, the developers decided that kiting monsters around to death with DoT's was too overpowered. So they put in a nerf to DoT's that made them do 33% less damage whenever the monster is moving. This is an example of how the game was changed in response to what the players were doing. These days in 2019, we have players doing wayyyy more abusive things with game knowledge/mechanics than just kiting with DoT's. If we were to transport the current playerbase to 1999, then the developers would have instituted a multitude of game changes in response to what players are doing these days, in order to improve the gameplay equilibrium.

That is the reality of how Classic EQ actually played out. The game code was constantly changing in order to suit the vision of what the gameplay should be. If we want to have a game that's going to have a similar gameplay feel to Classic EQ, then many changes are needed to make it happen. Sure, there are some things that can never be brought back (players are now familiar with the general layout of the game world for example, so we aren't going to get lost as much as we did back then), but there are plenty of other game facets that be altered in order to create a more similar gameplay to what Classic EQ was.

From my point of view though, if you are going to put the effort in to change the game code to re-create the Classic EQ experience, then you might as well go ahead and make further improvements at the same time. Some of these things are bound to be closely related anyway. For example, in Classic EQ, tons of people played on the Qeynos side of the world; that was an essential part of what made Norrath feel alive. These days, if the game code remains the same, people won't. They realize there are "better" places to go. Logically, the Qeynos side of the world should be made more attractive to the playerbase, which would not only be better for the game itself AND serve what it was envisioned as (Qeynos being a major area with lots of traffic through it), but would also accurately reflect what the 1999 experience actually was.

[Justinian]

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

If you could convince the staff that not only players, but the games developers didn't understand the XP penalties

I'd say this is self evident, considering they stated that it was supposed to be Humans who got the exp bonus, but Brad and his idiots were too busy doing coke to check it and ended up giving it to halfings instead.