Where did EQ Live go wrong?

[Zuranthium]

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

But, this is the thing that pisses me off. Build up before you branch out. Check out East Commonlands these days...the number of alts there begging for buffs off high levels. From all races, Iksars, Erudites, Wood elves etc. Races that don't even start remotely close to EC.

So they get a port, bind and SoW in 10 minutes and that fear is lost and they all just congregate to the fast exping of "buff me with all your druid buffs thanx"

It was pretty rare to see a non-barbarian/erudite/half-elf/human in Blackburrow. So too was it pretty rare to see a non-gnome/dwarf/high-elf/wood elf in Crushbone. But it happens all the time in P99 cause people know that if they just get a SoW/Bind/Port from a friendly druid they can go wherever they want and not fear travel at all. And thats what most resort to. Sending people like myself tells for ports, binds, and sows.

Yeah, these issues need to be addressed if the original quality of Everquest is ever to be recreated and maintained. Don't allow characters to get a teleport until they reach a certain level. Don't allow buffs to have an effect on a player that is vastly level inappropriate. Don't allow equipment to give players stats that are vastly level inappropriate.

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

As for the go to where people exp argument, if you add more zones, there is no way the existing zones + new zones will hold a population and sustain it unless more people join the game to fill those new zones.

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

Id like to point out that server population dictates where it is viable to hunt. The world needs to be "small" for a small server population.

I don't agree with this, however. I mean to a certain extent, yes, there needs to be a high enough base line amount of people in the area of the game you start out in for it to be viable to hunt there (if your class can not solo very well). Otherwise, though, there is no reason for zones to go extinct or for everyone to flock to a couple choice zones. It comes down to (1.) The zones being balanced properly in terms of risk vs. reward, (2.) The player profession and content design of the game being balanced properly such that a wide variety of class combinations form into strong parties, without any specific class ever being absolutely essential outside of epic encounters (3.) Content not being static and every single character needing to go to different places in order to fulfill their "quests".

[Bazia]

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

Cats on the moon! OH my! So bad!

What about kerra?

Not a valid reason.

A.) They weren't on the f'ing moon.
B.) Cat people are cool just not the Vah Shir models (if they were kerra isle models and had a starting zone on Odus it woulda been $)

[Davardo]

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

A.) They weren't on the f'ing moon.
B.) Cat people are cool just not the Vah Shir models (if they were kerra isle models and had a starting zone on Odus it woulda been $)

C.) What lives on moons that you know of? Nothing? So why are Vah Shir so bat shit crazy? It's just something people bitch about, any sensible person see's it as the reaching that it is.

EDIT: Also there is lore about luclin, it was unknown of because of Veeshans Veil or whatever that surrounded Norrath, completing the Plane of Sky and defeating the dragons removed the veil or some shit.

[ArumTP]

Cats on the moon was a problem because it created yet another need for newbie/low/mid/mid-high zones that we didn't need, in a time we already seemed spread thin.

[stormlord]

I'd have to say mudflation. It destroys old content. And then companies try to replace said content with a mediocre effort. It's usually something like 3-5 pieces of content for every 20 pieces of old content. It's also much faster experience to boot. The goal is to level up players. They also do this because they want to have updated graphics and mechanics. Since it would be a lot of work to update all of the old content, they almost always choose to just make something new. And for the same reason that it's too much to update, it's also too much to replace 1 to 1, so it's usually much less than what was previously offered. Most MMORPGs are guilty.

I could say this for every MMORPG. The answer is probably a diverse one. But the way I'd go about doing it is to prepare in advance and to have methods ready when population or dynamics change. For example, the people who designed Anarchy Online never thought it would last beyond 4 years. So their design included this expectation. Most MMORPGs make disposable content and do not intend on ever updating most of it.

And something else is when companies shift their ideas... (explained below)

Anarchy Online had a very robust design concept early on that removed a lot of grind from the gameplay. You could solo your way to max level. There was much less downtime. But then they saw how successful EQ was and decided to make the Shadowlands expansion. They wanted to pull players from EQ and have a more open world feel to things. Shadowlands depended a lot more on groups (teams) and added more downtime and did not have a grid or many of the other characteristics associated with AO in its earlier evolution. As a result, the expansion was mostly a failure. AO failed its audience and did not anticipate changing trends. This is another thing that MMORPG companies do time and time again and it usually has bad consequences.

Companies succeed when they do it right the first time. When they do it afterward it usually just fractures the community and doesn't mesh well with the rest of the game. Eve-Online is a exception. My advice to companies is KNOW WHO YOU ARE and be comfortable with your own skin. It's good to learn from others and it's good to try to attract players from elsewhere, but if you lose yourself in all the mess then you'll lose your players too. In the end, a company needs some confidence in itself. Do not look at what others do TOO MUCH. Be yourself.

I guess this is similar to what people call "vision". The problem with vision is it can be terribly wrong. While it does give a creator confidence and can keep a good idea going for a long while, it can also cause a bad idea to stubbornly stick around. So I am unsure whether to say a company or a group of developers should have a "vision". If Anarchy Online had had a vision and kept it then maybe they never would have made Shadowlands. Maybe they would have expanded on their original ideas rather than abandoning them. But it could also have turned out bad. Maybe they would have held onto something that did not work and could not persevere. Bottom line, a company should not let its vision and confidence blind it, but neither should it shift around too much.

[Littlestgnome]

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

Check out East Commonlands. The number of alts there begging for buffs off high levels. From all races, Iksars, Erudites, Wood elves etc. Races that don't even start remotely close to EC.

So they get a port, bind and SoW in 10 minutes and that fear is lost and they all just congregate to the fast exping of "buff me with all your druid buffs thanx"

It was pretty rare to see a non-barbarian/erudite/half-elf/human in Blackburrow. So too was it pretty rare to see a non-gnome/dwarf/high-elf/wood elf in Crushbone. But it happens all the time in P99 cause people know that if they just get a SoW/Bind/Port from a friendly druid they can go wherever they want and not fear travel at all. And thats what most resort to. Sending people like myself tells for ports, binds, and sows.

Which is fine, until those exact people crusade against Luclin for it ruining the 'fear of travel' lol. Or against PoP for PoP books etc.

As for the go to where people exp argument, that just came natural with... better gear + more zones. If you add more zones, there is no way the existing zones + new zones will hold a population and sustain it unless more people join the game to fill those new zones.

There is a huge difference between players of today utilizing other players/friends/coin for their travelling and levelling needs and the ability for any level 1 to traverse the globe without so much as having earned a single copper or speaking with another player. And again, the idea of that level 1 doing so without any fear of death, repercussion or even time constraint makes the game as a whole less potent than it was before. The Nexus started this trend and PoP compounded the matter exponentially.

The exp argument is not a mere matter of spreading the population too thin because now there's more zones. If the newer zones were on equal footing with their predecessors then this would be a more accurate claim. That was not the case however. Luclin made it so that anyone NOT levelling in the new zones did so at a clear dissadvantage whether it was via the potential item drops or the sheer exp gain potential, and it did so almost from the very first level of the game. The exp modifiers alone made Paludal the premiere choice for anyone over level 10. And again thanks to the spires this zone was readily available to virtually all playable races without even the slightest fear or effort. To make it even more enticing a city that could be bound to and was friendly to all was a mere zone away. The only thing left to complain about was the time it took for unassisted players to get there to which Sony responded with the PoK books which took even that consideration out of the picture.

[Kika Maslyaka]

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

[jainiseq]

EQ went wrong when they started replacing content instead of adding new content. Instead of oasis...there was Pauludel Caverns. Instead of Overthere... there was Netherbian Lair.
I'm sure we can all come up with more examples... but that's the bottom line if you ask me. They kept fixing things that need not be fixed.

[BrandeX]

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

I LOVED the Vah Shir, though yes it would have made more sense for them to start on Kerra Isle. Never did play Beastlord. That said, I HATED the Frogloks. Here's what they should've done: Instead of having them look so completely different than the old school froggies, they should have given you the option of playing one looking like the older frogloks (e.g., old graphics vs. Luclin). Second, rather than having them start in Rathe Mountains or taking over Grobb, they should have started in the Froglok city that was in Swamp of No Hope (or did anything good drop there? IDK).

That is just like AxClassic server.

[BrandeX]

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

I guess this is similar to what people call "vision". The problem with vision is it can be terribly wrong. While it does give a creator confidence and can keep a good idea going for a long while, it can also cause a bad idea to stubbornly stick around. So I am unsure whether to say a company or a group of developers should have a "vision". If Anarchy Online had had a vision and kept it then maybe they never would have made Shadowlands. Maybe they would have expanded on their original ideas rather than abandoning them. But it could also have turned out bad. Maybe they would have held onto something that did not work and could not persevere. Bottom line, a company should not let its vision and confidence blind it, but neither should it shift around too much.

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