Raising the lvl cap past 50+ is what ruined EQ

[myriverse]

Feh. The A in AA stands for Awesome. Both of them.

Apart from the hellishness, 51-60 weren't that bad.

[Leddy]

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

1-50 is a glorious ride, doesn't even feel like grinding. Getting to 50 was fun but going from 50-60 is terrible.

I dont know how they could have done things better, I'm not creative just calling it like it is- shit. And its a shame that they turned EQ into such a level grindfest.

I wish there was a vanilla only server. 1-50.

Don't level past 50, or use kunark items. Problem solveddddddddddd.

[timhutton]

I don't understand why they went with such a large level gap right off the bat. They would have done better to cap it at 55 in Kunark and tune content appropriately, and then cap it at 60 during Velious and leave content as it was.

I think that given the fact they switched to a +5 per cap increase down the road it was either not thought out properly, or they were just playing a raw numbers game to try to add as many spells/abilities/levels as they could to help sell Kunark when it came out.

I've never read anything official from Sony about why it was +10 and was later changed to +5 level increases.

[thugcruncher]

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

I've never read anything official from Sony about why it was +10 and was later changed to +5 level increases.

Well, +10 was a Brad and friends decision, and +5 was a Sony decision, so that's a start.

The grind isn't the important part, the important part is making something hard, so you have this feeling inside after you've done something difficult, that you feel good about. Even if it's just pixels you did something that took time and effort.

Let's use how character's look as an example:

Everquest: look like a fucking chump from levels 1-30, or higher depending on the amount of money and gear you acquire. But eventually look rad, with sweet weapons, shiny armor, and sweet particles. Enjoy a long everquest career of friendship and merriment.

Everquest 2: Look like an awesome archetypal warrior decked out in full plate at level 1, or better yet spend 100 station cash and look like whatever you want to look like, and never change your visual appearance ever again. Quit playing immediately because there's no difficulty curve andof the stupid flashing icon wackamole mechanic.

Everquest Next: See avatar.

Arguably, these features that people "want" like leveling faster, or looking awesomer, or out of combat regen, or more power to do x, ultimately lead to downfall. The only people that remain in the long run are the core who need to be the best and max out all their shit and experience all content. Yes, the same thing is happening to wow.

[Zarash]

I started playing MMO's around 97. I think there were many factors that ruined EQ. There were to many new games comming out for people to choose from. People always want what is new over the old. The biggest factor that ruins games is dual boxing, and is probally the biggest part or why MMO's are not the same any longer.

When you dual box you effectively stop looking for groups. To me MMO's are about looking for other people to play the game with and socialising. The more the merrier.

MMO's are all about me and not about everyone any longer. When EQ first came out people could not dual box because our computers were just to shitty to handle that so we had to form groups to get that good stuff from high end mobs. Thus we grouped hung out together, socialised, and just did funny stuff together. Now mmo's should be called (MMOSPE) Massively Multiplayer Online Single Player Experince.

Also, they do not need to raise levels. They should add the special perks in, and new content with harder mobs to fight. I think the special stuff are the AA's people are talking about? I am not sure I have not played EQ since around 2001. Extra character slots are there for when people are board of playing their main and want to do something different.

I do like EQ, but I also like pvp MMO games and to me the PVP in EQ was not good lol. For most people that played EQ that really was not a factor tho. I started playing Ultima Online in 97, and pvp in UO was great. It was alot of button mashing and knowing what someone else was going to cast. Alot of people did not like UO and then went to EQ from UO.

[webrunner5]

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

Well, +10 was a Brad and friends decision, and +5 was a Sony decision, so that's a start.

The grind isn't the important part, the important part is making something hard, so you have this feeling inside after you've done something difficult, that you feel good about. Even if it's just pixels you did something that took time and effort.

Let's use how character's look as an example:

Everquest: look like a fucking chump from levels 1-30, or higher depending on the amount of money and gear you acquire. But eventually look rad, with sweet weapons, shiny armor, and sweet particles. Enjoy a long everquest career of friendship and merriment.

Everquest 2: Look like an awesome archetypal warrior decked out in full plate at level 1, or better yet spend 100 station cash and look like whatever you want to look like, and never change your visual appearance ever again. Quit playing immediately because there's no difficulty curve andof the stupid flashing icon wackamole mechanic.

Everquest Next: See avatar.

Arguably, these features that people "want" like leveling faster, or looking awesomer, or out of combat regen, or more power to do x, ultimately lead to downfall. The only people that remain in the long run are the core who need to be the best and max out all their shit and experience all content. Yes, the same thing is happening to wow.

Great post Thug.

[mtb tripper]

all seems very peculiar

[runlvlzero]

PnP is intelligent and creative gaming.

MMO's are acheivement and goal oriented. But much more superfluous. That doesn't mean their bad, dumb.

But they don't fit every personality type equally well. And "achievers" will always love MMO's because they will creatively seek the most efficient ways to "achieve" whatever there is. Their focus isn't really on the game, its on the metagame. You see this with Diablo II as well even though its a faster paced game. The really nerdy people figured out how to grind out level 80 characters as fast as possible with the least risk involved.

Hence many peoples motivation to max to 60 is not there. Because their not interested in that meta gaming experience. The carrot at the end of the stick is generally not good enough. (I'm speaking from a biased personal perspective).

This is why EQ will always be nostalgia to me and I doubt it could ever be more.

Sorry for the scare quotes...

[Danth]

Grinding is only grinding when you aren't having fun doing it; otherwise it's just playing the game.

There's nothing innately wrong with raising the level cap to 60 or with the rate of experience gain 50-60. The problem was that Kunark tried to be a 1-60 expansion with fewer zones than the original 50-capped game world, with the inevitable result being that 50+ and particularly 55+ didn't have a lot of places to go. Excessive repetition within too short a time causes apathy and boredom.

---------------------

Everquest was not a particularly difficult game. Indeed, it probably achieved its popularity because it was the easiest game of its kind when it came out. Compare it to cutthroat environments available at the time like Ultime Online with its PvP and item looting and Everquest seems positively safe and friendly by comparison. It only seems difficult now because games have continued growing easier over the years as the market continues attempting to appeal to inexperienced players and non-gamers.

Player vs player combat is more of a challenge (and I enjoy it greatly) but other genres are better-suited to it. Shooters provide an obvious example. My own preference is for MMO-flightsims when I want to fight other players. 350 MPH combat through 720 degrees of motion offers far more tactical diversity than anything you'll encounter in a fantasy game.

Danth

[runlvlzero]

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

Grinding is only grinding when you aren't having fun doing it; otherwise it's just playing the game.

There's nothing innately wrong with raising the level cap to 60 or with the rate of experience gain 50-60. The problem was that Kunark tried to be a 1-60 expansion with fewer zones than the original 50-capped game world, with the inevitable result being that 50+ and particularly 55+ didn't have a lot of places to go. Excessive repetition within too short a time causes apathy and boredom.

---------------------

Everquest was not a particularly difficult game. Indeed, it probably achieved its popularity because it was the easiest game of its kind when it came out. Compare it to cutthroat environments available at the time like Ultime Online with its PvP and item looting and Everquest seems positively safe and friendly by comparison. It only seems difficult now because games have continued growing easier over the years as the market continues attempting to appeal to inexperienced players and non-gamers.

Player vs player combat is more of a challenge (and I enjoy it greatly) but other genres are better-suited to it. Shooters provide an obvious example. My own preference is for MMO-flightsims when I want to fight other players. 350 MPH combat through 720 degrees of motion offers far more tactical diversity than anything you'll encounter in a fantasy game.

Danth

You pretty much pegged it. Though I don't prefer flight sims, but for different reasons. Quake 3 is still my favorite competitive FPS. Something about working against the constraints of the environments, engine, and weapons, is more appealing to me than full freedom of movement.