EQ 'Next'

[Ingmar]

I don't think MOBA style classes would create much character attachment for people, and that's pretty important in what keeps people coming back to an MMO.

[Venkman]

That video looked good, nice to see some details on how the tool works. Reminds me of a cross between SL and MC Edit. Right up my alley but I wonder how much time a lot of gamers will really put into it. And how much SOE will put in front of me getting those tools. I could totally see them doing some type of price-per-primitive or even penny-per-cubic-area-of-air some type of paygo thing.

I'd gladly pay a monthly fee. I'd gladly pay a monthly fee and box purchase. But don't charge me by the CC of air please...

So, the player base is members of the military and furries.  I bet their chat channels are amazing to behold!  

Also, omg omg omg, Atriarch still has a website!!!!

http://www.atriarch.com/

Totally hilarious. I was about the google for that based on this thread, because all Atriarch was the first game I could recall which promised fully procedurally generated bullshit and whatnot. I even remember thinking Horizons was trying to knock it off  

How the shit does that website still exist though? It probably doesn't generate even a rounding error worth of bandwidth much less managed host costs. But man, it predates even common use of "cloud"! And yet someone had to go in and update the copywrite date to 2012. Who the hell keeps a dead site up for a dead game for fourteen freaking years. They trying to outdo Half Life 3 or Duke Nukem fanwank wait-around-ery?

[Draegan]

I don't think MOBA style classes would create much character attachment for people, and that's pretty important in what keeps people coming back to an MMO.

You need to stop thinking about "MMOs" as all RPGs. We're way past that, and we'll always have DIKUs around for people to play with. If a game is fun, and people can collect/build things they will get attached to their collection whether it's pants on a character or a collection of champs.

Even in WOW, who gets attached to characters anymore when a lot of people have 8 alts, all level 90 and playing in LFR. People are attached to the game, their collection of characters and gear.

[MediumHigh]

Honestly depends on the game. The average player may only bother going through the content as many times as there are classes they are interested in. Or just once. A lot of people just learn one class. In guild wars 1, because I PVP'ed, my attachment to characters was  practically zero. There was nothing to collect, the things worth unlocking were account wide, and you didn't get into the meat and bone of the game if you didn't experiment with other classes, learned new combinations and builds. But the average dow eyed pve'er? I'd say they were pretty damn attached to their characters to the point that re-rolling to play another class or class combo (major part of a pvp'er life style) was a major barrier of entry for pve'ers wishing to transition out of pve. As in some players simply refused to do it, and that's in a game where you had up to 6-8 free character slots and the pve'er in question probably used less than 3 or had one character stuck at level 13 or some shit. 

Personally I prefer games with no assumptions about class attachment, but I haven't seen an MMO built like guild wars 1, so I wager the vast majority of mmo players are rather "stuck" on the one class per game model, or at least have an attachment to the first class they really like. MOBA's work mostly because their channeling fighting games more than RPG's, the concept works waay less if you can raise your power level indefinitely. Even though I do believe someone is going to make an mmo where classes have like 4 skills and you mash Q all day.

I love that people figure a good chunk of people online are looking for minecraft with better graphics and more people mucking around in your shit. No...they kinda don't.

"Hey dude! Wouldn't it be awesome if we had like thousand people strip mine everything, build giant penis's everywhere, and break all the shit I make!"

[Falconeer]

I think Landmark will do "fine", while testing the technology behid EverQuest Next and getting free assets for it, and understanding how community works and how much they need to limit it for the Next game. Remember that part of their plan with EQNext is to create one of the largest landmass for any MMORPG out there ever, literally explorer heaven, and we always agreed that the problem with something like that was the have enough content. With Landmark (and the people who will invest time in Landmark) they are aiming to have virtually infinite land, with virtually infinite content (provided by LandMark builders and picked by SOE) and a quest system that hasn't been fully explained yet but will mix lots of automated and randomly-generated quests to traditionally handcrafted ones.

Point is, they don't need Landmark to be a bomb, doesn't need a million players subbing for months (also, there's no sub), they just need for it to do OK, to work, and then it will be the springboard for the big project EQN. I think we should focus our doubts on EQN, cause that's the really ambitious project which challenges what we -and the market- know about MMORPGs. Landmark on the other hand seems to simply be a better Minecrafting with shared and private spaces. I really don't see what could possibly go wrong, especially considering everything they learn from it will be used for the thing they are really investing on, while issues and failures won't hinder what they are really working on.


EDIT: Streaming from yesterday's online event. At about the 8 minutes mark they start to show how you move your character around and mine. She starts tunneling around the 11:40 minutes mark 

[Ingmar]

I don't think MOBA style classes would create much character attachment for people, and that's pretty important in what keeps people coming back to an MMO.

You need to stop thinking about "MMOs" as all RPGs. We're way past that, and we'll always have DIKUs around for people to play with. If a game is fun, and people can collect/build things they will get attached to their collection whether it's pants on a character or a collection of champs.

Even in WOW, who gets attached to characters anymore when a lot of people have 8 alts, all level 90 and playing in LFR. People are attached to the game, their collection of characters and gear.

I don't think of MMOs as all RPGs, but you know, we're in a thread about Everquest. I would say that for almost all of my friends I play these games with I could identify a single character that they're attached to that keeps them coming back. /shrug

EDIT: And sure, that encompasses the gear the character has too in some cases. Doesn't really change the discussion.

[Draegan]

I was speaking in generalities.

[Venkman]

Just watched parts of that video Falconeer.

THIS is a beta invite I won't turn down.

Though of course not paying for

[Nebu]

Just watched parts of that video Falconeer.

THIS is a beta invite I won't turn down.

Though of course not paying for

I'm not very excited about Medieval Second Life.  Perhaps they will surprise me.

[tazelbain]

Looks like minecraft 3.0 to me. I am desperately trying to resist purchasing alpha. Wish terriaria had mufti-voxel mining.

[Paelos]

I want to get back into minecraft because of this game.

[Signe]

I want to get back into minecraft because of this game.

What a hilarious unintentional feature! 

Have they even started testing this game yet?

[Falconeer]

Those who paid at least 60 bucks will start testing it in February. So, the short answer is no.

[Samprimary]

I hope I am being clever and original when i term this idea they're working with as "world of minecraft"

[palmer_eldritch]

They're doing a great PR operation in my view, releasing regular updates on their design decisions and the thinking that went into them in the form of short YouTube videos. They've discussed everything from how long the day-night cycle will be (two hours) to whether certain classes will be restricted to certain races (they won't - any race can be any class).

The process seems to be that they put up a poll on their website and then often ignore the response but explain why they've made the decision they've made, which actually seems to work pretty well in terms of interacting with fans and keeping people interested while appearing to supply actual information rather than just hype.

Here's the playlist for the films, where they discuss everything to how friends lists should work (by character or by account?) to whether EQ Next should have ninjas: http://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PL7cdOT0cP_M0rnGh1OkcI_5UVSElbjU1l

[schild]

This almost looks like something I would want to reach out to Smedley about.

I'm not sure slapping the name EQ on it was necessary.

[Merusk]

Recreating/ resurrecting a brand is easier than creating one.  How much attention would we have paid if it didn't have that sticker on it?  As much as folks have to the other Voxel-MMO wannabes out there, probably.

[Numtini]

My understanding is the EQ name is on it because the same tools are going to be part of EQ Next.

[Malakili]

Yeah, let us not forget that the actual MMORPG version of this game is going probably going to make doing anything with this only interesting feature a pain in the ass. 

[Merusk]

I assumed he meant why the whole project was associated with EQ, not just the min-builder. Maybe I was wrong.

[Sky]

I imagine their long-term goal is to monetize it around the people still playing EQ1 and 2. All the rest of us just exist to get it up and running.

[Venkman]

I'm confused. I always assumed this was called EQ because they decided to make a game with a deformable world, then built a toolset to generate content for that world, then decided to release that toolset so they could crowdsource some of that content and potentially monetize it along the way.

So basically, the end goal of an MMORPG called EQsomething is what has driven the branding of the toolset.

[palmer_eldritch]

I'm confused. I always assumed this was called EQ because they decided to make a game with a deformable world, then built a toolset to generate content for that world, then decided to release that toolset so they could crowdsource some of that content and potentially monetize it along the way.

So basically, the end goal of an MMORPG called EQsomething is what has driven the branding of the toolset.

That's right. The end product is EQ Next, and EQ Next Landmark is really just part of the process of creating that, even though SOE are going a long way to turning it into a game in its own right.

I think the confusion is simply that people are talking at cross purposes. Some of us are talking about EQ Next - which includes EQ Next Landmark - but some people are only really interested in discussing Landmark, which is fair enough but causes confusion when someone writes about "it" without saying exactly what they mean.

My post above about the PR operation was about the the PR for EQ Next as a whole.

[KallDrexx]

Didn't someone at SOE previously say it turned out to be a mistake to brand EQ2 with EQ?

[Merusk]

Didn't someone at SOE previously say it turned out to be a mistake to brand EQ2 with EQ?

Seems familiar, but it was at the start and I believe it was being used as the excuse for why EQ2 "underperformed."  i.e. "We have all this ill-willl against EQ so people stayed away from EQ2! It has nothing to do with the gameplay, terrible performance or weird uncanney-valley graphics!"

[shiznitz]

If EQ2 had been a new brand, I fail to see how that would have helped. The vast majority of initial players were EQ vets, at least from my anecdotal experience.  Allk the new MMO players went to WoW.

[Lantyssa]

I think the confusion is simply that people are talking at cross purposes. Some of us are talking about EQ Next - which includes EQ Next Landmark - but some people are only really interested in discussing Landmark, which is fair enough but causes confusion when someone writes about "it" without saying exactly what they mean.

I think it's more that they're trying to make a separate game and both are named 'EQ Next'.

[Venkman]

If EQ2 had been a new brand, I fail to see how that would have helped. The vast majority of initial players were EQ vets, at least from my anecdotal experience.  Allk the new MMO players went to WoW.

Branding EQ2 "EQ" only became a mistake because WoW redefined the metrics of a "successful MMO" which EQ never achieved. And because it didn't achieve those success metrics, they changed their mind and left EQ1 running (iirc, their original plan was to shut it down).

EQ2 couldn't have ever achieved those expectations though.

• First, it was a sequel, so they could only focus on making EQ1 better rather than focusing on what would make a good MMO in general.
• Second, they decided to push the graphics envelope into a place where it would focus the game mostly on those willing to continually invest in new hardware. And that choice didn't translate to creative decisions everyone liked either. I assume they chose ugly brown overtones for authenticity and not because of any engine limitation. There was some uncanny valley for sure, but that mostly came out in screenshots. Ingame it just came across as ugly.
• Third, they made the choice to open early late-Alpha/early-beta access to those fans paying that crazy $25+/mo fee for special access to, what was it, "Stormhammer" server or something like that?

Niche of a niche of a niche .

Meanwhile against all of this was a game that was designed to be the exact opposite in every single way. Over the top stylized graphics, super casual onboarding experience, lowest common denominator hardware spec, etc. Because they could focus on making a good MMO without any internally biased precedent.

Among other advantages.

[Rendakor]

Branding EQ2 "EQ" only became a mistake because WoW redefined the metrics of a "successful MMO" which EQ never achieved. And because it didn't achieve those success metrics, they changed their mind and left EQ1 running (iirc, their original plan was to shut it down).

EQ2 couldn't have ever achieved those expectations though.

• First, it was a sequel, so they could only focus on making EQ1 better rather than focusing on what would make a good MMO in general.
• Second, they decided to push the graphics envelope into a place where it would focus the game mostly on those willing to continually invest in new hardware. And that choice didn't translate to creative decisions everyone liked either. I assume they chose ugly brown overtones for authenticity and not because of any engine limitation. There was some uncanny valley for sure, but that mostly came out in screenshots. Ingame it just came across as ugly.
• Third, they made the choice to open early late-Alpha/early-beta access to those fans paying that crazy $25+/mo fee for special access to, what was it, "Stormhammer" server or something like that?

Niche of a niche of a niche .

Meanwhile against all of this was a game that was designed to be the exact opposite in every single way. Over the top stylized graphics, super casual onboarding experience, lowest common denominator hardware spec, etc. Because they could focus on making a good MMO without any internally biased precedent.

Among other advantages.

EQ2 on minimum specs actually ran on lower end machines than WoW, because you could turn the graphics down REALLY far. I had an ancient laptop that wouldn't install WoW because the graphics card was below their standards, but I raided in EQ2 on it by staring at the ground while on minimum spec which left my character looking like a stick figure.

[Mithas]

I raided in EQ2 on it by staring at the ground while on minimum spec which left my character looking like a stick figure.

Now that sounds like fun.

[Venkman]

EQ2 on minimum specs actually ran on lower end machines than WoW, because you could turn the graphics down REALLY far. I had an ancient laptop that wouldn't install WoW because the graphics card was below their standards, but I raided in EQ2 on it by staring at the ground while on minimum spec which left my character looking like a stick figure.

I didn't say it wouldn't run, just that they targeted higher end machines for business purposes. You could play it on your machine, but based on what you wrote, you weren't even Blizzard's lower end target, much less anything anyone tracked at SOE. And it looked like shit aesthetically and technically

tl;dr: functional != fun

[palmer_eldritch]

I think the confusion is simply that people are talking at cross purposes. Some of us are talking about EQ Next - which includes EQ Next Landmark - but some people are only really interested in discussing Landmark, which is fair enough but causes confusion when someone writes about "it" without saying exactly what they mean.

I think it's more that they're trying to make a separate game and both are named 'EQ Next'.

They are not separate games. EQ Next Landmark is a tool for designing objects and areas to be used in EQ Next, which SOE are quite open about. They're going to transfer the best creations into the main game, and it looks like they will be holding competitions to encourage players to build the stuff they want ("this week we're looking for the best wizard's tower!"). Players will also be able to use the toolset to design items to be sold to EQ Next players and enjoy a share of the profits, but they will have to submit those items to SOE first and SOE decides whether to put them on the player marketplace or not.

It's also true that SOE are adding some gamey elements to EQ Next Landmark beyond simply building, such as resource collection, and they're allowing players to build objects which have no hope of being transferred to the main game if they want to, but it's always been presented as a way of letting players contribute to building EQ Next.

I'm also sure there will be plenty of people who only ever play EQ Next Landmark because they like the idea of building stuff a lot more than they like the idea of playing an Everquest MMO. But it's very much part of the EQ Next project.

[Nebu]

I must be losing my memory.  I thought EQ stood for Ever QUEST.  The again, writing good story, creating engaging dungeons, and developing an organic and heroic questing system is HARD.   

[Venkman]

How much of Everquest was actually questing? Shit, that's why WoW was World of Warquest colloquially

[tazelbain]

I must be losing my memory.  I thought EQ stood for Ever QUEST.  The again, writing good story, creating engaging dungeons, and developing an organic and heroic questing system is HARD.   

What you're panties bunching about exactly? Cross branding minecraft clone with a tranditional mmo? Seems pretty win/win and surprisely forward thinking for a legacy video game company.