Kingdom of Sky

[Signe]

Well, if you start playing, we're on Steamfont and need a developer in our guild.

[Murgos]

No, it's not wrong.  I'm sure you have your reasons for wanting a HUGE snow globe.

Lets just leave it at a combination of child hood trauma and growing up in south Florida.

[Cheddar]

Have they announced wether there will be a reclass option or not when they roll this out?  SOME people did not take others advice and went a route without thought, and want to know if they can continue with their character or just re-roll.

[Morfiend]

Are they implementing the thing with starting your end class at level 1 yet?

If they do that, I *might* resub to check it out. No way Im grinding up to 20 again though. Fuck that.

[Cheddar]

Are they implementing the thing with starting your end class at level 1 yet?

If they do that, I *might* resub to check it out. No way Im grinding up to 20 again though. Fuck that.

Yes.  I do not see what the problem with the current system is, though.  Seriously, as long as you know what you want in the end, then how hard can it be to get there?

I am a simple person with simple needs.

[MrHat]

I am not.

[MrHat]

Have they announced wether there will be a reclass option or not when they roll this out?  SOME people did not take others advice and went a route without thought, and want to know if they can continue with their character or just re-roll.

There will be a reclass option to all characters sub 20.  So joy, I can play my guy up to 19 now. 

On a sidenote, I was scanning through the producer's letter and something funny occured to me.

It was 9 pages total.  A post like that on the WoW forums nets broken threads of 40+ pages.  EQ2 requires you register for the forums to even play.  Heheh.

[schild]

5,000,000 versus a few hundred thousand can do that. I don't see what's funny.

[Hartsman]

Have they announced wether there will be a reclass option or not when they roll this out?  SOME people did not take others advice and went a route without thought, and want to know if they can continue with their character or just re-roll.

There will be a reclass option to all characters sub 20.  So joy, I can play my guy up to 19 now. 

On a sidenote, I was scanning through the producer's letter and something funny occured to me.

It was 9 pages total.  A post like that on the WoW forums nets broken threads of 40+ pages.  EQ2 requires you register for the forums to even play.  Heheh.

If you're looking for the other 72.8 pages of posts, you're welcome to my PM box.   Some day, I will make it through everything that's in there.

More seriously -- Since a post from one of us isn't the rarity that it is in some other games, it's only the controversial or disliked stuff that draws the crowds.  For the most part (not all, but the large majority), the archetype change announcement was met with: "Cool.  Finally," which is pretty much what we expected.

[Cheddar]

If you're looking for the other 72.8 pages of posts, you're welcome to my PM box.   Some day, I will make it through everything that's in there.

More seriously -- Since a post from one of us isn't the rarity that it is in some other games, it's only the controversial or disliked stuff that draws the crowds.  For the most part (not all, but the large majority), the archetype change announcement was met with: "Cool.  Finally," which is pretty much what we expected.

This is the greatest dig a dev has ever posted about another company.  Am I the only one who saw this?  I  Hartman!!!  Manbabies?

[Margalis]

Yes.  I do not see what the problem with the current system is, though.  Seriously, as long as you know what you want in the end, then how hard can it be to get there?

There are a lot of problems.

In the first few levels there are only 4 classes, whereas most games have at least 8. Also if you don't read a lot of FAQs or forums it can be really unclear what to take. Say I want to be a pet class - which tree do I go?

It makes the game seem more basic than it really is. In WoW if I want to be a spellcaster I can be a Shaman, a priest, a warlock or a mage. In EQ2 I can be a priest or a wizard, that's it. And if I want to be a melee damage dealer I have ONE choice.

But really what they need is the FFXI job system. EVERY GAME NEEDS THE FFXI JOB SYSTEM.

[Strazos]

But really what they need is the FFXI job system. EVERY GAME NEEDS THE FFXI JOB SYSTEM.

NO!

Having to basically level up the same character twice just to be "competant" (in order to keep you sub class in step with your main class)? No thank you sir.

[Soukyan]

Yes.  I do not see what the problem with the current system is, though.  Seriously, as long as you know what you want in the end, then how hard can it be to get there?

There are a lot of problems.

In the first few levels there are only 4 classes, whereas most games have at least 8. Also if you don't read a lot of FAQs or forums it can be really unclear what to take. Say I want to be a pet class - which tree do I go?

It makes the game seem more basic than it really is. In WoW if I want to be a spellcaster I can be a Shaman, a priest, a warlock or a mage. In EQ2 I can be a priest or a wizard, that's it. And if I want to be a melee damage dealer I have ONE choice.

But really what they need is the FFXI job system. EVERY GAME NEEDS THE FFXI JOB SYSTEM.

I really dislike having to go to web sites and forums to dig up information about a game as well, so I'm going to point out here that if you RTFM for EQ2 (which you have plenty of time to do during install), then it explains all the classes and subclasses and even lays out a chart of the progression AND tells you who to talk to for the subclass quests. While people may not like to read manuals, the fact remains that the information is right there in the box.

Not only that, but if you want to play a caster of any kind, you start off as a mage. Things start to get hairy after that, BUT not so much. Since I just recently rolled one up, let's look at the bard. I want to become a bard. I would typically think to start as a rogue to become a bard, being a geek and all, but since rogue is not a starting class, I choose scout because the guy on the Isle of Refuge has explained to me that this is the class that leads to roguishness. Once I am a scout and I make my way to Qeynos, I find the guy who gives me the subclass quests. He sends me on three different errands. These errands are one per subclass and are given one at a time after a detailed explanation of what each class does. After this, I decide which to become and choose bard. I am then given another quest to complete to become a bard. Now, I have not advanced to level 20 just yet with this character, so I will be a bard for a bit, but my next choices are Troubadour or Dirge. As I am good aligned, I will end up as a troubadour. If I were evil (or did the quest to expatriate or whatever the hell it's called in-game), I would become a Dirge.

To me, that is pretty damn straightforward. You choose an archetype (fighter, mage, priest, scout) from a set of 4 familiar RPG concepts. You then choose the actual class you want to be. After that, the next step is more a function of alignment and merely gives you a little more specialization. Now, I didn't do a mage example, but I think it is pretty straightforward and I know the subclass quest giver explains it well. The choices are Sorcerer (Direct Damage), Enchanter (Crowd Control) or Summoner (Pets). Each of those splits into two later on, but again, those choices are based on your alignment. Evil summoners are necromancers and good ones are conjurors.

As to the comparison to WoW, well, the classes in WoW are more directly comparable to EQ1 because that's what they are. If you want to be a caster in WoW, your choices are mage, priest, shaman, warlock, druid (magician, cleric, shaman, necro, druid in EQ1 lingo). If you want to be a caster in EQ2, technically your choices are Sorcerer, Enchanter, or Summoner, but since you clumped priest classes into the WoW group, you can also be a Cleric, Druid or Shaman. Six caster choices. Not bad and they can become specialized based on your alignment or preference.

Long story short, yes, it appears as though you don't have many choices in EQ2, but if you are actually looking to play the game and want to know more, you may check their web site which explains the class choices. When you click on one of the archetypes, you immediately see that there are more classes. If you don't, well then I guess you would assume there are only 4 classes. I think the only people that would pass on EQ2 because of the appearance of limited class choice would be the consumer who is looking for a game and not asking any questions about it. I would be willing to wager that this is not the majority of consumers. Most people at least ask some basic questions about a game before buying it (genre? playstyle? pay-to-play? etc.) and in the case of MMOGs, a lot of people will take the time to draw comparisons to previous MMOGs, ask friends or colleagues who play it for more details, and even take the time to check the web site or at least read the box for the game (which contains marketing to indicate more than 4 classes).

Actually, I think the archetype system makes it clearer for people to make a decision. In WoW or EQ1, if I choose shaman, I may not realize what that entails for playstyle until quite some levels into the game. Whereas with EQ2, I know that shaman is a priest archetype so I can expect to be healing and buffing amongst other activities during play. If I had any reservations about being a buffer/healer, I would know to avoid that class and look to something else. Sure the shaman has other abilities (DD, debuffs, DoTs, etc.), but the general overall use is that of buffer/healer. Because of the sheer number of skills given to each class in these games, we could discuss each of them at length for days, but I chose shaman because from the days of EQ1 and forward, most MMOG players think of "SoW plz" when they look at that class and quite honestly, pretty much every implementation has played like that (totems anyone?). Anyhow, I've run on for too long, but my point is that it is not confusing and is actually very straightforward even if you don't read the manual. Sure, there are those people in the world who may not know that a bard should be a scout first, but they can do one of two things. They can do trial-and-error or crack the manual and find out (using the TOC) in less than a minute.

In every game, the melee classes are all essentially just warriors with specialized abilities. And no, leveling up multiple classes can stay with FFXI and DDO, thanks.

[Lt.Dan]

If you're looking for the other 72.8 pages of posts, you're welcome to my PM box.   Some day, I will make it through everything that's in there.

More seriously -- Since a post from one of us isn't the rarity that it is in some other games, it's only the controversial or disliked stuff that draws the crowds.  For the most part (not all, but the large majority), the archetype change announcement was met with: "Cool.  Finally," which is pretty much what we expected.

C'mon, you know there were at least 2 pages of 'First!!1!', "Second!!", etc before you even got to the "+1" posts, before you got to "OMG you brok ur game", before you could log in on your second account to post "Cool. Finally"

On another topic - I had a Kerra Dirge in Qeynos, so I'm not sure alignment necessarily constrains final class choice.  But, don't quote me on that, it may just be races who can be good and evil.

[Murgos]

Many classes are both Qeynos and Freeport, like Dirge, Troubador, Bezerker, Guardian etc...

Also most races are open in both cities, it's only a few that are limited; ratonga to freeport, high elves ot Qenos.

[Sky]

Souk - that's nice. Except I've played EQ2 twice now and never made it to the fucking profession I wanted to play.

Necromancer, not beetle lord. Shadowknight, not fighter then crusader. Fighter has zero interest factor imo, unless you just want to play a generic basher-type. A shadowknight has some deep-seated issues (as a paladin does) and makes for a much more interesting class choice. (Sue me for the roleplaying bent...all my characters have been on rp servers).

[Soln]

Souk - that's nice. Except I've played EQ2 twice now and never made it to the fucking profession I wanted to play.

Necromancer, not beetle lord. Shadowknight, not fighter then crusader. Fighter has zero interest factor imo, unless you just want to play a generic basher-type. A shadowknight has some deep-seated issues (as a paladin does) and makes for a much more interesting class choice. (Sue me for the roleplaying bent...all my characters have been on rp servers).

Funny I only made it to 2 more than my chosen class (22 ranger) to find out what it was really like and then I quit.  Didn't like the eventual discovery. 

[Glazius]

I really dislike having to go to web sites and forums to dig up information about a game as well, so I'm going to point out here that if you RTFM for EQ2 (which you have plenty of time to do during install),

I'm going to point out here that users don't have the manual, and even if they did, they wouldn't read it.

--GF

[Alkiera]

If you're looking for the other 72.8 pages of posts, you're welcome to my PM box.   Some day, I will make it through everything that's in there.

More seriously -- Since a post from one of us isn't the rarity that it is in some other games, it's only the controversial or disliked stuff that draws the crowds.  For the most part (not all, but the large majority), the archetype change announcement was met with: "Cool.  Finally," which is pretty much what we expected.

C'mon, you know there were at least 2 pages of 'First!!1!', "Second!!", etc before you even got to the "+1" posts, before you got to "OMG you brok ur game", before you could log in on your second account to post "Cool. Finally"

No, that's the SWG boards.  The EQ2 boards are actually much nicer.

On another topic - I had a Kerra Dirge in Qeynos, so I'm not sure alignment necessarily constrains final class choice.  But, don't quote me on that, it may just be races who can be good and evil.

There is one class from each archetype whose subclass is not alignment dependant.  Warriors can be either Berserkers or Guardians, Sorcs can be either wizzys or warlocks, druids can be either of their subclasses, and bards can be either of theirs, regardless of city.  All other classes are alignment dependant.

Races are fairly restricted, Humans, gnomes, half-elves, and halflings, I think, are the only races that can be good or evil.  Maybe barbarians, too.

Alkiera

[Soukyan]

Souk - that's nice. Except I've played EQ2 twice now and never made it to the fucking profession I wanted to play.

Necromancer, not beetle lord. Shadowknight, not fighter then crusader. Fighter has zero interest factor imo, unless you just want to play a generic basher-type. A shadowknight has some deep-seated issues (as a paladin does) and makes for a much more interesting class choice. (Sue me for the roleplaying bent...all my characters have been on rp servers).

I understand your perspective. Actually, it's more roleplaying that you don't just appear in the world as a shadowknight. After all, gotta be a squire before you make your way up to jousting. That is more roleplaying than just popping in the world at a chosen profession. However, looking at the character's age, the assumption is made that you've paid your dues and are now on your way to becoming something quite specific. So I realize there are other ways one can look at the situation. I know you wish to be a shadowknight or a necromancer and such is your right. I wanted to be a bard. I'll eventually be a troubadour, but no biggie. I was, as you were, slightly annoyed at having to play a scout for the first ten levels. I'm not big on the scout gameplay style, but I worked through it. I may eventually be able to be less and less "sneaky" in my playstyle as a bard, but based upon the skillset that I have, for the time being, my scout skills are still my biggest damage dealers. I don't know that my melee skills and playstyle will change all that much as a bard anyhow because bards are essentially rogues with buffs. *shrug* I didn't say that the system worked well for everyone, just wanted to point out that the system is not really that complex or confusing. Hell, perhaps they made it too simple. For me, I don't mind not being a troubadour right away, but my current gaming style is pretty laid back and I'm enjoying just doing quests and exploring the world. My advancement and my class have pretty much been asides to the other things I'm doing.

I haven't felt "the grind" when I've played EQ2 before, nor do I feel it now. However, I'm saying that it isn't there. For spell upgrades, I will personally be buying them from another crafter as I'm doing a different tradeskill. The nice thing I've found with EQ2 is that I go out questing and while I'm out and about, I gather and mine and harvest. I manage to get quite a bit done in the world by just questing and having a good time of it. I should point out that I enjoy exploration and I enjoy the sights of this virtual world. I think that makes a big difference. Since I played EQ for so many years and my attitude was always "eye on the max level prize" and I burned out, I've long since given up on that approach. Especially since I had the same approach in DAoC and when I reached the max level and beat everything there, it was not only anti-climactic, but shortly thereafter, Mythic raised the bar with an expansion. While the new content was neat, they essentially took the "maxxed out prize" away from me and laid it 5000 meters away again. This meant grinding it out to reclaim the prize. Some may say it's a different prize, but being "maxxed out" is the same exact prize, the MMOG designers just add more tassels to it. ;)

So these days, I don't much care if I ever reach the max level in a game. As a matter of fact, I never even consider it to be an option. After all, looking at EQ2, in February the max level will go up to 70. It would take me a year or more to even reach the original max of 50 and by then, the max will most likely be 75 or higher and include all sorts of alternate advancement stuff as well. So why bother myself with it. The worst thing for me to see in regards to EQ2 (or any online world for that matter) are screenshots from expansions. I saw some shots of Desert of Flames and said to myself "I can't wait to see that in action!" There are some gorgeous looking places to explore. I realize that I can't just pop over to Desert of Flames so in an intelligent move, rather than buying the expansion and taunting myself with the desire to level to the point where I can see those places, I simply put off buying the expansion until I reach the appropriate level. I should also save a little cash this way. More importantly, I can continue to play and not worry about how soon I get to see those places. After all, there are many other virtual places in the world that I've yet to see. (Rolling an alt is a different story. I don't often do the alt thing these days because I'd rather just enjoy the game time on one character and let it flow, as it were)

I'm rambling again. I'm much like you, Sky, in terms of my playstyle and the amount of time I have to devote to MMOGs. The difference, I think, is that I just stopped giving a damn about the top of the heap and decided to just play as long as it is fun. Actually, I guess you do the same thing, but didn't find anything fun to divert your attention from the fact that you weren't immediately a shadowknight or necromancer. Point well made and sorry to hear that you didn't enjoy the game more. It would've been fun to hang out in Norrath with you. How did it look on that monster screen of yours, btw? (I'm always green with envy over your gaming setups)

[Soukyan]

I really dislike having to go to web sites and forums to dig up information about a game as well, so I'm going to point out here that if you RTFM for EQ2 (which you have plenty of time to do during install),

I'm going to point out here that users don't have the manual, and even if they did, they wouldn't read it.

--GF

I'm going to point out that EQ2 has an extensive context-sensitive text AND voice help system that will even start telling you about new features the first time you attempt to do something. It is right there in your face to read and hear. I wouldn't even begin to argue that they have a great interface (although it is a direct imitation of the Windows Start menu, which most PC users in the world are used to), but it is clear and easy to use. Perhaps finding the tab where you change your title may not be immediately apparent, but clicking the EQII button gives you a menu with access to everything you could need and other interface functions are standard fare (even so far as both arrow keys AND WASD allowing for movement of the character for those who come from other game genres or who skip the tutorial). They mimic the functionality of the Windows OS wherever possible (right-click context-sensitive menus for everything). This was a smart move because most PC users use Windows and know at least a little bit about getting around. I realize that there are a lot of people not familiar with the right-clicking and the right mouse button (god knows they've been around long enough that you would think most users would click it just to see what happens, but I've found bunches of users who never even touch the right mouse button... at least not on purpose ;)). So yeah, I've read his site and a couple of his books. Thanks, but if we look at the quote:

"Users don't have the manual, and even if they did, they wouldn't read it."

The important words are the contraction "wouldn't". Would Not. It's not my problem if a user would not read the manual. This is why geeks tell people to RTFM. It's not that you could not read it. It's that people should read it, but would not because people are fucking lazy asses. It's that simple. People want to have everything handed to them. I'm surprised more people don't just want to fire up the game and have a max level character ready to play... oh wait, there are people who do want that! :)

While the philosophy is great for design, there's a reason the designers include a manual and take the time to document. It is so that users can refer to it should there be a problem with interface. I'm all for users giving feedback to developers to improve the interface for the next iteration, but let's face it, that could take a while to implement, especially in a large complex developed system such as an online game. In the meantime, the user will still need to refer to documentation for some things. I might also point out that there will never be a perfect interface (I'm sure someone will have a link to refute this) until we can directly speak to, touch, smell, taste and feel in the virtual worlds. Hell, even then, due to handicaps, human won't have a perfect interface. At least not all of them, which brings me to my quote:

"You can please some of the people some of the time, but you can't please all of the people all of the time."

[UD_Delt]

Odd. My vitality drops to .1% but never disappears completely. Maybe it's a bug. It's a bug I like. My /played time is like 30 hours and I'm only level 17. I should quest more.

Hmmm... not sure if I should shatter the illusion or not...


Oh well, I noticed this last night as well. My vitality appeared to be .1% when hovering over the bubble at the end of the exp bar. But I was definately out of vitality and NOT earning double exp. The arrows that denote where your vitality ends disappeared despite the bubble claiming I still had .1% left.