Results 1 to 8 of 8

Thread: EverQuest Next Makes Its Debut

  1. #1
    Staff Healer RPGamer Staff TwinBahamut's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2003
    Location
    Sacramento, California
    Posts
    1,173

    EverQuest Next Makes Its Debut

    Sony Online Entertainment is bringing us back to the days when MMO designers offered us something we have never seen before, promising the moon in the process. At least this time they are giving Minecraft fans something shiny to play with while we wait for them to fulfill their promise.

    [Link]
    Last edited by TwinBahamut; 08-05-2013 at 11:15 AM.

  2. #2
    That sounds freakin' cool. I'd be all over this if I wasn't 168 months clean of the original EverCrack (it's a daily battle, but I learned to just say NO to MMOs.)

    It's pretty interesting how they are saying it will slowly revert back to the original state. I can imagine player created castles/etc that slowly deteriorate and must be properly maintained. On the other hand, poor implementation where a moved voxel just goes back to its original location after some X amount of time would shatter the illusion. I can see player created mineshafts having cave-ins as the world 'restores' itself rather than a random floating block showing up that was in the wall of a castle. I wonder how a normal bridge, "knocked down" by players, would restore? Maybe if NPCs naturally rebuilt it, rather than it just sort of re-appearing?

    On the other hand, I get the impression that player created content may not be create-able after launch. It'd be a lot more amazing if the game was alterable at any point, but the news post gives me the impression that the developers are mostly just looking for free work from the modding community.

  3. #3
    Terrain and quest altering features definitely capture my attention, but like Smacd said, if it's just a feature that's available now to give Sony free work, then I won't look into it.

  4. #4
    Staff Healer RPGamer Staff TwinBahamut's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2003
    Location
    Sacramento, California
    Posts
    1,173
    Quote Originally Posted by smacd View Post
    That sounds freakin' cool. I'd be all over this if I wasn't 168 months clean of the original EverCrack (it's a daily battle, but I learned to just say NO to MMOs.)

    It's pretty interesting how they are saying it will slowly revert back to the original state. I can imagine player created castles/etc that slowly deteriorate and must be properly maintained. On the other hand, poor implementation where a moved voxel just goes back to its original location after some X amount of time would shatter the illusion. I can see player created mineshafts having cave-ins as the world 'restores' itself rather than a random floating block showing up that was in the wall of a castle. I wonder how a normal bridge, "knocked down" by players, would restore? Maybe if NPCs naturally rebuilt it, rather than it just sort of re-appearing?

    On the other hand, I get the impression that player created content may not be create-able after launch. It'd be a lot more amazing if the game was alterable at any point, but the news post gives me the impression that the developers are mostly just looking for free work from the modding community.
    Yeah, it is really hard to say if this will end up as either a world fully controlled by the players, or as a game where the developers are just using players as cheap labor.

    To be honest, I found most of the reveal rather disappointing. Maybe it's because I wanted something a bit more clearly hardcore and group-oriented to balance out other modern MMOs (I'm actually nostalgic for the days of dying to trains in EQ1), but I'm having a hard time really getting excited for EQ Next. A lot of the talk about very reactive world is exciting and interesting, but it is also the exact same stuff that MMO designers have been promising since Ultima Online. This exact thing has been promised many times in the past, so it is hard to buy into it on faith alone. It's nice to see people reviving the old quest for the holy grail of MMO design rather than just try to chase after WoW over and over again, but that doesn't mean I'll believe it will actually work. Also, I'm rather alarmed they never once made mention of players being able to build their own cities in-game. That seems like it should be essential for an interesting sandbox MMO, but all of the talk so far has been "we (the developers) will cause a big change, and you will control how it plays out." The content made in EQN Landmark seems like it will only be put into the actual game by SOE, not by the players themselves. I get the impression that players will be as dependent on developer-provided content as ever before, it will just be more unpredictable.

    Also, I just don't like the look of the game's combat. Just doesn't interest me. It also didn't help that they started the whole "we're doing things no one has ever done before!" conversation by saying they are adding multiclassing of all things. They actually said they wanted to stop players from having to keep playing D&D all the time, and followed that by talking about a mechanic that has been in D&D since before videogaming was a thing and has been in MMOs for over a decade (hello, FF11).

    So, yeah, they need to prove they've got something before I'll get hyped.

  5. #5
    Tactic's Ogre I choose u! scorpio_7's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Location
    Newfoundland
    Posts
    331
    This certainly sounds different... I'm interested to see what they come up with. The screenshots on their website look really nice.

    If done right, this player-created/destructible world could be very interesting. But I am curious as to how this works with regards to players destroying other players environments. Will be neat to see where they go with all of this.

    To the poster above me... you are absolutely right, they need to show us how this will all work, not tell us. MMO creators have told all kinds of crap over the years. It's time for a developer to show us how they are different.
    Last edited by scorpio_7; 08-05-2013 at 10:41 PM.

  6. #6
    Member TheAnimeMan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    Albuquerque, New mexico
    Posts
    2,607
    To me it sounds like heavy use phasing technology, so until we see what they actually mean that is how I'll look at it. Cause even right now WOW has areas that change as your progress
    I am bad and that is good, I will never be good and that's not bad, there's no one I'd rather be than me - Wreck-it-Ralph

    27 years of gaming and still going strong
    and now a Proud if slightly annoyed Father :D

  7. #7
    Member Kiralyn's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2002
    Location
    A little to the left
    Posts
    273
    Quote Originally Posted by TwinBahamut View Post
    Maybe it's because I wanted something a bit more clearly hardcore and group-oriented to balance out other modern MMOs (I'm actually nostalgic for the days of dying to trains in EQ1)
    Honestly, I have a hard time seeing any company working with a "real" (i.e, large) budget, being able to make a game like that these days. The hardcore/nostalgia/masochist playerbase likely isn't large enough in the modern era to be able to get your money back. (Or, you'd never convince the shareholders & investors of that.)

  8. #8
    Member Jitawa's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    665
    Lots of the old EQers jumped ship for WoW, and I guess that says something about how appealing the punishment was. I played EQ multiple separate times: at release with a friend, after quitting on a new server, and then again with new characters on a PvP server. Large-ish chunk of my life at the time, I feel good about not playing MMOs anymore, and yet I can still recall stupid things like a SSoY being 8/24 with a 75 dd proc. Yaks were passe circa 2002 (post-Kunark, Velious, AND Luclin), and yet now... 11 YEARS later, you could still find one and have some new player asking why anyone would care.

    I dunno. I admire the scope of games like WoW, etc., but I like the idea of games coming to a conclusion. Even Skyrim gets played out, but at least you don't have that sunk-cost grind mentality where the actual game design is about you continuing to fork over money... as opposed to a player experience.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •