Classic EQ ARPG?

[Rust1d?]

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

Show us some other games you've made and prove that your a competent game developer before we will take this seriously

I am just gauging interest. And why would I care if you take me seriously or not? It's not like I am asking for money or anything...just trying to make a fun game

[Rust1d?]

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

Lords of Everquest. /thread (j/k)

You'd be wiser to use a premade game engine to create something like this such as Unity or Gamemaker.

Scripting/doing triggers for SC2 editor isn't for the light hearted and in the time it would take you to achieve what you wanted you could have learned a valuable coding skill such as C#, C or C++.

I have played the Diablo SC2 map and while it works it's not on par with diablo by a long shot! The amount of scripting and triggers that went into that would probably make most of our heads fly, among other tricks the author used to achieve their goal.

I don't mean to be a downer but there are already Arpgs you can play, leave EQ where it belongs as an mmorpg. Just because something can be done doesn't mean that it should or that it will work.

I've often thought about re-creating EQ in the UO engine but that's for another thread.

I was thinking about Diablo 2 pvp and now that I have been playing Diablo 3, I miss the pvp aspect. PvP on EQ PvP servers seems to be almost non-existent.

Taking the aspect of oldschool EQ with the fast pace of Diablo/PoE etc. Not sure if it would work, just gauging interest. EQ in UO sounds pretty good too...

[Ket]

Now I miss Champions [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

[Zadrian]

Is this game out yet? I'm ready to play.

[Kich867]

As a fellow programmer interested in game development, I would recommend the Unity engine. It's free to use*, it has amazing power, it's pretty intuitive, and there's copious amounts of documentation and tutorials out for it.

If you're familiar with C# or JavaScript, that's what the logic is scripted with. It's awesome.

*It's free so long as your game / company makes less than $100,000 a year. Which would be the case.

[stormlord]

New ideas are what led to EQ in the fist place. What would happen if we took a MUD and made it graphical for a 1999 playing audience? So wondering what would happen if you took classic EQ and tweaked it into a action RPG is not altogether differnet from what led to its creation.

However, I enjoyed playing on classic EQ. I only really played in the levels under level 25. Personally, I think the downtime in the game and the steep leveling curves just makes the game too painful later on. However, I thin the downtime and cooldowns in the lower levels are fine. Not all cooldowns or sources of downtime are bad. Cooldowns give us a way to gauge our performance over a period of time. Did you run out of HP or Mana? Did you die? What of downtime? Downtime, if it's not extreme, reinforces the dimensions of the world. Havin to move from A to B imprints it in our memory and the points between A and B give the game maker an opportunity to give the world flesh and bone. And like it or hate it, but human memory is limited and some repetition is needed for us to understand and appreciate. It's not necessarily bad to go to the same place for a while.

I also don't always like fast paced games. I know many players don't like it mentioned, but the downtime in EQ really did encourage us to talk to each other and take timeout. It also, incidentally, gave us an extra excuse to take hte garbage out or get some lunch or go to the bathroom.

I also played lots of Diablo 2. Thing about Diablo 2 is its world was very shallow. It basically was all combat. There were some quests and some story and even a couple non-players, but it was all very limited and immobile and short and even cliche. It really was not the same kind of game as an RPG. That doesn't mean it was a bad game because I enjoyed it, but at teh same time, I also like slower richer RPGs.

Some things I'd want right away if I could recreate EQ:
1) Minimal GUI - no big hotkey bars or lots of windows or lots of bind keys
(note) This will probably impact the game. In EQ's case, I don't think the game was so bad early on. I can recall switching to the f10 or whatever it was to shut off the original client. Was that Velious era? It wasn't too bad. Just chat window and some spell icons and a hotkey bar. But as the years passed, it added more and more luggage onto the screen. These days, last I was there, the screen was an abomination. Even in EQ2 I found there was a lot on the screen. Many games rely too much on windows.
2) In-game map doesn't have a global positioning system, so your position isn't shown
(note) No automatic (manual is allowed) markers, either - quests won't add stuff to it automatically
(note) Additionally, I think it's not necessarily bad to allow players to copy and sell their maps in-game. One way to combat the game becoming too well known is just to have a more dynamic spawning system for camps and monsters. Of course, that's probably too complicated...
3) No radars or glowing paths
(note) One way to combat information overload and lost players is to make simpler cities with intuitive layout. However, this should not mean on the same token you make ALL cities this way. NO. You still must create at least several very winding confusing layouts. INTENDED.
4) Every player has a way to pause the game no matter what the circumstances
(note) This is like feign deaht in classic EQ, but every class would have it
5) Much more capable NPC scripting for both conversing with players and acting autonomously in the world
6) All classes can solo
(note) I could add a stripped down warrior class but new players would play at a disadvantage. The advantage is it would be very simple to play. I'd allow them to add new skills and abilities as they wish, so eventually it'd become a normal class, depending on how fast the new player adopts things. I'd make hte lower level content easier so new players can adjust to the game playing the skeleton class.
7) Much more feature rich /note window for organizing notes
(note) I think /note was added later in EQ's life, but I always felt it was underdeveloped
8) Perhaps put teleporters in the noob places to connect them which are free for the first X uses but charge after that

Now I'm not a game designer, so I shant go into much more depth than this. I really don't know yet how I feel about group vs solo, for example. Should groups get more experience? And what about mudflation? How would I retain some of the value in old content, while allowing for new? And you know how in modern EQ everybody can breath underwater and levitate and have sow? I don't like that, but yet I don't think a game which has too may restrictions would be popular. What about weight encumberance? I like it, but here again, some don't think it's a worthy "challenge".

One last thing. I think the thing that defines me as a player most is my likeness for tight gameplay, first person and immersion. How I define immersion is really unique to me and not something which can be universally applied to others. My own feeling is I should have to be alert to do well. I like consequences as well. Stepping into the sewers of Qeynos and falling into the pit trap is one of my ice cream moments in EQ. While moments like that can turn people away from games, I think game makers should not stop doing it. There's got to be an inbetween wherein there can be surprises yet not all of them are rainbows. Now, in the same breathe, I want to say surprises of this sort should not be completely random or too frequent. Negative surprises which are random or frequent can sour even the tightest of gamers such as myself.

[Rust1d?]

Some good ideas. For example, I played on Vile's Crucify server and while it was fun being able to gear up and just pvp, eventually it got boring.

On the other side of the coin, when Red99 came out, leveling and the pace in general was too slow. I mean it took 4 hours just to get lv 5.

I feel something more towards the pace of Crucify, but obviously not as fast paced. I think you should reach 50 in about 2 weeks. I am thinking you get 3 spells/skills every 5 levels for a total of 30 skills. For example lets take a druid:

Level 1 you get fire/heal/shield
Level 5 you get gate/ice/thorns
Level 10 you get sow/AoE/Str
Level 15 you get DoT/Ice/lev

So you won't have every EQ skill, but you will get the more important ones.

As far as the world, it would be your normal EQ map but Diablo perspective.

[Gotze]

Both champion games were fucking beautiful

[Kich867]

Honestly, I think EQ has some phenomenally well built systems already. I really don't think, if I had to "redo" EQ that it would be overhauls of too many systems.

Toning down the power level of mobs outside of "dungeon" zones so that people can solo for decent XP. Making Int / Wisdom factor into spell damage/healing. Fixing bow damage for rangers. Clarifying in the UI how stats actually affect you.

That's about it. Let casters scale with gear, let rangers use bows for worthwhile damage, let more people solo for XP, and let me know how much damage I actually receive from STR or what my chance to proc a weapon is from DEX.