Project 1999 - [Opinion] EQ Next - Game Changers/Breakers

Project 1999 (/forums/index.php)

- Blue Server Chat (/forums/forumdisplay.php?f=17)

- - [Opinion] EQ Next - Game Changers/Breakers (/forums/showthread.php?t=111802)

Quote:

Originally Posted by t0lkien (Post 994290)

You guys have a plethora of instanced psuedo-MMOs to choose from.

Thisssssssssssssssssssss.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Nune (Post 994297)

Well, when you constantly subject the world to your own standards, you'll find yourself in the minority on anything. It'd be cool to have it zone like EQ1 did, it's just a dated concept. And calm down lol. fuckin Fred Flinstone up here bitchin because they dont make cars with open floors anymore

More like going to see an event and its the same exact event with nobody else to watch it with you, no matter how many tickets you buy.

EDIT: make more sense

More like going to an MMA fight and seeing the same fight it was last month with the same people and the same outcome. No matter how many times you go.

Like i said wayyyy earlier in the thread. Non instanced leveling and instanced end-game raid content.

Quote:

Originally Posted by JurisDictum (Post 994286)

These are legitimate problems with non-instanced MMORPGs. These issues have been largely avoided by the modern incarnations of the genre. But to suggest that instancing is the only way to solve these issues demonstrates a complete lack of imagination.
How large is Unrest really?. Is the FBSS bottleneck in classic EQ really the best a non-instance MMO can hope for? Is there something about open world raid encounters that inherently makes them only viable for the most hardcore of gamers? Or is this just some of the problems that exist now that can be overcome...
Instancing, in my mind, always was a lazy fix to a complex problem. Just give them all their own dungeon. No need to ambitiously make a huge dungeon larger than Dreadlands, filled with all kinds of unique mobs and items. We ca just give everyone their own copy of a KC crawl to the boss.
The majority of the industry simply has not been trying. Why would they? The majority of modern MMO gamers seem to have no idea what they are missing.
Unlike the problems of open world content, which can be fixed simply by providing more viable content (including removing the severe bottlenecks that exist in EQ); the problems with instancing are inherent in its design. Its the difference between a training simulation in the matrix and an actual alternate digital world.

I agree that many forms of instancing are lazy fixes, but do you think that by creating a world or dungeon that is so massive, you are effectively creating some of the same problems instances do? Like making players feel disconnected or decreasing player interaction?
To kind of explain my vision of an instance:
I'd love to see a dungeon like Sebilis, where a group would work their way down to the Emperor's room, to enter a 72-hour lockout 5 level difference instance which features ~15 mins of clearing and a chance at killing the emperor. Sort of a Boss instance, with a long lockout, at the depth of a dungeon. This stops people from camping the same items for days/weeks/months and instead encourages them to do many, many dungeons.
Perhaps make major world bosses such as Trakanon a 10day lockout. Instances such as Plane of Fear a 7 day lockout. Perhaps 10 man raids vs 20 man raids with no scaling of the mobs. Doing it with less rewards you with more?
Regardless, I agree the mass/indiscriminate instancing seen in many games is inexcusable. I think there is a smart way to implement it though.

Even the people who come together to play a 14 year old game (because it's the only one that is close to giving them what they like) can't agree on anything.

There is no hope. None. :eek:

Quote:

Originally Posted by SpartanEQ (Post 994307)

Even the people who come together to play a 14 year old game (because it's the only one that is close to giving them what they like) can't agree on anything.

There is no hope. None. :eek:

lol when you have a lot of people you have a lot of opinions. It's only natural.

Trying to cater to everyone is crazy talk. Why can't we get a niche game when there's other games to cater to the masses? Besides, non instanced non theme park MMOs are a niche playerbase remember? We wont have this overpopulation problem :)

Quote:

Originally Posted by Rhuma7 (Post 994291)

Lets say on a given day on p99, people loot a total of, 5k platinum.

over a month thats only 150k.

Lets say we have an ingame store that sells platinum.

The entire economy is based on how much platinum people actually have and items are listed at prices people can/will buy said item.

If theres an influx of 1 billion platinum on the first day, nobody but people who bought platinum will be able to afford items with this huge influx of platinum in the market.

The only way to compete is to buy. Pay2win.

EDIT: As far as retiring in a mansion in malibu on a mcdonalds salary. The dollar is much more valuable and a persons time is even more valuable. It only makes sense to skip being a scrub and shelling out a few bucks to completely deck out a character and within a year of having buyable currency you wont be trading with currency, it will be traded in stone of jordans. Which is a sure sign you fucked up.

I'm sorry. I was mistaken. In EQ live, Platinum cannot be purchased. Valuable items which can be easily sold to other players for platinum can be purchased. It equates to about 100k for ~$7.
On live, gold memberships (which are 14.99 a month) can be sold to other players in a form of currency called Kronos (Which are sold for 17.99). These sell for 240K. There are also tradeable bags and such.
This is more of what I was saying, though I did a poor job saying so. This doesn't change the amount of money in the economy, it just gives players a way to move that currency around and encourages people that would normally hoard their plat to move it around for the sake of saving some $$. It also financially supports the game.

Rhuma, what you just said... is not at all how economies work.

edit: To clarify, a select few people with massive wealth, unless intentionally maipulating prices, will not have an adverse effect on the overall economy. It's a function of supply and demand, and items will be priced at the marginal bid/ask spread. If one guy has a billion plat, and offers 10m for an item, it will definitely get sold at that price, but because no one else has that money, the next item won't sell for a billion plat, it will sell for its normal price or become illiquid to the seller.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Nune (Post 994297)

And calm down lol. fuckin Fred Flinstone up here bitchin because they dont make cars with open floors anymore

O_o No-one's upset. It's a discussion, and we disagree - politely I hope.

EQNext needs to take advantage of the nostalgia for EQ by choosing an art style - at least for player characters - that closely resembles the one for EQ1.

As many posters have pointed out before, the art direction EQ1 had personality, whereas the plastic garbage from luclin models and EQ2 was vapid and uninteresting.

Also I don't want instances for regular dungeons. I think I'm ok with it for raid targets because raid rotations are shitty, and cause more problems than the benefits of competition, but if you have enough dungeons having them be open shouldn't be a huge deal.

Put lots of mobs in, use random zone drop tables instead of everything being on a camp (some things on a camp is still cool), and cap the number of players on a server.