Cheating everywhere, GMs???

[Croco]

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

Good insight in above post.

I was doing a corpse recovery yesterday after unfortunately passing through the digestive tracts of an elder snow griffon.

I got the corpse to a zoneline, and along ran a monk, chased by a couple of giants.

If I wasn’t there he’d have just zoned them. Instead i shot him an invite, we beat down one, zoned the other and had a chat. I made a new acquaintance from a situation which might never have occurred if EW opened instances for ring stuff.

Wot? No one has ever suggested regular random zones get instances. For quests or xp or anything else. We're specifically talking about raid instances. You would've still has your interaction if there were raid instances on p99.

[Ooloo]

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

Because it was literally the only option available with the technology and knowledge available in 1999 perhaps? [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

Classic EQ got some things right and it's still near and dear to my heart in a lot of ways. At the end of the day though it's still technically a failed mutation in a long evolutionary history of MMO's and video games in general. It's extremely foolish to imply that because of spawn times and no instances that must mean Brad sat in his chair thinking to himself "Man I really hope people line up at the snow line in Kael and stare at a screenshare/bind sight for 16 hours to run a preplanned footrace they've practiced hundreds of times for a chance to kill a giant with a guild of 70 people that drops 2 items". No chance things just worked out that way coincidentally and it had some negative side effects they didn't anticipate? That they fairly quickly started addressing via GM rotations on many servers and eventually instances?

There's a reason there has been ZERO other games that do this and I hate to break it to you.... It's not because EQ did it right and everybody else is wrong for 23 years.

I'm not sure how you're defining a game doing something right or wrong though outside of just sub numbers I guess? So whatever a game does, if it has high subs it's doing it right? I guess in a sense it is.

EQ2 quickly became a WoW clone though and never even came close to the popularity of WoW itself. The warcraft franchise and blizzard as a developer already had a TON of name recognition and credibility. WoW blew EQ away in terms of sub numbers more because of the lore that people were invested in already, rather than some brilliant new game mechanic. EQ2 should have also blown EQ1 numbers away if that were the case, since it was very much like WoW, but it didn't at all.

[Arvan]

Wow had better sub numbers because it had the same exact dopamine addiction loop that EQ has but they just dumbed down the mechanics so little kids and middle aged+ people could pick it up and easily progress.

[Ravager]

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

Wow had better sub numbers because it had the same exact dopamine addiction loop that EQ has but they just dumbed down the mechanics so little kids and middle aged+ people could pick it up and easily progress.

Not to mention better production value, colorful and appealing artistic aesthetic, excellent musical score, more capital, more production resources, better advertisement, engaging gameplay and it doesn't kill you and make you go on a corpse run in the first 5 minutes of playing. What else did I miss?

[Praxcthius]

Wow catered to no skill, quick/insta gratification. eq2 graphics > wow graphics. same game though. just different names and advertising schemes.

[Ravager]

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

Wow catered to no skill, quick/insta gratification. eq2 graphics > wow graphics. same game though. just different names and advertising schemes.

There's no skill in EQ either. #/autoattack

[Praxcthius]

Clearly you've never grouped with a shitty or newb tank.

[myrddraal]

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

Wow had better sub numbers because it had the same exact dopamine addiction loop that EQ has but they just dumbed down the mechanics so little kids and middle aged+ people could pick it up and easily progress.

WoW -retained- better sub numbers because people paying for the game wanted to experience the content at their own pace, which instancing most / all raid content allowed and why EQ moved toward that as time passed.

[SantagarBrax]

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

Because it was literally the only option available with the technology and knowledge available in 1999 perhaps? [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

Classic EQ got some things right and it's still near and dear to my heart in a lot of ways. At the end of the day though it's still technically a failed mutation in a long evolutionary history of MMO's and video games in general. It's extremely foolish to imply that because of spawn times and no instances that must mean Brad sat in his chair thinking to himself "Man I really hope people line up at the snow line in Kael and stare at a screenshare/bind sight for 16 hours to run a preplanned footrace they've practiced hundreds of times for a chance to kill a giant with a guild of 70 people that drops 2 items". No chance things just worked out that way coincidentally and it had some negative side effects they didn't anticipate? That they fairly quickly started addressing via GM rotations on many servers and eventually instances?

There's a reason there has been ZERO other games that do this and I hate to break it to you.... It's not because EQ did it right and everybody else is wrong for 23 years.

My explanation was to define that "everything in Classic Everquest is competitive, by design" and not once did I mention anything about the raid scene, yet there is a correlation that can't be disproven.

You're attempting to attribute what the p99 staff did here in the raid scene in an attempt to counter the competitive nature of the game and it's natural evolution during a time locked server. Of course, staff had to make changes to address the unforeseen consequences of said natural evolution during a time locked server.

One may not agree with everything and that's completely fine, yet I believe the staff have sincerely given some consideration to the matter in an effort to make it as fair as possible, within the constraints of the game. Is everything perfect? Of course not. The server is always evolving and so are the staff in regards to it.

You point to the fact that Live went the way of instancing and GM rotations, yet you fail to address that this is logical fallacy by taking the position of limiting interactions within a true MMO. It's counter-intuitive. This is a decision that should never have been made and the results were clearly evident. There was a smaller moment when luclin came out where questions began to arise as to the direction of the game with port scions limiting interactions and other minor issues, yet the main downfall of the game came post PoP when instancing became the normal and players and other guilds stopped interacting with each other completely. This decision, while made in an attempt to benefit "the health of the server", in fact did the exact opposite and killed their own game to the point it no longer became the King nor relevant.

[unsunghero]

I’m a huge WoW fanboy yet I still prefer EQ 1 realistic graphics to WoW’s cartoony oversized shoulder pads

WoW’s pvp was light years ahead of EQ’s though…