How did they get this game so right?

[magnetaress]

Modern games are gambling simulators designed like those mobile games where u gamble for credits. Designed not to simulate a world and tell a story. They are designed to put you in a skinner box and milk you for "points", points u can usually get through purchasing other points.

Sadly this is a failing of the human species and it isn't just games that do this. Until there is an evolution of our brains and a successful revolution and renaissance. Things won't change much, just be greatful one of projects and art exists every few decades.

[branamil]

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

It had to be luck right? Or was Brad a genius?

They were basically just ripping of DnD and MUDs. But so many other mmorpgs sucked ass.

I mean objectively they didn't get very much right as it's not very popular right now. Many other old games are way more popular. How did they get so much right for its time, until other games did it better? They were just one of the first RPG games to do a 3D world. That was really the only innovative thing they did. Everything else was a direct ripoff of pre existing fantasy lore and DnD mechanics.

[Evia]

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

I mean objectively they didn't get very much right as it's not very popular right now. Many other old games are way more popular. How did they get so much right for its time, until other games did it better? They were just one of the first RPG games to do a 3D world. That was really the only innovative thing they did. Everything else was a direct ripoff of pre existing fantasy lore and DnD mechanics.

I think it's kind of sad that you equate 'getting it right' with 'being popular' as those are not at all the same.

EQ1 was a stepping stone to the next step of pc online rpg games, and it was a huge step. World of Warcraft took what EQ1 did and took another giant step. So of course very few people want to go back multiple steps behind the current MMORPG landscape and play EQ1 when so many new features have been introduced in modern games.

but to just say EQ1 wasnt good just because it's not currently popular is a laughably disingenuous take.

[aussenseiter]

They're gr-r-reat!

[You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

[branamil]

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

I think it's kind of sad that you equate 'getting it right' with 'being popular' as those are not at all the same.

EQ1 was a stepping stone to the next step of pc online rpg games, and it was a huge step. World of Warcraft took what EQ1 did and took another giant step. So of course very few people want to go back multiple steps behind the current MMORPG landscape and play EQ1 when so many new features have been introduced in modern games.

but to just say EQ1 wasnt good just because it's not currently popular is a laughably disingenuous take.

There is no other measure of getting it right other than market appeal. If you use any other metric then it's just your personal opinion. You also don't know what the definition of disingenuous is.

[Evia]

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

There is no other measure of getting it right other than market appeal. If you use any other metric then it's just your personal opinion. You also don't know what the definition of disingenuous is.

Oh man the irony of this comment. You gotta be trolling.

[Ciderpress]

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

There is no other measure of getting it right other than market appeal. If you use any other metric then it's just your personal opinion. You also don't know what the definition of disingenuous is.

Lol this is like babby's first foray into the concept of subjectivity in art.

If you figure out how to min\max your exploitation of modern tech and the brain's reward system so that a bunch of whales play your crappy game, it's still a crappy game.

There's a reason p99 exists. There's a reason so many people still play diablo 2, nobody cares about diablo 3, and diablo 4 is another battlepass microtransaction hellworld that everyone will also soon forget. I have my doubts that in 2050 there's gonna be "Project 2023" where you get to relive the magic of vanilla diablo 4!

See, many people have an aversion to the modern model because it's a shit model and everyone hates it but whales, is the thing.

[Ciderpress]

I think a specific challenge that classic EQ\p99 faces when it comes to attracting new players is that it was developed during an ugly (literally) period of gaming where transitioning from sprite\rasterized art to polygonal\true arbitrary 3d was all the rage, so by today's standards it doesn't just look bad graphically, it looks *really* bad, in a way that older games don't. But when it came out, every cutting edge game was full 3d with chonky blurry polygonal characters so nobody really noticed or cared.

It says nothing about the value of it's core gameplay mechanics.

[zelld52]

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

Lol this is like babby's first foray into the concept of subjectivity in art.

If you figure out how to min\max your exploitation of modern tech and the brain's reward system so that a bunch of whales play your crappy game, it's still a crappy game.

There's a reason p99 exists. There's a reason so many people still play diablo 2, nobody cares about diablo 3, and diablo 4 is another battlepass microtransaction hellworld that everyone will also soon forget. I have my doubts that in 2050 there's gonna be "Project 2023" where you get to relive the magic of vanilla diablo 4!

See, many people have an aversion to the modern model because it's a shit model and everyone hates it but whales, is the thing.

Younger generations don’t know what the “old way” is like. They like what they grew up with. For us it was EQ

But to say “many people” is a vague overstatement. In the grand scheme of MMO players, p99 has a whole few thousand. With at most maybe 1500 concurrent. Across all classic MMOs? It’s the same demographic. 40 year old men and their families/children who played with them back when

[Ciderpress]

Originally Posted by zelld52 [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

Younger generations don’t know what the “old way” is like. They like what they grew up with. For us it was EQ

But to say “many people” is a vague overstatement. In the grand scheme of MMO players, p99 has a whole few thousand. With at most maybe 1500 concurrent. Across all classic MMOs? It’s the same demographic. 40 year old men and their families/children who played with them back when

Haha well okay I guess let's just never try to compare games accross time because kids like what they like etc? Only relevant metric is market share, and it doesn't even matter cause kids?

Maybe you didn't read my point about the diablo franchise: Diablo 1 is remembered fondly but nobody plays it, diablo 2 was hugely successful and tons of people still play it to the point where there are still paid tournaments for it, nobody plays diablo 3 and I literally forgot it exists, and diablo 4 which only just launched saw it's active players plummet within a couple months. This seems to contradict the notion that everyone just likes what they grew up with.

The whole premise of this thread is "what is so inexplicably addicting about this game?" and then people kramer in with "actually nothing beep boop the market" haha.