Penny Arcade on EQII

[Evil Avatar]

While I don't normally link to Penny-Arcade (under the assumption that you all visit the page on a regular basis), I couldn't help but notice that Gabe tried out SOE's EverQuest II. His short article on the game (http://www.penny-arcade.com/2006/02/15#1140015960) so perfectly sums up what I think is wrong with EverQuest II and Star Wars Galaxies that I wanted to pass it on to you.

At this point I think Gabe and Tyco are right, you would have to pay me to play those two games.

[Grimgrock]

Woody also had something to say (in his comic) about it today.

www.gucomics.com

[Atorak]

I played the EQII Demo that was out last year, and I feel the same way Gabe does. He described the world as being "sterile", which I definitely agree with. Everything looked clean, but lifeless. I only lasted a few months playing WoW before it became boring, but I only lasted a few hours before I uninstalled EQII.

Best quote of the article: "It is a world designed by math rather than imagination." - Gabe

[PIPBoy3000]

It's still amazing that developers are flocking to the world of MMORPGs. Tom Hall declared he was helping make one in the Escapist the other day. I think publishers see the millions pouring into WoW and drool, not realizing that if you're not the 800 lbs Gorilla, it's extremely difficult to become the 800 lbs Gorilla.

I think the ones that survive do so on a shoestring budget and aim for a smaller audience that isn't satisfied with the WoW goodness that most people find most tasty.

[TheKeck]

I don't know anything about EQII but I feel obligated to make an appearance on any PA related thread.

[devicelimit]

Actually I think they do pay you in a way. They let you download the client for free and then let you play for a month free which is a 15ish dollar value.

[Evil Avatar]

Actually I think they do pay you in a way. They let you download the client for free and then let you play for a month free which is a 15ish dollar value.

No, that is giving away the product for free. I mean they would have to mail me a check (or cash) to get me to play EverQuest II.

(And there had better be a one followed by a pretty significant number of zeros on that check!)

[TheKeck]

(And there had better be a one followed by a pretty significant number of zeros on that check!)

Wow, is it really THAT bad? I think I'd be willing to play just about any game for, say, 2 zeros a month. :)

[Roc Ingersol]

Visually, they're spot on with my own opinion.
As far as the game goes, I never even tried it. Combine the lifeless visuals with the association to EQI, stacked up against WoW and there's no contest. Even considering WoW's flawed endgame I have 0 desire to play it.

Vanguard had much of the same problem in its early visuals, but luckily they've made quite a bit of progress. It could still use more life, but it doesn't offend my sensibilities.

[S1n1star]

The sterility must have been contagious and brought over to $igil, because Vanguard looks as sterile as Martha Stewart's sybian.

[GrinR]

It's still amazing that developers are flocking to the world of MMORPGs. Tom Hall declared he was helping make one in the Escapist the other day. I think publishers see the millions pouring into WoW and drool, not realizing that if you're not the 800 lbs Gorilla, it's extremely difficult to become the 800 lbs Gorilla.

I think the ones that survive do so on a shoestring budget and aim for a smaller audience that isn't satisfied with the WoW goodness that most people find most tasty.

I agree with the sentiment here, but not with the conclusion. Lest anyone forget, the 800 pound gorilla used to be Everquest. Plenty of competition came out while EQ dominated the MMO market, and all of it sputtered and limped along. EQ seemed absolutely unbeatable - and the promise of EQ2 was a shoo-in for more domination.

World of Warcraft looked "cartoony" and "made for the very casual mass-market crowd". I remember a LOT of scoffing at the idea that it would compete with the titan that was EQ (much less EQ2). I also remember telling everyone I knew that although I thought it looked like shit and it's going to be a lot of idiots /emoting "zug zug" all day long, I also knew that Blizzard is an elite workshop of folks who know how to make fun and addictive games. On that basis alone I claimed it would do quite well.

Little did I know HOW well.

Ultimately, the appeal of their "world as game" design philosophy (watch the collectors edition "making of" DVD for more on that) stomped the living shit out of EQs smugly complacent level-treadmill model.

For the exact same reasons WoW utterly annihilated EQ - some new game could do the same to WoW. Innovation, integration, creativity, and ease-of-access are the required elements. Sony has none of these. In many ways Sony seems to actually HATE these elements, and this is why they fail.

[Roc Ingersol]

as sterile as Martha Stewart's sybian.
Thanks. That mental image just seared my Mind's Eye.

[thegameguru]

I agree with the sentiment here, but not with the conclusion. Lest anyone forget, the 800 pound gorilla used to be Everquest. Plenty of competition came out while EQ dominated the MMO market, and all of it sputtered and limped along. EQ seemed absolutely unbeatable - and the promise of EQ2 was a shoo-in for more domination.

World of Warcraft looked "cartoony" and "made for the very casual mass-market crowd". I remember a LOT of scoffing at the idea that it would compete with the titan that was EQ (much less EQ2). I also remember telling everyone I knew that although I thought it looked like shit and it's going to be a lot of idiots /emoting "zug zug" all day long, I also knew that Blizzard is an elite workshop of folks who know how to make fun and addictive games. On that basis alone I claimed it would do quite well.

Little did I know HOW well.

Ultimately, the appeal of their "world as game" design philosophy (watch the collectors edition "making of" DVD for more on that) stomped the living shit out of EQs smugly complacent level-treadmill model.

For the exact same reasons WoW utterly annihilated EQ - some new game could do the same to WoW. Innovation, integration, creativity, and ease-of-access are the required elements. Sony has none of these. In many ways Sony seems to actually HATE these elements, and this is why they fail.

There simply isnt enough talent left at SOE and more importantly the whole shop has become "japanese" in nature in that everyone is deathly afraid to speak out or take a chance.. its basically a line of yes men reporting to some clueless gits that still think their way dominates the MMOG industry.

There is a reason (besides money and control) for Sigil and it doesnt take much thought to figure it out.

[jacktion]

Woody also had something to say (in his comic) about it today.

www.gucomics.com

Dude, Woody sounds like an ass.
"Please stop sending me info about this new game!! I knew about it NEARLY a WEEK ago!!!1"
Wow, your fan base is trying to help you. Way to sound like a knowitall bitch who is trying to impress fanboys with his l33t uber knowledge.

With that said, PA is hitting the nail right on the head. You know the artists at SOE are souldead. The poor bastards. PETA should break in there and free them from their cages like they were cosmetic test bunnies.

[rein]

I was a big EQ player... .well... .I played it a lot (~10 hours a day). I tried EQII and just didn't get into it. Of course now I am stuck in my love and hate relationship with WoW. I only play WoW a few hours a day but still... ..it is there.. ..looming in my thoughts. I do know some people who really enjoy EQII. The game does have it's followers and they find WoW too "cartoony" if that is a word. It is the word they used. I would expect with the art style of PA those guys would find the art style of WoW to be appealing. I find it more appealing. However, there are a few people out there (maybe lack of taste?) who actually like the SOE style of EQII over the Blizzard style of WoW.

[Evil Avatar]

The funny part is that I would still play EverQuest 1 if they hadn't cocked up the interface and the Interface artwork.

[PacerDawn]

Despite the lackluster review by Penny Arcade, I have friends who have played EQII before and liked it, so I was interested in this offer. Just join up with Fileplanet for a month and you get a month to play EQII, which would cost, what, $4 or so? Not a bad deal to try the game at least.

However, I got to the web page (http://www.fileplanet.com/promotions/eq2/) , was all ready to sign up with Fileplanet, when I noticed the disclaimer at the bottom of the EQ graphic, nicely colored in white to be easy to miss:
Everquest II keys are on a first come first served basis. Subscribing does not guarantee participation.So it looks like that, not only is this a limited time offer, but there are a limited number of EQII keys to go around and you are taking your chances by subscribing, since, you know, they won't tell you if there are any left until after they have your money.

No thanks.

[Donut11]

Woody also had something to say (in his comic) about it today.

www.gucomics.com

BURN! I have never understood how Raph has been able to dodge the failure of SWG so well. Everyone in Austin knows where the fault lies.

[Abednigo]

Wow, is it really THAT bad?

No it's not. I stopped playing all MMORPGs, mainly because I don't have the time to commit to them. And paying $15 a month if I'm only going to play a max of 2 hours a month just isn't worth it. Ah the good old days when I would spend all day Saturday playing EQ... :(

[Borys]

Hey Evil, always wanted to ask - do you play WoW?

[Roc Ingersol]

Was SWG a failure?

250k subscribers is more than Dark Age, Ultima Online, Asheron's Call or City of Heroes ever had. Against what useful measure are they all 'failures'?

Just because SOE/LucasArts changed their minds on what they wanted after they saw Blizzard grow the genre doesn't make anything about the original style of the game wrong.

If you want to fault someone for SWG not pulling in a huge audience, fault the guy who hired Koster. When you hire Raph, you know what you're going to get. So find the guy who looked at UO's numbers, and EQ's numbers, and decided that a Koster-land was the way to go.

(No offense to the world style of massmog design intended. It just clearly isn't the mass market preference.)

[jeffool]

I don't fault Raph. Myself and everyone I knew who DID play the game early on loved a lot of the ideas that he brought to it. I mean, all the bitching that's been going on about that new upgrade? He had nothing to do with it, and the players claim that what they didn't like about it is that the update took out a lot of Raph's work.

What folks didn't like were things like having to walk down stairs backwards because the 'walking down stairs' animation wasn't there and would crash the game. Sounds like someone was trying to shove it out to meet a certain date, rather than the gameplay being shit.

I don't play it any more, but I don't get why everyone's so angry about the updates either. If it's evolve-or-die time for the game, then players who enjoy it should be willing to go with the designers a little bit and see what they can offer you before you stick your fingers in you ears and shout "lalalal I want my old game!"

[Ajguy]

I feel like I'm in a minority here, but here it goes.

First, I think I'm one of the few people who actually likes the SWG update. To me, it's like a 3D Diablo in the Star Wars universe, which is no bad thing to me. Coupled with Jump to Lightspeed and it's a very fun and fast paced game, something missing from most MMOs.

As far as EQ 2 goes, I'm said in the past that yes it is not as good as WoW, but it's different. And after a year of WoW, different is good. The graphics could be interpretted as sterile, but I really see it more as realistic. I can understand where some would not get into it, but I actually enjoy it quite a bit.

Plus the fact that I get EQ, EQ2, SWG, and Planetside on the same subscription plus free adventure packs to EQ2 for having that subscription makes the deal all the sweeter.

[xcalibur]

SWG was bad.. just bad.... perhaps if they had been able to shipt it 6 months - 1 year later than they did, it would have been ok. The only reason SWG ever had up to 250k subs, or still has the number of subs it does now, is because it has the name "Star Wars" attached to it. If SWG had been some generic, non-named sci-fi MMO, I highly doubt it would have ever seen 50k subs.


-X

[GreenIce]

I like how everyone bitches about style over substance and then bitches when there is no style without even attempting to try the substance. EQII isn't a terrible game but any stretch. When I played it in june it was nothing to really write home about in any regard, though from what I understand has gotten somewhat better. The solo play is just inannme, and most of the world I saw (up to 20) pretty lifeless, with the exception of one instance I did which was pretty amusing. The combat is too similar to whackamole. That being said it's definitly worth a try if you don't get hung up on something so superfical.

[drakkarim]

it's all personal tastes.

personally i prefer the sharp graphics of EQ2 much more then the crappy ones (to me) that are in WoW. he said that EQ2 looks like it was put together by computer and algorithms rather then artist.... by that analogy, i believe WoW was put together by kids with paint rollers.

either way, i don't care cuz i won't play either.

my ONLY gripe with MMORPG's (besides some of them just being crappy) is that they all make you group to do anything of consequence. until they get out of that mindset they can kiss my ass.

[Rakael]

A friend of mine plays SWG and actually enjoys himself a great deal. He said that its a blast to run through the derilict player cities and search for scrap. Sometimes the scrap can be worth a ton of money.

[XenonCJ]

it's all personal tastes.

personally i prefer the sharp graphics of EQ2 much more then the crappy ones (to me) that are in WoW. he said that EQ2 looks like it was put together by computer and algorithms rather then artist.... by that analogy, i believe WoW was put together by kids with paint rollers.

either way, i don't care cuz i won't play either.

my ONLY gripe with MMORPG's (besides some of them just being crappy) is that they all make you group to do anything of consequence. until they get out of that mindset they can kiss my ass.Uhm, they put the "MM" in "MMORPG" for a reason dude.

[Rakael]

Uhm, they put the "MM" in "MMORPG" for a reason dude.

I'm sick of this argument. I want to game in a world populated by real people, interacting with them when necessary or when I want to. I don't want to be forced into interaction. Force-grouping is a bad and outdated model, its time for a change. Not to say that I strictly solo, but to force me to look for a group is pure shit.

Not an attack on you really Xenon, just the argument in general.

[GrinR]

Uhm, they put the "MM" in "MMORPG" for a reason dude.

I don't agree with this logic. Never have. I like my MOGs set up where there is a large economy for me to sell the items I farm. That's the game for me. I also like to get help when I am stuck, or show off the cool stuff I got through my adventures. None of the things I like to do require me to party with others.

I gave up on AO and AC because it gets to a point where it's impossible to progress without grouping - effectively the game for me ends. So far, at 57 in WoW, this hasn't happened to me and I don't think it will, either.

The notion that a "massively multiplayer" game means that you must actively play in collaborative groups completely ignores the much larger population of people who lack the time or inclination to play that way. It's usually the folks who have a LOT of free time who get pissy about how "you're -supposed- to group", and those folks are the vocal minority.

[DirtyHippy]

I leveled to 60 in Wow almost exclusively solo or with one friend. We did run some of the instances once to do quests with PUGs. After raiding ad nauseum in WoW I quit last April or May a week before we downed Ragnaros. So I played about 6 months or so.

I have played EQ2 the last few months and have a 40 and 30 char. It is not nearly as good a game as WoW.

In WoW you quest to level and grind some on the way. I remember grinding to get to one or two levels, because I was out of quests and didn't know about thottbot.

In Eq2, you start getting in grinding groups at level 20 and never stop. As a matter of fact, I just log my two chars off in dungeons so the next time I play I can get in a group just as fast. Soloing in EQ2 is just pointless. You can run various dungeons with a good group and not only level fast but kill endless named mobs in a short period of time. For the most part, quests are a waste of time.

[rein]

You can get to 60 in WoW solo sure. However, you will not be competitive in pvp (at level 60) with the gear you have. In order to get competitive gear, you have to group. Even the pvp gear (which you could get solo) does not compare to the higher tier dungeon gear. It all comes down to instance groups in the end. Face it, mmorpgs are not for casual players. They never have been.

[aversion2k]

I must be one of the only people in the world who acutally liked starwars galaxys despite all its flaws.
Although I only played it for the 15 day trial period

[Rakael]

My hopes and dreams are now resting on Seed (http://www.seedthegame.com/news.php?page=1). I just hope to God they can pull it off.

[xcalibur]

WoW does the best job of appealing to players who like to group, and players who don't like to group... until you hit level 60. Once you hit level 60, to do anything other than farm rep in the BGs, you have to have a group or raid. That is one of the things that sucks about WoW... for 60 levels you can play and have fun without being forced to have a group, then once you hit 60 you are S.O.L. unless you join a large guild, or don't mind taking your chances with PUGS in some of the smaller instances.

I don't know what the answer is to making a compelling solo player end-game, but I hope WoW or another MMO finds one. I think a persistent world PvP endgame is one answer, like in DAoC. Obviously you would be more powerful in RvR if you were in a group, but soloing was definitely viable and fun.


-X

[Wyrm]

I think WoW has absolutely beautiful graphics. I run a 6800 GT at max resolution, and it is a gorgeous game. I ran EQ II on my computer, and it looked like a prerendered mess of brice models, just like Tyhco said. I couldnt get over how god damn unrealistic it looked, while it was apprently striving to look SO real.

He's right, they have absolutely no creativity with their game. WoW has awesome art direction, cool characters, and even cooler weapons and ideas behind it. EQ has never had a great back story, nor a compelling reason to continue returning to that universe. I'm a firm believer that Sony could have remade the first game with a huge graphical update (not the piece of crap they released), and a new interface (I hated every interface they ever put in the original), and they'd have another winner.

It's been said many times, but all Blizzard did was take all the ideas from everyone else and put them in an awesome, near perfectly polished package with some of their own spins of things. That's why I keep going back to WoW every night instead of sleeping, or some other MMO.

Though I continue to ponder reactivation of my Shattered Galaxy account....

[Evil Avatar]

Hey Evil, always wanted to ask - do you play WoW?

I played it about once a week from the time it came out until about a month ago. I may go back to it and join the n00b rush when the expansion pack comes out.

I'm currently playing EVE Online (http://www.eve-online.com) instead. I only pay for one MMORPG at a time.

[Evil Avatar]

Was SWG a failure?

My understanding is that they are down to about 40,000 subscribers now with only a couple of hundred people on each server at any one time. (Between 100 - 400.)

It would be a great time to play, because I guess there is no waiting in line for a drop.

[Steele Johnson]

I like a game with a lot of style. When the artists are allowed to really shine, that's what I like. Blizzard just had the best opportunity to create an MMORPG. They already had the artwork and original theme.

I much rather have style and creative artwork over trying to capture "realism" at this point. Because no matter how real you try to make a game, it's not going to be very convincing. So in the end, trying to look real makes a game look very bland, IMO, and that's what happened to EQII. I mean, just look around you. I don't want a game that looks like this place. :) I need something to stretch my imagination, something surreal.

[XenonCJ]

I don't agree with this logic. Never have. I like my MOGs set up where there is a large economy for me to sell the items I farm. That's the game for me. I also like to get help when I am stuck, or show off the cool stuff I got through my adventures. None of the things I like to do require me to party with others.

I gave up on AO and AC because it gets to a point where it's impossible to progress without grouping - effectively the game for me ends. So far, at 57 in WoW, this hasn't happened to me and I don't think it will, either.

The notion that a "massively multiplayer" game means that you must actively play in collaborative groups completely ignores the much larger population of people who lack the time or inclination to play that way. It's usually the folks who have a LOT of free time who get pissy about how "you're -supposed- to group", and those folks are the vocal minority.

I'm really not sure what "logic" you don't agree with. I simply meant that MMORPGs are designed specifically around cooperative play with others. If you don't agree, then you would just be wrong. It's not an opinion, it's a fact.

[XenonCJ]

I'm sick of this argument. I want to game in a world populated by real people, interacting with them when necessary or when I want to. I don't want to be forced into interaction. Force-grouping is a bad and outdated model, its time for a change. Not to say that I strictly solo, but to force me to look for a group is pure shit.

Not an attack on you really Xenon, just the argument in general.With MMORPGs, it's SUPPOSED to be fun to group... If it's not, then maybe the game, whatever it is, is "pure shit".

When it comes to 40-man required high end content, I have mixed feelings...

On one hand I want cool stuff accessible to me alone.... On the other hand, would that stuff be "as cool" if just ANYONE could get to it?

[GrinR]

You can get to 60 in WoW solo sure. However, you will not be competitive in pvp (at level 60) with the gear you have. In order to get competitive gear, you have to group. Even the pvp gear (which you could get solo) does not compare to the higher tier dungeon gear. It all comes down to instance groups in the end. Face it, mmorpgs are not for casual players. They never have been.

You are absolutely and precisely wrong. I routinely kill lvl 55-60 players on my PvP server and don't break a sweat. The people you mention who are decked out in tier-whatever epics are all busy doing what you are talking about, grinding away on endgame raids. They aren't in the game I play, because I'm busy doing quests and helping my guildies level up.

I've been playing since launch day, whenever I feel like it (probably 3-4 days a week for as many hours) and I have 20 alts all around 35th level and characters above 50, including my main who is a 57 Druid. I am definitely a casual player. I have also had more fun in WoW than any other game ever.

So again, just because your goals are different from mine, don't tell me the game isn't for me.

[GrinR]

I'm really not sure what "logic" you don't agree with. I simply meant that MMORPGs are designed specifically around cooperative play with others. If you don't agree, then you would just be wrong. It's not an opinion, it's a fact.

Let me clarify for you then:

He said:
my ONLY gripe with MMORPG's (besides some of them just being crappy) is that they all make you group to do anything of consequence. until they get out of that mindset they can kiss my ass.

You said:
Uhm, they put the "MM" in "MMORPG" for a reason dude.

You were clearly implying that his desire to avoid grouping meant that he was playing the wrong game - since "the MM in MMORPG" was there to let you know that it was a grouping-centric game. I responded that that implication was false and explained why.

[GrinR]

With MMORPGs, it's SUPPOSED to be fun to group... If it's not, then maybe the game, whatever it is, is "pure shit".

When it comes to 40-man required high end content, I have mixed feelings...

On one hand I want cool stuff accessible to me alone.... On the other hand, would that stuff be "as cool" if just ANYONE could get to it?

I think you are mistaking MMORPGs for collaborative gathering games, like diablo or maybe Magic:TG. I think most of the "serious" gamers make the mistake of thinking that their perspective on MOGs (and WoW in particular) is the prevailing one.

There is no way I would be playing with 4 girls, one my gf, if that were the case. They do not care one bit about "gear" or "leveling" or all the nerdish acronyms. They enjoy logging in, getting a quest, fighting (in apallingly inefficient ways) mobs, getting a little reward at the end, talking with others, and exploring the world. Emphasis on the last part. They LOVE finding out that a new zone has flying roaches, or a new type of tree, or that there are coral reefs out there. To them, it's not a "grind" or a challenge to get the "coolest stuff" - it's just a game, to enjoy like a TV show or a small party.

It may stick in your craw to recognize that as a "serious" gamer you are the minority, but that won't change the plain fact of it.

[SMES]

Can anyone tell me if there is an MMO which has a somewhat similar questing world like WoW, but also offers a sense of being able to affect the world? Build up a sizeable in-game asset of some sort? Maybe found a town and gain influence in the in-game political system?

I'm looking for a game where I can use my brain to make tactical business and socially oriented decisions and, as a result of my success or failure, gain or lose both tangible influence and tangible in-game representation of my assets.

I don't consider epic items on my toon and a shiny mount to be very substantial in game assets, and WoW is definately lacking in any real ability to gain actual power over other players. I don't just want to gank them and corpse camp, I want to strategically liquidate their budding empire and maliciously ruin their gaming experiance! MWA HA AH!

I'm thinking take all the best parts of Civ 4 and the best parts of Wow and put them together.

[GrinR]

SMES it sounds like EVE might be more up your alley. I wouldn't know because I only give a game an hour at most to teach me how to play.

[AbinSur]

I've been playing since launch day, whenever I feel like it (probably 3-4 days a week for as many hours) and I have 20 alts all around 35th level and characters above 50, including my main who is a 57 Druid. I am definitely a casual player.

That's a pretty hardcore version of "casual" there. :)

[SMES]

SMES it sounds like EVE might be more up your alley. I wouldn't know because I only give a game an hour at most to teach me how to play.

Yeah, maybe. I certainly wouldn't mind spending a few hours learning to play if it meant an experiance like I described.

Unfortunately, my only experiance with Eve is the infamous scam story written by the "zzzz best" guy, where his entire operation was burned by a nerf that disabled some hyper-speed ability he relied on. Nerf stories leave bad tastes in my mouth. I want the game to be balanced in such a way that trust and respect are mutually given between players who have worked to build their power, and when I get disposed or assassinated or whatever, I want it to be clear who did it and why, and have a means for revenge. Basically I want a game where people are coerced into being honorable, but who are given the option to be dishonorable if they are willing to accept the bad rep. The last thing I want is for an established operation to be nerfed just because the devs don't like the way the game is balancing itself.

Evil, can you tell me if Eve has the deep gameplay and player community I'm describing?

[TheKeck]

SMES it sounds like EVE might be more up your alley. I wouldn't know because I only give a game an hour at most to teach me how to play.

I haven't played the game at all, but from the large amount I've READ, I would completely agree with GrinR here. From my understanding, EVE offers exactly what you're looking for SMES.

[SMES]

I haven't played the game at all, but from the large amount I've READ, I would completely agree with GrinR here. From my understanding, EVE offers exactly what you're looking for SMES.

Well, there's another vote for Eve. I will have to look into it more.

I'm hesitant partially because of the Sci Fi theme (the colorful world of WoW is just begging for player-designed and owned houses/castles), but also I just generally fear being deceived by the premise of a deep game, then realizing after a month that it is just a cleverly veiled grind. If Eve really is "all that," I'm suprised more people don't play it.

The thing about player communities is that they will always be full of liars, cheaters, scammers, and unreliable people when you don't have real consequences for behaving dishonorably. Ganking enough low levels in WoW should result in the opposing kingdom putting a bounty on your head for people to hunt you down. Having your house (if there WERE houses in WoW) broken into and robbed could result in you using your influence with the local NPC noble to track down the criminal and have them punished, and your items returned maybe.

It's all about meticulous gameplay balance, so I understand why Blizzard doesn't bother with all that, they want to keep it simple. But it severely limits the holding power of a virtual world when grinding mobs is replaced with doing quests... which require you to grind mobs (or play FedEx).

Maybe I'm just the insane (retarded?) minority here, but don't you think it would be cool to have courts and trials for people who do criminal acts in MMO? Get a jury duty letter in your mailbox and be penalized if you don't come online to serve the Alliance. "Lawyer" could be a player profession, and if you hire someone and they can't come online because their mom had to use the computer, then pretty soon nobody would hire that wack lawyer! HAH!

I dunno, it's details like these that are, I'm sure, hard to impliment. But I can't wait for a game to do them all properly!

[GrinR]

That's a pretty hardcore version of "casual" there. :)

Well, considering the time span(s) I'm talking about, it's about as casual as anyone who watches network TV, or has any kind of extra-curricular activity, give or take a girlfriend or two. A few hours a day for half the week or so is not that much "free" time. Hell, I remember spending at least double that playing Quake, TFC, Counterstrike, Ultima (3,4,7), and so on.

But I take your meaning.

My gf mostly plays with me on weekends, for 5-9 hours or so in sessions while the TV is on and we're "hanging out". Part of the reason I'm casual is because my attention level is divided, and so am useless for most serious groups and certainly any raid instancing.

[GrinR]

SMES, I didn't want to quote your whole post but I agree with all of it. I'm still waiting for a more dynamic world. I recall hearing that Ultima Online was a lot like that.

[SMES]

SMES, I didn't want to quote your whole post but I agree with all of it. I'm still waiting for a more dynamic world. I recall hearing that Ultima Online was a lot like that.

UO wasn't bad, but if you've played WoW or EQ, UO didn't have much more variety than those games. And it was certainly much less polished than WoW. There were a few cool things like the oft-mentioned player owned property, but the houses were cookie cutter and existed basically as glorified banks. The world was huge and you would just run past one cookie cutter after another. Once in a while you would pause when you ran past the "deluxe castle" model, maybe take a moment to cursor over it to see who owned it, then run off again.

If I get a house in game, I want to make it look as personalized as possible. Purple poka dot walls maybe. In the online game I imagine, the entire game of the "Sims" would be just one small, relatively inconsequential (vanity, basically) minigame component of the greater scheme of things.

Sure the lag would be horrible constantly loading everyone's customized wingdings and completely uniquely bred dragon-mongoose pets waddling around, but that's what the entertainment industry does best- forces the development of better technology! I want my dragon mongoose, damnit! Mondragoose FTW!

[GrinR]

"Mondragoose FTW"

LOL!

[Mason]

Can anyone tell me if there is an MMO which has a somewhat similar questing world like WoW, but also offers a sense of being able to affect the world? Build up a sizeable in-game asset of some sort? Maybe found a town and gain influence in the in-game political system?

I'm looking for a game where I can use my brain to make tactical business and socially oriented decisions and, as a result of my success or failure, gain or lose both tangible influence and tangible in-game representation of my assets.

DAoC used to be like that, but its time has passed from the world. In the glory days of the old Frontiers, the players who ran the leading guilds of a faction's major alliances were freaking celebrities. Everyone knew them, they'd coordinate relic raids and defenses, commanding hundreds of players at a time. Respect and loyalty were essential and meaningful, and the strategies involved in playing the other two realms off each other were a constant source of entertainment.

The game had many negatives that we don't all need to go into, but the brilliance of its RvR system can't be denied. Games like WoW are empty and dead in comparison. You can't actually effect anything, the BGs have all the enduring presence of a CS round, guilds aren't much more than chatrooms (when will WoW at least have houses and guildhalls? that's sad), social status and 5s will buy you a pint of mead, and there's basically no reason to form alliances in the first place.

[Spigot]

I've never been a big fan of EQ and EQ 2 just looked ugly from the get-go, so I'm with Gabe, Evil and most others who didn't like the art style.

I find it really funny that Absath over CAD has been positively gushing about how gorgeous and fun EQ2 is for the last week or so. Sure, it might be something he likes, but even today he was over there raving about how beautiful the game. Every shot or trailer I've seen of the game looks so uninspired I just go blank...

Shrug. I'll stick to WoW for my MMO needs. The game just oozes so much style and personality. I'd rather have that than whatever passes for artistry in the EQ world.

Now, if only Turbine could have done an Asheron's Call game with modern tech that wasn't AC2, I'd be a happy camper. It'll never happen, but one can dream.

[ProfPuppet]

my ONLY gripe with MMORPG's (besides some of them just being crappy) is that they all make you group to do anything of consequence. until they get out of that mindset they can kiss my ass.

Try City of Heroes, you used to be able to solo 90% of the game, and now with being able to change mission difficulty, you can solo 99.9% of the game I hear. Combat is fast paced, and while gameplay isn't deep, it's a lot of fun.

Things like 'fetch' quests (have yet to see an mmo without one) are a heck of a lot less of a pain when you can fly/superjump/teleport/superspeed between places.

[SMES]

social status and 5s will buy you a pint of mead, and there's basically no reason to form alliances in the first place.

I think part of the problem is that MMO designers have long been fixated on clearly defining the progress of the game world when designing games. For example, the whole idea of having experiance points and clearly tiered ranks (level 1-60, 1-300 in skinning, etc) is an idea tied to a linear, single player game. Simple leveling works in a single player game because the content only is supposed to last 50, 100 hours. In a persistant online world, you really need to define the progression and achivements of a character with less definite, less "goalpost" oriented gameplay. It's possible to keep the leveling, but it needs to be heavilly augmented by implimenting creative tools for players to wield. These "tools" can range from customizing things, to open-ended gameplay rules which encourage those kinds of player-initiated activities. It has to be guided by gaming structure, of course, otherwise it's just a big ruthless king of the hill game never-ending. The point is that it should be a gaming structure that encourages inventive play styles rather than force feeding ultra-simplified, pre-determined skill ladders to people.

It is assuredly satisfying to ding, but it's a single player convention wedged into a persistant world gameplay. Doing this neuters the game and turns it into a single player game with a chat window, no matter how many fancy enchantments and 1337 loot you sprinkle around the world. If you want a truely engaging online world, you need to redefine the measurement of achivements and create gameplay that works with a human player's natural tendancy to be creative and unpredictable, rather than relying on the number-leveling system which is simplified so that combat can be reduced to AI algorithims determined by dice rolls. After all, a NPC with weak AI can't think and react like a human. So why is it that MMO designers continue to treat player-characters like they are mindless NPCs?

I don't care how much shadowcraft junk you have hanging off your toon if it is ultimately just boiled down to a slightly higher number and vanity/sims style blurry texture map.

[SMES]

Combat is fast paced, and while gameplay isn't deep, it's a lot of fun.

I just wanted to point out that games like CoH and WoW are fine in this regard. Simple is probably more fun for most players. I don't want to sound like I'm bashing a successful product, cause clearly the people have spoken with their dollars.

But I still think that the small voice in us all which yells "get to a higher level! get cooler loot than everyone else!" could, with the right combination of elegant gameplay, user interface, and game world, be harnessed and redirected so that it started to yell "secretly form an alliance with jonar because jonar is trying to take down my enemy's castle and we can make a deal to split the profits and set up another one of our enemy with fake clues strategically left at the crime scene and..." instead.

This is why games like chess endure so well. You don't have to worry about what frickan level your pawn has. The game is deep enough on it's own, and you focus on playing mind games with your opponent. This philosophy could be applied to fantasy online worlds as well. Nerdy? Yes. Better? In my opinion.

[51|RandoM]

Just like Blizzard has done elsewhere, they've set the bar for art direction in the MMORPG genre.

If you don't build a world that feels as fleshed out as WoW, you better have something incredibly special going for you elsewhere.

The only thing close in the art department is FFXI, imho, which is kind of interesting considering that one is hobbled by the ps2.

[MaiXu]

I feel like I'm in a minority here, but here it goes.

First, I think I'm one of the few people who actually likes the SWG update. To me, it's like a 3D Diablo in the Star Wars universe, which is no bad thing to me. Coupled with Jump to Lightspeed and it's a very fun and fast paced game, something missing from most MMOs.

As far as EQ 2 goes, I'm said in the past that yes it is not as good as WoW, but it's different. And after a year of WoW, different is good. The graphics could be interpretted as sterile, but I really see it more as realistic. I can understand where some would not get into it, but I actually enjoy it quite a bit.

Plus the fact that I get EQ, EQ2, SWG, and Planetside on the same subscription plus free adventure packs to EQ2 for having that subscription makes the deal all the sweeter.

Dude just how much free time do you have?!

FOUR MMOS?!

[Busted_Astromech]

SMES, I know it doesn't apply now, but your concept is very close to how I treated SWG. I say treated because the game world didn't exactly reflect my roleplaying aspirations, but I was able to do some very neat things.

Example: after getting to a decent level I wished to join the most powerful Imperial guild, IOI. I had a friend in the guild but there recruitment standards were high and so I felt I had to prove myself. I was able to set up a secret meeting on a remote area of Dantooine with the leaders of 4 medium Rebel guilds, where I discussed strategy and a plan to attack IOI while simultaneously relaying all this information back to IOI's military officer. After the trap was successfully executed I committed to joining the Empire and the guild but kept my contacts with the rebels through the in-game mail, never letting on that I had joined an Imperial guild. I was thus able to feed information to IOI until the day I was spotted by one of the Rebel leaders at a starport, at which point the gig was up--I was attacked and, being a humble droid engineer, subsequently killed, all for the glory of the Emperor.

That's the kind of situation I love in an MMORPG--roleplaying, on a huge scale. Granted, SWG had tons of other problems (like almost no actual content) but while I played WoW for a similar amount of time (6-8 months) and will agree that as a game WoW is better, I have much fonder memories of SWG. The ability to own property and affect your world was a huge concept in the game, and you could at times catch glimpses of what the designers were striving for.

It's a mark of a real roleplaying game that you have stories to tell later on. I have plenty for Star Wars Galaxies but comparatively few for WoW. WoW, everything it gets right, does not have nearly enough room for a person to stretch their roleplaying legs.

As an aside, the Star Wars license is actually a big boost to a roleplaying-heavy game like SWG (er, formerly roleplaying-heavy). Because the world is much more detailed than even a superbly-fleshed-out universe like Warcraft, there is a lot more for players to work from. I even wrote an editorial column for a website about the need for the Empire and its laws, from my character's point of view. Never could I imagine doing such a thing for WoW.

I've been tempted to get into EVE Online from what I've read here, and I'm wondering, will it provide an experience similar to that which I describe as my highlight, except with perhaps more content than the empty SWG? Like I said I've been tempted but I just don't know if I can get into another MMORPG with ES4: Oblivion coming out next month.

[SMES]

Dude just how much free time do you have?!

FOUR MMOS?!

Question: can you run all four clients at once on one computer with four windowed, PIP games I could control like a mad MMO puppeteer?

I suppose doing it four times simultantiously (oh yeah) would make the level grind a little more bearable?

[SMES]

I've been tempted to get into EVE Online from what I've read here, and I'm wondering, will it provide an experience similar to that which I describe as my highlight, except with perhaps more content than the empty SWG? Like I said I've been tempted but I just don't know if I can get into another MMORPG with ES4: Oblivion coming out next month.

My question exactly.

And the reason those ad hoc roleplaying moments are so very satisfying is because of the way the gamer mind works. I can't wait for the gaming utopia that will take advantage of this and really run with it.

[Chimpbot]

I just wanted to point out that games like CoH and WoW are fine in this regard. Simple is probably more fun for most players. I don't want to sound like I'm bashing a successful product, cause clearly the people have spoken with their dollars.

But I still think that the small voice in us all which yells "get to a higher level! get cooler loot than everyone else!" could, with the right combination of elegant gameplay, user interface, and game world, be harnessed and redirected so that it started to yell "secretly form an alliance with jonar because jonar is trying to take down my enemy's castle and we can make a deal to split the profits and set up another one of our enemy with fake clues strategically left at the crime scene and..." instead.

This is why games like chess endure so well. You don't have to worry about what frickan level your pawn has. The game is deep enough on it's own, and you focus on playing mind games with your opponent. This philosophy could be applied to fantasy online worlds as well. Nerdy? Yes. Better? In my opinion.

There is a gaming experience like this, and it's existed for years...offline, of all places.
If you haven't already, you should give pen-and-paper games a shot. Specifically, games like WhiteWolf's Vampire: The Requiem(or Masquerade, if you want to play an Old World of Darkness game...) can provide the perfect scheming, ploting and triple-crossing gameplay that you so desire.
Of course, the only hinderance is the fact you need other players and a Storyteller to run it...but if you have that, you're all set.

[SMES]

There is a gaming experience like this, and it's existed for years...offline, of all places.
If you haven't already, you should give pen-and-paper games a shot. Specifically, games like WhiteWolf's Vampire: The Requiem(or Masquerade, if you want to play an Old World of Darkness game...) can provide the perfect scheming, ploting and triple-crossing gameplay that you so desire.
Of course, the only hinderance is the fact you need other players and a Storyteller to run it...but if you have that, you're all set.

Yeah, I used to do that years ago when I was a teenager and the closest thing to massive multiplayer online was getting excited about chatting in AOL 1.5 (I didn't know about MUDs at the time, if they even existed)

Basically I've been waiting for a videogame interpretation of my idea ever since I played Gemstone, a text-based persistant ORPG. I have had high hopes for pretty much every MMO since UO, and ironically UO gave me the greatest satisfaction just because it made the biggest leap. Since then it's just been about refinement rather than expansion.

All my DnD friends have long since grown up, and the cruel irony is that I have as well. Even if a wonderous playground dream game came out, I probably wouldn't have the time to play it.

[rein]

You are absolutely and precisely wrong. I routinely kill lvl 55-60 players on my PvP server and don't break a sweat. The people you mention who are decked out in tier-whatever epics are all busy doing what you are talking about, grinding away on endgame raids. They aren't in the game I play, because I'm busy doing quests and helping my guildies level up.

I've been playing since launch day, whenever I feel like it (probably 3-4 days a week for as many hours) and I have 20 alts all around 35th level and characters above 50, including my main who is a 57 Druid. I am definitely a casual player. I have also had more fun in WoW than any other game ever.

So again, just because your goals are different from mine, don't tell me the game isn't for me.


Gear makes a huge difference in WoW end game. If you do not believe me go ahead and take one of those 50+ characters up to 60. Take it into the 60 only BG's and come back and tell me it doesn't make a difference. You would be wrong.

I wasn't trying to say what YOUR goals were in any game. I do not recall quoting you when I said MMORPGS are not designed for casual players. I didn't even mention your name. As matter of fact, I was actually responding to DirtyHarry's post about hitting 60 solo. Maybe he should come in and bitch at me. So... ..lose the ego, it wasn't about you.

MMORPGS are not designed for causal players. As a casual player (myself included) you will miss out on a lot of the games content. THAT DOES NOT MEAN YOU CAN'T HAVE FUN! It just means the game was not designed with casual players in mind. I will give Blizzard credit. At least they made it more casual friendly than most previous MMORPGS.

[rein]

SMES

You might look into A Tale in the Desert (http://game1.atitd.com/main.html). I remember reading about it a long time ago but never played it. It looks a little bland but sounds like it could be closer to what you are looking for. There is also that game (?) or online community thing that was in the news a while back where a guy spent an ungodly amount of real life money for an island. I can't remember the name of it.

Second Life Online is the name of the online community I was trying to remember. Thanks jeffool.

[GrinR]

A good clarification, rein. You are still wrong. Crunch the numbers! If there are 10K people on a particular server, how many of them are doing high-level raids/instances? What is the size of the biggest guild on your server? Let's go crazy and say 30% for the first, and 2000 members for the second... that STILL leaves a huge majority that are NOT doing the high-end content. People with alts, people with families, people with SOs, people who just like logging in for a while and doing a quest or two.

WoW in particular was designed with the casual gamer in mind - and in fact was designed specifically FOR the casual gamer. Watch the "making of DVD" and listen to it yourself - the entire design of the game was to make a "world as game" - to have fun doing lots of things for a long long time.

It is exactly why they have enjoyed the massive subcriber numbers they've gotten - because they made a game that everyone (and anyone) can enjoy, while still luring the 'HardK0r3' gamers in with the usual instance/raid stuff that they would enjoy pretty much in ANY MOG.

You're telling ME to lose the ego, but you're making sweeping statements about the game design based on your very limited experience with the game - an experience that has blinded you to the facts. What I've already said stands.

[jeffool]

SMES,

The reason I don't usually enjoy MMOs is because of exactly what you said. I don't feel that I (or any player) can effect change in any of the worlds. The closest I've ever come to that was when I initially began playing UO and SWG. (Though, I've not played DAoC or AC,) in both of those games when players got together and did something, others were willing to go along and have fun with it. So even if we weren't actually changing the virtual world, we were changing the virtual society via our interaction with other players.

It may sound lame to those who didn't play it, but after going out and nearly getting slaughtered by Storm Troopers, my pals and I would sit around the musicians/dancers in a bar and hatch plots that rarely worked.

And I'm always tempted to try Second Life Online, but I just can never really get around to it.

[Jetherik]

You know a game is in trouble when they have to combine servers, and then they start giving out free trials only a year after they have been around, and everyone who tries the trial doesn't want to continue.

[rein]

Not to take this into the realm of an Assassin argument :).... .. I have experienced WoW since beta. I wouldn't call my experience limited. Now let me clarify exactly what I mean by the game not being designed for casual players.

As I mentioned, you will not see end game content as a casual player of any kind. You will still see the same mobs and small instances you saw while getting to 60. You are going to be missing out on a lot of the games content. give me some level 60 content as a solo or casual player. Give me an equal level 5 man instance that maybe has more puzzles to solve or something when I get to 60. Don't make me have to take a day off from work because it is going to take a half a day to get through an instance. Not to mention, you had better be in a big (well established) guild if you want to be invited to go in the first place.

As a casual player you do not have equal access to the same quality equipment as someone who raids consistently or is getting 250K honor points a week. Let me clarify that more by saying the mid to larger instances that take several hours to complete. You will not get past tier 1 equipment solo or in small man raids. Heck you won't even get a set of tier 1.

What it comes down to is I have a different opinion on what a game designed for a casual player would be. I think a game designed for a casual player should give them (un)equal access to equipment and content of equal value. Make it harder or make it take longer for them to get it, but do not make it impossible. That is what the current mmorpgs do. They make it impossible for casual players to get equal value equipment. Lets face it, part of playing a mmorpg is to show off accomplishments. I want a chance at some leet accomplishments too. Right now, the biggest accomplishment offered to a casual player is an epic mount and a level 60 on their portrait.

What WoW has done is given casual players a way to fit into the game and have fun on their way to 60. However, it is not designed with them as the focus. If they were the focus, you would have more casual content than just getting to 60 and saving for an epic mount.

Please do not take this to mean you can't have fun in WoW. I have fun is why I still play it as a casual player. I just know that the end game was not designed for my casual play style.

[GrinR]

Brace yourself rein!



I completely agree with you.

:-D

[rein]

Brace yourself rein!



I completely agree with you.

:-D

:) I think this might be my proudest moment as an Evil Avatar forum member. lol.

I can also agree with your assessment on how many casual players there are vs the hardcore. I actually meant to mention that in my post... ..no, really I did.

[Oblivion]

Realm vs Realm in WOW. think about it.

[Rommel]

Was SWG a failure?

Depends on how you look at it. They had a decent enough user base and some devotees, but it did not live up to its promise of bringing the genre mainstream. Also, did the game truly cover license cost, and how much of their profits were funneled directly to Lucas? When you have a franchise like Star Wars you have a safety net that represents the minimum you will achieve. Thusly, success and failure are measure by how well you do above and beyond that safety net.

The way I see itis that it is by no means the biggest MMO failure of all-time. Sims Online was. But it was by no means as successful as it could have, and perhaps should have, been.

[BigJonno]

SWG had so much potential as a roleplaying game. Flexible skill system, player controlled economies, player owned houses and businesses and rewarding non-combat gameplay. I had a blast in the early days, despite the feeling that it was released six months too early. My smuggler spent most of his time hanging around in cantinas doing dodgy deals and setting people up with "illegal" weapons and armour.

Of course, the rather vocal hardcore l33t d00dz started bitching about it and it got progressively EQized and, more recently, completely shat upon. If they'd concentrated on the orignal vision that was undoubtedly there, they would have a stable, profitable game by now, rather than a rapidly sinking crapheap.

[Derella]

I played EQ2 for the free month when it first came out, mainly because I had been in the WoW beta for several months prior and wanted to try something new. After the trial month, I quit and went back to WoW.

I just couldn't get into EQ2, and the graphics were a large part of that. A lot of people describe them as realistic, but I think that is only true if you're speaking about the environments. The character models are just awful -- they look lumpy, and deformed. I didn't find they really had much in the way of customization either... Sure there were a lot of sliders to play with, but they only made a real difference if you set them to extremes and that just made the models look worse.

Having to zone 3-5 times while in a city in order to get where I wanted to go was also frustrating.

[Sykus]

All my DnD friends have long since grown up, and the cruel irony is that I have as well. Even if a wonderous playground dream game came out, I probably wouldn't have the time to play it.

All my D&D friends have long since grown up as well. Two of them are over 30. We still play a PnP RPG 2-3 nights a week.

Before everyone goes off about how I still live in my parent's basement, I've been married for 9 years, there are at least two other married couples we play with, and my wife plays too. We have our first child on the way and she should be coming any day now.

I've never understood this stigma that PNP RPGs are for kids, but videogames you can keep playing. PNP RPGs just get better and better as the people you're playing them with mature.

[SMES]

I've never understood this stigma that PNP RPGs are for kids, but videogames you can keep playing. PNP RPGs just get better and better as the people you're playing them with mature.

Oh, yeah I agree. When I said my friends "grew up," what I really meant is that they became grumpy old farts who are too cool for DnD.

I've casually tried to find good DnD groups in the past but... lets just say I wasn't interested in playing with the people I found and leave it at that. Even if it's an unfair stigma, it is still a stigma.

My friends are still willing to play WoW and they love Mario and Zelda as well. That's good enough for me. Finding personalities I'm compatable with for DnD groups is hard for me.

[Spigot]

I wish I could play more D&D or any other PnP RPG. Unfortunately, most of my friends who actually game are scattered to the four winds. One of my new coworkers has a gaming group that meets close to my house, but I haven't tried them out yet. I guess I'm just agoraphobic :)

Thankfully it's mostly just a matter of time for gaming for me. I know a bunch of people who want to game. It's just a matter of getting the time to do it. Ah well.