Success Criteria for the Serpent's Spine
by Loral on August 27, 2006
What does the Serpent's Spine, Everquest's twelfth expansion, need to be successful? What will define that success? Prophecy of Ro looked quite strong when we reviewed it during beta and shortly after its release. Only a couple of months in did we determine how deep the problems lay. Today we will look at the criteria for a successful expansion and match these criteria against what we know of the Serpent's Spine right now.
Defining Success.
There are many ways to define success for an expansion but I will stick to the actual features of an expansion that I find useful or fun. I will not define success based on commercial monetary gain for SOE, but by my own standards.
In short summary, a successful expansion should include the following criteria: progressive rewards, huntable zones, challenging raids, and pickup-group-friendly content. While not all of these are important to everyone and many other criteria are omitted, these criteria can directly affect the perceved success of an expansion.
Progressive Rewards.
We already know that the Serpent's Spine will include five new level ranges and a host of new alternate advancement abilities. This alone will make it a more useful expansion than the last. New levels and new AAs give everyone a reason to hunt for experience. Experience hunting encourages to grouping and grouping leads to the true strength of Everquest in the first place: getting players together to have fun.
Some players complain about the perceived forced requirement to level and earn AAs. Without a level increase and more AAs, the game becomes stagnant. Players at the max level with large amounts of AAs don't bother to hunt in groups, and hence many players have more difficulty grouping.
The power gain from new levels and AAs also helps previous expansions. Players who aren't geared in top-end gear have the opportunity to earn enough power to defeat previously undefeated content. I get nervous, however, when content is released in current expansions with the intent that players will earn enough power later to come back. I pay $30 for content I might be able to use in two years? What sort of evil reverse lay-away program is that?
Progressive gear paths are also very important. Ensuring that all players at all power levels have reasonable paths available to improve gear should be a top priority for the itemization of Serpent's Spine.
Good Huntable Zones.
Previous expansions have had limited success with static hunting zones. Dragons of Norrath, Depths of Darkhollow, and Prophecy of Ro all saw very limited numbers of players willing to hunt in the static content of those expansions. Instead players either focused on instances or on previously released but more rewarding zones like Riftseekers.
In order to break out of this downward trend, SOE will need to ensure that new static zones offer enough useful, huntable, exciting, and rewarding content to bring people out of the holes of instances from previous expansions and into the open. High experience rewards, fun but not frustrating encounters, beautiful but well performing zones, and the chance for good equipment upgrades will all be required.
Challenging Raids.
Raid targets are particularly tricky. To non-raiders it appeared Prophecy of Ro included a lot of raid content. To high-end raiders, much of this content was considered either too rewarding, not rewarding enough, tedious, or impossible. Finding the perfect balance of raid content so that it is challenging, rewarding, and offers a good path of progress is quite difficult. Only time will tell if the raid progress in Serpent's Spine meets the need.
Pickup-group-friendly content.
This is quite a debatable statement but, to me, the success of an expansion is directly proportional to the amount of pickup groups one finds within its zones. Players need to be able to get into the game, find a group, and make some progress all within a reasonable period of time. While some players are able to sacrifice a great deal of time to face the most extreme challenges of a game, others only desire a chance to find a quick bit of fun.
Pickup-group-friendly content is extremely difficult to get right. Lost Dungeons of Norrath had it. Omens of War had it. Dragons of Norrath had it but only for a very limited set of content: Creator and Gimblax missions. Depths of Darkhollow had it as long as raid-geared players were willing to bring a few non-raid-geared players along. Some players rely completely on ones ability to get groups from within their own guild but this still hampers players with only limited time.
Again, only time will tell if Serpent's Spine will offer suitable content to help pickup-groups form and succeed. The level and AA increase should help but beyond that is any one's guess.
Will Serpent's Spine succeed? It is impossible to answer the question with only the data we have available. Much of the frustration over the previous expansion was due to a limited set of usable content. The scope of the Serpent's Spine looks quite a bit larger but only with excellent tuning can it meet all of the needs players expect.
Loral Ciriclight
27 August 2006
loral@loralciriclight.com
Comment Posted by: Ogulbuk on August 28, 2006 11:10 AM
What? No mention on these?:
http://eqforums.station.sony.com/eq/board/message?board.id=Veterans&message.id=274364
http://eqforums.station.sony.com/eq/board/message?board.id=Veterans&message.id=274365
Comment Posted by: Wolfkinder on August 28, 2006 11:37 AM
Yeah, I brought that up in the last thread, Ogulbuk, the new changes (revolutionary IMHO in regards to solo'ing as well as the ability to now have AAs "flow" at a younger age) but Loral is too quick for me and already posted another article. Grrr.......Loral.......
--Wolfkinder
Comment Posted by: Aarkan on August 28, 2006 11:59 AM
Those changes look awesome. Hopefully TSS is able to hold things together.
Comment Posted by: Quesci on August 28, 2006 12:00 PM
Some editing required (duplicate paragraphs):
Some players complain about the perceived forced requirement to level and earn AAs. Without a level increase and more AAs, the game becomes stagnant. Players at the max level with large amounts of AAs don't bother to hunt in groups, and hence many players have more difficulty grouping.
Some players complain about the perceived forced requirement to level and earn AAs but without a level increase and more AAs, the game becomes stagnant; players at the max level with large amounts of AAs don't bother to hunt in groups, pickup grouping falls short and fewer players are able to find enough other players to successfully hunt.
Comment Posted by: Loral on August 28, 2006 12:51 PM
I had to make a hard decision about whether to go with this article or write about the new changes. I figured the new changes were big news everywhere else and rather than stick my nose too far into it, I'd cover this topic instead.
The big one is the downtime change. I've seen it in action and its a huge huge change. I don't have any idea how much it will impact the game but it will be a lot. It probably warrants a new article but I won't get around it until I get back in mid-September.
Comment Posted by: RosesAreRed on August 29, 2006 01:30 PM
The new race looks like Frankenstein. Ugh.
Comment Posted by: sunshadow on August 29, 2006 10:24 PM
The success of TSS will be determined by how repeatable the content is. This is where instances in DoDH, and PoR failed. The tasks can be long and difficult and the reward is automatic for all group members on completion (be that an item or flag or spell), this contains little incentive to repeat any mission. OoW was sucessful reasonable zone layout and runes which every caster needs and are random drops. It also has some nice faction based items which encourage people to hunt in zones they might otherwise aviod.
For Static zones PoR failed cause of annoying mobs, be it annoying abilities from the mobs in Acrstone or the huge agro ranges in Devestation and named with no loot.
Devestation really disappoints me, so much potential so little use. Has heaps of different types of always rotating mobs, lots of camp spots, but wipes are so easy or your puller ends up waiting 5 mins for a mob to split out far enough to be single pulled. Not to mention finally getting a named single, then getting nothing to show for it.
So for me, I now have my 70 spell (did the collect 4 kobold paw quest, not the skins quest) why would I every go back there. Case in point "no repeatability" incentive.
Comment Posted by: Armarant on August 30, 2006 12:20 AM
http://www.next-gen.biz/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=3715&Itemid=2
An article entitled.. is it possible to surpass world of warcraft?
it has a pretty good break down of what world of warcraft has done right and puts some stuff into a perspective light that I didnt think about its a good read.
Comment Posted by: Loral on August 30, 2006 07:53 AM
The one thing I would like to see in Warcraft are instanced PVE content that is as easy to get into and play as Battlegrounds.
Why can't I get into PVE battlegrounds that pit 10 to 20 players against a big boss mob for fun and profit?
Comment Posted by: Aarkan on August 30, 2006 07:47 PM
I really don't understand your complaint, Loral, I thought that the instanced dungeons (at lower levels at least, i did a few of the ones before and at 30) are masterfully done. LOTS of great loot, awesome experience, really cool areas you get to explore, lots of quests.... Isn't that what you want? Or do you specifically want like 20 people to just spawn and go attack one big guy?
Comment Posted by: Teremar on August 31, 2006 01:28 AM
I'm not sure what you mean either Loral.
Do you mean the way people just sign up for battlegrounds and groups are formed automatically? That only works because balanced groups don't mean as much in PvP. The meeting stones try to do something similar but are a dismal failure. WoW definitely needs a better LFG system, but they should just copy EQ's. Forming groups automatically doesn't work.
Do you mean the way everyone's just teleported in as soon as the teams are formed? Blizzard devs insist they'll never do anything like PoK stones because they don't want to "shrink the world." Personally by the time I've travelled a route 20 times I'm ready for it to shrink.
Or do you mean the length? Blizzard realized in beta that their dungeons were too long, and Dire Maul reflects that. The three wings are each a very nice length. Unfortunately there's been no small group content added since Dire Maul, but it sounds like the expansion will continue in that pattern.
Comment Posted by: Loral on August 31, 2006 07:54 AM
I think they could put in a PVE system that almost exactly mirrors PVP. They don't have to have ideal classes, they could have heal-zones or NPCs or something. The events should be tuned aroun 15 to 30 minutes - typical WOW dungeons take about three hours.
WOW dungeons also require that you travel to the dungeon where battlegrounds let you join from any major city. One way they can increase the use of dungeons along is to let people join dungeon groups from any major city.
These PVE battlegrounds shouldn't eliminate dungeons or PVP battlegrounds, they should just be another option.
Comment Posted by: Ogulbuk on August 31, 2006 03:21 PM
2:58 Rio Grande
Ivelis Algarin
>The big one is the downtime change. I've seen it in
>action and its a huge huge change. I don't have any
>idea how much it will impact the game but it will be
>a lot. It probably warrants a new article but I
>won't get around it until I get back in
>mid-September.
You mentioned how successful Serpent's will be, and honestly, this change was crucial for the success of the expansion as a "new introduction to the game" for people that have never played it before. Without this downtime change I'd dare say the game had absolutely no chances to succeed with a new player base. Even if not going deep into it I think you should have noted it in there, some people only read mobhunter for their EQ news. :P (I learned about it by chance in Gucomics.com)
>WOW dungeons also require that you travel to the dungeon
>where battlegrounds let you join from any major city.
>One way they can increase the use of dungeons along is
>to let people join dungeon groups from any major city.
Additionally would be nice if the dungeons used the same new cross server system they implemented for battlegrounds... but since when did Mobhunter become a WoW site? Does this means you going to start doing editorials on WoW too? I would love that btw :P
Comment Posted by: Aarkan on August 31, 2006 06:08 PM
Loral, that's not part of Massive gaming as it is now really, only City of Heroes pulls that off somewhat. What you're describing is Diablo-like gameplay sorta. Ah well, I don't really feel that is necessary.. ESPECIALLY not in WoW where there's only 8 classes or whatever so it's much more likely to get a tank and a healer than in EQ.
Comment Posted by: Ogulbuk on September 1, 2006 10:26 AM
I find it necessary in wow, finding groups there is a pain, good thing we can solo though.
CoH pulls this easily because of
a) Loose balance: There are balance issues still but truth is no encounter is designed to require a specific mix of Archetypes (may yield a few easily trivialized encounters though)
b) Accessibility: Once you are level 14 hero or do your first mayhem mission as a villain (level 6 minimum) you get a travel power that will easily take you anywhere in minutes if not seconds.
c) Sidekick feature: unlike monster shrouds, you actually level up to your friend's level to accompany, only you get junkish powers and equipment but you still can get xp and feel not entirely useless, so you can form teams regardless of level barriers.
It’s not rare to find yourself in an 8-man team rather fast in City of Heroes but it’s due to those points.
WoW on the other hand is just good soloing
Comment Posted by: Aarkan on September 1, 2006 02:04 PM
Not to mention that CoH has the greatest LFG feature in all of massive gaming. It's pretty similar to the tool in EQ except you can see all players (not anon) in your zone and it flags the LFG ones specifically and then you can go through and see all players (not anon) in any zone and search for specific archetypes (classes) and level ranges for every player (not anon) on the server. If WoW had that I guarantee there would be groups forming for instances and for hunting spots and everything all the time. Maybe not so much in EQ but if it were improved a bit so people were using the LFG feature even if they didn't realize it then things would be much easier.
Comment Posted by: Tiane on September 2, 2006 06:04 AM
Loral, you dont make mention of the biggest failure in progress of TSS... the lack of a retail boxed version, in either upgrade or compilation form. I realize you mentioned this once, in one of your diatribes, but it wasnt nearly enough. They said it could change at the turn of a pen, and it didnt. Forum holders like you are to blame for not making this an issue.
This was the expansion designed around attracting new players to the game, with zones for all levels, and yet, there is no way for a new player to get this expansion without previously owning the game.
This is a massive failure in marketing, and I cant believe that any dev is happy about this. I'd rail on them except that those I talked to are furious about this decision. This will make 75% of The Serpent's Spine an *instant* failure.
Oh sure, they'll come out with a christmas compilation, but by then nobody's alt will still be there, you'll have a bunch of frustrated newbies with no upgrade path struggling to get through too-hard zones. Recipe for success? Sure, the suckers bought the compilation box, maybe they can sucker them into another 30 days... but that's a dead end, big time, especially considering the dev time.
You made big light of the PoR lack of progression WELL after the fact, when it was obvious from the beginning. You've only touched on the lack of a retail box for this "rejuvinating" EQ expansion. I dont know who listens to you, or to me, anymore, but your voice would be better shouted if you spent if on things preventable.
Comment Posted by: Skuz on September 2, 2006 08:05 AM
It is my understanding that what the bods at SoE are after initially is wooing back previous players of Everquest, some 500,000 people have or still are playing everquest over the years it has been running, & TSS is pretty much a relaunch of Everquest aimed at getting them back.
I think the changes to the game that will be put in in-conjunction with the release of TSS do put it in a good position to garner a fresh throng of followers though, only time will tell if it achieves what it is aiming to do.
Comment Posted by: Loral on September 2, 2006 08:33 AM
"I dont know who listens to you, or to me, anymore, but your voice would be better shouted if you spent if on things preventable."
I shouted.
Comment Posted by: Juror on September 2, 2006 08:39 AM
Not only did he shout, he shouted at the people who had power to change it - the Marketing Dept. He sent email, IMs, and talked directly to them.
They are considering it but if they do come out with boxed set, it won't be any time soon.
Comment Posted by: Ogulbuk on September 2, 2006 11:58 AM
The marketing department is indeed being retarded IF they do not think about releasing a boxed set by November 1.
I personally think it is smart to not release a boxed set simultaneously. If you want new players you will want the game to be VERY well stress tested, that content debugged as much as possible, beyond what any beta can help debug. SOE has a history of releasing buggy expansions and fixing the HUGE issues in the first few weeks. The enthusiast may tolerate this but a totally new player will simply return the game trough whatever means he can.
So I think its smart to first release the download only version. I doubt “people leveling their alts by then” excuse means nothing. The idea after all is not to bring new players in day one and that be it, if the game cant hold new players troughout the next 6 months then it simply was designed poorly. The game should be able to accommodate new players at any moment regardless of population density. Also I don’t get the note about extremely difficult zones, most likely the lower level zones will actually be easier than the average zone up to now, with loads of solo kill task for players that cant find groups easily.
Comment Posted by: Skuz on September 2, 2006 05:34 PM
I think I read it somewhere that they do intend to release a compilation boxed set with everything including TSS, however there is no way it will be done before xmas.
Missed opportunity.
Comment Posted by: Teremar on September 3, 2006 03:14 AM
This (from their FAQ) is still the latest word on the Vanguard release, right?
"We are, however, anticipating release sometime in Winter 2006/2007."
I think that explains the lack of an EQ box in time for the holidays.
Comment Posted by: Tiane on September 3, 2006 07:05 AM
Loral said, "I shouted."
Not in public you didnt.
Maybe I've been at it longer than you. Nvm, I have... You dont get results from marketing by taking to Devs. In fact, you dont get any HONEST results unless you make your shouts public.
You know who I am, and you know that I *know* how these people work. Emails and private talks and whatever have *never* worked. Not on anything important. And besides, you were talking to devs, and they had no control over this marketing nightmare.
Dev decisions are ultimately decided by marketing, and marketing is only ever these days influenced by buzz. No friend of yours or mine can make a TSS Box reality because SOE Marketing has decided that it can make more money via Digital Download than offering a Box, despite the Devs desires.
That is the truth. And you never made an article about it.
Comment Posted by: Teremar on September 3, 2006 10:35 AM
Um, Tiane, the article is called "Snapping the Serpent's Spine." Scroll down a bit on the home page and it's right there. Maybe it's not everything you might want, but Loral most certainly did write an article about it.
And I seriously doubt it's about making more money if TSS is download only. SOE has always pushed players to buy boxes because they know having boxes on store shelves makes for new players. This is about wanting those new players to buy Vanguard, SOE's new flagship MMORPG.
Comment Posted by: Pomaikai Po'okela on September 3, 2006 05:46 PM
I don't think the lack of a retail box is a based upon a lack of desire at SOE. In no way do I think their marketing department wanted this to be a download only expansion. It was their marketing department that was pushing TSS as a way of injecting new blood into the playerbase afterall.
There is one thing that you are forgetting here. Just because a software company makes a game and wants to sell it, doesn't mean that retail stores have to stock it. The stores have to believe that there is a market for the game, and that they will make money selling it. IF they believe that to be true, then they will buy it.
How many copies of the past few expansions can you find on retailer shelves right now? Can you find EQ1 for sale at CompUSA, or Wal-Mart right now? The answer is NO... Yes, the retailers sold preorders of the game, but there were very few boxes actually on the shelf for impulse buyers. After the first month or so of release, there are not any copies to be found on retailer shelves unless they are in the bargain bin.
The collectors tin editions with all of the previous expansions only show up around Christmas time, and again are gone by the first weeks of February. There are not any reorders of the product. That is NOT good for a retailer. Why should they take up valuable retail shelf space for a product with that short of a lifespan?
There is no good reason, and that is why TSS is a download only product. Do I expect to see TSS in a collector tin type box set for Christmas? Sure I do. Those sell well for the holiday season. Retailers will stock it, and THAT is where you will possibly see an influx of new players to the world of Everquest.
Coincidentally, those new players will be opening their presents and installing EQ and TSS right about when the majority of the buggy content has been fixed, the overpowered gear and such nerfed, and things will be running smoothly again in the land of Norrath. If they can make that work, then their marketing department will have actually done a marvelous job of finding a silver lining in the release cloud of TSS...
Comment Posted by: concerned1 on September 3, 2006 11:48 PM
you arent going to see a influx of actual new players to eq. if you give eq to people at christmas what you gonna see are people returning a 8 year old dieing game and exchanging it for your wow's,warhammer's,and your vanguard's. sure a few old eq players may come back to hit 75 and to get more aa but thats all you are gonna get. people know about eq.....they know it is a immense time sink and caters to ubers. the reputation is out there.
Comment Posted by: Tiane on September 4, 2006 06:39 AM
Ok Teremar, I stand corrected as regards an article about it. My apologies to Loral. He did write an article about it, though it seems it got little attention. Course, there's nothing like a bit of controversy to bring it up, eh? ;)
As far as retail availability goes, I've worked in retail software for 15 years. We always had the past few EQ expansions on the shelves. Even after I left, and went around shopping for DoDh and the PoR for a retail box, both Futureshop and EBGames (Canada) had all the old expansions taking up space, even though they didnt get the new expansion boxes for a few days after (annoying, but better than downloading the whole damn thing.)
What retail stores can order for putting on shelves is another matter entirely, and totally depends on SOE's relationships with its distributors. As I recall, it's been a couple years..., we had no probs with them shipping us what we wanted.
/shrug. There's no real distribution excuse for this decision. It's pure money, and obviously nobody in marketing understands that to get new players into a MMOG you need to put a box on the shelf, especially an expansion designed to get new players in. SOE saves money by not printing cd's and manuals (sic) and a doll or whatever gimmick they'd have decided to include in the box.
Course they miss the boat on the ZERO new subscribers by making TSS download only.
Comment Posted by: Loral on September 4, 2006 08:10 PM
"You know who I am, and you know that I *know* how these people work. Emails and private talks and whatever have *never* worked. Not on anything important. And besides, you were talking to devs, and they had no control over this marketing nightmare."
I didn't just talk to the devs.
Oh, Juror and I got married! Yay!
Comment Posted by: sunshadow on September 4, 2006 09:38 PM
Grats mate, but you should be too busy to be visiting this site ATM. Wink, Wink.
Comment Posted by: Teremar on September 5, 2006 02:01 AM
Every expansion up until now has been sold in stores (with the exception of Ykesha I believe). So if you want to understand why SOE is making TSS download only, you have to ask "What's changed?"
It's possible that with EQ's declining subscription numbers retailers are balking at giving it shelf space--though even in its decline EQ is bigger than a lot of games. I still think it's that SOE realized how dumb it was to have EQ and EQ2 going head to head, and don't want to repeat that performance with Vanguard. One thing I'm reasonably confident it's not is that someone woke up one morning and realized it would be cheaper to just have everyone download it. I'm sure they've been aware of that for a very long time, and have been pushing boxes for all these years for the exact reasons Tiane describes.
If I'm right, then I think this is an important milestone: the first time SOE has clearly held back EQ in order to advance Vanguard.
But speaking of milestones, marriage is a far more important one. Congrats you two!
Comment Posted by: Richard Hinson on September 5, 2006 05:23 AM
Loral & Tiane,
I guess I'm a bit confussed. How would a Dev, or a merketing person, or anyone think that TSS was the midas touch to turn around the failings of the game?
Yes; it does create one single area in the game where players can level from 1-70, and in theory, that single area will provide for gearing those characters in a fashion that in on a par with the realities of the game as it is today.
What hasn't been noted is in order to take advantage of this one sole method/area, you will have to scrap the entire idea of race/class faction for ALL the existing content. As NONE of the rest of Norrath is being re-tuned. The tutorial will still kill off the very idea of seperate starting cities and races. PoK will still be the one stop shop for all trade skills. TSS will become the default singular area of play (with the possible exception of PC for levels 10 to 24).
In essense what the developers are offering is; Look here, EQ 1.5. While quietly trying to ignore the 800lb gorilla's in the room. ou know things like the essential lock out of 60% of PoP & GoD content for most new players, the huge disparity in risk vs. reward vs. time for LoDN and DoN (admitted by the Dev's but still unacted on even though it doesn't require a content change but rather just a change on the cost/sellback points for gear).
Face it. EQ has so many broken content items its tragic. If you bought a car with the number of "features" broken in it that EQ has, you'd be in court right now getting your money back.
TSS is nothing more than a bandaid on a gushing artery wound. It is an irrational concept to think that "new" players are going to buy TSS and become seven year veterans of the game as a result.
What SOE needs to desperately due is unify the game, all parts of it, and make it so that the game as a WHOLE, not little bits and parts, work, flow, and mesh together.
EQ has a 7 year history of being buggy, of releasing product that is barely above Beta release. It has a 7 year history of creating content that locks out casual players. It has a 7 year history of release products with massive loopholes and exploits that the elite guilds get to abuse for a few weeks and that then get "fixed" just as the regular player base gets the abilty to use them.
That's 7 years of bad word of mouth press. That's a lot of bad feelings on the part of the potential player base to over come.
I mean, hell, I still play the game, but I have seven years invested in my characters. That's the ONLY reason I still play. Will I buy TSS? Possibly never, but definately not for at least three years. Why, because as a casual player with less that 200 AA on any character I have such a huge gap between me and any need for "more" content that it's a waste of money. Hell, right now I'd thank a GM for banning me from the game as it would break the link. Why on earth would I recommend the game to anyone?
So seriously, with as many problems in the game as EQ has that the Dev's either flat out won't address, or for what ever reasons aren't allowed to address, why would a boxed version of TSS do anything more than create a one or two month bump in subscriber numbers?
I both like and dislike both of you. I read your posts, I read your writings, I appreciate you both have the ear of the inner circle at SOE.
What I cannot fathom is why you both get side tracked with what ever new shiney distraction SOE pops out, rather than keeping your eye on long standing issues.
Pick any endemic issue. Pick the drop rate of spell reseach items, both use in practice runes, or the pages/runes/etc., themselves. Do a search on the SOE forums, you'll see posts on the issue going back as long as the forum history allows. You'll see time and time again Dev's admitting there is an issue. Yet the majority of issue remain, month after month, year after year.
So tell us, what in the name of all that's sane is so great about TSS that any rational person would look thier best friend in the eye and say "look, I know that SOE has had bad spots, but really, SOE has turned a new leaf, you should really try this game."
Comment Posted by: Skuz Bukit on September 5, 2006 05:45 AM
In response to some of what Richard Hinson posted:
I think with TSS, the aim in to supercede the old content, along with all of it's problems.
By superceding it the Old content's problems no longer apply, for example a player working from 1-75 in TSS alone won't need to be frustrated by time vs risk vs reward in ldon points based gearing system simply because he will gear up just fine in TSS.
Having built TSS to be a "stand alone" expansion & therefore being quested, missioned, itemised etc etc from the ground up through 75 levels, the past regards/bugs/issues will be made largely irrelavant to a new player.
Having said all that, I totally agree with what you say in regards to a need (or rather more aptly, a want) for Everquests wide array of disparate Pre-TSS elements, to mesh together & unify better into a cohesive whole, a pipe dream maybe, but unfeasible until Everquest can garner a bigger influx of new & returning players before the developers could justify the cost & man-hours involved in doing just that.
Comment Posted by: Tiane on September 5, 2006 06:34 AM
Loral said,
"I didn't just talk to the devs."
Who are you, Robert Novak? Spill it or get off the pot. Name names. The previous Mobhunter may have sold out, but thats no reason for you to continue the tradition.
Comment Posted by: Tiane on September 5, 2006 06:52 AM
Richard Hinson said,
"What I cannot fathom is why you both get side tracked with what ever new shiney distraction SOE pops out, rather than keeping your eye on long standing issues."
Dude, I've been at it longer than you or Loral has been playing.
The only way to fight is to keep moving the front. We, the players of these MMOG's, fight a defensive action on two fronts.
One, against the devs. They have their Vision of the game. The players who actually deal with it have their concerns.
Two, against capitalism. The bottom line is all that ultimately matters to the accountants and shareholders. This conflicts with the devs constantly, and I have sympathy.
The problem is that the marketeers dont know a damn thing about MMOG society. This is a new thing, and not properly understood by anyone currently employed by SOE. Look at the BF1942 backlash. And for a weird sideways example, one only has to look at Steam. Backlash, backlash.
Bottom line... Internet consumers have the ultimate power, to purchase on a whim. Or not. As for EQ, this expansion that was designed for new consumers will be barren after one month. And thats a failure for all concerned.
Comment Posted by: Ogulbuk on September 5, 2006 07:50 AM
Tiane, Juror (his wife) already told he talked directly to the marketing people, the only people with controll on the matter.
Comment Posted by: Ogulbuk on September 5, 2006 07:56 AM
Also: if this is what the marketing department thinks is actually the right way to go, there is NOTHING that a CURRENT player can say to change it. You can shout or whatever but you own the game and in the end you do not affect their strategy as you are not the target of such strategy.
Additionally, there is no way a "simple fan" will convince a "marketing pro" that he knows how to handle the market better than he/she does. Sure time may prove the fan right, but its very unlikely that a professional in any field will take advice from some one they know is already biased due to fandoom AND on top don’t know the market (in their eyes anyways.)
I’m not saying you are wrong, I’m simply saying, its not the current player that has true power of convincing the marketing department of this, unless such a player is actually in Donald Trump's or Microsoft's marketing department and sent them a full market analysis report or something like that :P
Comment Posted by: Teremar on September 5, 2006 12:25 PM
Skuz Bukit is right. TSS is designed to bypass the current problems so they don't have to fix them.
EQ is far too big to fix, not at reasonable cost anyway. And even if they did, it probably wouldn't go over well (see SWG). Richard Hinson's post gives a great example: he's unhappy that the old faction system is practically irrelevant, but I'll bet that if SOE were to do a complete revamp they'd get rid of it entirely. That's the trouble: in many cases one person's problem is another person's treasured part of the game.
So instead they created a little island of...well, that's an interesting question. Modern graphics, for sure. "Content integrating the lessons they've learned over the past eight years"? "Content for the Warcraft age"? New players can enjoy that, or, if they dare, venture out into the untamed wilds of the old EQ.
Thus if rune drops are a problem, it looks like SOE's preferred solution is to have them drop somewhere in TSS, hopefully at more reasonable rates. Reminding them to do so seems more likely to succeed than pushing them to fix the current drop locations.
But this all makes me wonder if the EQ devs and SOE marketing are talking to each other. The devs seem to have put a lot of work into attracting new players. But marketing isn't backing them up. I can't really blame them--I'm afraid I have to agree with those who think TSS is unlikely to attract a large number of new or returning players (especially since disgruntled WoW players will have a new expansion at the same time to check out and see if it fixes their complaints). But if marketing wasn't going to put TSS in stores where it can attract new people, the devs probably should have put their effort into making more and better content for high level players of all play-styles.
Comment Posted by: Aarkan on September 5, 2006 06:51 PM
Tiane, I don't understand how Moogard getting a job with EQ2 is a bad thing. I don't think there's a MMO player who writes for a fan board or site or something that wouldn't kill to get a job for a MMO. That's the dream. I'm sure Loral would LOVE to work for SoE or any other MMO company.
Comment Posted by: Tuppet on September 6, 2006 09:25 PM
I hear a lot of interest in a box-version of the game. However, I STRONGLY disagree with this request. Welcome to the new age of purchasing software, via The Internet. I'm sorry but you will have to get used it, there are just too many benefits to downloading your game/software
than a retail store. The fact that EQ isn't offering a retail box doesn't mean they've given up on EQ, it means they are CATCHING UP WITH THE TIMES! Welcome to 2006. Valve introduced this concept in 2004(?) and it's gaining momentum; SOE is jumping on the bandwagon.
THE MAIN DRAW
--------------
* improves quality and distribution of the product. you get the latest version of the game, not the build that was burned to the disc 1 month before! (maybe 2-3 months? I don't know the delay)
- I remember buying DODH retail for the retail reward. What a croc! I didn't know that my EQ-patcher already downloaded some of the expansion's files before its release. I loaded the disc, installed the game, only to have the patcher download all of the files AGAIN!! because the files were outdated. WHOOPS! Needless to say I was a little miffed.
GOOD FOR SOE and OTHER RETAILERS
* cut down costs by avoiding the following: printing discs/boxes, shipping them, and the outlet's shelve space, etc.
SIDE BENEFIT
*environment-friendly. remember those HUGE software boxes a few years back that held those tiny little cd cases? what a waste of materials. thankfully, they have gotten a lot smaller lately.
--------
what's the point of advertising EQ? You think that anyone who plays MMORPG's HASN'T heard of it by now (7 years)? Everquest, O RLY?!!
you're going to make a purchase based on word-of-mouth or a review from somewhere (magazine, online mag, online gaming site, etc) NOT because you saw a pretty box on a shelf in a retail store.
Come to think of it, when is the last time you bought a PC game at a retail store? With price engines and online shopping, one can buy a game online for less money and effort. So what's the point of wasting time/gas to go to and from the store when you can point-click and be playing the game in the time it takes to download?
Comment Posted by: Skuz Bukit on September 7, 2006 06:38 AM
I'm pretty certain a boxed "compilation" is in fact in the pipeline.
Advertising a 7 year old game isn't a pointless exercise when you take into account that the fundemental mechanics of the game are being altered in a big way, that the way the content is delivered within the new expansion is much more "focused" & that it provides content for every level from 1-75 not just raiders, not just the high end, I've seen a few of the adverts around & so far they are concentrating on the content for all levels, the level raise, & the new race...I think for the future the adverts should also speak of the new out of combat regen system & the "focused" content.
Sure a lot of people have heard of Everquest, but there's undoubtely still newcomers to gaming, & in turn newcomers to the MMO market that probably haven't heard of Everquest, or if they have, know very little about it.
There's a great article linked from the Eqplayers site that's titled "resurrecting Everquest" thats well worth reading, also on Casters realm are some good articles about the new expansion.
No expansion is perfect, & I am sure this one will have it's low points as well as highs, but I think this one is bringing a whole new "feel" to Everquest, the changes that are seperate to but going live with this expansion should also help re-invigorate the game as a whole.
Comment Posted by: Teremar on September 7, 2006 04:18 PM
"what's the point of advertising EQ? You think that anyone who plays MMORPG's HASN'T heard of it by now (7 years)? Everquest, O RLY?!!"
Yeah, they've heard of it. "Oh yeah, Everquest. That game that was really hot before World of Warcraft came out. Do people still play it?" Put a box in stores and they'll know the answer is yes.
"you're going to make a purchase based on word-of-mouth or a review from somewhere (magazine, online mag, online gaming site, etc) NOT because you saw a pretty box on a shelf in a retail store."
It's called impulse buying. People do it.
Selling software online for download only is a great way to open up the market for small, low-budget titles that wouldn't make it otherwise (seems like it's the only way most serious wargames can get to market at all). It's just sad to see EQ in that category.
I hope you're right about a compilation being in the pipeline Skuz Buckit, but the big question is whether it will be there for the holiday shopping season (or the period immediately after Vanguard's release if they miss the holidays). I still think that's a key indicator of SOE's commitment to EQ.
Comment Posted by: Ogulbuk on September 7, 2006 05:20 PM
>what's the point of advertising EQ? You think that
>anyone who plays MMORPG's HASN'T heard of it by now
>(7 years)? Everquest, O RLY?!!
Your entire post was very poor and lacking objectivity, but that line there was enough to show you had no clue what marketing is about.
Lets tell you this little Marketing anecdotes:
One day an aspirant enterpriser takes a flight and finds he sitting by the side of the CEO of a very successful soda company. The two engage in a conversation for a while and after a bit the novice enterpriser asks the CEO:
I’m curious, you run this huge international company, everyone knows your product, its everywhere, its a given that everyone knows it's name, then why do you spend so many billions of dollars a year to advertise it?
The response was quick and short:
Its simple, stopping advertisement for my product would be as silly as the pilot of this plane shutting off the engines just because we are in mid air.
The moral? If you didn’t get it, nothing reminds a household name on it's own. Marketing is essential, you WANT and you NEED the image of your product everywhere you can afford it without falling into losses. If you don’t advertise the product, if you do not make sure the average Joe sees it regularly somewhere, then you WILL crash and burn.
Comment Posted by: Skuz Bukit on September 7, 2006 08:19 PM
Think I posted this before but they wont have a compilation ready before Christmas, a big shame & I think the devs know it, but that's how it goes.
I think a part of the reason Everquest has lost subscribers could well be attributable to not advertising enough, enough players still love the game enough to keep it going as long as it has been & there has been a a slow but steady trickle of new players, a couple I have met actually started MMO's with other games & moved over to EQ.
If the marketing guys at SoE read this website I'm sure they'll find a good handful of ideas posted on getting eq out there to a wider audience, I don't expect eq to ever match WoW subscriptions, it doesn't need to, but it does need a "healthy" population somewhere 400k + would be great for the game to maintain, any more is a bonus.
Comment Posted by: Tuppet on September 7, 2006 08:26 PM
you're 100% right I have no clue about marketing; and point taken. I'll concede that I went too far - I was too hasty in my decision to hit 'post'.
Admittedly, the game needs more blood to be enjoyable (for faster grouping) but the game is aging and it's a tough sell.
Comment Posted by: Ogulbuk on September 8, 2006 09:22 AM
One thing I forgot to note about going download exclusive:
There are loads of players that don’t have high speed connections, even in this day and age not everyone has DSL or Cable. The devs know this, and the change to "not zoning upon death" was explained to be precisely to help those players. If they consider enough players are in such a slow connection to justify this entire change, they should also be aware that these players might not be able to download the game.
Also note that even if some can afford leaving the computer on overnight to do the downloads, dialup users still have to monopolize a phone line to do so, and many just cant afford blocking their phone line for 24 hours for various days, these players may only be able to allocate time for the games’ downloads within their perhaps already casual playing window.
I think the marketing team is combining the “this expansion renews the whole game’s experience and rejuvenates the world” with “well, Legacy of Ykesha was the best selling expansion and it was download only” to get their “download only and rejuvenation means epic success!!!”
Never mind the real reason many got Ykesha was due to the interface additions, like the horrid in game map.
Comment Posted by: CONCERNED1 on September 8, 2006 10:33 AM
this is kind of interesting. i see that several sites have these articles to try and hype eq. some that are laughable at best. claiming the next expansion is "really for the players" and such. the stakes seem higher then ever. how hard will the new expansion hit when it flops? when the people that are suckered into it realize the bs and just quit....like always....
Comment Posted by: wiggles on September 8, 2006 10:44 AM
The dial-up excuse is lame. You can start downloading TSS right now, in fact you should be regardless of whether you are buying the expansion right now or not. You have weeks to get most of the files. They send it out piecemeal right now. By the time TSS is live, any store bought disc would be completely out of date anyway and you would end up downlading the files.
If people crave a physical item, burn the files to a CD/DVD yourself, they'd be more relevant. I archive my EQ folder about every 6 months and so far it still fits on a single DVDR without the maps folder. If I ever need to reinstall, it would take just a few mins to copy back and do some small patching (most patches overwrite the same files).
Comment Posted by: Ogulbuk on September 8, 2006 11:29 AM
>By the time TSS is live, any store bought disc
>would be completely out of date anyway and you
>would end up downlading the files.
Huge exaggeration. The disk contains zone geometry, character models, huge amounts of textures, and all the art that are the true bulk of the data. This data rarely changes at all once approved and burned into the gold disk. The data that usually changes is stored in much smaller files that are no burden to download.
Also note, even if players can download right now, they will still be subject to their time restrictions, so should they stop playing and start downloading? I used to hate free full zone releases back in the day because it meant i was just not able to play that night, and sometimes the following one, due to dialup speeds.
There may be things that alleviate this, but the issue exists and is not just an "excuse" its a true problem with web distribution.
Comment Posted by: wiggles on September 9, 2006 11:56 AM
In order to have a retail box out, they would have to ship it weeks before they were ready. A very large portion of the files would be useless. You *WILL* need to download significant amounts. Yes, they change geometry and models as up to the last minute. Just a single node change on a model or zone def and the whole file is considered new. Perhaps if SOE used an rsync method of patching things would be different but they don't.
And it's not *if they can download now*, they *CAN* download now.
Do you realize you can download these files while you're playing EQ?
Do you realize you can download as many of the files you want at a given time? Simply cancel the download and get others another time.
Did you know you can download these files while not really wanting to play the game?
All in all, it's a very lame, tired excuse to needing a retail copy to play this expansion.
Comment Posted by: Ogulbuk on September 9, 2006 08:46 PM
All I see is you not wanting to see beyond your situation.
I wont go on repeating how many have bad connections as it is, these players ARE a big amount of the player base, not a minority, and they cant leave the computer on all night or while not playing taking up their phone line to download patches, and the connections are not strong enough to download while playing. Off course, these are already kicked in the nuts by the Bazaar implementation that forces them to not be able to earn money at all, they may be able to use the inverted bazaar thing to sell though.
I have installed multiple EQ expansions; I can’t remember the last time I had to download a zone geometry file. Generally the first things to be finished ARE the zones, reason why it’s also usually the first type of screenshot we see, empty zones.
This is not an excuse, it’s a reality. You are the one setting marketing excuses to the consumers that do have problems.
Comment Posted by: Loral on September 10, 2006 02:02 PM
Hello from Bass Lake, CA! I can't even have a full honeymoon without checking to see what nonsense we have on the boards.
Aarkan, I'm not dying for a job at SOE. I'm very happy doing what I do where I do it. I am very happy being a fan of the game and a writer of editorials.
Tiane, I am not going to get into the details of private conversations or personal correspondences, but I have communicated my thoughts on the download-only release in articles, conversations, and emails. I am satisfied with my attempt to get the message across. I am not, however, satisfied with the responses and I am not satisfied with the continued direction towards a download only release.
Time for a swim!
Comment Posted by: Skuz on September 10, 2006 06:26 PM
Hope you're enjoying your honeymoon Loral (& Juror), looking forward to your next article, I hope you enjoy the time away ( shows you care that you dropped in mid-honeymoon).
I have no doubt you voiced your concerns about a download-only release (and the implications), in as best a way as you knew how to, only time will tell if they got the decision right, though it might not be as big a disaster as it appears, but only if they do sufficient work at getting enough publicity to achieve a good response, the advantages are there, but only if they can offset the disadvantages sufficiently, i'm doubtful they can as are many others.
I hope TSS does well as dl only, & I truly hope the boxed set with all exp& TSS gets out asap after the Holiday season & can create enough interest, I dont expect humungoous influx of new people, but the game needs a good number of new people to remain vibrant, Ultima online is revamping it's game & is probably the only long-time comparison to EQ, after all 7 years + is uncharted territory for a permanent virtual community, & the issues eq has to deal with are something the rest of the industry will be watching for, there are things to learn even still.
Comment Posted by: Aarkan on September 10, 2006 06:34 PM
If a compilation box set with all 12 expansions doesn't come out before the holiday season there is no way that it will sell well. Especially not with the WoW expansion supposedly coming out in late November. EQ is far from dead though what you see is what you get, don't expect any large influxes of newbies to ever come again, just expect more server mergers.
Comment Posted by: Loral on September 10, 2006 06:37 PM
"If a compilation box set with all 12 expansions doesn't come out before the holiday season there is no way that it will sell well."
From what we heard at a dev chat a bit ago, the next compilation pack will not come out before the holidays.
Comment Posted by: Aarkan on September 10, 2006 09:51 PM
Then we call all expect similar sales as Titanium.
And Loral, come on go enjoy your honeymoon! You shouldn't stop for longer than a ciggarette/coffee break ;P
Comment Posted by: Richard Hinson on September 13, 2006 05:43 AM
Just a couple thoughts that struck me as I was reading through the message thread.
There's no mention of an increase in the maximum number of characters per server per account. That means in order to play the 'new race' you either need to still have a blank, you'll need to restart on a new server, or you'll need to open another account.
It's less that a week from the advertised launch date. Yet there's been no posting by the Dev's of what the new spell/skills will be, or what neew AA's will be out for each class.
Comment Posted by: Tuppet on September 14, 2006 09:58 AM
*taps foot impatiently*
the lack of info is killing me...
Comment Posted by: Aarkan on September 14, 2006 05:41 PM
Loral isn't gonna be posting a new article until the middle of next month at least, he's enjoying his honeymoon. Go gather gear for a Drakkin twink or something.
Comment Posted by: Tuppet on September 14, 2006 07:28 PM
not from loral... obviously he's busy; SONY. i was referring to the blackout of info for the expansion (due to NDA).
TSS launch is 5 days away and still no word on aa's or spells. there's no details to read, look forward to. it's a little sad (but not a travesty).
Comment Posted by: sunshadow on September 14, 2006 07:57 PM
5 day till pet pulling is nerfed. What affect will this change have on the game? Will it fix a game braking exploit or just anoy a lot of Mages, BSTs and Shammies who were using it to be able to get at least some Solo XP?
Comment Posted by: Richard Hinson on September 15, 2006 04:02 AM
I'm a little more than a tad perplexed.
Four days to go till launch if my watch is right. Yet the expansion that the developers seem to think will re-invigorate the game is practically a whisper on thier own forums.
No news on new spells. No news on new skills. No news on new AA's.
The "traps" and "totems" from the last expansion still appears to be a complete flop. Impracticle to get for the casual player, and pretty much unwated it seems by raid guilds.
Class re-envisionment appears to have been nothing more than running two year joke or some smoke and mirrors scam to get people to cool thier jets and stop cancelling accounts.
Trade skill drops issues appear to be not only not being addressed, but appear to not even be on the to-do list.
Research drops (now that reseach can't be trained) is a known issue admitted to but apparently even further off the to-do list than trade skills.
In short, it appears that SOE and the SOE developers have chosen to completely ignore 7 years worth of issues spanning millions of dollars of player invested time and money, all so they can pump out a new player race that they've been willing to say almost nothing about.
Yet despite the complete lack of stewartship on thier part they keep spaming us with attempts to get the players to pre-order this expansion.
I'm at a loss here. Exactly how low do the developers think the average players IQ is? How short do they think the average players memory is?
Comment Posted by: Pomaikai on September 15, 2006 07:11 AM
I found this on another website out there. I should note that I am NOT in the Beta, and I did NOT sign an NDA, and so am NOT in violation of it before someone starts whining...
[ Removed due to size, questionable authority, and questionable NDA release - post a link if you want - Loral ]
Comment Posted by: Skuz Bukit on September 15, 2006 10:10 AM
NDA isn't some hardcoded contract per say, it's much more of a bond of trust between those members of the community that are in Beta helping test/debug/feedback game elements, breaking NDA hurts that tie between devs & players.
By posting this here you are in effect (even if not deliberately) displaying contempt for those in beta & the devs who are all trying to make the best game eq can be, a link to the post that you copy-pasted from would have been better & would leave the blame for this at the original leaker's door.
I appreciate that people are keen to see the new AA etc & that normally by now the NDA has been lifted, but TSS is far and away a bigger project than previous expansions & changes are still ongoing even at this late stage because of the sheer workload the devs have on, it is in my view wrong to post Beta information before the NDA is lifted because of such changes being ongoing, people will see the AA and may hate some of them or love some of them only to find that their disappointment or joy is unfounded as the aa were altered after the list was publicised.
Comment Posted by: Ogulbuk on September 15, 2006 11:52 AM
Even if you are not under the NDA this information IS protected by law, by giving access to the information only to people that sign an NDA.
Loral himself can get in trouble if he leaves this post on this site for long.
Comment Posted by: Tuppet on September 15, 2006 12:06 PM
ruh roh. not good.
Comment Posted by: Nolrog on September 15, 2006 01:55 PM
>>"you're going to make a purchase based on word-of-mouth or a review from somewhere (magazine, online mag, online gaming site, etc) NOT because you saw a pretty box on a shelf in a retail store."
That's exactly the way I got it. I buy games like this from time to time. I'll stop at Best Buy or CompUSA and see what's there, look at the boxes and read about it, and sometimes, I'll walk away with it.
There are several things at play here. First, boxes on shelves do indeed lead to accounts. Even EQ2 is releasing a boxed version (EQ2s expansion comes with the previous 2 expansions as well as the core game. A very novel concept to get new players in and get them caught up quickly.)
Keep in mind that not everyone has the ability to buy the expansion over the internet. Some people use only cash; and without boxes in the stores, they have no way to buy it.
The other factor at play, is keeping in the good graces of the WallMarts (WM) and the Best Buys (BB) of the world. Next year, SOE will release a new game, and want to put it on store shelves. WM/BB have very long memories and will say why should I put your new PlayStation 3 title on my shelves, when you cut me out of the last EQ expansion?
Comment Posted by: Tuppet on September 15, 2006 02:33 PM
"The Serpent's Spine Beta NDA has been LIFTED! You are welcome to discuss and share things from The Serpent's Spine beta on public boards now. Please keep your posts respectful, mature and constructive."
yay!
Comment Posted by: gordulek_stromm on September 15, 2006 03:35 PM
The list posted above is pretty out-of-date. Should be current lists up on the boards soon with the NDA lifted.
Comment Posted by: Skuz Bukit on September 16, 2006 03:46 AM
Want to know what one of the Major forces in SoE thinks in regards to digital downloads versus in-store boxes?
Take a look at this blog & it may well shed some light on the matter.
LINK> http://blog.station.sony.com/
Comment Posted by: CONCERNED1 on September 16, 2006 07:43 AM
yeah. and that smedley guy clearly knows what he is talking about. just look at the success of eq,eq2,and swg. together they have lost what? 200k-500k subscribers? maybe more. you know i remember seeing a post were travis mcgeathy(spelling?) rashere(spelling again?) claimed that over eq's life span it has had millions of customers.....well,where are they now? if less then 200k is left? i read soome info ,which was just a taste of the new expansion and i honestly dont see how you people put up with the catering of ubers in eq. that stupid spell tier is a load of horse s*hit. the first level is the weakest and the fourth level is the most powerful but is only obtainable by uber raiders? yeah right. sounds like more of the same. cater to uber players. elitism. after that expansion bombs prepare for the mass exodus of eq again: the new wow expansion (which will have even more catering to the casuals baby) and then vanguard will come along and take a few more. battlehammer. age of conan.....etc....
Comment Posted by: Nolrog on September 16, 2006 10:08 AM
>>the first level is the weakest and the fourth level is the most powerful but is only obtainable by uber raiders? yeah right. sounds like more of the same. cater to uber players. elitism.
It's excatly the complete opposite of that. It gives EVERYONE a way to get the spells, so they aren't running round 3 expansions later with 1 levle 70 omens spell. Now, everyone can get the spells.
>>after that expansion bombs prepare for the mass exodus of eq again: the new wow expansion (which will have even more catering to the casuals baby)
Didn't you say that last expansion? And the one before that? And the one before that? And the one before that? And the one before that? . . . . Enjoy your 2 extra days of XPing that WoW's new levels will bring you. Then you'll be stuck max level with nothing to do but raid for gear yet again. Oh wait, wouldn't that make you uber? /gosh.
>>and then vanguard will come along and take a few more. battlehammer. age of conan.....etc....
Ah yes. The next EQ killers. Along with all the rest. They all came, they saw, but EQ is still here, 12 expansions strong and still going. How are those killers doing now? Half of them dead themselves, eh?
Comment Posted by: Ogulbuk on September 16, 2006 11:56 AM
>yeah. and that smedley guy clearly knows what he
>is talking about. just look at the success of
>eq,eq2,and swg. together they have lost what?
>200k-500k subscribers? maybe more.
If you mean lost by bad choices in part of SOE, perhaps about that, but most of them (almost 95% of them) left from Starwars Galaxies.
>you know i remember seeing a post were travis
>mcgeathy(spelling?) rashere(spelling again?)
>claimed that over eq's life span it has had
>millions of customers.....well,where are they now?
Same place where the other 5 million WoW buyers that no longer play are now: trying other stuff out.
The market works in a way where you try to keep a steady number of players, but you cant change the fact that every day some one gets tired of a game, not even offering them a new lamborgini may change that... ok I may keep my account active yet not play if i was offered a lamborginini... Point is, no matter how much you do good for the game players will leave, you just have to get new players in to compensate for the ones that leave, and thats the issue with the online only download thning, it wont give SoE any burst of new customers.
>if less then 200k is left?
As far as i know the number is more arround 400 to 450k for EQ1
>I read soome info ,which was just a taste of the
>new expansion and i honestly dont see how you
>people put up with the catering of ubers in eq.
Everyone needs love in the expancion, not just he casuals. Sure every expancion has uber content yet not all have significant casual content but you do have to keep in mind, the casuals may also become ubers eventualy and they may not feel happy about being pushed to do content from older expancions that simply does not look as hawt and c00l as the latest expancion's art.
>that stupid spell tier is a load of horse s*hit.
>the first level is the weakest and the fourth
>level is the most powerful but is only obtainable
>by uber raiders? yeah right.
And this is why NDAs exists, that was not final info, and was already pointed its no longer valid and has changed, but now you just biased yourself (altough heck, you been biased allways, if they gave ubers a horse that gave .0001% better run speed you may also complain, taking your previous complaint history in mind)
Curious, if you dislike the direction of the game so much, why are you not between the group of players that have left the game and no longer give a damn about it?
Comment Posted by: concerned1 on September 16, 2006 06:02 PM
i did quit eq a while back but when i see uber bs jumping down casuals it provoked me to start posting here and on other boards. you cant honestly sit there and say with a straight face that you think eq has 400-500k subscribers.its total non-sense. as for the person before you, are you blind? just look at the people who have quit eq....if that isnt dieing what is? it may not be completely dead but its working on it.its just a bunch of crap. that game is catered to uber players and flopping commercially and you cant stand it.
Comment Posted by: Aarkan on September 16, 2006 06:06 PM
Concerned, please use your free time from not playing EQ anymore and learn spelling and grammar. Thank you.
Comment Posted by: Utziel on September 16, 2006 07:25 PM
So now we not only get lower lvl gear than raiders, we now get lower lvl spells LOL. And the GAP KEEPS GETTING BIGGER.
Comment Posted by: Skuz Bukit on September 17, 2006 04:41 AM
[Quote]Comment Posted by: Utziel on September 16, 2006 07:25 PM
So now we not only get lower lvl gear than raiders, we now get lower lvl spells LOL. And the GAP KEEPS GETTING BIGGER.[/quote]
You are looking at it with a severe case of Myopia.
The fact is that ALL casters will be able to get Tier 1 spells from spell vendors, so immediately for a few platinum ALL casters can have access to the functionality of ALL the spells for their class. the tier 1 spells will be significant upgrades to current spells.
Tier 2 spells will be tradeable & will be drops/rewards from missions & quests for GROUPS.
Tier 3 spells will drop from RAID mobs, if you need a Tier 3 spell it will be because you are a raider, all group content will be beatable with tier 2 spells, raids only will need tier 3.
This is a system that lets non raiders get MORE spells FASTER.
The tier 3 spells are pretty much like the old "Ancients" system which were only ever found on high level raid mobs anyway.
So, you are unhappy about group players getting group content relevant spells faster & easier?
Comment Posted by: Utziel on September 17, 2006 10:52 AM
" So, you are unhappy about group players getting group content relevant spells faster & easier? "
Nope, it should be 1 tier and vender bought or one groupable. Now we will see a HUGE difference in power not just a big one. Of course the raiders love it. Just another gap builder is all this is. BTW I believe there were not Ancient versions of every spell in every level though I could be wrong......
Why dont the Devs come out and say "we are turning EQ into a Raid or dont play" type of game?
Comment Posted by: Skuz Bukit on September 17, 2006 03:23 PM
So you are saying raiders should be on exact same terms as groupers spellwise when they aren't gear wise, next you will say that gear should follow suit.
What then, would be the point of raid content in the first place?
No ancients were not upgrades of every spell in the past, yes the new system probably does, but the gap in spells is not that huge.
The day that gear & spells are equal for all is the day that progressing through raid content is rendered utterly pointless. A gap should exist, but thats a whole conceptual argument right there that non raiders probably cannot envisage.
Comment Posted by: Armarant on September 17, 2006 03:46 PM
skuz wrote: The day that gear & spells are equal for all is the day that progressing through raid content is rendered utterly pointless. A gap should exist, but thats a whole conceptual argument right there that non raiders probably cannot envisage.
---
a gap should exist as long as the gap isnt so big that the developers feel the need to create single group content aimed at raiders because they dont feel challenged enough.
Comment Posted by: Ogulbuk on September 18, 2006 09:35 AM
>a gap should exist as long as the gap isnt so big
>that the developers feel the need to create single
>group content aimed at raiders because they dont
>feel challenged enough.
THAT is a very valid point.
I like the approach WoW has announced for their expansion, every single instanced dungeon in the expansion (not old world ones) will have a difficulty setting. Setting it to High will mean 10 level higher enemies than normal, so a big time raider will have a heck of a ride, and the drops will be also boosted in effectiveness to reflect this difficulty.
Same exact content will be enjoyable by non-raiders, and even the extreme casual player may be able to set it to easy mode and just go trough it having fun albeit not expecting any amazing rewards or significant upgrades other than quest rewards.
Comment Posted by: Teremar on September 18, 2006 05:47 PM
I'm not sure where you're getting your information Ogulbuk, but that's not my understand of how difficulty levels will work in the WoW expansion. "Hard" simply means "Level 70" (the new cap). It does not mean "raid gear required." Basically it's a way to ensure that the new content they put in for low 60's isn't a complete waste once people hit 70.
I know this is recapping something I said before, but if there's any gap at all between raider and non-raider gear, then raiders will always find any given content less challenging than non-raiders. So if you want them both to face the same level of challenge, you have to have harder content for the raiders. There's no way around it.
On spell tiers, spells are the casters' weapons, so it makes sense for them to get upgrades. Otherwise you struggle to give casters a really meaningful way to improve. I certainly think it's better to restrict access to a slightly improved version of a spell than to restrict access to any version of key spells. I remember how not being able to get the mez I needed for the higher-end OoW content really killed my incentive to level to 70.
Will spell tiers increase the raider/non-raider gap? All other things being equal, yes. But all other things aren't equal. In theory, there could be all sorts of things in TSS to reduce that gap. There's been too much (negative) discussion of what will be available to raiders in TSS, and not enough about what will be available to non-raiders (especially for a site which has been an advocate for non-raiders).
Given SOE's track record I can understand why people assume the worst, but it is just an assumption at this point.
Comment Posted by: Ogulbuk on September 18, 2006 06:15 PM
Last i read on it told that it will boost the dungeon by 10 levels, in this way a lvl 70 dungeon will turn into a lvl 80 one, while a lvl 60 will turn 70. This means a lvl 60 player that wants to attempt a lvl 60 dungeon in hard mode will require raiding equipment to hope winning.
>So if you want them both to face the same level of
>challenge, you have to have harder content for the
>raiders. There's no way around it.
There are many ways around it, from the artificial ways of dificulty settings, to the most sherished holly grail of dynamic content (and its not that hard to make dynamic content that adjusts to the player, its just not used due to whoever knows why)
Comment Posted by: Teremar on September 19, 2006 01:16 AM
The clearest explanation I found of WoW difficulty levels:
"All the five-player instances that can be found on Outland are equipped with a Dungeon Difficulty option. The group leader of a guild can set in advance the difficulty to "normal" or "hard." When the dungeon is set to the "normal" mode, the monsters will be level 60-65; and when set on "hard," the monsters will be level 70."
No jumping from 70 to 80.
On content for raiders and non-raiders: if raiders are choosing a higher difficulty level than non-raiders, or if the difficulty scales automatically to their gear somehow, then that constitutes giving them harder content just like I said.
Comment Posted by: Buddy on September 19, 2006 10:08 AM
Score one for the EQ luddites. 59 warrior on the sleeper... cancelling as soon as Luclin is unlocked. Progression PvP anyone?
Comment Posted by: Ogulbuk on September 19, 2006 10:36 AM
Also from Joystick and stright from a Dev interview:
http://www.joystiq.com/2006/08/11/exclusive-joystiq-interviews-wows-jeff-kaplan/
*******************************************
So, what other new ideas are coming down the line?
*******************************************
We will have a dungeon difficulty level setting. Party leaders for groups will have the ability to set the level with two different settings -- normal and hard. For example, a 60 to 62 dungeon on hard will turn into a level 70 dungeon with level 70 rewards in it. In a level 70 dungeon on hard, the enemies will be extremely dangerous but you will definitely be rewarded better for doing the harder difficulty mode.
*******************************************
Notice he is not saying 60-65, he is saying that a 60 to 62 (big difference) dungeon will turn to 70, and a level 70 will be extremely dangerous. Yes I am assuming a level 70 dungeon will become raid content hard and applying a similar increase in difficulty by boosting enemy levels, but it is indeed going to turn a level 70 dungeon in something impossible for a casual player.
Taken how Tier 3 equipment is almost 10 levels higher in power I find this to be a good educated guess. They also mentioned (not sure if on that interview) how a Tier 3 player wont see any real upgrades until he reaches 70 and do the big raids of the expansion.
Comment Posted by: Teremar on September 19, 2006 11:12 AM
Looks like we're both half right and half wrong. Here's an official interview quote on difficulty levels:
"Q: Dungeon difficulty setting?
A: The dungeon difficulty settings will allow you to replay dungeons at an increased level of challenge, meaning you'll also gain access to greater rewards. For example, you'll be able to replay that same level-63 wing you just mastered later on at level 70, with level-70 monsters and level-70 drops. If it's a level-70 wing and you play it at the harder difficulty level, the content will still be level 70, but the loot tables will reflect the higher challenge that comes as a result of the monsters having more hit points and dealing more damage. Or you might get more monsters per pull...that sort of thing. We are definitely trying to provide a great deal of content for players, regardless of the amount of time they have to devote to it or how many other people they like to play with."
(Note that with WoW's system, level 80 mobs would be almost impossible for level 70 characters to hit.)
The previous answer that led to this question was about solutions to raider vs. non-raider, so I take this to mean that going from 60's dungeons to 70 dungeons to 70 dungeons on hard is the non-raid progression path. I could be wrong about that. But it sounds a lot like LDoN to me.
(see http://www.worldofwarcraft.com/misc/fpearceinterview.html)
If I am wrong and level 70 hards are single group content for raiders, I still say that just demonstrates my point that once you have a gear gap at all, you can't challenge both raiders and non-raiders with the same content. Thus the devs have to either decree that once you raid there will never be anything meaninful for you to do in a single group again, or provide single group content specifically designed for raiders.
Comment Posted by: Ogulbuk on September 19, 2006 11:43 AM
>If I am wrong and level 70 hards are single group
>content for raiders, I still say that just
>demonstrates my point that once you have a gear gap
>at all, you can't challenge both raiders and
>non-raiders with the same content.
Depends what you call content.
If its the exact same dungeon, with the exact same enemies and layout, and the diference is that everything is stronger and deadlier for the raiders, then I call that the exact same content.
In my eyes saying you cant give the same content would mean saying that the raider needs entirely custom made dungeons and that is not true, the addition of a dificulty setting (be it automatic or manual) alone allows both crouds to enjoy the exact same content AND have a challenge, without hindering each other's access to any of the new content.
Additionaly, if memory serves me right, the hard setting in LDON was precisely for the uber and raiders to find challenge.
Comment Posted by: Teremar on September 19, 2006 12:57 PM
I did LDoN hards without raiding, though I agree it was mostly intended for raiders.
We started with the idea that the gear gap is too big if the raiders need different content. But if you're going to call reusing the zone geometry and mob models but changing the mob stats to make them harder "the exact same content" then size of the gap no longer matters. After all, in LDoN the level 65 hard dungeons were the same zones as the level 20 dungeons.
Personally, I don't care how big the gap is as long as there's plenty of interesting content for me. I understand the zero-sum thinking that the more content the raiders get the less non-raiders must get, just because SOE has finite resources for developing content. But I haven't yet heard a case that there's not enough for non-raiders in TSS, just an assumption that there must not be since raiders are getting a lot. In particular, I think the criticism of SOE including two single-group zones for raiders is premature until we know whether or not the zones for non-raiders are adequate (both in quantity and quality).
Comment Posted by: Skuz Bukit on September 19, 2006 03:45 PM
It's human nature i guess, if some guy gets a cookie & even if he can see that the cookie jar is full & will take him a week to finish...if he sees a guy eating a bigger cookie then regardless of how many cookies he can see in the big-cookie jar, if any, then he will be envious & want a bigger cookie.
Moral, be happy with your cookies as long as you get enough cookies to keep you busy.
Comment Posted by: Teremar on September 19, 2006 05:32 PM
In fairness, SOE's track record is pretty poor when it comes to providing interesting non-raider content. I can't blame people for assuming the worst--I just want to point out that it's still an assumption at this point.
Comment Posted by: RosesAreRed on September 19, 2006 10:27 PM
Difficult to play and evaluate if you can't get past the log in server ....
Comment Posted by: RosesAreRed on September 20, 2006 01:42 AM
Oh goodie .. now in addition to the LAME EQ2 spell gems ... we have the horrible EQ2 log in screen. What's up with that?
Comment Posted by: Dendory on September 20, 2006 11:23 AM
I'm not trying to troll or state the obvious, but really, Loral, with the type of game you describe in your past articles, why not go to WoW. EQ has been a raider's game forever. We both know that. Since PoP, it's always been like that, and with the latest expansions, has it changed any in all of those years? People have 2 choices. Leave, regardless of the spent time and friends staying behind, and go do something they enjoy, or stay and bitch every day, which really is the meat of most of your recent articles. It seems the 'review' part of your articles is really the coating for a rant about how EQ continues to not be the game you want it to be.
Comment Posted by: Ogulbuk on September 20, 2006 02:50 PM
Loral loves EQ as any good fan but is critical yet objective.
I dont doubt that should WoW have stronger group content and incentive he would be gone to WoW for good, but so far WoW is either a Raider's game or a Soloist's game. Group content there is almost an aftertought that most characters never get to experience.
Comment Posted by: Teremar on September 20, 2006 04:01 PM
So Ogulbuk, did you never play WoW, or just never level past the mid-teens? You see, in WoW there are these little things called single-group instanced dungeons. Yes, you can avoid them if you really want to, but pretty much anyone who's not completely anti-social runs them at least occasionally. I spend almost all my time in them. They're good xp and give the best available loot as you're leveling up. Now, at level 60 there are issues: Blizzard stopped making new single-group instances shortly after release, and the level 60 single-group instances are all pretty much the same difficulty so there's no progression. Hopefully the expansion will fix that. Hopefully.
But to call them an "afterthought" or to claim that most characters never get to experience them is completely off-base. EQ should have such afterthoughts.
Comment Posted by: Ogulbuk on September 20, 2006 04:22 PM
Yes, as a matter of fact I play wow right now!
And yes I know of those instanced dungeons that i end up out leveling soloing while all week asking in the LFG global channel for group to join in.
Yes, occasionally I manage to get me a run, but the current system in that game makes it a huge headache to form a dungeon group and therefore players end up either soloing their way to 60 without seeing the things or simply get high level friends to escort them trough the things.
I admit they are amazingly well designed, but single group content itself is the afterthought, not the (few) dungeons. Also my point was mainly on how grouping is an afterthought in the mind of players, they most don’t even care about grouping, some only end up doing a duo or something if they find an elite they must dispatch just to as quickly disband and keep soloing their way outdoors.
If they did as Loral suggests and implemented all the features they have implemented for Battlegrounds but for dungeons (cross server grouping, teleporting from cities, incentive repeatable quests,) then things would be different.
Comment Posted by: Loral on September 20, 2006 06:35 PM
Soloing in Warcraft is far more efficient than grouping. I hardly grouped from level 1 to 60 with my hunter. At that point it turned into either a raid game or a battlegrounds game.
Comment Posted by: Teremar on September 20, 2006 09:59 PM
I guess my server (an RP server for what it's worth) is very different from yours. Grouping is alive and well, not even close to an afterthought in the minds of anyone I play with.
I'll grant soloing is the path of least resistance. Blizzard could definitely do more to change that, such as finally caving in and copying EQ's LFG system. But anyone who solos to 60 chooses to do so.
Comment Posted by: Ogulbuk on September 20, 2006 11:41 PM
As Loral stated, truth is soloing is more effective than grouping.
If you have a solid group of friend that is constantly on at the time that you are, well, off course you will think grouping is alive and kicking.
However I play in an RP server too, Earthen Ring, and the only reason I am in a guild is because a RL friend invited me, but everyone is higher level than me so its mainly chatting that goes on there, not grouping.
I think it’s perfectly fine to have soloing being a viable path, but soloing should never be as fast as grouping. I think if one game out there has the closest to perfect balance of xp gain ration between soloing and grouping its City of Heroes. Soloing is perfectly viable, and many, even the worst solo builds, can solo to 50, yet grouping is definitively not only better experience, but also a way thrilling play time plus extremely accessible.
Comment Posted by: Teremar on September 21, 2006 12:53 AM
I was more or less out of the game for four months when our baby was born. My guild is all but dead. My schedule is still erratic so I don't have anyone I play with on a regular basis. I still find pickup groups on a regular basis--and at all levels with various alts. You're much more likely to succeed if you take the initiative rather than just spamming LFG, but that's true in EQ as well. If you really think grouping is dead on Earthen Ring come on over to Silver Hand, but I have a hard time believing the servers are really that different.
As for effectiveness, it depends on what you mean by effective. You definitely get better gear by grouping. XP goes faster solo, true, but given how fast XP goes in WoW anyway does that really matter? Also, if the XP for a dungeon run isn't pretty close to what you'd have gotten solo, you probably should have run a higher level dungeon.
Personally, what matters to me is that I find soloing boring and grouping fun. The XP I get is good enough that I feel no need to do anything but what I want, and that's great. What I don't get is people who criticize WoW for not forcing people to group, but apparently choose to solo when they play the game themselves. "You were supposed to make me have fun!"?
Comment Posted by: Mike on September 21, 2006 07:23 PM
I've never understood the whining about the so-called ubers get the best gear and we get the shaft, etc. The game scales according to the time you have to invest/enjoy playing it. If you aren't in a raiding guild, you do not need demiplane gear that would overpower you for the group content and trivialize a lot of the game for you and therefore remove the challenge and fun of playing many places. Conversely, this isn't much of a loss to people who raid because they are already preoccupied at least 20 to 30 or more hours a week raiding. They are most likely to do the hardest group content and xp wherever they yields per kill are greatest in a never ending AA and temporarily now, reg. xp grind to make thier characters more viable for the continually harder raid encounters in every expansion.
In short, unless you are raiding 3 to 6 nights a week in challenging encounters for 50+ players, you don't need that gear. Get over it and go have some fun playing and upgrading to gear that is attainable for you and in the same way, improves your character to play more challenging group content as well as perhaps casual raiding of older raid content such as PoP flagging, Gates, etc.
Everyone wants 400 hp gear they don't need just to have what they perceive as the best and feel deprived if they cannot have it all. But they don't need it and that's why they don't get it. The raiders simply need it to play where they do.
If people put aside the green monster of greed and obsession with getting stuff that is only pixels and remembered this is a game you ought to be playing to have fun with other people, there wouldn't be the never ending whining about the raiders get the best gear and we get screwed.
I raid now but I sometimes wonder why I am wasting this much time when I could play the group and casual game and have just as much fun almost. I only like to raid for the encounters, to see them and beat content that requires strategy and cooperation by a large team of players. I don't raid so I can have the best BP in the game. I could care less. I only need gear so I can live long enough to see the end of the encounter once in a while.. lol.
My advice to those who have the I have less than issue troubling them I would recommend, just go play and try to enjoy the adventure instead of worry about who has the best gear. When the game dies and it certainly will, you won't be taking your prized gear with you and nobody is going to care if you were the top xxxx class on your server, except maybe your therapist while they help you to reconstruct a life since accomplishing that cost you most of your RL relationships.
Sorry if that sounds harsh but you can't tell me there isn't more than a little truth to it.
Look at the prevalence of boxing in EverQuest? Why? Because if I bot I can have all the gear and I can not only do that, but my barbie dolls all get cool stuff too. That is sad and so prevalent its made me want to leave the game when I find myself as a main rolling against greedy people's bots. Bots are evil in my opinion.
As for subcriptions numbers, yes EQ is probably around 200k or so subs now, but the scary thing is when you count all the bot accounts, you are probably really looking at a customer base that has dropped below 100k. Seriously, there is no denying that either. I hate to break this to you guys but you had better hurry up and get that uber gear on as many of your bots as you can as fast as you can. You'd better step the anguish aug runs for your bots now while you still can. Because pretty soon it is all going away.
No, EQ isn't shutting down this year and probably not next year either. After all, SOE still supports abysmal failures like Planetside and SWG and then goes and purchases failed products like The Matrix Online. So, like Ultima Online, this dying game will die slowly but if you can't see it is terminal already, you must be blind.
Comment Posted by: Mike on September 21, 2006 07:34 PM
By the way, the serpent's spine is too late to save EQ. Despite the talk to the contrary, I do not believe for a moment the real plan was ever to resurrect EverQuest and bring in new players. No wonder they are in no rush to ship a retail box. If they wanted to do that, they could very easily and it do it right now. You guys don't seem to realize that once's it's gold, duplicating discs and shipping them is not very hard or expensive. In the case of EQ however, it sadly is probably not worth doing and that my friends is the real reason they don't. At best, this is an attempt the keep the revenue flowing and hopefully get some former players to come back for more of what is essentially the same thing is has been for a very long time now. They are basically milking this dying game for all its worth and nothing more. Vanguard is the focus now, not EQ. You may as well accept that right now, along with the EQ2 community. It's as good as over, even if the winding down will take a long time.
Case in point, if you are in a raiding guild have you noticed that we now NEED bots to do the content because there are no longer enough real players to do it? I rest my case. It's already over and for some reason, I guess its the denial commonly associated with addiction, the players of EverQuest do not seem capable of seeing this and become highly defensive, angry and flame anyone who suggests the reality of the situation.
I know this game has been some people's life for years but guys, you are going to need to find a new somebody to be, because your uber toon's been handed a death sentence and there is no escaping that. I'm sorry.
Comment Posted by: Skuz on September 22, 2006 03:28 PM
Congratulations!
You are the Millionth person to say "EQ is dead!".
I know its subs are low, but so what?
As long as there is a big enough playerbase for it to earn SoE money it will continue to be around.
& I still think EQ can draw people to itself, is TSS the answer? Maybe not, but I don't see SoE quitting on EQ.
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons License. Email Mike at mike@mikeshea.net for more questions or comments.