On Feb 19, 11:06=A0pm, "Lunaren" <Luna...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
>
> I don't like the damned card game being foisted on players ingame. I
don't=
> like the damned cards dropping off mobs and the fact that it is little
mor=
e
> than a way to extract more revenue from players wanting the ingame toys.
> Most who buy cards don't even play the game. They want the mounts and
> familiars and potions, etc. I truly hate all that.
I really don't see any impact from LoN. As a matter of fact, with the
cards dropping in the game, I've considered checking it out. I kind of
liked Magic the Gathering, though I never really played it much. I
could see where an EQ-themed game of that type would appeal to me. I
don't think it affects my experience in EQ, though. /shrug
> Once upon a time
> EverQuest was a entirely an online ROLE PLAYING GAME. Gems was one
thing.
> LoN is just a bit much, a lot much. That's how I feel anyway and I know
fr=
om
> friends I am not alone in my disdain over that move. Smed talks business
s=
o
> constantly he forgets about the fact that the entertainment needs to be
of=
> the very highest possible quality first and the money will flow from
that
> accordingly. Say what you will about WoW but that sort of thing is
somethi=
ng
> Blizzard would not even consider, just as they reject RMT, etc. By the
> numbers it appears Blizzard must be doing something right whether its
one'=
s
> cup of tea or not.
They're doing something right, alright. It's called appealing to the
drooling m***** (no offense to those upstanding, well-educated folk
who also enjoy WoW). I've often referred to WoW as the "cotton candy"
of MMORPG's. Some people really love the taste and just eat it all the
time. Others really like it at first but can only stomach so much.
Others just don't care for cotton candy. In any case, substantive is
most definitely not a term that should be used to describe it. It is
what it is, something simple and fun that appeals to a lot of people.
Chess and Monopoly appeal to a lot of people as well, but I wouldn't
pay a monthly fee to play them. ;)
> I don't like the ridiculously complex armor that is now battery powered
an=
d
> for which you need a calculator to consider the power factor across gear
a=
nd
> weapons and remove and replace a damned battery all the time which one
has=
> to run missions to have currency for, else buy it. Battery powered epic
> stats armor. Oh my God...
Yeah, I thought the energetic stuff was kind of lame.
> The game needed more to refine and improve what was always great about
it
> from the start and not constantly invent new and needless complexity
with
> each new expansion which seems to be the new norm of late. I for one am
> sorry to see that.
Complexity I like. It can make for a more rich game world and more
involving player experience. However, complexity for the sake of
itself it just a bad idea. I agree with you in that I just don't think
they needed to go there at that point. Deteriorating items have never
been a part of EQ. I don't understand why they feel that's a viable
game element.
> I have never wanted to say this but I now see EverQuest as I once loved
it=
> is gone and the game as a whole is well on the way to fading into a
UO-lik=
e
> obscurity.
>
> I let my "investment" in my main and my nostalgia for fun, friends and
tim=
es
> gone by hold me for years but its just not enough while I watch the game
g=
o
> to hell in a handbasket.
>
> Such is the end of the road for MMOs I guess, not just EQ but any of
them =
as
> they age, populations dwindle, new ones come along, etc. The world we
hope=
d
> might never go away in mind largely already has. It pains me to say all
> that. I loved EverQuest and I spent more time than I would want to admit
t=
o
> in Norrath over some six years. Like someone else said my choices now
are
> play alone or grind till I can play with others. Neither is what the
game
> was ever meant to be and I guess I am simply not willing to pay those
kind=
> of dues in terms of time to get to where the fun is.
>
> They'd need to give away copious amounts of XP to fix that and in doing
so=
> would of course be breaking a lot else. It's too late. It's terminal.
:-(
Well, I don't find it to be all *that* bleak. Sure, the population is
dwindling, but there is a difference between that trend in EQ vs. the
same in UO. I knew people who continued to play UO for years after it
was already considered washed up. They each only continued to play it
because it was free to play (on the shards they played on, anyway).
They didn't see any other MMORPG's worthy of a monthly fee. My brother
was one of those people. However, when I bought him the SoF box, he
gave it a try and was immediately hooked.
My point is, while the EQ population is a fraction of what it once
was, the people who still play are generally very enthusiastic about
the game - enough so to continue to pay a monthly fee, even though it
is largely considered well past its prime. Most of us have tried most
of the other MMORPG's that have come along over the past several
years, each time eventually returning to EQ.
WoW is doing something right, but it's not doing EQ, and that's what
keeps this group of players coming back. SoE needs to recognize that.
--
Richard Carpenter
|
