Variants in EQ2?

[Thecla]

Here's an debatable quote from Moorgard, the EQ2 community manager (whatever that means).

http://eqiiforums.station.sony.com/eq2/boa...scending&page=3

Because at the end of the day, nobody wants to be the worst and weakest example of their profession; they want to be the best and strongest. But there can't be one without the other, and we're not particularly keen on creating such a situation in the early life of a brand new game.

Nevertheless, I have to say there's a much higher level of discussion on the official EQ2 forum than the WoW forum.

[FoxBat]

Originally posted by Thecla@Jun 4 2004, 08:29 AM
Nevertheless, I have to say there's a much higher level of discussion on the official EQ2 forum than the WoW forum.

Might have something to do with not needing a beta account to post. :P

P.S. You know Sony is going to directly sell in-game items for real $$$ to customers, yes?

[Thecla]

Might have something to do with not needing a beta account to post. 

I'd expect a forum that selects posters by requiring a beta account to have a higher level of discussion, with less mindless drivel, than one that doesn't. But the reverse seems to be true for WoW and EQ2 -- not a good sign for the translocation of the general battle.net population into a massively multiplayer world.

P.S. You know Sony is going to directly sell in-game items for real $$$ to customers, yes?

Yup, SOE seems to be completely despicable when it comes to making a quick buck. They've already pretty much sold EQ2 beta-spots to legend subscribers, and who knows what the financial quid-pro-quos were on the recent July PC Gamer EQ2 beta slots. AFAIK, even SOE hasn't quite got to selling items yet, though they did conduct a poll asking EQ players how they felt about the provision of a secure means to transfer items for real $$ (absolutely mind-boggling they would even ask that). Still, in practical terms -- having played Diablo for 7 years -- I'm not sure it matters too much to me personally if 99% of the rest of population uses dupes, stuff they bought off ebay, or stuff they bought from the company.

I do think SOE is experiencing quite a backlash to their greed, and it remains to be seen how EQ2 will work out. I had no interest in the original EverQuest, but after reading around a bit, it seems to me that EQ2 is aiming at pretty much the same audience as WoW (possible to play with less time investment, more possibilities for soloists or small groups etc. etc.), so you might as well look at both games or neither (though I was struck by the anti-variant character of the original quote -- I guess the devs figure that EQ2 will be tough enough with the `best' characters).

Guild Wars looks like the most Diabloesque of the upcoming games, but I agree with you that its PvP component may be the only thing to have any possible long term interest.

[FoxBat]

Originally posted by Thecla@Jun 6 2004, 02:27 AM
Still, in practical terms -- having played Diablo for 7 years -- I'm not sure it matters too much to me personally if 99% of the rest of population uses dupes, stuff they bought off ebay, or stuff they bought from the company.

Have you played a MMOG? What 99% of the players do is a problem, because in most cases you don't have something called a "private game". They'll be the ones Kill-Stealing, Camping, and half the time, you will have to party with them just to survive. Many MMOGs make soloing unrewarding to impossible, and level/geographical/factional/shard distances often split you apart from your old friends. From what I've seen in WoWas a so-called "solo-friendly' game, it's not.

This is a reason variants often suffer in MMOGs too; unlike Diablo, they actually can keep the promise of monsters so tough that you can't solo them. When that happens, some will start griping when their team members can't keep up due to their mages going into melee or whatever, and that's especially a problem with pubby strangers. You might find yourself alone very soon once they figure that out.

On the other hand for sony's specific quote, I don't think it means that much for variants actually. The vast majority of variant restrictions in D1 were item and playstyle; many variants don't even mention anything about stat distribution restrictions. If you could somehow avoid partying with strangers and somehow survive the tough mobs, it would be just fine for variants.

[Thecla]

Have you played a MMOG?  What 99% of the players do is a problem, because in most cases you don't have something called a "private game".

Of course MMORPGs are very different from games like Diablo (one reason I'm not so optimistic about a MMORPG populated with the typical content of a battle.net chat room). But the point of my Diablo comparison was that the (lack of) morality of a company that made the game selling items (or character levels or whatever) is a separate question from its impact on the game, or on players who don't participate in such schemes and play their own way. (Not that I'm defending the practice -- I seriously doubt that I would play a game that stooped so low.)

From what I've seen in WoW as a so-called "solo-friendly' game, it's not.

If it's not possible to play WoW solo as well as in groups I for one will not be playing it.

This is a reason variants often suffer in MMOGs too; unlike Diablo, they actually can keep the promise of monsters so tough that you can't solo them.

Yup, well maybe variants will suffer if the game is really hard for optimized characters (I suspect WoW will be easier than EQ2 in that respect), but who knows...

When that happens, some will start griping when their team members can't keep up due to their mages going into melee or whatever, and that's especially a problem with pubby strangers. You might find yourself alone very soon once they figure that out.

About this I care not one tiny little bit.

On the other hand for sony's specific quote, I don't think it means that much for variants actually. The vast majority of variant restrictions in D1 were item and playstyle; many variants don't even mention anything about stat distribution restrictions. If you could somehow avoid partying with strangers and somehow survive the tough mobs, it would be just fine for variants.

Well, although I think you're basically right I can't resist this link

http://www.lurkerlounge.com/realmsbeyond/f...act=ST&f=3&t=89

And probably there will be lots of playstyle/variant opportunities in the system. What struck me about the original quote -- and why I posted it here -- was the apparent completly unreflective assumption that everyone did want to be "the bestest", which seems to me very stange in such a game, whether for variants or roleplayers, or just people that like to try out off-beat builds.

[Nystul]

And probably there will be lots of playstyle/variant opportunities in the system. What struck me about the original quote -- and why I posted it here -- was the apparent completly unreflective assumption that everyone did want to be "the bestest", which seems to me very stange in such a game, whether for variants or roleplayers, or just people that like to try out off-beat builds.

Just based on the WoW beta and secondhand accounts of other MMORPGs, if you combine the people who play intentionally weakened characters in these games with the people who roleplay in these games, you might be able to scrape together enough for a small guild....

Perhaps the MMOG designation is dead on, because the RP does seem to be missing.

[FoxBat]

There was a time when Ultima Online started this whole Graphical MMOG thing, and they tried to build an alternative world. Sony's brilliance was to throw those initial attempts out and instead focus on monster thwacking, and the reaped in the profits because of it. EQ2 is naturally headed in the same direction, and WoW copies EQ more than any other MMOG.

Free worlds created by amateurs (MUSHes, IRC, OpenRPG, IC Forums, NWN) continue to be the best place for roleplaying. I would never pay a monthly fee for that when I can get something of far higher quality for nothing.

[Lissa]

Of course MMORPGs are very different from games like Diablo (one reason I'm not so optimistic about a MMORPG populated with the typical content of a battle.net chat room). But the point of my Diablo comparison was that the (lack of) morality of a company that made the game selling items (or character levels or whatever) is a separate question from its impact on the game, or on players who don't participate in such schemes and play their own way. (Not that I'm defending the practice -- I seriously doubt that I would play a game that stooped so low.)

If you are at all bothered by SOE, realize they are not the first to do this. Origin/EA was the first to do this with UO where you can pay them $X for a certain power level character and skip the early leveling. I figure it will only be a matter of time before more companies head down this road as they want to tap into the insanity of people buying and selling virtual goods for RL $ on places like Ebay and others.

[Thecla]

Originally posted by Lissa@Jun 6 2004, 05:26 PM
Origin/EA was the first to do this with UO where you can pay them $X for a certain power level character and skip the early leveling.  I figure it will only be a matter of time before more companies head down this road as they want to tap into the insanity of people buying and selling virtual goods for RL $ on places like Ebay and others.

Hmm...I never knew that, but looking at the uo website I see that they do indeed offer an "advanced character service" for the very reasonable one-time fee of $29.99 per character. As they point out

Purchasing an Advanced Character is a great way to move quickly ahead in specific areas of the game without taking a character through every step of the building-up process...This service really helps to move you into the fast lane!

I have to say I find this pretty depressing for the future (or present) of any of these games.

(Actually, I played uo briefly when it first came out, though I never went back or kept track of it. I think the original version was a pretty idealistic attempt to implement a virtual world in which players were free to do what they wanted within the imposed virtual constraints, but it's true that it didn't work well as a game. I mostly recall sitting in caves with other miners for hours while waiting for the ore to 'pop', beating on training dummies for ever (took me a long time to figure out that I couldn't use the swinging ones because they were being used by other people who were invisible because they were also practising hiding) , then taking my proudly but amateurly equipped character on a tour of the wilderness so that I could be pk'd by the first guy with a bone mask that I ran into. I'm sure he got a lot of use from my wooden shield, rusted sword, and below-average breast plate, or whatever it was that I had.)