[Megathread] Everquest Next

[Rumblecrush]

I have to disagree with Smedley that content-driven model cannot keep up. He uses the most extreme example: SWTOR, where the production values for the class stories were high, almost too high, to the detriment of endgame content. As WoW demonstrates, a themepark MMO CAN keep up with the consumer, but it requires a delicate balancing of a bit of grinding here, a bit of content there, and spacing it enough to always keep that carrot (or at least parts of it) on the stick.

However in the other extreme, Smedley would be incorrect if he simply expects to just give a box of crayons to the players, and think that alone would sustain the game. There a reason pure sandbox games are very niche and don't attract as much of an audience as themepark ones.

I do agree with him on the point more player-driven content is healthy for an MMO, and most themepark MMOs are already doing that. WoW is coming with Garrisons, Wildstar with Housing, etc.

This isn't being mocked enough. WHAT?

[Fencers]

I don't think anyone realistically expected the class story stuff to last.

Expectation really had nothing to do with the situation. It was about design.

The only aspects of SWTOR that are/were unique in it's design (and well executed) was the narrative. When that content ran out, players were left with what was the most generic parts of a 2nd era MMO- which SWTOR did poorly.

Specifics of so-so guild thinking KP was too easy are ignorable.

The content that compelled SWTOR forward ran out as quick as most players consumed it. What was left was threadbare or terrible. Actually it was both, threadbare and terrible.

Under no circumstances was it possible for BW/EA to continue content delivery on that scale in fashion that at the same level as the initial class/planetary narratives. That is exactly what Smed is referencing; SWTOR had a great set of content that was simply unsustainable.

It's a kind of game design arms race in the MMO space.

[Deleted]

This isn't being mocked enough. WHAT?

What's wrong with it? Have you seen the statistics for the % of people who A) entered and B) cleared completely Naxxramas in Vanilla? I know it's hard to believe in a world (of Warcraft) containing LFR, but yes, there's many many guilds and individuals who haven't cleared all the content. I distinctly remember the news item right here on MMO-Champ when there was actually a person who had completed every single achievement. Has that even been repeated?

So yes, unless you have consumed all the content, then most definitely Blizzard are ahead of its playerbase in terms of delivering it.

[Fencers]

World of Warcraft offers a lot secondary play system for players too. Most of which are excellent &/or highly involved from a design and gameplay perspective.

One does have a significant amount of content and play systems baked into World of Warcraft to last an average player literal years of playtme. I think only a few of the grand MMORPGs can claim the same (EQ2, AC, etc) or sandbox heavy designed MMOs. As Smed pointed out.

Though that is partially the rub as well. WoW or Everquest 2 have the benefit of decade plus live development at this point. In an established style and production sense. It is quite possible for these games to continue offering content to satisfy the audience for years to come still.

Though new IPs or higher productions values make it difficult to maintain that constant plateau of content your (rare) Warcraft or EQ2 offer.

[ignitar]

From smedley's new blog:

We want to innovate and let players be a part of everything we do including make the game in the first place

Too bad not all gamers are equal in their minds, I'll never be able to play a Sony game again until I change continents. In 2013 208,000,000 gamers played PC games alone inside of China. Dat revenue lost.

[Lilly32]

I have to disagree with Smedley that content-driven model cannot keep up. He uses the most extreme example: SWTOR, where the production values for the class stories were high, almost too high, to the detriment of endgame content. As WoW demonstrates, a themepark MMO CAN keep up with the consumer, but it requires a delicate balancing of a bit of grinding here, a bit of content there, and spacing it enough to always keep that carrot (or at least parts of it) on the stick.

WoW has also been losing subs ever since Wrath. I think it is largely due to the fact that people are clearing the content so fast that they become bored. ICC was gated so people couldnt just rush right through it and be done. TBC was basically gated in the form of attunements. Getting rid of both was a terrible idea. Now people just blow through the content and they are done with each major patch after the first week. SWToR was even worse. The game was epic from 1-49. But when you hit 50 end game was either PvP where pretty much every server was one sided and either one faction won 95% of the matches or you lost 95% of them. End game PvE was basically sit in Fleet and spam you were LFG all night long then rage log. Hell I was level 50 for a month before finally getting a group to do some FPs.

[Fencers]

World of Warcraft has lost subs more so due to greater market fragmentation than anything "wrong" with World of Warcraft itself or it's content. Consumers now have more choices, cheaper alternatives, more varied and higher quality choices in the MMO genre than at any point in history.

Market fragmentation is the most likely culprit due to being a consistent factor across the whole of the market. Rather than the myopic view of World of Warcraft alone.

[Ighox]

That's an incredibly simplistic way to view it and kind of dismissive of WoW fans. Implying that Blizzard can get away with Flaming Poo you say that WoW players are sheep? If Blizzard makes a crap expansion, they WILL suffer for it.

My point was just that WoW was a one hit wonder and no matter what WoW does it will not drop to the level of unsustainable. WoW can keep up with consumers, but that's not really about how much content WoW has or whatever, it's more about 9 years of history/friendships/guilds, people liking Blizzard and Blizzard is great at marketing.
Just because something "works" in WoW does not mean it will work just as good anywhere else.

However, what makes you think that player-created content would offer a solution to that? Not even player-created content would keep up with the demands of hardcore raiders for example.

Actually, other than one or two gems, player-created content quality would be mediocre at best, with little to no tuning (too hard, too easy, crap design, etc). Kind of like only a few dungeons are worth trying in Neverwinter Foundry, and even the quality ones take a long time to make.

High-end competitive raiding as most people know it from WoW just doesn't have a real place in a sandbox, so no, player created content will not keep up with them.
But player created content is far more than a dungeon creator. You have things like player city sieges, territory control, a meaningful economy/crafting system, fluff, player events and lots of small stuff that "spawns" in between the mechanics. If everything is done right the potential for content is pretty huge, and definitely way easier to maintain than being forced to add content all the time.

[Kryos]

Is there a time frame when Everquest Next (not Landmark) will be out? 2015? 2016? Later?

[Fencers]

Well, depending on the game players can "blow through all the content" of a new patch if we take it to mean they have seen all the content. A hard mode isn't necessarily additional content. That is even assuming that instanced or phased content is the extent of added content in a live development game- which often isn't the case.

Now it may be different depending on game. For example, Rift and World of Warcraft instanced/phased hard modes have had additional areas or encounters in the past. Though as mentioned, that is not the case for all games.

It is very conceivable that a good portion of players do "blow through" added content in the respect of "playing all added content" of a patch, adventure pack or expansion.

Multimode content is still singularly developed content in most cases.

High-end competitive raiding as most people know it from WoW just doesn't have a real place in a sandbox, so no, player created content will not keep up with them.

This is not necessarily true. There are no "shouldn't"s in gaming. As long as a game's rule set (gameplay) and design are not in conflict literally anything can be done in a game. And be of a cohesive design, natch.

Such limiters are mostly external; cost of development, technology, implementation, deadlines, design clarity, etc.

[Kryos]

No, they don't.

Like I said above, people blow through LFR at best and then declare the game "beaten" because the harder stuff is....well, harder. Something like 1-4% of people ACTUALLY beat all the content each patch, so really it's absurd to say that people just "blow through" it.

The majority of people does not consider (nearly) the same content just with a higher level of difficulty as "new content". Once you have seen every boss for the majority they are pretty much done. Some repeat it until they get a complete tier-set and that's it. Only few do normal and even less heroic. Hell, the majority does not even raid lfr! Only 40% of all WoW players even cleared the LFR raid content. If you look at my sign you see that I know about the whole raiding difficulty aspect. But we are a tiny tiny minority in that game.

[Kelimbror]

Content is sustainable by Blizzard due to their unique structure, decades of iteration, and top of the class talent in all fields. Pretty much no other game is going to have all of those pieces to make it sustainable. So while it is possible, it's not possible for just about anyone out there. In regards to player driven or created content, we have a myriad of examples (though not in the MMO genre) via modders and addon creators through Steam, for example.

The longevity of some single player games has exploded due to the capability of people to create content for the game. Take Skyrim and pretty much every Workshop title as living proof that user created content does keep people playing. The problem with player created content for an MMO is providing the right tools and support to the players to make it sustainable. I think that is where it fails. If you give players the same power as developers, you are going to find that the game has almost infinite potential. But if you restrict them, don't support them, and generally don't build your game from the ground up with that in mind then no, it won't be sustainable.

[Ighox]

Is there a time frame when Everquest Next (not Landmark) will be out? 2015? 2016? Later?

I think they said somewhere that they aimed to release Landmark this year and EQN next year, but I wouldn't expect it until 2016.
Guess it all depends on how fast they can complete the building tools and let Landmark people build stuff for them, as of right now I don't really see anything from Landmark going into EQN so hopefully they focus on refining the tools soon.

This is not necessarily true. There are no "shouldn't"s in gaming. As long as a game's rule set (gameplay) and design are not in conflict literally anything can be done in a game. And be of a cohesive design, natch.

Such limiters are mostly external; cost of development, technology, implementation, deadlines, design clarity, etc.

High-end competitive raiding like WoW would require it to be instanced and that effectively makes your sandbox less sandbox

[Ashana Darkmoon]

Content is sustainable by Blizzard due to their unique structure, decades of iteration, and top of the class talent in all fields. Pretty much no other game is going to have all of those pieces to make it sustainable. So while it is possible, it's not possible for just about anyone out there.

Like I said earlier, it's not even possible for Blizzard and they are the best at it. Their last content patch dropped 5 months ago, and the next one (which isn't even on the horizon) will cost $40.

If that is the best anyone can do, the paradigm is absolutely unsustainable.

[Edge-]

Like I said earlier, it's not even possible for Blizzard and they are the best at it. Their last content patch dropped 5 months ago, and the next one (which isn't even on the horizon) will cost $40.

If that is the best anyone can do, the paradigm is absolutely unsustainable.

They're horrible at the gap between the final content patch and expansion (honestly, I don't know how anyone can subscribe to a MMO with 9+ months of no new content between expansions), but they were very solid with their content patches. I think they were roughly every 3ish months, and each was quite sizable. They're actually close to hitting that sweet spot. The only company that's ever really managed to nail the sweet spot was Trion with their handling of chocolate Rift. Content patches roughly every 2 months that included new raid/dungeon content, new systems, and tons of other stuff.

[Kelimbror]

Like I said earlier, it's not even possible for Blizzard and they are the best at it. Their last content patch dropped 5 months ago, and the next one (which isn't even on the horizon) will cost $40.

If that is the best anyone can do, the paradigm is absolutely unsustainable.

Like Edge said, that's not an accurate representation of what is going on. You're just taking an end of expansion lull to promote a false belief. I'm not vouching their ability to deliver timely expansions, I'm talking about delivering content updates at an acceptable cadence. Only Rift and WoW have been capable of it, with GW2 keeping a rapid stride with a unique style of content, so it can't really be factored into the same discussion.

Equating an expansion to a content patch or expecting them to keep putting out the same level of content patches when working on an expansion is naïve at best and deliberately ignorant at worst. I should also add that what I said served as an introduction into an entirely different point regarding user sustained content, but by all means cherry pick away.

[Yvaelle]

Is paying 60$ the only way into Alpha?

The Beta is free, but yes - the Alpha is buy-in only

[Ashana Darkmoon]

Like Edge said, that's not an accurate representation of what is going on. [...]
Equating an expansion to a content patch or expecting them to keep putting out the same level of content patches when working on an expansion is naïve at best and deliberately ignorant at worst.

So basically, during an expansion cycle it is okay to pay $45-60 for 3-4 month content updates, but then the customer is wrong to expect the same thing after the last patch? That makes absolutely no sense. Compare that to any other subscription-based service; the customer should *absolutely* expect the same level of content patches all the time for a subscription-based game.

Whether that expectation is realistic or not (*deliberately ignorant*) because they have shifted all their resources to the expansion, that is an entirely separate point - and it proves the whole idea that this type of content delivery isn't feasible. The best MMO company the world will have gone 3 expansion in a row with a year-long content gap.

I mean, if you like WoW and their service, great. I do too. But repeatedly letting them off the hook for gaps that would destroy any other game is silly.

[Edge-]

But repeatedly letting them off the hook for gaps that would destroy any other game is silly.

That's what you get when you have a thriving, rabid fanbase. No other game can get away with that kind of behavior, or even a lot of the other stuff Blizzard does. But because of the brand loyalty that they've built up over the year, they can hold onto subscribers for 8+ months without new content being released. I don't agree with it and I think it's disrespectful to the players, but hey, they can do it and it's a lot cheaper than simultaneously working on live content and an expansion.

[Ashana Darkmoon]

That's what you get when you have a thriving, rabid fanbase. No other game can get away with that kind of behavior, or even a lot of the other stuff Blizzard does. But because of the brand loyalty that they've built up over the year, they can hold onto subscribers for 8+ months without new content being released. I don't agree with it and I think it's disrespectful to the players, but hey, they can do it and it's a lot cheaper than simultaneously working on live content and an expansion.

Well yeah, that's kind of the point. They get away with it because they can, and it's absolutely in their best interests to do so. The idea is that wow players should make a lot more noise about it so it stops being in their best interests.

But this is obviously a big tangent so Just reading the constant drek in the various ESO threads apparently touched a nerve about the hilarious double standards.