Remastered eq

Discussion in 'The Veterans' Lounge' started by Andrael, Jan 17, 2020.

  1. Laronk Augur

    Like what Waring said, just because they don't keep games open doesn't mean they didn't make money. Planetside 1 made money but then they made ps2, sure some of those were also failures but sometimes SOE was actually willing to do new things which has risk like Planetside (when the first one was out it was pretty cool) .

    The problem with online games is at some point it's not commercially viable to keep the lights on. If original everquest were to release today with the limited content it had people would eat it up the way they do on TLP, today's gamers are way different than they were 20 years ago.

    20 years ago classic EQ was ground breaking and for that time it was a super immersive world, released today the same game with better graphics would just be trash. Oh so my guy can turn on attack and he can kick that's all he does? TLP servers do well because of nostalgia.
    Vumad likes this.
  2. MasterMagnus Augur

    Interesting that we are discussing the finer points of the phat lewtz made by other games on the tired old 20 year old game's forums.

    Sure their other games 'made money' in the Gross Collected sense. What is more important is the Net Profit made. And even greater still, and the point at hand, what was re-invested to maintain and maybe even strengthen that title?

    As to EQ making 'more every year'. Is that gross or net, and was that spent on other projects or on EQ?

    Without knowing factual numbers we are left to look at publicly available signs of the games health.

    I would propose sunsetting a game isn't looking good for that game being healthy in the Net Profit sense. (check those off the long list above)

    Laying off 50% or more of the staff of a title after it's profitable period (if it had one) has passed, ain't lookin' too pretty either. (check those off)

    So what are we left with on that list? The handful of titles they should have focused on the whole time?

    Everquest can't last forever, and it's got 20 years on anything that gets released tomorrow.

    But we're still here on this tired old game's forum.

    Could they maybe develop something amazing? Maybe in the realm of possibility.

    In my opinion they should never ever try EQ3 again, other than some stupid mobile game (that I suspect is the thing they've been working on).

    EQ Next was stupid. Landmark was amazing and could have been so much. Just look at Landmark when it got the combat update. Love it or hate it, with people bunny hopping around. It looked and played like Fortnite is in many ways.

    They could have had an amazing hit in those days, but it was all smoke and mirrors to make the sale.

    Daybreak and EQ are in a one of a kind position, the rules don't apply, or they are the exception to the rule.

    They should keep up as long as they can, let it die gracefully. It will last a bit more if they don't take whatever it makes and waste it on a list like the one Fanra kindly posted. In my opinion.
  3. Strawberry Augur

    There's still this idea in the back of some people's mind that if only you updated the graphics in EQ, it would attract new players.

    I think this is a very misguided idea, it's based on the assumption that the gameplay is perfect and the graphics are holding back the game.

    Games have evolved, there is tons of stuff EQ players put up with that almost no one would accept in 2020.

    The sheer amount of timesinks. The ability to grief. The amount of cheating that goes unchecked. Zone loading. Unintuitive Quests lacking any sense of direction. Massive power disparities between gear. Powerleveling.

    There are so many things in EQ that would never be acceptable in a 2020 launch title. A lot of mechanics would be considered pointless timesinks, a lot of mechanics would be considered unfair and exploits, and the cheating would be deemed completely unacceptable.

    The core D&D based EQ class combat and class dependency is amazing. But there is tons of other stuff that no one would accept in 2020, graphics would be the least of the complaints.

    You can not simply update the graphics of this game and hope to attract new players. There are way too many issues with EQ as a game itself.
    MasterMagnus and Vumad like this.
  4. Kidiani Journeyman

    I say put all the money into the forums, they seem more popular than the game :)
    MasterMagnus likes this.
  5. Vhayne Journeyman



    Sorry, I disagree with most of that. Also, sorry for the long reply....

    In recent years, many "classic" games have seen remasters. These remasters, which have updated graphics/sound/animations/UI/Netcode etc., allow new potential customers to enter in. They had zero interest in the "classic" game, but when that new, refreshed version came out....and they learned of the history of the original (for example RE2), hype grew. Those players that would never have purchased a nearly 30yo console to play a 25yo game, were now actually excited to finally be able to play it in a "refreshed" mode. It was hugely successful due to that reason alone. You think it was just those 40yo gamers from 1998 or whatever that purchased the RE2 reboot? How about the new FF7 Remake? That's going to drawn in a HUGE amount of people. Why? Because they have heard of the amazingness of the original FF7. But they never played it because they couldn't get past the absolutely horrible graphics compared to today's standards. They would love to play FF7, but the old tech is holding them back.

    New customers do not want to even download and try out a 20 year old game, that looks like it hasn't been updated at all in those 20 years. We literally have young adults of 20yo that could be potential customers that would have to play a game that was released before they were even born. That usually does not happen. If you have children that play games, you would experience this yourself.

    Next, you are assuming that EQ's playstyle would not be acceptable in 2020. That is a huge miscalculation. There is zero data for this. There have been NO new games released in the past 16 years (since original WoW) that even come close to the playstyle of the original EQ. So there is no way to tell if people would accept or deny this style of play.

    You go into detail about some things to suggest they are facts, however I will argue that they are simply your opinion.

    Timesinks. Timesinks are still in modern mmo's today. Have you played current WoW? They remove freedom and totally disrespect the player's time by introducing more and more, unrewarding timesinks. As well as time-gates. You are expected to grind out repetitive tasks all over the world, each day, to acquire a tiny bit of "exp" on your necklace...it's called Artifact Power. But, WoW is still one of the most popular examples today as far as mmo's are concerned. So yes, people still grind daily, for hours, doing boring stuff - and this stuff has nearly zero reward and is done solo (no groups - therefore no chance of meeting new friends, and conversing with strangers) as opposed to EQ's "social grinding exp groups".

    Griefing. I do agree that griefing is bad. Modern games, since WoW's release have enabled many systems to reduce or eliminate this behavior. Mob tagging, consensual PvP, private instances, etc. These systems are usually a good thing, however I will argue that the original EQ (when it was policed by GM's and Guides back in the early 2000's) was still fine. You see, removing those possibilities by means of systems, removes player freedom. Freedom is something you greatly appreciate when returning to EQ after playing these modern mmo's. More on that soon.

    Cheating. I totally agree with you on this. No way about it, hacks, bots, etc., should be dealt with by GM's on a very regular and strict basis.

    Zone loading. This is more of a gameplay related issue actually. If you are travelling from one end of the continent to another, then yeah, you're going to hit a few loading screens. But the way EQ is played, is once you actually get to your destination (for example Chardok) and get into a group...the zone loading is done with. You are there for hours with zero loading screens, unless you die. Again, in comparison to very recent mmo's (going to take WoW's BfA expansion as an example again), the player is loading between zones ALL the time. I'll go into detail later if you'd like. Or you can take my word for it.

    Quests with no direction. Well, that's exactly what they are..."quests". In modern mmo's, we actually have "tasks" that are labeled as quests. The little bite-sized objectives (go to that cave over there and kill 20 cave slugs, then come back to me for your reward), are not "quests" at all. Everquest was full of actual quests. "If you happen upon <this particular item>, bring it back to me so I can examine it. Then we might get a clue on what we will need next." There is a mystery involved with the quest structure in EQ. You did not need any quest to collect rat whiskers from rats. You just got them as they were killed. Then you happen to talk to an NPC that says they want some whiskers, and you either have them in your bags or not, in which case you'd go get more if you wanted. The key phrase here is "if you wanted." See, that's the amazing thing with Everquest. ALL of the quests were optional. The player is given the freedom of doing them or not, and not PUNISHED for skipping them. Advancement was found in other ways.

    Massive power disparities between gear. I'm assuming you are speaking of "twinking"? Because every mmo and RPG has huge power differences in max level and starter gear. So let's discuss twinking. Again, it's about Freedom. Nearly every mmo since WoW has eradicated this feature (yes, I called it a feature). See, when you're in a dungeon in EQ, and you loot this badass sword...as you're playing a cleric...you have a couple of choices. You can give it to the melee class (who end up already having better...and you did win the roll afterall), you could sell it on the AH/Broker/ECTunnel, sell it to a vendor for a tiny amount of coin, or you could pass it onto your newbie melee alt. This last option was one of the preferred methods for many people. As it usually resulted in a massive power boost for that alt. Making that particular customer EXCITED to have won that item, as they could make use of it however they chose. Many EQ players (maybe all?) have loved this particular choice. Removing choice from a player is restricting freedom. As long as it doesn't hurt other players in the process, then freedoms should not be removed. But this leads onto the next topic...

    Powerleveling. Again, something removed from modern mmo's. Another freedom that many many EQ players enjoyed and still do enjoy. Twinking is a form of powerleveling. As are out-of-group buffs. The buffs in EQ are powerful, as they should be. Again, this is another form of freedom that was given to players, one that many have enjoyed throughout the years. A druid could decide that night that they were going to spend the night just helping newbies...possibly making friends in the process. They would travel to the newbie zones and pass out buffs to extremely thankful newbies. This made the druid happy that they were able to help people a little, as it was greatly appreciated. Or that druid might decide to charge for his time, and make a bit of coin doing buffs or giving ports to people. This again, is freedom. All of that is powerleveling of a sort. In some ways it's minor, but it is still powerleveling (giving a lower level character an advantage they would normally be incapable of). Real powerleveling is taking this a huge step further, and working with the systems (also to be considered "freedoms") in place to drastically alter the advancement of that newbie. The point is, why not? And why remove that freedom when it made many paying customers happy to be able to spend hours doing it for their friends, or just simply for the fun and challenge....to see what was possible...find the limits and try to push through them. That is called FREEDOM. Something today's games have eliminated.


    My entire point can be summed up simply by saying that modern games have removed freedom in favor of balance. The removal of freedom to direct customers down a certain path with pre-designed outcomes. Newer gamers younger than 30 years old have probably never even played a game that had any kind of freedom that Everquest allowed. They can't even imagine what that's like because the option was never even presented to them. Each game they play is this forced playstyle and direction, with no real player choice given to them.

    So no, there is no data to suggest a Remastered Everquest would be unacceptable in 2020. The new demographic has never been given the choice. I would however say there IS data to suggest that those people have avoided Everquest due to the antiquated interface, sound, graphics, animations, and the simple fact that is it 20 years old - probably older than many of them. So, given this FACT, Everquest will slowly die as it is not attracting newer/younger players. Those of us 40+ years old (I started in 2000 at 23 years old - fairly young), can only keep the game running for just so long. A Remaster is needed to inject this game with new blood. Those younger players usually have just as much freetime that we had 20 years ago before families and careers got in the way lol.

    I should mention that when I say "Remaster", I mean ONLY the graphics, sound, animations, UI, and netcode. The game should remain exactly as it is now (I'm speaking of Classic, Kunark, and Velious). The systems and freedoms should remain, that allow the gameplay we have options for (for example: a druid kiting, a necro fear-kiting, a shaman root-rotting, enchanter charming, twinking, powerleveling, etc.).
  6. Vumad Augur

    Something about remastered. A remaster is not a remake. I bought the new version of Goldeneye, shut it off and returned it in 5 minutes of game play. I don't want that trash gameplay of press the right stick to counter an attack in what is basically a cut scene. I am playing a video game not following the movie script. I hate that trash in my modern MMO. I will drop coin on Goldeneye REMASTER for Xbox One without blinking an eye. The REMAKE was trash because it wasn't Goldeneye.

    Post 25 makes so many good point. EverQuest has overall good gameplay. EverQuest is currently suffering from one huge thing and that is people swipe left when the see it. Great personality judge by a cover. A new game engine and graphics would probably justify any expense in the long term.

    Unfortunately, as TLP has proved, the change may alienate the current player base that doesn't want the wolves in Halas updated. I think that they would stick around for the update and we'd get lots of new people, but maybe not I guess.
  7. Bobokin Augur

    Unreal Kelethin

    Fanra likes this.
  8. Bobokin Augur

    Everquest in Unreal Engine 4

    Fanra likes this.
  9. Bobokin Augur

    Everquest in Unity3d

    Fanra likes this.
  10. Vumad Augur


    This looks nice.


    This goes with what I said above with changing game play. If I wanted ESO I'd play it. That is not EverQuest. Using the EQ lore while making a completely different game is not a remaster, it is a remake, redevelopment, change in direction, the wrong direction.

Share This Page