Livestream: Founders' Packs and More! November 13, 2013

I cant thank you enough for capturing this! Posting it to my guildies now.

They said it will be on the PC but they didn't tell us what kind of specs we need on our PC to run the game. Maybe they don't know for sure yet but they could give a ball park estimate. I might have to get a desktop.

Pre-alpha, they really cannot say. And by can not, I mean will not. It's just a development point. You get your basic features in place, the textures you're going to need, the basic game play working. Add all the stuff you're going to need for alpha/beta. Then, you'll re-factor and compress and handle shadows slightly differently, and all sorts of improvements.

After all that is done, you'll run it on different computer specs and map out performance, and come up with your "lowest bar" machine that it will run it "acceptably". That's a process you can't really ball park.

I tried using the search engine, but didn't find a straight answer.

Are there Founders Packs planned for EverQuest Next as well? Not just Landmark. If there are plans for it, approximately how long would it be before such information is revealed?

Thank you in advance!

That's because there has been nothing said about EQN Founder's Packs. However, EQN:L and EQN are probably going to be rolled out similarly.

With the positive response on EQN:L's Founder's Packs, I really, really doubt they will not offer a similar pack for EQN when it is ready.

Nice to have a Forum but unfortunately I do not find some place where I can post the following text which I want to discuss as it is a big issue for a number of mmorpg out actually:

I am absolutely against and do not support the F2P model and I prefer a subscription model in which I have from the beginning on access the full game and all its contents in order to enjoy it to the fullest and not to find myself directly in front of a non-accessible area , a " lockbox " or during character generation to pay to unlock a race or class.

n F2P you always have the impression that something is not accessible before not paying for an unlock option or that the game is somehow an incomplete "demo" version , in which you have to buy the "special content" first. In this context terms like " exclusivity" and "better" are used in advertisements... stiring up a split in the community of players from the beginning on and not particularly contributing to solidarity.Moreover, the basic principles of an RPG suffer where you should have the opportunity to earn everything in the game by yourself through playing freely, even if it requires some diligence or several attempts. But at least the incentive is much better.The motivation is also very much lowered when you try to save some in-game currency by investing about 200 hours play for spending in e.g. some nice item/mount, and next to you someone else indulge himself the same with a one time investment of 15 EUR / USD (etc., real money) in a few minutes.The other way around, players are supposed to buy so-called (overpriced) in-game packages in F2P games that contain supposedly "great" or "exclusive" stuff, but ultimately only serve to suck the money out of the pockets of players, by applying more subtle kind of psychological tricks what is no longer concealed any more by the developers of f2p titles. Finally, in F2P making money at any price is in the foreground, even if it sounds contradictory ... Accordingly, these games are designed with a greate Focus to get Money from players opposed to the traditional payment model where the game design is concentrated on the exploration of the game world without limitations.
A reasonable subscription model, which introduces ALL players with the same conditions into the game and provide access to all Content without preferences, still gives me the greatest charm to play a MMORPG with a high grade of fun and competition and longevity for the game in contrast to a so-called F2P game, which later develops itself to a P2W from the perspective of a non-payer, while paying for it can quickly become an endless spiral of purchases in order to keep up with the "best" or "most extraordinary" players in the game.
Furthermore, the item shop in some of B2P titles is not without pitfalls: e.g. I want to play an archer and a visible quiver on the character is only obtainable by investing in the item shop, what should I make of it as a role player? You feel somekind to be hookwinked by that. For me many so-called items only purchasable through the in-game store belong by default in the game and not in the Item Shop.


Therefore, I am also against the principles of founder packs. How will the f2p affact players who do not pay a Cent and what will be the Advantage of investing in the game exactly?

Cheers for the reply! I'm really hoping there will be one, will have to wait and see then

I really want EQ:Next to succeed. I really want to support it, I really want to spend money on it. If some sort of Collector's Edition or Founder's Pack or whatever were to come out, I'd pick it up.

EQ:Landmark, eh no. I'm sure I'll have fun with it, but in the end, it's just a pacifier. I wouldn't buy a premium pack for that.

So please don't base the profitability of an EQ:N Founder Pack on the success (or lack thereof) of an EQ:L Founder Pack, as I am sure there are many who would feel this way.

I feel a question needs answering before anyone should pay money into this game. How much of a impact is this so called free to play game going to have on peoples wallet? FTP is realistically a lie, game companies need to make money off their games as they should for their hard work. That being said I want to know exactly what part of the game are going to be paid for. I would very much like to see you all be upfront about how you are making money off this instead of being like other FTP games and try to sucker people into endless micro transactions for missing parts of your game.

Also on another note I think that the temp passes for beta are kinda a jerk move. A 7 day pass is pretty pointless unless you are going for a subscription based game which honestly I would rather see then a FTP game.

To those who are complaining about FTP and not having a subscription model:

SOE has a subscription option for every game in their 'stable', even Clone Wars Adventures (maybe not Free Realms, I haven't played that one). The subscription gives you all the content, all the expansions, all the extras, and you can still use the shop to buy cosmetic or convenience items as you feel the need. They even give you 500 SC a month - usable in all their games - if you pay with a recurring subscription.

I haven't seen any indication that EQ Next is going to deviate from that pattern.

I'm guessing that won't be the case for European players since we aren't allowed to use our SOE accounts to play EQN... which is really bad.

How is it a jerk move? Those passes can be given to your friends. It is just so your friends can also test the game instead of having to rely on luck to get a beta key or having to buy a beta founder pack.

I believe it is erroneous to call something an FTP game when it also includes a subscription fee. I wish the gaming industry and gamers would stop calling hybrids FTP. A true FTP game is free to play with micro-transactions but doesn't include a sub fee.

If that is what it is for but my understanding is everyone who signed up for the beta who did not buy a founders pack will have a random chance to get 7 days and nothing more unless they get luck enough to get multiple ones. They call the game free to play but you cant play in the beta for more then 7 days without paying for the game that is part of the issue. Either it is free to play or it is pay to play but pick one. The other issue in my mind at least is that even in games that are not free to play such as WoW, Star craft 2, KTOR(before ftp), and I havent been in other beta but I am sure many more have all had free betas for those that went through the effort to get involved with the game early. The people who are talking about their game and promoting it and with the round table giving feed back to help with the development process. It is my opinion that a beta shouldnt be a temp thing unless it is a game that is in perminate beta but even so they claim it is ftp so that kinda cancels that out.

That is potentially worse in that you need to pay for a subscription + micro transactions to get the full game. Of course to a degree that is just a guess off what you said since I have not played a SOE game before. Regardless I wasnt just complaining about free to play I just want them to announce to what level and for what things they want to charge. If it is like DOTA where it is entirely cosmetic items and you can get just about anything from playing the game long enough then I got no issue but I think before I sink money into the game it is important information.

@Pockninja

I am still not seeing the issue. The game is free-to-play AFTER release. Wanting to be in beta for as long as the beta runs is, in my opinion, just being spoiled. It is a beta. It is not for the release client. A beta is meant to test the game instead of just being an option to play the game early.

Landmark still has free betas too. You can apply for a chance to get a beta invite. Even in WoW you don't get guaranteed beta access if you apply.

In FTP you always need to pay something to get the full game. And heck, you could say the same exact thing about WoW if you believe that you should have access to all mounts, even the ones in the store.

And there are just no answers yet what the micro-transactions will be considering the game is in pre-alpha. They only recently started with the creation of the voxel game itself, I believe they started in June this year. This game is even less further along than WoW's next expansion.

From your comments I think it is best for you to wait until more is known. Alpha is even less forgiving than beta is. If it is all about a test drive of the game then trying to pay for alpha is not the most logical thing to do. Expect lots of issues during alpha. And beta, well you don't have to pay for that either, you can apply to get a chance to get an invitation, free of charge.

Okay, they didn't start in June with the creation of the game in the voxel engine. Based on the world panel it does seem they started with it this year and not too long ago.

Edit:
Sorry for the double post I couldn't edit my previous post anymore.

First I would like to state I understand what beta is for but I understand it is both a early access to game as well as testing. The free options are 7 days that is my point. I wasnt suggesting a guarantee of anything so do not put any words in my mouth. I wouldnt have any issue if they said that unlimited free betas will be handed out at random from people who signed up and random 7 days passes to get friends involved like what you seem to be saying were happening. My issue is that the only free way to get into beta is for 7 days. It is either pay to get into beta or don't get in for more then 7 days. No game I have ever heard of has done something like this and I dont like it. Also for your knowledge WoW did give out guaranteed beta for people who went to blizcon (I know as I was one of those people).

I cant imagine there is no idea in their mind as to how they are going to make their money. That is something they consider in the start before they even decide to make a game otherwise they would get no investors. They might not have a very well defined plan but I am saying I want more info.

Yeah I have no interest in the alpha. Way to expensive and that is when everything is broken. I dont have a issue with playing a game in alpha hell I used to be a bug tester for a job. I just wont enjoy it as much in the wallet or in the experience.

Exactly - free to play YOUR way: you can pay a subscription, and enjoy the game that way.
You can not pay anything and get most of the content.
You can not pay a subscription, and buy the expansions to get all of the content (subs need buy xpacs too).
You can simply pay for unlockers and little things you need for convenience as you go.

It's still a FTP game - it's just one that includes an option for people to pay a monthly fee if they choose and get better game access that way. I'm sure there are plenty of people playing for "free" who spend more than that every month for their station cash. The difference between SOE's system and others is SOE gives you more choices as to how you want to play and/if you want to pay.

Yes, they did give our guaranteed beta for people who went to Blizcon and Sony is doing the same thing for people who went to SoE Live.

I still don't see the issue with only getting in beta for 7 days. Nowadays betas have become nothing more than early demos of a game. And I think it is smart move to limit the amount of time you can test, or actually play in beta. This issue has got nothing to do with the game being free-to-play though. It hasn't become a pay-to-play game with the monetization of alpha and beta.

Sure they likely have an idea but it is likely not set in stone yet. It is just not a smart move to give information about something which isn't completely set in stone.

Yes, it is still a FTP game but it is also still subscription based game. There is always the distinction being made that a particular game is FTP or sub based whereas SoE's game are both and yet there is no true term for it. It is a hybrid of both systems instead of only being FTP.

Also, according to a research done by Curse, FTP gamers tend to spend less on micro-transactions at average than gamers who also pay a subscription fee. It is not a huge difference but the difference is still there. Just some food for thought.

It sucks the beta invites that are random are only 7 day ones. That sucks. But the GAME aka the launch of the finished (the one they launch with) game is F2P. Alpha/beta are not free for unlimited time. They apparently have gotten a huge response and people paying for that.

Now I hope they don't do what they did with EQ2 for F2P. I don't think they will since Landmark/Next didn't start with a sub. Now that being said, if you want uber skins of awesomeness, more than like you will have to pay for those. I think they are going to go a bit more GW2 with this game. Skins, vanity etc. I don't think (and i hope they don't) limit actual game features for money. Things like not allowing you to talk in general channels and all that is really stupid.

For landmark, i can see you able to get multiple plots without paying money. it will just take a ton of things to do instead of paying 3 bucks for another plot or whatever it will be.

I think the quickest way to turn people off is limit actual game playable features (dungeons, zones, tiers of spells etc). If they want to release unique skins and such, thats probably the better way to go. Example, rare cool looking pets for rangers. No increase in dps or anything just a new pet that looks cool. A historical shield skin for warriors. Stuff like that.

F2P games rarely get it right. GW2 got it right. Skins and vanity only or similar things.