So whats after Shadow Odyssey? Everquest III?

[Burdock2]

<p>I truly hope so!</p><p>New engine! New classes! Set 100 years after EQ2 (similar to the new 4th ED FR D&D Campaign)</p><p>Just how much more can they expand EQ2? EQ has 15 expansions already - how about updating the game and engine for the current gaming market?</p><p>/</p>

[Gala]

I bet there alraddy working on everquest III. The big question is when it will come out. But as (i think) everquest II still has the ability to add levels to go all the way to level 200 (if  remembered correctly) it will take some more time before everquest III comes out.You also have to think about the stuff in everquest I. Still allot of content is not there jet in everquest II. Like Velious, Odus, the planes, ect ect.

[dawy]

I'm darn sure SOE are working on EQ3,though i doubt it'll be called that when the time comes for release..but that i would assume is a couple if not more years away

[Detor]

<cite>Galafk@Permafrost wrote:</cite><blockquote>I bet there alraddy working on everquest III. The big question is when it will come out. But as (i think) everquest II still has the ability to add levels to go all the way to level 200 (if  remembered correctly) it will take some more time before everquest III comes out.You also have to think about the stuff in everquest I. Still allot of content is not there jet in everquest II. Like Velious, Odus, the planes, ect ect.</blockquote>That's a misinformation hangover from prerelease.  Levels used to be faster, but there were more of them and abilities were more spread out. They also were counting adventure and tradeskill seperately, so 100 adventure levels, 100 tradeskill levels, new spell every few levels - vs what it was when it launched, 50 adventure levels, 50 tradeskill levels, but spells every level.  I remember them talking about that in early EQ2 in interviews. 

[Aneova]

Not sure if I would jump ship to EQ3 no matter what they called it, I'd be edgy about any chance they would add RMT to it, as that's how a LOT of MMO's are heading towards, the more money a person has the better gear they can get their character, that just seems wrong to me, unless they keep it on an exchange type server and let the other servers work for their items.

[Tamo]

<p>After the shadow odyssey is released, we will all grind out the new quests, 60 AAs, and check out the new raid zones (if any available). Then we shall wait.</p><p>As for EQ3, I'm thinking it is 4 years at most. Will I play it? Probably...</p>

[Kelticdragon]

EQ3 will be years away with this years eq1 expansion they are able to tie eq1 to eq2 they still have several lands to discover to catch up eq2. Planes of Power, Gates of Discord ect...Just my humble oppinion.

[Norrsken]

Its too soon to release a new MMO IMHO. thats pretty much why the EQ2 killers didnt. EQ2 for all its ugly warts (and Lineage 2 and WoW) still offer enough for a new MMO not to take off properly. To make a new MMO fly, you need to have new crap thats not in the current generation. To wow the customers with graphics is sortof hard considering that EQ2 still holds out pretty well in comparison. So, they need other stuff. While that might be doable, the hardware for servers might not be ready for it yet.but in a couple of years I'd guess a new MMO with all the latest and greatest would be able to take off despite not having as much content as the powers that be have.

[Cusashorn]

<p>I seriously doubt they're going to release an EQ3... Especially since EQ2 already works off the basis that it exists in an alternate timeline.</p><p>How would EQ3 take place? Another timeline that further changes the timeline? If you set it 100 years after EQ2, wouldn't you just be playing in the exact same geographical settings that you find in EQ2? Nothing short of another cataclysm would change Norrath enough to make it different from how it is now in just 100 years.</p><p>EQ2 still has Odus and Velious to explore, and still has expansion potential to work off from there.</p>

[Xalmat]

The biggest mistake of EverQuest II was calling it EverQuest II. I seriously doubt SOE will repeat the same mistake twice in this regard.

[Vonotar]

EQ3 won't be called EQ3 and it will be available on PS3 first...It will also be a lot more MMO-lite that EQ2.That is the way Sony are moving, anybody thinking that EQ3 will just be EQ2 with better graphics needs to play EQ1 to fully realise how each generation of the game is a different beast than the one before.

[Norrsken]

<cite>Cusashorn wrote:</cite><blockquote><p>I seriously doubt they're going to release an EQ3... Especially since EQ2 already works off the basis that it exists in an alternate timeline.</p><p>How would EQ3 take place? Another timeline that further changes the timeline? If you set it 100 years after EQ2, wouldn't you just be playing in the exact same geographical settings that you find in EQ2? Nothing short of another cataclysm would change Norrath enough to make it different from how it is now in just 100 years.</p><p>EQ2 still has Odus and Velious to explore, and still has expansion potential to work off from there.</p></blockquote>They could place it prior to EQ1 if they really wanted.

[Galithdor]

<cite>Ulvhamne@Nagafen wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>Cusashorn wrote:</cite><blockquote><p>I seriously doubt they're going to release an EQ3... Especially since EQ2 already works off the basis that it exists in an alternate timeline.</p><p>How would EQ3 take place? Another timeline that further changes the timeline? If you set it 100 years after EQ2, wouldn't you just be playing in the exact same geographical settings that you find in EQ2? Nothing short of another cataclysm would change Norrath enough to make it different from how it is now in just 100 years.</p><p>EQ2 still has Odus and Velious to explore, and still has expansion potential to work off from there.</p></blockquote>They could place it prior to EQ1 if they really wanted.</blockquote><p>That already exists...its called EQOA</p><p>and you know...eq2 is really eq3 <img src="/smilies/283a16da79f3aa23fe1025c96295f04f.gif" border="0" alt="SMILEY" /></p>

[Qandor]

There will be another Everquest since really without Everquest what else do they have exactly? As for the name, do you truly believe this game would have faired any differently with a different name? I don't think so and no need to throw a Smedley quote at me. I take all that he says with a ton of salt.

[LordPazuzu]

I think after TSO we'll get another expansion a year later.  Probably filling in more of the missing areas of the Shattered Lands or adding one of the missing continents.  This is fine by me as I'm not really looking for a new game or feeling the need to try "the next big thing".  I'm overall happy with the game and where it's at and where it's going.  Unless SOE does something utterly drastic I'll be here for some time to come, so I hope the expansions keep getting cranked out.

[Nolrog]

<cite>Qandor wrote:</cite><blockquote>There will be another Everquest since really without Everquest what else do they have exactly? As for the name, do you truly believe this game would have faired any differently with a different name? I don't think so and no need to throw a Smedley quote at me. I take all that he says with a ton of salt. </blockquote><p>It's not that the game would (or would not) have fared differently, but rather the fact that the MMO community at large saw the game as a successor/replacement of Everquest simply because of the name.</p><p>They do have plenty in the stable besides EQ by the way.  Though, I do agree that we'll see another "everquest" game in the future (how far in the future though, I don't know.)</p>

[DragonMaster2385]

Personally, I think they will move away from the EQ franchise. They still have a strong playerbase for the two games that they have on PC. EQOA never did well, and I really hope that they don't release a new MMO on just the PS3. I have never seen a console only MMO do well; the mainstream console gamers are a different breed of gamers (no insults or anything, I have an X360). They are going to push The Agency when that comes out and they may move to another fantasy franchise, but Norrath can only take so much before the lore just gets twisted and confusing from the different "timelines".

[Rashaak]

<cite>Burdock2 wrote:</cite><blockquote><p>I truly hope so!</p><p>New engine! New classes! Set 100 years after EQ2 (similar to the new 4th ED FR D&D Campaign)</p><p>Just how much more can they expand EQ2? EQ has 15 expansions already - how about updating the game and engine for the current gaming market?</p><p>/</p></blockquote>There won't be an Everquest 3...or at least a game called EQ3. SoE has already said it was a mistake to call EQ2 ... EQ2, since it's a completely different game, but also I believe they are kind of done with Fantasy games for now. But...as long as there are enough paid subscribers they'll continue to make expansions, for both EQ and EQ2...

[dawy]

<cite>Xalmat wrote:</cite><blockquote>The biggest mistake of EverQuest II was calling it EverQuest II. I seriously doubt SOE will repeat the same mistake twice in this regard.</blockquote>Even Smed has said this in the past

[Snowdonia]

What's next? Odus dangit!

[Vulkan_NTooki]

I'd like to see the next expansion without new lvl progress.. Maybe a rebirth thingy where u can go back to lvl 1 and lvl back up to 80 (and getting access to special powers(new powerful aa tree) along the way). Would give u a chance to experience the low lvl zones without rolling an alt.. :p

[Illine]

<p>or giving you the same ability as crafting.</p><p>right now you can have a first and second profession (tinkering and transmuting)</p><p>why not being able to have a second adventure profession? <img src="/smilies/3b63d1616c5dfcf29f8a7a031aaa7cad.gif" border="0" alt="SMILEY" /> </p><p>it would totally unbalance the game, I'd love it <img src="http://forums.station.sony.com/eq2/images/smilies/283a16da79f3aa23fe1025c96295f04f.gif" border="0" alt="SMILEY" width="15" height="15" /></p>

[DragonMaster2385]

<cite>Earar wrote:</cite><blockquote><p>or giving you the same ability as crafting.</p><p>right now you can have a first and second profession (tinkering and transmuting)</p><p>why not being able to have a second adventure profession? <img src="/eq2/images/smilies/3b63d1616c5dfcf29f8a7a031aaa7cad.gif" border="0" alt="SMILEY" /> </p><p>it would totally unbalance the game, I'd love it <img src="http://forums.station.sony.com/eq2/images/smilies/283a16da79f3aa23fe1025c96295f04f.gif" border="0" alt="SMILEY" width="15" height="15" /></p></blockquote>what a headache.  There are enough classes in the game and allowing subclasses will, like you said, totally unbalance the game. 

[Gargamel]

Oh who cares about naming... they can just call it "Norrath" or some nonsense.  As far as timeline, they can always do a prequel taking place in the eldar age or something before the time of eq1.Besides considering eq1 is still getting expansions I doubt they are in a hurry, espically since people are just starting to be able to run on highest settings during big fights smoothly.Original game did 1-50, DoF did 50-60, KoS 60-70, EoF fleshed out content 1-70, RoK did 70-80 heavy on solo content, ToS will suppliment 50-80 mainly on heroic content and 77-80 with additional solo content.  Not to mention that they seem to be trying to add one or two raid zones and 2 or 3 instances between expansions as live updates.Next expansion after ToS will raise lvl cap to 90, and repeast the process (need another exp without lvl increase to flesh out the 80-90 range which will probably include some content applicable to 70ish range)I doubt they'd do it but personally I'd love a raid expansion with 20 zones  /drool

[Rocc]

<p>EQ3 is the name. 2010 is the year. First quarter to be exact. <img src="http://forums.station.sony.com/eq2/images/smilies/8a80c6485cd926be453217d59a84a888.gif" border="0" alt="SMILEY" width="15" height="15" /></p><p><a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Telepathy" rel="nofollow" target="_blank">Techlepathy</a></p>

[Rahatmattata]

<cite>Earar wrote:</cite><blockquote><p>or giving you the same ability as crafting.</p><p>right now you can have a first and second profession (tinkering and transmuting)</p><p>why not being able to have a second adventure profession? <img src="/eq2/images/smilies/3b63d1616c5dfcf29f8a7a031aaa7cad.gif" border="0" alt="SMILEY" /> </p><p>it would totally unbalance the game, I'd love it <img src="http://forums.station.sony.com/eq2/images/smilies/283a16da79f3aa23fe1025c96295f04f.gif" border="0" alt="SMILEY" width="15" height="15" /></p></blockquote>They could implement it simlilar to FFXI... your second adventure class capped to half of your main class level. 80guardian/40dirge or defiler or something. The additional class could also effect your power pool. Take a mage class like 80 guardian & 40 coercer (master1 charm yay!), and you would probably have more mana than an 80 guardian & 40 bruiser (FD!). At least you wouldn't have any higher than level 40 abilities and skill level though. So, if you were say a 80guard/40coercer... you would have a T4 mez and like.... 200 subjegation or something. You probably couldn't successfully stun or mez anything at level 80, but you would have level 40 power regen and charm. You wouldn't have any sweet ancient teachings though like channel/tower of stone/tsunami/hurricane/dispatch etc. Probably no 2nd class AAs either because that would be a cluster *bleep*.Oh... and everyone knows the world ends 2012 anyway<img src="/eq2/images/smilies/9293feeb0183c67ea1ea8c52f0dbaf8c.gif" border="0" alt="SMILEY" width="15" height="15" />

[Lithran]

I would think the name game (fantasy type) they come out with will be totally different then eq1 or 2. It will support dual core and all that new hardware we all have. Heck, it might even support quad core (if they were smart).I think also keeping the classes is good, but the history not. Reason is if you keep the history from either eq1 or 2 everyone will start calling it eq3. It should be a new world. All new lore and history. Man the fun they can have!. Not limited by current lore.I think they should also have build in multiple monitors. I don't mean with a little add on (which you will need) but that you can turn it on and choose what you see. Like see right behind you on one screen.

[Maergoth]

EQ3 would do nothing more than pull EQ players from other EQ games. All of them would expect improvements, and all of them would settle for something they consider "Easier".The EQ2 engine is pliable enough.. and the play styles are all covered between EQ1 and EQ2. They can do almost ANYTHING with EQ2, from game coding (Dual Core Support) to a complete graphical revamp if it became necessary.As of right now, it would be easier to correct EQ2's flaws by fixing them within EQ2. No new game, no having to choose between progress and friends on EQ2, or fresh stagnant buggy start on EQ3.And when I say EQ3, everyone knows there won't be a game titled EQ3, but a game intended to succeed this one.

[Noaani]

<cite>Earar wrote:</cite><blockquote><p>or giving you the same ability as crafting.</p><p>right now you can have a first and second profession (tinkering and transmuting)</p><p>why not being able to have a second adventure profession? <img src="/eq2/images/smilies/3b63d1616c5dfcf29f8a7a031aaa7cad.gif" border="0" alt="SMILEY" /> </p><p>it would totally unbalance the game, I'd love it <img src="http://forums.station.sony.com/eq2/images/smilies/283a16da79f3aa23fe1025c96295f04f.gif" border="0" alt="SMILEY" width="15" height="15" /></p></blockquote>Tinkering is as much a secondary adventure class as it is a secondary tradeskill class, reguardless of what its called.

[trovan2]

<p>I think that the new game (whether its EQ3 or "Norrath" something) will be a few years out. SOE will wait for some game-breaking technology or concept before expiring it's use of EQ1 + 2 (or at least starting up a new MMORPG). </p><p>Think of the future: holograph and VR technology are in various stages of development by certain companies....</p><p>Will touchscreens be the normal? Have you heard of the new Windows platform Microsoft has develped (a literal "table-top" system lol)?</p><p>Perhaps they will wait for when creative AIs are feasible, so unique interaction with the world is possible ...</p><p>A random-loot system simliar to Diablo, but smarter?</p><p>A system where the player makes the world?</p><p>Who knows? The developers do ... we just wait. <img src="http://forums.station.sony.com/eq2/images/smilies/283a16da79f3aa23fe1025c96295f04f.gif" border="0" alt="SMILEY" width="15" height="15" /></p>

[Vumael]

<p>Velious.</p>

[Straughm]

<p>If Sony was to make any form of EQ3, no matter what the name of it would be, it would be absolutely stupid of them.  Every other month a new MMO comes out for PC.  And everyother month the current MMO's thin out in players.  If Sony desided to make a 3rd generation Everquest, they would be thinning out the already thin playing core of their 2 games.  When it gets to the point of playing a game and it's only you and 5 other people on the server (exaggeration)...no one will play.  </p><p>There is more than enough unexplored content from EQ1 in EQ2 to continue with EQ2 without a thought for a 3rd EQ.  And then there is the aspect of it being a FANTASY game, who says that all of Norrath was explored in EQ1?  Hell, EQ1 could have just been one hemisphere of a planet for all it's worth.</p><p>Expansion is the key...not thinning out it's playing core.</p>

[Ceridon]

<cite>Straughm@Guk wrote:</cite><blockquote><p>If Sony was to make any form of EQ3, no matter what the name of it would be, it would be absolutely stupid of them.  Every other month a new MMO comes out for PC.  And everyother month the current MMO's thin out in players.  If Sony desided to make a 3rd generation Everquest, they would be thinning out the already thin playing core of their 2 games.  When it gets to the point of playing a game and it's only you and 5 other people on the server (exaggeration)...no one will play.  </p><p>There is more than enough unexplored content from EQ1 in EQ2 to continue with EQ2 without a thought for a 3rd EQ.  And then there is the aspect of it being a FANTASY game, who says that all of Norrath was explored in EQ1?  Hell, EQ1 could have just been one hemisphere of a planet for all it's worth.</p><p>Expansion is the key...not thinning out it's playing core.</p></blockquote>Agreed, if you look on the "world" map when you first create a character, can you honestly say that looks like all of the world of Norrath?

[Qandor]

<cite>Straughm@Guk wrote:</cite><blockquote><p>If Sony was to make any form of EQ3, no matter what the name of it would be, it would be absolutely stupid of them.  Every other month a new MMO comes out for PC.  And everyother month the current MMO's thin out in players.  If Sony desided to make a 3rd generation Everquest, they would be thinning out the already thin playing core of their 2 games.  When it gets to the point of playing a game and it's only you and 5 other people on the server (exaggeration)...no one will play.  </p><p>There is more than enough unexplored content from EQ1 in EQ2 to continue with EQ2 without a thought for a 3rd EQ.  And then there is the aspect of it being a FANTASY game, who says that all of Norrath was explored in EQ1?  Hell, EQ1 could have just been one hemisphere of a planet for all it's worth.</p><p>Expansion is the key...not thinning out it's playing core.</p></blockquote><p>So you are saying that SoE should just content themselves with maintaining EQ2 and expanding that? So in a market where a game has demonstrated that 10 million subs is possible, they should content themselves with 150-200k? Nothing wrong with 200k per se but I'm sure they are lusting after a bigger market share and like it or not Fantasy is still the king in the MMO space and will continue to be so for the forseeable future. They misfired with EQ2. That doesn't mean that another Everquest might not get it right and pull large numbers. They hit their high point years ago when EQ1 crested at 500k subs, which was a huge number back in the day. Since then they haven't had a single product that even approached that number in a much larger market. They will certainly maintain EQ2 just as they have EQ1, so EQ2, if you happen to love it, will be here no matter what they do. There was a lot of interest in EQ2 pre-launch but they made 2 critical mistakes. First, was the decision to go toe-to-toe with WoW's launch. Secondly, actually related to number one, they pushed EQ2 out unpolished to do so.  That's why Smedley saying "oh, it was mistake to call it EQ2" is nothing more than a smoke screen. Certainly some expected EQ2 to be more like EQ1. However, are you going to believe that they left here because it was not and then turned around and went to WoW? They didn't go back to EQ1, that's for certain. Their other problem was that their "future proofed" game required a pretty decent system to get a satisfactory playing experience. Many potential players did not have such a system at that time.</p><p>Now I suppose they could develop an entirely new fantasy IP from the ground up but that will not stop people from comparing it to EQ since for most people, SoE means Everquest. Whether they do an EQ3 or another fantasy title, you can be certain of one thing. They will kill themselves trying to make it as much like WoW as possible and in doing so they will fail once again. They have to stop copying other stuff and become innovative if they want to crack the Blizzard stranglehold on the market. </p>

[Wydow]

If I was to put money on it, I would say that EQ3 will be launched mid-late 2009.

[Lethe5683]

They can't beat WoW by copying it.  Why would anyone who's currently playing WoW switch to another game thats just like it?  They need to do something different to succeed.  EQ2 isn't too bad as it is, mostly things like itemization and poor performance are what kill it.

[Aneova]

SOE has 3 more slices to an ever growing pie that are getting ready to launch, Agency, Free Realms, and DC Universe Online, that's 10 slices of pie for SOE. Not many other companies can boast that (course how many actually play all of SOE's titles i'll leave for more important folks to guess at)

[LordPazuzu]

<cite>Aneova@Kithicor wrote:</cite><blockquote>SOE has 3 more slices to an ever growing pie that are getting ready to launch, Agency, Free Realms, and DC Universe Online, that's 10 slices of pie for SOE. Not many other companies can boast that (course how many actually play all of SOE's titles i'll leave for more important folks to guess at)</blockquote>Agreed.  SOE's business model is not putting everything into one game, but selling a stable of diversely themed or niche market games and offering the Station Pass to allow access to all of them.  SOE has three high fantasy titles in their stable of games already, I can't see them thinking it would be profitable to add a 4th, especially when the overall market is saturated with high fantasy MMOs.

[Detor]

<cite>Galafk@Permafrost wrote:</cite><blockquote>I bet there alraddy working on everquest III. The big question is when it will come out. </blockquote>New interview with Smedly:<a href="http://venturebeat.com/2008/09/26/qa-with-sony-online-entertainments-john-smedley-on-making-online-games/" target="_blank" rel="nofollow">http://venturebeat.com/2008/09/26/q...g-online-games/</a><p>VB: Sony's EverQuest was once the most popular, most talked about online role-playing game, but its been eclipsed by World of Warcraft. Do you ever see a way that an EverQuest property can recapture that top spot and regain the crown?</p><p>JS: EverQuest is a franchise that we have a lot of faith in, it's been around 10 years now and we've released "EverQuest 2″ very successfully. We've run both games very profitably, and they've made a lot of money. More importantly they've made a lot of players very happy. So yes, we're investing in the EverQuest franchise for the future. And <b>you'll see more EverQuest games in the future</b>. We liked the look of the crown, and we'd like to put that back on.</p>

[Froed20]

<cite>Xalmat wrote:</cite><blockquote>The biggest mistake of EverQuest II was calling it EverQuest II. I seriously doubt SOE will repeat the same mistake twice in this regard.</blockquote>I actually have to disagree with this statement.  I think the biggest draw of this game is the nostalgic element that's presented when we get to go through the game and see what has happened to the world of Norrath, and to see all the changes that have occurred.  Don't get me wrong, its nice to see new zones and places that we never saw in the original, but the real magic of this game that has held me here since launch is the trip down memory lane.  It's like driving down a street you once lived on, only the crazy old lady next door has moved out and been replaced by a pack of rabid gnolls waiting to tear your throat out.  Yeah, good times.

[pohsibsk]

Gnomes finally figuring out time travel and going back to try and prevent the shattering of Norrath?  <img src="/smilies/3b63d1616c5dfcf29f8a7a031aaa7cad.gif" border="0" alt="SMILEY" />

[Lethe5683]

I bet they will release some sort of "eq III" reguardless of what they call it.  And certainly it won't be for quite awile, I imagine they are going to continue expanding eq2 for a long time.

[Keyh]

Maybe they're putting all this work into Vanguard's engine so that if they can fix the bugs, and maybe change some of the things that were complained about (chunking/bad performance) so that they can use it in the next "Everquest"....maybe. Probably not though.

[Qandor]

<cite>Keyh wrote:</cite><blockquote>Maybe they're putting all this work into Vanguard's engine so that if they can fix the bugs, and maybe change some of the things that were complained about (chunking/bad performance) so that they can use it in the next "Everquest"....maybe. Probably not though.</blockquote>Good lord, let's hope not.

[Gaige]

According to this:<div></div><div><a href="http://venturebeat.com/2008/09/26/qa-with-sony-online-entertainments-john-smedley-on-making-online-games/" target="_blank" rel="nofollow">http://venturebeat.com/2008/09/26/q...g-online-games/</a></div><div></div><div>and Smedley's quote here:</div><div></div><div><span class="Apple-style-span"> EverQuest is a franchise that we have a lot of faith in, it's been around 10 years now and we've released "EverQuest 2″ very successfully. We've run both games very profitably, and they've made a lot of money. More importantly they've made a lot of players very happy. So yes, we're investing in the EverQuest franchise for the future. And you'll see more EverQuest games in the future. We liked the look of the crown, and we'd like to put that back on.</span></div><div></div><div>It looks like we'll definately be seeing an EverQuest 3.  Its probably what Butler and Nino and a few other folks from the VG team that SOE retained are doing right now, if I had to guess.</div>

[troodon]

Odus would be my guess.

[Qandor]

<cite>Gaige wrote:</cite><blockquote><div></div><div>It looks like we'll definately be seeing an EverQuest 3.  Its probably what Butler and Nino and a few other folks from the VG team that SOE retained are doing right now, if I had to guess.</div></blockquote>That would be my guess also. Theme for an EQ3 should be bringing back the magic. The Norath of EQ1 felt like a far more magical place than the current iteration. In EQ2 realism was empahasized. That hurt the game imho.

[ke'la]

You know there is more to Everquest then being an MMO, and while I will grant you that someday eventually there will be another MMO baised in Norath, my guess is that the "Everquest" games that Smed was talking about in that quote where more along the lines of Chamions of Norath, and other Single player games set in the Everquest Universe.As far as what the Retained VG people are doing... well based on the HUGE improvements over there I would say they are working on VG.To the person that said the MMO market has "Proven" that you can get 10million players... well it's also "Proven" that it was a confulance of good timing and an already INSAINLY popular IP, and no one sence has been able to come with-in ICBM range of it. If anything the years sence WoW's release have proven that the Fanacy MMO market is WAY over saturated right now. In a few more years when WoW really starts to show it's age and the Clone army has moved on to cloning the "next great thing", then maybe it will be time to work on a new Fantacy MMO, but until the current fad of making Fantacy Basied MMOs dies down, I don't think it is a very good idea to pile another on top. Which is why SoE is looking in new directions with New IPs like Agency, DC Online and Free Relms.

[Qandor]

<cite>kela wrote:</cite><blockquote>As far as what the Retained VG people are doing... well based on the HUGE improvements over there I would say they are working on VG.</blockquote>They weren't retained as in retained for Vanguard. At the time it was stated that those names, Butler, Nino, etc were being sent on to a secret project for SoE as in something other than Vanguard.

[Qandor]

<cite>kela wrote:</cite><blockquote>To the person that said the MMO market has "Proven" that you can get 10million players... well it's also "Proven" that it was a confulance of good timing and an already INSAINLY popular IP, and no one sence has been able to come with-in ICBM range of it. If anything the years sence WoW's release have proven that the Fanacy MMO market is WAY over saturated right now. In a few more years when WoW really starts to show it's age and the Clone army has moved on to cloning the "next great thing", then maybe it will be time to work on a new Fantacy MMO, but until the current fad of making Fantacy Basied MMOs dies down, I don't think it is a very good idea to pile another on top. Which is why SoE is looking in new directions with New IPs like Agency, DC Online and Free Relms. </blockquote><p>Yes, WoW has proven that a single game can draw 10 million subs. How or why is not the issue. They have greatly expanded the MMO space in terms of subscribers. If it was done once, it can be done again and 10 million isn't necessarily the upper limit either. </p><p>Fantasy is still king until proven otherwise. Has any non-Fantasy MMO ever reached even 500k subs? AoC had 800k in box sales for  game that was suspect by a lot of folks going in. Not sure what WAR sales figures are like but I bet they are quite decent. In the non-Fantasy realm we have Eve which has done ok, especially seeing as it was built on a shoestring budget by about 18 people but what do they really have maybe 200k in subs? Not sure what City of Heroes has drawn but they have not been a threat to any other title. PotB pretty much tanked, they were down to 4 servers not that very long after release. How did the Matrix do? Hey, how well did SWG do seeing as it may be the single most popular IP of the modern era? Did not hold up too well in the MMO space. </p><p>It may seem to you that there is a glut of fantasy titles but there is soon to be a glut of non-fantasy titles as well. Stargate Worlds, Startrek online, the Agency, DC online, just to name a few. The biggest successes to date have been Fantasy titles. Everquest for its time, Lineage in Asia, WoW in the current era. </p><p>Fantasy may be a fad but it is a fad that is world wide and has lasted a very long time in more than just MMO's. I'm certain it still has very long legs. If it were me and I was chucking 50-100 million dollars at a major MMO title, it would most certainly be fantasy based. </p><p>You know one thing about MMO's and games in general. We tend to view everything in terms of what we have played and what we have done. However, there is a brand new crop of players entering the market every year and they haven't been tired of what has gone before since they never played any of it. For them everything is fresh.</p><p>Finally, if Smed was talking about single player Everquest games as you suggest, why would he state "we liked the look of the crown and would like to put it back on". the crown was  a reference to Everquest being top dog at one time, which WoW now wears. He is not going to grab the crown, top dog in the MMO space, by making a single player game. </p>

[Thunderthyze]

<p>Take EQ....give it a complete graphics overhaul to bring it into the 21st century. Update the UI and remove the outdated chat based quest progression design. Increase the subscription to $50 a month.</p><p>Voila</p><p>A game to rule them all!</p>

[ke'la]

<cite>Qandor wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>kela wrote:</cite><blockquote>To the person that said the MMO market has "Proven" that you can get 10million players... well it's also "Proven" that it was a confulance of good timing and an already INSAINLY popular IP, and no one sence has been able to come with-in ICBM range of it. If anything the years sence WoW's release have proven that the Fanacy MMO market is WAY over saturated right now. In a few more years when WoW really starts to show it's age and the Clone army has moved on to cloning the "next great thing", then maybe it will be time to work on a new Fantacy MMO, but until the current fad of making Fantacy Basied MMOs dies down, I don't think it is a very good idea to pile another on top. Which is why SoE is looking in new directions with New IPs like Agency, DC Online and Free Relms. </blockquote><p>Yes, WoW has proven that a single game can draw 10 million subs. How or why is not the issue. They have greatly expanded the MMO space in terms of subscribers. If it was done once, it can be done again and 10 million isn't necessarily the upper limit either. </p><p>Fantasy is still king until proven otherwise. Has any non-Fantasy MMO ever reached even 500k subs? AoC had 800k in box sales for  game that was suspect by a lot of folks going in. Not sure what WAR sales figures are like but I bet they are quite decent. In the non-Fantasy realm we have Eve which has done ok, especially seeing as it was built on a shoestring budget by about 18 people but what do they really have maybe 200k in subs? <span style="color: #ff0000;">Eve was designed as a Niech game and it the most "hardcore" of MMOs on the market(meaning least accessable) it was NOT DESIGNED for WoW numbers and never wanted them. </span> Not sure what City of Heroes has drawn but they have not been a threat to any other title. <span style="color: #ff0000;">Repeative game play and cloned "Dungons" did this game in. </span>PotB pretty much tanked, they were down to 4 servers not that very long after release. <span style="color: #ff0000;">Have you accually played this game, outside of ship to ship combat, and the "Stock Market" mini-game this game stinks, and it take way to long and way to iffy to fight ship to ship, I think the in eccessablity of PotBS is more the reason why it's not got "WoW numbers... that and it was designed from the start to be a Neich game. </span>How did the Matrix do? Hey, how well did SWG do seeing as it may be the single most popular IP of the modern era? <span style="color: #ff0000;">Um, a) SWG was about as "Star Wars" like as Battlestar Gilatica was(you couldn't even go into space at launch)... I think it's lack of Star Wars Feel and the HUGE issues it had at launch were far more the reason behind its down fall then its Genre.</span> Did not hold up too well in the MMO space. </p><p>It may seem to you that there is a glut of fantasy titles but there is soon to be a glut of non-fantasy titles as well. Stargate Worlds, Startrek online, the Agency, DC online, just to name a few. The biggest successes to date have been Fantasy titles. Everquest for its time, Lineage in Asia, WoW in the current era. <span style="color: #ff0000;">So two Science Fiction Games one of which already died once and is an IP that has NEVER done well as a video game, One Spy Game(the only one on the market) and One Superhero game(One of Three that will be on the market when it launchs and the only one with a Major IP behind it) is a glut huh? but I don't know about 10 different Fantacy games isn't? LotRO, WoW, WAR, EQ, EQ2, Leage, Leage 2, Guild Wars, Guild Wars 2, FFXI, etc. </span></p><p>Fantasy may be a fad but it is a fad that is world wide and has lasted a very long time in more than just MMO's. I'm certain it still has very long legs. If it were me and I was chucking 50-100 million dollars at a major MMO title, it would most certainly be fantasy based. </p><p>You know one thing about MMO's and games in general. We tend to view everything in terms of what we have played and what we have done. However, there is a brand new crop of players entering the market every year and they haven't been tired of what has gone before since they never played any of it. For them everything is fresh.</p><p>Finally, if Smed was talking about single player Everquest games as you suggest, why would he state "we liked the look of the crown and would like to put it back on". the crown was  a reference to Everquest being top dog at one time, which WoW now wears. He is not going to grab the crown, top dog in the MMO space, by making a single player game.<span style="color: #ff0000;">He could have been talking about "Taking the Crown" with Agency or DC Online as well, or most likly FreeRelms... that part did not necicarally mean EQ.</span></p></blockquote>Lastly, I am not saying that SoE will never make a Norath based MMO, again. I am saying that right now in the current market it would be better for SoE to invest in expaineding the Market more, instead of trying to steal WoW's Fan Base, because the ONLY way to get WoW numbers is to get WoW subscribers, because the MMO market especally for Fantacy games is already well Mined. There are however a huge number of people that just don't like Fantacy games that would be interested in games based on other Genres. IF those games are well exicuted... Unlike say VG or SWG(at launch).

[Kaarim]

Well if you come to think of the "TSO" seems to be a completely new EverQuest "II". Soon with the new live update the game will function smoother, run much better, graphics tweaked, overall performance will be increased. Changes to classes, additions, fixes, improvements. New techniques and game/combat mechanics, a new area to adventure in. The game will be totally different I believe come Nov 18th. Can't wait! <img src="/smilies/283a16da79f3aa23fe1025c96295f04f.gif" border="0" alt="SMILEY" />I 

[Scrappe]

<p>I dont think EQ2 is popular enough to warrant EQ3 just yet.</p><p>IMO, EQ2 still has the best "realistic" graphics in MMO'ing. That's not to say there arent better looking MMO's out there like Lineage2 and the upcoming Aion, but that's an opinion based on personal taste. </p><p>EQ2's graphic engine is a hodgepodge of duct tape and chewing gum. It lacks a centralized structure that's easy to modify, so there's room for a new streamlined graphic's engine, which would most likely suggest a new game, but I'm finding that doubtful. </p>

[trovan2]

<p>Ok, so WoW has taken the lead. Why? In the 1990s there is the Warcraft francise that was a big hit on the PC. Then, that game was supported by expansions over the years. So, you have a game that has been nurtured for several years, then left alone to gather some dust (makes players crave another game). Then Blizzard announces a new MMORPG that is based on the already popular PC game. Not only that, but SOE was really the only <i>competing</i> company in terms of MMOs, perfect timing.</p><p>What did everquest have? A couple Norrath games on the PS2. The fan base for PS2 was a good size, but not nearly as big as the number of people that use computers. Not only that, but when SOE annouces a MMORPG for Norrath (Everquest), all the PS2 fans now need to buy or update a computer to play it, as opposed to Warcraft, which all the fans are already on the PC.</p><p>Another thing, Blizzard boasts 10 million players, but I am sure that number is grossly inaccurate. The way they count players is by accounts. How many people have 2, 3, or even 4 (rediculous!) accounts? A lot im sure. Now add up the number of PEOPLE that play (not accounts), and the number drops.</p><p>Also, WoW targets a younger people, giving Blizzard a larger fan base. EQ (1 and 2) have both targeted an older range of people, so the number of fan usually are smaller.</p><hr /><p>Either way, SOE needs to think of something different to use in their games to reclaim "the crown", whether that be in game play or technology.</p><p>In my opinion, EQ has won and WoW is just a good rip off in alot of areas.</p>

[Nolrog]

<cite>Wydow@Najena wrote:</cite><blockquote>If I was to put money on it, I would say that EQ3 will be launched mid-late 2009.</blockquote>Less than a year away?  They'd have already mentioned it was in development. 

[Nolrog]

<cite>Fayle@Mistmoore wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>Xalmat wrote:</cite><blockquote>The biggest mistake of EverQuest II was calling it EverQuest II. I seriously doubt SOE will repeat the same mistake twice in this regard.</blockquote>I actually have to disagree with this statement.  I think the biggest draw of this game is the nostalgic element that's presented when we get to go through the game and see what has happened to the world of Norrath, and to see all the changes that have occurred.  Don't get me wrong, its nice to see new zones and places that we never saw in the original, but the real magic of this game that has held me here since launch is the trip down memory lane.  It's like driving down a street you once lived on, only the crazy old lady next door has moved out and been replaced by a pack of rabid gnolls waiting to tear your throat out.  Yeah, good times.</blockquote><p>The mistake wasn't creating the game, the mistake was calling it Everquest 2.  The nostalgia is exactly right, and a big draw for a lot of people.  But the fact that it was EQ2 made a lot of people think it was a sequel/successor/repalcement for EQ, and not another game in the genre, set in the same world with a lot of the same lore behind it.  </p>

[Thunndar316]

<cite>Burdock2 wrote:</cite><blockquote><p>I truly hope so!</p><p>New engine! New classes! Set 100 years after EQ2 (similar to the new 4th ED FR D&D Campaign)</p><p>Just how much more can they expand EQ2? EQ has 15 expansions already - how about updating the game and engine for the current gaming market?</p><p>/</p></blockquote>I hate the shattered lands.  If there is an EQ3 it needs to go back in time before Luclin exploded. 

[Rahatmattata]

<cite>trovan2 wrote:</cite><blockquote><p>Another thing, Blizzard boasts 10 million players, but I am sure that number is grossly inaccurate. The way they count players is by accounts. How many people have 2, 3, or even 4 (rediculous!) accounts? A lot im sure. Now add up the number of PEOPLE that play (not accounts), and the number drops.</p></blockquote>So.. maybe only 5 million people play wow. Even still that's a lot.

[Thunndar316]

<p>The next expansion for EQ2 should be Velious.  Veeshan could return and refreeze the continent or something.  <img src="http://forums.station.sony.com/eq2/images/smilies/ed515dbff23a0ee3241dcc0a601c9ed6.gif" border="0" alt="SMILEY" width="15" height="15" /></p><p>The sleeper, HoT, ToV, Kael, Thurg, ST, god I miss it</p>

[Norrsken]

<cite>Rahatmattata wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>trovan2 wrote:</cite><blockquote><p>Another thing, Blizzard boasts 10 million players, but I am sure that number is grossly inaccurate. The way they count players is by accounts. How many people have 2, 3, or even 4 (rediculous!) accounts? A lot im sure. Now add up the number of PEOPLE that play (not accounts), and the number drops.</p></blockquote>So.. maybe only 5 million people play wow. Even still that's a lot.</blockquote>Yep. and I for one am glad that wow caught that crowd.biggest is not by default the best. Its just biggest.

[Katelei]

<cite>Thunndar316 wrote:</cite><blockquote><p>The next expansion for EQ2 should be Velious.  Veeshan could return and refreeze the continent or something.  <img src="http://forums.station.sony.com/eq2/images/smilies/ed515dbff23a0ee3241dcc0a601c9ed6.gif" border="0" alt="SMILEY" width="15" height="15" /></p><p>The sleeper, HoT, ToV, Kael, Thurg, ST, god I miss it</p></blockquote>Those do bring back a lot of memories.  I loved Crystal Caverns!  One of the best spots to level back then!

[Qandor]

<cite>kela wrote:</cite><blockquote>Lastly, I am not saying that SoE will never make a Norath based MMO, again. I am saying that right now in the current market it would be better for SoE to invest in expaineding the Market more, instead of trying to steal WoW's Fan Base, because the ONLY way to get WoW numbers is to get WoW subscribers, because the MMO market especally for Fantacy games is already well Mined. There are however a huge number of people that just don't like Fantacy games that would be interested in games based on other Genres. IF those games are well exicuted... Unlike say VG or SWG(at launch). </blockquote><p>So we have a huge number of people who just do not like fantasy games and yet virtually every non-Fantasy title created to date has failed to pull them in. What's to say that yet another non-Fantasy title will pull them in? So a developer has a choice, go after the elusive non-Fantasy market, dreaming up something that might finally interest them or tap into a market they know for sure exists. Easy choice in my book if you are investing millions. Perhaps one day someone will finally make an absorbing non-Fantasy title for the masses but it has not happened yet. I hear many, like yourself, that want a non-Fantasy game but have a laundry list of what is wrong with every non-Fantasy title on the market. So they grab you anyway into a fantasy game or so I assume if you are posting here. </p><p>Millions of subscribers across a wide array of fantasy titles proves beyond a doubt that there is still a huge market for fantasy games. Non-fantasy has yet to prove itself as a viable mass market MMO target audience.   </p>

[Cusashorn]

<cite>Ulvhamne@Nagafen wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>Rahatmattata wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>trovan2 wrote:</cite><blockquote><p>Another thing, Blizzard boasts 10 million players, but I am sure that number is grossly inaccurate. The way they count players is by accounts. How many people have 2, 3, or even 4 (rediculous!) accounts? A lot im sure. Now add up the number of PEOPLE that play (not accounts), and the number drops.</p></blockquote>So.. maybe only 5 million people play wow. Even still that's a lot.</blockquote>Yep. and I for one am glad that wow caught that crowd.biggest is not by default the best. Its just biggest. </blockquote>Technically, by the whole Account Counting thing, WoW's population is beat out by many magnitudes by Korean MMOs like Ragnarok Online and Lineage 2.

[Aenielle]

<p>Taken from a recent Jhon Smedley interview at MTV multiplayer (http://multiplayerblog.mtv.com/2008/10/03/sony-online-talks-dc-everquest-massive-action-game):</p><p>"It’s pretty safe to say that “EverQuest” has not seen its last game. So we’ve got our own cards to play there, and I think we will play them at the right time. But the quality level will be something that people will be very happy with."</p><p>So it would seem EQ3 is in the works as we speak <img src="/smilies/8a80c6485cd926be453217d59a84a888.gif" border="0" alt="SMILEY" /></p>

[Jeenyous]

<p>I'm hoping for EQ3 to be a prequel to EQ1.</p><p>I'm hoping for EQ3 to come out as soon as possible.</p><p>I love EQ2 but I do not care if it "catches up" with all those other expansions.  I'd rather have a vastly superior mmorpg of the EverQuest line that takes full advantage of today's technology.  So basically, I would like all those upgrades people discuss about EQ2 needing to happen for a brand new game (EQ3) taking place 500 years before EQ1.</p>

[Nolrog]

<cite>Fizzletop@Splitpaw wrote:</cite><blockquote><p>Taken from a recent Jhon Smedley interview at MTV multiplayer (http://multiplayerblog.mtv.com/2008/10/03/sony-online-talks-dc-everquest-massive-action-game):</p><p>"It’s pretty safe to say that “EverQuest” has not seen its last game. So we’ve got our own cards to play there, and I think we will play them at the right time. But the quality level will be something that people will be very happy with."</p><p>So it would seem EQ3 is in the works as we speak <img src="/eq2/images/smilies/8a80c6485cd926be453217d59a84a888.gif" border="0" alt="SMILEY" /></p></blockquote>Could certainly infer that from his statement.  "The quality is something people WILL be happy with."  That's more definitive than saying "we need to make sure that the quality is something people are happy with" (or something more generic like that.)

[Buneary]

<p><edit></p>

[Thunndar316]

<cite>Enrique@Lucan DLere wrote:</cite><blockquote>I saw that SoE has plans to put their MMOs on consoles now (PS3, PSP). I hope that if there is an EQ3, or some other EQ based MMO, that it isnt PS3 exclusive and its released on the PC simultationly as well. I am never buying a PS3 or PSP and that would just also kill the game. The PS3 isnt stellar atm, the Wii and 360 dominate (too bad a 360 version would be out of the question).Also, I hope that they dont make the game need an expensive killer rig to run/run on max, nor depend on "future technology" (we all saw how well THAT worked out...). A rig with recent hardware that came out within the last 3-4 years should be enough. One of the reasons WoW is so popular is cause it can run on most any PC decently , Im not saying to make the game look like WoW, but you can get a really good looking game with low hardware requirments. It depends on the engine really.</blockquote><p>One good thing about the PS3 is every console has a built in hard drive along with Wi-Fi.  It is very possible that the next version of EQ could cross the PC/console line and allow PS3 owners to play with PC owners.  The PS3 version could include a mouse and a keyboard with bluetooth capability to allow console gamers to play right along with PC gamers and not dumb down the interface.  We have already seen games like Guitar Hero and Rock Band released with hardware like this at increased costs to the consumer and sell very well.</p><p>Also, you have the PlayStation Store right there on the PS3 where you could purchase expansions and pay your monthly fee.</p><p>Personally I do own a PS3 but I would still opt for the PC version.  </p>

[Xeph]

<p>In regard to the 10,000,000 WoW subs...</p><p>Everyone knows that only two people play it. Bill Gates (Horde) has 5 million accounts and Steve Jobs (Alliance) has the other 5 million. Please get it right people.</p>

[Arcueid]

<p>As a PS3 and a 360 owner, I see one clear addicting advantage with the 360 to ps3..the Achievements system. A nice little ego booster to show your useless acomplishments! <img src="/smilies/3b63d1616c5dfcf29f8a7a031aaa7cad.gif" border="0" alt="SMILEY" /></p><p>For the record, wished 360 came with built in Wi-fi without having to buy a 99$ USD addon.</p>

[Thunndar316]

<cite>Fizzletop@Splitpaw wrote:</cite><blockquote><p>Taken from a recent Jhon Smedley interview at MTV multiplayer (http://multiplayerblog.mtv.com/2008/10/03/sony-online-talks-dc-everquest-massive-action-game):</p><p>"It’s pretty safe to say that “EverQuest” has not seen its last game. So we’ve got our own cards to play there, and I think we will play them at the right time. But the quality level will be something that people will be very happy with."</p><p>So it would seem EQ3 is in the works as we speak <img src="/eq2/images/smilies/8a80c6485cd926be453217d59a84a888.gif" border="0" alt="SMILEY" /></p></blockquote>Oh I would almost guarantee that something is in development right now.  We may not hear about it for a couple more years and it may not be called EQ3 but they are working on something. 

[Thunndar316]

<cite>Arcueid@Guk wrote:</cite><blockquote><p>As a PS3 and a 360 owner, I see one clear addicting advantage with the 360 to ps3..the Achievements system. A nice little ego booster to show your useless acomplishments! <img src="/eq2/images/smilies/3b63d1616c5dfcf29f8a7a031aaa7cad.gif" border="0" alt="SMILEY" /></p><p>For the record, wished 360 came with built in Wi-fi without having to buy a 99$ USD addon.</p></blockquote>Yeah the 360 is kind of a rip off compared to the PS3.  Not only the built in WiFi but a Blu Ray player lol.  I haven't turned on my PS3 or my 360 in a while now.  EQ2 is all I need.  However, Gears 2 is coming soon <img src="http://forums.station.sony.com/eq2/images/smilies/b2eb59423fbf5fa39342041237025880.gif" border="0" alt="SMILEY" width="15" height="15" />

[epyon333]

<p align="left">Ok heres what i think EQ3 should be.  I think it sould be a continuation of the true timeline and does something to eliminate the alternate timeline.  Which means a true sequeal to EQ that, with a major event brings EQ2s alt timeline or atleast some of the events and lore back in to the EQ1 timeline.  Im not a fan of alternate timelines and realties.  They always make things difficult and confusing, but i do like playing eq2.</p><p align="left"> They should do this by using expansions and world events, in both games, to get the story going and make the transition easy from eq1 and eq2 to eq3.  </p><p align="left">For the advancement system id love to see something simalar to SWG pre NGE.  I loved that system, i really enjoyed how complex and unique it was and would jump to any game with a similar system.</p><p align="left"> And continue to use updates to advance a story, not just before an expansion.</p><p align="left"> </p><p align="left"> </p><p align="left"> </p><p align="left"> </p><p align="left"> </p>

[Fernia]

EQ2 still has a very good looking engine. All it needs is bringing up to date (which is already happening by the looks of it) and there's no real upper limit to how big the game can get. If you run out of room on Norrath there's always other planes, space, moons etc to fill out.The biggest thing EQ2 really needs is a sales department thats bigger than a closet with a fax machine and a part-time employee. Honestly, this game has the least media exposure I've ever seen outside of its comfort zone demographic.

[afarak]

Agreed. It seems like the main reason WoW got so big was because Blizzard knows how to advertise. Who didn't think seeing that scene from Office Space spoofed into a WoW ad wasn't brilliant (not to mention the fabled FoHawk Warrior!)? EQ2 needs something like that (humor) to pull in the mainstream audience. It's sad to say that a lot of gamers out there don't even know this mmo exists.As far as the game itself, I would like to see the old zones updated like they did with Everfrost. Give me a live update that tweaks around Antonica, Commonlands, and all the other old world zones (espescially that Halfling city that no one ever goes into except for the HQs...whatever it's called). I hate having to go to Timerous Deep just to do the quests so I can get the best armor at those lower levels (I hate the quests and that rediculous city, but the rewards are the best at that level). Make the game's zones balanced so that there isn't such an advantage to starting at any one area. Upgrade Lavastorm like you did with Everfrost (although I'm sure this is coming at some point). It would be great to get an expansion that did this, plus added a few extra dungeons here and there so that the lvl 1-50 content would be refreshed. After that, upgrade KoS (although this plays second fiddle to my previous suggestion since the next expansion is giving more dungeons for this lvl range). Ultimately, I'm excited at the direction this game is going. I just wish it would hurry up a bit. I hate having to wait 3 months for something cool to happen like Everfrost.Oh...and what's up with Kurn's Tower? Are we EVER getting into that place?

[Giral]

<p><span style="font-size: small;font-family: Times New Roman;">it would be great if with  EQ3 they could make it compatable with eq2 and eq1</span></p><p><span style="font-size: small;font-family: Times New Roman;">there could be time rifts that allow you to go back in-time into eq2 or eq1 </span></p><p><span style="font-size: small;font-family: Times New Roman;">for each of the 3 games you would have seperate layouts and UI that would load up wyle your in transit thru the time warp </span></p><p><span style="font-size: small;font-family: Times New Roman;">this would make eq3 the largest mmo game beyond imagining , with all the content in eq3, all the content that would be in eq2 by then and all the content in eq1 , it would unify all three games allowing the players in each game to play in each eq, tons of people to guild/group play with, there would be endless raid content ,endless group content, endless solo content, would be so many difrent skills to learn in each game for variations on classes/abilities/skills. </span></p><p><span style="font-size: small;font-family: Times New Roman;">like watching flashbacks in movies who cares if the graphics in eq1 and eq2 are dated by then , it would make sence that the Ancient times were a more Rugged look /chuckle. they had to travel to and from raid zones up hill both ways in the snow in lioncloths back then.  </span></p><p><span style="font-size: small;font-family: Times New Roman;">you would have seperate bags, and banks in each game so you wouldnt take gear into diffrent realms, but you could also choose a feature similair to mentoring(but not overpowered like mentoring is lol) and get a standerd buff for your level until you can gear up in each section of the game.  or they could figure a way to make armor interachangable for all realms lol so you could raid a level 100 duneon in eq3 and it would be equal to a lvl 100 item from an eq1 or eq2 raid.</span></p><p><span style="font-size: small;font-family: Times New Roman;">and..and..and </span></p><p><span style="font-size: small;font-family: Times New Roman;">/wakes up... oh just a dream...wipes drool away... /falls back asleep </span></p>

[StaticLex]

I want to play a MMO that utilizes dual processors AND video cards, not this seemingly outdated EQ2 engine.  As far as EQ1 is concerned.. there comes a point when they simply have to pull the plug on the older games.  Fans of the franchise get too spread out over the various incarnations and server populations everywhere suffer.  Shutting down a game like EQ1 would make those people stop clinging to their silly abacus of a computer and upgrade to something that could play EQ2 or EQ3.

[Qandor]

<cite>StaticLex wrote:</cite><blockquote>I want to play a MMO that utilizes dual processors AND video cards, not this seemingly outdated EQ2 engine.  As far as EQ1 is concerned.. there comes a point when they simply have to pull the plug on the older games.  Fans of the franchise get too spread out over the various incarnations and server populations everywhere suffer.  Shutting down a game like EQ1 would make those people stop clinging to their silly abacus of a computer and upgrade to something that could play EQ2 or EQ3.</blockquote>I think shutting down a game that is still profitable and has a dedicated fanbase would be beyond dumb. When those folks had EQ1 pulled out from beneath them do you really think they would be clamoring to switch to another SoE title? If you cannot entice them to move to your new product you certainly will not get them by shutting down what they are playing. They will go elsewhere.

[Batelu]

<p><cite>Qandor wrote:</cite></p> <blockquote><cite>StaticLex wrote:</cite> <blockquote>I want to play a MMO that utilizes dual processors AND video cards, not this seemingly outdated EQ2 engine.  As far as EQ1 is concerned.. there comes a point when they simply have to pull the plug on the older games.  Fans of the franchise get too spread out over the various incarnations and server populations everywhere suffer.  Shutting down a game like EQ1 would make those people stop clinging to their silly abacus of a computer and upgrade to something that could play EQ2 or EQ3.</blockquote> I think shutting down a game that is still profitable and has a dedicated fanbase would be beyond dumb. When those folks had EQ1 pulled out from beneath them do you really think they would be clamoring to switch to another SoE title? If you cannot entice them to move to your new product you certainly will not get them by shutting down what they are playing. They will go elsewhere.</blockquote> <p>Party don't readily upgrade their computers. Large parts of the US are still on dialup and have no intention of getting broadband, pathetic though US broadband is. Its hard to convince people to upgrade their computers, especially with the Dow dropping 40% in the last few months, job layoffs, cut backs, etc. People are spending money on necessities, not their PCs.</p> <p>Not me though, for me, my PC is a necessity. I just ordered another 4GB of RAM this morning. <img src="/smilies/3b63d1616c5dfcf29f8a7a031aaa7cad.gif" border="0" alt="SMILEY" /> After that, I'll be waiting until Intel's Westmere(nehalem refresh) and whatever AMD launches before I do a complete rebuild. Although, I may upgrade my Radeon 4870 to its successor in the middle of 2009 . . . provided my job doesn't get canned anyway.</p> <p>Oh, back on topic. Since EQ2 is only on expansion number 5 and EQ1 just launched their 15th, I don't see them launching an EQ3 anytime soon. Having said that, I also believe that there is a succesor to EQ2 in the planning stages, though 'planning stages' could mean drunken doodles on bar napkins by SOE devs. <img src="/smilies/8a80c6485cd926be453217d59a84a888.gif" border="0" alt="SMILEY" /></p> <p>EQ2's engine could use some updating, and future expansions could address that, adding in better SMP/SMT support, better video card performance, better textures, etc.</p>

[PakMonyet]

<p>Check out this new tech thru the links below..... I hope they put into EQ2 but certainly they've gotta put it in EQ3!</p> <p><a href="http://www.iz3d.com/" target="_blank" rel="nofollow">http://www.iz3d.com/</a></p> <p><a href="http://tngames.com/" target="_blank" rel="nofollow">http://tngames.com/</a></p> <p><a href="http://www.emotiv.com/" target="_blank" rel="nofollow">http://www.emotiv.com/</a></p>

[DerykRenaln]

<p>I would really like to see a 3rd EverQuest game that makes a "connect" between EQ1 and EQ2 in a new environment. What I mean by this is...it would be a 3rd EverQuest game that acts as a "hub" between the shards in time of Norrath. Let me explain...</p><p>SOE could develop an engine that would have the ability to allow players to traverse the space / time continuum of Norrath to make it possible to have ONE massive game! Can you imagine...suddenly your two games become one! 100k or so players with EQ1 and 300k with EQ2 suddenly become 400k, plus the draw of a third product with all of the best of EQ1, EQ2, and Vanguard to boot! Hell even toss a portal to Vanguard and you've suddenly got 500k players overnight in one game!</p><p>The third Everquest product would start out in the Plane of Time... and I mean make this thing massive with its own content! The entire plane with portals that lead to the various EverQuest time shards (EQ1 and EQ2). Even throw in a primitive Norrath where we see savage continents with various pre-historic beasts. Perhaps famous Norrathians have found out a plot by some nefarious EQ1 or EQ2 villains that have joined forces beyond time to conquor ancient Norrath to subvert the traditional timeline of Norrath. And our favorite heroes of EQ1 and EQ2 have banded together to ask adventurers to assist them in this endeavor. Players could choose one of the factions to aid and hinder the other; thus the introduction of RvR in EQ! Of course this would not be the emphasis, but RvR in certain areas of the new ancient Norrath...where hastily erected giant timber walls prevent the RvR from spilling into the "safe areas".</p><p>Of course this would mean upgrade of the EQ1 and EQ2 engines using the same new engine to make all of this possible. Yes oh "ancient ones" (talking to you EQ1 players...) that means you'd be dragged kicking and screaming into the 21st century! *grin* ie...GO OUT AND BUY A NEW FRIGGING COMPUTER ALREADY! *smile* Just a little humor with a WHOLE lot of truth to it.</p><p>I know this sounds like fantasy and probably is, but if it were possible, wouldn't that be one step closer to making the EQ franchise a more competitive product?</p><p>So now EQ would be competing with what...ALL of the Fantasy MMOs out there today, plus going beyond...allowing cross-game play! Heck let's even make it so that the new EQ would allow cross-server time travel!</p><p>I'd leave EVERY other MMO I play to play this game!</p>

[Saphirewind]

<p>EQ3 Operating System.</p><p>Storyline:</p><p>The airship from the D.I.R.T.Y. excavation discoveries has been in use for some time, though the full potential of it's propulsion system has just been realized and an expedition team has been assembled to go explore the shattered moon and find out/explain (using some form of scientific method) what happened and see the full extent of the damage that was done.  The initial recon helped lead to the formation of an outpost and more permanent research site (similar to the one in Bonemire) so that teams could explore farther out onto the shards.  A group goes missing, returning some days later, though looking as though they had aged years; with tales of a stable void rift that led to other times/places (one of which we would learn later is the world of EQ1) and after years of research, they finally worked out how to get back, but without this method the rift could send a person anywhere in space/time/planes randomly.  In the course of this discovery they learn that Norrath is destroyed by one of the big baddies; but they don't know exactly when this happens, or who is the cause.  So it is your task great adventurer to travel to Norrath of old and train/look for clues as to who would want to/have a reason to/be powerful enough to actually completely destroy Norrath and use what you discover to attempt to avert the destruction of the world as your character knows it.</p><p>That is just my idea, cause it would tie in the lore of EQ1 and EQ2 and tie the two together without forcing the lore of EQ2 to exactly follow that of EQ1.</p>

[Lethe5683]

<p>They dont even need to change the lore.  The main problem is gameplay mechanics are so messed up in eq2 is sad.</p>

[Phlix]

<p>I still don't understand why people play EQ1. </p>

[Jeenyous]

<p>EQ2 does not need to catch up and fill in all this Odus, Velious, etc., content before an EQ3 can be released.</p><p>EQ3 can and should truly be a "next generation" mmorpg just as EQ2 was.  It should cater to the next generation, high-end machine owners as well.  In my opinion, this would win over community members that would enhance the game experience.</p><p>EQ3 is overdue and I'd play it immediately.</p><p>EQ3 could be a prequel, set sometime before EQ1.</p>

[wolfseeker]

<p>eq2 has a long time to go. at least 4 or more years. and if you go by the eq timeline its still kicking alittle. i doubt eq3 is even a glimmer of a thought. now for whats next maybe a free odus adventure pack. then maybe planes or something along that line. maybe a boost in tradeskill/adventure to 90 maybe something different than AA points. how about opening the qeynos/freeport castles meet some past npcs or meet your rulers. or how about a new leader?? maybe qeynos get takenover or freeport overthrown??</p>

[ke'la]

<p><cite>Jeenyous wrote:</cite></p><blockquote><p>EQ2 does not need to catch up and fill in all this Odus, Velious, etc., content before an EQ3 can be released.</p><p><span style="color: #ff0000;">Nope it doesn't you are correct there... though it would be nice</span></p><p>EQ3 can and should truly be a "next generation" mmorpg just as EQ2 was.  It should cater to the next generation, high-end machine owners as well.  In my opinion, this would win over community members that would enhance the game experience.</p><p><span style="color: #ff0000;">One of the biggest issues at EQ2's launch was you needed a "Super Computer" to play it, while I agree it should be state of the art, they would also need to scale it back to older PCs far better then EQ2 did.</span></p><p>EQ3 is overdue and I'd play it immediately.</p><p><span style="color: #ff0000;">Thats, cool however many people think that Fantacy MMOs are over done and want a change of pace, and entering an already crowded field at this point would be a bad idea.</span></p><p>EQ3 could be a prequel, set sometime before EQ1.</p><p><span style="color: #ff0000;">They already did that it is called EQOA and I believe it still has a fairly good following... though I also think development of that game has come close to if not completly stopped.</span></p></blockquote><p> When they make EQ3* it will most likly be a cross platform game wich will also play on the PS3(or PS4 depending on how long they wait). Personally, I'll wait until other SoE crossplatform titles come out befor I get my hopes up for EQ3*.</p><p>*BTW, while it will be set in Norath and PLAYERS will call it EQ3(probly) SoE will not... It will be Norrathian Adventures or some other name... to make it clear that it is NOT a Sequel just like EQ2 was not a Sequel though everyone thinks it is.</p>

[Qandor]

<p><cite>kela wrote:</cite></p><blockquote><p><span style="color: #ff0000;">Thats, cool however many people think that Fantacy MMOs are over done and want a change of pace, and entering an already crowded field at this point would be a bad idea.</span></p></blockquote><p>Apparently 11 million people playing WoW and millions of others playing the myraid of Fantasy titles on the market may disagree with wanting a change of pace. There are changes of pace out there now but they, relatively speaking, they are not drawing flies. Fanrasy is far from dead and still the biggest draw on the market. If I were investing 50 million+, the amount it takes to make a quality MMO these days, I would most certainly be investing that in a proven genre, ie Fantasy,</p>

[Lethe5683]

<p>It's not really over done, there are bajillions of crappy fantasy MMOs but no really good ones.</p>

[Froed20]

<p>I'd prefer them to keep working on EQ2, but some of the issues affecting the game (i.e. graphics system and class balance) are just so overcomplicated and messed up, that it may be easier for them to simply wipe the slate clean and start on an EQ3.  I'd be willing to bet that if they went and made a new version of the game, consolidated the classes to a more manageable size (cut it in half and scrap the good-evil counterpart stuff... they are the same classes with just a shift in focus on things like aoe vs. single for the most part), get the graphics system working correctly so we don't wear the same recolored armor, and add a little more variety to the gameplay other than grinding, that this would be one of the best mmo's in the market.  The lore is there, the places are some of our favorites, its just the technical aspects that are kicking the game's butt and making things difficuilt.</p>

[Eshaye]

<p><cite>wolfseeker wrote:</cite></p><blockquote><p>eq2 has a long time to go. at least 4 or more years. and if you go by the eq timeline its still kicking alittle. i doubt eq3 is even a glimmer of a thought.</p></blockquote><p>If EQ2 has only 4 years to go, they better be thinking about EQ3 or a similar high fantasy title to take over the mantle. And I hope they already have a good idea of what this next title might be otherwise people will just move along to other games and companies. It takes years to make an MMO, and I'm sure SOE wants to be on the ball and keep their fans playing Sony games. That is IF EQ2 drops in subs dramatically over the next four years.</p><p>I would ask, pretty please, that if there is to be an Eq3, please get rid of the whole evil vs good theme. It drives me nuts, I understand that let's say Teir'Dal would not get along with other cities and faction should remain, but being called good or evil solely on race or choice of deity, or class for that matter, really rubs me the wrong way on an RP viewpoint. I think it's a DnD remnant that needs to die.</p>

[Rorasis]

<p>EQ2 was never a next-gen game.  What makes one?  Polygon count?  Hardly.  There are so many limitations in EQ2 that make it almost as big a dinosaur as EQ1.  Zoning, no flying mounts, terrible multicore "support" and little to no video card support.  This game was not a "next gen" game, ever.  Please stop referring to it as such.</p>

[ke'la]

<p><cite>Riliszkas@Splitpaw wrote:</cite></p><blockquote><p>EQ2 was never a next-gen game.  What makes one?  Polygon count?  Hardly.  There are so many limitations in EQ2 that make it almost as big a dinosaur as EQ1.  Zoning, no flying mounts, terrible multicore "support" and little to no video card support.  This game was not a "next gen" game, ever.  Please stop referring to it as such.</p></blockquote><p>So I guess WoW... Warhammer... LotRO... AoC are all of the same generation as EQ1 too then Huh? as they all have similar limitations as EQ2 in many cases.</p><p>What makes a "Next Gen" game IS the graphics because that is the only thing that can be Objectivly quantified, what is the differance really between the "Current Gen", Madden '06 for the PS2 and the "Next Gen" Madden '06 for the 360? It's even harder in the computer relm when Generation Changes are Evolutionary and not Revolutionary like they are in Consols. The Fact that EQ2 requires DX9 video cards to run well is what made it Next Gen as DX is the only thing that computers have to mark generation changes.</p><p>Legacy, game play elements and not being optimized for a system does not deturmin the generation of a game. Oh and BTW when EQ2 launched NO GAME had multicore Support even future titles didn't because it was believed that Intel's path of every faster Single Cores was the way to go.</p>

[Rorasis]

<p><cite>kela wrote:</cite></p><blockquote>{0}</blockquote><p>Yeah, let's take a look at things like WoW.  A smoother game, to be sure.  Now supports multicore, and it even has a better shadow system than EQ2 does now.  WoW is updating itself with the times.  EQ2 is not.  Vanguard looks better and runs better to boot.  Both of these games have a "seamless" world that allows for things like flying mounts and even boats in Vanguard's case.</p><p>EQ2 is dated and has been since it's release.  If they actually do make an EQ3, I hope more thought is given to it's design than that of EQ2.</p>

[Eshaye]

<p><cite>Riliszkas@Splitpaw wrote:</cite></p><blockquote><p>EQ2 was never a next-gen game.  What makes one?  Polygon count?  Hardly.  There are so many limitations in EQ2 that make it almost as big a dinosaur as EQ1.  Zoning, no flying mounts, terrible multicore "support" and little to no video card support.  This game was not a "next gen" game, ever.  Please stop referring to it as such.</p></blockquote><p>It was next gen when it was released. Now it's current gen.... Like Ke'La said they were betting on  technology to go one way, but instead it went another and SOE lost their bet. It still was developped for the next generation, and unless I miss something they are updating the game it just seems to take them longer for whatever reason.</p>

[Hrungnir]

<p>I cannot believe anyone is talking about Everquest 3 so early.  EQ2 is 4 years old.  So many are talking about EQ3 just so it can utilize a new graphics engine.  Ever heard of a graphics engine overhaul?  Everyone who played EQ1 sure has.  I despise the "zoning" concept, but maybe an engine overhaul could change that.  The big doors and invisible zone lines could be made into seamless zone entrances.  A MASSIVE one, but perhaps it is possible.  The simple pixelation, resolution, and bits can all be changed midstream.  Seeing how god-awful the current engine runs (still choppy at top quality with full shadows on a 1GB GDDR3 top of the line in early 2007 video card, over 2 years after release [Removed for Content] is that about, the card kicked the living hell out of Oblivion, which has FAAAAAAARRRR better graphics), greater graphics could make the game run MORE smoothly if done properly. </p><p>I'm no video game designer, nor will I pretend to be.  This is some complex, complicated stuff.  However, after speaking to programmers, a game with superior graphics today could run on a 64MB DDR video card if the programming concept was completely overhauled and made into less layers instead of 5 trillion layers on top of 5 trillion layers (exaggeration on the layers concept but you know what I mean).  This tells me that if the graphics programming was done intelligently and carefully, greater graphics could also mean smoother graphics.</p><p>The concept of thinning out an already thin EQ/EQ2 population at a time when EQ2 has so many more things to uncover (like locked areas in Freeport and Qeynos, and just what the hell does the Overlord's fortress or the Queen's Castle look like?)  is just silly.  If EQ2 is an alternate timeline, then the shattering of Luclin could uncover an unlimited amount of new content, such as visitors from other worlds who noticed the shattering, visiting the shards of Luclin, uncovering worlds long since vanished under the oceans but the change in gravity from the moon shattering brought them out of the water.  The possibilities are endless. </p><p>Just have patience, I beg of you.  The game is getting better by the day.  When I think back to launch of EQ2, God that game sucked.  Now I look at the game today, the ONLY MMO I have ever played where the mid level content is just as exciting as the endgame content, I love the path the game is taking now.  SOE just needs to get the word out there about it.  Maybe after an excellent engine overhaul advertising would be more viable.  Who knows.</p>

[Qandor]

<p><cite>Hrungnir wrote:</cite></p><blockquote><p>I cannot believe anyone is talking about Everquest 3 so early.  EQ2 is 4 years old.  So many are talking about EQ3 just so it can utilize a new graphics engine.  Ever heard of a graphics engine overhaul?  Everyone who played EQ1 sure has.  I despise the "zoning" concept, but maybe an engine overhaul could change that.  The big doors and invisible zone lines could be made into seamless zone entrances.  A MASSIVE one, but perhaps it is possible.  The simple pixelation, resolution, and bits can all be changed midstream.  Seeing how god-awful the current engine runs (still choppy at top quality with full shadows on a 1GB GDDR3 top of the line in early 2007 video card, over 2 years after release [Removed for Content] is that about, the card kicked the living hell out of Oblivion, which has FAAAAAAARRRR better graphics), greater graphics could make the game run MORE smoothly if done properly. </p><p>I'm no video game designer, nor will I pretend to be.  This is some complex, complicated stuff.  However, after speaking to programmers, a game with superior graphics today could run on a 64MB DDR video card if the programming concept was completely overhauled and made into less layers instead of 5 trillion layers on top of 5 trillion layers (exaggeration on the layers concept but you know what I mean).  This tells me that if the graphics programming was done intelligently and carefully, greater graphics could also mean smoother graphics.</p><p>The concept of thinning out an already thin EQ/EQ2 population at a time when EQ2 has so many more things to uncover (like locked areas in Freeport and Qeynos, and just what the hell does the Overlord's fortress or the Queen's Castle look like?)  is just silly.  If EQ2 is an alternate timeline, then the shattering of Luclin could uncover an unlimited amount of new content, such as visitors from other worlds who noticed the shattering, visiting the shards of Luclin, uncovering worlds long since vanished under the oceans but the change in gravity from the moon shattering brought them out of the water.  The possibilities are endless. </p><p>Just have patience, I beg of you.  The game is getting better by the day.  When I think back to launch of EQ2, God that game sucked.  Now I look at the game today, the ONLY MMO I have ever played where the mid level content is just as exciting as the endgame content, I love the path the game is taking now.  SOE just needs to get the word out there about it.  Maybe after an excellent engine overhaul advertising would be more viable.  Who knows.</p></blockquote><p>You have a 4 year old product that has a subsistence level playerbase. Why would you make a big investment in that? Many have tried the game and moved on to other things. Only a fresh product would actually give them a chance of attracting substantial numbers of players.</p><p>If you love EQ2 it will undoubtedly be here for some time to come. However, for many of us, we are looking for something new. This game has held me for 4 years for the most part but it has grown stale and successive expansions are becoming less and less interesting. I'm looking for a fresh new game. It could be an SoE Everquest themed game or something else. An EQ3 type game would be my preference but barring that I'll go elsewhere.</p>

[Misiakpisiak]

<p>Well I'm still not giving up on the 'EQ1 with EQ2/3/VG graphics' idea. Someone needs to drag that old cow back out into the sunlight, turbo-charge the engine and hit it in the interface with the sex hammer. *folds arms grumpily*</p>

[Thunndar316]

<p><cite>Hrungnir wrote:</cite></p><blockquote><p>I cannot believe anyone is talking about Everquest 3 so early.  EQ2 is 4 years old.  So many are talking about EQ3 just so it can utilize a new graphics engine.  Ever heard of a graphics engine overhaul?  Everyone who played EQ1 sure has.  I despise the "zoning" concept, but maybe an engine overhaul could change that.  The big doors and invisible zone lines could be made into seamless zone entrances.  A MASSIVE one, but perhaps it is possible.  The simple pixelation, resolution, and bits can all be changed midstream.  Seeing how god-awful the current engine runs (still choppy at top quality with full shadows on a 1GB GDDR3 top of the line in early 2007 video card, over 2 years after release [Removed for Content] is that about, the card kicked the living hell out of Oblivion, which has FAAAAAAARRRR better graphics), greater graphics could make the game run MORE smoothly if done properly. </p><p>I'm no video game designer, nor will I pretend to be.  This is some complex, complicated stuff.  However, after speaking to programmers, a game with superior graphics today could run on a 64MB DDR video card if the programming concept was completely overhauled and made into less layers instead of 5 trillion layers on top of 5 trillion layers (exaggeration on the layers concept but you know what I mean).  This tells me that if the graphics programming was done intelligently and carefully, greater graphics could also mean smoother graphics.</p><p>The concept of thinning out an already thin EQ/EQ2 population at a time when EQ2 has so many more things to uncover (like locked areas in Freeport and Qeynos, and just what the hell does the Overlord's fortress or the Queen's Castle look like?)  is just silly.  If EQ2 is an alternate timeline, then the shattering of Luclin could uncover an unlimited amount of new content, such as visitors from other worlds who noticed the shattering, visiting the shards of Luclin, uncovering worlds long since vanished under the oceans but the change in gravity from the moon shattering brought them out of the water.  The possibilities are endless. </p><p>Just have patience, I beg of you.  The game is getting better by the day.  When I think back to launch of EQ2, God that game sucked.  Now I look at the game today, the ONLY MMO I have ever played where the mid level content is just as exciting as the endgame content, I love the path the game is taking now.  SOE just needs to get the word out there about it.  Maybe after an excellent engine overhaul advertising would be more viable.  Who knows.</p></blockquote><p>Well EQ1 went live in 1999 and EQ2 went live in 2004.  It is now almost 2009.</p><p>Time for EQ3.</p><p>They need to do things right this time.  Eliminate the stupid good/evil thing, and go back in time before the god aweful shattered lands idea.  I would act like it never even happened and start all over again.  Make the real sequal to EverQuest what it should have been, which is a total overhaul of the original game with some new lands thrown in. </p><p>Simplify the classes!  You don't need 2 druids, 2 wizards, 2 warriors, 2 monks, 2 shaman, 2 Rangers, 2 Rogues, 2 Bards, 2 Clerics, 2 Enchanters, ect.</p><p>Combine their skills and just have 1 class, like EQ1 did.   Make it easier on yourselves to balance them.  Make the world totally open and zoneless, except for instances of course. </p><p>We dont want a bunch of bell hopping either.  We want enormous landscapes and FLYING MOUNTS to travel within them.</p><p>Stop catering to the hardcore.  Raids should not require 24 people.</p>

[ke'la]

<p><cite>Thunndar316 wrote:</cite></p><blockquote><p><cite>Hrungnir wrote:</cite></p><blockquote><p>I cannot believe anyone is talking about Everquest 3 so early.  EQ2 is 4 years old.  So many are talking about EQ3 just so it can utilize a new graphics engine.  Ever heard of a graphics engine overhaul?  Everyone who played EQ1 sure has.  I despise the "zoning" concept, but maybe an engine overhaul could change that.  The big doors and invisible zone lines could be made into seamless zone entrances.  A MASSIVE one, but perhaps it is possible.  The simple pixelation, resolution, and bits can all be changed midstream.  Seeing how god-awful the current engine runs (still choppy at top quality with full shadows on a 1GB GDDR3 top of the line in early 2007 video card, over 2 years after release [Removed for Content] is that about, the card kicked the living hell out of Oblivion, which has FAAAAAAARRRR better graphics), greater graphics could make the game run MORE smoothly if done properly. </p><p>I'm no video game designer, nor will I pretend to be.  This is some complex, complicated stuff.  However, after speaking to programmers, a game with superior graphics today could run on a 64MB DDR video card if the programming concept was completely overhauled and made into less layers instead of 5 trillion layers on top of 5 trillion layers (exaggeration on the layers concept but you know what I mean).  This tells me that if the graphics programming was done intelligently and carefully, greater graphics could also mean smoother graphics.</p><p>The concept of thinning out an already thin EQ/EQ2 population at a time when EQ2 has so many more things to uncover (like locked areas in Freeport and Qeynos, and just what the hell does the Overlord's fortress or the Queen's Castle look like?)  is just silly.  If EQ2 is an alternate timeline, then the shattering of Luclin could uncover an unlimited amount of new content, such as visitors from other worlds who noticed the shattering, visiting the shards of Luclin, uncovering worlds long since vanished under the oceans but the change in gravity from the moon shattering brought them out of the water.  The possibilities are endless. </p><p>Just have patience, I beg of you.  The game is getting better by the day.  When I think back to launch of EQ2, God that game sucked.  Now I look at the game today, the ONLY MMO I have ever played where the mid level content is just as exciting as the endgame content, I love the path the game is taking now.  SOE just needs to get the word out there about it.  Maybe after an excellent engine overhaul advertising would be more viable.  Who knows.</p></blockquote><p>Well EQ1 went live in 1999 and EQ2 went live in 2004.  It is now almost 2009.</p><p>Time for EQ3.</p><p>They need to do things right this time.  Eliminate the stupid good/evil thing, and go back in time before the god aweful shattered lands idea.  I would act like it never even happened and start all over again.  Make the real sequal to EverQuest what it should have been, which is a total overhaul of the original game with some new lands thrown in. </p><p>Simplify the classes!  You don't need 2 druids, 2 wizards, 2 warriors, 2 monks, 2 shaman, 2 Rangers, 2 Rogues, 2 Bards, 2 Clerics, 2 Enchanters, ect.</p><p>Combine their skills and just have 1 class, like EQ1 did.   Make it easier on yourselves to balance them.  Make the world totally open and zoneless, except for instances of course. </p><p>We dont want a bunch of bell hopping either.  We want enormous landscapes and FLYING MOUNTS to travel within them.</p><p>Stop catering to the hardcore.  Raids should not require 24 people.</p></blockquote><p>EQ2 was never ment to be a Sequel to EQ1, hence the reason Smed said biggest "Marketing" mistake they made with EQ2 was calling it EQ2... and it will not be a mistake he will make again. IF there is an EQ4(techincally EQ2 IS EQ3 as EQOA came befor EQ2), it will also NOT be a Sequel, as a sequel will interfere with the lore of the other games, as such it will also be called something like Norrathian Adventures or something like that. And being that its pritty much a certainty that the next EQ game will be cross platform... be ready for a game that is even less like EQ1 then EQ2 is.</p>