The Shadow Odyssey (Name change?)

Sethok · 05-19-2008, 04:54 PM

I just noticed if you do an Everquest II trademark search now on the official government trademark site, The Shadow of Odyssey has now been changed to 'The Shadow Odyssey'. Seems to change the perspective quite a bit. Interesting.

ATLDawgy · 05-19-2008, 05:29 PM

Sethok wrote:

I just noticed if you do an Everquest II trademark search now on the official government trademark site, The Shadow of Odyssey has now been changed to 'The Shadow Odyssey'. Seems to change the perspective quite a bit. Interesting.

Guess this is why there's been no official announcement. I believe RoK was announced around May 10th of 2007 for the November launch. Wonder if TSO will be a November launch or will they push it into 2009 say February.

Galithdor · 05-19-2008, 05:47 PM

Akaros@Unrest wrote:

Sethok wrote:
I just noticed if you do an Everquest II trademark search now on the official government trademark site, The Shadow of Odyssey has now been changed to 'The Shadow Odyssey'. Seems to change the perspective quite a bit. Interesting.
Guess this is why there's been no official announcement. I believe RoK was announced around May 10th of 2007 for the November launch. Wonder if TSO will be a November launch or will they push it into 2009 say February.

Expansions are once a year...they wouldnt push it back to febuary of 09 SMILEY

Articulas · 05-19-2008, 05:54 PM

It still doesn't change it much for me. I maybe dead wrong, but i think its still dealing with Odus.

ATLDawgy · 05-19-2008, 06:29 PM

Galithdor wrote:

Akaros@Unrest wrote:
Sethok wrote:
I just noticed if you do an Everquest II trademark search now on the official government trademark site, The Shadow of Odyssey has now been changed to 'The Shadow Odyssey'. Seems to change the perspective quite a bit. Interesting.
Guess this is why there's been no official announcement. I believe RoK was announced around May 10th of 2007 for the November launch. Wonder if TSO will be a November launch or will they push it into 2009 say February.
Expansions are once a year...they wouldnt push it back to febuary of 09 " width="15" height="15" />

Any company that sacrifices their product to force a deadline will eventually fail. That said, check the history of EQ2 expansions and adventure packs at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Everqu...Adventure_Packs.

Only 2 have been released in November. As a matter of fact, there's only been a single 1 year gap between expansions ever and that was from EoF to RoK which could be attributed to the amount of work that went into EoF.

Add in the original EQ2 launching in November of 2004. They could stick to an annual release but I wasn't aware of an official announcement of such. They seem to push them out when they are ready.

Articulas · 05-19-2008, 06:55 PM

History lesson time.They came out with two expansion in a one year time period, Desert of flames, and Kingdom of Sky. After these two expansions they learned their lesson. After these two and multiple adventure packs they decided to release one expansion a year to increase quality of the expansion, and one free content package a year. Now, why would they need to push back an expansion pack that's already been worked on extensively for a year? The expansion will probably be pretty good when it is released in November. Most of their maneuvering from the past 3 years has actually been pro-consumer in almost every way.

Arianah · 05-19-2008, 07:13 PM

Akaros@Unrest wrote:

They could stick to an annual release but I wasn't aware of an official announcement of such. They seem to push them out when they are ready.

I'm pretty sure there was an official announcement that both EQ and EQ2 expansions would now only be released once a year.

ATLDawgy · 05-19-2008, 07:39 PM

Articulas@Antonia Bayle wrote:

History lesson time.They came out with two expansion in a one year time period, Desert of flames, and Kingdom of Sky. After these two expansions they learned their lesson. After these two and multiple adventure packs they decided to release one expansion a year to increase quality of the expansion, and one free content package a year. Now, why would they need to push back an expansion pack that's already been worked on extensively for a year? The expansion will probably be pretty good when it is released in November. Most of their maneuvering from the past 3 years has actually been pro-consumer in almost every way.

That's all well and good and I don't disagree with the history lesson at all which is why I linked the history. I'm just curious about the time table since no official announcement has been made and they are still settling on the title. I'm also saying that they shouldn't force it out in November just to say it came out in November. Big questions still remain about the content of this expansion, both zone and mechanics. I'm sure the devs are tired of being beat up with every expansion by people complaining about their classes in the new expansion and are paying more attention to how each class will behave and function with the new content. If they plan to add new zones and quests only then the expansion will be ready way earlier than November. If they are adding any combination of a new AA page, level increase, starting zone, starting race, revamp of existing AA/CAs/zones, etc then they might have a lot more work to do on maintaining whatever vision of balance and functionality they have for this game. How can they "extensively work" on this game without beta feedback when it's player issues that dictate the success of a launch?

The only history we can go by is the history that SOE has changed their philosophy on releasing new content several times. I for one hope they are planning to do more than just add new zones and quests so I would hope that they take the time to make sure the expansion (now the 5th) is the smoothest launch ever with the fewest amount of nerfs post-launch ever. They might want to consider making the beta longer this time because a lot of the "broken" issues people complain about the first day or two into an expansion are issues that should have never gotten out of beta in the first place. The whole reason these issues make it to live is because they are brought up in the weeks before launch which results in daily tweaks to the beta server and they run out of time to actually "fix" the outstanding issues such as class balance or CAs. To stick to the release schedule, these outstanding issues make it to the live game and are addressed over the first few weeks with patches. If they want to be pro-consumer they need to make TSO as solid as can be before launch. Take the id software approach and instead of declaring a date simply state that release is "when it's ready". The devs would take much less of a beating if they satisfied issues from beta player feedback during beta than to address it on live servers against the non-beta community. Heck, announce an anticipated launch date with a disclaimer that it is subject to change per beta feedback and they'll be ok. IMO, the final month of beta should be devoted to resolving class and quest issues like NPCs not updating or a certain CA not functioning according to description and the associated balance of the CAs value. Once the tweaking or nerfing stops in beta for a predefined duration for stability, then the product is ready for live. I guess I'm just keeping my fingers crossed that they get away from only adding new content as the main focus and pay more attention to the class issues that still exist.

Gethani · 05-19-2008, 09:09 PM

http://gaminggrannie.blogspot.com/ I did a blog about this very name "The Shadow Odyssey" back on April 24th. Gethani

Nolrog · 05-19-2008, 09:24 PM

Akaros@Unrest wrote:

Only 2 have been released in November. As a matter of fact, there's only been a single 1 year gap between expansions ever and that was from EoF to RoK which could be attributed to the amount of work that went into EoF.

That doesn't make sense to me. They put so much work in to EoF that the expansion after that had a 1 year gap.

Besides the fact that 1 year was the planned gap all along.

Nolrog · 05-19-2008, 09:24 PM

Gethani wrote:

http://gaminggrannie.blogspot.com/ I did a blog about this very name "The Shadow Odyssey" back on April 24th. Gethani

I get an error: Blog Not Found.

Gethani · 05-19-2008, 09:42 PM

Try thisThis worked for me. I am not sure why the other did not work.

Cusashorn · 05-19-2008, 10:30 PM

Articulas@Antonia Bayle wrote:

It still doesn't change it much for me. I maybe dead wrong, but i think its still dealing with Odus.

Yeah but the developers have stated the recent lore they've released ever since Erollisi Day are all related to the new expansion. We're looking at Everfrost, Rivervale, Innothule Swamp, Guk, and Grobb so far.

Captain_Xpendab · 05-19-2008, 10:38 PM

Not too surprised they changed it, it was kind of an awkward title and they probably also want to avoid confusion due to its similarity to Shadows of Luclin (yes, some people have already been speculating along that line). Is it just me, or does either version of the title create the sense that this expansion is going to be very different from what we've seen before?

Clowd · 05-19-2008, 11:30 PM

Trademark links:http://tess2.uspto.gov/bin/showfiel...tate=buml9s.2.2 http://tess2.uspto.gov/bin/showfiel...tate=buml9s.2.3start changing all abbreviates to "TSO"

TaleraRis · 05-19-2008, 11:52 PM

Cusashorn wrote:

Articulas@Antonia Bayle wrote:
It still doesn't change it much for me. I maybe dead wrong, but i think its still dealing with Odus.
Yeah but the developers have stated the recent lore they've released ever since Erollisi Day are all related to the new expansion. We're looking at Everfrost, Rivervale, Innothule Swamp, Guk, and Grobb so far.

I've been taking those less as a checklist of places that might be involved and more that there's some overall story that involves all the people in that party in something.

Cusashorn · 05-20-2008, 12:19 AM

Gwyneth@Najena wrote:

Cusashorn wrote:
Articulas@Antonia Bayle wrote:
It still doesn't change it much for me. I maybe dead wrong, but i think its still dealing with Odus.
Yeah but the developers have stated the recent lore they've released ever since Erollisi Day are all related to the new expansion. We're looking at Everfrost, Rivervale, Innothule Swamp, Guk, and Grobb so far.
I've been taking those less as a checklist of places that might be involved and more that there's some overall story that involves all the people in that party in something.

It very well could be, but so far none of the stories indicate anything even remotely related to the Erudites or Odus. If they are connected to Odus, then we have yet to see it.

ke'la · 05-20-2008, 01:02 AM

Akaros@Unrest wrote:

Articulas@Antonia Bayle wrote:
History lesson time.They came out with two expansion in a one year time period, Desert of flames, and Kingdom of Sky. After these two expansions they learned their lesson. After these two and multiple adventure packs they decided to release one expansion a year to increase quality of the expansion, and one free content package a year. Now, why would they need to push back an expansion pack that's already been worked on extensively for a year? The expansion will probably be pretty good when it is released in November. Most of their maneuvering from the past 3 years has actually been pro-consumer in almost every way.
That's all well and good and I don't disagree with the history lesson at all which is why I linked the history. I'm just curious about the time table since no official announcement has been made and they are still settling on the title. I'm also saying that they shouldn't force it out in November just to say it came out in November. Big questions still remain about the content of this expansion, both zone and mechanics. I'm sure the devs are tired of being beat up with every expansion by people complaining about their classes in the new expansion and are paying more attention to how each class will behave and function with the new content. If they plan to add new zones and quests only then the expansion will be ready way earlier than November. If they are adding any combination of a new AA page, level increase, starting zone, starting race, revamp of existing AA/CAs/zones, etc then they might have a lot more work to do on maintaining whatever vision of balance and functionality they have for this game. How can they "extensively work" on this game without beta feedback when it's player issues that dictate the success of a launch?
The only history we can go by is the history that SOE has changed their philosophy on releasing new content several times. I for one hope they are planning to do more than just add new zones and quests so I would hope that they take the time to make sure the expansion (now the 5th) is the smoothest launch ever with the fewest amount of nerfs post-launch ever. They might want to consider making the beta longer this time because a lot of the "broken" issues people complain about the first day or two into an expansion are issues that should have never gotten out of beta in the first place. The whole reason these issues make it to live is because they are brought up in the weeks before launch which results in daily tweaks to the beta server and they run out of time to actually "fix" the outstanding issues such as class balance or CAs. To stick to the release schedule, these outstanding issues make it to the live game and are addressed over the first few weeks with patches. If they want to be pro-consumer they need to make TSO as solid as can be before launch. Take the id software approach and instead of declaring a date simply state that release is "when it's ready". The devs would take much less of a beating if they satisfied issues from beta player feedback during beta than to address it on live servers against the non-beta community. Heck, announce an anticipated launch date with a disclaimer that it is subject to change per beta feedback and they'll be ok. IMO, the final month of beta should be devoted to resolving class and quest issues like NPCs not updating or a certain CA not functioning according to description and the associated balance of the CAs value. Once the tweaking or nerfing stops in beta for a predefined duration for stability, then the product is ready for live. I guess I'm just keeping my fingers crossed that they get away from only adding new content as the main focus and pay more attention to the class issues that still exist.

With the release of Echoes of Faydwar, SoE officially announced that they are moving from a 6 month expansion cycle to a yearly expansion cycle, and with the success of EoF, they decided to expand that idea to Everquest Live as well. So there has been an official announcement that we will see 1 expansion every year, and as the both expansions released after the switch from 6 months to 1 year expansions both where released on the same Tuesday in November(the Second) and that Everquest Live is also releasing on the same schedule it is very safe bet that TSO will be released on the Second Tuesday in November.

Editedmind · 05-20-2008, 02:38 AM

From this title we can now deduce that the Odyssey of the title now refers to the roughly four years it's been for SOE to fix the Shadow rendering of the game so that it doesn't kill top of the line machines. I highly anticipate such an expansion.

Enever · 05-20-2008, 02:50 AM

As ROK did ,details of The Shadow Oddessy maybe revealed when E3 draws closer.

Wilde_Night · 05-20-2008, 02:56 AM

Sounds like the title depicts more about the Shadowmen and Void-realm. Since we have been hinted that the creatures of the Void will play a large part in this coming expansion, should we expect a journey into many Void-based areas? *bounces* I love killing Nightbloods!!!

littleman17 · 05-20-2008, 06:02 AM

Why would SOE push back the release of this expansion? Simple answer as to why they may, and it's that a year just sn't enough time for them to do one right. Just look at RoK... they put a year into it, and it /still/ isn't finished. Epics weren't ready, the itemization sucks, and some of the zones aren't out yet.

EoF took forever and a half to come out, and they /still/ couldn't get Unrest out in time.

I hope they put as much time as they need into it t get it right, and actually listen to the players (conjies will tell you they didn't listen in rok beta with their pets). Just hope the item guy for this one isn't the same item guy that did rok... or the same pet design guy.

I hope to see more of the smart mob system that RoK brought, but don't want to see the solo mobs hitting like heroic mobs thing. As a chain wearing Ranger that can hit just over 50% avoidance, I should be able to take more than 6 hits from a mob that is even con to me. I mean, I'm wearing all fabled and legendary armor here...

Kitsune286 · 05-20-2008, 10:36 AM

littleman17 wrote:

Epics weren't ready, the itemization sucks, and some of the zones aren't out yet.

Ya'know, there was this thing, called a fire, not long before RoK release? =)

DragonMaster2385 · 05-20-2008, 11:54 AM

There is a great post in the long thread for the expansion that shows a conversation between the player and Mayong Mistmore after completing one of the RoK T3 raids. It is on page 22 of the thread (I think). I promise that you won't be disapointed once you have read it; it provides a great setup for the next expansion. I don't think anything points to Odus, just the fact that one word in the title is similar, nothing else. The word Odyssey is clearly explained in the Mayong conversation.

HeiligHangranate · 05-21-2008, 06:40 PM

littleman17 wrote:

Why would SOE push back the release of this expansion? Simple answer as to why they may, and it's that a year just sn't enough time for them to do one right. Just look at RoK... they put a year into it, and it /still/ isn't finished. Epics weren't ready, the itemization sucks, and some of the zones aren't out yet.
EoF took forever and a half to come out, and they /still/ couldn't get Unrest out in time.

What makes you think that the release of epic weapons and Unrest separately from RoK and EoF wasn't intentional? SOE has said to expect one expansion a year with free content released at intervals throughout the year. That's a pretty good business plan, considering that other games seem to have trouble releasing new content at all. Releasing one expansion a year brings players back, and releasing more content at intervals throughout the year keeps them here. Sounds good to me.

Burnout · 05-22-2008, 05:33 AM

Kittsune@Unrest wrote:

littleman17 wrote:
Epics weren't ready, the itemization sucks, and some of the zones aren't out yet.
Ya'know, there was this thing, called a fire, not long before RoK release? =)

you're refering to this months burning inferno that did block 100% of soe's activity? hmmm - i just saw a weeks taking interference that closed soe a few days. and epics for example have been late xtimes more than those fires have been active.

Galithdor · 05-22-2008, 05:45 AM

Burnout wrote:

Kittsune@Unrest wrote:
littleman17 wrote:
Epics weren't ready, the itemization sucks, and some of the zones aren't out yet.
Ya'know, there was this thing, called a fire, not long before RoK release? =)
you're refering to this months burning inferno that did block 100% of soe's activity? hmmm - i just saw a weeks taking interference that closed soe a few days. and epics for example have been late xtimes more than those fires have been active.

a fire can screw a lot of things up ya know...

thanks for reading SMILEY

ATLDawgy · 05-22-2008, 08:38 AM

HeiligHangranate wrote:

littleman17 wrote:
Why would SOE push back the release of this expansion? Simple answer as to why they may, and it's that a year just sn't enough time for them to do one right. Just look at RoK... they put a year into it, and it /still/ isn't finished. Epics weren't ready, the itemization sucks, and some of the zones aren't out yet.
EoF took forever and a half to come out, and they /still/ couldn't get Unrest out in time.
What makes you think that the release of epic weapons and Unrest separately from RoK and EoF wasn't intentional? SOE has said to expect one expansion a year with free content released at intervals throughout the year. That's a pretty good business plan, considering that other games seem to have trouble releasing new content at all. Releasing one expansion a year brings players back, and releasing more content at intervals throughout the year keeps them here. Sounds good to me.

A better business plan would be to release a solid product to prevent people from leaving in the first place...

Norrsken · 05-22-2008, 12:37 PM

Akaros@Unrest wrote:

HeiligHangranate wrote:
littleman17 wrote:
Why would SOE push back the release of this expansion? Simple answer as to why they may, and it's that a year just sn't enough time for them to do one right. Just look at RoK... they put a year into it, and it /still/ isn't finished. Epics weren't ready, the itemization sucks, and some of the zones aren't out yet.
EoF took forever and a half to come out, and they /still/ couldn't get Unrest out in time.
What makes you think that the release of epic weapons and Unrest separately from RoK and EoF wasn't intentional? SOE has said to expect one expansion a year with free content released at intervals throughout the year. That's a pretty good business plan, considering that other games seem to have trouble releasing new content at all. Releasing one expansion a year brings players back, and releasing more content at intervals throughout the year keeps them here. Sounds good to me.
A better business plan would be to release a solid product to prevent people from leaving in the first place...

that would probably have been the best, now they didnt manage to get the game decent by release time so they pushed it live with a crapton of bugs, but since then they actually remedied most of the stupid stuff.

DragonMaster2385 · 05-22-2008, 01:02 PM

I am ok with how they released content for EoF and RoK. Even through Unrest and the epics weren't ready at launch, I am happier that they delayed those portions of the expansion rather than rushing it to get it done and screwing it up. With epics, it took a lot of people that long to get to 80 anyway, so it really didn't hurt. As for unrest, I think it was fine for them to release the zone late since the rest of the heroic instances were getting old and Unrest gave us something new to do. I imagine the same will be done with Kurn's tower in Kunark.

05-19-2008, 04:54 PM	#1
Sethok Loremaster Join Date: Mar 2005 Posts: 2	I just noticed if you do an Everquest II trademark search now on the official government trademark site, The Shadow of Odyssey has now been changed to 'The Shadow Odyssey'. Seems to change the perspective quite a bit. Interesting. __________________ Leader, Ritual of Reason on Oasis

05-19-2008, 05:29 PM	#2
ATLDawgy Loremaster Join Date: Jun 2005 Posts: 179	Sethok wrote: I just noticed if you do an Everquest II trademark search now on the official government trademark site, The Shadow of Odyssey has now been changed to 'The Shadow Odyssey'. Seems to change the perspective quite a bit. Interesting. Guess this is why there's been no official announcement. I believe RoK was announced around May 10th of 2007 for the November launch. Wonder if TSO will be a November launch or will they push it into 2009 say February.

05-19-2008, 05:47 PM	#3
Galithdor Loremaster Join Date: Dec 2005 Posts: 984	Akaros@Unrest wrote: Sethok wrote: I just noticed if you do an Everquest II trademark search now on the official government trademark site, The Shadow of Odyssey has now been changed to 'The Shadow Odyssey'. Seems to change the perspective quite a bit. Interesting. Guess this is why there's been no official announcement. I believe RoK was announced around May 10th of 2007 for the November launch. Wonder if TSO will be a November launch or will they push it into 2009 say February. Expansions are once a year...they wouldnt push it back to febuary of 09 __________________

05-19-2008, 05:54 PM	#4
Articulas Zombie Aardvark Join Date: Nov 2004 Location: Fort Worth, Texas Posts: 453	It still doesn't change it much for me. I maybe dead wrong, but i think its still dealing with Odus. __________________

05-19-2008, 06:29 PM	#5
ATLDawgy Loremaster Join Date: Jun 2005 Posts: 179	Galithdor wrote: Akaros@Unrest wrote: Sethok wrote: I just noticed if you do an Everquest II trademark search now on the official government trademark site, The Shadow of Odyssey has now been changed to 'The Shadow Odyssey'. Seems to change the perspective quite a bit. Interesting. Guess this is why there's been no official announcement. I believe RoK was announced around May 10th of 2007 for the November launch. Wonder if TSO will be a November launch or will they push it into 2009 say February. Expansions are once a year...they wouldnt push it back to febuary of 09 " width="15" height="15" /> Any company that sacrifices their product to force a deadline will eventually fail. That said, check the history of EQ2 expansions and adventure packs at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Everqu...Adventure_Packs. Only 2 have been released in November. As a matter of fact, there's only been a single 1 year gap between expansions ever and that was from EoF to RoK which could be attributed to the amount of work that went into EoF. Add in the original EQ2 launching in November of 2004. They could stick to an annual release but I wasn't aware of an official announcement of such. They seem to push them out when they are ready.

05-19-2008, 06:55 PM	#6
Articulas Zombie Aardvark Join Date: Nov 2004 Location: Fort Worth, Texas Posts: 453	History lesson time.They came out with two expansion in a one year time period, Desert of flames, and Kingdom of Sky. After these two expansions they learned their lesson. After these two and multiple adventure packs they decided to release one expansion a year to increase quality of the expansion, and one free content package a year. Now, why would they need to push back an expansion pack that's already been worked on extensively for a year? The expansion will probably be pretty good when it is released in November. Most of their maneuvering from the past 3 years has actually been pro-consumer in almost every way. __________________

05-19-2008, 07:13 PM	#7
Arianah Loremaster Join Date: May 2006 Posts: 406	Akaros@Unrest wrote: They could stick to an annual release but I wasn't aware of an official announcement of such. They seem to push them out when they are ready. I'm pretty sure there was an official announcement that both EQ and EQ2 expansions would now only be released once a year.

05-19-2008, 07:39 PM	#8
ATLDawgy Loremaster Join Date: Jun 2005 Posts: 179	Articulas@Antonia Bayle wrote: History lesson time.They came out with two expansion in a one year time period, Desert of flames, and Kingdom of Sky. After these two expansions they learned their lesson. After these two and multiple adventure packs they decided to release one expansion a year to increase quality of the expansion, and one free content package a year. Now, why would they need to push back an expansion pack that's already been worked on extensively for a year? The expansion will probably be pretty good when it is released in November. Most of their maneuvering from the past 3 years has actually been pro-consumer in almost every way. That's all well and good and I don't disagree with the history lesson at all which is why I linked the history. I'm just curious about the time table since no official announcement has been made and they are still settling on the title. I'm also saying that they shouldn't force it out in November just to say it came out in November. Big questions still remain about the content of this expansion, both zone and mechanics. I'm sure the devs are tired of being beat up with every expansion by people complaining about their classes in the new expansion and are paying more attention to how each class will behave and function with the new content. If they plan to add new zones and quests only then the expansion will be ready way earlier than November. If they are adding any combination of a new AA page, level increase, starting zone, starting race, revamp of existing AA/CAs/zones, etc then they might have a lot more work to do on maintaining whatever vision of balance and functionality they have for this game. How can they "extensively work" on this game without beta feedback when it's player issues that dictate the success of a launch? The only history we can go by is the history that SOE has changed their philosophy on releasing new content several times. I for one hope they are planning to do more than just add new zones and quests so I would hope that they take the time to make sure the expansion (now the 5th) is the smoothest launch ever with the fewest amount of nerfs post-launch ever. They might want to consider making the beta longer this time because a lot of the "broken" issues people complain about the first day or two into an expansion are issues that should have never gotten out of beta in the first place. The whole reason these issues make it to live is because they are brought up in the weeks before launch which results in daily tweaks to the beta server and they run out of time to actually "fix" the outstanding issues such as class balance or CAs. To stick to the release schedule, these outstanding issues make it to the live game and are addressed over the first few weeks with patches. If they want to be pro-consumer they need to make TSO as solid as can be before launch. Take the id software approach and instead of declaring a date simply state that release is "when it's ready". The devs would take much less of a beating if they satisfied issues from beta player feedback during beta than to address it on live servers against the non-beta community. Heck, announce an anticipated launch date with a disclaimer that it is subject to change per beta feedback and they'll be ok. IMO, the final month of beta should be devoted to resolving class and quest issues like NPCs not updating or a certain CA not functioning according to description and the associated balance of the CAs value. Once the tweaking or nerfing stops in beta for a predefined duration for stability, then the product is ready for live. I guess I'm just keeping my fingers crossed that they get away from only adding new content as the main focus and pay more attention to the class issues that still exist.

05-19-2008, 09:09 PM	#9
Gethani Gaming Grannie Join Date: Nov 2004 Posts: 61	http://gaminggrannie.blogspot.com/ I did a blog about this very name "The Shadow Odyssey" back on April 24th. Gethani

05-19-2008, 09:24 PM	#10
Nolrog Loremaster Join Date: Dec 2004 Posts: 487	Akaros@Unrest wrote: Only 2 have been released in November. As a matter of fact, there's only been a single 1 year gap between expansions ever and that was from EoF to RoK which could be attributed to the amount of work that went into EoF. That doesn't make sense to me. They put so much work in to EoF that the expansion after that had a 1 year gap. Besides the fact that 1 year was the planned gap all along.

05-19-2008, 09:24 PM	#11
Nolrog Loremaster Join Date: Dec 2004 Posts: 487	Gethani wrote: http://gaminggrannie.blogspot.com/ I did a blog about this very name "The Shadow Odyssey" back on April 24th. Gethani I get an error: Blog Not Found.

05-19-2008, 09:42 PM	#12
Gethani Gaming Grannie Join Date: Nov 2004 Posts: 61	Try thisThis worked for me. I am not sure why the other did not work.

05-19-2008, 10:30 PM	#13
Cusashorn Loremaster Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: Cheeseland, USA Posts: 14,919	Articulas@Antonia Bayle wrote: It still doesn't change it much for me. I maybe dead wrong, but i think its still dealing with Odus. Yeah but the developers have stated the recent lore they've released ever since Erollisi Day are all related to the new expansion. We're looking at Everfrost, Rivervale, Innothule Swamp, Guk, and Grobb so far.

05-19-2008, 10:38 PM	#14
Captain_Xpendab General Join Date: Nov 2004 Location: I'M IN THE PHONE BOOK!!! I'M SOMEBODY!!! Posts: 205	Not too surprised they changed it, it was kind of an awkward title and they probably also want to avoid confusion due to its similarity to Shadows of Luclin (yes, some people have already been speculating along that line). Is it just me, or does either version of the title create the sense that this expansion is going to be very different from what we've seen before? __________________ __________________________________________________ ____ "Let me guess, my theories appall you, my heresies outrage you, I never answer letters, and you don't like my tie." It's been nice working with you GIR, now self destruct. FINALLY!!!HEhehehehehehehe BOOM "One foozlebit short of a fwinger"

05-19-2008, 11:30 PM	#15
Clowd Server: Antonia Bayle Guild: Journeymen of the Overlord Rank: Member/Alt Loremaster Join Date: Jul 2005 Posts: 86	Trademark links:http://tess2.uspto.gov/bin/showfiel...tate=buml9s.2.2 http://tess2.uspto.gov/bin/showfiel...tate=buml9s.2.3start changing all abbreviates to "TSO" __________________

05-19-2008, 11:52 PM	#16
TaleraRis Loremaster Join Date: Nov 2004 Location: Indianapolis, IN Posts: 2,083	Cusashorn wrote: Articulas@Antonia Bayle wrote: It still doesn't change it much for me. I maybe dead wrong, but i think its still dealing with Odus. Yeah but the developers have stated the recent lore they've released ever since Erollisi Day are all related to the new expansion. We're looking at Everfrost, Rivervale, Innothule Swamp, Guk, and Grobb so far. I've been taking those less as a checklist of places that might be involved and more that there's some overall story that involves all the people in that party in something. __________________ Gwyneth Lecarde 90 Warty Arrow Flinger 90 Sword Shiner Najena Morgasand Ka'Bael 54 Roswellian Mind Scrambler 87 Shield Polisher Najena

05-20-2008, 12:19 AM	#17
Cusashorn Loremaster Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: Cheeseland, USA Posts: 14,919	Gwyneth@Najena wrote: Cusashorn wrote: Articulas@Antonia Bayle wrote: It still doesn't change it much for me. I maybe dead wrong, but i think its still dealing with Odus. Yeah but the developers have stated the recent lore they've released ever since Erollisi Day are all related to the new expansion. We're looking at Everfrost, Rivervale, Innothule Swamp, Guk, and Grobb so far. I've been taking those less as a checklist of places that might be involved and more that there's some overall story that involves all the people in that party in something. It very well could be, but so far none of the stories indicate anything even remotely related to the Erudites or Odus. If they are connected to Odus, then we have yet to see it.

05-20-2008, 01:02 AM	#18
ke'la Loremaster Join Date: Dec 2004 Posts: 5,445	Akaros@Unrest wrote: Articulas@Antonia Bayle wrote: History lesson time.They came out with two expansion in a one year time period, Desert of flames, and Kingdom of Sky. After these two expansions they learned their lesson. After these two and multiple adventure packs they decided to release one expansion a year to increase quality of the expansion, and one free content package a year. Now, why would they need to push back an expansion pack that's already been worked on extensively for a year? The expansion will probably be pretty good when it is released in November. Most of their maneuvering from the past 3 years has actually been pro-consumer in almost every way. That's all well and good and I don't disagree with the history lesson at all which is why I linked the history. I'm just curious about the time table since no official announcement has been made and they are still settling on the title. I'm also saying that they shouldn't force it out in November just to say it came out in November. Big questions still remain about the content of this expansion, both zone and mechanics. I'm sure the devs are tired of being beat up with every expansion by people complaining about their classes in the new expansion and are paying more attention to how each class will behave and function with the new content. If they plan to add new zones and quests only then the expansion will be ready way earlier than November. If they are adding any combination of a new AA page, level increase, starting zone, starting race, revamp of existing AA/CAs/zones, etc then they might have a lot more work to do on maintaining whatever vision of balance and functionality they have for this game. How can they "extensively work" on this game without beta feedback when it's player issues that dictate the success of a launch? The only history we can go by is the history that SOE has changed their philosophy on releasing new content several times. I for one hope they are planning to do more than just add new zones and quests so I would hope that they take the time to make sure the expansion (now the 5th) is the smoothest launch ever with the fewest amount of nerfs post-launch ever. They might want to consider making the beta longer this time because a lot of the "broken" issues people complain about the first day or two into an expansion are issues that should have never gotten out of beta in the first place. The whole reason these issues make it to live is because they are brought up in the weeks before launch which results in daily tweaks to the beta server and they run out of time to actually "fix" the outstanding issues such as class balance or CAs. To stick to the release schedule, these outstanding issues make it to the live game and are addressed over the first few weeks with patches. If they want to be pro-consumer they need to make TSO as solid as can be before launch. Take the id software approach and instead of declaring a date simply state that release is "when it's ready". The devs would take much less of a beating if they satisfied issues from beta player feedback during beta than to address it on live servers against the non-beta community. Heck, announce an anticipated launch date with a disclaimer that it is subject to change per beta feedback and they'll be ok. IMO, the final month of beta should be devoted to resolving class and quest issues like NPCs not updating or a certain CA not functioning according to description and the associated balance of the CAs value. Once the tweaking or nerfing stops in beta for a predefined duration for stability, then the product is ready for live. I guess I'm just keeping my fingers crossed that they get away from only adding new content as the main focus and pay more attention to the class issues that still exist. With the release of Echoes of Faydwar, SoE officially announced that they are moving from a 6 month expansion cycle to a yearly expansion cycle, and with the success of EoF, they decided to expand that idea to Everquest Live as well. So there has been an official announcement that we will see 1 expansion every year, and as the both expansions released after the switch from 6 months to 1 year expansions both where released on the same Tuesday in November(the Second) and that Everquest Live is also releasing on the same schedule it is very safe bet that TSO will be released on the Second Tuesday in November. __________________

05-20-2008, 02:38 AM	#19
Editedmind Loremaster Join Date: Dec 2004 Posts: 126	From this title we can now deduce that the *Odyssey* of the title now refers to the roughly four years it's been for SOE to fix the *Shadow* rendering of the game so that it doesn't kill top of the line machines. I highly anticipate such an expansion. __________________ "I do not fail, pristine or nothing at all!"

05-20-2008, 02:50 AM	#20
Enever Loremaster Join Date: May 2005 Location: Kenosha, Wisconsin Posts: 320	As ROK did ,details of The Shadow Oddessy maybe revealed when E3 draws closer. __________________

05-20-2008, 02:56 AM	#21
Wilde_Night Loremaster Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: Kenosha, Wisconsin Posts: 1,127	Sounds like the title depicts more about the Shadowmen and Void-realm. Since we have been hinted that the creatures of the Void will play a large part in this coming expansion, should we expect a journey into many Void-based areas? bounces I love killing Nightbloods!!! __________________

05-20-2008, 06:02 AM	#22
littleman17 Loremaster Join Date: Nov 2004 Posts: 675	Why would SOE push back the release of this expansion? Simple answer as to why they may, and it's that a year just sn't enough time for them to do one right. Just look at RoK... they put a year into it, and it /still/ isn't finished. Epics weren't ready, the itemization sucks, and some of the zones aren't out yet. EoF took forever and a half to come out, and they /still/ couldn't get Unrest out in time. I hope they put as much time as they need into it t get it right, and actually listen to the players (conjies will tell you they didn't listen in rok beta with their pets). Just hope the item guy for this one isn't the same item guy that did rok... or the same pet design guy. I hope to see more of the smart mob system that RoK brought, but don't want to see the solo mobs hitting like heroic mobs thing. As a chain wearing Ranger that can hit just over 50% avoidance, I should be able to take more than 6 hits from a mob that is even con to me. I mean, I'm wearing all fabled and legendary armor here... __________________ Faynar: Level 71 Ranger Daynar: Level 57 Bruiser Tulnar: Level 61 Necromancer Kulnar: Level 50 Templar Bronar: Level 43 Paladin Vronar: Level 40 Defiler Everfrost FTW!

05-20-2008, 10:36 AM	#23
Kitsune286 Loremaster Join Date: May 2005 Posts: 474	littleman17 wrote: Epics weren't ready, the itemization sucks, and some of the zones aren't out yet. Ya'know, there was this thing, called a fire, not long before RoK release? =) __________________

05-20-2008, 11:54 AM	#24
DragonMaster2385 Loremaster Join Date: Dec 2004 Posts: 1,063	There is a great post in the long thread for the expansion that shows a conversation between the player and Mayong Mistmore after completing one of the RoK T3 raids. It is on page 22 of the thread (I think). I promise that you won't be disapointed once you have read it; it provides a great setup for the next expansion. I don't think anything points to Odus, just the fact that one word in the title is similar, nothing else. The word Odyssey is clearly explained in the Mayong conversation.

05-21-2008, 06:40 PM	#25
HeiligHangranate Fansite Staff Join Date: Nov 2004 Posts: 73	littleman17 wrote: Why would SOE push back the release of this expansion? Simple answer as to why they may, and it's that a year just sn't enough time for them to do one right. Just look at RoK... they put a year into it, and it /still/ isn't finished. Epics weren't ready, the itemization sucks, and some of the zones aren't out yet. EoF took forever and a half to come out, and they /still/ couldn't get Unrest out in time. What makes you think that the release of epic weapons and Unrest separately from RoK and EoF wasn't intentional? SOE has said to expect one expansion a year with free content released at intervals throughout the year. That's a pretty good business plan, considering that other games seem to have trouble releasing new content at all. Releasing one expansion a year brings players back, and releasing more content at intervals throughout the year keeps them here. Sounds good to me. __________________

05-22-2008, 05:33 AM	#26
Burnout Loremaster Join Date: Dec 2004 Posts: 341	Kittsune@Unrest wrote: littleman17 wrote: Epics weren't ready, the itemization sucks, and some of the zones aren't out yet. Ya'know, there was this thing, called a fire, not long before RoK release? =) you're refering to this months burning inferno that did block 100% of soe's activity? hmmm - i just saw a weeks taking interference that closed soe a few days. and epics for example have been late xtimes more than those fires have been active.

05-22-2008, 05:45 AM	#27
Galithdor Loremaster Join Date: Dec 2005 Posts: 984	Burnout wrote: Kittsune@Unrest wrote: littleman17 wrote: Epics weren't ready, the itemization sucks, and some of the zones aren't out yet. Ya'know, there was this thing, called a fire, not long before RoK release? =) you're refering to this months burning inferno that did block 100% of soe's activity? hmmm - i just saw a weeks taking interference that closed soe a few days. and epics for example have been late xtimes more than those fires have been active. a fire can screw a lot of things up ya know... thanks for reading __________________

05-22-2008, 08:38 AM	#28
ATLDawgy Loremaster Join Date: Jun 2005 Posts: 179	HeiligHangranate wrote: littleman17 wrote: Why would SOE push back the release of this expansion? Simple answer as to why they may, and it's that a year just sn't enough time for them to do one right. Just look at RoK... they put a year into it, and it /still/ isn't finished. Epics weren't ready, the itemization sucks, and some of the zones aren't out yet. EoF took forever and a half to come out, and they /still/ couldn't get Unrest out in time. What makes you think that the release of epic weapons and Unrest separately from RoK and EoF wasn't intentional? SOE has said to expect one expansion a year with free content released at intervals throughout the year. That's a pretty good business plan, considering that other games seem to have trouble releasing new content at all. Releasing one expansion a year brings players back, and releasing more content at intervals throughout the year keeps them here. Sounds good to me. A better business plan would be to release a solid product to prevent people from leaving in the first place...

05-22-2008, 12:37 PM	#29
Norrsken Loremaster Join Date: Dec 2004 Posts: 6,450	Akaros@Unrest wrote: HeiligHangranate wrote: littleman17 wrote: Why would SOE push back the release of this expansion? Simple answer as to why they may, and it's that a year just sn't enough time for them to do one right. Just look at RoK... they put a year into it, and it /still/ isn't finished. Epics weren't ready, the itemization sucks, and some of the zones aren't out yet. EoF took forever and a half to come out, and they /still/ couldn't get Unrest out in time. What makes you think that the release of epic weapons and Unrest separately from RoK and EoF wasn't intentional? SOE has said to expect one expansion a year with free content released at intervals throughout the year. That's a pretty good business plan, considering that other games seem to have trouble releasing new content at all. Releasing one expansion a year brings players back, and releasing more content at intervals throughout the year keeps them here. Sounds good to me. A better business plan would be to release a solid product to prevent people from leaving in the first place... that would probably have been the best, now they didnt manage to get the game decent by release time so they pushed it live with a crapton of bugs, but since then they actually remedied most of the stupid stuff. __________________

05-22-2008, 01:02 PM	#30
DragonMaster2385 Loremaster Join Date: Dec 2004 Posts: 1,063	I am ok with how they released content for EoF and RoK. Even through Unrest and the epics weren't ready at launch, I am happier that they delayed those portions of the expansion rather than rushing it to get it done and screwing it up. With epics, it took a lot of people that long to get to 80 anyway, so it really didn't hurt. As for unrest, I think it was fine for them to release the zone late since the rest of the heroic instances were getting old and Unrest gave us something new to do. I imagine the same will be done with Kurn's tower in Kunark.