EQ3/EQ Next ~ The Ideas Thread

[digitalfre]

Take the best things about Vanguard, LotRO, WoW, etc. and build a game around that.  It's really sad that Vanguard ended up like it did.  There are quite a few very awesome concepts there, but the technical implementation was crap.

[Xephier]

Banedon@Antonia Bayle wrote:

Sell the franchise rights for EQ3 to NCSoft or Blizzard, see if somebody else can run it in a fair and competent manner.

allow me to just say F no to that idea, last blizzard mp game i played was diablo2, what a pile of trash and in the last update they ruined the game and never updated it again, i have no respect for blizzard, soe is much better, they make many mistakes but if blizzard took over id have to sell my sub and move on, especialy if they took the pvp aspect of the game into their own hands, anyone wanna have their corpse 'expode' again, i sure as hell dont.

[icebones]

i hope you guys do know that sony will never put out an EQ3 right?

as is eq2 was and still is considered a failure of a game along with the buying of the failed game Vanguard...

sony made it clear that there will never be an EQ3.

and sony would never sell the entitlements of Eq to blizzard or anyone else, partially because of us old timers of eq1 eq was already bought from varant. and since both eq1/2 bring success they will never sell their game title or any form of it. they could but why would they?

plus use these ideas for a totally different game idea/concept maybe sony will read em over and start a different game with it.

[Armawk]

icebones wrote:

and sony would never sell the entitlements of Eq to blizzard or anyone else, partially because of us old timers of eq1 eq was already bought from varant.

Wow, you have sure shown what an old timer you are. By posting an old myth any actual 'old timer' would laugh at.

Sony bought eq1? hah.

[Deadrus]

What I took from Smed's quote was that Eq3 wont be called eq3. Since an mmo sequel has never been done before and didnt turn out as well as they'd like. But the next eq game would be called something else. I think since they started with numbers they should continue with numbers. For instance if they dont call the next eq game eq3 they call it something like "Lands of Northath" for instnace. Since its based in norath and it is an MMO its going to be called most likely by every one that plays the game EQ3. Because for all intents and purposes it is eq3.

[icebones]

and yes EQ1 was bought from varant by sony...

anyway what i meant was by there being no eq3 is that there wont be one but if they do work with more content and better systems to make another installment to the lands of norrath sure it could or would be called something else other than eq3.

and shaunfletcher its not a myth sony did buy eq1. i was playing eq1 when was originally owned by varant a year later it was sold to sony.

well the entitlements of it anyway.

and i agree with deadrus

[Piratejoe]

Actually you could make the World in EQ 3 much like the old one in EQ 1. Its easy, the world is made up of small islands because of the lunar pull from the blown up moon. In EQ 3 or even more expansions in EQ 2 the crazy lunar gravitational pull calms down and the sea levels go down too their old levels (Its possible the Poles melted somewhat when the moon blew up and they refreaze again, bringing the water down again). The world will never look the same in EQ but it would resemble the old one but with new lakes, rivers and a new shoreline. When you enter magic and druids into this its possible too move into these lands pretty quickly.

well just a thought.

[Armawk]

icebones wrote:

and shaunfletcher its not a myth sony did buy eq1. i was playing eq1 when was originally owned by varant a year later it was sold to sony.

well the entitlements of it anyway.

and i agree with deadrus

Verant Interactive was a company essentially set up by Sony to develop EverQuest and other properties. Sony later consolidated this company into SOE. EverQuest was, from its first inception by John Smedley of Sony Interactive a Sony invention. Verant was from inception nothing more than a Sony subdivision, so to describe the Sony division which replaces it as 'buying' it and therefore buying everquest is just silly.

[Guy De Alsace]

EQ2 would have been more of a success if it had actually been advertised. Even now there is hardly a peep about it in games mags.

My Suggestions:

Less Rigid Items. 

. As it stands there are clear and unchanging differences between the worst item in any given tier and the best. Thus rendering everything under the best obsolete from the word go. I'd prefer some more random elements thrown in so that its not always obvious what the best items are in each tier.

More mob variety.

Would like to see an end to the "saturation level" mob placement currently in the game. Lets see less mobs that are more cunning, generally tougher and have a much better AI. For instance, in LP there's not the massively overcrowded morass of unrelated mobs wandering around but a seemingly empty plain with zombies ready to leap out of the ground when approached. The Gremlins dont sit there like donkeys but shapeshift into boulders, trees and so on.

Attack styles.

Each with its own distinctive animation. Say based on AP with the final AP bestowing the new animation.

No EQ3 would be a bad mistake imo.

[gi]

Enlocke@Vox wrote:

But this game cannot exist under the title EQ2. It simply would not work.

Enlocke I wasn't even suggesting any of my ideas would work in EQ2. This thread is about a theoretical EQ3.

[gi]

Aurorum wrote:

skinandbones wrote:

Rlaal@Antonia Bayle wrote:

• Guild run Mercantile endeavours - setting up shops, smitheys etc in guild run towns. Clearing trade routes, for caravans. Hiring other PC's for tasks!

Yea its called SWG and it sort of failed. 

SWG had its time of almost universal success; a time, barely varying by server, in which large populations easily supported player-based cities.

If enemy NPCs were continually involved in attacks upon the guild-operated city-zones, ultimately, neglected but dynamic regions would become "new" areas; inevitable ghost towns would be fun and explorable.

For the Guild run Villages idea, you would of course have to make the economics simplified, and have it populated by npcs who operate the facilities.

Also just because an idea was not fully realised in SWG does not make it a bad idea. A lot can be learnt from SWG and improved upon I am sure.

• Monsters should not respawn! once there dead they are dead. If you clear out the den of orcs, they should not just re-appear there. Its possible that they may come back, but whose to say that some other creature doesn't setup shop in that lair. Also unchecked monster lairs should grow and expand there influence dynamically.

Ummm What???   

Simple premise I thought. Monster AI would be more dynamic and be based on realistic AI model. If you goblin tribe is left unchecked its going to grow and threaten a larger area..

My opinion falls somewhere in-between: Increase the number of various bots and disguise spawn spots (behind rocks or hills or trees).

• Ships!!!

Umm no just more lag for people and stuff to be broken.

Well just because other games had problems implementing ships successfully, does that mean its a bad idea? or that it should not be considered in a theoretical eq3.

Zoning and transmutation!

• A new innovative combat system, perhaps based(only) on the DDO style, rather than button mashing.

No way in freakin hell.  DDO has the worse combat system.

We will have to agree to disagree, whilst not perfect a twitch based combat system adds a level of excitement that is very difficult to simulate in tradtional mmo button bashing.

I hope to one day see (or create) a combat system that allows a player to adjust the level of automated help; complete manual control means more freedom to function slightly higher or lower than total automation.

Thanks for your comments.  I would like to say that these initial ideas are just that , they are not fully fleshed out.

I believe someone else pointed out earlier that there are currently no next gen mmo's out there. From reading about Conan, it may be as close as we will get with current technology.

I don't see the point personally of them creating a new game and making it a clone of a previous one with fancier graphics and a few bells and whistles.

[Decad]

icebones wrote:

i hope you guys do know that sony will never put out an EQ3 right?

as is eq2 was and still is considered a failure of a game along with the buying of the failed game Vanguard...

sony made it clear that there will never be an EQ3.

and sony would never sell the entitlements of Eq to blizzard or anyone else, partially because of us old timers of eq1 eq was already bought from varant. and since both eq1/2 bring success they will never sell their game title or any form of it. they could but why would they?

plus use these ideas for a totally different game idea/concept maybe sony will read em over and start a different game with it.

I would bet good money on the fact that there will certainly be an EQ3 someday. Even though EQ1 is still chugging along, it looks quite dated, no? At some point, I would think either EQ1 or EQ2 is going to be shelved and an alternative will be released with coding that utilizes the technology at that time to it's fullest. (ie; 6-core technology, HD graphics, blah, blah, blah...) When this will be.... who knows? Perhaps 3 years, 5 years.

And by the way, Lore wise I would love to see a Marvel Comics-esque "Ultimate EQ" type of thing (alternate reality type of thing) done where the moon didn't blow up. Have the teleporters still destroyed by the orcs (I think they did it, no?), so we would still have no access to the moon. However, the maps and the world would then be a lot more similar to EQ1. Oh yeah, and no zoning...

Edit: Although I guess if Anarchy Online can get a new graphics engine, I guess they could do it for EQ1 or EQ2 in the future...

http://mmorpg.com/gamelist.cfm/game...oadFeature/1718

[Vlahkmaak]

Beastlords, fewer servers, and eq1 kiting abilities.

[Drager]

what i would like to see for EQ3 would be a spell creation system and some npc's gaining lvl just think it would be interesting to see and more realistic

[Iapetus]

...

[Iapetus]

...

[ainth]

My offical reply is fix eq2 content first then and only then consider a eq3 type game=)

[Iapetus]

...

[Deadrus]

I really think Eq3 is the best place for EQ to go at this point. I think the consept of the shattered lands was a bad one or just poorly implemented. I hopeing they will do the skeletal revamp for eq2 to so we can hopefully get some veriety in clothing. But its been over 3 years since launch and weve had the same armor rehashed over and over with just a new coat of paint over top the same old modles. Now I really am hopeing that it is still comeing but with lack of Dev's mentioning it and seeing how their are so many threads talking about it in one way or another with no dev responce is just depressing. I think if they Do an eq3 start from scratch make a game that can utalize mulit core processors and dual graphics cards would probably be easier at the point in the game rather then trying to revamp the curent eq2 engine. I'm hopeing Eq2 will suprize me with the skeletal revamp but if it doent come soon ill be hopeing eq3 will be around the corner.

[Hekynn]

fix the gpu bugs, add built in music player, voice chat support, let us 1gb of ram users run the game a bit smoother, Bring Luclin and the Vah Shirs/beastlords back!!!!

[RoXx]

-No zoning: a globe (you may add barriers around some areas so you can expand those areas when expansions come etc).-Modern technology support: several cores, physx etc.-More unique classes. Some classes can be merged. Bring back beastlords.-Keep all races, maybe add a couple. Implement common skelly system so armor can easily be added to all races.-Incorporate armour dyes.-Incorporate guild halls.-Cloaks w/guild sign and insignia from day 1.-Flying mounts and ships.-Levitation and more spells for fun usage.-The ability to sit in chairs and lay in beds: actually be able to use house and the items in it.-PVP battlegrounds on several servers.-A RP server with enforced RP and GM's constantly giving missions, creating events etc. Could even charge extra from people on this server. I know many that would happily pay.-Graphic compareable to Vanguard or better. A highly developed graphic core without flaws.-Some scaleable dungeons, like SP. Can be a lot of fun.

 I got more, just cant think of it atm..

[ChildofHate]

i think Vanguard was meant to be what EQ3 should have become... but failed.  Does anyone still play VG?  I think there are more EQ1 players then VG players.

The return of Beastlords will mark the end of EQ2 and doom EQ3 before it launches.

[Jovie]

I for one am tired of all of the hate tossed at beastlords. This isn't eq1 this is eq2. Perhaps in eq1 they were overpowered because it really wasn't meant to be a soloable game.

Eq2 is highly soloable by all classes. Adding beastlords wouldn't break the game for anyone.

If you have a hatred for the class, don't play it. That aside, stop with the bs that beastlords are the prodigy of all things doom and gloom.

[Wildmage]

Jovie@Guk wrote:

I for one am tired of all of the hate tossed at beastlords. This isn't eq1 this is eq2. Perhaps in eq1 they were overpowered because it really wasn't meant to be a soloable game.

Eq2 is highly soloable by all classes. Adding beastlords wouldn't break the game for anyone.

If you have a hatred for the class, don't play it. That aside, stop with the bs that beastlords are the prodigy of all things doom and gloom.

Shaman's spirit wolf pet from KOS Achievements is the closest thing you will ever see to Beastlords PERIOD. EQ2 will not add new classes PERIOD.  I don't have a hatred of beastlords but I just don't see a point for them except for rose colored glasses and woolgathering.   Shamans that go down the Achievement lines that buff the spirit pet are the closest thing to beastlords that EQ2 needs to have.  whatever you thing they would do with beast lords it wouldn't be significant enough from Shaman's as they are now post KoS to be worth adding, without making it a broken class.

[Deadrus]

ChildofHate wrote:

i think Vanguard was meant to be what EQ3 should have become... but failed.  Does anyone still play VG?  I think there are more EQ1 players then VG players.

The return of Beastlords will mark the end of EQ2 and doom EQ3 before it launches.

I played vanguard during beta. I had high hopes and thought it was great at first then kept seeing all theast bugs. The character modles were horible and the game just wasnt fun. Yourd be fighting level 10 mobs then youd see a river with something beyond it you go over there witch about 100 yards away and bam they are leve 35 mobs. The game had promice. It was layed out horible. Sometimes i could walk around a few minutes with out even encourting a mob. The world was huge yes and I think eq3 should be build on something that scale because the scale of eq2 is laughable compared to vanguard. but The thing is the world was huge but there was nothing it it but ruins. (which i loved the runis because it gave the world age something that eq2 doent do very well) Mobs were very spread out and it just felt empty to me. And i didnt get the deplomacy stuff it didnt apeal to me. But over all Vanguard was a game with a lot of promice that just didnt deliver.

[Talz]

Wildmage wrote:

Jovie@Guk wrote:

I for one am tired of all of the hate tossed at beastlords. This isn't eq1 this is eq2. Perhaps in eq1 they were overpowered because it really wasn't meant to be a soloable game.

Eq2 is highly soloable by all classes. Adding beastlords wouldn't break the game for anyone.

If you have a hatred for the class, don't play it. That aside, stop with the bs that beastlords are the prodigy of all things doom and gloom.

Shaman's spirit wolf pet from KOS Achievements is the closest thing you will ever see to Beastlords PERIOD. EQ2 will not add new classes PERIOD.  I don't have a hatred of beastlords but I just don't see a point for them except for rose colored glasses and woolgathering.   Shamans that go down the Achievement lines that buff the spirit pet are the closest thing to beastlords that EQ2 needs to have.  whatever you thing they would do with beast lords it wouldn't be significant enough from Shaman's as they are now post KoS to be worth adding, without making it a broken class.

There will never be a return of deities PERIOD.  There will never be AA PERIOD.  There will never be epics PERIOD.Things the community believes will never come back obviously aren't set in stone. However, I also believe that AA spec shaman are the closest that the game will ever get to beastlords.

[Zin`Car]

ChildofHate wrote:

The return of Beastlords will mark the end of EQ2 and doom EQ3 before it launches.

+1

devs don't let devs reintroduce BL's.  BL's, Just say No.  Don't drink and bring back BL's.  Only you (devs) can prevent BL's... Only you.

[Jovie]

Gotta love the parade of stupid going on.....

Well in all honesty, sony should merge the shaman, merge the bards, merge the wizards and merge the rogues and the clerics as well as the monks. That would clean up the classes for you and perhaps allow for sony to introduce some other classes that actually have some originality.

[Csky]

id love an eq3 and i love the way SoE keeps the core of eq1 

o,  and bring back the beastlord please 

[Harvash]

ChildofHate wrote:

i think Vanguard was meant to be what EQ3 should have become... but failed.  Does anyone still play VG?  I think there are more EQ1 players then VG players.

The return of Beastlords will mark the end of EQ2 and doom EQ3 before it launches.

QFE!

Last I checked, all the beastlords went and died in a fire...RIP