There seems to be a debate amongst the old-school blogosphere about whether Rifts or EQ:Next will be the new EQ1. Personally, I'm not convinced that either title is likely because both projects are high profile, but I've generally refrained from commenting for lack of more thorough information.
Over the weekend, I listened to episode 14 of the Rift Podcast, which featured an interview about the game's quest system, featuring the studio's Senior Design Director. According to the guy in charge, the majority of quests will be solo or small group quests, with quest hubs that conveniently distribute overlapping quests to kill 10 rat-equivalents and loot 10 potato-equivalents from the same field. The game will also offer daily quests, rep grinds, and the option for max level players to replay the dungeons they soloed past while leveling. Overall, it sounds a lot more like an attempt at the next WoW than the next EQ1.
Don't get me wrong, Trion has some talented people on board, and I would love for them to succeed. Telling players what they want to hear requires that the developers first determine what it is that the players want, which is at least one step in the right direction. Unfortunately, I feel like the hype mirrors Warhammer more closely than any other game in my albeit limited experience. Yes, the game engine is working and polished enough to hold an encouraging demo for the press. Beyond that, pretty pictures are everywhere, hype is high, and the game itself is whatever the reader would like it to be for lack of evidence to the contrary.
Learning from the past?
Beyond the possibility of raising unrealistic expectations, the things that I'm hearing about this game do not reassure me that Trion has learned from the issues that others have faced. For example, the "soul" system for building your own class sounds really neat, but nothing I've seen has addressed how they will actually balance a game in which the majority of character setups are useless, a few are overpowered, and a few are worthless except for the one encounter that becomes trivial because the designer didn't plan for a pet that can kite and is immune to stuns or whatever.
More to the point, this idea of having players solo their way to the level cap and then switch over to some other form of play (generally group PVE, or PVP/RVR in Warhammer's case) really isn't panning out that well across the entire industry. Yes, solo players will buy boxes and pay fees to level - assuming that you can beat solo-focused games like WoW, LOTRO, and others at their own genre. However, time and time again we've seen that the majority of these players either can or will not shift to the more structured group format. Meanwhile, if the real strength of this game is supposed to be its group PVE instances, it does not make sense to encourage players to do something else instead of dungeons/rifts for 49 levels (any more than it made sense for Warhammer to encourage players to solo and run instanced scenarios instead of doing open RVR).
The especially sad part is that I'm not even convinced that this will be an especially good solo game. In between promising little tidbits - squirreling away some quests in obscure places for explorers or whatnot - it sounds like the game's two factions will have separate starting zones and then can expect to largely share the same content (either via neutral questgivers or through slightly varied versions of the same quest for the two factions). This is not original territory, and the studio will have to execute it extremely well if they really mean to compete in the crowded fantasy solo-friendly MMO niche.
Incorrect Blizzcon Predictions For 2010
Blizzcon is coming up in just over a week, so time to put predictions that are usually proven wrong to electronic paper is running out. Here are my best guesses for this year's event.
- Diablo III and the first SC2 expansion (called the second game in a "trilogy" so that Bobby Kotick can charge the new game price instead of the expansion price) will be playable. I really am not following either game at this point, so there's not much else I can predict about them.
- Cataclysm's cinematic introduction will make its debut. My guess is that it will finally include gnomes, though I suppose we can't put it entirely past Blizzard to make a point of including Goblins and Worgen over gnomes as a running gag.
- With most of the juicy Cataclysm news out on live servers, PTR's, and the no-NDA beta, WoW news will include discussion of patch 4.1. The patch will include a major feature that has not been announced or discussed publicly (sorry, dance studio).
- Blizzard will have to announce the mystery fourth project (confirmed to be an MMO based on a new IP) if they do not want the event to be widely viewed as a disappointment. My guess is that the new game will be more action-based, will be designed with some form of item shop or other transaction system in mind, and will not be a straight up fantasy setting (perhaps Steampunk, Sci-Fi or Cyberpunk).
- Date MMO-Champion leaks the juicy details: Monday, Oct 18th.
Improvements to F2P LOTRO and EQ2X
Two news tidbits from September's two big Free To Play conversion stories today.
LOTRO Lowbie Sale
Via Syp comes news of a major one day sale in LOTRO - the three lowest level quest packs are all going 75% for one day only on 10/13. I got 245 TP for new deeds that were added in the F2P launch, and I can now convert these points into two entire zones worth of content at discounts far steeper than anything that I've seen in LOTRO or DDO.
Though Turbine is obviously fond of sales, my guess is that they're really looking to lower the entry barrier to those first paid areas as they try to convert more of the new players who have come in with free to play into actual paying customers. The thing I'm wondering now is how it makes sense to have players who take this deal (a single $6.50 purchase of 400 TP - the worst exchange rate and one that I would ordinarily never recommend - will cover it) own most of the content from 1-40 (you're missing part of the Trollshaws) and then most of the content from 50-65 with the mandatory expansions. Sales of content might not be the game's primary source of revenue for this to make sense.
EQ2X Broker Purchase Access
Meanwhile, over in EQ2X, non-subscribers who pay for the one-time "silver" account upgrade are now permitted to purchase stuff from the broker at no additional charge. Silver players were originally not permitted to use the broker at all, and an earlier compromise required the use of a broker token (about 15 cents per) to either buy or sell anything.
In practical terms, this change removes one of the major roadblocks to playing the game normally as a nonsubscriber. Any player may now pick up a pair of bags (such as the 40-slot mottled leather backpack or sumac strong box) for a relatively attainable amount of gold. Useful items such as crafting/harvesting tools and mastercrafted weapons are now also available without a real money token purchase.
At the same time, subscribers (and silver members who pay to sell stuff) win because this dramatically increases the market of players who are able to (and therefore interested in) purchasing their wares. Sony might even see more token sales with this change - before, it did not matter that I had a bunch of sellable stuff sitting in my bank because I had no way to spend the gold I could get if I did manage to sell anything. Now, I have an incentive to list my goods so that I can turn around and use the gold to buy other things that I want.
This everyone-wins approach is how free to play models are supposed to work, and it's really encouraging to see SOE taking a step in the right direction on this front.
LOTRO Lowbie Sale
Via Syp comes news of a major one day sale in LOTRO - the three lowest level quest packs are all going 75% for one day only on 10/13. I got 245 TP for new deeds that were added in the F2P launch, and I can now convert these points into two entire zones worth of content at discounts far steeper than anything that I've seen in LOTRO or DDO.
Though Turbine is obviously fond of sales, my guess is that they're really looking to lower the entry barrier to those first paid areas as they try to convert more of the new players who have come in with free to play into actual paying customers. The thing I'm wondering now is how it makes sense to have players who take this deal (a single $6.50 purchase of 400 TP - the worst exchange rate and one that I would ordinarily never recommend - will cover it) own most of the content from 1-40 (you're missing part of the Trollshaws) and then most of the content from 50-65 with the mandatory expansions. Sales of content might not be the game's primary source of revenue for this to make sense.
EQ2X Broker Purchase Access
Meanwhile, over in EQ2X, non-subscribers who pay for the one-time "silver" account upgrade are now permitted to purchase stuff from the broker at no additional charge. Silver players were originally not permitted to use the broker at all, and an earlier compromise required the use of a broker token (about 15 cents per) to either buy or sell anything.
In practical terms, this change removes one of the major roadblocks to playing the game normally as a nonsubscriber. Any player may now pick up a pair of bags (such as the 40-slot mottled leather backpack or sumac strong box) for a relatively attainable amount of gold. Useful items such as crafting/harvesting tools and mastercrafted weapons are now also available without a real money token purchase.
At the same time, subscribers (and silver members who pay to sell stuff) win because this dramatically increases the market of players who are able to (and therefore interested in) purchasing their wares. Sony might even see more token sales with this change - before, it did not matter that I had a bunch of sellable stuff sitting in my bank because I had no way to spend the gold I could get if I did manage to sell anything. Now, I have an incentive to list my goods so that I can turn around and use the gold to buy other things that I want.
This everyone-wins approach is how free to play models are supposed to work, and it's really encouraging to see SOE taking a step in the right direction on this front.
The Value Of Emblems
With patch 4.01 looming, I'd been agonizing over whether to purchase heirloom maces for my planned Enhancement Shaman alt. This class prefers slow swinging maces over the fast daggers I already own for other characters, but none of the other classes I plan to play would want to use them. On the other hand, the maces are costly at the Argent Tournament (overpriced compared to other heirlooms), and my current supply of emblems would not buy even one at the newly increased level 85 prices.
In the end, I decided to take the maces, and I also traded in all the emblems on my warrior for the heirloom staff to use on my second server.
In principle, both characters could or perhaps even should have used the emblems/justice points for actual gear for themselves instead. That said, the thing I realized as I pondered this question was that it's only virtual money. I got a good deal if I actually end up using the things, and, if I don't, my "losses" are digital points that I'm going to earn more of anyway. Sometimes, it's worth remembering that.
In the end, I decided to take the maces, and I also traded in all the emblems on my warrior for the heirloom staff to use on my second server.
In principle, both characters could or perhaps even should have used the emblems/justice points for actual gear for themselves instead. That said, the thing I realized as I pondered this question was that it's only virtual money. I got a good deal if I actually end up using the things, and, if I don't, my "losses" are digital points that I'm going to earn more of anyway. Sometimes, it's worth remembering that.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)