Beta
×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

SOE Unveils In-Game EverQuest TCG

Zonk posted more than 7 years ago | from the trade-you-for-a-mox dept.

Role Playing (Games) 55

Sony Online Entertainment this week stated they'd have a 'new announcement' on Friday at their annual Fan Faire player event. SOE President John Smedley addressed the assembled players, revealing an in-game trading card game that's to be rolled out to players of EverQuest and EverQuest 2 sometime before the end of the month. The game was developed by the SOE-Denver studio, the same folks who made online TCGs out of Pirates! and Stargate. Gamespot reports: "All current EQ and EQ2 players will initially receive a starter deck, and additional booster packs can be purchased with real-world cash. However, those wishing not to spend any extra money will be happy to know that booster packs can also be acquired as loot off of boss mobs in both games, and the game will be free of charge to play. Of further note, the game will feature loot cards that can be redeemed for in-game items for players' characters. SOE plans to offer substantial support for the product, including in-game tournaments, card trading, a unique user interface, and deck-building functionality."

cancel ×

55 comments

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

addictive much? (1)

ILuvRamen (1026668) | more than 7 years ago | (#20116471)

Oh yes, because Everquest needs something to make it more addictive lol. Obviously they don't think their players are playing enough lol. I think since a lot of the players are older, it won't work as well as with kid games because I'd much prefer collecting rare armor and other viewable wearables in any game I play and I'm 20

Re:addictive much? (1)

ringbarer (545020) | more than 7 years ago | (#20116553)

If you're 20, then why do you write like a 10 year old?

Re:addictive much? (1)

DarkMantle (784415) | more than 7 years ago | (#20116557)

They should just make a TCG that you can play. Not in NeverRest. If your playing EQ then you want to play EQ. If you want to play a TCG then play Magic [wizards.com] already.

The Spoils (1)

Lehk228 (705449) | more than 7 years ago | (#20127211)

Magic is old and busted, and the new direction WotC is taking MTG is made of Fail.

play The Spoils instead

Actually, that's the whole problem (4, Insightful)

Moraelin (679338) | more than 7 years ago | (#20116783)

Oh yes, because Everquest needs something to make it more addictive lol. Obviously they don't think their players are playing enough lol.


Actually, it does need more players. Badly. And, no, not enough people play it. World Of Warcraft is currently at around 20 times more subscribers than EQ1 at its peak, and rising. (Whereas by definition EQ1 went downwards after the peak.) And EQ2 actually peaked lower than EQ1, and even giving away the base game didn't save it.

EQ2 actually had to merge pairs of servers into a single server pretty quickly, because the populations on each was ridiculously low. It was starting to get the reputation of being, I quote loosely from memory, "like Morrowind, except you occasionally see another player." Of course, Sony's PR hacks worded it like it was some great innovation to improve gameplay experience... which technically it was, but only because it reduced a _problem_ they were having.

Add the fact that WoW subscriptions are slightly more expensive, and you're looking at Blizzard making some 25 times more money than EQ1 at its peak. And, you know, EQ1 used to be called a money printing license.

Add to that a bit of hubris too. Sony used to own the MMO market, and now they went to being an also-ran, fighting to keep a single-digit market share percentage. I'm betting that a lot of people at Sony took that as an insult.

From a more pragmatic thing, there's the image and word-of-mouth factor too. At one point Sony used to be _the_ name in MMOs and EQ was almost a synonim for MMOs. Anyone you knew who was playing an MMO, chances are they played EQ. That's free marketting. Nowadays, if you think "MMO", you think "WoW". And if you hear of someone who plays any Sony MMO, you don't ask, "how much does it cost?", you ask, "why?" (Planetside almost bombed, Matrix Online was a major dud, EQ2 we already discussed, and SWG managed to allienate even its die-hard fanboys without bringing any new customers in the process.)

Heck, even if you talk to someone who's sick and tired of WoW, chances are they won't say, "I'm gonna try EQ2 then", they'll say something like, "I'm gonna try LOTRO, 'cause it's like WoW with a Tolkien theme."

Add to that the awful lot of bad PR that Sony managed to get itself into lately, and you can see how it would only amplify the existing problems.

Basically, Sony has all the reasons to fight for more players, and you could watch them getting in a panic to copy WoW ever since it got launched and their EQ2 barely survived. There are a lot of disjointed, poorly planned, uninspired changes that their games went through precisely to try to copy WoW. The history of the last couple of years at Sony has been almost 100% trying to play catch with WoW.

The problem is that they don't have any designer who even understands _why_ WoW did well, or what actually worked. So they're taking random guesses, managing at most to annoy the players whose characters just got massively changed, but not quite to hit the mark. Or come even within 1 mile of it. It's like watching a (piss-poor) cook trying to copy someone else's dish that sells better, and going, "Oh, they used salt too. I get it! People love salt. I'll put 10 times more salt in mine!" But I digress.

On the bright side, this sounds like the kind of a change which, if done even half-way sane, at least doesn't mess anyone's existing character or annoy the existing players in any other way. Then again, it's Sony. I wouldn't be surprised if they manage to screw up even this.

Re:Actually, that's the whole problem (1)

nschubach (922175) | more than 7 years ago | (#20117515)

SOE is really screwing things up lately. I was kind of hoping that they'd fix the problems in Vanguard (frame rate/performance) but they keep stripping out the stuff that made it unique (EE) and putting standard EQ2 systems (BOP/BOE) in it's place. If I wanted to play EQ2 I wouldn't be logging in with the craptastic performance and playing the game, I'd be playing EQ2.

Re:Actually, that's the whole problem (1)

Lehk228 (705449) | more than 7 years ago | (#20127217)

Lately?

you must be new to EQ. they have always been screwing up, there never used to be a real alternative for players, now there is WoW

Re:Actually, that's the whole problem (1)

nschubach (922175) | more than 7 years ago | (#20147827)

Unfortunately, I've been playing something from SOE since 1999 starting with Everquest, moving on to Planetside for a bit, SWG, EQ2, and then Vanguard got sucked in. So, yeah, I've seen my fair share of massive changes and screw ups. But these latest changes (to Vanguard esp.) concern me.

Re:Actually, that's the whole problem (OT) (1)

Javit (68742) | more than 7 years ago | (#20117969)

Moraelin,

Sorry for the bizarre OT Slashdot comment, but I came across a post of yours here on sword fighting (link [slashdot.org] ) and was impressed by your in-depth knowledge of the subject. I'd be interested to know how you came to be so knowledgeable on the subject, so that I might follow the same path. Please email me or let me know where I can email you. My email address is (obfuscated):

user: cmindrum
domain: gmail.com

-Chris

Well, actually I'm no expert (OT) (1)

Moraelin (679338) | more than 7 years ago | (#20119469)

Well, I'm flattered, but actually I'm not an expert on swords by any kind of reckoning. It's all just extensively googled on the Internet. And, as usually is the case with that source of information, it's probably not all accurate either. At any rate, I wish I could tell you some authoritative source, but other than hitting Google again, I'm a bit at a loss.

Pretty much it all started with a MUD I was playing on. They used to have the regular weaponry and armour mis-conception, namely 10 pound rapiers, 30 pound warhammers and 100 pound gothic breastplates. And we all kinda took it for granted.

So someone gets it into his head to change it to something more realistic, and the MUD pretty quickly got polarized into "noo, 3 pound warhammers are bogus" and "damn right they only weighed 2 to 3 pounds" factions. Being the wisearse you can see here, of course I wanted to jump into the debate and sound like a know-it-all. Also being a complete nerd, I went and googled it first. Much to my unexpected surprise, it turned out that the latter faction was right, and I found a bit more information about those weapons and armours too. Damn, I never would have guessed that a warhammer isn't a giant sledgehammer.

Not much later came a similar debate about katanas vs longswords, with manga fans swearing that a katana should be armour-piercing and how they've read somewhere that in WW2 some japanese bugger with a katana cut straight through a machinegun barrel. More googling, turns out that, damn, I was wrong about that one too.

Fast forward a bit more, and I was pondering making my own MUD. I actually wrote a driver from scratch, and it even worked, now to code the equipment and stuff. Now that was a lot of googling to get each and every piece of armour as historically-accurate described and balanced as possible.

'Course, then I decided I don't want to run a MUD after all.

At any rate, there you go, it's all googled. And from there, I just have a good memory for all sorts of trivia that no sane person would bother with.

Re:Actually, that's the whole problem (1)

Sage Gaspar (688563) | more than 7 years ago | (#20118237)

Actually, there's been a lot of movement around EQ2 lately. I've been finding a large population of returning players (as in, from three years ago) in my pickup groups and they are very much enjoying themselves. As one example, a new guild that opened on my server from the FoH boards a couple months ago has 175 active unique accounts (almost all played within last week). The newbie zones have had two instances open during primetime. They're also both $14.99 as far as I can tell, and I'm not sure what you mean by "giving away" the base game (including it with expansions? the deal they handed out for ex-VG players?).

Yeah, WoW is the two million gigaton gorilla. EQ2 is still doing well enough to support the last large expansion and a new one that is even bigger. There has been a solid rationale behind all the decisions they've made besides "WoW did it." On the occasions when WoW did it first and it's a good idea, damn skippy I'm glad they're doing it too. The devteam has seemed like genuinely good people and responded to my private messages on the forums on the three occasions I've tried to communicate with them thus far. In my opinion they've been making one good move after another with only a couple missteps, and Kunark looks to step up their game. People in-game and outside of the game seem genuinely optimistic, aside from the usual rumblings from the 1% hardcore end of the playerbase that has continued playing for three expansions despite themselves. The game is truly not hurting in any way unless your yardstick doesn't measure any smaller than the biggest show in town.

The SoE strategy doesn't seem to be to build a single WoW killer either way, though EQ2 is its competitor for WoW. They're pushing Station Access (which is worth two accounts) and trying to build up a stable of solid, if not best-in-class games. EQ2 and EQ1 are both solid contributors, SWG and Planetside are at least self-sustaining on life support and maybe pushing some people over the line towards a Station pass, and if they can unfuck VG in six months as they'd hoped that might be another source of income as well. The interesting battle isn't EQ2 versus WoW anyway, it's what AoC and Warhammer are going to bring to the table shortly. This card game thing is a nonstory.

Re:Actually, that's the whole problem (1)

leathered (780018) | more than 7 years ago | (#20125137)

Indeed.

I've played many MMOs and the one I keep coming back to is EQ2. The devs have performed and astonishing turnaround for a game that was at best mediocre at launch and have turned it into the most polished and content filled game out there.

Where SOE are not doing it justice is in promotion and distribution of EQ2. Boxed copies of the game are virtually impossible to find in Europe.

Re:Actually, that's the whole problem (1)

Sage Gaspar (688563) | more than 7 years ago | (#20126945)

Personally I think they're waiting for Kunark to make the push. Faydwer brought more AAs, more low level zones, and more polish, but Kunark is really pulling out the stops, changing the design to improve things lots of people didn't like, and giving players that left the game at cap motive to reactivate with the new levels and stuff. Plus it's Kunark, which is even more nostalgic than Faydwer for lots of people. They really only get one more chance to make a marketing push and I think they were waiting until they had everything set. I hope they don't prove me wrong :P

Re:Actually, that's the whole problem (1)

ChronosWS (706209) | more than 7 years ago | (#20118789)

Actually, having played most of those games, I even wonder why WoW did so well (I played it up to 50 when 50 was all the further you could go. Or was it 60, been a while.) The only thing I can think of is that they made it easy to solo, at least with some characters. In Everquest, you are pretty much locked out of solo from level 25 on. The other thing is the ability to fight other players, though it turns out this is pointless since you really can't gain or lose anything important.

Honestly, I don't see what the attraction is any more. ProgressQuest accomplishes just as much without the annoyance of actually grinding.

Re:Actually, that's the whole problem (1)

Fizzl (209397) | more than 7 years ago | (#20119275)

"Oh, they used salt too. I get it! People love salt. I'll put 10 times more salt in mine!"

Hehe... I remember when the instances came. I hadn't tried WoW.
I was quite confused. "Wait what? So everyone gets their own dungeon so the M won't be so massive in MORPG? You get to buy stuff with these things you call points. You know, we used to have a form of currency already. You know, platinum, why not use that to buy new stuff?"
Now that I have picked up WoW habit, I see that the instances were desperate attempt to implement both instanced dungeons and battleground rewards in one sweep. How, fucking, original... I was also dissapointed in all the new shit that was introduced in latter expansions.
Luclin: Fast world travel. Geez! I used to be proud of knowing the whole game world. Newbies wouldn't even know how to get to the nearest city.
PoP: Instant world travel! Now the newbies won't even know how to run to the other side of the zone.
Luclin&PoP: Insanely involving progression trees to get to the higher level dungeons. Thank SOE, perhaps you noticed in WoW you can do most of everything with single group. Also, you only need 12h raids for very end game items, and even there they drop regularly so many people in the raid get rewards. In EQ you need a 30 man raid to tip a cow with a shield of poo. And only ones able to roll for the shield of poo are those who have already raided the same place 30 times so they have enough DKP.

And the level grind. In each expansion it makes the lower level grind faster and makes the new 5 levels an arse rape. Fucking anoys me that a newbie can pick up to the higher levels in days what I had to grind for ever. Also, what's the point of the midway content in the game at all? You only want to get past 60 fast so that you can get to PoP progression. No-one wants to waste time anywhere on the way. Just buy those 1pp used-to-be-uber things from bazaar and be done with it.

Oh *cough*; sorry about rant.

Re:Actually, that's the whole problem (1)

ninxf (1139073) | more than 7 years ago | (#20132925)

How, fucking, original... I was also dissapointed in all the new shit that was introduced in latter expansions.
Umm, are you actually calling Luclin and PoP unoriginal when compared to WoW? You do realize that Luclin and PoP came out 2-3 years before WoW was released right?

Re:Actually, that's the whole problem (1)

flayzernax (1060680) | more than 7 years ago | (#20150245)

I think he is flaming wow and EQ equally, I don't think he meant that Luclin and PoP were supposed to compare to any of WoW's expansions or additions.

I agree for the most part with everything he says about EQ. For someone who played extensively pre-velious and then post PoP, GoD, OOW, he's got it right.

BTW I played on test server and leveled 75, almost got into end game OOW, but burned out and quit...

MMO's are all about how long you can go without food, water, or a job, until you burn out and have to resupply your real life amenities and pay that internet bill.

I would like to see a new MMO without the grind, a low level cap that allows "unique and quick character progression", preferably skill based, the ability to earn your own "class titles" based on fantasy genre classes from DnD, and others. For example the skills you would build your character around would make you eligible for fitting class titles. Also all the skills in game should be learned through an action the player does or buy able in an in character fashion. Something like level 1-30 in a month, or 2 or 3 days played time, 2 or 3 hrs per session.

Another thing that drives me nuts is the HUDs, and overinformation of characters, and items, and quests, and waypoints... Characters in town should run up to appropriate characters and offer them dialog which allows the player to refuse or get the quest. Some characters should be hard to find and hidden and only offer quests to those they deam worthy. No rogue quest npc's running over to a paladin that sits down in a tavern to offer the "Grand Heist" quest, the computer would determine the NPC's reaction and players quest worthyness by simply checking the kinds of skills, and actions the player has made... if the player constantly solves quests in an aggressive non-pacifist manner, and has death touch, and wears black armor with skulls (all easily variablized) a good alighned NPC quest giver may even "cower in the corner". They already do this with faction systems, and agro in the original EQ, which has an amazingly interesting faction system, the #1 reason to still play that game (although its been made virtually pointless). Anyway non-combat NPC AI has a long way to go, but not a horrendous amount "groundbreaking" programming to get it there...

Classic things from EQ that were unique at the time. Underneath Qeynos there was an entire sewer system with easter egss. Tox forest usto be really murkey and had a very scary atmosphere to a newbie in clothe armor, rusty sword, newbie wizard nuke. Most dungeons only required a group for 99% of the content pre-kunark. Only naggy, vox, and a few really powerful mobs required more. raid content is ok, but it should never be required to "raid" to progress or get the best stuff, only unique, really good things quickly. They need to keep the group and solo content on par with raid gear, and need to have a higher ratio of group, solo:raid content, like 5(group/solo):1(raid).

As far as requiring groups, they should be a must at after the newbie tutorial/levels. Its just what these games were meant to be. Only the ridiculously twinked could ever take Crusbhone Orc hill right outside the wood elf starting city and the Crushbone orc dungeon. You got a sense of the story, as you progressed through the old world zones. And running out to east Karana to fight the gnolls on reaver hill with a group was part of the experience, it was an adventure in and of itself to see the sites on the way and get there alive in one peace. The best players were the ones with the social skills and political know how to get people to cooperate and work together in order to crush their openents or block out other players from content. It added a real attractive social dynamic which is destroyed by making all the content "fair" or "obsolete" except for the very end game content.

Tradeskills... WoW went in the right direction of tradeskills.

As far as the TCG thing, it would have been a good thing back when instead of having to look at the book in EQ1 for 30 mins you could have played the TCG between killing guards, its a grind centric mechanic and doomed for all but the most must hardcore players will "have to get all the cards, and unlock all the armors etc".

Re:Actually, that's the whole problem (1)

Gel214th (827454) | more than 7 years ago | (#20120167)

Err, why does EQ2 *need* 9 or 10 million players? What it needs is a steady player base that brings in enough revenue to maintain the world servers, fund additional development, and turn a decent profit. As long as it is doing that then it makes a lot of sense continuing and means it's performing quite well. Why fixate on competing with WoW?

Re:Actually, that's the whole problem (1)

Moraelin (679338) | more than 7 years ago | (#20124123)

Does it _need_ to be #1? Well, no, technically not. But I don't think anyone, much less Sony, is going to actually want to be a niche. People aim at a niche only when they can't compete in the mainstream. Why?

1. I guess in the same way that anyone else needs more customers. Greed is a powerful driving force of capitalism. Plus, honestly, even when you invest your money in a corporation, you expect it to make as much more money as physically possible if it can, not to aim for a barely-survivable niche. Sony is a corporation, and it's out to make money, not art, so...

2. Because more money means more funds for development.

E.g., You can see in Planetside what happens when the revenue stream slows down too much. It's a game that's barely still maintained, but isn't getting an expansion any time soon.

3. As I was saying, being #1 is a powerful marketing factor. So you can't fault anyone for coveting that place.

E.g., the New Coke fiasco, was caused precisely by not wanting to split up the Coke line and end up with Pepsi being more sold than either of them.

E.g., you can see it in Sony's case by their refusing to disclose the number of subscribers for the last couple of years. When they were at the top, you had no problem getting all the statistics you wanted out of them... because those statistics proved that Sony is #1, king of the hill, owner of the MMO market. Ever since WoW they suddenly refuse to give exact numbers for a lot of their games. Why? Because it's not good for marketting. And also because of the next factor, probably.

4. For pride. And if SOE is about anything, it's about hubris. They just have to show the world that they're number one, they're the ones who are right, they're the ones whose overpriced console is worth getting a second job for, etc. I just can't see them bending over that easily.

But be that as it may, the fact is that Sony _is_ fixated on competing with WoW. My guesses for their reasons cold be wrong, but it's hard to miss the symptoms. Do they _have_ to be fixated on it? Well, technically no, but they are anyway. And as a corporation, they're expected to claw their way to the top too.

Re:Actually, that's the whole problem (1)

Gel214th (827454) | more than 7 years ago | (#20125171)

Being Number 1 would be great for any company in any market, that was never in dispute. And one would expect Sony to attempt to maximise their subscriber base and their marketshare, sure. However that doesn't mean that if they don't have 9 million subscribers as WoW does that they have failed. I'd like to know exactly which MMORPG *has* released their subscriber numbers lately beside WoW? I haven't seen City Of Heroes do it, or EVE, or Vanguard, or Lineage II recently. In fact that old mmorpgcharts site had to painstakingly compile statistics from a variety of pieced together information. EQ2 does not need 11 million subscribers to be termed a success at all. And maybe it's because they aren't number one that they are thinking of things like the Sony Station Exchange, and this new CCG idea which, to me, add to the game and actually help innovate the genre (never thought I'd be saying that about Sony actually) which is something that the 9 million player guy isn't about to do.

Re:Actually, that's the whole problem (1)

Moraelin (679338) | more than 7 years ago | (#20126311)

Actually, dunno about others, NC Soft did release the number of subscriptions at least in their financial reports. As of March 2007, that was 143,127 subscribers for US & Europe. Plain, clear and transparent.

So although I didn't originally want to get into that, I'll go now and add that AFAIK Sony is the only one who pulls that kind of crap.

That said, it seems to me like you're fixated on "yeah, but it didn't fail". Yeah, technically it didn't get canceled, if that's what you mean. Never said otherwise.

On the other hand, if you want to talk _success_, I'm not sure how you want to define "success" there, then. Sorry, I don't consider minor niche players to be big successes. As I was saying, noone aims for a niche, unless that's all they can get. A niche isn't "success", it's at best "honourable mention."

If you like it, good for you, and I certainly don't wish them anything bad. But a "success" it ain't, any way you want to slice it.

And let's talk another thing: Sony doesn't even look like it can decide on a niche. They went through several major changes and switched direction in mid-flight every few months. Sorry, that doesn't tell me that they had a vision or concept and were successful in implementing it. From where I stand, the only "vision" they have is trying desperately to find that random change which will get them more market share. That's it. There is virtually no artistic or game design concept left that they didn't randomly change once or twice already, in their endless quest to copy WoW without even understanding what they're copying.

At any rate, it tells me that they didn't carefully aim for a niche and succeeded in reaching it. It tells me their whole plan was and is to get mainstream... and failed miserably in that plan.

Don't take that as hate or anything. I just find it, and them... sad. That's just about the word that sums it up.

Re:Actually, that's the whole problem (1)

Gel214th (827454) | more than 7 years ago | (#20128437)

? No one aims for a niche market?
On the contrary *many* successful business aim to fill a niche market and are highly profitable providing for that niche market.You might say that the entire Super Luxury Car line is based on this premise.

The changes could simply indicate a flexible company that is willing to adapt to what it sees the market wants. Which is not an easy thing to figure out to begin with:what people want. If you listen to people they all say they want something different than WoW, something different to the Grind. But yet WoW's subscriber base continues to grow and they aren't losing subscribers who are being replaced either. Then you look at Sony bringing out a game like Tabula Rasa which is truly trying to break the mold.

I say go for it Sony, do the whole CCG thing and let's see where it ends up.I for one am very interested in that concept, as it is a concept that I myself have held and theoretically explored and wondered,"Wow, why doesn't one of these MMORPGs do this".

Anyways, I just found a few things that you said perhaps needed further explanation.

Re:Actually, that's the whole problem (1)

ninxf (1139073) | more than 7 years ago | (#20132995)

And let's talk another thing: Sony doesn't even look like it can decide on a niche. They went through several major changes and switched direction in mid-flight every few months. Sorry, that doesn't tell me that they had a vision or concept and were successful in implementing it. From where I stand, the only "vision" they have is trying desperately to find that random change which will get them more market share. That's it. There is virtually no artistic or game design concept left that they didn't randomly change once or twice already, in their endless quest to copy WoW without even understanding what they're copying.
Holy god...apparently any change SOE makes to EQ2 is a attempt to copy WoW. How about you give us some examples?

Re:Actually, that's the whole problem (1)

Lehk228 (705449) | more than 7 years ago | (#20127227)

SOE may have held the largest market-share for a time, but their support, coding, and design has always been "number two"

Re:Actually, that's the whole problem (1)

Ogive17 (691899) | more than 7 years ago | (#20131141)

SOE is the inverse to King Midas... everything gold they touch turns to lead.

Good games aren't as successful as they should be because SOE is attached (even if they have 0 say in programming/gameplay).

Re:Actually, that's the whole problem (1)

ninxf (1139073) | more than 7 years ago | (#20132825)

Actually, it does need more players. Badly.
What facts are you basing your assumption on? WoW is a freak occurance in the world of MMO's. If you ignore the sub numbers of WoW, EQ2 and some other games such as LOTRO are a complete success. Just because WoW has "20 times more subscribers" that also means that they have 20x the operating costs and possibly 20 times the employees needed to maintain the game (200+ GMs the last time I checked). There is more to factor in when determining the profit of a company then just the number of it's subs.

The problem is that they don't have any designer who even understands _why_ WoW did well, or what actually worked.
So there is a problem if a designer designs his/her own game instead of copying the mechanics of another game? WoW did well because Bliz fanboys flocked to it and gave it a large sub base from the start. That got a lot of media attention which caused more people to try it. Most of their subscribers haven't played an MMO before (Look at the combined MMO sub base before WoW and after WoW...there just weren't that many playing MMOs).

Basically, Sony has all the reasons to fight for more players, and you could watch them getting in a panic to copy WoW ever since it got launched and their EQ2 barely survived. There are a lot of disjointed, poorly planned, uninspired changes that their games went through precisely to try to copy WoW. The history of the last couple of years at Sony has been almost 100% trying to play catch with WoW.
Haha, what a load of crap. Why is the post marked as informative when it's just a bunch of incorrect information being spewed out by a WoW fanboy? Please, do tell of these poorly planned, uninspired (He apparently knows the inspirations of the dev team) changes. EQ2 barely survived...too funny.

Re:Actually, that's the whole problem (1)

Grimwiz (28623) | more than 7 years ago | (#20140457)

You are incorrect flinging the insult "wow fanboy" at the previous poster.

Any game that REQUIRES groups for progression also therefore requires enough players that have the inclination, abilities and time to get together and make a group to progress. As your world gets bigger and the number of levels increase you dilute your player base to the point that people are unable to get a group and therefore unable to progress and therefore drop out of the game from frustration.

e.g. me.

I play WoW because some days I can solo, some days I can get involved with other people (from 2 to 39). I can do what I want and enjoy myself rather than sit folornly trying to get a group together. Oh, and if I get fed up and try something that gets my character killed I dont lose 3 weeks of xp.

Re:Actually, that's the whole problem (1)

triptogn (932201) | more than 7 years ago | (#20150203)

You might want to try re-activating your account. You are still living in 2004 as far as systems go for EQ2. The game is practically all solo now. There are no shards or group xp debt. Debt from a death is usually paid back within 3 or 4 kills.

Re:Actually, that's the whole problem (1)

Psychochild (64124) | more than 7 years ago | (#20150825)

Add the fact that WoW subscriptions are slightly more expensive, and you're looking at Blizzard making some 25 times more money than EQ1 at its peak.

Not quite true. A large part of those 9 million subscriptions are in China specifically. Chinese players do not pay $13-15/month as Western players do. So, yes, WoW is bigger and certainly more profitable, but not quite to the factor you stated.

Some clarification from an MMO developer.

Re:Actually, that's the whole problem (1)

Daindalin (1140415) | more than 7 years ago | (#20171953)

I noticed the original starting city and zones are very underpopulated. I'm suprised to see more than 5 people in zone. I propose SOE to give away the original EQ with a minimal monthly charge of lets say 5 dollars. To prevent gold miners from abusing this they could prevent all tells from the basic membership to anyone outside their zone. They would still have chat channels but I think it would be easy to find and bane them if they start broadcasting there.

TCG go well with MMORPGS (1)

CrazyJim1 (809850) | more than 7 years ago | (#20116615)

After all, you need something to do with your time when you're bored with grinding. In all serious though, RPG players like TCGs. I remember Magic the Gathering being marketed in magazines that catered to RPG players.

Kinda lame IMHO (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#20122047)

I started playing Everquest in 2000 with a friend of mine. He quit to play World of Warcraft when it came out but I kept playing Everquest until the last expansion. I didn't like the direction the game was headed and now reading this makes me glad that I quit when I did. SOE needs to unplant their heads out of their butts and fix the problems with Everquest rather than put more stupid crap in the game. There are still many things that are broken in the game that date back to the original old world. Atleast the game is now on an anual expansion schedule now instead of one every 6 months. Maybe that will give the developers more time to go through the existing game and fix the majority of the problems that have been left untouched.

I didn't read through the replies to see if this particular bit of info was posted yet but this would make the 2nd sub-game put into place to try to help pass the time spent out of boredom. The first one was called "Gems" which was a tetris type wannabe using the existing game's spell icons which I thought was silly to begin with. My impression is that SOE is trying to think up ways to keep their already dwindled player base to keep paying their monthly dues. What they need to do instead of prolonging the inevitable demise of Everquest is try to revitalize it and find a way to get new players and bring back some of their old ones but we all know that will never happen. Last count that I heard was Everquest had a little over a hundred thousand subcribers remaining versus World of Warcraft's seven million. How much longer will EQ stay alive?!?

actually pretty cool... (1)

phildawg (1104325) | more than 7 years ago | (#20117125)

This is pretty cool, if you get past the fact that you are going to play a game... to play another game.

It's kind of sad state of SOE. They have such a small base that they probably couldn't get anybody to produce a physical card set for them.

Instead they just try to detract from the actual game to keep people playing instead of trying out the massive breadth of MMOs available to them.

Like Animal Crossing NES games (1)

tepples (727027) | more than 7 years ago | (#20117363)

This is pretty cool, if you get past the fact that you are going to play a game... to play another game.
Mario Party? The "Triple Triad" and "Tetra Master" (no relation [tetrisconcept.com] ) minigames in Final Fantasy for PlayStation? The NES games in the original Animal Crossing?

Re:actually pretty cool... (1)

ChronosWS (706209) | more than 7 years ago | (#20118747)

Massive breadth? If by that you mean the sheer volume of games, you are right. If you mean the large number of games with different gameplay experiences... not so much. Playing Everquest, WoW, Lord of the Rings Online, Dark Ages of Camelot and Final Fantasy offers virtually no differentiation in substance. This really does seem like a last ditch effort by Sony to retain players.

Really, I think it is as much an indictment of the state of fantasy MMOs today as on SoE itself. I suspect this exact game would be received just as well in most of the other MMOs and would have the same effect, dragging people away from grinding. Actually, it gives people PvP effectively, which at the very least is a positive change to most of these systems.

Re:actually pretty cool... (1)

Shihar (153932) | more than 7 years ago | (#20118945)

Massive breadth? If by that you mean the sheer volume of games, you are right. If you mean the large number of games with different gameplay experiences... not so much.

Amen.

The MMORPG market has been downright pathetic ever since EQ1 was a success. Before EQ, you could see people experimenting and trying different styles of gameplay. UO in particular was a truly unique and interesting experience for a while after it opened. Today though, the difference between EQ and WoW is cosmetics and a refinement of the whack-a-mole gameplay.

Personally, I hope someone grows some guts and tries something innovative. Instead of making a game based upon getting your users to hit the 'feed crack button' over and over again until they are level 60, it would be nice to see a game with gameplay that relies on fun instead of addiction and a love of watching numbers rise. Well, I can hope at least. Until than though, there is always my wonderful perm death MUD. [armageddon.org]

Re:actually pretty cool... (1)

FishWithAHammer (957772) | more than 7 years ago | (#20121371)

Armageddon is a player-hostile shitpit with MUD conventions that were old ten years ago and never improved hence.

Any MUD that calls itself an RPI is immediately suspect.

sounds like a great idea! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#20117307)

Let's make a niche product and try to sell it to people who use our already existing niche product!

Sounds like a recipe for failure to me.

so sad (1, Funny)

br14n420 (1111329) | more than 7 years ago | (#20117475)

you guys sit around talking about card games so much that it requires an acronym now? lame.

To be honest (1)

Dachannien (617929) | more than 7 years ago | (#20117905)

The most disturbing part of this story is the new link between having stacks of cash at your disposal and specific success in the game. That is, if you can afford to collect all the best cards due to your RL wealth, you get special bonus prizes in the game. And apparently, not some dinky thing like you get when you fork over the extra $20 for the collector's edition of a MMOG, but actual worthwhile items.

This further weakens the barrier between RL wealth and in-game property, and sadly, bolsters the position of the RMTers. Of course, SOE has always been happy to sacrifice integrity to make an extra buck (such as EQ Legends, the EQ2Bay server, and about three times as many $25 expansions released as they really needed to).

Re:To be honest (1)

JohnRoss1968 (574825) | more than 7 years ago | (#20117957)

As i was reading all the comments on how bad EQ sucks now , I couldnt help but notice in all the rambleing about MMORPGs Poor little UO didnt even get a mention. Its so sad. And to think once it was one of the best. now if you hop on and goto the bank in Brit theres no-one there but bots

First thought to come to my mind (1)

vpetite (1111039) | more than 7 years ago | (#20118061)

hm. sanctioned gold buying.

But that's the thing. For a lot of people, possessing an all powerful avatar kind of wipes the mind blank as to how they got there. Perhaps it's the cynic in me, but I feel like this is a cheap attempt to win over current MMO players....no risk of being banned after all.

ugh (1)

readin (838620) | more than 7 years ago | (#20119543)

I play Everquest, and this doesn't sound like fun. I don't want loot cards that I have interest in. I don't want to play an "in-game" game that players can buy extra cards for. I like the egalitarian idea that everyone pays the same fee and then gets a level playing field ( yes, there are gold farmers, but Sony tries to stop them, not become them). And I don't know how this is supposed to integrate with the world of Norrath. I mean, why would, for example, a skeleton be carrying around a trading game card? Kinda seems out of place.

Re:ugh (1)

Gel214th (827454) | more than 7 years ago | (#20119657)

If you don't want to, then don't. There's nothing Egalitarian about gains made in an MMORPG. Those with the most time, make the most gains. Those with jobs and families end up left behind. What's so 'fair' and 'equal' about that? Why would a skeleton not be carrying the exact weapon it is using at the time? Where does it fit a shield that it never had? Are there hidden bone pockets? come come..are you truly attempting to foist 'reality' on a Fantasy Game where a little halfling creature can carry 400 pounds of items in a backpack? The Card represents just another piece of loot. With all that you have said, i am certain if you come across a rare card that someone would pay 1000 gold for you would certainly trade it!

Re:ugh (1)

readin (838620) | more than 7 years ago | (#20128973)

There's nothing Egalitarian about gains made in an MMORPG. Those with the most time, make the most gains. Those with jobs and families end up left behind. What's so 'fair' and 'equal' about that?

What's fair is that what you get in the game depends on what you do in the game, not on how much money you pay outside the game. As someone with pretty limited time, I do find it frustrating that people I play with one week are so many levels above me the next week that I can't group with them again. But they did all the things required to level in the game, so they achieved the level. Also, actions in the game cause them to reach new levels, so their achievements don't have much impact on me. But someone who paid extra and has a new sword because of it is someone I may group with. He makes my contribution to the group seem less valuable. If I were to PvP with him, I would lose. And before you mention twinking, yes I find that annoying too, but less so because it actually happens in-game. It doesn't represent an interference of real life into the fantasy world.

Fantastic!! (1)

Gel214th (827454) | more than 7 years ago | (#20119637)

I wonder why other games haven't already done this! it's great to have 'sub-games' to play within the larger RPG context. For example why not add Chess and other games as well in Taverns etc. across the world? I was wondering when a company would decide to merge the highly profitable and engaging Trading Card type of game with a MMORPG, and here Sony's gone and done it! Sony of all companies! I was thinking it would have been Blizzard or some new startup! This will start a whole new economy going within Everquest and yet another reason to play. The issue of 'cash for items' is really old school. There's nothing wrong with setting up an economy which allows players to purchase items other than jealousy. Sony has already made the move to support real world trading on certain servers! I am actually downloading the Trial of The Isle right now, I note that gameplay in EQ has changed drastically and it actually seems to be quite interesting from what I am reading!

Re:Fantastic!! (1)

DrSkwid (118965) | more than 7 years ago | (#20119835)

EQ already has an in-game mini-game but single player

Just closed ADOM for the night.... (1)

magores (208594) | more than 7 years ago | (#20120621)

ASCII graphics. It's hard. No sound. But, it's fun.

I played EQ, DAoC, etc. And after awhile, they stopped being fun. ADOM hasn't stopped being fun. And, if anything, it's MORE addictive than EQ et al ever was.

Isn't that what a game is supposed to be about?

Re:Just closed ADOM for the night.... (1)

Warshadow (132109) | more than 7 years ago | (#20125281)

I still prefer many MUDs to any MMO *shrug*.

Antithematic (1)

obeythefist (719316) | more than 7 years ago | (#20126191)

Isn't that just a little extremely antithematic?

It's supposed to be a fantasy game - CCG's are pretty starkly unfantasy.

What next, Coke ads? Nike armour? Toyota mounts?

Talk about ruining the illusion. Even WoW keeps a better grip (barely).

Re:Antithematic (1)

everphilski (877346) | more than 7 years ago | (#20129477)

WoW has a card game, and in-game vendors where you enter codes ...

Re:Antithematic (1)

obeythefist (719316) | more than 7 years ago | (#20138673)

Not to be confused with in-game TCG. Lancelot and his buddies didn't sit at the round table playing Magic: The Gathering.

Having said that, even the keycode entry things being in-game is a small but glaring distraction.
They should be available at the logon screen and appear, I don't know, through the in-game mail or something. So we don't have to run by the "Buy lots of boosters for the WoW-CCG" guys in BB.

Re:Antithematic (1)

everphilski (877346) | more than 7 years ago | (#20147429)

yar, agreed. EQ tried the whole redemption-code thing, there was a issue of PC Gamer that had a code where you could redeem a shield, in order to do it you went to the EQ website (everquest.station.sony.com), logged into your account and entered it online. Then, in-game you would type '/claim' to claim your reward. No messing with the world.

When they do implement this, hopefully they try and make it mesh. It would make sense that people in Norrath would have games they like to play, after all they have a casino, and other entertaining attractions. So in order to get cards it would make sense to get them off of players - by killing humanoids in the world. And then to play, it would make sense to go to a certain zone and play at a table with other players. I hope its kinda implemented like this. The way the reviews were sounding, scarce with details as they are, it sounds more like a boss/raid mob drop. Which, while I'd like to watch guildies waste ERP/DKP on it so I can get the loot I want, I'd rather see it drop in a more role-playish way.

Re:Antithematic (1)

obeythefist (719316) | more than 7 years ago | (#20150681)

They did that with the Pazzak cards in KOTOR, I thought it was fun because it was a mini-game and worked really well in the theme that gangsters in space bars would play cards etc.

But "booster packs" and things dropping off fantasy monsters? Come on!

WoW does have the darkmoon cards that you can collect and turn in to make a darkmoon deck, but it's not a game, just a neat epic trinket.

If the game wasn't like a CCG so much as just a card game of some kind, and fantasy themed, it could work out allright. But boosters??

Re:Antithematic (1)

SupremoMan (912191) | more than 7 years ago | (#20143805)

Why is your mount so small? It's a Toyota.
Check for New Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?