Game Forum / Role Playing Games / EverQuest / September 2005
Caster's Realm: Who Deserves New Content
|
|
Thread rating:  |
Mike Shea - 26 Sep 2005 21:33 GMT Caster's Realm: Who Deserves New Content
We have all bathed in the dark waters of the Uber vs. Causal bloodwar. We have all seen expansions in the past and questioned their target audience. High-end raiders look at expansions like Legacy of Ykesha scratching their heads and angered at the lack of high-end raid mobs. Single group hunters look at expansions like Planes of Power and Gates of Discord wondering what dark god they must worship to access more than 25% of the expansion. Today we will look at SOE's focus with each expansion and ask ourselves who deserves new content.
The title of this article is already misleading. The answer, of course, is 'everyone'. We all play this game and we all pay our $9 to $15 a month. We all expect to receive entertainment for our money and thus our money is wasted if we spend it on a game, or an expansion, that is of little use to us.
Hundreds of thousands of Everquest players each play in a particular style. We might try to group these players by level or class or playstyle but none of us plays exactly the same way or for the same reason as others. We all have a set amount of time we play and we all have things we enjoy doing. For the most part, Everquest offers many different ways to play that might be vastly different from one another. Consider those who tradeskill and play the market in the bazaar to those who lead groups of 54 hunters against the demon kings of Kuua.
These differences become apparent when one asks another to define a 'raider' or a 'casual player'. Some consider raiders to be those fighting Grummus in Plane of Disease. Others consider raiders only those at the highest end of the game (post Overlord Mata Muram at the time of this writing). One can easily begin slicing up these broad categories into dozens or hundreds of smaller categories.
Problems arise when players begin to think that they are the largest populous of Everquest and demand that new content and new expansions focus nearly entirely on them. I have heard players say that SOE should only release expansions with raids harder than the previous. Following this logic, every raid in Dragons of Norrath would be harder than Overlord Mata Muram. I have heard other players say that SOE should release expansions with content only for those between levels 25 and 50 and exclude high-end raids completely.
It is important to remember that whatever our play style, we are a minority. No single group or play style holds a monopoly on the game. We don't all mostly raid or mostly single group hunt. We aren't mostly level 70 or level 50 or level 10. We don't all mostly want solo content or encounters harder than Overlord Mata Muram. The Everquest population is vast and wide.
When we look at various groups, however, we can see areas where players, and the game as a whole, benefit from new content.
Overlord Mata Muram is the hardest single creature in the game. He is still undefeated on some servers. On others, however, he has been defeated and the groups who have hewn him down are now out of future content. Where will they point their swords when the greatest threat has fallen? This group certainly needs new raids to pacify their hunger. From recent developer discussions, they are likely to find this within Depths of Darkhollow.
What of lower power raiders? Many have yet to climb their way through the Planes of Power but still enjoy hunting with a larger group. Some might argue that enough lower power raid content exists to keep these groups happy and they don't need new content. However, recent expansions such as Gates of Discord, Omens of War, and Dragons of Norrath have shown future advancements for all raids. Instancing, lockout timers instead of rare spawns, multi-night raid progression, and flag rewards all greatly improve over the traditional races to the rare spawns we remember from our Kunark, Velious, and Luclin days. Are lower power raiders not deserving of these new tools as well as the high-end raiders?
Single group hunters above level 60 have seen a lot of content since Planes of Power. Lost Dungeons of Norrath, Omens of War, and Dragons of Norrath have given single group hunters some of the best and most powerful hunts in Norrath's history. We have seen point-based loot systems, group instanced dungeons, and focused adventure goals. There is no lack of good and rewarding grounds from level 60 to 70. Lost Dungeons scales all the way from level 20 to 70, ensuring a wide range of hunting grounds without any risk of overcamped lands.
Still, as technology improves, as the SOE team becomes better at creating new encounter styles and new paths for progression, should these single-group hunters not reap the benefits?
What about low level players? Recently SOE revamped the original tutorial, adding all new content from level 1 to 10 and a new set of quests and missions from 10 to 20. Players below level 20 don't often stay there very long so the requirement for continually improved level 1 to 20 content doesn't really exist. However, how can EQ continue attracting newer players, even future hardcore raiders, if the lower end content isn't representative of the best that SOE can offer? Depths of Darkhollow offers new Monster Missions and spirit shrouds for all levels from 5 to 70 so even a level 5 gets new content with this coming expansion.
How about levels 20 to 50? This group has the largest bulk of existing content from the old worlds. The complaint of a lack of content at level 20 to 50 is far surpassed by complaints that zones remain empty for weeks from a lack of players willing to hunt there. Lost Dungeons offers the best instanced content from level 20 to 50. The task system of Omens of War offered a moderately useful way to solo from level 20 to 50, but not nearly as well as other games allow. Again, the Monster Missions and Spirit Shrouds open up a lot of possibility for level 20 to 50 hunters.
What about other play styles? There has been a strong tradeskill community for a long time who constantly and continually requires new content. While some expansions offered better benefits than others, every expansion has had some new direction for tradeskills.
Everquest's players travel in dozens of different paths yet all of us desire new content. While it is easy to declare that one expansion or another was a 'casual' or 'Raid' expansion, each expansion really holds benefits for all groups. The more recent expansions including Omens of War, Dragons of Norrath, and the upcoming Depths of Darkhollow include features and content for many if not most of these play styles. SOE focuses Everquest on the wide variety of play styles such as raiding, single grouping, tradeskills, adventures, missions, and quests. It is this variety that makes Everquest as strong a game as it is.
Loral Ciriclight 30 August 2005 loral@loralciriclight.com
Faned - 26 Sep 2005 23:51 GMT <mshea01@gmail.com> wrote:
> It is important to remember that whatever our play style, we are a > minority. You are flat out wrong. The irony is that it is your egocentric viewpoint, the same thing you attempt to admonish everyone else not to display, that leads you to being wrong. =P
42 - 27 Sep 2005 00:33 GMT > <mshea01@gmail.com> wrote: > > [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > the same thing you attempt to admonish everyone else not to display, that > leads you to being wrong. =P Right, we all know most people play exactly like Faned. You know, hard core raiding 3-boxers in an endgame guild.
/smirk
Faned - 27 Sep 2005 20:16 GMT <nospam@nospam.com> wrote:
> > <mshea01@gmail.com> wrote: > > > [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > Right, we all know most people play exactly like Faned. You know, hard > core raiding 3-boxers in an endgame guild. No, most don't. There's a far larger segment of the population that doesn't raid nearly as much. Like Loral. Who still raids.
Mark Rafn - 27 Sep 2005 20:41 GMT >> > <mshea01@gmail.com> wrote: >> > > It is important to remember that whatever our play style, we are a >> > > minority.
>> > You are flat out wrong. The irony is that it is your egocentric viewpoint, >> > the same thing you attempt to admonish everyone else not to display, that >> > leads you to being wrong. =P <nospam@nospam.com> wrote:
>> Right, we all know most people play exactly like Faned. You know, hard >> core raiding 3-boxers in an endgame guild.
>No, most don't. There's a far larger segment of the population that doesn't >raid nearly as much. Like Loral. Who still raids. You're both right (or wrong, as the case may be). Loral, it's simply not true that Sony can't come up with categories broad enough to cover 51% or more of the customer base. It MAY be true that the common stereotypes (high-end 25+ hour/week raider and sub-70 casual) are not a majority. Faned, arguing this point as a "you're flat-out wrong" is not very helpful, and not true unless you define terms more clearly.
My take on the whole argument: nobody "deserves" new content. SoE makes business decisions based on what they can produce in a given time for a given budget, that they think enough people will buy to make it worthwhile. Players buy and play if they think it'll be a net positive on their happiness.
The decision Sony makes on what players are willing to buy does NOT boil down to categorizing every account as one of N buckets, and writing features that cater to each bucket proportional to it's revenue. It is (or it would be if I were King) far more nuanced than that. They have to guess what will sell in light of both lying/confused customers (who think they want something and scream loudly about it, but won't be happy if they actually get it), a large group of hard-to-categorize customers (former raiders, high-end casual, family midlevel raiders, etc.), and the fact that there's a lot of crossover and mobility in the customer base. -- Mark Rafn dagon@dagon.net <http://www.dagon.net/>
the wharf rat - 27 Sep 2005 21:32 GMT >The decision Sony makes on what players are willing to buy does NOT boil down >to categorizing every account as one of N buckets, and writing features that >cater to each bucket proportional to it's revenue. It is (or it would be if I >were King) far more nuanced than that. Ha ha:
Director or Marketing to Development: "Dark elfs are cute. Do something with dark elfs in it. Ummm, and maybe, like, a dragon or something..."
Development: "But..but..."
Marketing: "Dark elfs. Dragons. Got it? We already had the print ads run."
Development: "Grumble..."
Faned - 28 Sep 2005 00:57 GMT <wrat@panix.com> wrote:
> >The decision Sony makes on what players are willing to buy does NOT boil down > >to categorizing every account as one of N buckets, and writing features that [quoted text clipped - 13 lines] > > Development: "Grumble..." A scene repeated in game houses across the world every day. =)
D.J. - 28 Sep 2005 16:13 GMT ] Right, we all know most people play exactly like Faned. You know, hard ] core raiding 3-boxers in an endgame guild. ] ] /smirk
Or like myself, I have no time, nor inclination, to raid.
JimP.
 Signature http://www.linuxgazette.net/ Linux Gazette http://crestar.drivein-jim.net/ September 8, 2005 http://www.drivein-jim.net/ July 31, 2005: Drive-In movie theatres http://poetry.drivein-jim.net/ poetry blog March 12, 2005
Larry Lard - 28 Sep 2005 17:31 GMT [snip]
> It is important to remember that whatever our play style, we are a > minority. No single group or play style holds a monopoly on the game. > We don't all mostly raid or mostly single group hunt. We aren't mostly > level 70 or level 50 or level 10. We don't all mostly want solo content > or encounters harder than Overlord Mata Muram. The Everquest population > is vast and wide. I remember many years ago (I think before Luclin, definitely before PoP) we were told that 'the majority' of accounts had 'at least' one character over level 50. Given that levels tend to rise over time (discuss!), we can then say that 'we' are 'mostly' over level 50 with at least one character.
 Signature Larry Lard Replies to group please
BKOFOED@YAHOO.com - 29 Sep 2005 03:40 GMT > [snip] > > It is important to remember that whatever our play style, we are a [quoted text clipped - 13 lines] > Larry Lard > Replies to group please and what of us poor 50+ soloist? How much does Sony think about us other than how to get rid of us?
BKOFOED@YAHOO.com - 29 Sep 2005 03:42 GMT > [snip] > > It is important to remember that whatever our play style, we are a [quoted text clipped - 13 lines] > Larry Lard > Replies to group please and what of us poor 50+ soloist? How much does Sony think about us other than how to get rid of us?
Lance Berg - 30 Sep 2005 02:03 GMT > [snip] > [quoted text clipped - 10 lines] > (discuss!), we can then say that 'we' are 'mostly' over level 50 with > at least one character. I have several characters over 50. I find, however, that I eventually tire of them somewhere in that range, or especially when I get up to the highest level, and start over. Despite having 3 level 65s, and a half dozen more in the 50-60 range, I've spent most of my time in the 1-50 range, and will continue to do so. (The 65's all are "hit the wall" characters, I quit them before the 66-70 game was introduced... now if I ever take a character up past 60 again, I'll be likely to go to 70, and THEN get bored with him)
Why? Because I don't like raiding, and as you level up, more and more thats where the game takes you.
As long as they continue to produce more content for high levels that involves raiding, and more content for low levels that involves soloing and small groups, I'll keep tiring of the high level and starting new characters to try new angles on the lower level game.
Trouble is, rather than make the low end more interesting, they seem to have tried to make it fly by faster, boosting exp and providing better gear and so forth at the low end, so you just fly thru it.
And the other problem is, fewer and fewer players seem to be playing that low end game, and those who -are- doing it are mostly speeding thru as quickly as possible, so its hard to get interesting groups to go do different things; if you don't want to do Tutorial>Kurns>PC>DSP you'd better be good at soloing. Variations on the solo theme aren't nearly as interesting as the vast number of class/style combinations you can approach things with as a group.
Midi
Palindrome - 30 Sep 2005 08:36 GMT <SNIP>
>Trouble is, rather than make the low end more interesting, they seem to >have tried to make it fly by faster, boosting exp and providing better [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] >as interesting as the vast number of class/style combinations you can >approach things with as a group. Yes, that's the state of the game in a nutshell, nowadays. The Tutorial seems to reflect this "blitz the lower levels" attitude, because gtting to level 10 is like clicking your fingers. I have to say the Tutorial was pretty interesting though, simply because (and TAKE NOTE, SONY!!) it was fresh, new and (for once) it was for low-level players.
When I got to PoK, I just couldn't face Paludal Caverns yet AGAIN, and actually sent an ooc out asking if anyone knew of some other place to go to :D It's as you say - hit Tutorial/Kurns/PC/DSP and ignore the rest. The other zones for characters of appropriate levels may as well not exist.
At a tangent whilst not quite unrelated, one guy in PoK did a mini quest early this week. He said he was going to be in a particular zone, which his friend would give a clue to after he'd left, and first player under 20 to find him got 15k. He duly left, and his pal then announced the clue: "He's beside the Shady Swashbuckler!" Some baffled people in PoK were saying things like "Is this in a new zone?" and "What expansion is this zone in?" Good lord, I remember when this was the most famous NPC in Everquest, heh. The only movement in the zones now is people using the Magus, and there ain't a group in sight.
Palindrome
|
|
|