One of the hottest topics from the entire EQNext announcement so far has been the news that – like several games before them – EQNext is doing away with the Holy Trinity of Tank, Healer and DPS.
The argument is that EQNext’s advanced AI will completely remove the need for the tank/healer/dps combo, and furthermore that most people don’t like being forced into those roles.
What did the many bloggers watching the announcement think of all that? Read on to find out!
Read more →
Rohan argues that whilst a more advanced AI can easily negate the Trinity, the problem is that it will also negate the spirit of the fantasy archetypes on which EQNext is based.
Read “Revisiting The Trinity” »
Ald takes a look at the Trinity from a number of games, from EQNext to Final Fantasy XI, and argues in favour of a five-person Trinity: Tank + Healer + DPS + CC + Support.
Read “Trinity!” »
Rowan Blaze points us to a well-known political figure’s views on the entire “EQNext And The Trinity” debate…
Read “Godwin’s Law Strikes Everquest Next” »
And Belghast writes two fascinating posts on the topic – firstly, pointing out that many tanks actually LIKE tanking, and secondly, looking at the inspirations, archetypes, and role models of the tank…
Read “No Love For Tanks” »
Read “A Tank Is…” »
So, Sony recently announced their next Everquest game. It sounds pretty cool – dynamic world AI, voxel-based landscapes, and –
Oh, you’ve heard about it already?
I’m really not sure when we last saw an announcement that has gotten the MMO community as excited as the EQNext reveal this weekend – and for good reason. The features they’re promising sound utterly revolutionary, and more importantly, at least reasonably achievable. I’m personally familiar with the kind of voxel-based landscape engine they’re using – it’s very doable for a next-gen game.
But will it actually work?
Let’s go to the phones – or, as the case may be, blogs:
Aardwulf gives us a comprehensive look at the announcement’s key features, with detailed thoughts on just how achievable they are – plus a video look at the entire thing!
Read “Everquest Next Impressions So Far” »
Watch “EverQuest Next Revealed and Why You Should Pay Attention” »
Tobold, ever the contrarian, takes issue with the description of EQNext as a pure “world” MMORPG, pointing out that the real world doesn’t have levels, amongst other things.
Read ” There is no such thing as a sandbox game ” »
The Ancient Gaming Noob gives us a round-up of more spur-of-the-moment posts from before all the announcements were completed, as well as a huge rundown and discussion of everything revealed.
Read “Monday Morning Talking Points For Everquest Next” »
The Nozy Gamer gives us an EVE player’s view on the world – and in particular, how genuinely free players’ choices will be in this world.
Read “Everquest Next: I better be careful” »
Flosch gives us a short, helpful hint on a way that might work if you want to sign up for the EQNext beta as a European.
Read “Signing Up For The EQN Beta As A European” »
Jaedia’s sold. Officially. And in this interesting post, she gives us all the reasons why she’s extremely excited about EQNext, from the graphical style to the sheer innovation.
Read “Everquest Next: OK, I’m Sold” »
And in something of a counterpoint to the last post, it will surprise no-one to learn that Syncaine doesn’t think EQNext is going to be any good – but his reasons are thought-provoking.
Read “EQN – Leading Off With Your Best” »
Scree gives us a balanced look at the announcements, praising the passion of the developers but questioning if, in particular, the AI’s actually possible.
Read “Everquest Next Revealed” »
What do you think? Is it as good as it looks?
Read more →
Milady at Hypercriticism writes a fascinating post on a single, tiny facet of World of Warcraft that many ex- and current players will remember: the Tower of Azora.
She’s looking at how WoW’s game design has changed, and how, in particular, Blizzard’s world-building has changed.
What would the Tower of Azora had Blizzard decided to fully incorporate it in their Cataclysm remake? Milady attempts to answer that question in a post that’s thought-provoking whether you agree with her or not:
“If Blizzard had cataclysmed Azora, they would have had it explained out to passers-by, they would have stripped it naked for the player to stare and yawn, commodified it into a quest hub. No enchanting trainer at the top of it: what for? Every profession is now found in the capital. No more inconvenient trailing back and forth.
They ironed out Azeroth. Every thing that stood out as unique was pressed down upon the flat surface of convenience. In so doing they turned a world with its peaks and valleys into a two-dimensional print. Following the creed of balance they made everything equal: nothing harder or more desirable, nothing different. Enchanting, with its inaccessible trainers and excessive material expenditure, and its grindy furbolg reputation that granted a much-coveted recipe only a few obtained, and with it fame and clients. Then they made each class equal in what they could do, so that nobody was discriminated in the basis of being a paladin without crowd control. The saddest of these equanimities was the shadow priest that now just did raw dps. Tanking and healing styles were fused into one big blob.
This did not only affect the enjoyment of the gameplay – it also changed how players viewed the world. The shadow priest was more effective now that he could put out more damage, but he was no longer fulfilling a unique role, different from all the rest. He might as well be firing darkened fireballs. They ‘balanced’ the gameplay to the detriment of the world.
Read the rest of “The Tower Of Azora And EQNext” »
Read more →