Monual's Guilddeath

Archived from groups: alt.games.everquest (More info?)

Well, it happened, not unexpectedly. Our guildleader, faced with rebuilding
just about the entire guild in the face of rapidly declining numbers in EQ,
decided that it would be best just to disband the guild. Somewhat
surprisingly, no one disagreed. We've barely had 20 people log on each
night. The impetus to do anything seems to have gone out of the guild.

So Monual is now guildless. I have precious few options on Drinal, except
to go to the only remaining uber-guild. It's actually still going strong,
having absorbed a lot of my guild plus gotten lots of people cross-server.
But it's having problems, too; they've actually gone as far back as flagging
people for Time to gear them up. Their numbers have gone way down, too.

Not that I would ever guild with them; their leadership has done so many
despicable things in the past. I remember when their guildleader saw that a
Shadowknight in our guild was attempting to gather a force to take down a
named mob that dropped a very nice two-handed sword in the Plane of Water.
So he got a few of his guildmates to take down the mob, then destroyed the
sword and taunted the SK. I could never, ever be associated with someone
like that. Curiously, though, the SK left our guild for theirs a few weeks
ago.

What to do? Cross-sever application? Maybe, except my schedule makes
full-time raiding difficult unless the guild starts their raids at 10pm
Central. Plus who's to say the same thing won't happen at that other guild?
For the first time ever, I'm actually starting to believe the EQ is in its
death throes. Oh, I'm sure there will still be people playing a year from
now, but the high-end raiding scene is essentially done with. Old people
have moved on and new people won't pick up EQ over EQ2 or WoW.

It's sad; I so wanted to get Monual his epic. He's at the final fight of
his 1.5 epic, but my guild couldn't field a raiding force capable of that
fight for the past couple of weeks, and now they're gone. I wanted to see
Tacvi, Anguish, all that. I wanted to complete all the MPG trials, I wanted
to get all my level 69 and 70 spells. Now those things will quite likely
never happen.

What to do? I truly don't want to start all over again with another MMORPG.
I truly don't want to give up on EverQuest. At the same time, though, I
felt a sliver of relief amidst the depression about the death of Silent
Tempest, because I felt like I was letting the guild down with my reduced
playing time. Now I don't have to feel guilty about that any more. It
would be nice to not feel committed to a game, at least for a little while.

Monual's account is prepaid for some months yet, so I have plenty of time to
work things out. In the meantime, I may take Monual and Marrtuk out to do
some duoing and see if I can't get Marrtuk to 60. After all, I had some fun
times in the early days running around doing things on my own; it might be
good to return to that for a while.


--
-Richard

Monual Lifegiver
Prelate of Rodcet Nife
Drinal server
26 answers Last reply
More about monual guilddeath
  1. Archived from groups: alt.games.everquest (More info?)

    In article <co0tmr0fne@news2.newsguy.com>, Richard Lawson wrote:
    > What to do? I truly don't want to start all over again with another
    > MMORPG.

    How is starting over in another MMORPG really any different than when a new
    EQ expansion adds higher levels and content that is above your current
    capabilities? Well, there is one difference--a lot of people I've seen
    who start over in another game have a lot more fun, because they got the
    "must be uber" urge satisfied in the first one, and can stop and enjoy the
    game the second time. :-)


    --
    --Tim Smith
  2. Archived from groups: alt.games.everquest (More info?)

    Several Guilds have died recently on Modern Rasp. While none were what
    could be considered High End Guilds, it is very disconcerting (I don't
    even know if Rasp has a High End Guild). All Guilds lost are being
    blamed on EQ2 playing, not just Drama. My guild im in is a primarly
    family guild thats wants to move up on content. We tried Rumblecrush
    with a 2 group (avg level 54) and got owned ;p And that Animist(sp) in
    Riwii with two pets, all I saw was loading, please wait ....

    Slowping 58 Chanter on Modern Rasp
    Slowtoping 55 Pally on Modern Rasp
  3. Archived from groups: alt.games.everquest (More info?)

    "Tim Smith" <reply_in_group@mouse-potato.com> wrote in message
    news:mDTod.11780$Qh3.98@newsread3.news.atl.earthlink.net...
    > How is starting over in another MMORPG really any different than when a
    new
    > EQ expansion adds higher levels and content that is above your current
    > capabilities?

    Is that a serious question?

    Expansions hardly change the entire dynamics of the game. They add some
    more of the same.. you still have a char you know, mastered over years,
    skills and abilities gained and worked on over the years.. the gear and
    money you work for.

    Or you start level 1. No knowledge of the game, a new interface, new people,
    new communities, new spells to learn, entirely brand new world, things that
    may carry the same name across games but mean something completly different.
    No clue of mobs, of in-depth game info, etc.

    But yeah, aside from those and more points.. its not really much different
    starting a new game or buying OoW, is it.....

    -m
  4. Archived from groups: alt.games.everquest (More info?)

    "Richard Lawson" <nouma@msn.com> wrote in message
    news:co0tmr0fne@news2.newsguy.com...
    > Well, it happened, not unexpectedly. Our guildleader, faced with
    rebuilding
    > just about the entire guild in the face of rapidly declining numbers in
    EQ,
    > decided that it would be best just to disband the guild. Somewhat
    > surprisingly, no one disagreed. We've barely had 20 people log on each
    > night. The impetus to do anything seems to have gone out of the guild.

    Why didn't he look to the guilds below you for a solution? I imagine most
    guilds below have gone through the exact same process, and if you could of
    absorbed 20 or so of them, even with the gear difference, you could at least
    still raid, and have a building block to carry on from.

    > But it's having problems, too; they've actually gone as far back as
    flagging
    > people for Time to gear them up. Their numbers have gone way down, too.

    Wow. The next patch will introduce a 15% rule for PoTime (amongst other
    zones).
    But even so - qvic and txevu would be a better solution to gear people fast.
    12 drops a day, 2 hours work, every third day 16 loots, plus random named in
    the zone. Its also armour a serious level above PoTime

    > What to do? Cross-sever application? Maybe, except my schedule makes
    > full-time raiding difficult unless the guild starts their raids at 10pm

    What about a guild behind instead of infront then?

    > It's sad; I so wanted to get Monual his epic. He's at the final fight of
    > his 1.5 epic, but my guild couldn't field a raiding force capable of that
    > fight for the past couple of weeks, and now they're gone. I wanted to see

    20 would of been enough for the WW fight sadly enough. Maybe in this age of
    guilds collapsing, some kinda PU raids will thrive?

    > Tacvi, Anguish, all that. I wanted to complete all the MPG trials, I
    wanted
    > to get all my level 69 and 70 spells. Now those things will quite likely
    > never happen.

    Tacvi>> no you don't want to see it!
    Anguish is an ok zone.
    Which MPG trials did you never win? (Mind and Realms?) Mind was never
    really much fun :p Going through hell to spawn the named, who then melees
    for upto 10k :)
    Spells> head to Rift. 69 spells are *common*! 70 spells take some doing,
    but drop there in small numbers.

    People have said EQ was dead/dieing since DaoC, PoP, LdoN raids, GoD... its
    still going strong. And if the newer games lack substance.. it will be
    another CoH/L2 all over again. Sure it drags people away for a while. But
    they all end up returning, eventually!

    -m
  5. Archived from groups: alt.games.everquest (More info?)

    > People have said EQ was dead/dieing since DaoC, PoP, LdoN raids, GoD...
    > its
    > still going strong. And if the newer games lack substance.. it will be
    > another CoH/L2 all over again. Sure it drags people away for a while. But
    > they all end up returning, eventually!
    >

    Assuming enough stay so theres something to come back to.
  6. Archived from groups: alt.games.everquest (More info?)

    A thousand monkeys banging on keyboards posted the following under the
    name "-martin" <nospam-villa_nospam_@cheerful.com>:

    >People have said EQ was dead/dieing since DaoC, PoP, LdoN raids, GoD... its
    >still going strong. And if the newer games lack substance.. it will be
    >another CoH/L2 all over again. Sure it drags people away for a while. But
    >they all end up returning, eventually!

    That's classic fallacious reasoning. Other times, the people who
    claimed that didn't understand the situation between the games. Games
    like Shadowbane, Horizons, SWG, AC2, L2, CoH, FFXI, even DAoC were
    never much of threats to EQ and the people claiming they would kill EQ
    were just deluded fools. For the most part, none of those times
    included a *better* option.

    This time it's different. EQ2 and WoW may not be better in every way
    for everyone, but they are better in *enough* ways for *enough*
    people. EQ outfought every mmorpg before now and kept its position.
    This time, it's going to take a hit, and that hit will be *big*. It's
    already happened, actually - the post I found the most interesting was
    one about Stromm mentioning that there was no longer an intact guild
    on the entire server capable of reliably getting the members on to
    clear Time, let alone later stuff.

    It's nothing to be sad about. EQ more than proved itself over the five
    and a half years it reigned supreme. Expecting more is unrealistic.
    Time to sink down into the horizon.

    EQ won't die, though. Just shrink down to subsistence levels. What it
    will mean for uberguilders is up in the air at the moment.


    --

    "Why stop now, just when I'm hating it?" - Marvin

    "It's certainly not a "memory leak." - 'shadows', my latest stalker
    "No one said it wasn't a memory leak." - 'shadows' a few posts later
  7. Archived from groups: alt.games.everquest (More info?)

    <ilkhanikeDIESPAM@yahoo.ca> wrote:
    > A thousand monkeys banging on keyboards posted the following under the
    > name "-martin" <nospam-villa_nospam_@cheerful.com>:
    >
    > >People have said EQ was dead/dieing since DaoC, PoP, LdoN raids, GoD... its
    > >still going strong. And if the newer games lack substance.. it will be
    > >another CoH/L2 all over again. Sure it drags people away for a while. But
    > >they all end up returning, eventually!
    >
    > That's classic fallacious reasoning. Other times, the people who
    > claimed that didn't understand the situation between the games. Games
    > like Shadowbane, Horizons, SWG, AC2, L2, CoH, FFXI, even DAoC were
    > never much of threats to EQ and the people claiming they would kill EQ
    > were just deluded fools. For the most part, none of those times
    > included a *better* option.
    >
    > This time it's different. EQ2 and WoW may not be better in every way
    > for everyone, but they are better in *enough* ways for *enough*
    > people. EQ outfought every mmorpg before now and kept its position.
    > This time, it's going to take a hit, and that hit will be *big*. It's
    > already happened, actually - the post I found the most interesting was
    > one about Stromm mentioning that there was no longer an intact guild
    > on the entire server capable of reliably getting the members on to
    > clear Time, let alone later stuff.

    I would have to agree, at least in part. And I still plan on playing EQ for
    a while yet, so this is opinion from that side of the fence. Every "high
    end" guild on my server is having turmoil of some sort. People that compare
    the current situation to DAoC or SWG or even CoH (the biggest prior hits to
    EQ) aren't paying attention. Sure, I expect some people to come back
    eventually, but I've tried both WoW and EQ2 (as well as DAoC, SWG, and CoH
    at their respective times). As you say, "better in *enough* ways for
    *enough* people." I'd personally be surprised if enough people came back to
    counteract the people filtering out (for WoW/EQ2/real life, etc.).

    > It's nothing to be sad about. EQ more than proved itself over the five
    > and a half years it reigned supreme. Expecting more is unrealistic.
    > Time to sink down into the horizon.
    >
    > EQ won't die, though. Just shrink down to subsistence levels. What it
    > will mean for uberguilders is up in the air at the moment.

    Without a doubt, there will be consolidation where necessary. When
    consolidation is no longer enough, SOE changes the way the game operates
    (the fact that they've already started down that path gives us a glimpse of
    the kind of numbers *they* are seeing). When even that is no longer enough,
    server mergers, though I feel that is in a far distant future yet.
  8. Archived from groups: alt.games.everquest (More info?)

    "Faned" <faned@wyld.qx.net> wrote in message
    news:slrncq9as8.2dp.faned@wyld.qx.net...
    > <ilkhanikeDIESPAM@yahoo.ca> wrote:
    > > A thousand monkeys banging on keyboards posted the following under the
    > > name "-martin" <nospam-villa_nospam_@cheerful.com>:
    > >
    > > >People have said EQ was dead/dieing since DaoC, PoP, LdoN raids, GoD...
    its
    > > >still going strong. And if the newer games lack substance.. it will be
    > > >another CoH/L2 all over again. Sure it drags people away for a while.
    But
    > > >they all end up returning, eventually!
    > >
    > > That's classic fallacious reasoning. Other times, the people who
    > > claimed that didn't understand the situation between the games. Games
    > > like Shadowbane, Horizons, SWG, AC2, L2, CoH, FFXI, even DAoC were
    > > never much of threats to EQ and the people claiming they would kill EQ
    > > were just deluded fools. For the most part, none of those times
    > > included a *better* option.
    > >
    > > This time it's different.

    That is what has always been said before....

    >> EQ2 and WoW may not be better in every way
    > > for everyone, but they are better in *enough* ways for *enough*
    > > people. EQ outfought every mmorpg before now and kept its position.
    > > This time, it's going to take a hit, and that hit will be *big*. It's
    > > already happened, actually - the post I found the most interesting was
    > > one about Stromm mentioning that there was no longer an intact guild
    > > on the entire server capable of reliably getting the members on to
    > > clear Time, let alone later stuff.
    >
    > I would have to agree, at least in part. And I still plan on playing EQ
    for
    > a while yet, so this is opinion from that side of the fence. Every "high
    > end" guild on my server is having turmoil of some sort. People that
    compare
    > the current situation to DAoC or SWG or even CoH (the biggest prior hits
    to
    > EQ) aren't paying attention. Sure, I expect some people to come back
    > eventually, but I've tried both WoW and EQ2 (as well as DAoC, SWG, and CoH
    > at their respective times). As you say, "better in *enough* ways for
    > *enough* people." I'd personally be surprised if enough people came back
    to
    > counteract the people filtering out (for WoW/EQ2/real life, etc.).
    >
    > > It's nothing to be sad about. EQ more than proved itself over the five
    > > and a half years it reigned supreme. Expecting more is unrealistic.
    > > Time to sink down into the horizon.
    > >
    > > EQ won't die, though. Just shrink down to subsistence levels. What it
    > > will mean for uberguilders is up in the air at the moment.

    As to the future who knows...
    There is an aweful lot of room for mmorgs to grow. where millions were
    online for games like diablo only hundreds of thousands were subscribed to
    games like everquest.
    I think the more good games that come out there is more growth potential for
    the better games.
    DaoC lives on. I no longer play that game but i dont think it is at
    subsistance levels.

    >
    > Without a doubt, there will be consolidation where necessary. When
    > consolidation is no longer enough, SOE changes the way the game operates
    > (the fact that they've already started down that path gives us a glimpse
    of
    > the kind of numbers *they* are seeing). When even that is no longer
    enough,
    > server mergers, though I feel that is in a far distant future yet.

    lots of the sky is falling on EQ over the last 5 years. seems like same ole'
    same ole to me..
  9. Archived from groups: alt.games.everquest (More info?)

    On 2004-11-24, -martin <nospam-villa_nospam_@cheerful.com> wrote:
    > People have said EQ was dead/dieing since DaoC, PoP, LdoN raids, GoD... its
    > still going strong. And if the newer games lack substance.. it will be
    > another CoH/L2 all over again. Sure it drags people away for a while. But
    > they all end up returning, eventually!
    >
    > -m

    Say hi to Naubi for me meem ;)

    Matt
  10. Archived from groups: alt.games.everquest (More info?)

    "Moopy" <pingu@keg.zymurgy.org> wrote in message
    >
    > Say hi to Naubi for me meem ;)
    >
    > Matt

    Will do. We see each other an awful lot now, if you haven't kept up with
    recent board activity!

    -m
  11. Archived from groups: alt.games.everquest (More info?)

    A thousand monkeys banging on keyboards posted the following under the
    name "Don Sly" <tdNOslySPAM@PLEASEsasktel.net>:

    >
    >"Faned" <faned@wyld.qx.net> wrote in message
    >news:slrncq9as8.2dp.faned@wyld.qx.net...
    >> <ilkhanikeDIESPAM@yahoo.ca> wrote:
    >> > A thousand monkeys banging on keyboards posted the following under the
    >> > name "-martin" <nospam-villa_nospam_@cheerful.com>:
    >> >
    >> > >People have said EQ was dead/dieing since DaoC, PoP, LdoN raids, GoD...
    >its
    >> > >still going strong. And if the newer games lack substance.. it will be
    >> > >another CoH/L2 all over again. Sure it drags people away for a while.
    >But
    >> > >they all end up returning, eventually!
    >> >
    >> > That's classic fallacious reasoning. Other times, the people who
    >> > claimed that didn't understand the situation between the games. Games
    >> > like Shadowbane, Horizons, SWG, AC2, L2, CoH, FFXI, even DAoC were
    >> > never much of threats to EQ and the people claiming they would kill EQ
    >> > were just deluded fools. For the most part, none of those times
    >> > included a *better* option.
    >> >
    >> > This time it's different.
    >
    >That is what has always been said before....

    ....but not by people with a clue.


    >As to the future who knows...
    >There is an aweful lot of room for mmorgs to grow. where millions were
    >online for games like diablo only hundreds of thousands were subscribed to
    >games like everquest.
    >I think the more good games that come out there is more growth potential for
    >the better games.
    >DaoC lives on. I no longer play that game but i dont think it is at
    >subsistance levels.

    DAoC was in a better position than EQ in that it still had the team
    PvP crowd. But DAoC took a big hit from WoW too. Not so much from EQ2.


    >> Without a doubt, there will be consolidation where necessary. When
    >> consolidation is no longer enough, SOE changes the way the game operates
    >> (the fact that they've already started down that path gives us a glimpse
    >of
    >> the kind of numbers *they* are seeing). When even that is no longer
    >enough,
    >> server mergers, though I feel that is in a far distant future yet.
    >
    >lots of the sky is falling on EQ over the last 5 years. seems like same ole'
    >same ole to me..

    Then you are not looking at the situation very intelligently.


    --

    "Why stop now, just when I'm hating it?" - Marvin

    "It's certainly not a "memory leak." - 'shadows', my latest stalker
    "No one said it wasn't a memory leak." - 'shadows' a few posts later
  12. Archived from groups: alt.games.everquest (More info?)

    Ben Sisson wrote:
    >> lots of the sky is falling on EQ over the last 5 years. seems like
    >> same ole' same ole to me..
    >
    > Then you are not looking at the situation very intelligently.

    I can't comprehend SOE supporting EQ much more than just minimally beyond
    probably 6 more months or so (if even that long), no matter what they've
    said.

    --
    chainbreaker

    If you need to email, then chainbreaker (naturally) at comcast dot
    net--that's "net" not "com"--should do it.
  13. Archived from groups: alt.games.everquest (More info?)

    noone@nowhere.com (chainbreaker) wrote in <co2g48020ao@news2.newsguy.com>:

    >I can't comprehend SOE supporting EQ much more than just minimally beyond
    >probably 6 more months or so (if even that long), no matter what they've
    >said.
    >

    EQ is profitable enough to maintain and grow at 50,000 customers. I know
    this because we asked Brad just before the game was released how many
    accounts would be required to maintain the game and grow the game.

    If UO can survive even in spite of the fact that EA really doesn't want it
    to. I have no idea why EA doesn't want UO to survive but they didn't even
    make enough copies of the games last expansion based on pre-orders to fill
    the pre-orders!

    So, I doubt EQ will be going anywhere. One benefit that I've gotten from
    everyone leaving is that the vast majority of people leaving are jerks that
    ruined the game for everyone else anyway. Has anyone else noticed that it
    appears there are more "nice" people playing now?

    Go go WoW and EQ2!

    --
    -Mary "I have no intention of making a spectacle of myself thank you."
    Poppins
  14. Archived from groups: alt.games.everquest (More info?)

    Mary Poppins wrote:

    > So, I doubt EQ will be going anywhere. One benefit that I've gotten
    > from everyone leaving is that the vast majority of people leaving are
    > jerks that ruined the game for everyone else anyway. Has anyone else
    > noticed that it appears there are more "nice" people playing now?
    >
    > Go go WoW and EQ2!

    Oh, I wasn't questioning its survival. There's no way SOE could just kill
    it, even if they wanted to--not for a long time, at least. But I also
    suspect there was no way they were going to come right out and relate the
    entire truth of their plans regarding it before EQ2 hit the ground, either.

    I was just sort of musing aloud that I suspect it won't be too very long
    before all but basic life support is withdrawn in favor of the "new kid".

    --
    chainbreaker

    If you need to email, then chainbreaker (naturally) at comcast dot
    net--that's "net" not "com"--should do it.
  15. Archived from groups: alt.games.everquest (More info?)

    "-martin" <nospam-villa_nospam_@cheerful.com> wrote in message
    news:30j3utF31gk7fU1@uni-berlin.de...
    > "Richard Lawson" <nouma@msn.com> wrote in message
    > news:co0tmr0fne@news2.newsguy.com...
    >
    >> Well, it happened, not unexpectedly. Our guildleader, faced with
    > rebuilding
    >> just about the entire guild in the face of rapidly declining numbers in
    > EQ,
    >> decided that it would be best just to disband the guild. Somewhat
    >> surprisingly, no one disagreed. We've barely had 20 people log on each
    >> night. The impetus to do anything seems to have gone out of the guild.
    >
    > Why didn't he look to the guilds below you for a solution? I imagine most
    > guilds below have gone through the exact same process, and if you could of
    > absorbed 20 or so of them, even with the gear difference, you could at
    > least
    > still raid, and have a building block to carry on from.

    A lot of the "lower" guilds aren't interested in raiding above their own
    level. We're going through the same thing on my server - most of the
    lower-end guilds approached don't want to lose their name and don't want to
    leave behind all the level 64, plays twice per month and expects loot
    friends in their old guilds.

    >> But it's having problems, too; they've actually gone as far back as
    > flagging
    >> people for Time to gear them up. Their numbers have gone way down, too.
    >
    > Wow. The next patch will introduce a 15% rule for PoTime (amongst other
    > zones).

    That doesn't help you *now*, and if you're recruiting enough people the
    15% rule still leaves a lot of people outside the zone. We've had no more
    than 42, with recruits and bots, on in the past week to week and a half -
    more than six of those people are unflagged for Time/Qvic.

    > But even so - qvic and txevu would be a better solution to gear people
    > fast.
    > 12 drops a day, 2 hours work, every third day 16 loots, plus random named
    > in
    > the zone. Its also armour a serious level above PoTime

    Reasons to do Time:

    (1) Breadth of drops. Can fill a weak slot no matter the class/slot.
    (2) Unique effects. Almost no clickable buffs in Qvic, haste wru, several
    foci missing in Qvic.
    (3) Number of drops. A day in Qvic/Txevu nets you many fewer items than a
    day in Time.
    (4) Competition. It's much easier to schedule a day in Time than it is a day
    in Txevu/Qvic with everything up, especially with an off-hours guild hitting
    the same targets (for us, Australians).
    (5) Lack of competition for the recruits. When we go to Time, the recruits
    gets everything through phase 3, almost everything in phase 4, and much of
    the stuff from phase 5. They even have a shot at Quarm loot, depending on
    the drops. When we go to Qvic, some items are snapped up by regular guild
    members who haven't got a full suit yet (I just picked up my final piece,
    helm, over the weekend). In Txevu, all but the worst drops are picked up by
    established guild members. You aren't gearing your recruits by going there,
    you're gearing your regular guild members.

    >> Tacvi, Anguish, all that. I wanted to complete all the MPG trials, I
    > wanted
    >> to get all my level 69 and 70 spells. Now those things will quite likely
    >> never happen.
    >
    > Spells> head to Rift. 69 spells are *common*! 70 spells take some doing,
    > but drop there in small numbers.

    Riftseeker's takes a serious group for most people. You can tank stuff
    there, but look at yourself - you're in the top five serverwide for HPs. You
    have more HPs than any non-uberguild warrior on my server. He's not going to
    get a pickup group that can handle that zone. Which is too bad - above and
    beyond the spells, the augments are the real reason to go there.

    > People have said EQ was dead/dieing since DaoC, PoP, LdoN raids, GoD...
    > its
    > still going strong. And if the newer games lack substance.. it will be
    > another CoH/L2 all over again. Sure it drags people away for a while. But
    > they all end up returning, eventually!

    They don't lack substance, though. I've read spoilers for both games,
    and they sound very in-depth, with a ton of content. I think the thrill will
    fade from WoW before EQ2, just because of how quickly people can level in
    WoW, but by the time people decide to come back there won't be anything to
    come back to.

    James
  16. Archived from groups: alt.games.everquest (More info?)

    In article <10q9d8kf74mhv1f@corp.supernews.com>,
    tdNOslySPAM@PLEASEsasktel.net says...

    > > > That's classic fallacious reasoning. Other times, the people who
    > > > claimed that didn't understand the situation between the games. Games
    > > > like Shadowbane, Horizons, SWG, AC2, L2, CoH, FFXI, even DAoC were
    > > > never much of threats to EQ and the people claiming they would kill EQ
    > > > were just deluded fools. For the most part, none of those times
    > > > included a *better* option.
    > > >
    > > > This time it's different.
    >
    > That is what has always been said before....

    Previously no challenge to EQ has ever come in the form of EQs own
    literal successor. As much as Sony pay lip service to the idea that EQ2
    is a different game... they still named it *Everquest 2*. Your only
    deluding yourself if you think management thinks they will be equals,
    side by side.

    Until now EQ was the crown jewel in SOEs software portfolio. It has
    likely already lost that position to EQ2 in the minds of management.
    Things are going to change for the worse; the only question is how
    quickly.

    > As to the future who knows...
    > There is an aweful lot of room for mmorgs to grow. where millions were
    > online for games like diablo only hundreds of thousands were subscribed to
    > games like everquest.

    Subscriptions filter out a large segment of the potential player base
    and always will. I'd play DAoC, AO, EVE, and other games on a quasi
    regular basis if i wouldn't be paying 10+ bucks each title for the 1-3
    days a month I'd play.

    > I think the more good games that come out there is more growth potential for
    > the better games.
    > DaoC lives on. I no longer play that game but i dont think it is at
    > subsistance levels.

    DAoC caters to a crowd EQ entirely fails at: RvR PvP.

    > >
    > > Without a doubt, there will be consolidation where necessary. When
    > > consolidation is no longer enough, SOE changes the way the game operates
    > > (the fact that they've already started down that path gives us a glimpse
    > of
    > > the kind of numbers *they* are seeing). When even that is no longer
    > enough,
    > > server mergers, though I feel that is in a far distant future yet.

    Server Mergers need to come sooner than later. Changing the way the game
    operates will not solve the problem for an uberguild that can't field
    more than 20 members.

    > lots of the sky is falling on EQ over the last 5 years. seems like same ole'
    > same ole to me..

    Sometimes when the little boy cries wolf... there's a wolf.
  17. Archived from groups: alt.games.everquest (More info?)

    "42" <nospam@nospam.com> wrote in message
    news:MPG.1c0ecf16bd8e4caa9898cd@shawnews...
    > In article <10q9d8kf74mhv1f@corp.supernews.com>,
    > tdNOslySPAM@PLEASEsasktel.net says...
    >
    > > > > That's classic fallacious reasoning. Other times, the people who
    > > > > claimed that didn't understand the situation between the games.
    Games
    > > > > like Shadowbane, Horizons, SWG, AC2, L2, CoH, FFXI, even DAoC were
    > > > > never much of threats to EQ and the people claiming they would kill
    EQ
    > > > > were just deluded fools. For the most part, none of those times
    > > > > included a *better* option.
    > > > >
    > > > > This time it's different.
    > >
    > > That is what has always been said before....
    >
    > Previously no challenge to EQ has ever come in the form of EQs own
    > literal successor. As much as Sony pay lip service to the idea that EQ2
    > is a different game... they still named it *Everquest 2*. Your only
    > deluding yourself if you think management thinks they will be equals,
    > side by side.
    >
    > Until now EQ was the crown jewel in SOEs software portfolio. It has
    > likely already lost that position to EQ2 in the minds of management.
    > Things are going to change for the worse; the only question is how
    > quickly.

    I wouldn't think so.
    EQ1 is still profit and lots of it on a steady basis.
    EQ2 is still expense and capital costs.

    > > As to the future who knows...
    > > There is an aweful lot of room for mmorgs to grow. where millions were
    > > online for games like diablo only hundreds of thousands were subscribed
    to
    > > games like everquest.
    >
    > Subscriptions filter out a large segment of the potential player base
    > and always will. I'd play DAoC, AO, EVE, and other games on a quasi
    > regular basis if i wouldn't be paying 10+ bucks each title for the 1-3
    > days a month I'd play.

    True. Even if DaoC, AO, shadowbane etc were free, I don't think I'd have the
    time to play them but I would stop in from time to time perhaps.
    Time and Money. We all only have so much of it.

    > > I think the more good games that come out there is more growth potential
    for
    > > the better games.
    > > DaoC lives on. I no longer play that game but i dont think it is at
    > > subsistance levels.
    >
    > DAoC caters to a crowd EQ entirely fails at: RvR PvP.
    >
    > > >
    > > > Without a doubt, there will be consolidation where necessary. When
    > > > consolidation is no longer enough, SOE changes the way the game
    operates
    > > > (the fact that they've already started down that path gives us a
    glimpse
    > > of
    > > > the kind of numbers *they* are seeing). When even that is no longer
    > > enough,
    > > > server mergers, though I feel that is in a far distant future yet.
    >
    > Server Mergers need to come sooner than later. Changing the way the game
    > operates will not solve the problem for an uberguild that can't field
    > more than 20 members.
    >
    > > lots of the sky is falling on EQ over the last 5 years. seems like same
    ole'
    > > same ole to me..
    >
    > Sometimes when the little boy cries wolf... there's a wolf.
    >
    Don't get me wrong. I don't think EQ1 will live forever.
    The crowds leaving and guild woes are just like I remember from when DaoC
    hit though.

    I haven't tried EQ2 yet so I don't know how different of a game it really
    is.
    If it is really different I wouldn't be surprised to see a big influx of
    returnees to EQ1 after the new year.

    I see EQ1s demise being a very slow death. Who knows maybe EQ2 will die
    first../shrug
    Top 3 uber guilds with a 100 members all quitting still represents a small
    percentage of the player base.
    The biggest thing EQ1 has going for it is the amount of time people have
    played their characters.imo of course
  18. Archived from groups: alt.games.everquest (More info?)

    > Has anyone else noticed that it
    > appears there are more "nice" people playing now?


    Yes. Nice isn't it?

    T.
  19. Archived from groups: alt.games.everquest (More info?)

    "Thomas Houseman"
    <thomashousemanHADTOPUTTHISHERETOSTOPTHESWENVIRUS@hotmail.com> wrote in
    message news:30kec8F2s2r4nU1@uni-berlin.de...
    > > Has anyone else noticed that it
    > > appears there are more "nice" people playing now?
    >
    >
    > Yes. Nice isn't it?
    >
    > T.

    I did notice a lot more joking and banter reminiscent of gfay trader days
    without the begging eh.

    But it could be that the states have a big holiday coming as well.

    Any one notice as many people leaving from smaller family lower level guilds
    as the ubers are losing ?
    Perhaps just a case of people with burnout having an excuse to take a break.
  20. Archived from groups: alt.games.everquest (More info?)

    On 2004-11-24, -martin <nospam-villa_nospam_@cheerful.com> wrote:
    > "Moopy" <pingu@keg.zymurgy.org> wrote in message
    >>
    >> Say hi to Naubi for me meem ;)
    >>
    >> Matt
    >
    > Will do. We see each other an awful lot now, if you haven't kept up with
    > recent board activity!

    I only play EQ2 about once a fortnight, but I generally shoot her a tell
    from eq2.crushbone ;) Once eq2 -> eq1 channels are working I'll be bugging
    you again in Age ;)

    s
  21. Archived from groups: alt.games.everquest (More info?)

    In article <PVqpd.189463$df2.125970@edtnps89>, jamesgrahame@shaw.ca
    says...

    > Below 40% in our guild and you're on loot probation; below 20% and your
    > head goes on the chopping block. Our average might be higher because of
    > that, but it won't be terribly higher.

    It might be approaching time to rethink that policy.

    > > I got bored in one day in WoW :D
    >
    > Which instances did you hit? That's where the fun is. Otherwise, it's
    > like saying "EQ sux, you just kill rats and bats. I got bored in one day."

    Yup! In fact, by its very nature, after one day in EQ you can't possibly
    have done anything that interesting. If you are going to judge EQ after
    playing for one day, you aren't judging EQ, you haven't even played EQ
    yet.

    Same goes for WoW, or really, any mmorpg.
  22. Archived from groups: alt.games.everquest (More info?)

    "42" <nospam@nospam.com> wrote in message
    news:MPG.1c0ff77bb69970f99898cf@shawnews...
    > In article <PVqpd.189463$df2.125970@edtnps89>, jamesgrahame@shaw.ca
    > says...
    >
    >> Below 40% in our guild and you're on loot probation; below 20% and
    >> your
    >> head goes on the chopping block. Our average might be higher because of
    >> that, but it won't be terribly higher.
    >
    > It might be approaching time to rethink that policy.

    I'm pushing for the below 40% part to be axed. We're on officer
    decision, there's no reason to tie the officers' hands as to who they can
    and cannot award loot. If they like, they can decide amongst themselves that
    they won't award to anyone below 40% except in special circumstances, but
    there's no need for a formal rule that puts a big "PROBATION" stamp on guild
    members. The 20%, though, I support. You can't babysit people through
    content above their gear level forever, and you can't give the people who
    show up the least the most loot per time spent playing without pissing off
    the people who really support the guild. It's easier to axe people who are
    below 20% for three consecutive months (our full policy) than hope they get
    back to full time and keep them up to speed in the meanwhile.

    James
  23. Archived from groups: alt.games.everquest (More info?)

    In article <L3upd.3158$VL6.1081@clgrps13>, jamesgrahame@shaw.ca says...
    >
    > "42" <nospam@nospam.com> wrote in message
    > news:MPG.1c0ff77bb69970f99898cf@shawnews...
    > > In article <PVqpd.189463$df2.125970@edtnps89>, jamesgrahame@shaw.ca
    > > says...
    > >
    > >> Below 40% in our guild and you're on loot probation; below 20% and
    > >> your
    > >> head goes on the chopping block. Our average might be higher because of
    > >> that, but it won't be terribly higher.
    > >
    > > It might be approaching time to rethink that policy.
    >
    > I'm pushing for the below 40% part to be axed. We're on officer
    > decision, there's no reason to tie the officers' hands as to who they can
    > and cannot award loot. If they like, they can decide amongst themselves that
    > they won't award to anyone below 40% except in special circumstances, but
    > there's no need for a formal rule that puts a big "PROBATION" stamp on guild
    > members.

    Makes sense. Especially in an explicit 'officer award' loot system.

    > The 20%, though, I support. You can't babysit people through
    > content above their gear level forever, and you can't give the people who
    > show up the least the most loot per time spent playing without pissing off
    > the people who really support the guild. It's easier to axe people who are
    > below 20% for three consecutive months (our full policy) than hope they get
    > back to full time and keep them up to speed in the meanwhile.

    Perhaps there simply won't be enough suitably high level players who
    want to play 8-hours & raid 5+ days in the same timeframe each week to
    allow a guild to be made up of just those. You might consider accepting
    using a pool of good players with <20% attendance.

    They aren't parasites. They're symbiotes. You will need them to field
    large enough forces to continue your progression, and, yes, in exchange
    you carry them a bit.

    Severing them may render the guild unable to progress at all. A pool of
    40 <20% players could represent an extra 5-8 bodies per night... and
    could make the difference between guild implosion and guild progression.
  24. Archived from groups: alt.games.everquest (More info?)

    "-martin" <nospam-villa_nospam_@cheerful.com> wrote in message news:<30j382F2vdkuuU1@uni-berlin.de>...
    > Or you start level 1. No knowledge of the game, a new interface, new people,
    > new communities, new spells to learn, entirely brand new world, things that
    > may carry the same name across games but mean something completly different.
    > No clue of mobs, of in-depth game info, etc.
    >
    > But yeah, aside from those and more points.. its not really much different
    > starting a new game or buying OoW, is it.....
    >
    > -m

    All downsides if the reason you play games is to just do the same
    thing over and over again.

    Even from your point of view, now that EQ2 is out, you have to look at
    and revalue the return on time investment with any character.
    Time/effort spent levelling an EQ1 character will become invalidated
    far sooner than the same investment into a new EQ2 character.

    But don't let that stop you from playing EQ1 if you really enjoy it. I
    still play old NES games, even though there's zero persistant value
    for my efforts.
  25. Archived from groups: alt.games.everquest (More info?)

    Well. I found out that there are several elemental flaged guilds on
    Rasp and at least one guild in time, so come on over to Rasp Monual :).
    I have enjoyed lurking and reading your posts :)
    slowping 58 Chanter on Rasp
    slowtping 55 Pally on Rasp
  26. Archived from groups: alt.games.everquest (More info?)

    A thousand monkeys banging on keyboards posted the following under the
    name patrik@nordebo.com:

    >Highest on Runnyeye are at least 35, five or six of them on /who
    >yesterday. Personally I think levelling is too fast (in EQ2), I keep
    >outlevelling my quests (and yes, I know I could turn off combat exp).
    >Not to mention I'll probably never get Bootstrutter's Field Guide to
    >Antonica to drop now that I'm almost 19. :-(

    I think it's droppable. You can probably buy it.


    --

    "Why stop now, just when I'm hating it?" - Marvin

    "It's certainly not a "memory leak." - 'shadows', my latest stalker
    "No one said it wasn't a memory leak." - 'shadows' a few posts later
Ask a new question

Read More

Video Games