Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

PvP Coming to EverQuest II

Tags:
  • Games
  • Video Games
Last response: in Video Games
Share
Anonymous
April 8, 2005 2:29:25 PM

Archived from groups: alt.games.everquest,comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.rpg (More info?)

Per a letter from John Smedley, President of SOE:

John Smedley's Letter to the Community: April 7th, 2005

Hello Everyone,

First off, I'd like to say thanks for all of the wonderful ideas we received
from you after my last posting. Having this ongoing dialogue is something
SOE is committed to in a major way, and it's one of the biggest things you
all asked for. So you'll see an increase in our public presence, not just
on our boards, but on a lot of the fansites, as well. And we've created a
new position within our ranks, the Director of Community Relations,
specifically to prioritize you, the community, within our service offerings.
Alan Crosby, previously EQ Community Relations Manager, will be stepping
into this role, and all of SOE's community managers and representatives will
report to him, while still maintaining close ties to the game teams, of
course. Under this new structure, we will become even more responsive, even
more dedicated to customer focus!

I'd like to give you a general update on our games this posting:

Since my last post , we launched our first Adventure Pack for EverQuest II -
"The Bloodline Chronicles" - and over half our player base is already
playing it! We are committed to releasing new content between Expansion
Packs that goes beyond our live updates, and so we'll continue to release
these Adventure Packs on a regular basis -- a first for our industry.

The EQII team is still hard at work on the existing game, and I think that
all of the new content the team has added since launch is pretty amazing. In
the past few weeks alone, we've added several new high level raids, an
in-game mail system, Mentoring (something we're really excited about), two
additional character slots for all subscribers , and we just added the new
merchant system, which will allow players to sell items in game without
having to leave their computer running. That's on top of the usual game
additions -- dozens of new quests, spells, items, tradeskill recipes, etc.
You can expect us to keep up this pace for a long time to come. Another part
of the EQII team is hard at work on our first Expansion Pack, coming out
later this year. We've taken a lot of your recent ideas and feedback into
account, and we're working on some innovative ways characters can move and
interact with the environment. Also, we're taking the first step towards
introducing PvP competition with the introduction of a new type of combat!

In Austin , our Star Wars GalaxiesT team is focused on a big change to the
game's combat system. The "Combat Revamp" is now live on the SWG test
server, and it's getting very positive feedback from the SWG playerbase. The
team is also putting the finishing touches on Star Wars GalaxiesT: Episode
III Rage of the WookiesT, which launches in less than a month. The SWG
playerbase is very strong, and we're continuing to put a lot of effort into
making Star Wars GalaxiesT even better and adding new content all the time.
The latest expansion pack adds Episode III content into the universe --
something our SWG players were asking for!

There's also a lot of action on EverQuest . We're consolidating many of the
servers to keep the game an exciting place to be, and we are investing a lot
of time and effort in making this game an even better experience for its
many fans. EverQuest just had its 6th anniversary on March 16th. It's very
gratifying to see such a strong demand for this game, but when you look at
how much of an impact EverQuest has had on so many people's lives - not to
mention the entire industry - it's not very surprising. We continue to hear
remarkable stories of how people are touched by the game. In fact, we just
had a player name her daughter Firiona!

One other subject I wanted to touch on is our Customer Service department.
We've made some significant changes, and I'm proud to say our average
telephone hold times are now 5 minutes or under. And our in-game response
times are among the best in the business! We know how important this is to
our players, and we will continue to focus on decreasing these response
times even further.

We're going to have a lot of new things to talk about in the upcoming months
.. Our games continue to thrive, and we have a bunch of exciting
developments coming out of our San Diego , Austin and Seattle studios.
We're enjoying the present and looking toward a very bright future for SOE
and the online games industry , and I wanted you to know that we truly
appreciate your support and feedback, and we're listening ! We're here to
entertain you.

Thanks,

John Smedley

More about : pvp coming everquest

April 8, 2005 4:52:25 PM

Archived from groups: alt.games.everquest,comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.rpg (More info?)

["Followup-To:" header set to comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.rpg.]
On 2005-04-08, Bob Perez <myfirstname@thecomdomaincalledSHADOWPIKE> wrote:

> One other subject I wanted to touch on is our Customer Service department.
> We've made some significant changes, and I'm proud to say our average
> telephone hold times are now 5 minutes or under. And our in-game response
> times are among the best in the business! We know how important this is to
> our players, and we will continue to focus on decreasing these response
> times even further.

Nice to see SOE make this a priority. In SWG response times by
CSRs was fast. In WoW the three tickets I did open were never
responded to.
Anonymous
April 8, 2005 5:20:57 PM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.rpg (More info?)

On Fri, 08 Apr 2005 12:52:25 -0500, shadows <shadows@whitefang.com>
wrote:

>["Followup-To:" header set to comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.rpg.]
>On 2005-04-08, Bob Perez <myfirstname@thecomdomaincalledSHADOWPIKE> wrote:
>
>> One other subject I wanted to touch on is our Customer Service department.
>> We've made some significant changes, and I'm proud to say our average
>> telephone hold times are now 5 minutes or under. And our in-game response
>> times are among the best in the business! We know how important this is to
>> our players, and we will continue to focus on decreasing these response
>> times even further.
>
>Nice to see SOE make this a priority. In SWG response times by
>CSRs was fast. In WoW the three tickets I did open were never
>responded to.

Funny, I always got responses within a day in WoW. However, no SOE
game have I played that I've gotten a response in under a day. Often
times, the response times were measured more in WEEKS.

--
Dark Tyger

Stop the madness! (Marvel Vs Cryptic Studios petition)
http://www.petitiononline.com/marvscoh/petition.html

Hey, everyone else is doing it. Free iPod:
http://www.freeiPods.com/?r=15728814
Related resources
April 8, 2005 7:29:05 PM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.rpg (More info?)

On 2005-04-08, i own a yacht <me@privacy.net> wrote:

> i've opened two tickets during my time in wow and both were responded to
> within an hour. considering the tone of your usenet posts when you're
> bitching about something, it doesn't surprise me that they ignored you.

This was during the first month when even Blizzard was closing
tickets and telling customers they did not have enoguh CSRs and
were training new hires to handle the load.
Anonymous
April 8, 2005 10:08:17 PM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.rpg (More info?)

shadows <shadows@whitefang.com> wrote in
news:slrnd5dh7b.1joo.shadows@helena.whitefang.com:

> Nice to see SOE make this a priority. In SWG response times by
> CSRs was fast. In WoW the three tickets I did open were never
> responded to.

I've opened about 6 tickets in WoW and every one of them were responded
to eventually. Sometimes it took them a long time, but they all were
responded to.

--

Knight37 - http://knightgames.blogspot.com
Once a Gamer, Always a Gamer.
April 8, 2005 10:08:18 PM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.rpg (More info?)

On 2005-04-08, knight37 <knight37m@gmail.com> wrote:

> Yeah, it's a religion to you, you're like a WoW-Atheist. Any chance to
> post an anti-Blizzard rant on here and you gladly do so.

Blizzard screwed me enough times that I moved on. Complaining
about it is my way of making customer satisfaction an
issue. Here's a free clue if you don't complain no one at
Blizzard will ever care.

> Your little "they never responded to my tickets" post is no more valid
> than mine. Basically, both of them are just one person's experience, and
> we don't have any numbers to verify one way or the other if Blizzard is
> doing a good job on customer service or not.

Spoken like a true fanboy. Please see http://www.patchtimer.org/

Plenty of people mail in with complaints. I especially liked the
EU player talk about how bad it is for them. One guy had to pay
twice to play for a month because Blizzard screwed up billing.

I can sense darkness in you Knight37. Let your fanboy walls come
down and reach deep inside. That anger you feel inside toward
Blizzard can be harnassed into a million angry posts. Don't be
afraid. The Darkside of the Force is far more powerful.
Anonymous
April 8, 2005 10:08:18 PM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.rpg (More info?)

"shadows" <shadows@whitefang.com> wrote in message
news:slrnd5diuq.1jpn.shadows@helena.whitefang.com...
> On 2005-04-08, knight37 <knight37m@gmail.com> wrote:
>> shadows <shadows@whitefang.com> wrote in
>> news:slrnd5dh7b.1joo.shadows@helena.whitefang.com:
>>
>>> Nice to see SOE make this a priority. In SWG response times by
>>> CSRs was fast. In WoW the three tickets I did open were never
>>> responded to.
>>
>> I've opened about 6 tickets in WoW and every one of them were responded
>> to eventually. Sometimes it took them a long time, but they all were
>> responded to.
>
> Your opinion on WoW doesn't matter.

What he stated was a fact, not an opinion.
April 8, 2005 10:14:07 PM

Archived from groups: alt.games.everquest,comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.rpg (More info?)

In article <115dfjrh82r354b@news.supernews.com>,
myfirstname@thecomdomaincalledSHADOWPIKE says...
> Per a letter from John Smedley, President of SOE:
>
> John Smedley's Letter to the Community: April 7th, 2005

A tongue in cheek response to John Smedley's Letter to the Community:
April 8, 2005

> Hello Everyone,

Hello John,

>
> First off, I'd like to say thanks for all of the wonderful ideas we received
> from you after my last posting. Having this ongoing dialogue is something
> SOE is committed to in a major way, and it's one of the biggest things you
> all asked for. So you'll see an increase in our public presence, not just
> on our boards, but on a lot of the fansites, as well. And we've created a
> new position within our ranks, the Director of Community Relations,
> specifically to prioritize you, the community, within our service offerings.
> Alan Crosby, previously EQ Community Relations Manager, will be stepping
> into this role, and all of SOE's community managers and representatives will
> report to him, while still maintaining close ties to the game teams, of
> course. Under this new structure, we will become even more responsive, even
> more dedicated to customer focus!

> I'd like to give you a general update on our games this posting:
>
> Since my last post , we launched our first Adventure Pack for EverQuest II -
> "The Bloodline Chronicles" - and over half our player base is already
> playing it!

Then almost half your playerbase declined? Good for them!

> We are committed to releasing new content between Expansion
> Packs that goes beyond our live updates, and so we'll continue to release
> these Adventure Packs on a regular basis -- a first for our industry.

Yup, until now, the players thought their monthly subscriptions were
supposed to be covering some sort of ongoing content development. If
they wanted to play a static online game there are several free ones out
there. So what exactly are you doing with all the subscription money
now?

>
> There's also a lot of action on EverQuest . We're consolidating many of the
> servers to keep the game an exciting place to be, and we are investing a lot
> of time and effort in making this game an even better experience for its
> many fans. EverQuest just had its 6th anniversary on March 16th. It's very
> gratifying to see such a strong demand for this game,

Strong demand and sever consolidation in the same paragraph. I can't be
the only one that sees some incongruity in claiming a game that appears
to have hemorrhaged 50+% of its playerbase in 3 months to be in strong
demand...

> but when you look at
> how much of an impact EverQuest has had on so many people's lives - not to
> mention the entire industry - it's not very surprising. We continue to hear
> remarkable stories of how people are touched by the game. In fact, we just
> had a player name her daughter Firiona!

Start saving now for the lawsuit; dear Firiona probably isn't going to
be quite as impressed. (Assuming her parents remember to feed her during
their downtime.)

> One other subject I wanted to touch on is our Customer Service department.
> We've made some significant changes, and I'm proud to say our average
> telephone hold times are now 5 minutes or under.

Telephone hold times are now 5 minutes or under because you've
demonstrated that there is no reason to call. You don't provide customer
service anyways, so whats the point?

> And our in-game response
> times are among the best in the business! We know how important this is to
> our players,

Good, thought out, personalized customer service is important to your
players. Getting told to "stuff it" isn't high on our priority list; no
matter how quickly you do it.

> and we will continue to focus on decreasing these response
> times even further.

Why not just cancel your phone lines and remove the /petition command?
You could then brag how proud you are that your customer complaints and
your hold times have dropped to zero.

> We're going to have a lot of new things to talk about in the upcoming months
> . Our games continue to thrive, and we have a bunch of exciting
> developments coming out of our San Diego , Austin and Seattle studios.
> We're enjoying the present and looking toward a very bright future for SOE
> and the online games industry , and I wanted you to know that we truly
> appreciate your support and feedback, and we're listening ! We're here to
> entertain you.

"Unless you have an issue. Then we're not really here at all. Please ask
someone else, somewhere else, and assume its your own fault!

PS Even it is our fault we won't...er can't, yeah that's it: "can't" do
anything to fix it anyways."

//////

/shrug I hate spin doctors
Anonymous
April 8, 2005 10:14:08 PM

Archived from groups: alt.games.everquest,comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.rpg (More info?)

On Fri, 08 Apr 2005 18:14:07 GMT, 42 <nospam@nospam.com> wrote:

>> Since my last post , we launched our first Adventure Pack for EverQuest II -
>> "The Bloodline Chronicles" - and over half our player base is already
>> playing it!
>
>Then almost half your playerbase declined? Good for them!

I'd wager most of those who are playing Bloodline Chronicles are the
all-access guys who got it for "free".

--
Dark Tyger

Stop the madness! (Marvel Vs Cryptic Studios petition)
http://www.petitiononline.com/marvscoh/petition.html

Hey, everyone else is doing it. Free iPod:
http://www.freeiPods.com/?r=15728814
Anonymous
April 9, 2005 12:20:28 AM

Archived from groups: alt.games.everquest,comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.rpg (More info?)

>In Austin , our Star Wars GalaxiesT team is focused on a big change to the
>game's combat system. The "Combat Revamp" is now live on the SWG test
>server, and it's getting very positive feedback from the SWG playerbase.

For "positive" read, lots and lots of negative feedback and complaints about
a
completely misguided approach that is driving away a large contingent of the
veteran players away to other game systems. Looks like they're up to the
same
tricks with EQ and EQ2 . . . . adopt the fingers in ears approach and start
to
sing "la, la, la . . . . . . . " very loudly.
Anonymous
April 9, 2005 12:20:29 AM

Archived from groups: alt.games.everquest,comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.rpg (More info?)

RangerGirl wrote:

>>In Austin , our Star Wars GalaxiesT team is focused on a big change to the
>>game's combat system. The "Combat Revamp" is now live on the SWG test
>>server, and it's getting very positive feedback from the SWG playerbase.
>
>
> For "positive" read, lots and lots of negative feedback and complaints about
> a
> completely misguided approach that is driving away a large contingent of the
> veteran players away to other game systems. Looks like they're up to the
> same
> tricks with EQ and EQ2 . . . . adopt the fingers in ears approach and start
> to
> sing "la, la, la . . . . . . . " very loudly.

What is the combat system revamp is SWG? The concept of SWG is cool,
but the implementation of the game is pretty piss poor....Has it gotten
any better?
Anonymous
April 9, 2005 12:20:30 AM

Archived from groups: alt.games.everquest,comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.rpg (More info?)

<jgarvin2004@comcast.net> wrote:
> RangerGirl wrote:
>
> >>In Austin , our Star Wars GalaxiesT team is focused on a big change to the
> >>game's combat system. The "Combat Revamp" is now live on the SWG test
> >>server, and it's getting very positive feedback from the SWG playerbase.
> >
> >
> > For "positive" read, lots and lots of negative feedback and complaints about
> > a
> > completely misguided approach that is driving away a large contingent of the
> > veteran players away to other game systems. Looks like they're up to the
> > same
> > tricks with EQ and EQ2 . . . . adopt the fingers in ears approach and start
> > to
> > sing "la, la, la . . . . . . . " very loudly.
>
> What is the combat system revamp is SWG? The concept of SWG is cool,
> but the implementation of the game is pretty piss poor....Has it gotten
> any better?

Man I so have to agree with that. SWG was sooooo close to being a great
game. It had tremendous potential, and an incredible license to build a
game world around. Among many smaller "failures" in their implementations,
the one that made the game "unplayable" for me was the complete and total
lack of a third dimension. When a 9 foot tall wookie runs into a 6 inch
tall rock, the rock *must* be the loser in such a confrontation. Not in
SWG.
Anonymous
April 9, 2005 12:38:17 AM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.rpg (More info?)

shadows <shadows@whitefang.com> wrote in
news:slrnd5dl7a.1jpn.shadows@helena.whitefang.com:

> On 2005-04-08, knight37 <knight37m@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> Yeah, it's a religion to you, you're like a WoW-Atheist. Any chance
>> to post an anti-Blizzard rant on here and you gladly do so.
>
> Blizzard screwed me enough times that I moved on. Complaining
> about it is my way of making customer satisfaction an
> issue. Here's a free clue if you don't complain no one at
> Blizzard will ever care.

Here's a free clue: Blizzard doesn't give two shits about what some
anonymous dork on USENET writes. No matter how many times he drones on
about it. You voted with your wallet, good for you. I really don't care
if you keep up your Blizzard bashing ways, it amuses me, but lets not
pretend your anti-WoW opinion is any more valid than my pro-WoW opinion.

>> Your little "they never responded to my tickets" post is no more
>> valid than mine. Basically, both of them are just one person's
>> experience, and we don't have any numbers to verify one way or the
>> other if Blizzard is doing a good job on customer service or not.
>
> Spoken like a true fanboy. Please see http://www.patchtimer.org/

LOL, that has NOTHING to do with the topic we were discussing, does it?
Besides which, why should I care if Blizzard's adding content or not in
patches? It's not like I've seen all the content that came in the box on
day one yet. Maybe the no-lifer's with six toons sitting at 60 care but
not me.

Anyway didn't they add a new dungeon in the latest patch? I haven't seen
it, it's for high-level people, but since I'm taking my time sniffing the
roses rather than rushing to the end as fast as possible I'm sure I'll
get to it eventually.

> Plenty of people mail in with complaints. I especially liked the
> EU player talk about how bad it is for them. One guy had to pay
> twice to play for a month because Blizzard screwed up billing.

Are you talking about on the forums? Because the site you just linked
doesn't have anything about this. I find it humorous that you've quit the
game but you are so obsessed with it that you still read the forums, LOL.

> I can sense darkness in you Knight37. Let your fanboy walls come
> down and reach deep inside. That anger you feel inside toward
> Blizzard can be harnassed into a million angry posts. Don't be
> afraid. The Darkside of the Force is far more powerful.

I find your lack of faith disturbing.

--

Knight37 - http://knightgames.blogspot.com
Once a Gamer, Always a Gamer.
April 9, 2005 12:38:18 AM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.rpg (More info?)

On 2005-04-08, knight37 <knight37m@gmail.com> wrote:

> Are you talking about on the forums? Because the site you just linked
> doesn't have anything about this. I find it humorous that you've quit the
> game but you are so obsessed with it that you still read the forums, LOL.

Actually it's on patchtimer. Maybe in the archive. An EU player
emailed in with his views.

> I find your lack of faith disturbing.

Touche.
Anonymous
April 9, 2005 3:25:44 AM

Archived from groups: alt.games.everquest,comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.rpg (More info?)

In article <slrnd5e3v9.2jd.faned@wyld.qx.net>,
Faned <faned@wyld.qx.net> wrote:

>Man I so have to agree with that. SWG was sooooo close to being a great
>game. It had tremendous potential, and an incredible license to build a
>game world around. Among many smaller "failures" in their implementations,
>the one that made the game "unplayable" for me was the complete and total
>lack of a third dimension. When a 9 foot tall wookie runs into a 6 inch
>tall rock, the rock *must* be the loser in such a confrontation. Not in
>SWG.


In beta I was running down a ramp from a building, and went to jump off the
side near the end. WTF I can't do that ? There was big hole in a wall and
rather than run around went to climb through over the small lip in front of
it. WTF I can't do that ? I felt like I had the freedom of movement as that of
a rat in a maze.

That was the end for me, never bought the game on release.

Jim
Anonymous
April 9, 2005 3:25:45 AM

Archived from groups: alt.games.everquest,comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.rpg (More info?)

foamy wrote:
> In beta I was running down a ramp from a building, and went to jump
> off the side near the end. WTF I can't do that ? There was big hole
> in a wall and rather than run around went to climb through over the
> small lip in front of it. WTF I can't do that ? I felt like I had the
> freedom of movement as that of a rat in a maze.
>
> That was the end for me, never bought the game on release.
>
> Jim

That's close to my impression of Guild Wars, at least the version of it I
played.

--
chainbreaker
Anonymous
April 9, 2005 3:44:51 AM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.rpg (More info?)

"shadows" <shadows@whitefang.com> wrote in message
news:slrnd5dqd2.1jtj.shadows@helena.whitefang.com...
> On 2005-04-08, i own a yacht <me@privacy.net> wrote:
>
> > i've opened two tickets during my time in wow and both were responded to
> > within an hour. considering the tone of your usenet posts when you're
> > bitching about something, it doesn't surprise me that they ignored you.
>
> This was during the first month when even Blizzard was closing
> tickets and telling customers they did not have enoguh CSRs and
> were training new hires to handle the load.

Your opinion doesn't matter. With your anti-Blizzard stance, you are not
reliable. Blizzard bashing is a crusade for you.

Until you can be honest and put things in perspcetive and look at things in
a reasonable manner, your posts are worthless.

Practice what you preach.


Peace,

Grotnar
Anonymous
April 9, 2005 5:07:15 AM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.rpg (More info?)

"shadows" <shadows@whitefang.com> wrote in message
news:slrnd5dh7b.1joo.shadows@helena.whitefang.com...
> ["Followup-To:" header set to comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.rpg.]
> On 2005-04-08, Bob Perez <myfirstname@thecomdomaincalledSHADOWPIKE> wrote:
>

With all this there is no reason to stay in WoW
Anonymous
April 9, 2005 8:30:33 AM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.rpg (More info?)

In article <vrpd515hdr6n6i5ijnurqe94q6c9va4pnv@4ax.com>,
Dark Tyger <darktiger@somewhere.net> wrote:
> >Nice to see SOE make this a priority. In SWG response times by
> >CSRs was fast. In WoW the three tickets I did open were never
> >responded to.
>
> Funny, I always got responses within a day in WoW. However, no SOE
> game have I played that I've gotten a response in under a day. Often
> times, the response times were measured more in WEEKS.

Perhaps he was using the bug reporting command in WoW? The one that let
you fill out a form and then didn't actually send it anywhere, so it
looked to you like you'd submitted something, but you actually hadn't.
(I believe they finally took this command out in one of the last two
patches).

That would explain his getting no response!


--
--Tim Smith
Anonymous
April 9, 2005 2:48:12 PM

Archived from groups: alt.games.everquest,comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.rpg (More info?)

"Dark Tyger" <darktiger@somewhere.net> wrote in message
news:tgud51pu2ppvehskvlvogf2jiola9lkdig@4ax.com...
> On Fri, 08 Apr 2005 18:14:07 GMT, 42 <nospam@nospam.com> wrote:
>
> >> Since my last post , we launched our first Adventure Pack for EverQuest
II -
> >> "The Bloodline Chronicles" - and over half our player base is already
> >> playing it!
> >
> >Then almost half your playerbase declined? Good for them!
>
> I'd wager most of those who are playing Bloodline Chronicles are the
> all-access guys who got it for "free".

Sshhh, don't spoil Smedly's daydreams of selling patches to an eager
playerbase! =D

--
Simond
"I ask for so little. Just fear me, love me, do as I say and I will be your
slave." - Jareth the Goblin King, Labyrinth
April 9, 2005 8:21:45 PM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.rpg (More info?)

On 8 Apr 2005 18:08:17 GMT, knight37 <knight37m@gmail.com> wrote:

>I've opened about 6 tickets in WoW and every one of them were responded
>to eventually. Sometimes it took them a long time, but they all were
>responded to.

Knight... this comment is over the top, even for you. Both the
"tickets" I opened vanished into the ether after I logged out. I was
on for 3 or 4 hours after opening them, both times. Do you ever log
out of the game? Because I can't see any way that all 6 of your
tickets were responded to "eventually" unless you are in the game
24/7.

Really, man, if you want people to take your comments seriously you
have to work on your credibilty.
April 9, 2005 8:25:35 PM

Archived from groups: alt.games.everquest,comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.rpg (More info?)

Hey, that's good news. EQ2 is a better game than WoW, lack of PvP is
it's major failing. Maybe I'll give it a try, again, whenever they get
beyond the "first step" (and the second and third :p ) - or maybe
won't. I'm having trouble generating any enthusiasm for MMORPGS these
days. I'm starting to believe that EQ was just a fluke. It's good to
see EQ2 is doing something about their biggest failing, though. A game
that's short on content really cannot be without PvP to fill the gap.
Anonymous
April 10, 2005 1:15:48 AM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.rpg (More info?)

Thrasher <spectre911@hotmail.com> once tried to test me with:

> On 8 Apr 2005 18:08:17 GMT, knight37 <knight37m@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>>I've opened about 6 tickets in WoW and every one of them were responded
>>to eventually. Sometimes it took them a long time, but they all were
>>responded to.
>
> Knight... this comment is over the top, even for you. Both the
> "tickets" I opened vanished into the ether after I logged out. I was
> on for 3 or 4 hours after opening them, both times. Do you ever log
> out of the game? Because I can't see any way that all 6 of your
> tickets were responded to "eventually" unless you are in the game
> 24/7.
>
> Really, man, if you want people to take your comments seriously you
> have to work on your credibilty.

The tickets do NOT vanish when you log out, every time you log in it shows
that you have an open ticket up in the top-right corner. Either they
answered your ticket and you missed the response from them or something
happened to your ticket. BTW, I know you play on a different server, and
JUST MAYBE the people in charge of your server aren't doing such a hot job.
Don't call me a liar, because what I wrote above is a hard cold FACT, I've
had 6 tickets, and they were ALL answered. Sometimes it took them a couple
of DAYS, but they never just vanished.

BTW, I've had several types of responses from tickets. A few times I got an
in-game email, and a few times I actually had a GM send me private messages
in the game. Even when a response was hardly necessary. Such as one time I
reported that some jackass was blathering a bunch of racist comments in the
newbie zone chat area, I really didn't expect to get a response, but they
did. That jackass probably came from your PVP server when it was down that
night.

--

Knight37 - http://knightgames.blogspot.com

Once a Gamer, Always a Gamer.
Anonymous
April 10, 2005 1:57:42 AM

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

Thrasher <spectre911@hotmail.com> writes:
> ... It's good to
> see EQ2 is doing something about their biggest failing, though. A game
> that's short on content really cannot be without PvP to fill the gap.

Um, doesn't that mean that EQ2's biggest failing is actually
lack of content?

-- Don.

---------------------------------------------------------------------
-- See the a.g.e/EQ1 FAQ at http://www.iCynic.com/~don/EQ/age.faq.htm
--
-- Sukrasisx, Monk 52 on E. Marr Note: If you reply by mail,
-- Terrwini, Druid 50 on E. Marr I'll get to it sooner if you
-- Wizbeau, Wizard 36 on E. Marr remove the "hyphen n s"
-- Teviron, Knight 11 on E. Marr
April 10, 2005 2:38:12 AM

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

In article <7wekdj8vft.fsf@ca.icynic.com>, don-ns@iCynic.com says...
> Thrasher <spectre911@hotmail.com> writes:
> > ... It's good to
> > see EQ2 is doing something about their biggest failing, though. A game
> > that's short on content really cannot be without PvP to fill the gap.
>
> Um, doesn't that mean that EQ2's biggest failing is actually
> lack of content?
>

Point! Set! Match!
Anonymous
April 10, 2005 8:24:04 AM

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

"42" <nospam@nospam.com> wrote in message
news:MPG.1cc1f937919c23da989aba@shawnews...
> In article <7wekdj8vft.fsf@ca.icynic.com>, don-ns@iCynic.com says...
>> Thrasher <spectre911@hotmail.com> writes:
>> > ... It's good to
>> > see EQ2 is doing something about their biggest failing, though. A game
>> > that's short on content really cannot be without PvP to fill the gap.
>>
>> Um, doesn't that mean that EQ2's biggest failing is actually
>> lack of content?
>>
>
> Point! Set! Match!

I'm still lol at anyone who seriously suggests that EQ2 is short on content.
(shakes head)

--
Redbeard, Slayer of Undead
<Veritas>
Dwarven Mystic and Alchemist
Loyal Citizen of the Antonia Bayle
Current resident of Qeynos Harbor
http://veritas.everquest2guilds.com

Descendant of the Elder Winterfury Thunderwolf
<Resolution, Retired>
Barbarian Prophet of The Tribunal
Retired Citizen of Firiona Vie
Anonymous
April 10, 2005 5:44:35 PM

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

On Sun, 10 Apr 2005 04:24:04 -0700, Bob Perez wrote:

>I'm still lol at anyone who seriously suggests that EQ2 is short on content.
>(shakes head)

Yea, it has to come from people who can't find half of the content that's
there. It's true what that barbarian NPC in Graystone Yard says:

"Treasures can be found throughout the land, for those who care to look."
--
Henrik Dissing
Vork - Dwarf Guardian and Weaponsmith on Highkeep
Member of Knights of Knowledge
(e-mail: hendis AT post DOT tele DOT dk)
Anonymous
April 10, 2005 6:38:26 PM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.rpg (More info?)

Thusly Thrasher <spectre911@hotmail.com> Spake Unto All:

>Really, man, if you want people to take your comments seriously you
>have to work on your credibilty.

Irony... or an imposter?


--

Avoid cliches like the plague!
Anonymous
April 10, 2005 8:14:48 PM

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

<myfirstname@thecomdomaincalledSHADOWPIKE> wrote:
>
> "42" <nospam@nospam.com> wrote in message
> news:MPG.1cc1f937919c23da989aba@shawnews...
> > In article <7wekdj8vft.fsf@ca.icynic.com>, don-ns@iCynic.com says...
> >> Thrasher <spectre911@hotmail.com> writes:
> >> > ... It's good to
> >> > see EQ2 is doing something about their biggest failing, though. A game
> >> > that's short on content really cannot be without PvP to fill the gap.
> >>
> >> Um, doesn't that mean that EQ2's biggest failing is actually
> >> lack of content?
> >>
> >
> > Point! Set! Match!
>
> I'm still lol at anyone who seriously suggests that EQ2 is short on content.
> (shakes head)
>

I'll seriously suggest that EQ2 is short on content.

Feel free to laugh at, and try to compare EQ2 (or any other "new" game)
favorably with, the content lead of EQ. There is no contest. Maybe in a
couple years EQ2, or WoW, or, or, or... but not today.
Anonymous
April 11, 2005 12:34:54 AM

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

"Bob Perez" <myfirstname@thecomdomaincalledSHADOWPIKE> writes:
> "42" <nospam@nospam.com> wrote in message
> news:MPG.1cc1f937919c23da989aba@shawnews...
> > In article <7wekdj8vft.fsf@ca.icynic.com>, don-ns@iCynic.com says...
> >> Thrasher <spectre911@hotmail.com> writes:
> >> > ... It's good to
> >> > see EQ2 is doing something about their biggest failing, though. A game
> >> > that's short on content really cannot be without PvP to fill the gap.
> >>
> >> Um, doesn't that mean that EQ2's biggest failing is actually
> >> lack of content?
> >>
> >
> > Point! Set! Match!
>
> I'm still lol at anyone who seriously suggests that EQ2 is short on content.
> (shakes head)

I do admit that my response was based on the post I was directly
responding to, and I have no first-hand knowledge of EQ2 (still
being quite content to explore the content in EQLive :-).

-- Don.

---------------------------------------------------------------------
-- See the a.g.e/EQ1 FAQ at http://www.iCynic.com/~don/EQ/age.faq.htm
--
-- Sukrasisx, Monk 52 on E. Marr Note: If you reply by mail,
-- Terrwini, Druid 50 on E. Marr I'll get to it sooner if you
-- Wizbeau, Wizard 36 on E. Marr remove the "hyphen n s"
-- Teviron, Knight 11 on E. Marr
April 11, 2005 3:01:48 AM

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

Faned scribbled:

> I'll seriously suggest that EQ2 is short on content.

Based on...?

> Feel free to laugh at, and try to compare EQ2 (or any other "new"
> game) favorably with, the content lead of EQ. There is no contest.
> Maybe in a couple years EQ2, or WoW, or, or, or... but not today.

There's a huge difference between "short on content" and
"less content than EQ." It's like saying Larry Ellison is
"short of money" because Bill Gates has considerably more
money. But it's a nice strawman anyway.
Anonymous
April 11, 2005 3:01:49 AM

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

<bgbdwolf@gte.net> wrote:
> Faned scribbled:
>
> > I'll seriously suggest that EQ2 is short on content.
>
> Based on...?

The amount of comment that exists currently...

> > Feel free to laugh at, and try to compare EQ2 (or any other "new"
> > game) favorably with, the content lead of EQ. There is no contest.
> > Maybe in a couple years EQ2, or WoW, or, or, or... but not today.
>
> There's a huge difference between "short on content" and
> "less content than EQ." It's like saying Larry Ellison is
> "short of money" because Bill Gates has considerably more
> money. But it's a nice strawman anyway.


Yep, there's a huge difference.

Not surprisingly, a lot of EQ players are *very* well situated to recognize
that difference, since we watched EQ itself go through the "short on
content" phase. You'll find that the majority of EQ players say the "golden
age" of EQ, when it finally had enough content to not be "short on content",
was around when Velious was released, *not* pre-Kunark, which is where any
"new" game will be (actually most new games seem to have jumped right to a
"Kunark-like" period, with more content than EQ itself had at launch, but
still "short").

"Strawman" is a good description of your reply, though. =P
Anonymous
April 11, 2005 3:01:50 AM

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

<faned@wyld.qx.net> wrote:
> <bgbdwolf@gte.net> wrote:
> > Faned scribbled:
> >
> > > I'll seriously suggest that EQ2 is short on content.
> >
> > Based on...?
>
> The amount of comment that exists currently...

What a bizarre typo... "content" =)

> > > Feel free to laugh at, and try to compare EQ2 (or any other "new"
> > > game) favorably with, the content lead of EQ. There is no contest.
> > > Maybe in a couple years EQ2, or WoW, or, or, or... but not today.
> >
> > There's a huge difference between "short on content" and
> > "less content than EQ." It's like saying Larry Ellison is
> > "short of money" because Bill Gates has considerably more
> > money. But it's a nice strawman anyway.
>
>
> Yep, there's a huge difference.
>
> Not surprisingly, a lot of EQ players are *very* well situated to recognize
> that difference, since we watched EQ itself go through the "short on
> content" phase. You'll find that the majority of EQ players say the "golden
> age" of EQ, when it finally had enough content to not be "short on content",
> was around when Velious was released, *not* pre-Kunark, which is where any
> "new" game will be (actually most new games seem to have jumped right to a
> "Kunark-like" period, with more content than EQ itself had at launch, but
> still "short").
>
> "Strawman" is a good description of your reply, though. =P
Anonymous
April 11, 2005 3:30:55 AM

Archived from groups: alt.games.everquest,comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.rpg (More info?)

42 <nospam@nospam.com> wrote in
news:MPG.1cc069d4870d9a10989ab5@shawnews:

> In article <115dfjrh82r354b@news.supernews.com>,
> myfirstname@thecomdomaincalledSHADOWPIKE says...
>> Per a letter from John Smedley, President of SOE:
>>
>> John Smedley's Letter to the Community: April 7th, 2005
>
> A tongue in cheek response to John Smedley's Letter to the Community:
> April 8, 2005
>

Hmm. I had several responses composed to a few of your takes, until I re-
read the beginning to see this part.

Still, I think you have the terms "veiled criticism" and "tongue in cheek"
confused.

--
Rumble
"Write something worth reading, or do something worth writing."
-- Benjamin Franklin
Anonymous
April 11, 2005 3:33:32 AM

Archived from groups: alt.games.everquest,comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.rpg (More info?)

Faned <faned@wyld.qx.net> wrote in
news:slrnd5e3v9.2jd.faned@wyld.qx.net:

> <jgarvin2004@comcast.net> wrote:
>> RangerGirl wrote:
>>
>> >>In Austin , our Star Wars GalaxiesT team is focused on a big change
>> >>to the game's combat system. The "Combat Revamp" is now live on the
>> >>SWG test server, and it's getting very positive feedback from the
>> >>SWG playerbase.
>> >
>> >
>> > For "positive" read, lots and lots of negative feedback and
>> > complaints about a
>> > completely misguided approach that is driving away a large
>> > contingent of the veteran players away to other game systems. Looks
>> > like they're up to the same
>> > tricks with EQ and EQ2 . . . . adopt the fingers in ears approach
>> > and start to
>> > sing "la, la, la . . . . . . . " very loudly.
>>
>> What is the combat system revamp is SWG? The concept of SWG is cool,
>> but the implementation of the game is pretty piss poor....Has it
>> gotten any better?
>
> Man I so have to agree with that. SWG was sooooo close to being a
> great game. It had tremendous potential, and an incredible license to
> build a game world around.

I agree. SWG was the biggest disappointment I've seen from the genre,
edging out Horizons by only a small margin.

--
Rumble
"Write something worth reading, or do something worth writing."
-- Benjamin Franklin
Anonymous
April 11, 2005 3:35:46 AM

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

"Bob Perez" <myfirstname@thecomdomaincalledSHADOWPIKE> wrote in
news:115i2ruclrmd16@news.supernews.com:

>
> "42" <nospam@nospam.com> wrote in message
> news:MPG.1cc1f937919c23da989aba@shawnews...
>> In article <7wekdj8vft.fsf@ca.icynic.com>, don-ns@iCynic.com says...
>>> Thrasher <spectre911@hotmail.com> writes:
>>> > ... It's good to
>>> > see EQ2 is doing something about their biggest failing, though. A
>>> > game that's short on content really cannot be without PvP to fill
>>> > the gap.
>>>
>>> Um, doesn't that mean that EQ2's biggest failing is actually
>>> lack of content?
>>>
>>
>> Point! Set! Match!
>
> I'm still lol at anyone who seriously suggests that EQ2 is short on
> content. (shakes head)
>

I would agree, especially at this stage of the game.

As far as PvP goes, I really have no desire to ever see it added to EQ2. I
disagree that it is so needed as some may claim.

--
Rumble
"Write something worth reading, or do something worth writing."
-- Benjamin Franklin
Anonymous
April 11, 2005 3:39:33 AM

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

"Wolfie" <bgbdwolf@gte.net> wrote in news:wfi6e.38108$Pc.7600
@tornado.tampabay.rr.com:

> Faned scribbled:
>
>> I'll seriously suggest that EQ2 is short on content.
>
> Based on...?
>
>> Feel free to laugh at, and try to compare EQ2 (or any other "new"
>> game) favorably with, the content lead of EQ. There is no contest.
>> Maybe in a couple years EQ2, or WoW, or, or, or... but not today.
>
> There's a huge difference between "short on content" and
> "less content than EQ." It's like saying Larry Ellison is
> "short of money" because Bill Gates has considerably more
> money. But it's a nice strawman anyway.

I wasn't around for the first 6 months of EQLive, but from what I hear, it
had even less content that EQ2 does now. EQ2 doesn't strike me as lacking
in content, though those who have already hit max level have understandably
run out of stuff to do in many cases. That's to be expected though, I'd
say.

--
Rumble
"Write something worth reading, or do something worth writing."
-- Benjamin Franklin
April 11, 2005 10:33:59 AM

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

"Faned" wrote
>>
>> > I'll seriously suggest that EQ2 is short on content.
>>
>> Based on...?
>
> The amount of comment that exists currently...

So - how much content exists now? I've never felt as
constrained as I did in EQ for level-appropriate content
with decent XP/loot.

>> > Feel free to laugh at, and try to compare EQ2 (or any other "new"
>> > game) favorably with, the content lead of EQ. There is no contest.
>> > Maybe in a couple years EQ2, or WoW, or, or, or... but not today.
>>
>> There's a huge difference between "short on content" and
>> "less content than EQ." It's like saying Larry Ellison is
>> "short of money" because Bill Gates has considerably more
>> money. But it's a nice strawman anyway.
>
> Yep, there's a huge difference.
>
> Not surprisingly, a lot of EQ players are *very* well situated
> to recognize that difference, since we watched EQ itself go
> through the "short on content" phase.

Yeah, been there, done that -- and EQ2 isn't "short of content"
by that standard, at least to 40ish. It is short at the high-end
of the game -- but the vast majority of players aren't at the
high-end yet.

> "Strawman" is a good description of your reply, though. =P

I'm just pointing out that EQ2 has enough content to allow a
player to XP up to 40 (at least) without doing the same thing
twice. How's that 'short of content?' It's certainly (from
my perspective anyway) *more* open than EQ was after
Velious -- for players not at the level-limit.

I've seen "short of content" (five groups at the giant fort in
Frontier Mountains, for instance) -- EQ2 is NOT short of
content.
Anonymous
April 11, 2005 1:28:34 PM

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

<bgbdwolf@gte.net> wrote:
>
> "Faned" wrote
> >>
> >> > I'll seriously suggest that EQ2 is short on content.
> >>
> >> Based on...?
> >
> > The amount of comment that exists currently...
>
> So - how much content exists now? I've never felt as
> constrained as I did in EQ for level-appropriate content
> with decent XP/loot.

That is a result of "herd mentality" (in a grouping game this isn't
necessarily derogatory) rather than any lack of content. There are dozens
of spots for all level ranges with decent experience and loot in EQ, the
vast majority of them unused.

> >> > Feel free to laugh at, and try to compare EQ2 (or any other "new"
> >> > game) favorably with, the content lead of EQ. There is no contest.
> >> > Maybe in a couple years EQ2, or WoW, or, or, or... but not today.
> >>
> >> There's a huge difference between "short on content" and
> >> "less content than EQ." It's like saying Larry Ellison is
> >> "short of money" because Bill Gates has considerably more
> >> money. But it's a nice strawman anyway.
> >
> > Yep, there's a huge difference.
> >
> > Not surprisingly, a lot of EQ players are *very* well situated
> > to recognize that difference, since we watched EQ itself go
> > through the "short on content" phase.
>
> Yeah, been there, done that -- and EQ2 isn't "short of content"
> by that standard, at least to 40ish. It is short at the high-end
> of the game -- but the vast majority of players aren't at the
> high-end yet.

And the day after EQ came out none of the players were at the high end. A
year later however...

> > "Strawman" is a good description of your reply, though. =P
>
> I'm just pointing out that EQ2 has enough content to allow a
> player to XP up to 40 (at least) without doing the same thing
> twice. How's that 'short of content?' It's certainly (from
> my perspective anyway) *more* open than EQ was after
> Velious -- for players not at the level-limit.

I am sure the game companies wish all players had the view that "I haven't
run out of stuff to do, so there's plenty of content." Rather
self-centered, but definitely favorable for the game companies.

> I've seen "short of content" (five groups at the giant fort in
> Frontier Mountains, for instance) -- EQ2 is NOT short of
> content.

You're again confusing the results of herd mentality with an indication, of
any sort, about the amount of content. Even in the Kunark era, and
assuming arguendo that only the latest expansion's loot and experience
would be worthwhile, Overthere, Dalnir's Crypt, Firiona Vie, Droga (or
Nurga, I never remember which is which), and the rest of the Frontier
Mountains zone itself all offered comparable experience/loot at that level
range.
Anonymous
April 11, 2005 1:48:44 PM

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

On 2005-04-10, Rumbledor <Rumbledor@hotspamsuxmail.com> wrote:
> 42 <nospam@nospam.com> wrote in
> news:MPG.1cc069d4870d9a10989ab5@shawnews:
>
>> In article <115dfjrh82r354b@news.supernews.com>,
>> myfirstname@thecomdomaincalledSHADOWPIKE says...
>>> Per a letter from John Smedley, President of SOE:
>>>
>>> John Smedley's Letter to the Community: April 7th, 2005
>>
>> A tongue in cheek response to John Smedley's Letter to the Community:
>> April 8, 2005
>>
>
> Hmm. I had several responses composed to a few of your takes, until I re-
> read the beginning to see this part.
>
> Still, I think you have the terms "veiled criticism" and "tongue in cheek"
> confused.

It seemed to be neither veiled, nor unjustified, criticism to me. SOE petition
responses are very fast now. They are also universally (in my experience, at
any rate) prepepared answers that bear no relation to the petition and utterly
ignore any detail you have provided.

EQ has had an astonishing population decline; and SWG is widely seen as a
failure.

So?
>
Anonymous
April 11, 2005 7:23:45 PM

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

Moopy <pingu@keg.zymurgy.org> wrote in
news:slrnd5khvs.1b1f.pingu@keg.zymurgy.org:

> On 2005-04-10, Rumbledor <Rumbledor@hotspamsuxmail.com> wrote:
>> 42 <nospam@nospam.com> wrote in
>> news:MPG.1cc069d4870d9a10989ab5@shawnews:
>>
>>> In article <115dfjrh82r354b@news.supernews.com>,
>>> myfirstname@thecomdomaincalledSHADOWPIKE says...
>>>> Per a letter from John Smedley, President of SOE:
>>>>
>>>> John Smedley's Letter to the Community: April 7th, 2005
>>>
>>> A tongue in cheek response to John Smedley's Letter to the
>>> Community: April 8, 2005
>>>
>>
>> Hmm. I had several responses composed to a few of your takes, until I
>> re- read the beginning to see this part.
>>
>> Still, I think you have the terms "veiled criticism" and "tongue in
>> cheek" confused.
>
> It seemed to be neither veiled, nor unjustified, criticism to me.

Of course, my point was that 42 was laying down some heavy criticism while
claiming it to be "tongue in cheek". Bah, nevermind.

--
Rumble
"Write something worth reading, or do something worth writing."
-- Benjamin Franklin
April 11, 2005 7:50:51 PM

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

Faned scribbled:

> I am sure the game companies wish all players had the view that "I
> haven't run out of stuff to do, so there's plenty of content." Rather
> self-centered, but definitely favorable for the game companies.

I don't understand that -- what else is a *practical* example
of "plenty of content" other than "plenty of stuff to do that
one hasn't done before?"
Anonymous
April 11, 2005 7:50:52 PM

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

<bgbdwolf@gte.net> wrote:
> Faned scribbled:
>
> > I am sure the game companies wish all players had the view that "I
> > haven't run out of stuff to do, so there's plenty of content." Rather
> > self-centered, but definitely favorable for the game companies.
>
> I don't understand that -- what else is a *practical* example
> of "plenty of content" other than "plenty of stuff to do that
> one hasn't done before?"

I can point to other *individuals* that have "done it all" in EQ2/WoW. In
other words, there is a shortage of content for some people/play-styles,
even if you *personally* have not run out yet. Whether that shortage of
content affects a large portion of the playerbase, or a small ratio, is what
I consider a "practical" example of "plenty of content".

There are people in EQ who have "done it all". As near as I can tell, that
applies to maybe a couple dozen people max, and that's probably an
overestimation because the people that have done the latest-and-greatest
I often find out never saw a lot of older raid content.
Anonymous
April 14, 2005 7:22:26 AM

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

"Moopy" <pingu@keg.zymurgy.org> wrote in message
news:slrnd5khvs.1b1f.pingu@keg.zymurgy.org...

> It seemed to be neither veiled, nor unjustified, criticism to me. SOE
> petition
> responses are very fast now. They are also universally (in my experience,
> at
> any rate) prepepared answers that bear no relation to the petition and
> utterly
> ignore any detail you have provided.

I like the responses you get, "Please consult with your fellow players" and
other useful responses when the issue is an NPC that's been removed from a
zone. All I was asking for was a simple yes/no whether it would be replaced
or if I should just delete the quest.

My "fellow players" didn't seem to have an answer... the concensus finally
was to just delete the quest as it hadn't been addressed since it occurred
before the BC release.
Anonymous
April 14, 2005 7:31:32 AM

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

"Faned" <faned@wyld.qx.net> wrote in message
news:slrnd5lc7e.2jd.faned@wyld.qx.net...
> I can point to other *individuals* that have "done it all" in EQ2/WoW. In

I'm rather surprised they don't list a total number for marketing, but
there're at least 300 quests on the Freeport side, likely more on the other.

Besides, if they'd done it all, wouldn't the Frogloks be unlocked?
Anonymous
April 14, 2005 12:02:21 PM

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

<kasar@hotmail.com> wrote:
> "Faned" <faned@wyld.qx.net> wrote in message
> news:slrnd5lc7e.2jd.faned@wyld.qx.net...
> > I can point to other *individuals* that have "done it all" in EQ2/WoW. In
>
> I'm rather surprised they don't list a total number for marketing, but
> there're at least 300 quests on the Freeport side, likely more on the other.
>
> Besides, if they'd done it all, wouldn't the Frogloks be unlocked?

That assumes, of course, that the people who have "done it all" have any
desire to unlock the frogloks (which, for the most part, is a very bad
assumption). Just because for everyone the standard for "done it all"
includes personal goals does not imply that everyone will have the personal
goal of doing all the quests. For a large portion of people, doing quests
is just slowing one down from "doing it all".
April 14, 2005 2:51:52 PM

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

In article <Xns963569C61150ARumbledorhotmailcom@204.127.199.17>,
Rumbledor@hotspamsuxmail.com says...
> Moopy <pingu@keg.zymurgy.org> wrote in
> news:slrnd5khvs.1b1f.pingu@keg.zymurgy.org:
>
> > On 2005-04-10, Rumbledor <Rumbledor@hotspamsuxmail.com> wrote:
> >> 42 <nospam@nospam.com> wrote in
> >> news:MPG.1cc069d4870d9a10989ab5@shawnews:
> >>
> >>> In article <115dfjrh82r354b@news.supernews.com>,
> >>> myfirstname@thecomdomaincalledSHADOWPIKE says...
> >>>> Per a letter from John Smedley, President of SOE:
> >>>>
> >>>> John Smedley's Letter to the Community: April 7th, 2005
> >>>
> >>> A tongue in cheek response to John Smedley's Letter to the
> >>> Community: April 8, 2005
> >>>
> >>
> >> Hmm. I had several responses composed to a few of your takes, until I
> >> re- read the beginning to see this part.
> >>
> >> Still, I think you have the terms "veiled criticism" and "tongue in
> >> cheek" confused.
> >
> > It seemed to be neither veiled, nor unjustified, criticism to me.

No, I would not have called them veiled either =)
>
> Of course, my point was that 42 was laying down some heavy criticism while
> claiming it to be "tongue in cheek". Bah, nevermind.

Actually I intended the *idea* of it as a *response* to be tongue in
cheek, writing as if it was an actual response to him, playing up the
transparent absurdity of the idea that his "open letter to the
community" represented anything remotely bi-directional with *me*.

That said the criticisms within the response were (mostly) about valid
issues, in particular the offense I took to the blatant self serving
doubletalk surrounding the customer handling situation (I can't bring
myself to even call it service).

Of course I would hardly characterize my response as a 'balanced and
fair argument'. Like a Michael Moore 'documentary', my objective was to
make a point and drive it home hard, indulging in a little hyperbole of
my own in the name of balancing out the indefensible self-congratualtory
tone of the original letter.
Anonymous
April 15, 2005 3:49:36 AM

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

"Kasar" <kasar@hotmail.com> wrote in
news:s4qdneEUt_ZF2cPfRVn-uw@comcast.com:

> "Moopy" <pingu@keg.zymurgy.org> wrote in message
> news:slrnd5khvs.1b1f.pingu@keg.zymurgy.org...
>
>> It seemed to be neither veiled, nor unjustified, criticism to me. SOE
>> petition
>> responses are very fast now. They are also universally (in my
>> experience, at
>> any rate) prepepared answers that bear no relation to the petition
>> and utterly
>> ignore any detail you have provided.
>
> I like the responses you get, "Please consult with your fellow
> players" and other useful responses when the issue is an NPC that's
> been removed from a zone. All I was asking for was a simple yes/no
> whether it would be replaced or if I should just delete the quest.

Perhaps you don't quite understand the role of the GM. They are not meant
to give hints on quests, bugged or otherwise. If the NPC were, in fact,
merely moved, they wouldn't be able to tell you one way or the other.

> My "fellow players" didn't seem to have an answer... the concensus
> finally was to just delete the quest as it hadn't been addressed since
> it occurred before the BC release.

That's part of it. If you search and fail to find the necessary NPC, your
choice is to keep searching, put it off until later or give up. GM
assistance is not meant to be available for that.

--
Rumble
"Write something worth reading, or do something worth writing."
-- Benjamin Franklin
Anonymous
April 15, 2005 3:59:24 AM

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

42 <nospam@nospam.com> wrote in
news:MPG.1cc7eb2aeeb65122989ac0@shawnews:

> In article <Xns963569C61150ARumbledorhotmailcom@204.127.199.17>,
> Rumbledor@hotspamsuxmail.com says...
>> Moopy <pingu@keg.zymurgy.org> wrote in
>> news:slrnd5khvs.1b1f.pingu@keg.zymurgy.org:
>>
>> > On 2005-04-10, Rumbledor <Rumbledor@hotspamsuxmail.com> wrote:
>> >> 42 <nospam@nospam.com> wrote in
>> >> news:MPG.1cc069d4870d9a10989ab5@shawnews:
>> >>
>> >>> In article <115dfjrh82r354b@news.supernews.com>,
>> >>> myfirstname@thecomdomaincalledSHADOWPIKE says...
>> >>>> Per a letter from John Smedley, President of SOE:
>> >>>>
>> >>>> John Smedley's Letter to the Community: April 7th, 2005
>> >>>
>> >>> A tongue in cheek response to John Smedley's Letter to the
>> >>> Community: April 8, 2005
>> >>>
>> >>
>> >> Hmm. I had several responses composed to a few of your takes,
>> >> until I re- read the beginning to see this part.
>> >>
>> >> Still, I think you have the terms "veiled criticism" and "tongue
>> >> in cheek" confused.
>> >
>> > It seemed to be neither veiled, nor unjustified, criticism to me.
>
> No, I would not have called them veiled either =)
>>
>> Of course, my point was that 42 was laying down some heavy criticism
>> while claiming it to be "tongue in cheek". Bah, nevermind.
>
< snip >
>
> Of course I would hardly characterize my response as a 'balanced and
> fair argument'. Like a Michael Moore 'documentary', my objective was
> to make a point and drive it home hard, indulging in a little
> hyperbole of my own in the name of balancing out the indefensible
> self-congratualtory tone of the original letter.

That's the way I took it, actually. I just thought I'd point out now that
your classification of their letter's tone as "indefensible self-
congratulations" is certainly a bit of an exaggeration.

--
Rumble
"Write something worth reading, or do something worth writing."
-- Benjamin Franklin
April 15, 2005 5:49:53 AM

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

In article <Xns9638C12FA582FRumbledorhotmailcom@63.240.76.16>,
Rumbledor@hotspamsuxmail.com says...
> >
> > Of course I would hardly characterize my response as a 'balanced and
> > fair argument'. Like a Michael Moore 'documentary', my objective was
> > to make a point and drive it home hard, indulging in a little
> > hyperbole of my own in the name of balancing out the indefensible
> > self-congratualtory tone of the original letter.
>
> That's the way I took it, actually. I just thought I'd point out now that
> your classification of their letter's tone as "indefensible self-
> congratulations" is certainly a bit of an exaggeration.

Maybe. I do feel the letter was a slap in the face to people like bizbee
and others who've recently been on the receiving end of their new
customer service program.

/quote:
"One other subject I wanted to touch on is our Customer Service
department. We've made some significant changes, and I'm proud to say
our average telephone hold times are now 5 minutes or under. And our in-
game response times are among the best in the business!"
/end quote

If that isn't self congratulatory, I don't know what is. And given that
by many accounts the *effectiveness* of their customer service has
declined in lockstep with the response times there is nothing to merit
congratulation. Perhaps if he'd addressed this to his shareholders
instead of his customers it would be better received. ;) 
      • 1 / 2
      • 2
      • Newest
!