[MUD-Dev] Interesting EQ rant (very long quote)

[Daniel.Harman at barclayscapital.com]

S. Patrick Gallaty wrote:

> I've heard this bogus argument before, from verant itself.  This is
> a failure to design for the player experience by abstracting too
> far.  If you are worried about meta-game issues, and looking at the
> macroscopic and sacrificing the enjoyment of -each and every one- of
> your players for some theoretical item introduction limit, you've
> definitely forgotten something about what it was you were trying to
> do in the first place.

The whole principle of EQ is that items are rare and thus coveted. If
they were common it would be like Asheron's Call where no item has any
real value. If I get a new item in EQ, I'm proud of it. No one has a
right to any item, and if its easy to get no one values it. On this
count I think Verant are correct, beware the Monty Hall effect.

> advancement model.  Weapon damage/time ratios go from 7.0
> time/damage (newbie weapons) to 1.8 (high end weapons) - and have no
> level limits.  Armor is similar.  Thus, in eq your skills and
> character advancement matter much less than the equipment you use
> (for melee characters), and the

Thats not something I agree with. Yes you can give yourself a head
start in EQ by twinking, but you'll plateau pretty soon. One of the
main criticisms people have of EQ is that level counts for far more
than equipment which disadvantages traders and makes it hard for
friend of divergent levels to group.

Mudinflation is certainly rampant in EQ, but its countered by the ever
increasing difficulty of the expansions - sadly this leaves the
casters out in the cold. My only real criticism is that caster gear
has negligable affect compared to melee. (Obviously mudinflation is
bad, but you need to improve things to keep the people interested)

Dan
_______________________________________________
MUD-Dev mailing list
MUD-Dev at kanga.nu
https://www.kanga.nu/lists/listinfo/mud-dev