Post by Cordelia on Aug 3, 2004 7:44:42 GMT -5
In any serious discussion regarding zone revision, is there the possibility of too much content?
In EQ, I felt that the major issue wasn't a lack of content but rather too much content; or rather that players would migrate to certain staple zones and ignore others. Hence, the problem that there was too much content and not enough focus on why players migrated to certain zones.
Well, the answer is manifold:
(1) Herd mentality (baaaaa!)
(2) Monty Haul i.e. an antiquated term from the days of Tunnels & Trolls, refering to GM's providing far too much reward for little risk
(3) Location, location and location
(4) Lack of interest in zone
With regard to the specifc issues in Jedi, we have to take into account the maturity of the player-base where remorts are the norm, and a lot of players already have sets of high end EQ.
Hence, should we be creating new zones that may not have a wide audience unless forced to attract players by the lure of riches? With the exception of zones in progress, I would take the view that zone building should be placed on hold until zone revision is completed.
Adding more and more content is not the way to revitalise the game - we need to focus on the purpose of zones and also what they add to the game beyond exp and EQ. I really support Tam's idea of city locations being fairly safe and secure, but becoming more dangerous the further one travels from them, as their civilising influence and ability to protect travellers diminishes.
Also, this would nip in the bud of random newbies starting up in a city and immediately wandering into Sieged or being made shark bait on Greza.
On another tact, I'm glad that old, staple zones are being put forward for revision such as Moria. I've always felt that Moria needs to be re-vamped to have a distinct feel rather than trading on the LOTR name.
Regards,
Cordelia
In EQ, I felt that the major issue wasn't a lack of content but rather too much content; or rather that players would migrate to certain staple zones and ignore others. Hence, the problem that there was too much content and not enough focus on why players migrated to certain zones.
Well, the answer is manifold:
(1) Herd mentality (baaaaa!)
(2) Monty Haul i.e. an antiquated term from the days of Tunnels & Trolls, refering to GM's providing far too much reward for little risk
(3) Location, location and location
(4) Lack of interest in zone
With regard to the specifc issues in Jedi, we have to take into account the maturity of the player-base where remorts are the norm, and a lot of players already have sets of high end EQ.
Hence, should we be creating new zones that may not have a wide audience unless forced to attract players by the lure of riches? With the exception of zones in progress, I would take the view that zone building should be placed on hold until zone revision is completed.
Adding more and more content is not the way to revitalise the game - we need to focus on the purpose of zones and also what they add to the game beyond exp and EQ. I really support Tam's idea of city locations being fairly safe and secure, but becoming more dangerous the further one travels from them, as their civilising influence and ability to protect travellers diminishes.
Also, this would nip in the bud of random newbies starting up in a city and immediately wandering into Sieged or being made shark bait on Greza.
On another tact, I'm glad that old, staple zones are being put forward for revision such as Moria. I've always felt that Moria needs to be re-vamped to have a distinct feel rather than trading on the LOTR name.
Regards,
Cordelia