MightyMeaghan
New member
lulz
Personal Preferences are not Bugs
- Thread starter 89Doilies
- Start date
vlada
Member
in 2006 i was 50!
Hartay
Keeper of the Server Hamsters
How's the Salisbury steak?
CommaCommander
Member
If the dev said they are aiming for 2006 ... and something in game is not 2006...then guess what... it is a bug.
vlada
Member
i do not eat red meatHow's the Salisbury steak?
There's something weird going on where people pointing out opinions being stated as facts, or bugs, is somehow considered trolling or 'against' certain very active individuals who love to state opinions as fact. One such opinion - the server must be a 1:1 recreation of 2006. No, the game should be enjoyable while embracing the general look and feel of 2006 while still appealing to a 2024 audience, and their wallets. (It's actually wholly unrealistic to expect a 1:1 recreation of 2006. I could post 20 screenshots confirming this but I have a life outside of browbeating people who disagree with me.) Sometimes that doesn't align with things in 2006. Oftentimes it does! But perhaps the values can be debated while acknowledging that people will have varying opinions. Googling old numbers doesn't negate that this server is NOT in 2006, never will be, and above all should be fun. Both opinions can be shared, maybe not over and over and over, but that's what feedback is. Not a bug, but feedback. On an opinion.
This is unrealistic and a sentiment that needs to be cleared up before people get hit hard with reality later on. If you've followed what's going on at all, the devs would be the first one to tell you this. This server is not and cannot be a 1:1 match of 2006. Right now the stats aren't even working correctly. This server is old systems being duct taped onto a modern client, WHICH IS NOT TO SAY it's wrong to try to get it right. But values will be fudged, they must be, and people debating things like xp being too fast or respawn rates is perfectly fine! But it's up for debate, they're not bugs, and at the end of the day it's a video game, not a museum piece.
People are really out here downvote bombing entire profiles on completely unrelated topics out of spite. Don't underestimate the petty, and why its turning into a meme.
You don't give up on the vision because it won't be perfect. Nobody is expecting a 1:1 recreation of the server. We're expecting people to stop shooting down the efforts to bring it closer to 2006 because it doesn't align with their preferred playstyles. Correcting something wrong by a factor of three is not an issue of squirreling away for "perfection." Especially since changing XP gain and respawn timers are likely much easier fix than rewriting stat curves that don't exist anymore.
If you need to litmus check yourself, ask this: What if Respawns or EXP was three times SLOWER than it was in 2006? Would you be equally okay with that? The answer is a glaringly obvious, deafening "no." And I wouldn't be in favor of keeping that, either.
The only opinions at the moment are what the priorities are. What is *intended* is not an opinion. What is intended is 2006. Everything not 2006 is considered a bug, according to Caith.
Last edited:
I'm about to blow your mind, but what if they really just disagree with you. People are really expecting a 1:1 because you keep harping on it. The rest I've already made my case about. Done replying over the whole 'not 2006 is bug' thing cuz it's ridiculous and unrealistic. What's intended is a fun and successful server. Full stop.
Disagreeing with a "person" is different than disagreeing with a concept. Of course they want to disagree with me. They're upset that I'm advocating loudly to keep the server to it's word: As close to 2006 as possible. And that's not what they want. They just want a new server.
"Not 2006 is a bug" is Caith's take. It is impossible for us, as players, to know what is or is not a bug. It's impossible for players to know what has or hasn't had a change attempted. It's impossible for players to know if there is a serverside override in place somewhere, because it's impossible for the designers and coders to know. All we can do is report what is found and let them make the value proposition.
Your definition of fun might have to wait until the next traditional TLE. There are hundreds of people who want this to be as close to 2006 as possible, and there are thousands of people willing to give it a try. People who won't simply jump to the next FOTM server when it pops up. The goal is to appeal to a different audience and bring new players in or back to the game. To offer a completely different experience previously not possible, not just make something palatable for the existing TLE trolls like yourself.
What is intended is what they advertised for on the launch advert. The people testing this server and the large volume of returning players want to play because it's advertised as a 2006 as is server. Disagreeing with a player who has largely provided factual evidence of his claims because another player wants the server to be how THEY remembered it, or easier, or less grindy isn't in the spirit of the server. There have been a multitude of TLP's with more or less difficult exp grinds, different versions of itemization or class availability, pvp or non pvp, different rule sets - and they were tested and played from that rulesets perspective.
I hope the staff are aware that every TLP at this point has pretty much been the same, initial hype, realization that it's nothing like what a real TLP should be and has absolutely no metric of original accuracy, and that if they put the effort into making this as it was in 2006 that they will retain a larger playerbase because the game will actually have things to do, there will be gear to farm, people to meet, instead of the ridiculous aoe fiesta with "pin the tail on the donkey" tier of itemization.
Euphrasie
Member
The issue I'm running into with the "IT MUST BE EXACTLY LIKE 2006!" People, is they only seem to be advocating for changes that make the game less fun, or more tedious to play.
Mobs may be spawning 3 times faster than they did in 2006, but at the very least right now that's a good thing. Yesterday evening in the sunken city there were multiple groups of people, and multiple solo people waiting for the same mobs to repop, and it still took quite a while for everyone to cycle through. No extra instance of the zone, just 30+ people in a zone that's got enough mobs for 10. and that's fun for nobody.
I get, and I'm totally for getting it correct to 2006, but there's a point where accuracy has to make way for not tearing your hair out in frustration, IMO.
What you consider "quite a while" is not, in the cosmic sense of a 6-12 month server. Roadblocks like this are what causes population to disperse into less optimal and occasionally new paths.
You were willing to wait *BECAUSE* you knew the spawn was quick. Was waiting in line fun?
If you found out it wouldn't be quick, you'd go somewhere else and do something else, maybe with different people.
That's a good thing. Being able to queue up in line behind a fast spawning quest mob is not a good thing. Both of those statements are opinions. What isn't an opinion is what it worked in 2006 and was classic, which is what the server is targeting. Individual mobs can be carved out as long term bottlenecks, but keeping the spawn rates cranked up on the entire game to combat those bottlenecks is objectively breaking the classic experience.
I have also yet to see anyone arguing against quality of life changes being left in -- Such as the quest feather over the collection NPCs. Are you saying because we haven't crusaded against that, we are somehow selectively trying to make the server unfun or tedious? It just so happens that the MAJOR DIFFERENCES are related to gameplay: EXP, Mob Respawns, Auto attack ranges, Threat meters, etc.
We're "advocating" for the things people are trying to aggressively shoot down because they think they make the game less fun. The kinds of submissions aren't biased, but defending the submissions as valid is absolutely biased.
The design intent of this server is to match the 2006 version of EQ2 as closely as possible. The whole point of the beta is to identify issues with the current build of the game and point them out so that the development team can fix them.
You may not like several aspects of how the game operated in 2006, and the developers have said we will be able to vote on some potential QoL changes that can be made before the final server goes live. But you shouldn't be criticizing people for pointing out legitimate issues with the way the game is currently functioning just because you personally don't want them to be fixed.
Euphrasie
Member
I do believe the quote from the dev said that people can agitate for changes they want to see, consider me doing that