EverQuest Next failed to clear its ‘technical hurdle,’ but Daybreak hasn’t given up on a sequel

    
96
Power whelming. Power with just the right amount of whelm.

Did EverQuest Next fail to come to fruition because it wasn’t fun, the studio didn’t want it, or its technical challenges were too great to overcome? Take your pick on a narrative here, but in a recent interview with Variety, Daybreak Game Director Holly Longdale put the blame square on the last item.

“There was a real nugget of an idea there, but a technical hurdle the team just couldn’t get over,” said Longdale. “All the other stuff that EverQuest is kind of got lost because it was focused on voxels and a dynamically-generated changing world.”

Longdale said that while the MMO’s cancellation hurt, it was necessary to pave the way for a more viable future. The interview mentions that over the past few years, the team has “been evaluating what makes EverQuest EverQuest,” which apparently includes classic high fantasy and community dependency. “Whatever we do in the future,” she said, “we’re going to embrace what we are […] We’ll mix something we think is the next evolution for EverQuest.”

Source: Variety. Thanks Wilhelm!
newest oldest most liked
Subscribe to:
April-Rain
Reader
Kickstarter Donor
April-Rain

Daybreak don’t have the money, resources or fans that trust them to make a decent Everquest 3.

Best thing daybreak could do is cash in and sell the IP to a decent/ credible company who will give it the love it deserves while it still has some fans left.

Reader
Solaris

OH HELL NO. Also, Pantheon is going to fill the EQ void quite nicely.

Reader
Armsman

^^^
“Vanguard: Saga of Heroes” reminds you: “Yeah, possibly; but I wouldn’t count on it.

Reader
Fervor Bliss

“There was not enough computational power. If people are digging holes, you have to update pathing for the entire world.”

Is this really that hard of a problem to solve?

Reader
Steven Williams

No. It’s over. I can’t anymore.

Reader
Bruno Brito

Sure. And i can shoot pigs outta my ass too.

Reader
Polychromantium

Like, you shoot them using a gun lodged in there, like a hunter, or launch them out of your butt like a cannon?

So many possibilities.

kjempff
Reader
kjempff

EqNext should never have been a destructible world – Voxel engine was a mistake they should have abandoned early. Instead they should have focused on the dynamic world part, and doing it without voxel tech.
Story bricks or not.. if it doesn’t work, kill it early and replace it with something that will make the idea work (3rd party or self developer).
Combat just wasn’t fun … that is such a stupid comment to give, then MAKE it fun. Kill it and start over, or do what good developers do, realize the mistake early and try something different, tweak the damn thing … combat should be the easy part of EqNext, the hard part is making dynamic world and ai work with content.

Landmark could have been great, EqNext could have been the only true next gen mmorpg – Developing both .. at the same time .. that is not just a bold move, that is downright insane. Landmark killed EqNext, and I know which one I wanted; not that I disliked Landmark, it was an amazing game that would have taken the rather square Minecraft type of game to the next level.
EqNext was the answer to all my dreams for where the genre would evolve towards. EqNext was where I thought back in early 2000 that mmos would move towards, and I couldn’t wait for those amazingly virtual worlds full of dynamic and ai – And then WoW and the static story driven mmo happened instead.

Still hoping for those Dynamic virtual worlds … developers, step up and make it happen (not you Daybreak, you failed on every part of good development practices that is possible to fail on, blindly and stubbornly).

Reader
Gunguz

Every time Holly Longdale speaks to the media, I literally lol, because she really does believe her audience is stupid enough to be manipulated by what she says.

EQN failed because Smed put Georgeson in charge of it.

“The interview mentions that over the past few years, the team has “been evaluating what makes EverQuest EverQuest….”

Sounds legit. Goes a long way to explaining why they have turned EQ2 into a small map focused almost entirely on grinding a handful of the same instances over and over and over, and with layers of game design that incentivize p2w cash shop sales.

The next “evolution” of Everquest is most likely the Nantworks mobile version. She’s just dangling an imaginary carrot; hoping to keep interest, subs, and cash shop revenue going until the mobile goes live.

It is interesting to note, that a recent “we want you back” email I got (their re-acquisition strategy) pitched the Kaladim TLE server and the Nagafen PVP seasonal event server – A complete admission that what they are producing today is junk, and their only hope is to sell an opportunity to re-experience the old game.

Freddy
Reader
Freddy

((Deleted at poster’s request.))

Reader
Ben Stone

Was the technical hurdle the fact that Daybreak was developing it? Please, just sell the IP.

Reader
Kevin McCaughey

I’ve backed so many kickstarters and other crowd funding MMO’s that I will never have time to play them all when they (if they) arrive. I wouldn’t be prepared to back Daybreak, aka the Russian MAfia. I think it is just a money laundering exercise that used microtransactions to hide the laundering.

Reader
Obi Wan

As someone who helped pay for the development of Landmark before its cancellation, it’s quite safe to say I won’t be supporting any future titles in the EverQuest franchise or anything else Daybreak is associated with.

Aelzen
Reader
Aelzen

Tell me about it. I’m not getting burned twice.

Reader
The Gleeful Grognard

Oh that is just crap and you know it, everyone LOVES to be told that there is nothing wrong… then have their game shuttered two months later :P