EverQuest Coming to Mac OS X

Anonymous Coward writes "EverQuest is coming to a Mac near you, as reported on GameSpot. Sony is planning to release it on Mac OS X sometime next year. You can also find details on Apple's website. Scott McDaniel, vice president of marketing for Sony Online said 'Combine the power and stability of Mac OS X with Apple's outstanding desktop systems and you've got an incredible gaming environment that'll take full advantage of EverQuest's huge and seamless 3D world.' (sounds good to me =)"

Comments

One Problem

[norwoodites]

It will no repeat will not connect to the PC version.

Re:One Problem

[dalamcd]

Are you trolling, or do you actually have some evidence of this?

dalamcd

Re:One Problem

[Alex Thorpe]

Problem or bonus? I think Mac users getting their own server, rather than joining a 4 year old world on the PC servers with 4 year old players is a good idea.

Re:One Problem

[Graff]

It will no repeat will not connect to the PC version.

If that's true then I might just give it a try. I would hate to join an online rpg after people have been playing it for so long. This will give us a brand-new world to play in. Maybe after a year or two they can merge the worlds.

Re:One Problem

[evel aka matt]

No they will not "merge the worlds." Perhaps you're not familar with the Everquest server setup. They have 20 or 30 or whatever different servers, and each server is a unique world. I mean, the geography and quests and everything is the same, but players on one server are completely and utterly seperate from players on another server. So the concerns about having to play with people who have been playing for years is moot, because you could just play on a brand new server. Also, they claim that the reason why Mac and PC players can't play together is due to "technical difficulties". Sounds like bullshit to me...

Re:One Problem

[Graff]

Also, they claim that the reason why Mac and PC players can't play together is due to "technical difficulties". Sounds like bullshit to me...

Yeah, I didn't know that they already had separate worlds. I just assumed that everyone would always be playing in the same world.

You are right, it is total bullshit. I mean, the programmers should know their own networking protocols and be able to use them in a new client. I guess it could be that they are too lazy and instead used DirectX or some proprietary protocol, but that is such a cop-out. You'd think that such a large corporation would have more control over their game than this.

Re:One Problem

[ealar dlanvuli]

You fail to understand, the problem with the EQ dev team is they all play EQ.

Re:One Problem

[xinu]

Do you have a link to where you found that tidbit of info?

I see no reason why it wouldn't operate with the current EQ servers. This isn't a new version with new protocol methods and stuff, it's a port.

So can yah help a brutha out and give proof that your not spreading FUD?

Re:One Problem

[Shrubber]

http://www.insidemacgames.com/news/story.php?Artic leID=5869
"Mac OS X EverQuest players will not be able to play against (or with) the PC players of the game, due to server incompatibilities. Also, Sony will be watching the sales of Mac EverQuest very closely, to evaluate whether ports of other titles such as EverQuest 2 and Star Wars Galaxies will be worthwhile."

jesus christ

[Anonymous Coward]

do people still play that? will there be people playing it next year even?

Re:jesus christ

[Rivard]

Only the unproductive citizens of society play Everquest, and none of them own a Macintosh.

But, seriously, the boat has passed. The only imaginable reason anyone would still play Everquest is a) being psyched up for geeky medireview-ishness by the Lord of the Rings or b) trying to relive their childhood, in the same horrible manner that people still care about Ozzy Osbourne because they were children of the 80's.

Of course it is an EverQuest.

Re:jesus christ

[Golias]

Some of us remember Ozzy as a 70's icon.

As for EQ, I had an account active for quite some time, because of the low-ish system requirements that allowed me to game on an old AMD K-6 333 with a cheap Voodoo3 card. (I prefer to keep my Mac free for doing other things, and the gaming PC sat next to it for when I felt like wasting some time.)

When the Shadows of Luclin expansion came out, they upped the requirements for all users, not just the ones who bought the expansion, so I chose to close my account rather than buy a new gaming PC.

My guess is that the Mac version's system requirements will be so rigid that it would probably demand tieing up my main G4 workstation (even though a well-coded port of that game really should be able to run fine on an old iMac G3-400... we all know that it won't though, eh?)

I'll pass, thanks. Neverwinter Nights for Mac will probably blow it out of the water anyway. If the Mac port of EQ came out two years ago, I would have been all over it... now I just don't care.

There's a lesson here for game design shops, though. Simultanious development efforts == Loyal Mac customer base. Bungie knew it, Blizzard has learned it. Even if your releases are a month or three apart (as with NWN), it will still profit you much more than porting a long-obsolete game and trying to sell it at new-release prices. Macs may be only 5% of the overall computer market, but keep in mind that over half of that other 95% is made up of office PC's that will never, ever be used as gaming stations, so efforts to build a simultanious Mac port actually reaches a proportionally larger unrealized market than you may have considered.

Re:jesus christ

[Rivard]

I see your second point, which is a good one, but is the same not also true for the Mac? Aren't a lot of Macs used for K-12 education, aren't a lot used at design firms, and aren't a lot used by, as a recent study discussed here pointed out, by richer people who wouldn't be inclined to game, as they have actual jobs?

I am honesly asking, not being rhetorical, do these uses equally dipose the use of Macs for gaming just as office tasks do for PCs?

Re:jesus christ

[Anonymous Coward]

so efforts to build a simultanious Mac port actually reaches a proportionally larger unrealized market than you may have considered

A best selling Mac game shifts around 30K units - this isn't even on the radar for a PC title, which would be considered a flop if it sells less than 200K. It's unfortunate, but true - there just aren't as many Mac users who play games (I know these numbers are correct, because I port games to the Mac for a living: see posts by people like Westlake at IMG/MacGamer if you want another source).

Companies which do simultaneous development typically do so because a)of their history, e.g., they started out on the Mac and feel they owe it to their users or b)due to internal politics (e.g., id do it because they want to help support OpenGL).

Re:jesus christ

[Golias]

A best selling Mac game shifts around 30K units - this isn't even on the radar for a PC title, which would be considered a flop if it sells less than 200K.

Yess, but a game that sells 230K is considered much, much more successful than a game that sells 200K. That's what simultaneous development can do for you.

Of course, if you port Mac games for a living, I'm sure you would rather that the game companies did not do it that way.

Re:jesus christ

[Anonymous Coward]

but a game that sells 230K

Saw that press release as well - that is simply outstanding for a Mac game, and puts it into Marathon/Sims territory. You can bet that nothing else will be close this year.

I'm sure you would rather that the game companies did not do it that way

Actually I'd love them to - good game sales for the Mac makes it easier to convince developers without any Mac experience that it's worth looking into a port (and as a Mac user, means more games for me to check out ;-).

Re:jesus christ

[masamax]

It seems to me that is D3D was simply dropped, and OGL was used for most games, the turnaround time onto a Mac would be a hell of a lot less. All it takes then is a little tweaking, a publisher, and you are ready to go.

Blah, D3D and DX8 may look nice, and all the new nVidia cards may have all that nice hardware stuff built in, but it would just be SO easy with OGL! :)

Re:jesus christ

[piznut]

Ill take prettier graphics (DX8 and up) over portability (OGL) any day. Macs are not gaming machines. If you want to game on your PC, you are really cheating yourself by not owning a Windows box. Im not trying to slam macs or mac users...its just a fact that fast hardware + Windows = a better gaming rig.

Re:jesus christ

[Scudsucker]

Yeah the hardware is a LOT faster on the pc side, but I'd have to disagree with you about DX looking better than OGL. Doom 3 is an OGL title and it's looking pretty damned good.

Re:jesus christ

[masamax]

The hardware is better? I don't know about you, but the stuff on Mac is starting to destroy things on PC. RISC BABY!

Re:jesus christ

[piznut]

Mac is destroying PC how? Got some benchmarks? ...and I dont mean photoshop running unsharp mask.

Re:jesus christ

[masamax]

Dunno about you, but x86 architechture isn't exactly shining performance.

So...

[Picass0]

How many people call it EverChest vs. EverCrack?

Re:So...

[Golias]

How many people call it EverChest vs. EverCrack?

Among the crowd I ran with, it was known as DivorceQuest.

Re:So...

[Anonymous Coward]

Never heard of EverChest (and I don't entirely get the joke, either). However, back when I used to play players who got up to higher levels used to call it EverCamp because of all the camping you had to do for the good items.

Re:So...

[Scudsucker]

Probably "EverChest" because its an endless treasure chest for Sony from all those poor bastards who are addicted to the game.

The main problem with this

[Mordant]

is that the folks who make enough money to buy a Macintosh on which to run EverQuest will soon end up losing their jobs and families because they're obsessed with the game . . . and so they won't be able to afford new Macintoshes and upgrades.

So, Apple and Sony will have to come up with a way to get some 'new blood' into this consumer base, or, within a year or so, it'll become extinct!

Well

[Apreche]

If we are to believe the apple switch campaign people who use Macs are smarter than people who use pcs. By that logic anyone who uses a mac is smart enough not to play everquest.

Re:Well

[Alex Thorpe]

ROTFL! I like your logic.

On the other hand, my father, a Mac user since '84, and the treasurer of the Gateway Area Macintosh User's Group plays EQ on my brother's PC all the time. Though he seems to be caught up in making things and fishing, and not fighting more than he has to.

In any case, I've watched it being played often enough, and I've no interest in playing myself.

Re:Well

[Anonymous Coward]

The smart thing to do is not always the right thing to do. If you do the right thing, you are damn smart. -Me

your sig is illogical. If you're going to have the gall to quote yourself in your sig, at least pick something sensible.

Drug Interaction Warning

[thefinite]

What happens when you mix RDF and EverCrack? I guess we'll find out.... hehehehehe

Odd timing.

[EvilBastard]

It's getting launched at pretty much the same time Everquest 2 is ramping up and Star Wars Galaxies is running. So, it looks like the latest attempt to save the EverQuest Brandname is to try to hook Mac OS users just as the game is being replaced.

So far to keep their game alive they have

- Removed information as to how many people are playing after noticing a 20% drop
- Started promoting EQ as a way of drunk women meeting famous people with a really amusing movie file that has basically vanished from the net
- Offering $40/month luxury servers that have what they used to promise the standard servers
- Providing a range of services that they swore they would never ever do (The Rename service netted then $69,200 last month alone)
- Trying to stir up interest in their game with some of the poorest tie-in merchandise in history
- emailing out free accounts
- giving free doses of their game away on magazine covers

(For people who don't play EQ, a lot of people are commenting on how once crowded zones are now going empty, and more and more people are leaving or Ebaying their characters rather then keep playing. When asked about Everquest 2, a common reaction is a shudder and 'Nope, never again')

Re:Odd timing.

[Golias]

This seems like a good time to put a plug in for good ol' "pencil and dice" role-playing. Rather than jump into Star Wars Galaxies or whatever, consider giving that new 3rd Edition of D&D a try (or some other RPG if you prefer). There are many advantages:

1. Lower startup cost. A $60 set of three books and a handful of dice is all you really need for a group of 5 or 6 friends to start playing. (Others are available, but ya don't really need 'em.)

2. You get to actually talk to the people you are gaming with, face to face. This allows you to beat the living crap out of anybody who is being a jerk, a feature which MMORPG's sadly lack. Also, you never need to look at the fucked-up hybrid shorthand that all the shitty typists on EQ inevitably resort to. If you were never an EQ player, you have no idea how annoying it got to see "r u cleric? heal plz." every time some Iksar monk saw you carrying a hammer.

3. More room for creativity.

4. No monthly fees.

5. If you were one of those geeks who played the original D&D back when you were in Junior High School, there's the spiffy nostalgia value.

6. No spawn points, no camping, no repetitive quests, no worries about 250 other players going on the exact same "epic" quest as you at any given time.

7. The originality of the stories are limited only by the imagination of the cleverest person in your group.

Neverwinter Nights looks like it might emulate the DM-run roleplay experience fairly well in some ways, and I'm sure I will waste a little time playing it, but it can't completely replace the fun you can have with a weekly or bi-weekly gaming group. Anyway, that's just my opinion. YMMV.

Re:Odd timing.

[Anonymous Coward]

Or you could try picking up a mud. Like evercrack but without all those obnoxious graphics! www.mudconnector.com

Re:Odd timing.

[Anonymous Coward]

You've also listed some of the disadvantages if you can't find a good group (which can be hard):

1. You have to actually talk to the people you are gaming with, face to face. In the real world, you can't actually get away with beating up someone for being a jerk, and you have to listen to far more whining if you kill their character for being a jerk in game than online. Plus, you get all those *cough* fascinating stories about their other characters in other games.

2. If you are playing with one of those geeks who last GMed with the orginal D&D back in Junior High Scool, he probably doesn't know that table top gaming isn't RL Diablo. As a result, you may find yourself still involved in the same repetitive "epic" quests as hundreds of other players in a real-life simulation of Joseph Campbell's assertion that all stories are the same.

3. The originality of the stores are very much limited by the imagination of the GM, who damn well better be the cleverest person in your group.

Re:Odd timing.

[chump daddy]

• When asked about Everquest 2, a common reaction is a shudder and 'Nope, never again')

probably because a lot of those people are in broken relationships because of EQ.

a friend of mine was into EQ pretty badly and his fiance - also a close friend of mine was always complaining about his addiction. it got the point where his friends were telling her to leave him.

she stuck with him, he got out of it, and now he's already in a guild with a site for star wars galaxies.

it's a vicious circle, and I pity the poor os-x users who get stuck in it now.

sony are just opening up another percentage of the world for ruined relationships and neglected children.

way to go sony..

Re:Odd timing.

[Anonymous Coward]

I think its rather sad that you blame sony for having a weak friend...
We see it every day, some company is to blame for someone being weak at heart...

In the end, its not realy their fault that your friend is weak... Some make it other parrish...

If you think that way, just dont buy the game when it comes out, simple as that...

Re:Odd timing.

[masamax]

Errr... Neverwinter Nights anyone?

*cough cough cough*

Re:Odd timing.

[Golias]

You didn't even finish reading my post, did you?

Re:Odd timing.

[masamax]

I did, but I wasn't simply replying to your post.

Better late than never

[Anonymous Coward]

What, 4 years or so? Coming soon: Doom for mac.

Re:Better late than never

[Rivard]

You forget to mention it was for System 7 users.

Seamless?

[SteveX]

EverQuest's huge 3D world is divided into around Zones (over 200 I believe), and moving from zone to zone involves basically stopping the game and loading all the data for the next zone, a process that can easily take over a minute. Any monsters chasing you in the previous zone forget about you when you zone, and monsters right on the other side of the zone line that you couldn't see may be hitting you once you step across it. Hardly seamless.

- Steve

Re:Seamless?

[Anonymous Coward]

Actually the have oldworld zonetimes down to about 4 seconds, luclin zonetimes are still up in the 20 second range.

Just thought I'd let you know it dosen't take a minuite to zone anymore.

Re:Seamless?

[piznut]

4-20 seconds on a PC. Yeah, it probably will take about a minute on a Mac.

Too true

[gidds]

I know two players personally... one's not married, and the other has split up with his wife. (Not only due to EQ, but it was definitely a factor.)

EQ: Just Say No!

Ridiculous

[Anonymous Coward]

Everquest has been out since 2000 at least, and is really showing its age. Why are apple fans so excited about getting this decrepit game, 3 years after it was released for windows?

Re:Ridiculous

[Alex Thorpe]

Guess what, a lot of us aren't. Surprised as heck that was announced, but not thrilled that it's not only an old game, but not due out until next spring. Some people think that they're porting this old game so that when the sales figures ae low, they can use this as an excuse not to port SW: Galaxies, but I don' think that makes much business sense myself.

Re:Ridiculous

[PythonOrRuby]

How many people still play Tetris, or original Nintendo games?

A lot of people do. Just because a game has been in existence for 3 years doesn't mean anyone, aside from hard-core gamers who go through a new game each night, is necessarily tired of it.

Re:Dear Apple

[Anonymous Coward]

nothing is funnier then a fat and lonely linux/starwars/sci-fi channel/"never even smelled a vagina geek starts mac bashing.

apple users get laid more often, and even supposing that there is a higher number of "gay" mac users (in accordance to it's acceptance in the design world) at least the heterosexuals that enjoy the platform are indeed actually have sex. and not eating 10 pizzas and masturbating furiously to hentai

love and kisses

Why don't you just get a REAL operating system...

[Anonymous Coward]

...instead of screwing around waiting for stuff that's been on Windows for ages?

No wonder everyone else uses Windows. Who wants to wait around for software?

Mac Version INCOMPATIBLE With Server? WHAT?

[Sembiance]

Ok, Inside Mac Games has an article on this as well:
insidemacgames.com

An interesting blurb in that article:

We have also learned several details that online game fans might be interested in -- Mac OS X EverQuest players will not be able to play against (or with) the PC players of the game, due to server incompatibilities.

Uh, am I the only programmer here that thinks that's about the most absurd thing I've ever heard?

The only incompatibilties that could possiblity exist is if they changed the protocol.
Server's just don't say "Icky, I Think this network connection is coming from a non-windows box, I better not work right with it".

It will be interesting to see what happens once some clever people hackersquest.org end up reverse engineering the protocol on the MacOS version and see how much it differs from the Windows version.

losers

[Anonymous Coward]

this is for pc geek idiots that are wintel's biggest customers. screw this fatass game

Online Gaming?

[xanthus]

EQ is coming for OSX. Neverwinter Nights is due out soon.

Assuming that I would want to play an online RPG (which will NEVER be a true RPG in my opinion; it can only be, at best, a war game), why would I want to play a game that's been out for the PC for so long? I see that players are gaming with other players, some good, some evil, some teenagers with nothing better to do than go online and wreck havoc...

I spoke to a buddy on EverQrack who has some rediculously high level character(s). He's not the only one.

These games seem to put a huge emphasis on Power Levels (again, where's the role playing in that?) What would make me, a new player, want to play in a power-hungry world with high level characters already out there? My joke to my friends who are playing NeverWinterNights already (PC version, natch), is that I can join as a 1st lever character and be a burden to the party as soon as the Mac client comes out. :lol: By then they should all be 7+ levels...