Test Patch note

[Mponthepc]

I keep staring at this and think, I'm sure this will be interesting:

*** Miscellaneous ***

- Made several changes to the way EverQuest is compiled. Please keep an eye out for any strange behavior.

 

[Lorekeeper]

If interesting = gonnabreakatonofshit
you're probably right.

 

[Mponthepc]

Word on the street is that it completely broke WinEQ, so if that's any sign of things to come, yeah.

 

[Lorekeeper]

WinEq did nothing but take the worthless shit out for us multi boxers, f you sony.

 

[aspire2008]

If it completely breaks MQ, I hate to imagine the state of EQ after 1-2 years.

 

[Deflator]

Yeah, I played for like an hour yesterday, and I noticed WinEQ wasn't working when I tried to log in with (on test.)

Hopefully they can get it working again.

 

[devestator]

Hrm, that really sucks if it broke WinEQ. I'll honestly be surprised if lavish fixes it if it did. He has been trying to convince everyone to go to to the inferior isboxer for a long time now. Will make playing with multiple eq sessions much more annoying.

 

[aspire2008]

For sure. I've totally become dependant on WinEQ. I remember when eqwindows (eqwin.exe) first came out back in 2000-2001? I think I still have that exe lying around on the harddrive somewhere. That was a godsend and relied on it for good 4-5 years before wineq.

 

[supertimmy]

does innerspace have configurable hotbuttons for each specific instance you are running? i can't play without that, macroquest or not.

the sky is falling!

 

[Noah3]

no fucking way

If it completely breaks MQ, I hate to imagine the state of EQ after 1-2 years.

if this were to happen id probally only play 2 toons, and the rest id only load in to buff or swap out, but i would never pay for more than my favorite 2 ever again.

 

[Copperhead]

Since EQNext is on the horizon, maybe they think that by killing off MQ completely finally that it'll get folks to congregate over to their new game. Remember, they dont wanna make the same mistake that they did with EQ2. They want and need EQnext to be successful using any means necessary.

I guarantee you that the hit in sub losses would be very very substantial if MQ was killed off. We'd likely see a 30-40% decease in population over a span of a cpl months.

 

[aspire2008]

Totally agree, but it would a domino effect. 30-40% in first couple of months, but then, people that don't use mq2 would loose interest as well, because there are less players to group/raid with, if the mq base of players starts to diminish. Naturally, the game will become overwhelming for the legitimate players and that impact could take up to 1-2 years.

 

[dewey2461]

I had an AutoHotKey script that did most of WinEQ does as long as MQ is working I don't think you have too much to worry about.

 

[Remianen]

Since EQNext is on the horizon, maybe they think that by killing off MQ completely finally that it'll get folks to congregate over to their new game. Remember, they dont wanna make the same mistake that they did with EQ2. They want and need EQnext to be successful using any means necessary.

Uh, no.

What you describe is a course of action fraught with risk. Sony, as a multinational conglomerate, is by its very nature, risk averse. It's also completely freakin' stupid in a business sense. EQNext is two maybe three years away*. So you're going to bury the standard bearer of the franchise in the hopes that maybe, possibly, hopefully its players will switch to the new game.....when it eventually comes out? That makes no sense.

*I say this because of how recently they hired their lead programmer (SKlug) which was only a few months ago. You don't bring a lead programmer into a new game's development after the codebase has been completed. Programmers tend to be divas, at least MMO programmers. No one wants to have to deal with someone else's code before the game's launch. If SKlug is lead, he's most likely the Code Czar and it's being done according to his preferences/specifications within the limits given to him from "on high".

As an aside, for those going to Fan Faire (I refuse to call it whatever the hell they're calling it now), ignore the devs/designers. Talk to the programmers present to see what can or can't be done and why. Get one drunk and you'll get stories you'll be telling your guild for years!

 

[Copperhead]

Since EQNext is on the horizon, maybe they think that by killing off MQ completely finally that it'll get folks to congregate over to their new game. Remember, they dont wanna make the same mistake that they did with EQ2. They want and need EQnext to be successful using any means necessary.

Uh, no.

Uh, yes.

EQ1 isnt pulling that big profit a lot of people seem to think it is. Yeah, it maybe making *some* profit, but its nothing earth-shattering and its likely small enough for them to pull the plug and not even think twice about it when EQNext launches. They want people to go to EQNext....which is not what happened with EQ2 and thus the reason I said what I did about them not wanting to make the same mistake twice.

 

[Villageidiot]

None of us know how much they do make or have much they don't make so everything said on the subject is an opinion. So arguing about it is rather pointless. And for the person that says, i have a friend that works for SoE. Shut it, i don't want to hear about imaginary friends.

 

[[40oz]]

does innerspace have configurable hotbuttons for each specific instance you are running? i can't play without that, macroquest or not.

the sky is falling!

Yes, it does. ISBoxer gives you even more configurability over things as well, but you can just use innerspace - every instance it launches gets the ctrl+alt+# style hotkey that wineq has, and i'm fairly certain that combination is also configurable.

 

[anothergeneric]

Question, if this does severely impact how MQ2 works and it takes several weeks to get it working again, how would this impact paying subscriptions? A few days of being unable to use MQ2 due to a large patch or new expansion is understandable, but if it turns into weeks of downtime, will we be compensated?

 

[wunaye]

I think bugsy costs $60 for a year man I don't think we need compensation. If it was $600 a year then maybe.

 

[anothergeneric]

I think bugsy costs $60 for a year man I don't think we need compensation. If it was $600 a year then maybe.

And $600 for a wealthy man is nothing as well. I do not pay yearly, and I'm not as wealthy as you may be. No one likes to throw money away, regardless of how much it is.