Episodic Eternia

[Theori]

You're right when you say Eternia's strength is its continuous story. No other RP game that has ever gained any interest from me presents the possibility of playing a character for a hundred and twenty ingame years, even if that rarely actually happens. I think you have some really interesting ideas here, but ultimately I think I disagree with this overall.

I can see a few problems with an episodic approach. I'll handle them in dot-points for easier understanding.

• The knowledge that something is coming to an end kills motivation. After the release date of Spires was announced, Eternia went for having a 100+ population to being lucky to find ten online within days. Spires retained a bit more when the release date of Esshar was announced, I think, but I also think that might have been because of the crazy ap modifiers, and I know I personally lost all interest in my character when it was announced because, playing as a child,  I knew I wouldn't have any chance to enjoy them as an adult. A similar thing happened pre-timeskip. People love the continuous story aspect of Eternia -I genuinely think its a big part of the draw- and while there will be slumps, I don't think an episodic approach would help.
  
• On a similar note, imagine you're a new player, coming in and playing for a week, getting really into your character...and then the next 'episode' is announced. Or a player who just finally, after weeks and weeks, finally got a hidden, and then within two weeks your character is gone unless you're lucky enough to become an elder. Eternia as it stands rewards investment in the game, creating a set end point reduces that reward, and I don't think that'd be healthy for the game.
  
• The case of elders in the first place. Either only a few people get to keep the characters they're invested in, or everyone does, except they're older and likely a lot of their goals are overshadowed by the next admin-set arc. The end of Eternia had Cinderfall, a 'good guy' settlement that beat back an attack from the Alliance of Azraelites, and had a pretty strong momentum to overthrowing them. And yet, in Valmasia's lore in Agartha, they lost, because thats what was decided in the lore writing stage of development. Having your goals erased or treated as not impactful when you're doing your best to do so because of decisions outside your control is not a great feeling, and the idea that as a player you can change the world with your actions is a big draw. I feel like even lessening that ultimately doesn't help the game's appeal.
  

Don't get me wrong, I think its a good idea to talk about this, but I don't think Episodic Eternia is the way forward, personally. Eternia works best as a sandbox; rather than eliminating that we should be leaning into it; making it easier for people to pursue their big ideas and the like. Someone recently pitched the idea of 'What if instead of pre-set Kingdoms, everyone started with nothing. No cultural or religious identity, no big city, and were just let free.' I think that would be chaos, but glorious chaos. The ideal of Spires of Agartha, but instead of being colonisers you're the original natives at the dawn of your history, and if you're the first to do something ingame, you're the first to do it in history. I'm not sure the point I'm trying to make, it just sounds neat.