In this day and age there is no reason to go back and start playing an MMO that is more than 3 years old unless you have a bunch of friends in there wooing you. So in other words, this discussion is in the category of "nobody cares" unless the purpose is to potentially upset those who are currently playing one of them.
I played both and can tell you that both "were" amazing games. However, now they are old. I do miss the bg music for EQ2 though.
I disagree with you, older mmo's are whats good, I just recently started playing EQ1 again, still playing UO, am an alpha/beta tester for EVE and would still be playing it if I didn't get perma-banned. New mmo's suck imo
I am sure you have social reasons for going back to EQ1 - there is no way you can convince me that it's because it is the best MMO to play these days.
This is what we call being closed minded.
Agreed, DAOC is still the most enjoyable game on the market for my play style. The only game that has ever come close was Vanguard when it actually had a pvp server with a decent population.
As you can see by my signature, me playing a 9 year old game is not from lack of trying new games, iv tried every major mmo to release since DAOC and still nothing compares in my book. Also this is not because of old friends wooing me back, all of my best mmo friends have gone on to new games or quit MMO's all together.
East Carolina University, Computer Science BS, 2011 -------------------- Current game: DAOC
Games played and quit: L2, PlanetSide, RF Online, GuildWars, SWG, COH/COV, Vanguard, LOTRO, WoW, WW2 Online, FFXI, Auto-Assault, EVE Online, ShadowBane, RYL, Rappelz, Last Chaos, Myst Online, POTBS, EQ2, Warhammer Online, AoC, Aion, Champions Online, Star Trek Online, Allods, Darkfall.
Some people just get too caught up in the whole "newer is better" ideology. Well, it isn't true for wine, music, or video games. Vanguard probably will never be surpassed in scope again. WoW ensured that new games would be simpler and more accessible. And that probably fits with the super-fast gotta-have-it-now need bright shinies and a naked hug every five minutes to enjoy my time sort of mentality that gamers have adopted. It just means that the time for imaginative, grandiose mmoRPG adventures is over. But really, it's better for us older folks this way anyhow. I don't have the 8 hours a day to spend MUDing on pay-per-minute dial up anymore anyway.
It was just a frankenstein monster cooked up to combat WOW. In which it laughably failed.
But SOE keeps and keeps investing all its resources in it ...
Crazy. ... But thats SOE
EQ2 was released before WoW, and included many features WoW didn't adopt until later. Having played both from each's respective beta, I'd put my money on early WoW taking the early MMO crown largely due to the far FAR easier system requirements. In the years since WoW has proven itself and brought many things to the MMO table, but it had extremely little that was "unique" at launch.
Soe moved the release date up in response to blizzards release date, just so they could release EQ2 2 weeks before wow. It isn't like eq2 was on the market for so long that wow emulated many of the games features. Just look at what game went through combat revamps, crafting revamps, questing revamps, etc.
Most of the features that eq2 released with were quickly removed if that says anything. I played on the eq2 test server for the first year after release and for every massive design change that eq2 went through, there were several others that were considered and tested before that one. The devs were litterally all over the map with the direction they were trying to take the game. One day the game would force grouping on players and the next it would be so dumbed down easy nearly anything could be soloed.
If wow took the crown due to performance, then soe would have spent the first few years of eq2 redesigning the engine and making the game run smooth. Soe spent those first few years redesigning the gameplay, because that was the biggest problem the game had.
Some people just get too caught up in the whole "newer is better" ideology. Well, it isn't true for wine, music, or video games. Vanguard probably will never be surpassed in scope again. WoW ensured that new games would be simpler and more accessible. And that probably fits with the super-fast gotta-have-it-now need bright shinies and a naked hug every five minutes to enjoy my time sort of mentality that gamers have adopted. It just means that the time for imaginative, grandiose mmoRPG adventures is over. But really, it's better for us older folks this way anyhow. I don't have the 8 hours a day to spend MUDing on pay-per-minute dial up anymore anyway.
I completely agree with you, lets put it like this...when it comes to metal...namely the Death Metal genre....most bands old material is waaaaay better then the stuff thats coming out today....Morbid Angel, Suffocation, Impaled, Cannibal Corpse, etc... all those bands first few releases are by far their best material....I think older is better imo
Mardy, your revisionist history aside, SOE stated multiple times that EQ2 is not EQ1 with prettier graphics. Any thoughts to the contrary are in your fevered imagination.
This, if you thought that then well its your own fault.
Hes talking about before release...and hes right! i was there myself all we heard while it was in development was that it was going to be an updated EQ! newer graphics and such! not trying to argue here but that was how they started out, they only backtracked and said it was not EQs successor when players left in thier thousands.
Us vets remember clearly unfortunately! thats why we still look for that EQ feel again. But im not saying eq2 isnt a good game in its own right, it is!
EQ2 as a game went through 2 years of revamps, changes, tweaks, and engine performance improvements before Smed finally came out and said, yeah, we probably should've called this a different name, because EQ2 is nothing like EQ1. By the way, EQ1 remained to be a higher populated game than EQ2 up until recently about a year and half ago. Please don't use Vanguard as a benchmark when comparing games like EQ1. EQ1 is a success story all around, the game that was #1 on the market for 4 years, the game that jump started the 3D MMO genre. Vanguard....failure all around, from beginning to the end, everything about Vanguard was a failure.
It was Meridian 59 that started the 3d mmo market in 1996.
I have tried both games a couple of times each and Vanguard wins hands down. EQII just didn't have the feel that either EQ or Vanguard has. It maybe prettier (I don't really agree) then Vanguard but I could never get past a month of play on EQII. Very dull without any hooks for me to strive for. Vanguard I resubbed to a couple of months ago, and while it still has some lag and bugs, is a superior game. I too have found myself jerking away from the monitor going...oh damn I have to get to sleep for work in the morning! It is more immersive then any other game out there including EQ. With all the changes to EQ I just don't even find the original EQ as compelling as it was. I find myself when gathering in Vanguard panning around to look at the landscape. Some areas are average other areas are stunning. Character creation is better then many mmo's. Combat is standard but that is a plus to me. I don't want to have to think too much how do I win this fight. I just want the tools necessary to have a decent chance to win. If it were a PVP game that would be different, then I'd want as many tools as I could get to maximize the chance to win. Being PVE I really don't care as much, while fighting is important it's not the hook for me.
I think one of the major reasons Vanguard appeals to me over any other game right now is the community. It's mature, speaks fully, (no trash talking) mostly without any antagonizm to new players, amazingly helpful to each other and strangers. I've grouped up easily, something difficult in most other games if you're not known to them. The community are very upset about SOE's part time developers with Vanguard and understandably so. This game could have been at the top of the lists with a little TLC.
I did try this game at launch and stuck with it for 4 months, even after friends moved on to other games. Finally I couldn't take the extreme lag and bugs and left. I was also a bit ticked off about the failure of the McQuaid/Butler team to hang tough with this game and SOE's failure to move this game to the forefront it where it should have been.
Personally I like Vanguard far better than EQ2. I just do not see what the people playing EQ2 see in that game. To each his own, but it certainly could not get my interest. I like big worlds, the reason for my preference for Vanguard.
Nothing wrong with old games, I have gone back and played AC1 even with the weak graphics. Probably one of the better MMO's today because your character is not pin holed into a restrictive class.
As to history, UO was the first MMO as far as I am concerned, mainly because Meridian 59 was pretty much invisible to most of us. It never appeared in stores and the net was still in it's infancy so finding games on it was a bit problematic. EQ took over that mantle because it had the social tools that UO lacked.
As to EQ2, SOE rushed it out as a sordid buggy mess, just to beat Blizzard out the door. It took SOE over a year to make it playable. It would not run well on most of the computers out there at the time. Vanguard was also far from finished when released, but Brad was clueless when it came to how to run a development studio and misspent millions. It also did not run well on most computers when released.
The OP failed to mention Vanguards unique diplomacy system which I have not seen in any other game and found to be challenging and fun.
Maybe he also missed the point of the landscape of EQ2 being broken. It is supposed to be! The world was shattered by the angry gods for all the raiding of their planes done in EQ1.
Maybe they could have done something different to allow travel between the various land masses like maybe a boat ride where you get n the boat and it takes off, zones and then you are landing at your destination.
The OP failed to mention Vanguards unique diplomacy system which I have not seen in any other game and found to be challenging and fun.
Maybe he also missed the point of the landscape of EQ2 being broken. It is supposed to be! The world was shattered by the angry gods for all the raiding of their planes done in EQ1.
Maybe they could have done something different to allow travel between the various land masses like maybe a boat ride where you get n the boat and it takes off, zones and then you are landing at your destination.
That was just SOE's way of coming up with an excuse for small ass un-inspiring zones.
First I would like to say excellent write up and comparison. Sadly I have never played Vanguard but have on two different occasions did a trial of EQ 2. I played EQ for five long years and would totally agree it is not a game for one who does not learn quickly.
I will agree that from the little bit I expierenced in my trails of EQ 2 the graphics were really nice and yes there was population. I can't say that they were friendly or helpful from my expierence but they were there. It is somewhat different from EQ in many aspects yet the same as well. But my little 6 levels that took no time to get but left me the having to purchase it to find out what the rest was going to be just wasn't enough to make me want to go that far.
I haven't ever seen a trail for Vanguard so I have never tried it but with the exception of a small population it really sounds like a game I could enjoy overall.
Again great article and will be looking to see the next part.
I think you're overly harsh on EQ2 in the world / difficulty sense. Don't get me wrong, I agree that EQ2 is not very immersive, compared to something like LoTRO, but if you look at the way the game launched (and played for the first couple of years), most adventurers did have to run everywhere, they couldn't afford the bells and getting to faraway lands required long access quests and travel on ships.
Over the years, these things have been taken away in order to let new players progress through the game without major roadblocks - this is done mainly because with the game being old and most players beying of higher level, new players no longer have the benefit of large population / grouping pool as they level up, so keeping the zones at same difficulty becomes excessively difficult.
You also did not mention that Vanguard did something very similar when they completely destroyed all the amazing race-specific starting areas and started to funnel everyone though the exact same generic experience. It was a terrible move, but it was necessary for the population.
If you were to compare the first 2 years of EQ2 to the first 2 years of Vanguard, the "Everquest'ness" factor would be a lot closer. The only reason vanguard hasn't changed is that SOE hasn't bothered to put in the money.
Like I said, I always hold up EQ2 as an example of how NOT to create an immersive world, but I think the points you made specifically are missing some key information.
"Id rather work on something with great potential than on fulfilling a promise of mediocrity."
- Raph Koster
Tried: AO,EQ,EQ2,DAoC,SWG,AA,SB,HZ,CoX,PS,GA,TR,IV,GnH,EVE, PP,DnL,WAR,MxO,SWG,FE,VG,AoC,DDO,LoTRO,Rift,TOR,Aion,Tera,TSW,GW2,DCUO,CO,STO Favourites: AO,SWG,EVE,TR,LoTRO,TSW,EQ2, Firefall Currently Playing: ESO
It was just a frankenstein monster cooked up to combat WOW. In which it laughably failed.
But SOE keeps and keeps investing all its resources in it ...
Crazy. ... But thats SOE
EQ2 was released before WoW, and included many features WoW didn't adopt until later. Having played both from each's respective beta, I'd put my money on early WoW taking the early MMO crown largely due to the far FAR easier system requirements. In the years since WoW has proven itself and brought many things to the MMO table, but it had extremely little that was "unique" at launch.
Soe moved the release date up in response to blizzards release date, just so they could release EQ2 2 weeks before wow. It isn't like eq2 was on the market for so long that wow emulated many of the games features. Just look at what game went through combat revamps, crafting revamps, questing revamps, etc.
Most of the features that eq2 released with were quickly removed if that says anything. I played on the eq2 test server for the first year after release and for every massive design change that eq2 went through, there were several others that were considered and tested before that one. The devs were litterally all over the map with the direction they were trying to take the game. One day the game would force grouping on players and the next it would be so dumbed down easy nearly anything could be soloed.
If wow took the crown due to performance, then soe would have spent the first few years of eq2 redesigning the engine and making the game run smooth. Soe spent those first few years redesigning the gameplay, because that was the biggest problem the game had.
"Soe moved the release date up in response to blizzards release date, just so they could release EQ2 2 weeks before wow. It isn't like eq2 was on the market for so long that wow emulated many of the games features. Just look at what game went through combat revamps, crafting revamps, questing revamps, etc."
Which is completely irrelevant to the claim that EQ2 was "cooked up to combat WoW," and in fact further disputes the claim, so thanks for the back up.
"Most of the features that eq2 released with were quickly removed if that says anything. I played on the eq2 test server for the first year after release and for every massive design change that eq2 went through, there were several others that were considered and tested before that one. The devs were litterally all over the map with the direction they were trying to take the game. One day the game would force grouping on players and the next it would be so dumbed down easy nearly anything could be soloed. "
EQ2 remains my longest played MMO and that is grossly exaggerated, feel free to provide a link citing how "MOST" of the features were removed. Regardless, it's still irrelevant to the claim that EQ2 was created to combat WoW, both games were in development simultaneously. I'd also point out that WoW has undergone far, FAR, more massive design changes than EQ2 has - to include dumbing down. Once Cataclysm hits the servers, any comparison between EQ2 and WoW design changes will be even more laughable.
If wow took the crown due to performance, then soe would have spent the first few years of eq2 redesigning the engine and making the game run smooth. Soe spent those first few years redesigning the gameplay, because that was the biggest problem the game had.
EQ2 ran perfectly smooth for me, but my gaming system usually run ahead of the bell curve. It sounds like you are implying WoW had no gameplay issues, but yet here we are years later with so many changes that the early game is considered a separate entity all together and people run clandestine "vanilla" servers on the side. Don't get me wrong, I enjoy both games and currently log more time on WoW - but any claim that a game was specifically created to combat another game that wasn't even released and was being developed concurrently yet is almost impossible, and if you have truly played both games then you realize how ludicrous that is as they are night and day different games. If EQ2's goal was to mimic WoW, they would have done it by now and play similar to Aion/RoM/Allods.
It was just a frankenstein monster cooked up to combat WOW. In which it laughably failed.
But SOE keeps and keeps investing all its resources in it ...
Crazy. ... But thats SOE
EQ2 was released before WoW, and included many features WoW didn't adopt until later. Having played both from each's respective beta, I'd put my money on early WoW taking the early MMO crown largely due to the far FAR easier system requirements. In the years since WoW has proven itself and brought many things to the MMO table, but it had extremely little that was "unique" at launch.
Soe moved the release date up in response to blizzards release date, just so they could release EQ2 2 weeks before wow. It isn't like eq2 was on the market for so long that wow emulated many of the games features. Just look at what game went through combat revamps, crafting revamps, questing revamps, etc.
Most of the features that eq2 released with were quickly removed if that says anything. I played on the eq2 test server for the first year after release and for every massive design change that eq2 went through, there were several others that were considered and tested before that one. The devs were litterally all over the map with the direction they were trying to take the game. One day the game would force grouping on players and the next it would be so dumbed down easy nearly anything could be soloed.
If wow took the crown due to performance, then soe would have spent the first few years of eq2 redesigning the engine and making the game run smooth. Soe spent those first few years redesigning the gameplay, because that was the biggest problem the game had.
"Soe moved the release date up in response to blizzards release date, just so they could release EQ2 2 weeks before wow. It isn't like eq2 was on the market for so long that wow emulated many of the games features. Just look at what game went through combat revamps, crafting revamps, questing revamps, etc."
Which is completely irrelevant to the claim that EQ2 was "cooked up to combat WoW," and in fact further disputes the claim, so thanks for the back up.
"Most of the features that eq2 released with were quickly removed if that says anything. I played on the eq2 test server for the first year after release and for every massive design change that eq2 went through, there were several others that were considered and tested before that one. The devs were litterally all over the map with the direction they were trying to take the game. One day the game would force grouping on players and the next it would be so dumbed down easy nearly anything could be soloed. "
EQ2 remains my longest played MMO and that is grossly exaggerated, feel free to provide a link citing how "MOST" of the features were removed. Regardless, it's still irrelevant to the claim that EQ2 was created to combat WoW, both games were in development simultaneously. I'd also point out that WoW has undergone far, FAR, more massive design changes than EQ2 has - to include dumbing down. Once Cataclysm hits the servers, any comparison between EQ2 and WoW design changes will be even more laughable.
If wow took the crown due to performance, then soe would have spent the first few years of eq2 redesigning the engine and making the game run smooth. Soe spent those first few years redesigning the gameplay, because that was the biggest problem the game had.
It sounds like you are implying WoW had no gameplay issues, but yet here we are years later with so many changes that the early game is considered a separate entity all together and people run clandestine "vanilla" servers on the side. Don't get me wrong, I enjoy both games and currently log more time on WoW - but any claim that a game was created to combat another game that wasn't even released yet is insane, if you have truly played both games then you realize how ludicrous that is.
And stole there character/world design cues from the Warhammer universe. If we are opening cans of worms, we may as well go all out with the factuals.
Which was copied from LOTR
Not so much the character design (i.e. visuals) as Tolkiens original stories weren't illustrated (well, he did do sketches but nothing akin to Warhammer's look). The Warhammer fantasy setting was inspired by several great fantasy worlds to include Howard's Conan and even D&D's Greyhawk as well as Tolkien. You make a solid point on the hierarchy of fantasy inspiration.
I was more specifically referring to the outcry that Warhammer Online was copying the character design of World of Warcraft, when Warhammer has been using that flavor of characters since the mid-80's at least... and the Warcraft universe began (Orcs & Humans) as a tech demo Blizzard created for Games Workshop in order to try to coax them into allowing Blizzard to create a Warhammer game.
Again, great point though OoMpAlOmPaZ, almost all modern fantasy can trace it's roots back to the grandfathers of the genre.
And stole there character/world design cues from the Warhammer universe. If we are opening cans of worms, we may as well go all out with the factuals.
Which was copied from LOTR
Not so much the character design (i.e. visuals) as Tolkiens original stories weren't illustrated (well, he did do sketches but nothing akin to Warhammer's look). The Warhammer fantasy setting was inspired by several great fantasy worlds to include Howard's Conan and even D&D's Greyhawk as well as Tolkien. You make a solid point on the hierarchy of fantasy inspiration.
I was more specifically referring to the outcry that Warhammer Online was copying the character design of World of Warcraft, when Warhammer has been using that flavor of characters since the mid-80's at least... and the Warcraft universe began (Orcs & Humans) as a tech demo Blizzard created for Games Workshop in order to try to coax them into allowing Blizzard to create a Warhammer game.
Again, great point though OoMpAlOmPaZ, almost all modern fantasy can trace it's roots back to the grandfathers of the genre.
Heh it's the morning and I got a massive headache and I didn't read that part of your post, well I did but it didn't comprehend in my head haha
And stole there character/world design cues from the Warhammer universe. If we are opening cans of worms, we may as well go all out with the factuals.
Which was copied from LOTR
Not so much the character design (i.e. visuals) as Tolkiens original stories weren't illustrated (well, he did do sketches but nothing akin to Warhammer's look). The Warhammer fantasy setting was inspired by several great fantasy worlds to include Howard's Conan and even D&D's Greyhawk as well as Tolkien. You make a solid point on the hierarchy of fantasy inspiration.
I was more specifically referring to the outcry that Warhammer Online was copying the character design of World of Warcraft, when Warhammer has been using that flavor of characters since the mid-80's at least... and the Warcraft universe began (Orcs & Humans) as a tech demo Blizzard created for Games Workshop in order to try to coax them into allowing Blizzard to create a Warhammer game.
Again, great point though OoMpAlOmPaZ, almost all modern fantasy can trace it's roots back to the grandfathers of the genre.
Heh it's the morning and I got a massive headache and I didn't read that part of your post, well I did but it didn't comprehend in my head haha
And stole there character/world design cues from the Warhammer universe. If we are opening cans of worms, we may as well go all out with the factuals.
Which was copied from LOTR
Not so much the character design (i.e. visuals) as Tolkiens original stories weren't illustrated (well, he did do sketches but nothing akin to Warhammer's look). The Warhammer fantasy setting was inspired by several great fantasy worlds to include Howard's Conan and even D&D's Greyhawk as well as Tolkien. You make a solid point on the hierarchy of fantasy inspiration.
I was more specifically referring to the outcry that Warhammer Online was copying the character design of World of Warcraft, when Warhammer has been using that flavor of characters since the mid-80's at least... and the Warcraft universe began (Orcs & Humans) as a tech demo Blizzard created for Games Workshop in order to try to coax them into allowing Blizzard to create a Warhammer game.
Again, great point though OoMpAlOmPaZ, almost all modern fantasy can trace it's roots back to the grandfathers of the genre.
Heh it's the morning and I got a massive headache and I didn't read that part of your post, well I did but it didn't comprehend in my head haha
Blizzard did indeed rip-off warhammer.
That reminds me... I need to get on some coffee
I am making some vanilla/hazlenut coffee right now and playing EQ1 lol
After getting the only two decent mmo's on the market in WOW vs. LOTRO for the first article I should have no we could oly go downhill from there but I would have hoped they would have atleast went with EVE vs STO/SWG before busting out this matchup of has beens.
but yeah, to call this game Fantastic is like calling Twilight the Godfather of vampire movies....
The article exposes something I've long felt about EQ2. EQ2 gets it's biggest criticism not for what it is, which is a fun, pretty 2nd generation MMO, but what it isn't, i.e. a direct port of Everquest with new graphics.
This despite SOE saying at length that they weren't trying to do that. So many EQ1 vets claim that they are looking for a game like that, but that's what Vanguard was supposed to be. It failed miserably and had to be rescued by SOE. Those boring tedious games like EQ1 are in the past and will stay there, thank goodness.
You're wrong with your history & facts. SOE was the one trying to sell EQ1 players that EQ2 was going to be an updated EQ1 with newer engine, newer graphics, but EQ1 gameplay. As a result, many EQ1 players (myself included) flooded into EQ2 on november 2004. We went, we saw, we played, and we went w t f. EQ2 turned out to be nothing like EQ1, it played nothing like EQ1, and it even didn't feel like EQ1. Hello EQ2 freeport, you aren't what I remembered, and I personally don't like zoning 5x just to get through a darn city.
So those of us disappointed with EQ2 either went back to EQ1, or went on to play WoW, which ironically, was a game more like EQ1 at launch than EQ2 was. But that shouldn't surprise anybody, WoW was developed by ex-EQ1 players. Vanilla WoW had everything EQ1 had, minus some changes to the tedious parts such as death penalty & exp loss. EQ2 lost out big time, they lost EQ1 players' support, and they failed to attract the newer generation playerbase.
EQ2 as a game went through 2 years of revamps, changes, tweaks, and engine performance improvements before Smed finally came out and said, yeah, we probably should've called this a different name, because EQ2 is nothing like EQ1. By the way, EQ1 remained to be a higher populated game than EQ2 up until recently about a year and half ago. Please don't use Vanguard as a benchmark when comparing games like EQ1. EQ1 is a success story all around, the game that was #1 on the market for 4 years, the game that jump started the 3D MMO genre. Vanguard....failure all around, from beginning to the end, everything about Vanguard was a failure.
Vanguard failed to live up to its hype, mainly because Brad McQuaid couldn't manage $30 million budget. He spent 5 years developing a game and couldn't deliver, he went over budget and the game launched in a poor state. Most of us that beta'ed and played Vanguard agree it was at LEAST 2 years from being finished. Heck the game released without visible player helmets, no raid interface, and a very very unoptimized engine. How in the world could you release a game in 2007 in such a bad state? People like to bash SOE for their lack of support for Vanguard. If I ran SOE, I would've never bought Vanguard, I would've told Brad to fail and not try to ever run a company again. The guy has creative ideas, but the guy doesn't know how to manage a company for crap.
Please for people trying to use Vanguard's failure as a way to bash EQ1 or old school gameplay, you aren't being fair and you know it. Vanguard was a failure all around, inside out, from beginning to the end. Why are people still talking about Vanguard when it has soon to be 1 server with SOE admitting that the game has no full time developers working on it, I just don't know. Let Vanguard rest in peace, the game needs to die so maybe someone else out there can make a new Vanguard with a better game engine, a finished game at launch, and a company that doesn't bankrupt within 3 months of launch.
It's how I feel about it. I used to be a VG fanboy, spent a year and lots of money & time playing it. But it does tick me off when people try to use Vanguard's failures to say why a new EQ1 would fail. Yeah, so are we to say newer games based on newer generation games should always succeed? Hello Warhammer Online (aka WoW-wanna be), hello AoC, hello all the other new overhyped games that released but don't deliver. Failed games are failed games, they have nothing to do with older games. They are failed games of their own, they failed for many different reasons. Vanguard didn't fail because it was built to be like EQ1, Vanguard failed because it was released as a broken game, with broken promises, and a very badly managed company that went bankrupt within 3 months of launch.
Amen brotha, UO (Pre-Trammel), EQ1 (Pre-SOL), EVE (Pre-Exodus), AC1 still remain the best mmo's ever created.
I would have to add Planetside and City of Heroes to that list. They were excellent MMO's when they were at their peak.
Comments
Agreed, DAOC is still the most enjoyable game on the market for my play style. The only game that has ever come close was Vanguard when it actually had a pvp server with a decent population.
As you can see by my signature, me playing a 9 year old game is not from lack of trying new games, iv tried every major mmo to release since DAOC and still nothing compares in my book. Also this is not because of old friends wooing me back, all of my best mmo friends have gone on to new games or quit MMO's all together.
East Carolina University, Computer Science BS, 2011
--------------------
Current game: DAOC
Games played and quit: L2, PlanetSide, RF Online, GuildWars, SWG, COH/COV, Vanguard, LOTRO, WoW, WW2 Online, FFXI, Auto-Assault, EVE Online, ShadowBane, RYL, Rappelz, Last Chaos, Myst Online, POTBS, EQ2, Warhammer Online, AoC, Aion, Champions Online, Star Trek Online, Allods, Darkfall.
Waiting on: Earthrise
Names: Citio, Goldie, Sportacus
Some people just get too caught up in the whole "newer is better" ideology. Well, it isn't true for wine, music, or video games. Vanguard probably will never be surpassed in scope again. WoW ensured that new games would be simpler and more accessible. And that probably fits with the super-fast gotta-have-it-now need bright shinies and a naked hug every five minutes to enjoy my time sort of mentality that gamers have adopted. It just means that the time for imaginative, grandiose mmoRPG adventures is over. But really, it's better for us older folks this way anyhow. I don't have the 8 hours a day to spend MUDing on pay-per-minute dial up anymore anyway.
I have to give the ole who cares shrug on this one, I have played both games, not a fan of either or SOE.. /shrug
Soe moved the release date up in response to blizzards release date, just so they could release EQ2 2 weeks before wow. It isn't like eq2 was on the market for so long that wow emulated many of the games features. Just look at what game went through combat revamps, crafting revamps, questing revamps, etc.
Most of the features that eq2 released with were quickly removed if that says anything. I played on the eq2 test server for the first year after release and for every massive design change that eq2 went through, there were several others that were considered and tested before that one. The devs were litterally all over the map with the direction they were trying to take the game. One day the game would force grouping on players and the next it would be so dumbed down easy nearly anything could be soloed.
If wow took the crown due to performance, then soe would have spent the first few years of eq2 redesigning the engine and making the game run smooth. Soe spent those first few years redesigning the gameplay, because that was the biggest problem the game had.
I completely agree with you, lets put it like this...when it comes to metal...namely the Death Metal genre....most bands old material is waaaaay better then the stuff thats coming out today....Morbid Angel, Suffocation, Impaled, Cannibal Corpse, etc... all those bands first few releases are by far their best material....I think older is better imo
Hes talking about before release...and hes right! i was there myself
all we heard while it was in development was that it was going to be an updated EQ! newer graphics and such! not trying to argue here but that was how they started out, they only backtracked and said it was not EQs successor when players left in thier thousands.
Us vets remember clearly unfortunately! thats why we still look for that EQ feel again. But im not saying eq2 isnt a good game in its own right, it is!
I have tried both games a couple of times each and Vanguard wins hands down. EQII just didn't have the feel that either EQ or Vanguard has. It maybe prettier (I don't really agree) then Vanguard but I could never get past a month of play on EQII. Very dull without any hooks for me to strive for. Vanguard I resubbed to a couple of months ago, and while it still has some lag and bugs, is a superior game. I too have found myself jerking away from the monitor going...oh damn I have to get to sleep for work in the morning! It is more immersive then any other game out there including EQ. With all the changes to EQ I just don't even find the original EQ as compelling as it was. I find myself when gathering in Vanguard panning around to look at the landscape. Some areas are average other areas are stunning. Character creation is better then many mmo's. Combat is standard but that is a plus to me. I don't want to have to think too much how do I win this fight. I just want the tools necessary to have a decent chance to win. If it were a PVP game that would be different, then I'd want as many tools as I could get to maximize the chance to win. Being PVE I really don't care as much, while fighting is important it's not the hook for me.
I think one of the major reasons Vanguard appeals to me over any other game right now is the community. It's mature, speaks fully, (no trash talking) mostly without any antagonizm to new players, amazingly helpful to each other and strangers. I've grouped up easily, something difficult in most other games if you're not known to them. The community are very upset about SOE's part time developers with Vanguard and understandably so. This game could have been at the top of the lists with a little TLC.
I did try this game at launch and stuck with it for 4 months, even after friends moved on to other games. Finally I couldn't take the extreme lag and bugs and left. I was also a bit ticked off about the failure of the McQuaid/Butler team to hang tough with this game and SOE's failure to move this game to the forefront it where it should have been.
I am very happy I've tried it again.
I kind of sort of find it funny that were comparing Vangaurd to EQ2.
Vangaurd has about 50-80K subs on one server. EQ2 has about 250k-300k subs spread out across mutltiple servers.
So saying Vangaurd is ahead of eq2, I have to really laugh at that.
Oh well. It worth a chuckle to point that out.
Personally I like Vanguard far better than EQ2. I just do not see what the people playing EQ2 see in that game. To each his own, but it certainly could not get my interest. I like big worlds, the reason for my preference for Vanguard.
Nothing wrong with old games, I have gone back and played AC1 even with the weak graphics. Probably one of the better MMO's today because your character is not pin holed into a restrictive class.
As to history, UO was the first MMO as far as I am concerned, mainly because Meridian 59 was pretty much invisible to most of us. It never appeared in stores and the net was still in it's infancy so finding games on it was a bit problematic. EQ took over that mantle because it had the social tools that UO lacked.
As to EQ2, SOE rushed it out as a sordid buggy mess, just to beat Blizzard out the door. It took SOE over a year to make it playable. It would not run well on most of the computers out there at the time. Vanguard was also far from finished when released, but Brad was clueless when it came to how to run a development studio and misspent millions. It also did not run well on most computers when released.
The OP failed to mention Vanguards unique diplomacy system which I have not seen in any other game and found to be challenging and fun.
Maybe he also missed the point of the landscape of EQ2 being broken. It is supposed to be! The world was shattered by the angry gods for all the raiding of their planes done in EQ1.
Maybe they could have done something different to allow travel between the various land masses like maybe a boat ride where you get n the boat and it takes off, zones and then you are landing at your destination.
That was just SOE's way of coming up with an excuse for small ass un-inspiring zones.
First I would like to say excellent write up and comparison. Sadly I have never played Vanguard but have on two different occasions did a trial of EQ 2. I played EQ for five long years and would totally agree it is not a game for one who does not learn quickly.
I will agree that from the little bit I expierenced in my trails of EQ 2 the graphics were really nice and yes there was population. I can't say that they were friendly or helpful from my expierence but they were there. It is somewhat different from EQ in many aspects yet the same as well. But my little 6 levels that took no time to get but left me the having to purchase it to find out what the rest was going to be just wasn't enough to make me want to go that far.
I haven't ever seen a trail for Vanguard so I have never tried it but with the exception of a small population it really sounds like a game I could enjoy overall.
Again great article and will be looking to see the next part.
Gikku
I think you're overly harsh on EQ2 in the world / difficulty sense. Don't get me wrong, I agree that EQ2 is not very immersive, compared to something like LoTRO, but if you look at the way the game launched (and played for the first couple of years), most adventurers did have to run everywhere, they couldn't afford the bells and getting to faraway lands required long access quests and travel on ships.
Over the years, these things have been taken away in order to let new players progress through the game without major roadblocks - this is done mainly because with the game being old and most players beying of higher level, new players no longer have the benefit of large population / grouping pool as they level up, so keeping the zones at same difficulty becomes excessively difficult.
You also did not mention that Vanguard did something very similar when they completely destroyed all the amazing race-specific starting areas and started to funnel everyone though the exact same generic experience. It was a terrible move, but it was necessary for the population.
If you were to compare the first 2 years of EQ2 to the first 2 years of Vanguard, the "Everquest'ness" factor would be a lot closer. The only reason vanguard hasn't changed is that SOE hasn't bothered to put in the money.
Like I said, I always hold up EQ2 as an example of how NOT to create an immersive world, but I think the points you made specifically are missing some key information.
"Id rather work on something with great potential than on fulfilling a promise of mediocrity."
- Raph Koster
Tried: AO,EQ,EQ2,DAoC,SWG,AA,SB,HZ,CoX,PS,GA,TR,IV,GnH,EVE, PP,DnL,WAR,MxO,SWG,FE,VG,AoC,DDO,LoTRO,Rift,TOR,Aion,Tera,TSW,GW2,DCUO,CO,STO
Favourites: AO,SWG,EVE,TR,LoTRO,TSW,EQ2, Firefall
Currently Playing: ESO
"Soe moved the release date up in response to blizzards release date, just so they could release EQ2 2 weeks before wow. It isn't like eq2 was on the market for so long that wow emulated many of the games features. Just look at what game went through combat revamps, crafting revamps, questing revamps, etc."
Which is completely irrelevant to the claim that EQ2 was "cooked up to combat WoW," and in fact further disputes the claim, so thanks for the back up.
"Most of the features that eq2 released with were quickly removed if that says anything. I played on the eq2 test server for the first year after release and for every massive design change that eq2 went through, there were several others that were considered and tested before that one. The devs were litterally all over the map with the direction they were trying to take the game. One day the game would force grouping on players and the next it would be so dumbed down easy nearly anything could be soloed. "
EQ2 remains my longest played MMO and that is grossly exaggerated, feel free to provide a link citing how "MOST" of the features were removed. Regardless, it's still irrelevant to the claim that EQ2 was created to combat WoW, both games were in development simultaneously. I'd also point out that WoW has undergone far, FAR, more massive design changes than EQ2 has - to include dumbing down. Once Cataclysm hits the servers, any comparison between EQ2 and WoW design changes will be even more laughable.
If wow took the crown due to performance, then soe would have spent the first few years of eq2 redesigning the engine and making the game run smooth. Soe spent those first few years redesigning the gameplay, because that was the biggest problem the game had.
EQ2 ran perfectly smooth for me, but my gaming system usually run ahead of the bell curve. It sounds like you are implying WoW had no gameplay issues, but yet here we are years later with so many changes that the early game is considered a separate entity all together and people run clandestine "vanilla" servers on the side. Don't get me wrong, I enjoy both games and currently log more time on WoW - but any claim that a game was specifically created to combat another game that wasn't even released and was being developed concurrently yet is almost impossible, and if you have truly played both games then you realize how ludicrous that is as they are night and day different games. If EQ2's goal was to mimic WoW, they would have done it by now and play similar to Aion/RoM/Allods.
WoW copied AC2, just to end that argument.
And stole there character/world design cues from the Warhammer universe. If we are opening cans of worms, we may as well go all out with the factuals.
Which was copied from LOTR
Not so much the character design (i.e. visuals) as Tolkiens original stories weren't illustrated (well, he did do sketches but nothing akin to Warhammer's look). The Warhammer fantasy setting was inspired by several great fantasy worlds to include Howard's Conan and even D&D's Greyhawk as well as Tolkien. You make a solid point on the hierarchy of fantasy inspiration.
I was more specifically referring to the outcry that Warhammer Online was copying the character design of World of Warcraft, when Warhammer has been using that flavor of characters since the mid-80's at least... and the Warcraft universe began (Orcs & Humans) as a tech demo Blizzard created for Games Workshop in order to try to coax them into allowing Blizzard to create a Warhammer game.
Again, great point though OoMpAlOmPaZ, almost all modern fantasy can trace it's roots back to the grandfathers of the genre.
Heh it's the morning and I got a massive headache and I didn't read that part of your post, well I did but it didn't comprehend in my head haha
Blizzard did indeed rip-off warhammer.
That reminds me... I need to get on some coffee
I am making some vanilla/hazlenut coffee right now
and playing EQ1 lol
After getting the only two decent mmo's on the market in WOW vs. LOTRO for the first article I should have no we could oly go downhill from there but I would have hoped they would have atleast went with EVE vs STO/SWG before busting out this matchup of has beens.
but yeah, to call this game Fantastic is like calling Twilight the Godfather of vampire movies....
I would have to add Planetside and City of Heroes to that list. They were excellent MMO's when they were at their peak.
lots of lulz here.
eq2 good graphics? since when. did i miss something?
I7@4ghz, 5970@ 1 ghz/5ghz, water cooled||Former setups Byggblogg||Byggblogg 2|| Msi Wind u100