I have been out of the loop at bit can someone give me a quick and dirty bullet list of how todays MMORPGs are different from EQ2?
Considerably better Graphics Engine (and utilization of system resources)
More Balanced, and Less Redundant classes
PvP that actually functions halfway decently
Better UI
More Responsive Developer Team - Summoner scout pets were broken for several (as in, 5+) years before developers addressed the issue, for example.
Less Stale Development Team (Some of those Daybreak Developers are well past their Expiration Date)
An Uninstaller that Works Consistently (will never install another Daybreak Game, because their uninstallers are almost always broken, forcing a manual Uninstall)
EQ2 has no robust Add-On System. Even UI Customization is fairly limited.
The Map System is EQ2 is awful.
EQ2 is mechanically overcomplicated, because the developers never bothered to keep the game "mechanically tidy." This resulted in tons of stats for everything, and stats that became useless remaining on items. They didn't address this until after DoV release, to some extent, when they did a "template" reallocation of stats on gear (making some lower level gear completely out of balance, trivializing the content even for true low level characters - not just mentored toons). BTW, they soon added even more stats to the game, which, pretty much, brought it right back up to where it was before (casters not looking for melee stats, etc.).
Crit Mit is probably one of the dumbest mechanics that I've ever seen in an MMORPG. The idea that content should be balanced around players critting 100% of their hits/casts is legitimately stupid. Crits are basically normal hits in that game. This shows just how inept the development team was.
As far as content is concerned, much of it was fairly similar to World of Warcraft.
I actually found raiding to be more fun in EQ2 due to the lack of Add-ons like DBM, GTFO, etc. It make the process or learning an encounter take considerably longer, which actually strengthened guild ties and increased the satisfaction of defeating an encounter.
People in EQ2 didn't generally share raid strats - the way you can find WoW raid strats on YouTube days after the content is released...
EQ2 still had large contested zones where you could farm legitimately useful gear. WoW puts these things in World Quests... I prefer EQ's method, for fairly obvious reasons.
I think EQ2 dungeons had more innovative encounter design than most WoW dungeons (many of which simply ape raid encounters).
Classes had a bit more room for variety of playstyle in EQ2 than in WoW, where you have a pretty hard meta that you're going to be working against - especially with the public logging that goes on.
I much prefer EQ2's AA system to the Talent and Artifact system in WoW. I consider it to be the gold standard of post-leveling, XP-based character progression. Many of the points are really powerful, but you don't simply max everything out like in EQ1. This leaves room for a lot of variety - much more so than in WoW. There aren't too many that the grind becomes unbearable, either.
Eq2 is actually the father of clones,Blizzard execs known for playing EQ imo were obviously in the loop on test servers as well for EQ2 so most likely were copying EQ2 which just so happens turns out Wow looks exactly like EQ2.
So in that sense EQ2 looks like Wow and all clones of now when talking modern you did not say MMORPG just MMO which of course is not the same thing.
Pretty much EVERYTHING i have seen the last 3-5 years is awful,it all looks like fast 1-2 year games rushing in with cash shops.Some are calling these mmo's,idc what they call them,they are off my to do list ,filed under garbage.
Games always have some mild differences but it is what you actually do in game and how you do it that makes a game different.In that sense EQ2 is exactly like 99% of the games,the few different were UO,FFXI,EQ1 etc etc.ALL the clone games are imo the anti MMO,they are designed to SOLO,designed to vee line to yellow markers,you could in essence remove the npc altogether as it is the yellow marker players are aiming at.
Obviously my opinion but even to this day EQ2 looks as good as most games because the detail and lighting was ahead of it's time while most games use terrible or cheap lighting often with no shaders and low detail.EQ2 is actually the template i use still to this day to rate and judge other mmorpg's of that type because it does so much.I don't have enough time and writing capacity to mention al the subtle little things EQ2 does beyond what all the Wow and clones do.
Agree. One of the worst misconceptions regarding these games is that EQ2 copied WoW. In reality, both games use the same formula, and EQ2 was released first.
I think the system requirements for EQ2 pretty much killed it, given the era it released in. It pretty much anointed WoW the default playable MMORPG for the masses, Lol.
I don't think it's possible to overstate just how badly EQ2 ran compared to WoW on 2003-5 era hardware, unless you were one of those people playing EQ on a $1,500 machine.
I don't recall liking much much about EQ2 when it first came out. My first experience was fighting some mobs and seeing someone in trouble. I couldn't even help said person because of the consent system they had in place. Spirit of the Wolf would drop during combat. The mobs were clustered together in large groups and targeting was fairly impossible. Pulling a single mob out of a group with lull spells just couldn't be done as there were just too many and too close together. For some reason, the experience dept and the way the towns were situated annoyed me a lot. Each person got their own instance house to decorate and I'm just not into that type of thing. When playing WoW the majority of things were almost the same as in EQ so it was more comfortable a transition for me. The mobs and world were setup in a similar fashion. Game mechanics worked almost the same. Overall for me, it was just a lot more enjoyable. The only difference was that mobs had leashes, only some mobs were elite, and all classes could solo to an extent.
I was so hyped for this after their first showing of the game, and was so close to backing them on KS, i never did for some reason, and watching the latest gameplay vids, im glad i didn't. The whole QTE bars for basic attacks has to go, it looks decent in some aspects, but im not sure about this one.
After their friends and family alpha play Ashes got good reviews, It looks like they made a lot of headway in the game for such a short time since kickstarter. I have a good feeling this one will launch and I mean as a real game not an alpha for 3 years game.
Games always have some mild differences but it is what you actually do in game and how you do it that makes a game different.In that sense EQ2 is exactly like 99% of the games,the few different were UO,FFXI,EQ1 etc etc.ALL the clone games are imo the anti MMO,they are designed to SOLO,designed to vee line to yellow markers,you could in essence remove the npc altogether as it is the yellow marker players are aiming at.
Oh how I wish we could go back to when games we're different and each one we tried it was an eye opening experience instead of just another clone of what has come before. I understand why it happens but it doesn't make it any easier. No game should be called a MMO when it focuses on soloing. Many mmo's that were once group focused games are now solo-centric or they wouldn't be around as long as they have. (and of course this is my opinion as I only know how to voice my own). thanks for the insights.
At first there was nothing but a multitude of text based games. The MMO market was new, there weren't that many MMO's out at all. Now the market is flooded and people who like to group are not as many as people who solo. Games have attracted those who are into grouping and are now after solo players. Now there are games for PvP, PvE, sandboxed survival, themes, and a host of letters as companies try everything they can think of to attract people and turn a decent profit by catering to the majority of playstyles.
"We all do the best we can based on life experience, point of view, and our ability to believe in ourselves." - Naropa "We don't see things as they are, we see them as we are." SR Covey
Games always have some mild differences but it is what you actually do in game and how you do it that makes a game different.In that sense EQ2 is exactly like 99% of the games,the few different were UO,FFXI,EQ1 etc etc.ALL the clone games are imo the anti MMO,they are designed to SOLO,designed to vee line to yellow markers,you could in essence remove the npc altogether as it is the yellow marker players are aiming at.
Oh how I wish we could go back to when games we're different and each one we tried it was an eye opening experience instead of just another clone of what has come before. I understand why it happens but it doesn't make it any easier. No game should be called a MMO when it focuses on soloing. Many mmo's that were once group focused games are now solo-centric or they wouldn't be around as long as they have. (and of course this is my opinion as I only know how to voice my own). thanks for the insights.
At first there was nothing but a multitude of text based games. The MMO market was new, there weren't that many MMO's out at all. Now the market is flooded and people who like to group are not as many as people who solo. Games have attracted those who are into grouping and are now after solo players. Now there are games for PvP, PvE, sandboxed survival, themes, and a host of letters as companies try everything they can think of to attract people and turn a decent profit by catering to the majority of playstyles.
Instead of creating a new game, they should just relaunch the original EQ2. It's different enough in it's original presentation and mechanics back then to qualify as a completely different game. It pisses me off how much they've gutted that game in a shallow effort to go trendy and F2P. When the game first launched I wasn't mature enough as a gamer to understand what they were trying to do with it, but it was as close to being a 'virtual world' as a theme park can get. I'll never understand why the hell devs go back and mess with their original contet, or as in EQ2's case remove half of it from the game. MMO's are originally in development for years and in a AAA title like EQ2 would've had hundreds of people who worked on it. Then 8 years later when they have a staff of like 10 people they decide they can suddenly make better content in 4 months while working on it for a fraction of the time so it's fine to go ahead and shit all over the original product. Just pathetic.
The graphics engine is terrible. That, by itself, is going to turn off many people.
EQ2 needs a new graphics engine, and they need to prune the amount of classes the game has. There are too many. It's a balancing nightmare.
I don't think the majority of MMORPG players are going to want to play another game "like WoW" without robust Add-On System, either.
Their UI is atrocious and needs a complete overhaul.
---
What the EQ franchise needs is a new game, and they really need to find a way to migrate players off of those older games and shut them down. Focus on one, if possible. This way, people can have a complete story and new players will get a full experience with a decent community from the lowest levels to the upper levels.
What they are doing by dragging on EQ and EQ2 is diluting the IP. They are basically reusing core facets of the IP (Kunark, Velious, etc.) to the point that no one is going to care that much about a new game. Blizzard has been a lot more responsible with their IP in WoW, for example. The story keeps moving forward, without revisiting prior events to the extent this happens in the EQ games.
This means that, should Blizzard decides to release a WoW 2, the story will simply continue on that trajectory... It will not be a mess of redundancy. Any new EQ game is almost guaranteed to be just that... They're better off just starting over and doing something similar to what Blizzard has done with WoW. The way Blizzard has paced their story and managed their IP across expansions and content patches is a huge reason why people still like that game.
EQNext was what they needed, but they decided to do things too differently. Also, many people saw that game as EQ in name and generally Look-and-Feel only. They should have simply stuck with the formula they know how to work with, or desgined something similar to GW2 that was B2P with Paid Expansions.
What EQ needs is a graphical overhaul and a new engine, along with more emphasis on the Lore/Story and less on "Buy a Level 85 Boost to play with your friends!" If they released EQ or EQ2 on WoW's engine with updated mechanics to match, that would literally be enough to move the vast majority of their players onto that one game, for example, and concentrate their development focus. They could probably charge a subscription for it easily ($9.99/mo. if they really wanted to compete fiercely in the current market).
Relaunching an original copy of any game never drives the genre forward.
I agree that the franchise needs a new game, one that will finally consolidate the EQ1 and EQ2 franchises that they may be closed down. Replaying the same 'lore' events over and over is monotonous and I'd consider it a sign of weak writing, at least a lack of inspiration.
Think of it this way. In the Marvel Comics X-Men series, exactly how many times do we need to see a version of the Phoenix Saga? There have been several versions in the comics, several in animated series, and at least one live-action version with another movie in the works. Aren't there other stories using those same characters that could be told? Of course there are.
EQ has done the same as Marvel in that regard. EQ1 has Kunark, EQ2 must have a Kunark. It was becoming evident that some aspects of EQ:Next were beginning to encounter similar problems. Reusing lore and retelling the same events only enforces feelings of deja vu. At some point, the customer simply walks away.
While I agree that multiple entries is only diluting the franchise, I don't think it really helps the genre to make another entry to the EQ franchise. Therefore, I'd rather see a new game with improved mechanisms, fresh lore to explore, and, most importantly, new ideas. That's the general direction I would hope any new development efforts from Daybreak would take. It doesn't need another EQ title.
Logic, my dear, merely enables one to be wrong with great authority.
The problem with most of these indy projects is they get everything but a fun combat system that makes doing all the rest of the great idea content worth doing all wrong.
The problem with most of these indy projects is they get everything but a fun combat system that makes doing all the rest of the great idea content worth doing all wrong.
Yea that can be true... What is sad is the lack of large development houses even thinking of making an mmo and worse yet is the ones that make a game for servers that hold 50 players max, like Conan Exiles and they have the balls to call it an MMO. sorry but 50 players is not Massive it is a joke.
The problem with most of these indy projects is they get everything but a fun combat system that makes doing all the rest of the great idea content worth doing all wrong.
Yea that can be true... What is sad is the lack of large development houses even thinking of making an mmo and worse yet is the ones that make a game for servers that hold 50 players max, like Conan Exiles and they have the balls to call it an MMO. sorry but 50 players is not Massive it is a joke.
If I were a large development firm, I wouldn't even risk anything on an MMO. I'd develop something like Overwatch, or an Action RPG. I think MMORPG genre is oversaturated, and the fact that there are so many F2P games siphoning off users from Subscription/Pay to Play games is a big issue. A lot of these games are terrible, but people put up with them simply because they don't want to pay to play a better game.
This means that even if your game is good, it can fail anyways just by virtue of the number of subpar games spreading the player base thin.
I wouldn't invest in such a project, period, so it makes complete sense that they are moving into other territories (FPS, ARPG, MOBA, etc.).
I do think the ARPG genre can use another AAA game. Path fo Exile is one of the most confusing, worst-optimized games I've ever played, and Grim Dawn isn't that great. There is room in that market for AAA offerings to make a profit. MOBAs are probably saturated at this point. There are quite a few. Destiny can probably use some competition in the AAA space, and so could Overwatch.
But there is almost no room in the MMORPG space for anything but Indies with low player/subscriber projections. Everyone that has tried to go subscription-only with high projections has had to completely revamp their business model, like ESO - and these "new" business models usually aren't very "friendly" to consumers (subscribe for adequate bag space, buy upgrade to play as an Imperial, ridiculously priced DLC released at breakneck paces which makes the game MORE EXPENSIVE to play without a subscription, XP Scrolls/Potions which are better than what you can get in-game, etc.).
The problem with most of these indy projects is they get everything but a fun combat system that makes doing all the rest of the great idea content worth doing all wrong.
Yea that can be true... What is sad is the lack of large development houses even thinking of making an mmo and worse yet is the ones that make a game for servers that hold 50 players max, like Conan Exiles and they have the balls to call it an MMO. sorry but 50 players is not Massive it is a joke.
If I were a large development firm, I wouldn't even risk anything on an MMO. I'd develop something like Overwatch, or an Action RPG. I think MMORPG genre is oversaturated, and the fact that there are so many F2P games siphoning off users from Subscription/Pay to Play games is a big issue. A lot of these games are terrible, but people put up with them simply because they don't want to pay to play a better game.
This means that even if your game is good, it can fail anyways just by virtue of the number of subpar games spreading the player base thin.
I wouldn't invest in such a project, period, so it makes complete sense that they are moving into other territories (FPS, ARPG, MOBA, etc.).
I do think the ARPG genre can use another AAA game. Path fo Exile is one of the most confusing, worst-optimized games I've ever played, and Grim Dawn isn't that great. There is room in that market for AAA offerings to make a profit. MOBAs are probably saturated at this point. There are quite a few. Destiny can probably use some competition in the AAA space, and so could Overwatch.
But there is almost no room in the MMORPG space for anything but Indies with low player/subscriber projections. Everyone that has tried to go subscription-only with high projections has had to completely revamp their business model, like ESO - and these "new" business models usually aren't very "friendly" to consumers (subscribe for adequate bag space, buy upgrade to play as an Imperial, ridiculously priced DLC released at breakneck paces which makes the game MORE EXPENSIVE to play without a subscription, XP Scrolls/Potions which are better than what you can get in-game, etc.).
All I can say is that as a gamer of over 20 years everything has it's cycles, the large MMO will return it just takes time and the right mix and before you know it another wow emerges.
It's been 14 years since EQ2 released...Hard to believe SOE couldnt make a better EQ in that timespan....It felt like EQN wasnt even really ever going to be a game, just a bunch of ideas thrown together to get people to buy Landmark.
EQ2 needs a new graphics engine, and they need to prune the amount of classes the game has. There are too many. It's a balancing nightmare.
I never want to see less classes in a game, I could care less if it's balanced or not. I'm so tired of games with 4 or 6 classes and then using some AA tree to make it seem like there is variety. Bring me back to the DAOC days where there are 50 unique classes.. now that is an interesting game.
DAOC had alot of different classes but not everyone was unique. The realms had counterparts so not 50 unique ones, one or two different abilites does not make the classes unique in my book.
I disagree completely. Look at the three realms speed classes alone. A hell of a lot more difference then 1 or 2 abilities.
Apparently I totally misunderstand this game. It got lost amid all the open loot survival games for me, which I thought it resembled. Now I'm starting to get interested. Flagging PvP system is what I wish all these games did. You choose to participate or not and not forced to if you want to simply quest in the world.
Apparently I totally misunderstand this game. It got lost amid all the open loot survival games for me, which I thought it resembled. Now I'm starting to get interested. Flagging PvP system is what I wish all these games did. You choose to participate or not and not forced to if you want to simply quest in the world.
So far it looks good....but I have said that before. So far for me they are strongly against pay to win and after the Archeage fiasco, I hope they stay true to there word.
Comments
As far as content is concerned, much of it was fairly similar to World of Warcraft.
I actually found raiding to be more fun in EQ2 due to the lack of Add-ons like DBM, GTFO, etc. It make the process or learning an encounter take considerably longer, which actually strengthened guild ties and increased the satisfaction of defeating an encounter.
People in EQ2 didn't generally share raid strats - the way you can find WoW raid strats on YouTube days after the content is released...
EQ2 still had large contested zones where you could farm legitimately useful gear. WoW puts these things in World Quests... I prefer EQ's method, for fairly obvious reasons.
I think EQ2 dungeons had more innovative encounter design than most WoW dungeons (many of which simply ape raid encounters).
Classes had a bit more room for variety of playstyle in EQ2 than in WoW, where you have a pretty hard meta that you're going to be working against - especially with the public logging that goes on.
I much prefer EQ2's AA system to the Talent and Artifact system in WoW. I consider it to be the gold standard of post-leveling, XP-based character progression. Many of the points are really powerful, but you don't simply max everything out like in EQ1. This leaves room for a lot of variety - much more so than in WoW. There aren't too many that the grind becomes unbearable, either.
Agree. One of the worst misconceptions regarding these games is that EQ2 copied WoW. In reality, both games use the same formula, and EQ2 was released first.
I think the system requirements for EQ2 pretty much killed it, given the era it released in. It pretty much anointed WoW the default playable MMORPG for the masses, Lol.
I don't think it's possible to overstate just how badly EQ2 ran compared to WoW on 2003-5 era hardware, unless you were one of those people playing EQ on a $1,500 machine.
I can't plan that far ahead lol.
Don't worry, only they need to plan ahead, you just sit back and do something else till then.
I hope for this too
"We all do the best we can based on life experience, point of view, and our ability to believe in ourselves." - Naropa "We don't see things as they are, we see them as we are." SR Covey
couldn't be said better ^^
I agree that the franchise needs a new game, one that will finally consolidate the EQ1 and EQ2 franchises that they may be closed down. Replaying the same 'lore' events over and over is monotonous and I'd consider it a sign of weak writing, at least a lack of inspiration.
Think of it this way. In the Marvel Comics X-Men series, exactly how many times do we need to see a version of the Phoenix Saga? There have been several versions in the comics, several in animated series, and at least one live-action version with another movie in the works. Aren't there other stories using those same characters that could be told? Of course there are.
EQ has done the same as Marvel in that regard. EQ1 has Kunark, EQ2 must have a Kunark. It was becoming evident that some aspects of EQ:Next were beginning to encounter similar problems. Reusing lore and retelling the same events only enforces feelings of deja vu. At some point, the customer simply walks away.
While I agree that multiple entries is only diluting the franchise, I don't think it really helps the genre to make another entry to the EQ franchise. Therefore, I'd rather see a new game with improved mechanisms, fresh lore to explore, and, most importantly, new ideas. That's the general direction I would hope any new development efforts from Daybreak would take. It doesn't need another EQ title.
Logic, my dear, merely enables one to be wrong with great authority.
What is sad is the lack of large development houses even thinking of making an mmo and worse yet is the ones that make a game for servers that hold 50 players max, like Conan Exiles and they have the balls to call it an MMO. sorry but 50 players is not Massive it is a joke.
This means that even if your game is good, it can fail anyways just by virtue of the number of subpar games spreading the player base thin.
I wouldn't invest in such a project, period, so it makes complete sense that they are moving into other territories (FPS, ARPG, MOBA, etc.).
I do think the ARPG genre can use another AAA game. Path fo Exile is one of the most confusing, worst-optimized games I've ever played, and Grim Dawn isn't that great. There is room in that market for AAA offerings to make a profit. MOBAs are probably saturated at this point. There are quite a few. Destiny can probably use some competition in the AAA space, and so could Overwatch.
But there is almost no room in the MMORPG space for anything but Indies with low player/subscriber projections. Everyone that has tried to go subscription-only with high projections has had to completely revamp their business model, like ESO - and these "new" business models usually aren't very "friendly" to consumers (subscribe for adequate bag space, buy upgrade to play as an Imperial, ridiculously priced DLC released at breakneck paces which makes the game MORE EXPENSIVE to play without a subscription, XP Scrolls/Potions which are better than what you can get in-game, etc.).
I never want to see less classes in a game, I could care less if it's balanced or not. I'm so tired of games with 4 or 6 classes and then using some AA tree to make it seem like there is variety. Bring me back to the DAOC days where there are 50 unique classes.. now that is an interesting game.
I disagree completely. Look at the three realms speed classes alone. A hell of a lot more difference then 1 or 2 abilities.