Howdy, Stranger!
It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!
Quick Links
EQ2 vs. Vanguard
nexus42
Member Posts: 288
Can some folks in the know give me some specifics about what will make Vanguard different from EQ2? Thanks!
...Pika
Comments
First this site has all the info you will need
http://silkyvenom.com/pages/faq.php
but one thing that will make Vanguard different than EQ2 is that Vanguard has no zones, its massive and seemless (and i mean MASSIVE). Diplomacy Classes (http://silkyvenom.com/pages/faq.php?faqid=332&expand=814#faq814 for more info on that)....boats, flying mounts (you can pretty much fly where ever you want, so you want to fly over the city, go for it!, owned houses (i know EQ2 has that but Vanguard has more options to interact with your home) you can open up a shop in your home, close it at a certain time so no more traverlers come in, and im pretty sure that none of these houses are instance, its all IN the world. There is so much more i could say, but i am sure more people will respond
CHeers
Jak
I see so many people that stereotype Vanguard. People call it a game for only hardcore players, EQ2, a game for only raiders or a clone of EQ1. All of these accusations are far from the truth. At its core Vanguard's vision is to make a more challenging game, which incorporates risk vs. reward and brings back a sense of community and reputation through game mechanics. At the same time it attempts to appeal to all play styles whether solo, group or raid by offering rewards of the best loot across all play styles.
This is post is one I have posted before in various evolving states in regards to a similar question.
In answer to your question, I will give you a brief list of its features which I find appealing and different.
1. Evolutionary complex combat system. The combat system incorporates many of the features from other games particularly DAOC. It adds reactionary attacks, positional attacks, chain attacks, stances, group chains along with its own innovation of being able to perceive mob attacks and mobs being able to perceive what you have in your attack queue as well. Sigil wants their combat to encourage planning, thought, knowledge and individual and group skill.
2. Innovative Endgame Rather than give raiders all the rewards. The endgame is designed to rewards those that use all of the games attractions. The best gear will come mainly from single group activities but will also come from solo/casual content, raid content, quests, crafting, diplomacy and other activities. If you want the best gear you will have to do all the activities or trade for the items that come from play styles you do not want to do. Hard to be fairer than that. Brad quotes on Endgame content.
[url]http://www.vanguardsoh.com/forums/showpost.php?p=1401499&postcount=194[/url]
(Summary of Brad's endgame posts made by Brad)
3. Crafting Supposedly there is skill in crafting. Hopefully it will not turn into another EQ2. Crafters will be able to build boats, houses, all furniture one sees in npc houses and stores and more. Crafters will not get experience by making items but by doing work orders and quests, for npcs. Crafters also have a planned role in supplying player city npcs with gear and in making player cities stronger. But keep in mind that player built and run cities is not planned to be included at release. Sigil is also planning on allowing crafters to be able to discover and make new recipes by experimenting and changing the existing recipes. This feature is not scheduled to make it into the game until after release. I have to wonder if they are simply doing to much.
4. Diplomacy. A war of wits between players. Cities essentially become the dungeons of diplomats. Gaining diplomatic skill allows one to gain faction and see parts of the game, npcs and quests that others will not be able to see. Diplomats are also planned to have a role in helping run player cities and will be needed to obtain rights to build on and acquire land.
5. Epic size of the game. The world is supposed to be huge.
6. No instances Sigil hopes to achieve what other games have accomplished with instances through huge dungeons that will allow many dungeons to coexist in dungeons, quests spawning mobs and its innovative advanced encounter system. The advanced encounter system sounds pretty amazing. To read more about it take a look at the following link.
[url]http://www.silkyvenom.com/pages/faq.php?faqid=544[/url]
7. Dynamic death penalty Dying to different mobs will provide a different death penalty. Each mob will be assigned a threat meter. The higher the threat level the higher the probability of good loot and the greater the death penalty. Some mobs will have no corpse runs, some will have some form of corpse runs and a few special mobs will have very hard corpse runs that will require perhaps killing the mob that you originally died to. The idea is to implement risk vs reward. If you want better loot you have to risk more. The high threat mobs will be spread out across all play styles. For raid content, single group content and in the casual/solo dungeons. [url]http://www.vanguardsoh.com/forums/showpost.php?p=1278950&postcount=202[/url]
8. Dungeons The one thing I miss most about EQ is the dungeons. Their size and scariness. According to Oloh the dungeons in Vanguard are huge. A small dungeon takes 2-4 hours to explore while the premiere dungeons could take weeks (they will have some kind in dungeon portal system to transport you to areas you have already visited).
9. Localized economies and bringing back Community They want to encourage communities to form by isolating people in certain areas. They plan to do this by not having any AH's, making death meaningful so player skill is important in picking group mates, and making travel slower. Although they seem to have moved off the idea of slower travel and are also putting in caravans to allow people to move wherever their friends go (bind spot) while offline. If the slow travel does more harm than good they promise to change it like many other ideas they have already changed because the original idea did not work. The overall idea here is to make player reputation matter. To make players dependent on each other by all three spheres being dependent. How much progress they can make in bringing back community to a genre that’s games have long since abandoned the idea is certainly questionable. I remember when EQ was released one would know most of the players your level. Many would be desirable to group with and many one would avoid at all costs because of their bad reputation. In a sense they are trying to turn the clock back and make player reputation matter again.
10. Planning Sigil are planners. They think out everything they do and often discuss it with the community. They claim to have the next seven years of the games development planned out. Including all new continents, towns, villages, dungeons, raising of the cap levels and so on. They usually have back up plans for ideas that might fail. I have played so many games where the developers have randomly thrown ideas, game mechanics and features together with little thought as to how they might mesh together. Its refreshing to see an academic approach being made towards a games development. One might argue that they are using this same academic approach into how they are building their beta with layered stages of content. Using this 1st year of beta to work on and hopefully perfect the core game systems of combat, crafting and diplomacy. Then adding the rest of the content and populating the world in the second year of beta.
11. Communication Bar none the best communication I have ever seen by a development team. The amount of posts by Brad on the forums is simply amazing. One must wonder if he sleeps. But what is more impressive is their approach to hyping this game. Most development companies promise everything under the sun. brad has done his best to under hype this game and under promise. If there is doubt a feature will make it into release he doesn't talk about it or if he does he states the likelihood he sees of these features making it by release. A very good role model for other game developers. It is refreshing to see some honesty in such a dishonest business.
12. Slow leveling Rather than making a game just like every other game where its a two to four week race to max level. Vanguard promises to bring back slower leveling and give meaning to a persons level. rather than having everyone having at least one maxed lvl character a month after release they would like a high lvl character to have earned that level. How this will play out I don't know. The example he gave in beta was a player who took 60 days to reach max level. While at retail I am sure it would be much faster hopefully this speaks to their intent. While many hardcore people hope the leveling will be slower it will probably be in the middle with average players taking 40 days played and skilled players taking 10-15 days played to reach max level.
13. How do we level While not really a feature or a reason that I like the game this is something that I think effects game play a lot and something sigil has not answered. Sigil has promised that there will be game mechanics to encourage us to move around and that true camping will be significantly slower. How they will accomplish this? I don't know. I know they plan for players to learn some combat abilities and skills by watching different mobs use these abilities during fights encouraging players to move around to get different skills. I would expect that quest experience somewhat similar to WoW's might be involved as well to encourage fighting in different areas. Factions rewards and other ideas could lead us around as well. This to me is a very significant point. How the devs lead us around the world will have a great effect on peoples enjoyment of the game and its something we don't know. I am not sure if its fully fleshed out or something that they just are not ready to talk about yet. But be there have been lots of cryptic dev quotes about how we will be led around by the game mechanics.
14. Layered design of the beta. One of the interesting aspects of the beta that has been revealed by the devs has been their focus. They have primarily spent the last 6 months of beta tweaking and revamping group combat. Combat IMHO is the key to any good game and it appears they realize that if the combat is bad everything else will fail. They have also spent a good deal of the beta tweaking and revamping the other core systems of crafting, diplomacy and harvesting. They have said they don't plan to add other content such as solo content, raid content, filling in the world with mobs and npcs until they have group combat perfected. It appears they must be happy with it now that they are moving on to beta 3. Beta 3 should be a telling point of this game. It is easy to make excuses for the game up to this point as the only part of the game they have focused on is the corse systems. But as they add more content and the core systems become finalized those who get invited to beta 3 should get a pretty good idea how well this game will turn out.
15. vanguard is not for everyone. Its focus is group play and risk vs reward. While they say they want to eliminate many of the tedious game mechanics of the past while providing challenging content this game will simply not be the game for everyone. Will it be a niche game? Maybe. If the game is good and fun to play people will most likely play it regardless of their preferred play style. If its not fun most likely then it will be a niche game. What’s most impressive to me here are the attempts of Sigil in its endgame design, new death penalty and overall philosophy to appeal to players of all sides without dumbing down the game. I did not think such a thing would be possible but I am highly impressed with what we have been told about these systems.
I see so many people bashing Vanguard because they think its to hardcore and hardcore fans bashing people for not being hardcore enough. I respect people that like Vanguard just as much as I respect people that don't like Vanguard. We are all entitled to have our own tastes and no ones play style is better than anyone elses. Many people are so focused on putting down anyone who disagrees with their particular play style. Its very sad. Vanguard may not be the game for everyone, but there is nothing wrong with disliking a game or a particular game design even if its Vanguard. Regardless of peoples preferences I hope we all get some good games made that will appeal to a broad spectrum of play styles.
16. Vanguard is not just for the hardcore Many people put down Vanguard saying its just for hardcore players. Hardcore players think of Vanguard as their last hope because it offers challenge. But if one looks closely at the games design it is being designed to make all play styles happy. Raiders, single group players, solo players, crafters, questers, hardcore players and casual players and more. It is easy to stereotype people and games. But it seems the more that is revealed about Vanguards design the more it appears their philosophy is one of inclusion but not at the expense of dumbing down the game. Keep in mind these ideas and designs they have given us are much easier to talk about in theory than in practice. When implementing these designs I would guess it will be much tougher to make everyone happy.
17. Margin Of Error
When EQ1 was released the margin of error was quite low which forced groups to play a lot better. Small mistakes could wipe your group. People were not only forced to learn how to play their character but how to group, choose a leader, listen to that leader, pull to safe spots and so on.In EQ and DAOC every player had to learn these basic fundamentals of good grouping or they would not be able to get groups and continue to level. In EQ if you played poorly you simply did not find good groups. People quickly learned to cooperate, listen and work together as teams.
That is the challenge that many people want to see return to Vanguard. They want the margin of error to be low enough where groups are forced to work together and play better. Lets now look at the margin of error in WoW. I don't mean to bash WoW here. WoW is a great game, lots of fun, very well made and everything is polished and works well. There is nothing wrong with liking WoW. But, fundamental grouping skills were never needed in WoW because the margin of error was so large.
In WoW people could make all kind of mistakes and the group would live. But even if it didn't there was no penalty. If someone was afk, had no idea how to play or would run ahead and pull aggro it really didn't matter because your group could still win. In other words a game like EQ encouraged good group play while a game like WoW does not. The margin of error is the fundamental difference here along with a death penalty that hurts. These concepts are in IMO the key to Vanguard’s success and a major factor in determining if players will have to play better and with more skill.
18. Boats, housing and City building Players will be able to build boats to use to pliot themselves around the seas. They can find hidden islands, become pvp pirates, or fight sea monsters. After release ship v. Ship combat is planned. Houses, crafting stations and otehr buidlinsg can be built. Every itrem seen in a npc buolding can be crafted for player buildings. After release city building features will be implemented. City health will be dependent on its crafters and diplomats. Cities can be attacked by npcs and by pcs on pvp servers.
19. A discussion of the what is potentially good about Vanguard would not be fair without expressing reservations and doubts about Vanguard. Almost all games dissapoint in some way and the odds are generally against any new game being good. While I have great hopes for Vanguard and I love the way Sigil has treated the fanbase I have one big concern listed below.
20. Ambition Vanguard is a very ambitious project which appears to be trying to be in some ways everything for everyone. One has to wonder if they are spreading themselves to thin here by trying to do to much. The biggest failing of EQ2 IMHO is that it tried to do to many things and had to many ideas (mainly stolen from other games) but all its features were mediocre and poorly implemented. One has to wonder if Vanguard may fall victim to same problem of having to many ideas and to much content to actually be able to implement those ideas well. Maybe its just to big a game. On this same line of thinking I also have doubts as to the level of quality control possible in such a huge game. Maybe I am just getting EQ2 flashbacks but its much easier to polish a smaller simpler game than such a huge epic game.
When one examines what the devs have said closely it apparent that the design of this game is far from being just from the hardcore. Rather Sigil plans to appeal to all play styles but without dumbing down the challenge. What is ironic here is many of the games detractors are upset because they think the game is to hardcore while many of the hardcore players will be just as upset when they realize that the game is very inclusive for different play styles. Further when one examines the features this not just another a cookie cutter game. It has an amazing amount of new and innovative features. If anything it is trying to do to much. Which might explain its long beta schedule.
Overall Vanguard looks like it could be a great game. I have doubts and concerns that they are trying to do to much. But I really trust Brad and the developers. I love how they have treated the fan base with respect and courtesy. I find it impossible not to be optimistic about this game. I love their vision and Sigil’s ability to admit their mistakes and make needed changes. If combat is good and the mechanics they use to lead us the around the world works well I don't see how this game cannot be good.
though somethings look the same as eq2 though :P
Starwars Galaxies, An Empier Diveded, That's what it says on my box anyway.
In an effort to keep it short, I can think of two major things:
Scope - EQ2 felt small because of the zones and linear content. Vanguard is suppose to be zoneless like SWG with large continents to explore in all dimensions, not just one zone after another in a line.
Freedom - EQ2 game mechanisms meant to control the play. Things like locked combat, group-only buffs, grouped mobs, etc. had a heavy hand in the feel of the game. Vanguard is suppose to be less controlling and more libertarian.
Not surprising, since the Sigil guys wrote the Spec for EQ2 (which had Diplomacy, boats, ect.)
Starwars Galaxies, An Empier Diveded, That's what it says on my box anyway.
Originally posted by grinreaper
Originally posted by nexus42 Can some folks in the know give me some specifics about what will make Vanguard different from EQ2? Thanks!
Which version of EQ2? the one at release or the one now...almost totally different animals
People keep saying EQ2 is a different animal from beta.
I played the beta and hated it. I brought the game cos people kept saying "its different from the beta" but the mistakes were still there and all they had done is copied areas of WoW.
I don't mean to offend or flame but EQ2 is still "very flawed" in my opinion and after reading FAQ on Vanguard and studying the forum a lot, I realised Vanguard is nothing like EQ2.
In fact if SoE had followed the original spec and added boats, had seamless terrain (no zones) etc EQ2 would be very close to Vanguard, instead they cut too many corners.
Now playing: VG (after a long break from MMORPGS)
Played for more than a month: Darkfall online, Vanguard SOH, Everquest, Horizons, WoW, SWG, Everquest II, Eve
Since Sigil has been somewhat vague about what their definition of the “core” gamer they say they are aiming Vanguard at this question is probably best understood by first looking at what EQ2 is.
EQ2 is a complementary game to the original, not a true sequel. It’s a more middle of the road, semi-casual game. People who really wanted to keep that EQ feel were intended to stay in the original while people who wanted a more moderate style (and there were/are a lot of them) of game play could play EQ2. Basically it has all the main elements of Everquest with allowances made for people who couldn’t spend days at a time in the game. It gives you a greater number of shorter term goals and the ability to accomplish things in a short or preset time.
It doesn’t go nearly as far as the first 60 levels of WoW. Social interaction, immersion etc is still encouraged just not enforced in such a way that the more casual player feel they are being excluded from the game. People who spend more time in the game still walk away with bigger rewards, but long play sessions or large numbers of hours per week are no longer a requirement.
The downside is that you loose some of the immersive and social qualities that made EQ so special to some people. They are still there but have been sacrificed somewhat to cater to a more diverse audience.
Vanguard wants to stick more to the core concept of a virtual world, and is making fewer compromises to that basic concept. This means that no matter what the dev statements it will not be as casual friendly. If your regular friends are in another part of the world joining them will be difficult. There will almost certainly be more downtime to encourage social interaction. It will be harder to get things done in a short period of time, you will need to dedicate bigger blocks of time, and quite possibly more of them to achieve things.
I know some Vanguard fans bristle at the description but Vanguard will be a more “hardcore” game in much the same way Everquest favored hardcore players. This is an inevitable result of not allowing convenience to impinge on the social, immersive or virtual world nature of the game.
There honestly isn’t anything wrong with either approach. I think EQ2 will ultimately appeal to a broader audience, but as Everquest ages and begins to feel more dated there is a lot of people out there looking for a game that sticks more to the original or “core” concepts of Everquest and its MUD precursors. SOE no doubt feels the same which is why they are comfortable offering both games. As they fall into different places on the MMO spectrum they will not cannibalize each other overly much because the people who feel most at home in each of them will be different.
The “difficulty” thing is something of a canard. As soon as you give people any level of freedome they begin to set their own challenge level. To much risk in the difficult dungeons and they stick to easier content, to little risk and they engage the content more aggressively. Basically as long as you allow them the freedom to chose what content they engage they will find their own comfort level and that will be pretty much the same in any game they play.
Vanguard hasn't released yet but alot of what they are preaching gives me the impression that they are going to be the game that EQ2 promised to be but didn't produce. EQII is just now getting around to adding dieities back into the game and have had to push out an expansion every six months to actually get more content and places to go in the game. Originally it felt smaller than the original EQI pre-Kunark. I bought EQII on day one and during my time playing it, it felt small, boxed in and severely lacking for loot and of choices. You had two starting areas with about two choices of where to go every ten levels.
If Sigil and Co keep their promises (A big "if" with MMORPGs) then it seems they will have a much larger epic world with a bigger identity and that they will bring back some of the challenge of EQI with some of the modern sensibility of WOW. EQII never defined what type of game it wanted to be. It jumped around and tried to please everyone and only pleased a few.
I personally do not think Vanguard will fit the bill as the great "3rd generation" game that blows away everything in it's wake graphically and playability but I do think it will bridge a gap between the great old MMORPGs and the MMORPG lites that currently litter the market. I think it will appeal to people who wanted EQII to be more like EQI on steroids and also to people who play WOW but want something with more challenge and want characters that aren't top of the mountain in 2 weeks. Since I fit both those bills I am watching it carefully and keeping my fingers crossed.
Dimitrio Darkblade
Founder Leader of Vitae Essentia
http://www.veguild.org
I'm just taking everything with a grain of salt. That "3rd generation" statement I think will bite Vanguard in the rump later on. I think they will beat EQII as far as having a big seemless world compared to linear boxlike zones but only time will tell if they can actually fill that space with enough content. Dark and Light for instance also promised the worlds largest MMORPG. I think to fill a worlds as large as Telon is going to take the vast majority of the rest of their time leading towards release. We know that the UI and the Chains are very similiar to WOW and EQII. We know that the characters favor EQII's characters and classes and we know the overall feel of the game is to make things a bit more challenging with corpse runs and long travel times via EQI. All this sounds OK to me but it doesn't sound revolutionary or "3rd generation". I think alot of people might be disappointed if they are expecting graphics, combat, crafting, adventuring and such to be something totally new and different. I am an old school EQI player who also enjoyed WOW briefly and can appreciate both sides of the coin and I think I will enjoy Vanguard because my character will have a longer life and a greater sense of accomplishment but I have a feeling anything extremely "3rd generation" will be postponed. Seeing player made boats and player owned flying mounts as well as mounted combat would be a step towards something new in my opinion and so would a awesome diplomacy sphere but I will have to wait and see if those get in before release or how long afterwards they take post-release.