MMOSanctuary.com's Review of Everquest 2

[MMOSanctuary]

<p>Greetings Everyone!</p><p>We just wanted to let everyone know about our recent review of the current state of Everquest 2.  This is the "core" game review, and will be followed by a more specific look at and review of the Sentinel's Fate content.  Feel free to leave us your feedback about what you think of the review.  Here's the link:</p><p><a href="http://www.mmosanctuary.com/game-reviews/everquest-2-review" target="_blank" rel="nofollow">http://www.mmosanctuary.com/game-re...rquest-2-review</a></p>

[Ksaun]

<p>If I might suggest a few things.</p><p>It probably isn't a good idea to boast about how wonderful the graphics in this game are (and they are top notch) while posting a screenie of an obvious graphics glitch.</p><p>The game actually uses less voiceovers in the later expansions than the original game, but I do agree that they do add a ton to immersion in the game.</p><p>Bashing on the maturity level of the PVP community was uncalled for, you can see the same amount of mother words on all servers. I feel that the person writing the review doesn't have a clue whats involved in pvp and probably wasn't very good at it...its not for everyone but it has a strong community of very good players.  Oh and just a heads up, there is no xp debt on a pvp server, ever.</p><p>Most of the review looked like it was copy/pasted from other websites from over the years and not a lot of effort was put in to show the quality and depth of the game.</p><p>My review of your article is a 5.5, you can do better than this.</p>

[MMOSanctuary]

<p>Well, the opinion on the attitudes and actions of the people encountered on the PvP server is more or less JUST an opinion.  That is what she encountered, so that's exactly what she wrote about.  You "can" encounter good players on PvP servers, just as you "can" encounter bad ones on PvE servers.  However, her observance was that the majority fell the way she saw it.  But I agree, PvP isn't for everyone.</p><p>As for the graphics, they are still very nice despite a loading glitch that occurred.  It has nothing to do with the quality of the graphics.</p><p>This was a review article, and one written by a long-time Everquest player.  As a matter of fact, she was a beta tester for the original game back in the late 90's.  Her article wasn't intended to be a game guide, with all the information about every aspect of the game.  It was meant to give players an overall look at what might be expected were they to pick up this game, or continue beyond a simple trial.  One of the things about EQ2 is the fact that there is SO MUCH to the game.  It would take a full guide book to explain all the different parts that go into the whole.  But we wanted to provide a useful overview that summarized one veteran MMORPG player's experiences in the current build of EQ2.</p><p>We do appreciate feedback, but I think you are  being a little hard on the writer.  The game was intentionally broken up into a "core" review and a "late game" review to provide more details on what comes as you get through the latter half of the game again because there is so much to the game.  Now, I'm personally expecting that will have more specifics, dungeon details, advanced features, etc.  We'll just see what she has to say when that article is finished.</p><p>Thank you everyone for taking a look at our review.</p>

[Malgera]

<p>This is one of the most superficial reviews I've read.  If the person who wrote the review is a long time player, then where is there any mention about the latest expansion and end game content? </p><p>Probably not a good idea to list graphics as a strength of the game.  The graphics look dated to most current MMORPGs, and the art within the game has actually digressed.  (Anything after KOS for the most part is either recycled or if new is uninteresting or poorly done)</p><p>There is also no mention of "The Hole" which was constantly lauded by the EQ developers prior to release as another large sprawling dungeon crawl.  Only to be nerfed into the ground the day after launch because they didn't bother to test it.  What about the lack of quest content for players who were max level at the end of TSO?  You can only quest to 86 without a RAF buff or other XP buffs.  After that, you eithe rhave to grind endlessly in the hole, or try to find groups for instances that would rather have level 90's in them. </p><p>A game is only as good as its last expansion and really this last one was by far and away the worst.</p>

[Priddles]

<p><cite>Malgera wrote:</cite></p><blockquote><p>This is one of the most superficial reviews I've read.  If the person who wrote the review is a long time player, then where is there any mention about the latest expansion and end game content? </p><p>Probably not a good idea to list graphics as a strength of the game.  The graphics look dated to most current MMORPGs, and the art within the game has actually digressed.  (Anything after KOS for the most part is either recycled or if new is uninteresting or poorly done)</p><p>There is also no mention of "The Hole" which was constantly lauded by the EQ developers prior to release as another large sprawling dungeon crawl.  Only to be nerfed into the ground the day after launch because they didn't bother to test it.  What about the lack of quest content for players who were max level at the end of TSO?  You can only quest to 86 without a RAF buff or other XP buffs.  After that, you eithe rhave to grind endlessly in the hole, or try to find groups for instances that would rather have level 90's in them. </p><p>A game is only as good as its last expansion and really this last one was by far and away the worst.</p></blockquote><p>You should really read the review before bashing it, and not just look at the cliffnotes at the top. It's stated explicitly that this is a review of the core game, and that a review of Sentinel's Fate would be coming soon. Heck, it even says that in the TC's post.</p>

[MMOSanctuary]

<p>I've mentioned several times now, both on the forums here and the author mentioned in her article, that is is a "core" review of the game.  This means, I'll say again, that it goes over the major elements of the game that players will experience in about the first half of the level range.  Yes, there is more content (and a lot of it) to be reviewed, but many players want to know how the game starts off and what they can expect when they begin in the game.  There WILL be a second part to the review, with more specific details on zones, instances, and latter features of the game.</p><p>Now, in terms of the graphics, I would have to say that it's 50% opinion and 50% examination of the quality of the graphic components themselves.  While the author isn't experienced with the development side of the industry, we do have people on our staff who are.  And they believe she's correct in giving a positive evaluation of the graphics.  Are some players going to prefer more "fancy" Asian-style appearances like Aion?  Yes.  There are also people who will tell you the graphics in World of Warcraft are excellent, but we have people who would disagree.</p><p>The bottom line here is that a. the review is a core review of the overall game experienced, as measured through the first half of the level range.  This was done to both split up all the information being gathered, and as I mentioned to provide those curious about the game a look into what the experience is like (at least from this writer's point of view).  b. things like asthetics are always going to be partially subjective.  As they say, "beauty is in the eye of the beholder".  I'm not sure what examples could be provided for why you would consider the graphics of this game flawed or inferior to  the description provided.</p><p>EQ2 has changed significantly since its launch years ago, and it's almost an entirely new game.  That's why we decided to create a review for this seasoned MMO.  However, it's simply not possible to cover every aspect of the game in a review (one of the reasons for splitting the process).  Your opinion may be that the additions are poorly done, but her view differs.</p>

[Tylia]

<p>Overall, I would say the review was informative and interesting to read.  It's true that there is so much content to this game that a short review does not adequately cover everything and only allows a taste of what the game consists of.  All in all, aside from a few spelling errors, it is a very nice article.  <img src="/smilies/3b63d1616c5dfcf29f8a7a031aaa7cad.gif" border="0" alt="SMILEY" /></p>

[Starley]

<p>"This was the case on Antonia Bayle. A majority of the players I encountered and spoke with were very helpful. They were readily able and willing to answer questions, and often times would even guide you directly to where you needed to go. That is what I call a good community..."</p><p>*beam*</p><p>Overall, I found it to be a very honest and personable review. Aren't <strong>-all- </strong>reviews ultimately opinion?</p>

[Brook]

<p>Max level is 90, might want to change that.</p>

[GrunEQ]

<p><span style="font-family: comic sans ms,sans-serif; color: #cc99ff; font-size: small;">A nice glancing over-view article, but sounds dated especially saving there are 80 levels when there are 90 levels. </span></p>

[Anestacia]

<p><cite>Malgera wrote:</cite></p><blockquote><p>This is one of the most superficial reviews I've read.  If the person who wrote the review is a long time player, then where is there any mention about the latest expansion and end game content? </p><p>Probably not a good idea to list graphics as a strength of the game.  The graphics look dated to most current MMORPGs, and the art within the game has actually digressed.  (Anything after KOS for the most part is either recycled or if new is uninteresting or poorly done)</p><p>There is also no mention of "The Hole" which was constantly lauded by the EQ developers prior to release as another large sprawling dungeon crawl.  Only to be nerfed into the ground the day after launch because they didn't bother to test it.  What about the lack of quest content for players who were max level at the end of TSO?  You can only quest to 86 without a RAF buff or other XP buffs.  After that, you eithe rhave to grind endlessly in the hole, or try to find groups for instances that would rather have level 90's in them. </p><p>A game is only as good as its last expansion and really this last one was by far and away the worst.</p></blockquote><p>For a 6 year old game I don't think the graphics are dated at all.  They may not be as realistic as some others but not everyone likes "real".  This is a fantasy setting after all.  And as for SF being the worst...far from it imo.  It's actually one of the most visually pleasing that they have done.  You are entitled to your opinion, of course, and my words haven't changed that, however just because it is your opinion doesn't mean that it is the writer of this reviews opinion.</p>

[MMOSanctuary]

<p>Thank you for the continuing feedback.  I've edited the mistake on the level range.  That must have been overlooked when she was writing it.  Trying to make sure any mistakes are fixed.</p><p>Thanks for the compliments as well.  A lot of time and effort is being (still) put into evaluating the game and more details will be added later.  I think the core review provides a good look at the main aspects of the game and what a potential player might experience beyond the trial.</p>

[Roast22]

<p><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; line-height: 13px;"><span style="color: #ff0000;">"Things like the Troubador (an evil bard who taunts down the strenghts of his enemies)"</span></span></p><p>Troubador's as indeed both bards classes are technicaly netural, however out of the 2 bards classes the Dirge would be the one considered by most as the more evil of the two as they use poision and disease spells, songs and abilities as their standard, not to mention their class discription taken from the main EQ2 home page. It's alittle misleading but not "the end of the world" or anything.</p><p><span style="color: #993300;">"</span><span style="font-family: arial, sans-serif; line-height: 17px;"><span style="color: #993300;">Dirges play songs of despair, misery and lamentation that invoke intense fury and aggression within the hearts of their allies.  The Dirge can use music to inflict great hopelessness and longing in enemies, demoralizing them so completely that their abilities are significantly diminished."</span></span></p><p>as opposed to Troubador's</p><p><span style="font-family: arial, sans-serif; line-height: 17px;"><span style="color: #993300;">"Troubadors inspire and protect their companions with songs of bravery and heroism.  By infusing music with magic, Troubadors embolden their allies into performing outstanding feats of courage against their opponents.  The Troubador’s songs are particularly popular with spell casters."</span></span></p><p>Honestly i think the review could have been better, it doesn't cover the main improvements to the "core" game since launch and seems to focus on reviewing the game as if this was a new release game.  I would think most people would be intrested in the improvments since EQ2 was launched 6 years ago rather than a lot of the info you would already know if you had either played before but were considering coming back to the game or if you had checked out the game reviews at launch but decided to opt for another more well known game but were looking for a change.  A good example of this is the addition of appeariance slots, something I always felt EQ2 should have had from day one and love. I think the use of screen shots was poor and could have been utilised better to emphasise the point the author was tring to get across at that point in the review.</p><p>I belive that the reviewer just generally doesn't like PvP, which to be honest I don't either.  The "smack" talk in the general channels is probably only a minority of players in PvP servers and doesn't give a good representation of the rest of the servers populas.  I would surgest either having someone who regularly plays on PvP server write a seperate review of the pvp aspect and incorpate it in the series of leave it out all together as it wasn't very objective.</p><p> I think the timing of the review is poor, in just a day from my reply to this post SoE are adding Halas, a new level 1 - 20 starting area that is being added to the core of the game (ie free to all subscribers).  If the idea of the review is to create new interest in EQ2 from either new, returning or even gamers from other MMO's then it feels liked you missed the boat here.  Gone are the isles of refuge and the new starting areas are not covered at all, as a new player this would matter to me and could influence my choice a great deal.</p><p>However i did enjoying reading it and thank you for taking the time to write it.</p><p><em>Disclaimer, i spelt gud =p</em></p>

[Leko]

<p>You do not get experience debt death in PvP fights. </p><p>This review is also a very broad reaching view of PvP in EQ2.  Might I suggest you have the reviewer spend more then a few hours playing PvP before they type up a review.  The experience of a low level player is vastly diffrent from an experience higher level player.</p>

[MMOSanctuary]

<p>The reviewer didn't spend much time on the PvP server because she couldn't stand it after about level 20.  There weren't enough people around to group with, she wasn't part of a guild, and she kept getting killed while out questing time and again.  So, I recommended she change servers.  For many players, PvP servers like that can be a frustrating experience and not a fun one.  This is the case with our reviewer.  Sure, some people like that sort of open PvP, but a lot of people just use it as an excuse to act poorly and take advantage of other players who are either wounded or inferior to themselves.  It isn't always about having a "fair fight".</p><p>As for the experience debt thing, that must have been an oversight, and we can correct that to clear things up.  That is why we ask for feedback, to make sure things didn't get missed or explained incorrectly.  In terms of what we DID and DID NOT cover in the article, that was by the author's choice and she put it mostly what she felt was necessary and what a prospective player might want to know.  This isn't an article about EVERYTHING in EQ2, all the starting areas, all the races, all the classes, all the zones, the spells, the skills, the crafting, the dungeons, etc., etc.  It is a summary review of what this writer's experience was when making new characters, then playing up through the first half of the levels.</p><p>Reviews are partially subjective, as is the choice of what to keep in and what to leave out.  And again, it's not a Guide Book, it's just a review.  It's about the same length as any other game review you'd find, and I felt it touched on most of the important aspects of the game (yes there were a couple incorrect facts we missed), and was a good overall view.  Now, the Part 2 will be more specific on details of what players can do, and what they are like as they advance into bigger and better things.  THERE, you can expect to find more details and feature descriptions.</p>

[VikingGamer]

<p>In the over all, I think you missed the pro that is the mentoring/chronomancer ability. The ability to mentor to the level of your friend or spouse who joined months after you or perhaps doesn't have as much time to play is a pretty huge deal. I love being able to play the character I want to play rather than having a second character that I only play and level with that friend. Too often you either end up wanting to play your alt more or hating having to get on your alt to play when your friend is on. This is one of the few games that you can always play your favorite character with anyone of any level below yours.</p><p>On the con side, fewer distinct starting areas. 4 (after tomorrow) is not bad but it is not as good as some, including EQ1. More starting areas adds to the replayablity of the game though that only deeply effects those players that tend toward having many alts or possibly those who lean toward being explorers.</p>

[Leko]

<p><cite>MMOSanctuary wrote:</cite></p><blockquote><p>The reviewer didn't spend much time on the PvP server because she couldn't stand it after about level 20.  There weren't enough people around to group with, she wasn't part of a guild, and she kept getting killed while out questing time and again.  So, I recommended she change servers.  For many players, PvP servers like that can be a frustrating experience and not a fun one.  This is the case with our reviewer.  Sure, some people like that sort of open PvP, but a lot of people just use it as an excuse to act poorly and take advantage of other players who are either wounded or inferior to themselves.  It isn't always about having a "fair fight".</p><p>As for the experience debt thing, that must have been an oversight, and we can correct that to clear things up.  That is why we ask for feedback, to make sure things didn't get missed or explained incorrectly.  In terms of what we DID and DID NOT cover in the article, that was by the author's choice and she put it mostly what she felt was necessary and what a prospective player might want to know.  This isn't an article about EVERYTHING in EQ2, all the starting areas, all the races, all the classes, all the zones, the spells, the skills, the crafting, the dungeons, etc., etc.  It is a summary review of what this writer's experience was when making new characters, then playing up through the first half of the levels.</p><p>Reviews are partially subjective, as is the choice of what to keep in and what to leave out.  And again, it's not a Guide Book, it's just a review.  It's about the same length as any other game review you'd find, and I felt it touched on most of the important aspects of the game (yes there were a couple incorrect facts we missed), and was a good overall view.  Now, the Part 2 will be more specific on details of what players can do, and what they are like as they advance into bigger and better things.  THERE, you can expect to find more details and feature descriptions.</p></blockquote><p>If the reviewer was not willing to put in the time on a PvP server then that aspect of the game shold have been left out of the review.  By not fully understanding PvP the review has now put you in the postion to defend the review.  That could have been advoided by leaving PvP out of the review and having the reviewer focus on aspects that they understand.</p><p>By not fully understanding PvP before writing the review the reviwer has bascily dismmesed PvP in the review which is unfair to new players looking at all aspects of the game.</p>

[MMOSanctuary]

<p>On your point about PvP, I beg to differ.  She attempted to play on the PvP server, but her opinion of it was just what she stated.  It's a valid point that can be made by anyone.  It isn't necessary to spend time trudging through an unpleasant aspect of the game (as it was to her) in the belief that it will somehow get better later.  I think giving it 20 levels was sufficient in forming the opinions she did, and that she found it unpleasant and frustrating.  That fact did not weigh into the quality of the game, but was theopinion made from her experience.</p><p>Now, if a player looks at that who is on the fence about whether to play on a PvP server, it will give them some information to be aware of.  Some people may wish to play despite the chances of having their normal play interrupted with unavoidable deaths, but other find it a very negative experience.  We're not telling people that no one should play on the PvP servers, but she communicated a clear warning to those who aren't "hardcore" PvP players. </p><p>And, about the mentoring system, that is a good point you have there.  She did not utilize that system during her game play, so it must have simply slipped through.  I've only used it a couple times in my experiences in EQ2.  But perhaps we should add a note to the review mentioning that players can have the ability to group with higher-level friends.  That is something that should be in more MMORPG's I think.</p>

[Shiirr]

<p>Just to chime in on the PvP aspect of the game, it probably should have its' own review.  It could be a short one. <img src="/smilies/8a80c6485cd926be453217d59a84a888.gif" border="0" alt="SMILEY" /></p><p>PvP up to 20 is going to be painful on anyone but an experienced PvPer (I was on Nagafen at launch, and watched the changes to classes and the PvP system throughout until last year).  You're basically cannon fodder at that level, food for somebody's 6th alt, with plat a-plenty to spend on nothing but the best.  And if you repeatedly go where you died last, chances are that you'll run into the same guy who killed you before.  That's not griefing; that's denial of resources.  Specifically, keeping you from levelling or looting.  There are some very helpful people playing PvP, but the majority don't want to hold someone's hand.  And hand-holding is exactly what a new player needs for PvP.  They need the gear, the spell increases, and the experience.  At level 20, chances are you won't have any of the above.  People like PvP because humans are unpredictable.  It also makes you a better PvE player, because "getting by" doesn't cut it on a PvP server.  I'm sure there are a few people in the game who would be willing to take a reviewer under their wing, so to speak, if such an opportunity were sought.</p><p>Okay, now that I got that off my chest, it's refreshing to see something positive about a game that's been around a few years.  The graphics are as good as your machine will let them be, and the gameplay itself is still quite a lot of fun.  Some of it's a bit 'thin' in the review, but as stated, it's not a detailed breakdown.  Crafting could use a bit more detail, but that's just my 2 coppers.</p>

[VikingGamer]

<p><cite>MMOSanctuary wrote:</cite></p><blockquote><p>And, about the mentoring system, that is a good point you have there.  She did not utilize that system during her game play, so it must have simply slipped through.  I've only used it a couple times in my experiences in EQ2.  But perhaps we should add a note to the review mentioning that players can have the ability to group with higher-level friends.  That is something that should be in more MMORPG's I think.</p></blockquote><p>I agree, it is the one feature that will very likely keep me and those I play with from returning to WoW. It significantly changes the interpersonal dynamics of a multi-user world.</p><p>Also, a related feature can be found in the way that leveling speed can be adjusted or even suspended using the AA slider. I find it very likeable that you can choose to enjoy the leveling game at a pace that suits you without feeling like you are loosing experience. If you are just a little way ahead of a friend in leveling, you can slow down and they can speed up until you are together again. You can also lock yourself at a level so that the quests in an area don't go grey on you as you work to complete them. As an explorer and an obsessive completionist I love being able to work though the game in a controlled fashion, at my own pace.</p>

[Laenai]

<p>It was okay. It wasn't fantastic.</p><p>Many areas of just flat wrong information. A lot of features that should've been included weren't. Very glossed over. I can almost understand that aspect, but a lot of it felt like it was written either for or by someone very young.</p><p>Way too many spelling errors. A lot of grammar issues.</p><p>I would absolutely edit out the blurb about the PvP and mention it in passing. I haven't played on a PvP server since shortly after they released, but it sounds like a lot of whining and complaining by the reviewer versus real attempts at much of anything. Finding a better way to get information on the PvP servers would've helped by a long shot.</p><p>I've played EQ2 since launch and quite honestly, I wouldn't buy the game based on the review. Not because the game sounds terrible, but because the review was written and edited poorly. /shrugs Sorry.</p>