PDA

View Full Version : Is EQ2 the true successor of EQ1?


Cercs
10-21-2007, 10:51 PM
So... is EQ2 the "true successor" of EQ1? Not trying to start anything; I don't really have an opinion. I just see the term thrown around a lot with varying opinions (usually Vanguardians saying no... :p). I just thought it'd be interesting to see the thoughts of some people here.If this is in the wrong place, my sincere apologies. <img src="/smilies/3b63d1616c5dfcf29f8a7a031aaa7cad.gif" border="0" alt="SMILEY" />So... thoughts? ^_^

Mawie
10-21-2007, 10:59 PM
Nope, not at all.

NANEEJE
10-21-2007, 11:34 PM
I quit playing eq1 for many reasons. all of which are no longer valid with eq2... so .. yes, in my opinion, eq2 is the smackdillywhackurbacknodoubtaboutit bombdiggitydogbombit schiznit!!! (did you get all that?) good luck and have fun!, I am!

Skua
10-21-2007, 11:58 PM
<cite>Cercsij wrote:</cite><blockquote>So... is EQ2 the "true successor" of EQ1? Not trying to start anything; I don't really have an opinion. I just see the term thrown around a lot with varying opinions (usually Vanguardians saying no... :p). I just thought it'd be interesting to see the thoughts of some people here.If this is in the wrong place, my sincere apologies. <img src="/eq2/images/smilies/3b63d1616c5dfcf29f8a7a031aaa7cad.gif" border="0" alt="SMILEY<img src="/smilies/3b63d1616c5dfcf29f8a7a031aaa7cad.gif" border="0" alt="SMILEY" />" />So... thoughts? ^_^</blockquote>lore wise , yes ........well yes....Gameplay , hardcore game , ect , no , far from it......i will love to see more content that require brain and no mashing buttons <img src="/smilies/3b63d1616c5dfcf29f8a7a031aaa7cad.gif" border="0" alt="SMILEY" /> but thats just me ..... example :in  eq2 if a mob healer is casting a cure spell , u dont care, yeah sometime some1 notice and stun ....but bleh just 3s more of mashing buttons...in eq1 , if a mob healer casted a heal , u silenced , stuned ,ect to prevent it ....pulling in eq1 .......vs pulling in eq2 ? adds in eq1 vs adds in eq2?raids eq1 vs raids eq2?spells eq1 vs spells eq2 ......classes still missing old spells <img src="/smilies/9d71f0541cff0a302a0309c5079e8dee.gif" border="0" alt="SMILEY" />  ....levitate D:beastlol ....ehm beastlord....enchanter....ups in eq2 there are? ....eq2  <>  Eq1

NANEEJE
10-22-2007, 12:13 AM
alright, I am going to correct myself after the above post. I am a paladin, and there are way better changes to play a paladin. As for the rest of the classes, I couldn't tell you, but I , just my opinion as an avid eq1 player, feel that this is a way better game. good luck.

Simera
10-22-2007, 01:05 AM
<p>My opinion..from playing both for way too long.. *grin*.. </p><p>EQ1 was a lot of fun but I personally like EQ2 better. The first four years of EQ1 was a lot of grinding and camping, and very few quests of any value that you could do on your own. I know they have changed and added the lower level quests in EQ1, I haven't played since EQ2 came out but I assume that does make it a bit better. </p><p>I like though being able to solo whenever I want, being able to do quest lines by myself, and still having fun group content to do if I wish. I like being able to run off agro instead of trying to make the zone with a futile death crawl, I like the level restrictions on gear and named loot drops, so farming and twinking is held to a minimum, and having played a priest in both I like EQ2 better for variety of spells and usage. I like that you don't need the holy trio (tank cleric chanter for those who didnt play eq1) to do anything. Infact any random group of six people can kill pretty much anything in their level range with just the right amount of challenge, there's no class that really gets left out. </p><p>In raids, at first I wasn't thrilled with the 24 person raid limit, because while no one should really be able to just zerg a mob, I hate leaving people out who want to come along. In the long run though its been pretty sensible, because on average thats just about how many show up for raids, and it sort of helps to regulate the size of uber guilds in general. </p><p>I like that, for whatever reason, EQ2 has not carried on the whole "Selling KEI at the bank" and "Paying 5p for a port" thing that was soooo annoying in EQ1.  There is a good amount of transportation options, and nothing is ridiculously far or dangerous to get to, but you still have a lot of world to explore if you like running everywhere. I like the way the death system works on EQ2 better...I was NEVER a big fan of the three hour long corpse runs deep inside Chardok or other nasty places, or having to beg and plead with some jerk necro to summon your corpses out for 10p each, and then another twenty minutes waiting on some cleric to come give you 96% rezzes. One of the biggest things I hated about EQ1 was downtime, and there is next to none in EQ2..it's just faster paced in all ways. Nothing in this game drags on till you want to shot yourself in the head. (I shot myself in the head many many times in EQ1..)</p><p> I like the way the broker works, (at least compared to the bazaar, which I hated). I love the housing and furnishing options, that especially gave the RP servers a nice way to add your own personal touch to your environment, and having little trophies to display..it's nice. </p><p>I never went back to EQ1, never even thought about it..and I had played 5 years at full speed..I didnt think I would ever leave that game..so..I think EQ2 really met the mark, myself. </p>

NANEEJE
10-22-2007, 01:10 AM
Safia? very well put! 100% agree with everything you said. Especially the Kei and porting, i love the griffons, and boats, those are my bio break times... lol

erin
10-22-2007, 01:12 AM
To me, it has a similiar feel.  Similar lore basically.  I like that.  But, in my view, EQ2 fixed many of the things that annoyed me about EQ1 (not saying they may not have fixed them since).  So no, EQ2 is not a successor to EQ1 in that it just isn't the same.  Its not as hardcore, not by a long shot.  I found it difficult if not impossible to play EQ1 solo.  In EQ2 I can log in for 10 minutes and still do something.  That's a huge difference.  EQ2 seriously has casual raiding.  EQ2 has very few grind groups (in EQ1 it was quite common to spend every night in a single spot in BoT, for days on end.  Staring at the same wall.  Every night.)  EQ2 in general, to me, is just friendlier to a casual playstyle.So in that sense, it very much isn't the successor to EQ1.It just really depends on what you meant by the question.

Redhenna
10-22-2007, 03:47 AM
<p>I think of EQ2 as a different game from EQ1, built from similar ideas.  It's not a successor, as the gameplay is significantly different, and really, currently, the two games cater to two different type players.  EQ2 gameplay is just similar enough to EQ1 that is leads new players, fresh from EQ1, to make a bunch of false assumptions.  Solo is wildly different, with all(or at least almost all) classes being able to solo with some success.  Raiding is so completely different it's almost hard to compare raiding in the two games.  Both games have very strong areas, and both have areas that they are really weak, but mostly these are different areas from each other.</p><p>I definitely would not call EQ2 a 'successor' to EQ1.  More like a different game incorporating lore, and certain elements from EQ1.  I am not sure if it was intended, but what has resulted is SoE has two games, both drawing different type players mostly, with the result of a larger revenue base than either game alone would provide.  Less of a parent/child relationship, more as the realtionship of two siblings of significantly different ages.</p>

djinnz
10-22-2007, 03:49 AM
<p>as far as lore goes id say it is</p><p>for gaming style id agree with the above posts and say eq2 took a big shift towards the casual, in this area vanguard is more like the sequal, although on a raiding level id have to say there just isnt a sequal yet, no game is even close to offering the complexity, size or commitment needed that eq 1 gives its raiders </p><p>from a wider point of view id say eq 1, was the begining of bringing this type of game to a much larger audience and was a break through title in this regard. eq2 tried to do the same thing by going more casual, but for lots of reasons it was WoW (in my view an inferior game) took this title from eq2. so in this one area i would say WoW is the follow on from eq 1</p>

gi
10-22-2007, 06:41 AM
<p>Well after having played eq1 off and on for for first few years of its life, and that I have played eq2 since release I feel I can definetly share my opinion.</p><p>EQ2 is definetely the successor to EQ1 when it comes to the Storyline and atmosphere of the game.</p><p>As for game mechanics that is difficult to say. EQ1 was the 1st real 3d mmo of its time,  by 2004 a lot of other games had come out, making eq1 game mechanics look clunky and outdated. I personally like the game mechanic changes they made for eq2, and the subesequent changes that we have now. </p><p>So yes, definately a successor in my eyes.</p>

CHIMPNOODLE.
10-22-2007, 09:02 AM
<p>Yes, it's the successor. Very happy with the changes made as well. </p>

Despak
10-22-2007, 09:13 AM
<p>As with everyone else; lore etc is similar and as such is pretty good.</p><p> But as a Bard from 7 years of EQ1 (still pplay it btw) and 3 of EQ2.  Nowhere similar.  I do actually miss my RSI from twisting for 8+ hour raids.  The sheer versitility of Bards has been brought right down, but that is pretty much my only quibble with EQ2.</p><p>I also miss being able to pull 30+ mobs in the knowledge that, yes I can solo them all if I wish to <img src="/smilies/9d71f0541cff0a302a0309c5079e8dee.gif" border="0" alt="SMILEY" /></p>

Siclone
10-22-2007, 10:22 AM
nopeDifferent game.  People that play and love EQ1, dislike EQ2.There are more EQ1 players then EQ2 players.In my view, EQ2 is so much better then EQ1 except the combat.Its to fast in EQ2, way to much button smashing,,,,,,Button smashing of EQ2 I will tell you right now, is the main reason so many still play EQ1.

Kaalenarc
10-22-2007, 11:04 AM
<cite>Siclone wrote:</cite><blockquote><p>nopeDifferent game.  </p><p><span style="color: #ff0000;">Of course it's different. And imo, improved.</span>People that play and love EQ1, dislike EQ2.</p><p><span style="color: #ff0000;">Not universally true.</span>There are more EQ1 players then EQ2 players.</p><p><span style="color: #ff0000;">No, there arent. Log into any Eq1 server and see. Sure over the 8+ yrs the game has been out more ppl have bought it. But there are far far far fewer ACTIVE players in 1 than in 2</span>In my view, EQ2 is so much better then EQ1 except the combat.Its to fast in EQ2, way to much button smashing,,,,,,Button smashing of EQ2 I will tell you right now, is the main reason so many still play EQ1.</p><p><span style="color: #ff0000;">Again, not sure where you are drawing your numbers from, but , at least in my experience, every time I log into EQ1 I can literally run around for an hour and not see another player. In virtually ANY zone in EQ2 I can stand still in any spot in any zone and within minutes I will see someone else.</span></p></blockquote><blockquote><p><span style="color: #ff0000;">I like EQ2 combat. I think those that say "button mashing" dont get the true subtleties of the combat system. Sure I can mash buttons and MAYBE defeat the thing with 1% on the tanks health. Or I can use the right combo of attacks, mezzes, heals ,etc to defeat it and move on with much better health. And no - that doesnt mean "button mashing in order. There are a lot of encounters in the game that simply cannot be beaten by simple button mashing</span></p><p></p></blockquote>

gi
10-22-2007, 11:10 AM
<cite>Siclone wrote:</cite><blockquote>nopeDifferent game.  People that play and love EQ1, dislike EQ2.There are more EQ1 players then EQ2 players.In my view, EQ2 is so much better then EQ1 except the combat.Its to fast in EQ2, way to much button smashing,,,,,,Button smashing of EQ2 I will tell you right now, is the main reason so many still play EQ1.</blockquote><p><img src="http://forums.station.sony.com/eq2/images/smilies/3b63d1616c5dfcf29f8a7a031aaa7cad.gif" border="0" alt="SMILEY" width="15" height="15" /> of course its different, its the Successor to EQ1, not a clone with nicer graphics. They got rid of most of the tedium that drove people mad and away from the game (like me) and replaced it with quests, and interesting crafting system, and fast exciting combat. not that this games is perfect, far from it. Don't understand why anyone would want a 5-10 minute long fight for something thats not epic. </p><p>The game is different yes, but that does not mean it is not the successor to EQ1. </p>

interstellarmatter
10-22-2007, 12:05 PM
They are two completely different games.  That's why I currently play both.  Each have different high and low points.  EQ2 should of been called something like Return to Norrath or Everquesting Neverresting.

netglen
10-22-2007, 12:15 PM
Early on, you had "Corpse Runs" versus "Shard Runs". After some major changes to EQ2, they got rid of the shard runs. There are some quaint things I miss from EQ1 but I sure don't miss the anxiety of corpse runs.

UlteriorModem
10-22-2007, 12:21 PM
<p>There was a post a while ago regarding an interview with a developer wherein he stated that he wished they had not called it EQ2 because he himself did not consider the game as a "Sequal" or "Successor".</p><p>I looked for the thread but it got buried in some obscure forum somewhere.</p>

Kiyalin
10-22-2007, 12:50 PM
I left EQ1 and took off about six months before playing EQ2 and have never looked back.  I like virtually everything about this game better.  Wish they would optimize the engine a bit and offer better support for dual/quad cores, but gamewise I am completely happy.

Cercs
10-22-2007, 01:51 PM
Interesting answers so far! <img src="/smilies/283a16da79f3aa23fe1025c96295f04f.gif" border="0" alt="SMILEY" />I do really miss shard runs and minor exp loss. Death doesn't sting at all now. Group exp debt was a good thing to rid of, though.

Dasto
10-22-2007, 02:44 PM
<cite>[email protected] Bayle wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>Siclone wrote:</cite><blockquote><p>nopeDifferent game.  </p><p><span style="color: #ff0000;">Of course it's different. And imo, improved.</span>People that play and love EQ1, dislike EQ2.</p><p><span style="color: #ff0000;">Not universally true.</span>There are more EQ1 players then EQ2 players.</p><p><span style="color: #ff0000;">No, there arent. Log into any Eq1 server and see. Sure over the 8+ yrs the game has been out more ppl have bought it. But there are far far far fewer ACTIVE players in 1 than in 2</span>In my view, EQ2 is so much better then EQ1 except the combat.Its to fast in EQ2, way to much button smashing,,,,,,Button smashing of EQ2 I will tell you right now, is the main reason so many still play EQ1.</p><p><span style="color: #ff0000;">Again, not sure where you are drawing your numbers from, but , at least in my experience, every time I log into EQ1 I can literally run around for an hour and not see another player. In virtually ANY zone in EQ2 I can stand still in any spot in any zone and within minutes I will see someone else.</span></p></blockquote><blockquote><p><span style="color: #ff0000;">I like EQ2 combat. I think those that say "button mashing" dont get the true subtleties of the combat system. Sure I can mash buttons and MAYBE defeat the thing with 1% on the tanks health. Or I can use the right combo of attacks, mezzes, heals ,etc to defeat it and move on with much better health. And no - that doesnt mean "button mashing in order. There are a lot of encounters in the game that simply cannot be beaten by simple button mashing</span></p><p></p></blockquote></blockquote>more players in eq1 came from a 3rd party source some time back that listed accounts held.you running though 1 out of 679 zones in eq1, and not seeing many, has nothing to do with what game is played more.if your saying for sure, that eq2 has more players please list your source.  What I am saying is some months back I seen the list from a website,,,things could have changed, I am not sure, and I dont have that site anymore.  I am sure someone around here does.button smashing is button smashing,,,of gamers who dont play eq2,,,thats their  major complaint. ((also read this on a 3rd party website, i forget it off hand)  Thats why eq2 is talking about "spell consolidation" ...I think you can have good combat and still the all the same abilities with less button smashing,,,in fact it would not be hard to do.

Bawang
10-22-2007, 02:45 PM
<p><span style="font-size: x-small;">The correct answer is</span> <span style="font-size: medium;">NO</span></p><p><span style="font-size: x-small;">Speaking as someone whose main in EQ1 was an enchanter and in EQ2 is an illusionist, SOE decimated enchanters in EQ2.  Besides the fact that mezzing is not needed in EQ2 (for most encounters), we can't mezz in groups because everyone has been given abilities which in their normal use break our mezzes.  </span></p><p><span style="font-size: x-small;">In raids, epics have been made virtually immune to mezz, stun, and stifle.  Epics used to be totally immune, but then they used the excuse of giving us insignificant abilities to CC epics in exchange for about one third of the length of our key CC abilites in groups.  So we got the shaft from the start, but then they drove it in real deep for emphasis.</span></p>

CrazyMoogle
10-22-2007, 03:47 PM
<cite>Cercsij wrote:</cite><blockquote>So... is EQ2 the "true successor" of EQ1? </blockquote>Not if "successor" involves taking the predecessor and improving it across the board.  For example, while questing in EQ2 is undeniably superior to that of EQ1, the class design in EQ2 is very much lacking compared to that in EQ.But if you just think of "successor" as literally "the one that came next" then yeah, I guess it is.

CrazyMoogle
10-22-2007, 03:59 PM
<cite>Bawang wrote:</cite><blockquote><p><span style="font-size: x-small;">Speaking as someone whose main in EQ1 was an enchanter and in EQ2 is an illusionist, SOE decimated enchanters in EQ2. </span></p></blockquote>You are 100% correct.  I played 2 box cleric and enchanter and my wife played a bard in EQ1 and those classes in EQ2 are very, very disappointing.

Skua
10-22-2007, 04:07 PM
<cite>Siclone wrote:</cite><blockquote>nopeDifferent game.  People that play and love EQ1, dislike EQ2.There are more EQ1 players then EQ2 players.In my view, EQ2 is so much better then EQ1 except the combat.Its to fast in EQ2, way to much button smashing,,,,,,Button smashing of EQ2 I will tell you right now, is the main reason so many still play EQ1.</blockquote>agree i prefer eq2 but as "battles" goes , the mashing button need to stop......eq2 is the 1 buttonfest <img src="/smilies/8a80c6485cd926be453217d59a84a888.gif" border="0" alt="SMILEY" />...... get the order of your skills...and 123456.. ..repeat.....

interstellarmatter
10-22-2007, 04:08 PM
<cite>Cercsij wrote:</cite><blockquote>Interesting answers so far! <img src="/eq2/images/smilies/283a16da79f3aa23fe1025c96295f04f.gif" border="0" alt="SMILEY<img src="/smilies/283a16da79f3aa23fe1025c96295f04f.gif" border="0" alt="SMILEY" />" width="15" height="15" />I do really miss shard runs and minor exp loss. Death doesn't sting at all now. Group exp debt was a good thing to rid of, though.</blockquote><p>I miss shard runs.  But only when I was grouped with friends and we had a fun time working together to recover them.  I don't miss shard runs with pickup groups.  Nothing was worse than losing a shard at the bottom of FG only to have your group fall apart.  It was fustrating and discouraged grouping with strangers.  There were times that I just got stuck for 3 days without playing because no one would help me get my shard.   I still remember the time at stumbling into the raid zone in that tower in CL.  Not only could I not recover it at the door but try to get a x4 raid together just to get your shard back.</p><p>They should of done it like VG where you could summon your shard and take a larger loss.  As it was, it did not promote grouping between strangers at all....</p>