PDA

View Full Version : Potential of EverQuest II


Cercs
10-23-2007, 01:10 AM
Please forgive me if this comes off as any sort of a negative post; it is nothing short of curiosity.*edited this out as to not derail my own thread <img src="/smilies/69934afc394145350659cd7add244ca9.gif" border="0" alt="SMILEY" />*Ok. So. Point being... <b>how much potential do you think EQ2 has and what do you think the future of EQ2 is? Why?</b> What makes EQ2 stand out among other games with open worlds, flying mounts, and such? What makes EQ2 shine?Thanks! ^_^

Arcanth
10-23-2007, 02:02 AM
Given the plethora of MMO's always around the corner I don't think any MMO has much opportunity to grow beyond it's launch window unless it grabs and holds a critical mass right off the bat. EQ2 obviously has enough subscribers to be a going concern, a few hundred thousand subscribers brings in millions a month so is obviously enough to make an MMO profitable if not a raging success.Vanguard is in this boat as well, even if they go with a big relaunch, it's done its dash and will never be more than a niche player unfortunately. However, so long as the style, flavour, ambience or whatever attracts enough people an MMO can make enough money, despite itself, to have a long life. Look at Anarchy Online, one of the worst launches there's been but I still had and retain a fondness for it just the same because it had *something*. I'd love to see an AO2, assuming the dev's have learnt enough for a successful launch of AoC.

Mic12
10-23-2007, 12:42 PM
<p>I think EQII has allot of potential. I also think that for once SOE is listening to the player base and changing the game to one that will draw more people.</p><p>EQII has stunning graphics. Sadly they are wasted on the blan armor and weapons. But that is something they are working on. Leveling is fast so players aren't stuck in one place for ever. It is a good game and has potential to grow and develope.</p><p>But that is just my opinoin. In my opinoin, I think Vangaurd is PoS. In that game everything is blan, characters, environments, spells. The gameplay is horrid. I couldn't go 30 minutes with out a crash, blackout, screen tearing, running in place, etc...I would never re-install that game. Everytime someone has asked me about it, they have put it back on the shelf. </p><p>BUt it doesn't matter because wether you play Vangaurd or EQII, guess who's getting paid?</p><p>**I forsee this thread getting locked. It doesn't have much to do with actual gameplay.</p>

LordPazuzu
10-23-2007, 02:19 PM
<p>EQ2 is finally implementing that skeletal body system that was originally intended pre-launch.  EQ2 character models, even as they are now, are so much better than Vanguard's it isn't funny.  I do't think they even managed to get tails on the animal races in VG yet. Every race in VG has the exact same human body with a different head pasted on it, even the animal races.  In EQ2, at least, the troll and the wood elf aren't sharing cut and paste body models.</p><p> EQ2 also has the added bonus of running smoothly on most current machines and not being hopelessly broken.  VG was so hopelessly mismanaged pre-buyout that SOE has still yet to be able to pick up the peices.  Vanguard is beautiful, I won't argue that.  So much of that world, while pretty, just comes across as being cut-and-pasted into place.  Alot of corners were cut to get that game into stores.  Vanguard has a long way to go to even come close to living up to its potential.  So far, in fact, that I have serious doubts that it'll survive long enough to do so.  Sure, SOE might keep it running, but by the time it gets to where it needs to be, will anyone still care or will they already be immersed in the latest WoW expansion or the latest new MMO that delivered everything VG promised but got it right the first time?</p><p>I think EQ2 has tons of potential.  It was an overly ambitious project during conception, but it seems like it's finally living up to that potential.  I know, barring any drastic change in direction, that I'll be here for a long time to come.</p>

Gungo
10-23-2007, 03:01 PM
<p>diplomacy in vangaurd is essentially scrapped. They just fired 15 additional vanguard devs. Vanguard is still on the fine line of becoming an AC2 clone. </p><p>EQ2 is still recovering from a non-ideal release. EQ2 did not have a bad release. It still was successful compared to 90% of the MMO's. </p><p>The thing with EQ2 is that it is constently improving, includign the new Character models and guild housing which will come sometime after ROK's release and probably during the first quarter of 2008. Depending on RoK and the future EQ2 expansions EQ2 can have continued growth due to word of mouth. But EQ2 will never be a WoW type 1 million+ subscriber game, even if it becomes a better game. </p><p>What i think will help EQ2 the most in the future, well as long as the devs continue to chug along at improving the game as they are doing. The art department and graphics of the game should be the place to draw in the most initial attention and i hope the the new characte rmodels truly allows the art department to create much better visually appealing armours. I hope that spell effects takes much more solid and dynamic approach, because as the computer systems allows people to increase spell effects it will showcase those visuals alot more even when the actual art becomes standard quality. </p>

Leatherneck
10-23-2007, 03:03 PM
<cite>Cercsij wrote:</cite><blockquote>Please forgive me if this comes off as any sort of a negative post; it is nothing short of curiosity.What potential do you think EQ2 has? It is a game that has come into her own very much; but looking back at pre-release videos character customization (physically at creation) was a million times greater than it is now. In my debacle of debating between VG and EQ2, I have to wonder... how much potential does EQ2 have? VG has flying mounts, crafting, diplomacy, different mount types (yay EQ2 for stepping up on this! <img src="/eq2/images/smilies/283a16da79f3aa23fe1025c96295f04f.gif" border="0" alt="SMILEY<img src="/smilies/283a16da79f3aa23fe1025c96295f04f.gif" border="0" alt="SMILEY" />" width="15" height="15" />), numerous cities; more world; more immersive combat etc. There's also a ton of awesome EQ2 features.So that was mostly rambling; I'm trying not to compare, but I think I failed. <img src="/eq2/images/smilies/69934afc394145350659cd7add244ca9.gif" border="0" alt="SMILEY<img src="/smilies/69934afc394145350659cd7add244ca9.gif" border="0" alt="SMILEY" />" width="15" height="15" />Ok. So. Point being... <b>how much potential do you think EQ2 has and what do you think the future of EQ2 is?</b>Thanks! ^_^</blockquote><p>I see two parts to this.</p><p>1)  Comparing VG to EQ2 is misleading, at best.  They're very different games now, and from the dev comments I've read, they're going to be even more different as time passes.  A multiplicity of cities and a larger world really are a disadvantage.  People complain now about how empty the game <i>feels</i>.  Increasing the number of cities and playing area would increase that feeling.  "More immersive" combat is purely subjective.  NO combat system has ever been "immersive" to me.</p><p>2)  I see EQ2 as having a great deal of potential.  They can pick-and-choose much of what EQ1 does in terms of expansions and the like as well as forging their own lore and lands to play in.  In that respect, EQ2 players should be somewhat thankful for EQLive's existence, as they do some of the EQ2 devs' work for them in the creation of "stuff".  Example, RoK; EQ2's team didn't need to create a expansion out of ether.  They had a starting place to work from, Kunark in EQ1.</p><p>Any game is potentially limitless.  There's no single thing one games that another can't have.  However, just because it can have something doesn't mean it should.</p>

Cercs
10-23-2007, 03:09 PM
I edited my OP as to not derail my own thread... <img src="/smilies/69934afc394145350659cd7add244ca9.gif" border="0" alt="SMILEY" />I look forward to reading more opinions! ^_^ Thanks, all!

Eboj
10-23-2007, 04:03 PM
eq2? oh that game... ok, the good:good learning curve, starts easy and gets progressively harder plenty of content,insane big amount of lore,thousands (literally) of quests,big number of classes and races to pick from "almost" freely,still the mmorpg with the best graphics,high quality community (not going to comment on the one from that other game lol),big variety in zones, mob types and difficultythe bad: combat is too fast so that you have little time to "plan" what to do next,heroics are easy to the point where crowd control and buffing classes are not required,engine was developed with different hardware in mind, so that performance is rather unoptimized.cities are split up in many small zones, i'd prefer one big zone, but, that the problem would be performance, see line above.the pvp system, it has potential, its just not refined yet (to say it nice)

Skua
10-23-2007, 04:34 PM
<cite>[email protected] wrote:</cite><blockquote>eq2? oh that game... ok, the good:good learning curve, starts easy and gets progressively harder <span style="color: #99ff00;"><--- Disagree starts easy gets easy ....yeah u get mor e skills but....?</span> plenty of content, <span style="color: #99ff00;"><---- AGREE!!!</span>insane big amount of lore,<span style="color: #99ff00;"> <---- Yeah <img src="/smilies/283a16da79f3aa23fe1025c96295f04f.gif" border="0" alt="SMILEY" /> still miss the "old citys" =/</span>thousands (literally) of quests,<span style="color: #99ff00;"> <---- thousands? MILLIONS!!!</span>big number of classes and races to pick from "almost" freely, <span style="color: #99ff00;"><---- Yeah but a lot of class can  be merged and no1 will care (enchanters?)</span>still the mmorpg with the best graphics, <span style="color: #99ff00;"><---- Disagree , Eq2 still impress me but , the incoming games .....</span>high quality community (not going to comment on the one from that other game lol), <span style="color: #99ff00;"><--- Agree , some [Removed for Content] but like all communities....</span>big variety in zones, mob types and difficulty <span style="color: #99ff00;"><---- Yup , i miss another frost zone =/ everfrost is a ghost town now</span> the bad: combat is too fast so that you have little time to "plan" what to do next,<b><u><span style="color: #99ff00;"> <--- Thats the worse part of Eq2 imo....</span></u></b>heroics are easy to the point where crowd control and buffing classes are not required,<span style="color: #99ff00;"> <--- CC wasnt part of eq2 (holy trinity any1?)</span>engine was developed with different hardware in mind, so that performance is rather unoptimized.<span style="color: #99ff00;"> <---- Bleh eq2 still eat my ram for breakfast</span>cities are split up in many small zones, i'd prefer one big zone, but, that the problem would be performance, see line above. <span style="color: #99ff00;"><--- yeah <img src="/smilies/9d71f0541cff0a302a0309c5079e8dee.gif" border="0" alt="SMILEY" /></span>the pvp system, it has potential, its just not refined yet (to say it nice)<span style="color: #99ff00;"> <---- Eq2 is a pve game afterall <img src="/smilies/8a80c6485cd926be453217d59a84a888.gif" border="0" alt="SMILEY" /></span></blockquote>

Ama
10-23-2007, 08:12 PM
<cite>Cercsij wrote:</cite><blockquote>Please forgive me if this comes off as any sort of a negative post; it is nothing short of curiosity.*edited this out as to not derail my own thread <img src="/eq2/images/smilies/69934afc394145350659cd7add244ca9.gif" border="0" alt="SMILEY<img src="/smilies/69934afc394145350659cd7add244ca9.gif" border="0" alt="SMILEY" />" width="15" height="15" />*Ok. So. Point being... <b>how much potential do you think EQ2 has and what do you think the future of EQ2 is? Why?</b> What makes EQ2 stand out among other games with open worlds, flying mounts, and such? What makes EQ2 shine?Thanks! ^_^</blockquote><p>I'll keep the comments I heard at GDC to myself, but most said EQII has staying power.  At the moment even though there has been alot of change people are free to choose how they want to play the game.  </p><p>You can make money adventuring, tradeskilling and/or practice marketing tactics. On Kithicor I wish I had bought up those planar orbs of fire when they were 1g a pop because at one point they soared to 21g.  </p><p>Adventuring has 3 aspects atm rewarding their own specific tier.  </p><p>Soloers have alot of quests they can complete and earn some nice gear.  Some raid items are made tradeable allowing for soloers to earn this gear with the money they made. </p><p>People who prefer groups have access to better items than soloers, but not better than raiders.  Alot of zones are group oriented atm which makes for great content. (Unrest, CoV, and the new Shard of Fear to name a few)</p><p>Raiders have access to higher end gear and this presents its own unique aspect.  You have casual raids such as labs, Temple of Scale, Lycenium and such that give a good challenge with decent rewards.  (Love my GDOH from LOA).  Semi-core raiders have more difficult zones to do such as FTH, DT, HoS and the like giving even better rewards.  FTH is a great zone for those starting to do EoF raids.  Hardcore people can do the higher end zones such as MMIS and Emerald halls plus Throne of New Tunaria.  </p><p>As far as content goes it's both good and bad because some content is new with some being rehashed.  All in all I would say EQ2 has the staying power and it will get better.  If developers improve upon key aspects of EQ2 it will truely develope drawing in more people. </p>

Haapy
10-23-2007, 09:06 PM
EQ2 has probably the most active development cycle of all MMOs, with very frequent updates, new zones, bonus adventure packs, and expansions. Numerous ways to advance a character beyond just levels and gear. Housing, titles (old guildmate was trying to collect every title in game), appearance, languages, lore (a friend of mine is trying to collect every book in game). Two separate tradeskills for every character.  Some  custom spells that come from quests only (master strikes, Splitpaw line, Bloodlines line). All that adds for more depth than average MMO.

Cleitanious
10-23-2007, 11:26 PM
I'd say this game has alot of potential, but its severely limited by its engine which, reall, truely needs work. It was designed for and works best with non-existant hardware, not that it is too demanding, but it's just not right in it's methods. Their shadow system is a shining example, and in it's current state the game is as good as not even having a shadow system at all.

10-24-2007, 01:56 AM
The biggest problem with the engine is the lack of multi core and dual graphic card support.The dual or quad core issue is the biggest since eq2 is heavily dependant on the cpu. CPU manufacturers have stop increasing the pipeline and have started adding in additional cores to increase system performance. The next intel core will be 8 cores. But sadly eq2 only will ever use 1 core. Now you can set the afinity of 1 core to exclusively do eq2, but this is no where near the upgrade you would recieve if eq2 was optomized to use all 8 cores.The same is close for dual graph cards.  

Cercs
10-24-2007, 02:00 AM
O_o; You're kidding??Single core? No dual graphic cards capability? Gross. It won't be too long before SOE is <i>forced</i> to have to update the EQ2 engine in some way.

Eboj
10-24-2007, 02:59 AM
<cite>Cercsij wrote:</cite><blockquote>O_o; You're kidding??Single core? No dual graphic cards capability? Gross. It won't be too long before SOE is <i>forced</i> to have to update the EQ2 engine in some way.</blockquote>well, if eq2 would have been developed back then in the pentium 3 days, it would actually scale better now. intel went for a inefficient but high clocking approach (their marketing department loved that), at the time eq2 was developed intel was saying in public that they would stay on that road and that they would expand that concept. its not soe who is to blame that intel then scrapped the development for the successor of the pentium 4 and instead scaled up their mobile architecture. (amd scaling down their server architecture). sli was around before, but, the company that had the patent for it went bankrupt (remains of company where bought up by nvidia), so its rather harsh to demand of soe to have known ahead that sli after being dead for many years would return. that said, a revamp for the engine in order to make better use of todays hardware is in order... before anyone jumps on me saying it would  be too expensive because of low number of players, well, other games, with less players than eq2 had engine revamps (or even replacements) too.

Willias
10-24-2007, 03:05 AM
EQ2 has lots of potential.  I think most of the game's newer content shows this.However, the game is held back by ugly character models, a significant number of boring areas (most of the stuff that is from the original game), and a graphics engine that was designed with "the future" in mind, yet said future didn't go the way that the original engine devs thought it would.If EQ2 can change that stuff around, I'd imagine sub numbers would start shooting up.  As it stands now...  Commonlands and Antonica are booooring.

AratornCalahn
10-24-2007, 04:44 AM
EQ2? Potential? Umm sure why not.Other games might have new interesting features (Which is perfectly fine by me to steal any good ideas they come up with, infact if you DON'T your insulting your customers by not having the best ideas in your product) but it's only real problems are its lack of challanging/consistent/rewarding solo/small group and even full group content. Most is very easy or trivialised by one class. And, of course, the sheer lack of appearance models and high end decorative textures.But forget that, SOEs big 'potential' game is Planetside. One day the MMO War Game will be big! .... Hopefully.

Shoushin
10-24-2007, 06:31 AM
i'd add some points to the con's of eq2.- even though the community is generally good (really good) on the european servers it's not too big (well at least on runnyeye) Getting together a group can be a pain in the butt sometimes (missing a healer / tank... bah... no one will help us....)- even though there are LOTS of content in EQ2 but after a time it starts to feel repetitive, monotonous. I'm missing the live events, a some change. *sigh*

Durelli
10-24-2007, 07:40 AM
<cite>Cercsij wrote:</cite><blockquote>Please forgive me if this comes off as any sort of a negative post; it is nothing short of curiosity.*edited this out as to not derail my own thread <img src="/eq2/images/smilies/69934afc394145350659cd7add244ca9.gif" border="0" alt="SMILEY<img src="/smilies/69934afc394145350659cd7add244ca9.gif" border="0" alt="SMILEY" />" />*Ok. So. Point being... <b>how much potential do you think EQ2 has and what do you think the future of EQ2 is? Why?</b> What makes EQ2 stand out among other games with open worlds, flying mounts, and such? What makes EQ2 shine?Thanks! ^_^</blockquote>How much potential? It has a lot but as this thread seems to have gotten at it has some fairly serious limits that stop much of that potential being reached. That said there is very good evidence that the devs know about it and are working on em.. in evidence:Seamless world- to me and many of the people I talked to at the time the worst part about eq2 at launch was the fact it isnt seamless. Norrath has been divided into (in fairness) recognizable loading zones. Ruined immersion. Now back at release the devs were pretty much "You want seamless? Too bad! zoning is for your own good, [Removed for Content]!!1". The attitude  of the current devs is "You want seamless ? Lessee what we can do.".  How revolutionary - but the attitude of the people making something is really the key to unlocking any potential. I know we dont have a seamless world, but they are making an effort to approach that at least.The current attitude is also fairly competitive (perhaps another reason for pushing seamlessness). This is good as it makes them stive for a better game. To stay competitive they'll need to upgrade the engine. As yea, no multi core or vid card support will start to verge on embarrassing before long let's face it.  So I have faith.There are some elements in the game, that have potential too which arent being utilized..The game could potentially be quite challenging and require good tactics if it looked at the CC tools in place for example.The previous devs showed that the game can be incredibly cinematic, this is all but gone now, but still the tools are in place.Yes the armour sucks. But there are awesome looking mobs all over the place. At least one person working on the game can draw, so there is potential there :pAs long as the game is helmed by people who listen to their customer(current and potential) base, it will be a strong contender.  What makes it shine? The lore and amount of content. The fact that deep down it's mouldy old Norrath :p.

Arcanth
10-24-2007, 01:13 PM
<cite>Durellius wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite></cite>To stay competitive they'll need to upgrade the engine. As yea, no multi core or vid card support will start to verge on embarrassing before long let's face it.  So I have faith.</blockquote>There are many of us who have been waiting since launch for graphic engine fixes, better characters and clothing along with other improvements or fixes. Guess what? We're still waiting...

DngrMou
10-24-2007, 01:34 PM
<cite>[email protected] wrote:</cite><blockquote>EQ2 has lots of potential.  I think most of the game's newer content shows this.However, the game is held back by ugly character models, a significant number of boring areas (most of the stuff that is from the original game), and a graphics engine that was designed with "the future" in mind, yet said future didn't go the way that the original engine devs thought it would.If EQ2 can change that stuff around, I'd imagine sub numbers would start shooting up.  As it stands now...  Commonlands and Antonica are booooring.</blockquote>If you want to see some hideous, uninspired character models, check LoTRO.  The rest of the world looks great, the character models are attrocious.  In comparison, EQ2's models are much better....some of the best out there, imo.

Kellin
10-24-2007, 02:07 PM
<cite>Durellius wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>Cercsij wrote:</cite>Seamless world- to me and many of the people I talked to at the time the worst part about eq2 at launch was the fact it isnt seamless. Norrath has been divided into (in fairness) recognizable loading zones. Ruined immersion. Now back at release the devs were pretty much "You want seamless? Too bad! zoning is for your own good, [Removed for Content]!!1". The attitude  of the current devs is "You want seamless ? Lessee what we can do.".  How revolutionary - but the attitude of the people making something is really the key to unlocking any potential. I know we dont have a seamless world, but they are making an effort to approach that at least.</blockquote><p>Actually, as I remember it, the zoning choice wasn't "zoning is for your own good, [Removed for Content]!!1".  It was because (I suppose at the time, anyway) zoning allowed the developers to create a much more diversified environment.  Seamless environments apparently have problems with things like changing flora, fauna, and weather.  Probably has something to do with loading too many types of models or something.</p><p>You must remember that WoW was in development at the same time, and everyone was aware of the differences in design philosophies of the two games.  WoW was intended to run smoothly on the hardware in common use at the time, EQ2 decided to go for the "grow into the next couple of generations of hardware" idea.  WoW - seamless, EQ2 - zones.  WoW - PvP, EQ2 - PvE.  And so on...</p><p>Zoning doesn't bother me, but I can appreciate that some folks find it annoying.  The fact that I can't run on max graphics is also a non-issue - as long as I can get a playable framerate and graphics that are good enough for me to see what's going on, I'm good.  It's all about playability - pretty graphics do not make a good game, so the way everyone harps about them kind of puzzles me.</p><p>As for EQ2's potential, I think the smartest thing the devs came up with was mentoring.  City of Heroes did it first, with the sidekick thing, but that was taking a lower character and raising their level.  By having higher level characters be able to group with lower levels on their own turf, it keeps the lower levels from feeling alienated, they get to see a lot more of the game world, and everyone gets to have more fun.  As a matter of fact, some of the most entertaining areas are for the lower levels.</p><p>Any game that has good gameplay through all levels and is welcoming to new players has more potential than one that's focused only on the endgame.  I think EQ2 does this quite well.  My main criticism would probably have to be with their marketing.  They just aren't aggressive enough, so a lot of people miss out on one of the best MMORPGs out there.</p>

Cercs
10-24-2007, 06:00 PM
VG can never implement boats and flying mounts though. X_x

Gromph
10-24-2007, 07:38 PM
EQ2 allows three different games to be played, namely:A) The leveling game.For these players the game ends at max level. They enjoy content and environment, and are in no hurry to end the game.B) The raiding game.For these players the game starts at max level. Leveling is just a transport and should be as quick as possible.C) The combat game.Leveling is just a transport between different kinds of combat challenges.Wow is mainly a combat game. That's why it's the the biggest game. The biggest customer category is teenagers who wants to combat others. You can go to wow from CS and continue play CS but in wow environment.EQ2 is a good leveling game. Therefore, SOE should continue to improve the leveling aspect of EQ2. Examples on that are:* character development/improvement,* more content to explore,* more lore and dialogues,* replace raiding with challanging quests that are independent of group size, * further develop crafting (allow making of extraordinary items at huge time and cost a few times per year), * ignore class balancing and make classes more diffe rent which will make playing a new toon more of a different game.SOE have two other games. EQ1 and Vanguard. They should improve the raiding aspect of one and make the other a combat game. SOE should niche the three games for different customer segments instead of trying to satisfy all customers with all games. That is just futile.

Starman
10-25-2007, 03:29 PM
This is an interesting topic, and one that I'm happy to see hasn't gone off into "versus" land <img src="/smilies/283a16da79f3aa23fe1025c96295f04f.gif" border="0" alt="SMILEY" />.I've been around the block with a lot of MMOs. I recently came from WoW (and still play there) because every single friend I had in the game left, except one and she plays Horde, and I'm not a big Horde fan.So after playing a bit of Halo 3 to clear my mind I decided to come back here.This game just rocks. The shame of it is that not a lot of people realize it. Forget staying power, I think that if the game was just marketed better it would attract the right people.I was trying to think of the right word for this game and the best I could come up with was "sophisticated". Maybe a little TOO much, there are some things I'd change (more on that below), but overall it's a great way to enjoy an MMO and not have it so braindead. It's a thinking-person's MMO.First and foremost, I have to applaud the dev team for talking WITH the users. It's respectful of them. They treat their customers like people, not cash machines. The fact that they listen and improve the game on a regular basis shows that they really want to keep a good relationship with the players.I left the game at one point. Feb. 2005. The combat system and the tradeskill system just annoyed me to the point where I felt I had to go. It wasn't the EQ I knew and loved and although SOE said it wouldn't be in some respects, it was so radically different that I wasn't having fun anymore and that's when I went to WoW. When I came back and saw all these changes to the game that fixed a lot of players' concerns, I supported SOE and came back. This synergy with the players is what I like about this game.If I had to point at one and only one single most important aspect of the game that I truly love it would be mentoring. It's such a wonderful way to allow players of almost any level to help others out. I've been mentoring players around 10-20 levels lower than me and it's time spent with them I wouldn't normally be able to do.The broker system rocks (except PLEASE change that obnoxious [Removed for Content] in NQ), guild banks rock, homes rock, the quest system rocks. So much of this game is amazing, but players of other MMOs need to have their attitudes changed in order for them to even try it. EQ2's biggest problem is the fact that socially, everyone's playing WoW. I started playing WoW only because EQ2 forced me to, and I stayed in WoW because everyone I knew was there.Things I'd change:Player and NPC models. There's still something....stiff about them. Those robotic head turns have to go. NPCs look like they're made of plastic. It still irks me.Armor seems to be improving, but I'd still like to see some Guild Wars/WoW/Lineage II-type armor.Dances. I know it's strictly eye candy, but man, the dances have to be fixed.Graphics are excellent, but even on my AMD Dual 3800 and Dual SLI nVidia 7800 the game crawls where it shouldn't. I hope that the devs can fix that. I'm a software engineer so I know it's not a simple task, but it CAN be done.And finally: there needs to be something in the game that makes the player say "WOW! That's cool". In EQ1 it was the NK Spires, in WoW it was Teldrassil, and EQ2 has....the newbie isle? Again, I know it's a serious dev change, but there's gotta be a "WOW!" moment in the game early on. Something that conveys the epic scope of the game early so that they get a sense that they're in a big world.In any case, it's good to be back.

Virulence
10-25-2007, 03:42 PM
<p>Im not super bright on EQ2's future unless things change and I think there might be some of that when RoK hits.</p><p>Kunark will really make or break EQ2 more than any expansion previous because I think we are seeing the real non-SoE/WoW competition finally step up to plate in the form of AoC and WAR.</p><p>I have alot of issues with game mechanics and the general way the endgame plays out that I think are really stalling what could otherwise be a great MMO. Im lucky Im on a highly populated server because I think some of servers have already sunk into a 'culture of decay' with endless players looping through to level 70, then quitting.</p><p>I would love to have an EQ2 type game with the freedom-based dynamics of Vanguard playstyle, but that might have to wait until EQ3 type venture.</p>

Gorhauth
10-25-2007, 05:03 PM
<cite>Virulence wrote:</cite><blockquote><p>Kunark will really make or break EQ2 more than any expansion previous because I think we are seeing the real non-SoE/WoW competition finally step up to plate in the form of AoC and WAR.</p></blockquote>People have been claiming every expansion was 'make or break' since DOF was still in Beta.  Here's an idea, Chicken Little, the sky <i>still</i> isn't falling.

Xaxius
10-25-2007, 08:21 PM
<p>I think there are several things which are going to be key when it comes to RoK:</p><p>1.)  The Marketing.   I think I was as surprised as anyone when I first saw the box for the RoK release. It's definately NOT what I expected from the release of one of the most anticipated expansions ever for EQ2. It seems that SOE is marketing the overall game, and not the expansion itself. This could be an either brilliant move or alienate potential "old-EQers" that would've been enticed a more nostaglic packaging. I will say that the incorporation of ALL expansions in one single purchase is long overdue and I only wonder how many more people would've been exposed to the original EQ all those years ago if it was the same marketing strategy back then. Low cost of entry FTW! </p><p>There also <b>needs</b> to be more of an overall focus in general to the marketing of the game itself, and not just during the expansion cycles. EoF was an incredible expansion, and the add-ons over the course of the last year (Fear Gate, Darklight Woods, Neriak, etc) have been equally impressive. They also have garnered great press over the last year as well, from various outlet who've reviewed the expansion and changes. Unfortunately, there is no mention of this press on the new website. Why? Just seems like another missed opportunity.   </p><p>2.)  A New Trial.  This would be really nice to exploit the most "up-to-date" design philosophy of the new expansion. Maybe make the only starting areas G. Fay, Darklight and the new Sarnak starting area?  </p><p>3.)  Further Revisions.  This goes back to combat, specifically the button mashing. EQ2 design team's focus needs to continue the focus on revising core mechanics. The SPAMING needs to die and is a catalyst for people moving on to greener pastures. The design team has shown that they are willing to go back and fix long broken dynamics in the game (new skeletal system, zone revisions, etc.), I only hope that continues.</p><p>Anyway, I could go on with what folks already know, but these are just a few of the items that are currently "top of mind" with me. </p>

Virulence
10-25-2007, 09:37 PM
The marketing strat for RoK is a very interesting point. They arent so much selling Kunark as essentially relaunching the whole game. Very good idea.