| 16 posts found | |||
|---|---|---|---|
|
Trying to get a fair overall view of how these games perform for each group. I am taking a poll to see if you have had better luck running EQ2 or LOTRO on your system...or have you not played LOTRO? or just here reading and have neither, or finally are they about the same... Check it, and be honest, as we really would like to see how well these games perform for you, and maybe add in a note of what system components you are using.. For example: e6600 dual core, 8800gts 640mg, 4 gigs DDR2, WD SE 16 Sata II with 16mb cache EQ2 seems to run better for myself... Thanks much!
|
|||
|
9/13/07 10:41:37 AM#2
Ive played both and its a very easy question... EQ2 - much better game (for pve) and will have much more performance issues. this would be easy for you to research..just go to the EQ2 technical forums vs the LOTRO forums. LOTRO- i never lagged there.....never had fun there either but thats another story. That game was more boring (to me) than the Matrix mmo was lol.
id just like to add im one of the biggest tolkien geeks on the face of the earth. |
|||
|
9/13/07 10:45:30 AM#3
I beta'd LOTRO. You couldn't pay me to play that game and I definately won't be paying them for it. Alot of people are leaving. Many that have lifetime accounts. Why are they leaving? Most of them cite "intense boredom". But I've been playing EQ2 for years and still love it. That should say something. My website is closed temporarily. Hopefully it will only be a short delay. |
|||
|
9/13/07 10:45:41 AM#4
The only difference in technical gameplay I've ever had between these two would be in Bree, I get a little bit of a slow down there. Other then that little annoyance, not too much of a difference in frame rates for me. I'm running a Dual core 2.66 Ghz, 8800GTX, 4 gigs RAM. This is actually a random occurrence. |
|||
|
9/13/07 10:47:49 AM#5
EQ2 ran a LOT better than LOTRO. I can run EQ2 in high settings while I had to run LOTRO in Medium with some things customly scaled down even further, because otherwise the game would become a lagfest. Still, I do think that LOTRO looks amazing, and I'm tempted to think it looks better than EQ2. Added to the fact that it's a newer game, the performance issues didn't surprise me...much, considering I have a 2.8 gHz dual core, a geforce 7950 gts with 512 RAM, and 2 gigs of DDR 2. |
|||
|
9/13/07 10:52:55 AM#6
LOTR:o i think runs better, but i didn't like the game. Plus your comparing apples to oranges. The game engines are 2 totally different engines. LOTR:O has the better performance, but EQ2 has a lot more pixel processing. This doesn't take into the fact that i like the graphics, gameplay, characters, story alot better in eq2...just an honest performance rating
|
|||
|
Thats all I wanted...was some honesty here...keep your thoughts coming, and thanks for the input.. |
|||
|
9/13/07 1:00:57 PM#8
Originally posted by tapeworm00 Your very very right. LOTRO does *look* better....but id be willing to bet my next paycheck after a week or two you will be like...uhh....... Monsterplay pvp was a total farce also. Heres why i think so; You can play a normal character to level 50 and go monsterplay against the evils (i forget what they call them) however, the evils... You can make any evil after you have reached level 15 on a normal character. If you choose to do this your evil character will *start* at level 50 and never be allowed to leave the pvp zone....also, your evil character is designed to be about 50% as tough as any normal character....yea you read that right...no matter how much work you put in on the evil character and yes you can build them up so to speak....you will never ever be able to kill a normal character 1v1......yep you read that right....its designed that way on purpose.....why? i havent a clue. im a MMO freak and also a MAJOR LOTR/tolkien geek...i mean...i cant help it lol. but that is one boring freaking mmo. again, these are my opinions and reflect my views only. they added odd things to the game.....for examle you can play a chicken....yea.......uh....a chicken. and There are a total of about 5-6 classes you can choose to play which look absolutely horrid and like nothing ive imagined in tolkien or seen in the movies.....not even close....good luck tho. i personally even thew the box/discs away....ya its *that* boring. |
|||
|
matraque
Apprentice Member
Joined: 11/10/05
If i''m paying a monthly fee, i demand an unfinished game! |
9/13/07 5:37:34 PM#9
Runs about the same on my system. Funny that in the LOTRO forum, LOTRO is winning... Seems like the EQ2 forum is more realistic. |
||
|
9/14/07 3:42:43 AM#10
Well i told you openedge1 that EQ2 players are not willing to amid wich runs better, and more have voted that EQ2 is better, a very few of the posters however do speak honnest wich suprised me, But overall players say thay dont like Lotro, wich is not the question, its about preformace most of the posters seem to vote about wich game looks better or thay like better, and not even bothering reading the poll, all thay do is bash Lotro, whitout going intro whats this thread/poll is about... Playing: Lord of the Rings Online. |
|||
|
Originally posted by sandage
Excuse me? Did you even look at the poll? It says they both run about the same is the winner...while the LOTRO forums show LOTRO the winner. So, why do you believe the EQ2 forum is less honest with their answer than the LOTRO forums? I stated in the LOTRO forums poll, you will not get any REAL answers either way...EQ2 players will have one opinion and the LOTRO forums will have another...and if I went to the GW forums, the same thing would happen. They would vote for GW..this has been proven... Again, I am sorry that people feel the way they do about LOTRO, and are quite disappointed about how it plays and runs and looks, but you will have to accept that. These polls are not scientific, and will be opinionated... And all opinions say LOTRO is just the same ole same ole in a new wrapper..and performs good for some, and bad for others... Cheers!
|
|||
|
9/20/07 8:24:22 AM#12
The fact is that LOTRO runs much better than EQ2, graphic engine wise. However that's only one part of the equation. Which game has more longevity? Which game am I playing? EQ2 is the clear winner by far. It boils down to a much deeper gaming experience with better content and experiences for all types of players. The LOTRO just didn't understand that up front. LOTRO is a great game for what it delivers but it wears thin quickly. Comparing the two performance wise is also tricky. EQ2 allows for more "high end" graphics settings than LOTRO does, such as full environmental shadows. However turn them on and the best machines today will slow down to 10 fps in busy cities and just die on raids. Turn them off however and it runs pretty damn well. LOTRO graphics is better looking over all due to more of the "newer" features. Hopefully we'll see some additions and improvements to the EQ2 graphics engine architecture over time, but that's pure speculation on my part. |
|||
Originally posted by Stevon Stevon You may not be far from the truth...discussion is currently underway to revamp the skeletal systems for the characters on the Dev forums, and as well...with Rise of Kunark, they plan to eliminate some of the zone loading that we normally see (which actually has not bothered like I thought it would...as I will spend quite a bit of time in any zone I enter..)...so, they always discuss performance changes... I do hate that I cannot turn on shadows, yet everything else is at 100%, and it runs like a dream with nary a drop...now, get that shadows issue fixed, and I will be there a very long time.. (PS: Agreed about LOTRO...I have already clocked more hours in one month of EQ2, than I played in 3 months on LOTRO...hopefully they can make LOTRO more fun for those of us who do not like that gameplay) |
|||
|
9/20/07 10:47:12 AM#14
I agree. Somewhat off topic but I think that one of the things that EQ2 has done so well, and every single other game has not, is to just fill the world with stuff to do. There's a vast number of quests, collections, zones, abilities, classes etc etc. If they would take the time to nail the graphics issues they'd go a long way to bringing in more of the masses imo. Remember those of us that can run the game at extreme settings (albiet without environmental shadows in many cases) are still a small percentage. Many still have older boxes and simply cannot run EQ2 at any setting that is pleasing to the eye. That's EQ2's biggest barrier to success, I think. |
|||
|
9/21/07 11:30:58 AM#15
Interesting that as this poll starts to age, the numbers are getting closer and closer to the numbers in the lotro forum. http://www.mmorpg.com/discussion2.cfm/thread/147579 I wonder if the original numbers were just backlash to the other thread.
|
|||
Originally posted by midwestnets I am not sure actually...I think both were just a little wonky. There is no doubt that if a person has an 8x or 79x series card, the games will both perform well.. But, as the hardware gets less powerful, it would definitely sway to LOTRO, as it seems more optimized like WoW to run slightly better.. Really, the first poll on the LOTRO forums were put up in hate and spite, and just is not scientific... What is scientific is the amount of posts about people leaving or quitting due to boredom...as that also matches what is happening out there on the net as well.. As an example, a blog post I found today..very hilarious
|
|||
