Everquest

Originally posted by Waterlily

Originally posted by Drafell

Everquest helped to pioneer a whole new era in online gaming.

I remember playing when it first came out. Sure, there were some annoying issues, and features that may be considered primitive by today's standards, yet it was still the first popular 3D MMO out there, and king of the hill until WoW came along.

 

Everquest didn't pioneer anything. SoE like to pretend they did.

UO was the FIRST mmo to hit 100k+ subs before anyone even heard of EQ.

The classes and stats from EQ are all copied from the DnD handbook and almost nothing was original.

AC launched right after EQ and was in many ways more advanced than EQ.

Because SoE tells you EQ pioneered MMO, doesn't make it true.

 

UO pioneering MMO, I'll buy that, but EQ?....no.

How do you arbitrarily pick 100K subs as the magic number to be a pioneer?

UO wasn't the first graphical MMO, that was Meridian 59

UO wasn't 3D or 1st person.

The Ultima lore and gameplay freely took things from D&D too.

AC launched about 8 months after EQ, if memory serves, and looked and played like ass.

EQ was the first one that was noticed by 'mainstream media', and spawned it's share of urban legends.

EQ was called, Evercrack, not UO

EQ's currency was once considered the 8th most stable currency in the world.

EQ was the game copied by Blizzard and Mythic. No one copies UO.  That game would be called 'More Ass'.

---

UO pioneering MMO, I'll buy that, but EQ?....no.

---

I was upset when EQ2 wasn't more like EQ. I still enjoy EQ2 and it has some nice perks, but I would have LOVED it if it had EQ2 graphics, UI, controls, with EQ gameplay/mechanics.

EQ was pioneering in the sense that it was the first graphical MUD. I used to be a heavy text-based MUD player in the early 90s. I didn't try EQ until 2003, but knew people who had played it since 1998. What I hadn't realised until I tried it was how similar it was to some of the MUDs I played several years before. I also remember all the magazine articles and press releases about it. EQ was the first graphical MMO I tried. I didn't like some aspects of it though. Fortunately, in 2003 there were other games on offer. I tried AO but found it too buggy. I then went to DAoC and found that it was what I was looking for. I stayed in that game for quite a while though I did eventually pick up AO off-and-on.

     This is the old debate of graphics versus gameplay.........I can guarantee 100% taht you hated the game before you played 1 second.....Thats because to players like yourself graphics are everything....It doesnt matter if its Hello Kitty Online if the graphics are good you are happy..........Alot of us others though look for good gameplay and challenge and EQ offers that......99 percent of the time the people that are graphics oriented never find a home because they get tired of graphics and are always looking for that next beautiful game.......To each his own.......

Originally posted by Theocritus

     This is the old debate of graphics versus gameplay.........I can guarantee 100% taht you hated the game before you played 1 second.....Thats because to players like yourself graphics are everything....It doesnt matter if its Hello Kitty Online if the graphics are good you are happy..........Alot of us others though look for good gameplay and challenge and EQ offers that......99 percent of the time the people that are graphics oriented never find a home because they get tired of graphics and are always looking for that next beautiful game.......To each his own.......

These are interesting stat's you have provided. Can you please site them, I am interested in checking their validity.
 

Anyway, I played EQ at its release. It was pretty fun, in my opinion. I wasted countless hours playing it. I returned to it a couple years back, and still enjoyed it for a while. Although this is true, I found it necessary to use 2 accounts at the same time, as the game play was extremely slow..... My brother played 2 accounts as well, which helped to cut back on the incredible waiting times required in finding and setting up groups. We, luckily, established our 4 characters to include the key classes of a tank, healer, cc, and dps. If someone playing this game doesn't have a healer stuck to their hip, or doesn't have a social network, I don't think they'll have a good time playing this game.

Everquest is lacking in both quality game play and graphics.   In fact EQ has some of the absolute worst game play mechanics of any game, ever released.      There is nothing challenging about EQ, everything takes time to obtain and is obtainable by anyone with enough time spent.

Want quality game play with a challenge, check out a little game called Portal.    Want a quality MMO with great graphics and game play, check out LOTRO.    Want a very dated game, ran by the worst gaming company in the business, with the most bitter community, check out EQ.

Originally posted by tfox2k1

Everquest is lacking in both quality game play and graphics.  

I saw a quote today by Edward Murrow that I believe is quite fitting:

Everyone is a prisoner of his own experience.  No one can eliminate prejudices - just recognize them.

Having played nearly all the MMORPGs, mainstream and others, my conclusion is they cannot match EQ's quality or graphics.  The world immersion in Everquest, with "dated" graphics, has still not been match.  More to the point, I like EQ's graphics.  In fact, I really like EQ's graphics.  The scale, visuals, colors ... all of it.

Originally posted by tfox2k1

Everquest is lacking in both quality game play and graphics.   In fact EQ has some of the absolute worst game play mechanics of any game, ever released.      There is nothing challenging about EQ, everything takes time to obtain and is obtainable by anyone with enough time spent.

 

Want quality game play with a challenge, check out a little game called Portal.    Want a quality MMO with great graphics and game play, check out LOTRO.    Want a very dated game, ran by the worst gaming company in the business, with the most bitter community, check out EQ.

 

 

Funny you mention LotRO as an adequate substitution for EQ. I, actually, found EQ to be more challenging, and not because of the over-powered monsters that needed to be combated. In my opinion, and it is only my opinion, EQ had raids that required some planning and strategy to see success. LotRO, having played it since beta, was simply surround and pound. All monsters were the same, the quests were all basically fed-ex or killing X to obtain Y. My girlfriend, who never played an MMO before, found the game very easy, capping her character to level 50 in just under a month. The raid zone, which was supposed to be set up as a 24 man raid (if memory serves correctly), could be done easily with 2 groups, provided you didn't attempt the dragon at the end (I admit, he was pretty tough). Although, to be fair, I think it did improve after they introduced the Rift. But, this is really best saved for the LotRO forum.

B'ah, you didn't claim LotRO was challenging, I miss read your comment. My appologies. I do agree that LotRO has superior game play and graphics than EQ, I just found EQ to be more challenging overall.