Not necessarily in order of importance:

1) Performance sucked.  It was ok by myself, but get in a group and it became very laggy.

2) Too many loading screens.  I like an open world.

3) Characters were ugly.  It's strange a company with such deep pockets couldn't afford better artists.

4) Armor ugly and redundant.

5) Quests sucked.  Many of them had me running from zone to zone, thus emphasizing of so many load screens and destroying the illusion of living in the world.

6) Progression slowed to a crawl around level 20. The game began to feel tedious.

7) I hated how the auction house was implemented.

8) I didn't like the crafting system.

Originally posted by Elikal

 

HAHA, I LOLed. XD

"Like hell you are." ^^ cool you have more somewhere? ^^

Well thank you young sir ; )

I do as a matter of fact.

A while ago the Lineage 2 test server was successfully hacked. This was while one of the chronicles was in the process of being tested. They closed down the game for a few days and then everyone who wanted in had to use their birthdates in order to get their accounts back.

Problem was, for some reason, mine (and many others) wasn't working. It took me several days to actually contact customer service, but moments to get my account activated.

During that time I played a little EQ 2. As I mentioned, I love the way that my chosen classes played but couldn't get into it, especially the art design.

Because I couldn't get back into my beloved L2 for quite some time I imagined what might have happened to my "Sovrath" character. I then imagined that he was thrown from Aden to find himself in Norath. What then follows is a series of cartoons while his new "dark elf" friend takes him on a journey across Norath in order to find a way back.

Here are two more ... sorry for the thread derailing but it seems sort of apt.

Originally posted by Sovrath

Originally posted by Elikal

 

HAHA, I LOLed. XD

"Like hell you are." ^^ cool you have more somewhere? ^^

 

er...  ok one more ; )

Originally posted by declaredemer

1. EQ 2 competed with itself; it suffers from a bad name.  Similar to why you do not make Coke II, or Pepsi II, or Ipod II.
2. Bad launch.  It tried to appeal to a more "hardcore" element, which is a small minority of the MMORPG community.
3. Name association with EQ 1; people confused in the market.

 

 

EQ 2 cannot be successful by virtue of its own name.  It would be fine if it were like Final Fantasy II, but EQ 2 was released with EQ 1 still going.  Why compete against yourself?  If it were a series fine.  But UO 2 would be as much of a bad idea.  

 

 

EQ 2's lack of success is less to do with content and features and more to do with the lack of sound business judgment.

 

 

 

EDIT:  Speaking from a gameplay point of view, the game felt too predictable and boring about level 19ish.  It had a sameness to it that felt tedious, not very exciting. 

Your first part is exactly what i say to the reason EQ2 didnt sell. It sounds nerdish with the name Everquest and since it was number 2 they looked at Everquest 1 and it was a nerd game. World Of Warcraft sounds like a game everyone would try and not feel like a nerd in the process. SoE just needs to understand that they are making a game for the High Fantasy audience and that audience isnt big. Accept your low numbers but make a good game. Your not WoW so dont be WoW and now thats whats wrong with EQ2. SoEs attempt to make the game for retards they f-d it up the gameplay and fun factor. I went back to EQ2 on the Ruins of Kunark expansion and it was fun the first 20 levels then it was the boring solo grind with repetivtive quest that were boring and gave no real xp bonus for the difficulty.

I bought EQ2 on launch day. Thought it was pretty awesome at first, but that wore off quickly. Think I made it to level 30 or so with my Troubadour. What I hated the most... probably that is was not solo friendly. Trying to find a group everytime I logged on was not fun at all. Then WOW came out and I never looked back.

Originally posted by Goldknyght

Originally posted by declaredemer

1. EQ 2 competed with itself; it suffers from a bad name.  Similar to why you do not make Coke II, or Pepsi II, or Ipod II.
2. Bad launch.  It tried to appeal to a more "hardcore" element, which is a small minority of the MMORPG community.
3. Name association with EQ 1; people confused in the market.

 

 

EQ 2 cannot be successful by virtue of its own name.  It would be fine if it were like Final Fantasy II, but EQ 2 was released with EQ 1 still going.  Why compete against yourself?  If it were a series fine.  But UO 2 would be as much of a bad idea.  

 

 

EQ 2's lack of success is less to do with content and features and more to do with the lack of sound business judgment.

 

 

 

EDIT:  Speaking from a gameplay point of view, the game felt too predictable and boring about level 19ish.  It had a sameness to it that felt tedious, not very exciting. 

Your first part is exactly what i say to the reason EQ2 didnt sell. It sounds nerdish with the name Everquest and since it was number 2 they looked at Everquest 1 and it was a nerd game. World Of Warcraft sounds like a game everyone would try and not feel like a nerd in the process. SoE just needs to understand that they are making a game for the High Fantasy audience and that audience isnt big. Accept your low numbers but make a good game. Your not WoW so dont be WoW and now thats whats wrong with EQ2. SoEs attempt to make the game for retards they f-d it up the gameplay and fun factor. I went back to EQ2 on the Ruins of Kunark expansion and it was fun the first 20 levels then it was the boring solo grind with repetivtive quest that were boring and gave no real xp bonus for the difficulty.

Actually, everyone I know who played EQ1 and looked forward to EQ2 wanted a bigger, better, more colorful, but mostly the same world of Norrath.  Personally, I envisioned Odus as being a revamped larger version of itself, with lush jungle vegetation.

The disappointment was the entire world was chiseled down to nothing; just Qeynos on one end, Freeport on the other, and a few zones in between.

An EQ3 would thrive, in my opinion, were it merely a larger, revamped, slicker version of EQ1 (minus POP and Luclin, of course).

Originally posted by pencilrick

Originally posted by Goldknyght

Originally posted by declaredemer

1. EQ 2 competed with itself; it suffers from a bad name.  Similar to why you do not make Coke II, or Pepsi II, or Ipod II.
2. Bad launch.  It tried to appeal to a more "hardcore" element, which is a small minority of the MMORPG community.
3. Name association with EQ 1; people confused in the market.

 

 

EQ 2 cannot be successful by virtue of its own name.  It would be fine if it were like Final Fantasy II, but EQ 2 was released with EQ 1 still going.  Why compete against yourself?  If it were a series fine.  But UO 2 would be as much of a bad idea.  

 

 

EQ 2's lack of success is less to do with content and features and more to do with the lack of sound business judgment.

 

 

 

EDIT:  Speaking from a gameplay point of view, the game felt too predictable and boring about level 19ish.  It had a sameness to it that felt tedious, not very exciting. 

Your first part is exactly what i say to the reason EQ2 didnt sell. It sounds nerdish with the name Everquest and since it was number 2 they looked at Everquest 1 and it was a nerd game. World Of Warcraft sounds like a game everyone would try and not feel like a nerd in the process. SoE just needs to understand that they are making a game for the High Fantasy audience and that audience isnt big. Accept your low numbers but make a good game. Your not WoW so dont be WoW and now thats whats wrong with EQ2. SoEs attempt to make the game for retards they f-d it up the gameplay and fun factor. I went back to EQ2 on the Ruins of Kunark expansion and it was fun the first 20 levels then it was the boring solo grind with repetivtive quest that were boring and gave no real xp bonus for the difficulty.

 

Actually, everyone I know who played EQ1 and looked forward to EQ2 wanted a bigger, better, more colorful, but mostly the same world of Norrath.  Personally, I envisioned Odus as being a revamped larger version of itself, with lush jungle vegetation.

The disappointment was the entire world was chiseled down to nothing; just Qeynos on one end, Freeport on the other, and a few zones in between.

An EQ3 would thrive, in my opinion, were it merely a larger, revamped, slicker version of EQ1 (minus POP and Luclin, of course).

That is precisely the problem.  Everyone you know wanted EQ 1 but better. 

Most people in this market do not want EQ 1, let alone a "better" EQ 1.

EQ 3 would be marketed as the real EQ 1 but a better EQ 2, and it would fail:

• EQ 1 people would not be satisfied;
• EQ 2 people would not be satisfied;
• WoW people would not be satisfied;
• SOE still competes with itself and fails.

SURE, we ALL (tongue in cheek) want a game like EQ 1.  Actually, in truth, tongue-out-of-cheek, we want some of those EQ 1 features we cherish that are lacking today === >  world immersion, group-cooperative gameplay, customization (though EQ lacked this, I felt "different" from others), challenge, community, and deeper content.  Whatever you do, however, do not call EQ 3, purely for business reasons.  Do not call the "next WoW" WoW 2.  It would be devastating.

Edit:  Besides, the "next WoW," my theory holds, is a game with OLD WORLD features (as described above) but in an entirely different genre.  Yet the persistence of elves and orcs might just prevail.  People, including WoW players, want something different, though . . . and I would say even a bit more deeper.  Not a "raid challenge" but an exploration challenge.

Are you kidding me Elikal? EQ with the stupid bells? The cloned zones? the auto targeting auto face auto everything? With SOE behind it? Using their lore to sell pizza?

Please.

/pizza

Originally posted by declaredemer

Originally posted by pencilrick

Originally posted by Goldknyght

Originally posted by declaredemer

1. EQ 2 competed with itself; it suffers from a bad name.  Similar to why you do not make Coke II, or Pepsi II, or Ipod II.
2. Bad launch.  It tried to appeal to a more "hardcore" element, which is a small minority of the MMORPG community.
3. Name association with EQ 1; people confused in the market.

 

 

EQ 2 cannot be successful by virtue of its own name.  It would be fine if it were like Final Fantasy II, but EQ 2 was released with EQ 1 still going.  Why compete against yourself?  If it were a series fine.  But UO 2 would be as much of a bad idea.  

 

 

EQ 2's lack of success is less to do with content and features and more to do with the lack of sound business judgment.

 

 

 

EDIT:  Speaking from a gameplay point of view, the game felt too predictable and boring about level 19ish.  It had a sameness to it that felt tedious, not very exciting. 

Your first part is exactly what i say to the reason EQ2 didnt sell. It sounds nerdish with the name Everquest and since it was number 2 they looked at Everquest 1 and it was a nerd game. World Of Warcraft sounds like a game everyone would try and not feel like a nerd in the process. SoE just needs to understand that they are making a game for the High Fantasy audience and that audience isnt big. Accept your low numbers but make a good game. Your not WoW so dont be WoW and now thats whats wrong with EQ2. SoEs attempt to make the game for retards they f-d it up the gameplay and fun factor. I went back to EQ2 on the Ruins of Kunark expansion and it was fun the first 20 levels then it was the boring solo grind with repetivtive quest that were boring and gave no real xp bonus for the difficulty.

 

Actually, everyone I know who played EQ1 and looked forward to EQ2 wanted a bigger, better, more colorful, but mostly the same world of Norrath.  Personally, I envisioned Odus as being a revamped larger version of itself, with lush jungle vegetation.

The disappointment was the entire world was chiseled down to nothing; just Qeynos on one end, Freeport on the other, and a few zones in between.

An EQ3 would thrive, in my opinion, were it merely a larger, revamped, slicker version of EQ1 (minus POP and Luclin, of course).

 

That is precisely the problem.  Everyone you know wanted EQ 1 but better. 

 

Most people in this market do not want EQ 1, let alone a "better" EQ 1.

 

EQ 3 would be marketed as the real EQ 1 but a better EQ 2, and it would fail:

• EQ 1 people would not be satisfied;
• EQ 2 people would not be satisfied;
• WoW people would not be satisfied;
• SOE still competes with itself and fails.

 

SURE, we ALL (tongue in cheek) want a game like EQ 1.  Actually, in truth, tongue-out-of-cheek, we want some of those EQ 1 features we cherish that are lacking today === >  world immersion, group-cooperative gameplay, customization (though EQ lacked this, I felt "different" from others), challenge, community, and deeper content.  Whatever you do, however, do not call EQ 3, purely for business reasons.  Do not call the "next WoW" WoW 2.  It would be devastating.

 

Edit:  Besides, the "next WoW," my theory holds, is a game with OLD WORLD features (as described above) but in an entirely different genre.  Yet the persistence of elves and orcs might just prevail.  People, including WoW players, want something different, though . . . and I would say even a bit more deeper.  Not a "raid challenge" but an exploration challenge.

then Just pull a Eve and Update the GFX... No MMO company should be in the market trying to Out Do it self. I honestly think Soe has learned this and is why its trying to choke off Vanguard and Nither of their new MMOs are anything to Do with older titles.

EQ2 failed  mainly because of the graphics issue, when it was launched noone had a rig to handle it, one didnt exist yet, by the time hardware caught up they realized the graphics were broke and by the time they worked all that out a large portion of people had jumped ship and were allready in a new game. But i think its coming back. Wil neve rbreak records but its doing well

Why did EQ2 fail? 

One word

PERFORMANCE

THE GAME RAN (AND STILL DOES) LIKE TOTAL AND UTTER DOG SHIT.   PROBLEM WAS THIS

• INTEL TOLD SOE THEY WERE GOING THIS WAY WITH CPUS >>>>>>>>
• SOE MADE EQ2 BASED ON THAT
• INTEL DECIDED TO GO THIS WAY WITH CPUS <<<<<<<<<<  (AKA , MULTI CORE)
• EQ2 ENGINE NOW FUCKED

Performance sucked dick at launch and never fully recovered.  not to mention the classes were fucking retarded (too many of the same type)

I think the developers hoped for a lot of EQ players to head over to EQ II once it came out, but it wasn't likely that an old EQ player with many years invested in that game was going to jump ship and try and start over anew in EQ II. I played EQ II  for 2 years from the very day it launched and I can say that for me there was a lot of things about the game that contributed to it's lack of success. First off was the memory leaks to the game. Even though I had a cutting edge pc at the time I used to have to reboot about every hour or so depending on how many times that I zoned in that game. Another thing for me was the monthly class ( Nerfs ) balancing that SOE used to do with the game. For me it was sad that after all that time in development they still didn't have a handle on their balance issues for the full two years that I played.

EQ II had some of the finest dungeons at the time in any MMO that I played but  one could find them selves in a dungeon all day ( literally )  hoping for the mob that they needed to advance in their quests to pop. It was like go room 1 and wipe mobs there and head into room 2 and see if the mob you needed popped. Another thing about was the rank of the spells you got. In order to have the best spells one had to have adept III spells crafted from rares that one harvested from floral and mines. To me that was a time sink not to my liking. It just felt like a second job that I didn't need.

And lastly while some of their early mini expansions at the time were really good like the Splitpaw Saga the really first big game expansion Desert of  Flames was poor in my opinion since it had many bugs and playability issues such as excessive zone crashing. The xpac felt as if it was rushed out the door with the hopes that the subscription fees that generated from it could help pay for further development of it.

The  server merges that they did before Vanguard was slated to be released was what was the last straw for me. SOE apparently was worried that they would loose subscriptions to the ' Game of all games'. I  actually feel pity for them since they was duped along with every one else.

Having said all that It was one of the finest MMO experiences that I ever had. From the voice overs of the NPC's that fed some of the best story lines of any game at the time. To the simply stunning visual effects of various spells the classes used. Maybe one of these days I will have to go back and check up on the game. But history repeats itself , SOE fails to consider what their paying player base will put up with.

The million or so EQ1 fans expected EQ2 to be actual sequel to their favorite game, but it was nothing like EQ1 so the million or so eq1 fans got disgruntled and let other people hear about it..leading to EQ2 having 200k players tops.

Marketing

Most of the answers were on target.

 While i can not answer for other people.

 I think the biggest issue was the pc requirements were made for "future pcs". The requirements were so high folks just got tired of upgrading. Even when they did up grade there pc there were preformance issues early on.

 My 2nd reason was after 20 the game seemed very different . I found repair costs very high and the death expearince way back when ( i under stand that has changed now) but the idea of taking death experaince if a group member died was awful.

 It seemed the cost of death there was very pain ful ( while i get some folks like the idea of harder games ) from death exp repair costs then taking other folks death experaince was to much.

Auction house having to stand there while selling screen watching was not well planned by the developers

  My quit point was at  22 i was in a group the leader looked at my eqipment and  i was kicked out of the group.

 Of most of the games i played this was one i never looked back on, even during free weekends. Unless with a soild group of pals to play with or guild, it was very hard to get into .

removal of shard retrieval and group xp penalty just made game EZmode.

Winey players (you know who you are) and the WOW factor have encouraged SOE to make this game easy peasy, solo play rules!

Some want challenge, EQ1 was good, I mean as it was originally, corpse runs and boats etc!!

you learned to group, you learned to be "social".

todays games encourage greed and solo play, EQ2 is old now, lets hope devs dont follow the SOE path.

Station cash shops are bullshit too in a p2p game.

Leveling and questing in EQ2 felt like a job, walking from 1 area to the next meant zoning thus removing any illusion of being in a huge open world, the graphics and design were woeful, the landscape completely uninspiring and the early group death penalties and shard retrieval was a complete nitemare, but it was the only thing out worth playing and it was at times fun, then WOW came out and the rest is history... i came back with the Fae expansion and noted the improved art design, i.e. adding in colour and making it more fantastical, the addition of "EZ" mode as some people call it or as i like to call it.. fun mode (it is a freaking game after all) breathed some life into it for me for a while but ultimately i went back to wow simply because wow feels like a world with a rich varying landscape and EQ2 feels like a load of bolted on leveling areas...

There are all kinds of theories as to why EQ2 was not a bigger success. They range from SOE business practices to performance issues. I think it was 3 more basic reasons. First, the biggest mistake was to name the game EQ2. Outside of the EQ players who the hell knew what EQ was and EQ player did not view it as sequel to EQ. Second, was the release of WOW at the same time and the fact people could play it on gramma's machine and enjoy it. Third, total lack of marketing. SOE never believed an mmo could reach the types of numbers WOW did so never even thought about mass marketing EQ2.

All the issues that we debate here about SOE or their games, the average player could careless about or have knowledge of. Had WOW never existed SOE would have been happy with the early numbers of EQ2. WOW changed the expectations of the possible revenues an mmo could generate. SOE then tried to remake themselves to get a piece of that pie and it failed in the market place. They lost their identity and WOW gobbled up their potential customers. With EQ2 however I feel most of the changes the game went through were good choices. The game is better know then at release. It was to little to late the mmo world has been WOWified.

Even though I love EQ2, I feel SOE has made many bad decisions about many of their games. While I recommend EQ2 to anyone I realize it maybe in it's golden years. So I enjoy EQ2 for what it is and hope it keeps going awhile longer since I am not ready to move on. I still have a lot of fun with it. I do not wish or speculate on what it was or could be. 

SOE with it's mmos has taken it on the chin and a lot of it is their own doing and some is bad timing. However, they are positioned to dominate again with one game. It may not reach the numbers of WOW but do not underestimate Free Realms. I predict it will have well over a million players in it's first few weeks. If Wizards 101 can top a million, as it has, Free Realms will dwarf that. For right or wrong you better get ready to welcome the kids into mmoland.

Great post Ecco.  I agree, SOE didnt see WOW coming (numbers-wise anyways).  My wife and I played EQ2 for a longtime and we loved it. We had a great time.  I wasnt a fan of the zoning...seemed after launch you would zone a few times and would have to relog because the game would lag too much. Q.H. was the WORST. The game got alot better though and I was a fan of most of the changes as well. Like the crafting changes. I wasnt a fan of the mob grouping in Kunark though. My warlock was forced to fight alot of single mobs rather than a group of three or more which obviously didnt play well for a lock. Seems they made a little too much solo play which hurt the game I thought.

So my wife and I play Vanguard now. It doesnt have the 'magic' to it that EQ2 does for my wife but the gameplay is close enough for her and I love the old-school feel of it the dungeons and no zoning. I am hopeful for the success of Freerealms. Our son plays Wizards 101 and he loves it. Having the younger generation exposed to mmo's this early can only mean good things for the genre as a whole. These kids will make the games of the future. Some good some bad. Maybe some great. 

Originally posted by pencilrick

3)  Heroic Opportunity Wheel degenerated into button-mashing "whack-a-mole" gameplay where folks just hit the flashing buttons in the same old sequences.  Also, H.O. wheel had effects which made no sense such as setting off a free group heal and such.

10)  Tons of meaningless quests.

Did not read the whole thread, but these two just caught my eye as a long time EQ2 vet.

3)  I whole heartedly believe in the HO system as a great way to keep group members from just spamming random attacks. In a group situation, if you had two nukes up, but one of them would trigger a huge mana refresh for the whole group, then why not use that one? The problem with the system is that it required that players stay awake and not spam random attacks, and to somewhat understand the system. If your priest didn't know how to do the "Hammer" attack and your scout didn't know how to "shift" to something else, then you'd get stuck in these horribly repeatative loops of failure. Also, on a side note, who in their right mind would complain about free group heals?

This isn't an overly complex system, it's just one more things that add to the "complexity" or the "depth" of the game, depending on which side of the fence you're on.

10)  This is just hysterical to a SOE forum goer- so many flamewars have been started over people wanting more quests. You just can't please everyone.

Yeh no matter how man pictures people show I still see:

- Poor textures
- Poor character models
- Barren generic environments where theres like an empty room with a mob in it....


I dunno just the whole game looks dated, generic and ugly. Most of my friends now play EVE and WoW and even all of them say the EQ2's graphics suck and it looks dated where as WoW looks modern and upto date.

1. WoW

Obviously Blizzard had a huge fanbase with games like Diablo, Warcraft and Starcraft being played by millions. You can just take the Starcraft fans in South Korea and they are already more people than EQ 1 and 2's entire fanbase. Furthermore, while the most advance gaming systems where having trouble running EQ2, WoW runs great on cheap budget PC's and since only a tiny percentage of gamers have an advanced gaming system that means that the game (EQ2) was already dead on arrival. Furthermore, the attention to detail and polish that Blizzard did made EQ2 look dated out of the box, WoW did away with a lot of grinding, and gave players a choice between grouping and soloing, whereas EQ2's solo focus only came after they figured no one was buying their game.

2. Sequal doesn't fit in MMO's.

So youve already spend 5 years in norrath in EQ and now your just going to do the same in EQ2? It simply doesn't work, its different for single player games because you finish them in a week, so a sequal comes a few years later, and why not, you enjoyed it the first time after all. But people spend years in an MMO, and a sequal for that reason is simply not entertaining. I think Blizzard actually knows this as they have constantly confirmed that their new MMO will not be a sequal. Very smart, people are often sick and tired of a gameworld after spending years in it and knowing every corner and loredetail. They want a new world, restyling an old world can only lead to dissapointment.

3. Marketing

When I bought EQ2, I had to go on an actual quest to obtain the game and it took me 2 weeks to finally find a gameshop who had the copy I was looking for. And this is in the Netherlands, the country that houses the EQ2 european server for gods sake. There is something fundamentally wrong with your marketing if it is easier to get a date with a pornstar then to get a copy of Everquest 2. And even worste, they could have somewhat solved this problem with their online shop, but buying EQ2 plus expansions at sony online is an extreme amount more expensive then buying it in a shop (if your lucky enough to find a copy in a shop that is).

4. Dated technology.

It is amazing that this zoned game looks worste then WoW when WoW can be played by any system yet you need a powerhouse to play EQ2.

it is dated. The game is 5 years old lol

Good:

Great and some innovative features.

Bad:

-Artificially looking world.

-Ugly charactermodels and gear (how the hell did they come up with pastel coloured plate armour?).

-Client with bad performance scaling (this makes above 2 points even worse).

-Bad release.

I can play games that dont look so great, but enjoy for its features or gameplay. I still play SWG and even go back to Anarchy Online from time to time. But sometimes games have charactermodels with gear that has a bad choice for artstyle. Or a world that just feels boring. For me that was LOTRO, WOW, EQ2 characters and EQ2 world.