Wow... Lots of real mental patients on this thread.  Seriously.  If you are this wound up and enraged over a game you need some deep therapy (maybe a visit to Dr Phil).  And if you are sitting in your basement rubbing your hands together salivating over the prospect of some anonymous corporation going "out of business" (thus putting thousands of people out of work), you probably belong in an asylum.

Is this what our pathetic entitlement society has led to?  A chorus of whining, overindulged, spoiled brats who throw a virtual online tantrum everytime something doesnt go their way?  Try being a man instead of a freaking 2 year old and do the following: cancel your subscription if you dont like the service or feel it isnt worth it.  Then email support, in a RATIONAL TONE, explaining you are cancelling b/c you feel the price hike isnt justified.

If you "never felt any of their games were worth it to begin with!!!", or if you think "Sony is the greatest evil in human history!!!!", or if you "never play SOE gamez anywayz LOLZ!", and yet you are still posting here in a rage,  then please STOP posting (on ANY forum), turn OFF your damn computer and go OUTSIDE so you can get something resembling a perspective on reality.

Damn threads like this really piss me off.  This is such a simple thing it isnt worth even ONE reply, yet it becomes 10 pages b/c of all of the mentally disturbed malconents who are so terminally unhappy with life they sit drooling over the chance to spew another wave of bile against the catalogue of things/people/companies they "hate".

I mean is everyone on these forums a 12 year old boy?  Thats the only thing I can guess with the tone of the garbage that you see posted.  It really seems like a crowd of spoiled brats angry that they cant get the toys they want when they want them.  If you are an adult posting this kind of crap about something so silly and trivial as a GAME subscription, take a step back and think seriously about what is going wrong in your life that this is what is on the top of your list of things to rant and rave over.

Zeblade nailed it....

PLEASE people..... DO NOT buy hardware for this game.  The engine is simply totally broken at this point.  You can tell very easily from the TYPES of problems people experience.  It isnt a framerate issue, its the pausing/chunking/stuttering anytime there is a texture load.  Sigil is BANKING on ignorant misinformation keeping peoples wheels spinning a while as they replace their whole PC.

Just look on the official forums at the guidance on 'random crashes'.  They have the audacity to say "disgard your router".  Next it will be, drive to your nearest backbone provider and plug directly into a backbone switch.  They are stalling b/c they know the game is broken.

Anyone claiming CONSISTENT FPS (like the guy on this thread), I need to see real proof (like a video of you running in and out of cities with the frame counter on), or I call total BS and, probably, fanatic fanboy in holy defense mode.  There are THOUSANDS of posts on the official site now with people having the same issues.  Most of the idiot time wasting "buy new power supply, turn PC to face the East, clean out your attic first (crazy, but it worked!), change the oil in your car" etc etc is now over and most people are now just accepting that the game has a deep flaw.  The Unreal 2.5 engine has issues with modern hardware as it is, and Sigil went and TWEAKED it.  I doubt they'll EVER unravel the mess as Epic is moving on and they prob have no clue what the hell they did towards the end as they RUSHED it out the door.

People can hope and pray and wait for fixes (ahem EQ2), but Im going to be that they will NOT be forthcoming.  A "fix" would need to be a "rewrite" of the rendering code.

You didnt "explain" anything.  You spouted your opinion on why you think EQ isnt a value as if you were diseminating some great secret of the universe.

The posters point still stands: its ridiculous to complain about new content.  Some people are just habitual unhappy malcontents.  You can always spot the type who just goes through life complaining about everything eternally miserable.  I often wonder just how good they are at what *they* do (probably not very), but thats a different topic.

Reality is if you dont like the new content, dont buy it.  If you feel the game is too buggy, stop playing it.  If you keep paying and playing and angrily buying expansions you dont want, you're a moron.  What is it with our society that everyone is "victimized"?  Its pathetic.  The folks that fly into a conspiracy theory laden rage when new content is released will have a valid point te day an SoE employee shows up at their house with a gun and makes them buy an expansion.  Until then, they're just sad cases.

---

Originally posted by Anofalye

Raid-free servers or DIE!

 

If raiding make better groupers, than grouping is dead before even existing.  Best groupers deserve to be groupers, serverwide!

 

Anyone saying otherwise is advancing his own questionable ideas.  See, peoples who care about who is the BEST groupers, well duh, breaking news, they are first and foremost groupers!  Nothing but grouping can be required of peoples who want to be BEST at grouping.  Groups, for the grouping health of the game, must desire first and foremost to group peoples who are groupers.  If groups take a non-grouper before a grouper, be them soloers or raiders, than you see that the grouping game is failing...  This is simple, logical and efficient.

 

EDIT: I said I was going to leave this Vanguard forum alone, but well, such titles may draw me in! 

---

"Simple, logical and efficient"?  I honestly have no clue at all what you are even attempting to say here.  Does anyone know what the above means?  Re-read your post and tell me that you see your point coming through clearly there.

I *think* what you *may* be trying to say is that the primary indicator of if a game is geared towards grouping (vs raiding or soloing) is if most groups are looking for "groupers" to join them.

If this is what you're saying, it's patently ridiculous.  Only on idiotic forums where people talk, whine and complain about gaming rather than playing (b/c for them, talking and complaining is what the TRULY enjoy), are things so cut and dry as this.

What is a "grouper"?  What is a "raider"? What is a "soloer"?  It's infuriating how these things are boxed so neatly on these threads.  Any MMO is going to have BIG challenging content (NOT necessarily at the end game either!) that requires more than 1 group to defeat.  Generally, the items gained from these encounters (there must be SOME reward in ANY game right?) is going to be better since the challenge is bigger.

There is nothing wrong with that.  A game that didnt have that would need to probably be completely PVP focused (like Guild Wars) or it would get boring. I think EVERYONE who plays any of these MMOs finds themselves participating in those types of encounters now and again.  So we ALL "raid".  And I dont think there are too many people who really refuse to group EVER (of course there is the occasional oddball who is anti-social yet chooses to play a MASSIVELY MULTIPLAYER game).  So we are ALL "groupers".

In every game, on every server, there are always (quite naturally) unions of those who play the MOST.  There is nothing wrong with that.  To "fix" it you'd have to artificially level playtime which would be pathetic capitulation to those who can't deal with a societal hierarchy.  Those folks with the high playtime tend to get branded as "raiders" because most games rely on raiding to fill the time once your character is maxed out.  MOST, but not all.  PVP games generally feature these same folks dominating PVP.

So this has nothing to do with play style (grouping, raiding, solo).  Everyone does all three of those.  This debate on this thread is, as usual, coming down to this pathetic "haves" vs "have nots" conflict that exists in every community and afflicts some percentage of the population.

"Raid free" servers are truly sad.  They would basically be made up of the people who wear their lack of playtime like some kind of badge of honor, but yet are so embittered over it they don't want to even be NEAR those who have more playtime than them.  The irony is that even on the non-raid servers, there will be those with higher playtime than average.  And as a result, the hierarchy will exist and the people whose really problem is that they need some psychological counseling will find themselves bitter and frustrated AGAIN.  Because even without "raiding" there will have to be SOME "end game" or "big event" type content and those that scream loudest for this type of segregation will no DOUBT end up "second class".

I would love to hear a rational explanation of what the upside would be of a server that deliberately removes certain content (content that tends to be the more interesting content in most games, to be honest).  The people that LOVE this idea - what the heck is it you feel you are gaining?!  You'll be the only losers since most normal people would stay far away from a server that "offered" less content at the SAME PRICE, so think carefully about what you're looking for.

I think the above post is calling for a server that gives all of the rewards of raiding but hands them out only to people who group.  Either that, or a server where "the best you can be" comes only from grouping and there is no raiding.  Well I'll tell you what - here comes the slippery slope.  Next soloers will complain that "groupers" get "all the good stuff" and "why should they have to group".  I guess a "solo only" server is next?  And what about the groupers who have more time than average?  Should there be a "non-raid - casual grouper" subserver that hands out great rewards for even the most minimal effort???

People that feel they "need" these things should really revaluate these types of games.  I dont think they're healthy for you.  I've gone from very high playtime to very low playtime in a dozen different MMOs and currently keep three different MMO accounts alive that I dabble in.  None of these "issues" have ever caused me stress like this.  I dont NEED to have "the best" gear.  I've never run into a game, contrary to the FUD, where I could do NOTHING because I wasnt "the best".  And if there is something I'd like to have that requires a raid, then I try to put the effort in to get it. If I cant, well then I live without it.  You know - kind of like LIFE.  What do you people do in your real life?  Do you want Ferrari banned or something b/c you'll probably never afford one?

---

Originally posted by alienpriest
You have got to be joking me.

I don't come here to read adverts about freaking chairs. I guess you gotta pay the bills somehow. A little payola is one thing, but this has nothing to do with your site's theme even.

Keep it up, and you will loose eyeballs on your page.

---

Jeez... Lighten up.  Most gamers spend 90% of their time on their lazy @#$ anyway, so I think its pretty relevant.  If it really bothers you, just dont read the review.  Why is that such a big problem?

There are a million other sites that do in depth hardware review.  It's not a core competency for MMORPG.com and it would be a distraction.  Personally, I'd rather see them do a wacky review like a chair then try to tackle Core 2 vs AMD FX memory bandwidth utilization analysis in Linux clustering applications.  If the editors were to say "sorry, we couldnt do a WarHammer Online Review because we had to review this neat couch mountable cup holder", then maybe you'd have a point.

Who cares about the Wiki "definition" of "grind"? I mean really.

It's a stupid question that people keep asking.  Everyone with "is there a grind is there a grind".  That term means different things to different people.

If you're fixated on it and need to keep asking, then you probably should *not* play *any* game with progression.

Im so sick of this ridiculous argument.  What do the people who call EVERY freaking variation on character progression a "grind" want?  To rocket to max skill/level immediately?  People say "its a grind if its not fun".  But its not "fun" if you dont *want* it to be fun.  Dont people get that?!

Some of the most fun Ive had in ANY MMO was just hanging out XPing with friends in EQ1.  To the masses of malcontent net posters, thats one of the most egregious examples of a "grind" there is.

If you find needing to put time into a game in order to develop your character a "frustrating grind", then you shouldnt play RPGs. 

This problem is a mental one with certain players.  They decide for THEMSELVES that the "end game" IS the game and/or that they need max level to "win" and then they bitch about the time it takes.  I leveled my mage to 60 in WoW just questing, soloing and casually grouping.  It took a long time and it was always fun.  I never felt like I was just mindlessly repeating things because I never just mindlessly repeated things. If I found myself getting bored, I would /gasp QUIT AND DO SOMETHING ELSE.  If the whole world beat me to 60, I DIDNT CARE.

So the answer to the question is no, the "grind" doesnt go away.  Saga is a traditional MMO in that it is about building your character.  If the very idea of having to put time into character development makes you cringe, then Saga is not for you.

Im *really* not understanding the argument that the "fault" for this trend lies somehow with the *game developer* for making a "bad game".

I mean how far are people going to go in absolving personal responsibility that even in a *video game* debate - an *entirely voluntary luxury* - the "evil corporation" gets the blame?

That argument is really infuriating.  If MMOs are just a "money making scam designed to exploit the people", then dont play them.  No one is forcing you to buy a $2000 computer, buy an expensive internet connection, buy a $50 game and then pay *monthly* to play it.  Go donate your time at a commune somewhere.

Role playing games are about character development.  There is nothing fundamentally wrong with the current batch of MMOs at all.  The problem is with the basic flaw in human nature that causes people who cannot "compete" to seek some advantage at any cost.

The games are *obviously* doing something right or this debate couldnt possibly exist!  The answer is clearly not to throw aside character development!  What an assinine assertion.  Because some people are dysfunctional and need to cut corners/cheat/whatever in order to feel important in a *game*, and because OTHER people are too dysfunctional to JUST IGNORE THEM, the *entire concept* should be tossed?!

Here's a little clue.  Games where you start at level 60 and compete in pure endgame content on skill ALREADY EXIST.  They're called FIRST PERSON SHOOTERS!  or REAL TIME STRATEGY GAMES.

As a long time MMO player who has seen this debate waged ad nauseum, I can honestly say it is just completely a pointless discussion.  Between people who, seemingly, often need very real psychological help.

MMOs are about character development.  For 70% of the audience that will inevitably play them, that means making a character and having fun for some period of time developing it until boredom or frustration sets in or until a more interesting game comes along, or perhaps, staying with that game forever if its right for you.

The other 30% really dont have a solid enough emotional foundation to be anywhere NEAR this genre to begin with.  They will run into ALL KINDS of frustrations that will come across on forums (where they will spend more time than they do playing) like the embittered rantings of a political prisoner. 

You will see rants against capitalism and western society.  Rants against the evils of class hierarchy.  Rants against the nefarious machinations of game developers.  Rants against "cheaters" and "botters" and "farmers".  Rants against "them".  Rants against meleers, or casters, or rogues (or probably - rouges).

It's just so amazingly ridiculous to even burn time discussing something as frivilous as all of this, and yet this "debate" never seems to go away.  People compete.  Its what they do.  In competitions, people cheat.  Its what they do.  Rules are made to define what "cheating" is.  Many folks will want adherance to those rules, others will not care, still others will strive to break them.  If the "cheating" has minimal/no impact on me, I tend to just accept it as a fact of life.  If it effects me and is rampant, I leave the game.  Very simple.

Its up to developers to decide what they want to accept and balance the cost of trying to create as secure an environment as possible (it is IMPOSSIBLE to establish complete security in ANY system), against the benefit a secured environment provides.  In general, PLVLing services are LOW on the cost/benfit analysis for a developer.  True exploits are at the TOP.

The people that cant deal with that at all and, instead, want to throw the baby out with the bathwater and eliminate the competition aspect alltogether, take out the character development completely, create some sort of bizarre genre that looks like an RPG, but has an artificially leveled playing field so no one "feels cheated", need to just accept that this genre isnt for them. 

If the nice rewards of having a persistent fantasy/sci-fi world sand box to play in during your liesure time and build an avatar there dont outweigh the risks of seeing someone with money to burn or time to spare become top dog while you're still just a pup, then you shouldnt be playing.

I totally agree with the sentiment that gender shouldnt be tied to class.  Any kind of rationalization for it seems pretty thin.  And really, Ive known women that, Im not ashamed to say, could probably kick my ass, so I dont think theres anything unrealistic about female meleers.  Many cultures have had women warriors in times before firearms were invented.  And as for magic, why would magic be gender based? 

Maybe there could be an interesting twist where women and men somehow did magic *differently* in some subtle way, but the only REAL reason I can imagine the Korean games do this is to limit the texture/model combinations.  It goes back to the fact that most Asian MMOs are really going for a different type of game than the western ones - they're more focused on the large-scale PVP aspect - sort of like a FPS/RTS hybrid.  That makes sense when you consider how MASSIVELY popular RTS games are in Asia.

Im going to reserve judgement, but personally, if I cant play a male mage I wont be playing AL unfortunately.  I always play a caster - its just my play style - and there is no way Im playing a female.

It's too bad because certain aspects of the game looked like they could be an interesting distraction for those times Im not in the mood for EQ2.

Wow.  This actually kills the game for me.  I thought people were saying there would be great customization in AL (unlike L2 and other Korean games)?

To me, the fact that they are locking you into specific gender for specific races and classes tells me that they are trying to severly limit the model/texture combinations they need to deal with.  That tells me that they're not likely to be so free with the customizations.  Hair color, eye color and 3 different faces != "good customization".  ESPECIALLY when you consider that every elf is somehow female and every human mage is as well.  ugh

---

Originally posted by odinwise
1.  I'm a poor college student who, sorry, can't afford jack.  mommy and daddy aren't going to buy my computer stuffs.  maybe when I'm rich and have the expendible income I can consider paying greedy businesses who are out to make every penny they can possibly make.  which brings me to my second reason.
2.  this is stepping into a rather "unrealistic" world in most people's view.  technology shouldn't cost the user money.  money is the bane of existence to begin with, but the

---

Sorry, but this is assinine.  You're a poor college student who can't afford jack?  Mommy and daddy arent going to buy "your computer stuffs"?   There are millions of kids in the world who dont have access to medicine (some of them in the US actually), but you feel you can rationalize theft because "mommy and daddy" won't buy you luxuries.

I see you look forward to the day when YOU'RE rich though.  And of course you'll do whatever it takes to make that happen.  IF you are so fortunate to achieve your goals, I'm sure you'll make DAMN sure that NO ONE steals from YOUR pocket.  I assume you don't plan on being a computer programmer.  Maybe an actor?  Oh wait, then you couldnt support pirated movies.  Can't possibly work for a "greedy business".  I wonder how "robin hood" gets rich without crapping all over his supposed "ideals". 

As for point 2 and conveniently resorting to the standard college kid cliche about utopian communism, where do I even begin?  Technology should be "free"?  How about your car?  Or a plane ticket?  Do you have a car?  Did you steal it from Toyota?  Toyota is a larger company than Microsoft.  There are a handful of car companies on earth.  Its a global oligopoly worth hundreds of billions.  If you think "anyone" can start a car company and compete, read up on history and see how well that works out.  So why dont you steal your car from Toyota? 

Bottom line, if money is the root of all evil, dont dream about being a millionaire superstar, dream about working in the peace corps.  Lets not hide behind BS.  Money is the "root of all evil" as long as it isnt YOUR money.  Money is simply a tool that humans use in the exchange of resources.  Maybe we should do away with it and go back to the days when you had to trade good hard work for other good hard work and services.  I think today's kids would be a LOT safer just PRAYING that never happens.  I dont think any of you would do too well under the backbreaking labor of communism (no time for MMOs in rural Vietnam last time I checked)

Im really really tired of our college generation making every rationalization under the sun to justify their bad behavior and having the audacity to try to be self righteous and indignant about it and, even worse, hide behind worthy causes.  Its just yet another example of the erosion of our society.  This isnt about software AT ALL.  OR about Microsoft.  It's about a moral code that says "if you can get away with it, do it"

The guy that singlehandedly fought the battle in this thread so far is DEAD ON.  All of the "robin hoods" I've ever seen on this topic are hypocritical and full of crap.  As for the international community, any country that has no interest in placing value on intellectual property in the 21st century will find themselves in an economic tailspin.  So if your country fits that bill, instead of smugly bragging about it as you pirate US software, ask yourself what kind of economic shape your nation is in today, how it will improve/sustain things over the next 2 decades as the world becomes a COMPLETELY knowledge based economy with ALL manufacturing exported and what exactly you and your children plan to do as a job in the future.  Much of Europe is simply sleeping on issues like this and will soon wake to a nightmare reality when they find that they have lost control of their destiny to Asia.  And you can bet the when Asian nations control the global creation of IP they WILL enforce their ownership with you and your governments WILL play ball and pay up because they will have no bargaining power.  But keep living for the next five minutes and cheering on the movement to completely erode the concept of inetellectual property value in Canada and Europe.  The only victims will be you.

You want to "fight the power" then run Linux.  Your "apps" wont run?  WHAT APPS?!  Games? Yeah, you really "need" games.  You can afford to "need" games and can afford the HARDWARE they run on but somehow run out of money when it comes to the $100 for the OS.  If your "apps" are REAL "apps" that are used for work, then there are alternatives for ALL of them.  And if you have a REAL app that you truly need for work that requires Windows and you are a student, then work the cost of Windows into your student loan and buy it on your colleges DEEP student discount.

There's no way out of this argument. Tell it to someone who can't easily see through the BS.  Like maybe a warez board.

---

Originally posted by brostyn
Ok, firstly I have been playing MMOs long enough to listen to the gripes on forums. I find that I tend to agree with these types of people. So they are the ones I listen to. I've read that to find forms and techniques at higher lvls you must group. That

---

This isnt a Horizons specific comment, just some advice on this notion.  Personally, I think you've got to really take what you read on forums with a BIG grain of salt.  I've also been playing MMOs for a long while now (nearly 8 years), and I've found that the forum gripes are nearly always very exaggerated.  It's a simple rule of human nature that the most disgruntled, disatisfied and unhappy people yell the loudest.  I really feel that I've never had the level of emotional attachment and distress over any game that the typical forum ranter seems to have with ALL of them.

There may be some grain of truth behind certain issues that get discussed, but when a group of chronically unhappy martyrs get together and work hard to make some small issue in a videogame the focal point of their disappointment with life in general, the conversation quickly becomes counter productive.

What I've learned to do over the years is just totally ignore the forums and play the game.  These games all have a free trial.  I've had the most fun in two of the most reviled games there are: EQ1 and EQ2.  Personally, I think EQ2 is the best MMO currently out, yet it is bashed CONSTANTLY on forums.

Just ignore that noise, play, and decide for yourself if you like the scenery ;-)  And yes, I played Horizons (back in beta), and while it wasnt for me, I thought it was a solid game and may check it out again.

---

Originally posted by sebbonx

My character had 12 days played to 62 or 63 and 10AA's. It's on EQplayers, Stromm server, "Sebbon" I sold him and moved him though since then, someone else plays him now. Yes, he had the "Emp" key and I quit right around Luclin.

---

Just a few points... Anyone who thinks that EQ1 had more "depth" than WoW or EQ2 needs to define for me what "depth" means to them.  I've played EQ1 since beta (still do) and have played WoW, EQ2 and CoH since release and have taken multiple characters to max level in all 4 games.  The way *I* view "depth", WoW and EQ2 have  a LOT more of it than CoH and EQ2.  CoH is fast and fun, EQ1 is good in terms of large scale end game raid content, but EQ2 and WoW provide the "depth" in terms of window dressing, other things to do that are actually somewhat fun/rewarding, quests that seem to tie meaningfully into the game and just a host of neat little niceties that you only appreciate if you actually put real time into the games.

There are also a lot of semantics problems that are not "opinion" that people need to accept.  "Timesink" is a pejorative.  "All MMOs" are not "based on timesinks".  Something that takes time to accomplish is not a "timesink".  Timesink should be used exclusively to describe frustrating/pointless endevours that you are forced into by the game design.  If we cant agree on basic definitions, we cant have any kind of discussion beyond semantics.  Camping an ultra rare random spawn for 400 hours because the devs have decided that it simply shouldnt spawn faster than that is a timesink.  Spending those same 400 hours stepping through 100 discrete quest steps that are achievable without frustration and are fun, but take a long time, would not be a "timesink".

"Challenge" and "penalty" are NOT the same.  One poster really nailed it perfectly and even gave a great analogy, but people seem to not want to get it.  Severe penalties do NOT make a game "challenging".  If a raid mob requires serious strategy, gearing, timing, and class composition to beat, that is a "challenge".  If every time your raid wipes you need 4 hours to CR, that isnt part of the "challenge" that is a severe penalty of failure.

Do severe penalties make the game more challenging overall?  No, not necessarily.  If that raid mob was easily zergable, you wouldnt wipe so the 4 hour CR wouldnt impact you.  The degree of penalty has some bearing on the overall level of challenge, but it should NOT be the *basis* of what makes a game "challenging".

I also dont think that tedious and annoying penalties some how make the players who put up with them more "l33t" than players who stick with something like WoW.  I hope that Brad has more up his sleeve than he came up with with EQ1.

If everything that people seem to believe is reality on this forum were true, EQ1 wouldnt be bleeding subs.  All of this nostalgia is total BS if you look at the real sub numbers.  People pretend they loved the old annoying aspects of EQ1, but at the time, they did NOTHING but bitch about it.  Its like mom and dad bragging about the days they walked 100 miles uphill in the snow to get to school.  Exaggerated and irrelevant.

Im hoping that Vanguard can actually deliver a challenge (a REAL challenge) that is fun and rewarding without being an endless and mindless grind riddled with ridiculous speed bumps and impediments to fun like severe penalties, loooooong travel times, annoying CRs, etc.  If it really delivers, Ill be there.  If not, they can keep it.

---

Originally posted by MX13

I just don't see it. EQ2's colors and world is bright & Cartoonie IMO, where as VSoH seems darker and more gritty. I definatly don't see the head thing. As far as the world goes, VSoH seems more Dark Ages than EQ2's complete Fantasy.

Regarding the graphics, that's what I saw as well. The Beta Client seems to not be quite as up to par as the offical Screenies show, but it still looks good IMO.

Well, that the great thing about Opinions, they Vary

---

Are you sure you're not thinking about WoW???  This one has nothing to do with opinion.  The graphics ARE very similar (at least in still shots).  If you dont see that, something is wrong.

Vanguard:

http://www.vanguardsoh.com/screenshot.php?ssid=120

EQ2:

http://everquest2.station.sony.com/en/img_viewer.jsp?name=018.jpg&collection=general

You're telling me you REALLY see some kind of dramatic difference there and the second screenshot somehow looks "cartoony and bright" whereas the first one doesnt?  They look the same man.

THIS is bright and cartoony (although still awesome, IMHO):

WoW:

http://killermookie.org/images/WoW/WoW11.jpg

Theres a definite irony that the OP posted a satire and gets ripped personally by folks claiming that he takes video games "too seriously" and needs to "get a life".  How can you not see the irony of tearing into a guy with personal insults just for lampooning a video game on the premise that HE takes games "too seriously"???

It's like sports talk.  We're all wasting time posting on  a forum ABOUT games, so the posts in this context are all "serious" in so far as they are about the subject matter.  Its a lame copout to selectively pick crap you dont like and label it as "too serious"

Those are some great posts from FoH and basically confirm some of my fears.  As a fellow EQ old schooler who has also played in a top tier raid guild, Im not really afraid of a game that is hardcore, but there is a clear line between hardcore and tediously annoying.  The obnoxious nature and total pig headedness of the vanbois that plague the WoW and EQ/EQ2 forums has always made me think that this game could be in trouble (assuming they either reflect the tone of the game or are the ones having some influence on it)

How can they possibly think that the key to world domination (they frequently make grandiose statements that WoW and EQ2 will fold with the release of Vanguard), is recycling the MOST annoying aspects of EQ1?!  Its pure insanity.

The 5M subs of WoW prove that WoW is a sort of gold standard.  For every moron that ignorantly claims WoW is "easy mode" and comes up with some idiotic cliche "World of [blank]craft" pun, there are about 10,000 people happily paying to play.

If the vocal vanbois are really representative of what the game is all about, and are the kind of folks Brad is trying to target, it will flop.

They're coke and pepsi really.  I play both and love both.  Lvl 60 Mage in WoW and Lvl 70 Wizard in EQ2.  I also played EQ1 since beta (lvl 70 wiz w/400 AA) and have played casual, hardcore, RPer, soloer, and raid guild over the years.

For me, both of these games are the pinnacle of the fantasy MMO genre today.  Its strange how they trade features off to each other.  Lets take immersion, which is a big one for me.  In some ways, EQ2 is more immersive - the trade skilling is deeper, the player housing (for me) is HUGE fun, the handling of languages is extremely cool and integrated into the game in interesting ways and the lore runs pretty deep.  On the other hand, WoW is no slouch in terms of immersion either.  The world is seemless with no zoning at all and is enormous! It "feels" much more "real" than Norrath.  Also, you can sit on chairs! FINALLY!  In addition, there are REAL live boats that WORK (something EQ NEVER got right - in EQ1 they were always broken and in EQ2 they basically dont exist) and WoW has even added airships.  WoW is also heavier on "supporting cast" NPCs that make the game feel real.  Farmers out in the wilderness, little kids in town, etc.  EQ2 does some of that as well.  I think I have to call immersion a draw.

The class and combat systems for these two games are quite different but, I think, equally functional and rewarding.  WoW followed closer to the classic EQ approach, but has enabled soloing as a real option until you hit bigger challenges and has done quite a good job of balancing the classes.  There are still complaints of course (there are ALWAYS the same complaints with every MMO), but from my experience soloing, grouping and raiding, WoW balance is pretty tight PVE.  Combat is also very fast with very little down time and basically no death penalty.  EQ2 is largely the same in the overall effect, but it feels different getting there.  I think the classes are also quite well balanced.  Soloing is less of an option, but it can be done by most classes to one degree or another and isnt actively blocked the way it is in EQ1.  Combat feels more cumbersome than WoW in some ways, but in the end, EQ2 also features pretty fast action and very little down time.  Also, there is effectively no death penalty.  So in terms of play mechanic (class and combat), Ive got to call it a draw again where it will very much come down to individual taste.  WoW is easier though, in terms of effort it would take to max out your character.  EQ2 is a longer slog and, with the addition of AAs, it has grown still longer.  This can be considered good *or* bad really, though (I think its kind of good, to be honest, and that WoW is probably a bit too easy).

Graphics come down to personal taste and machine power, and the art styles are radically different, so I think its wrong for anyone to make any sort of absolute statement here.  One place you can make a statement, though, is on the efficiency of Blizzards engine.  They have done a simply BRILLIANT job (no surprise), on their engine and the game can look terrific and play full speed on VERY minimal hardware.  EQ2 really requires a pretty bulky system to show off its polish and will struggle on systems where WoW can thrive.

PVP is interesting.  PVP was added to EQ2 only recently and offers some interesting options.  There are duels, there is the Arena (where you can field NPC combatants also making for a kind of mini-game) and there are now full blown faction based PVP servers.  WoW of course has PVP servers and PVE servers where PVP only happens in the battle grounds.  I think both games have a solid story here and, as I am only a casual PVPer, Ill leave it to others to comment.

Quest content is also a horse race.  WoW quests are fun, fast, rewarding and intuitive.  EQ2 probably less so, but the best EQ2 quests really really got me involved.  Also, EQ2 has more quest variety with the crazy collections, HQs, legend and lore, etc and things like custom titles and house items add another dimension to the quest process.  Both games have a pretty solid connection between quests and game lore, so they feel relavent to the content.  Another draw.

The guild system in both games is pretty advanced.  EQ2 has some interesting things like personal and guild status that tie into the level of housing you are allowed to purchase and status based items that are purchased with status and are a "reward" for being a sort of "famous" citizen.  I havent spent much time in a WoW guild, but I think the WoW experience is similar to EQ1 where a guild is a purpose driven organization.  The tabbards are a neat piece of customization.

To sum up, I just have to reiterate that these two games represent the gold standard (and Ive played them all really).  Returning to EQ1, there is just nothing there for me anymore and I think most of the "nostalgia" is the same kind of human nature reaction you get with parents pining for "the good old days".  Unline the "good old days", however, EQ1 is still here, so you can easily compare EQ2, WoW and EQ1 side by side.  For me, the advanced features of EQ2 and WoW just create a much more realistic world that EQ1 sadly cannot match these days.

I think anyone interested would need to play both games and draw their own conclusion.

But if they ever get it working, I'll run my own! When I can set my own rules and expansion level - imagine what would NWN have on such a server?! And of course, it'll be biased, it'll be my choice of rulesets with my GMs...

---

And... who on earth will care?  I mean really.  If this is how you would get your kicks then good for you, but it really is pretty lame.  "Ill run my own world with my own rules and Ill be uber and my friends will be too b/c they're my friends and nyah nyah nyah and we'll pwn Mata Muram with ONE GROUP!!!"

Its like the sad little kids who "play" AD&D with everyone being like Raistlin and soloing Gods.  How can that really be considered anyone's idea of "fun"

And thats really the essence of why Sony doesnt charge hard after the emu.  At the end of the day, after all that work and all those grandiose BS claims of how the emu community would "decimate" Sony and show what a REAL game was all about, it came down to a bunch of pathetic losers chortelling in the corner with their equally pathetic buddies on their "cheat" server.  And they still have the audacity to claim the SOE hates its users and cant run a game! 

If there were an emu that did what the original supposedly promised.  Which is establish a real, stable, server with all things functioning that was free and provided a superior and customer friendly environment, you can bet that Sony would be ALL OVER shutting it down.

Hey "cumbom", I cant figure out guys like you.  Im not going to take your bait in continuing a point by point argument of endless minutiae.  Instead, I'm just going to ask you why you would continue to pay to play SOE games and dedicate valuable time to a /blog crusade?

I mean really dude.  Its a game.  It isnt (or at least shouldnt be) a defining facet of your life.  Guys like you seem to want to twist things like this into some sort of Ralph Nader consumer crusade issue as if youre campaigning against faulty airbags or the tobacco companies, but the reality is that its a GAME.  A game you pay to play.  Why do you need to convince the world that SOE should be avoided?  You view it that you're doing some kind of service to "the public" but youre really just feeding a personal dysfunction.  Just let go man.

If you hate the way SOE handles its customers and/or the game bothers you to the point of dedicating a /blog to "warning unknowing consumers", it's time to move on.

People arent at some kind of big risk here.  They'll spend $30 on the game, use their free month, and if they decide they dont like it (which they're able to do on their own), they'll quit.  The world really doesnt need a dedicated batch of crusaders exposing "the hidden evils" of MMO customer support.

Go after the oil companies or something.