| Mail |
You might also like: WoW Insider, Joystiq, and more

Reader Comments (27)

Posted: Jul 12th 2010 3:42PM (Unverified) said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
Hmm, "Aru" is a WOW player complaining about graphics/art style and animations? WOW is a Saturday morning cartoon graphics and art-wise. Tried it for 3 weeks and the animations were extremely simplistic. AOC on the other hand has awesome graphics and animations. With superior combat but lacks dept. I like playing non-human races so AOC lacks that High Fantasy element. EQ2 is still great. Crappy UI? Yes. Performance issues? Yes. But still the absolutely deepest game out there.

Posted: Jul 12th 2010 4:52PM Sunlover said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
Yes, Aru is a "WOW player complaining about graphics/art style and animations". He also has played Guild Wars, EQ II, AoC, LOTRO, Final Fantasy XI, Lineage II, Vanguard, Aion, WAR, DDO, and many other MMOs. To call him (me) a "WOW player" without knowing his entire gaming history is interesting. So WoW has "Saturday morning cartoon graphics" to Jerry (you). Funny thing is, I remember some pretty awesome looking Saturday morning cartoons so I don't see how that's a bad thing. Is it? Maybe the cartoons the T.V. stations in your area showed on Saturday looked dreadful so perhaps that's where the basis for your comparison comes from?

I was an art student for most of my life, and although I agree that WoW's graphics are showing their age, especially in the older areas (Which is largely the point of the Cataclysm renovations), I personally feel that Blizzard's choices in art direction and design are usually well thought out and executed with such a level of mastery that it is difficult to find other games that come close. To understand this, however, you need to understand use of lighting, use of shading, color theory, and just all around coolness/fun factor. Just plain old good design. I won't make any assumptions as to your knowledge of these things based on your game preferences. I'll just agree to disagree.

Stylistic/Aesthetic graphical preferences aside, I find it hard to argue that Blizzard's animators have done anything but an amazing job with World of Warcraft. To this day, it is difficult for me to play ANY other MMO simply because their animations don't "feel" right and the overall presentation, graphics, animations, the whole bag, simply lack the polish that Blizzard puts into their game(s). I liked AoC's animations, for the most part. I liked Aion's, Final Fantasy XI's, and Guild Wars' animations as well. But other games seem to just be lacking, especially in the art/animation department, if not every other area as well.

Is EQ II still a great game? Sure. Is it worth trying out for many others looking for another MMORPG? Sure is. Is it worth it for me to play EQ II without it having those things I mentioned? Nope. Breaks my immersion. Glad you enjoy it enough to defend it though. Hope you continue to have fun in Norrath. I'm looking forward to some new MMORPGs releasing soon. Hopefully they have the polish I require at this stage in my gaming life.
Reply

Posted: Jul 12th 2010 5:11PM (Unverified) said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
Mr. Aru I have tried 13 MMO's in my time. Listing them is a waste of time. I consider myself an "EQ2 player" because I've spent the longest time there. Been playing since the 3rd day. I called you a "WOW player" because you stated you were returning to WOW's game world after your time in EQ2. It also seemed to be the game you were most impressed with. You are entitled to your opinion. But a background in art is not necessary to prefer 1 style over another. I have a BA in European History. But who cares? LOL. I'm not going to apply my knowledge to every pseudo-medieval game world to seem more valid.

Posted: Jul 12th 2010 7:10PM (Unverified) said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
Indeed not. But you should be honest and simply admit that the style Blizzard have chosen to implement is not to your personal taste, rather than trying to criticize it with objective (and objectively incorrect) labels like "extremely simplistic."
Reply

Posted: Jul 12th 2010 7:27PM (Unverified) said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
I find the animations "extremely simplistic". The art style I find "cartoony". Nothing anyone says here is objective. It's all skewed by personal preference. Myself included.

Posted: Jul 12th 2010 10:19PM Xarnlen said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
The UI can be modded just like WoW's UI, I currently use the Fetish UI replacement for my EQ2 and it is very nice.

One thing I really liked was the in game web browser.

Posted: Jul 13th 2010 1:12PM (Unverified) said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
I play EQ2 since it was released in europe, so I'm somewhat biased. :)

I tried Ryzom, WOW, AOC, Vanguard to name a few - heck I even have a lifetime account for Lotro - but none of those could or can really 'fascinate' me like EQ2. Like poster Aurickle pointed out: it never gets boring. (A good portion on this is also the small but friendly guild I'm part of since beginning, mostly people I already knew before EQ2.) Eq2 is more complex than its competitors. Also the playerbase/community is older (at least in my percetion) - you will rarely find people spamming, yelling or even insulting you.

SOE simplified a lot over the time, maybe hoping to make the game more accessible or better understandable for tourist/visitors/newbies resulting in a mixed blessing.
A few examples: In the beginning your leveling was capped at 19 - you had to fulfil a class-quest, each ending in a very own single-player instance, to turn from a warrior to berserk, vanguard... or from priest to templar etc. These quest weren't easy and you often needed help, depending on your class, better gear, spells at first and so on.

Also EQ2 had the 'soul-shards' your char left behind on dead - up to 12 could lay scattered around norrath, weakening your stats until you recovered them or a day per shard passed. soe changed this to a dept-system, meaning 50% of your experience is needed to pay the death-dept, effectively slowing your leveling. Not that bad, but makes you a bit more cautious. I don't remember how often we needed to call a gm to recover shards which were simply unreachable for world-barrier reasons.

Third example of how soe tried to be more 'mainstream' (speak: simplicity) is crafting: As an armorer you can craft armor, duh! - but you needed to have patterns, nails, leatherstraps etc. - crafting parts you could not build by yourself but have a sage, weaponsmith, tailor make them and give/sell them to you. soe changed this two times: first they installed the craft of 'geomancy' meaning everyone could craft these ingredients, practically cutting a whole market. In the second change geomancy was removed again - now every crafter simply has to have the pure base components - like 5x ore, 4 hides of leather, 4 strands of fiber and 5 coal, now stir together and voilĂ : there is your shoulder-armour. Not really satisfiying but time-wise practically (tightening crafting), as the time needed to kill some mobs to loot gear and to craft it is somewhat equalized.

These are only 3 examples to show how soe tries to improve the game - not only for the existing playerbase but for new players, and even if not every change is welcomed by the elder players, somehow they succed as EQ2 still is online with a huge fanbase.

The comments on fighting in EQ2 compared to say WOW or AOC are somewhat right in stating EQ2 being indirect or 'not-on-the-point' - but no mmorg is quake or diablo 'responsetime-wise'. On the other hand I like the ability of queueing 2 spells, meaning start one and clicking on the next and so on. Wow for ex. always told me that I can't do this now, because another spell is casted.

On animation: I really found only AOC be on an adequate level of 'believable' animation as EQ2 - the later one being motion-captured to my knowledge. Wow runs great but alike the whole style the animations are also 'cartoonish' to my perception, Lotro's animation is likewise far away from being realistic. Yes, EQ2 does not have such a mass of different animations, not even much for different classes but taken into account that the EQ2 engine is doing its job since half a decade it really runs and looks good - but needing you to tinker with lots of graphic settings to find your personal optimum (or different settings for questing, exploring, raiding etc.)

Another great plus I find worth speaking about is the totally customizable interface. Starting from having as much chat-windows as you like (for your group, guild, system, auction, paladin, our-chat-channel-1 etc. etc.), resizable hokeys, bags - there is an UI-Builder included in the EQ2 directory which let you modify one or nearly all ingame windows, you can fine-tune XML-code or download complete UI-sets (like the so called Profit-UI), you can even change some graphics in the game, for example the target-ring circling around the selected chars or objects. There are parser-tools, like ACT or addons like the map-tool which further improve gaming experience, depending on your personal needs.

In EQ2 there are some 40 languagues (along with their own fonts!) your char can learn - so chances are good you can select for ex. 'death-whisper', 'krombal' or 'draconic' and some people will only see cryptic symbols while others will understand you perfectly well.
('draconic' requires you to locate 26 runes scatterd all over norrath - a greater task, even if you know all locations)


A friend lately asked me, if I'm still into EQ2 and if so, why. After stating some of the above and things the other posters mentioned too, I concluded: Aside the enormous content EQ2 to me is like an old armchair: it's old but it is so comfortable to sit in, it's simply pleasing. :)

Featured Stories

Coming soon
Engadget

Engadget

Joystiq

Joystiq

WoW Insider

WoW

TUAW

TUAW