 |
 | Home | Contact Us | FAQ | Search & Site Map | Link to Us |
 | Sign In | Join | Other 45 Sites in Network |
| HomeDiscussion Groups Platforms PCXboxPlayStationNintendoGames ActionStrategyRole Playing GamesSimulatorsSport Games |
Game Forum / Role Playing Games / EverQuest / January 2008It's EQ2 for me (if anything)
Welp, After fooling around in EQ2 maybe 5 hours a week, tops, for the last few months (since it started getting too cold to go to the beach here in NY, so .. end of september actually), i finally made my way to the game's answer to the enchanter of EQ1. And i love it! By "love" i mean "i really dislike the way we were treated in EQ1" and "I think this is how it should have been all along - this is intuitive." The "character" of the class has evolved a bit - from "enchanter" in EQ1 we have a good and evil version - illusionist and coercer, respectively. Most classes from EQ1 splintered into a good/evil version, where typically the divide is on "light" vs "dark" magic, not offense versus defense. That distinction is rooted in the genre of fantasy itself, so you can check it out without hearing my editorializing. The major difference between the illusionist (good) and coercer (evil) is that the bad guy can dominate the mind of his opponent (charm) and the good guy can create a doppleganger of himself that will cast damage and stun spells (smart pet). Pets suck, AI sucks, and there's no way you'd get me to play the illusionist (though they get all the illusions - coercer only gets a few). Hence, I'm a coercer. I had been leaning toward coercer anyway because in EQ1, in the 50's when we got "titles" (that only showed up in a /w all enc 51 65 query), coercer was higher than illusionist (and beguiler and phantasmist too). The coercer can do most of what my enchanter (Faza in EQ1) used to be able to do. It seems they "got it right" and i'm sorry to report i'm only noticing this now. I didn't play any other EQ2 classes enough (by 20 they were pretty dull) to notice that they were really very well balanced and refined. All i noticed by playing other classes up to 20 was that the game is far more solo-able while being far more group- able too. Each class has something to offer a group *and* everyone can solo in varying degrees - all of them. And the tradeskill professions offer a non-combat experience that's mostly puzzle-collection based gameplay. So i like all of that, but it made me think EQ2 was just dumbed-down EQ1. It is, but it's still more fun than EQ1. That's a non- raider's point of view (haven't raided in EQ2, didn't enjoy raiding post-luclin in EQ1). And it's not really dumbed-down so much as the baseline requirements for competency are far lower, but an excellent player will shine through just as brightly. And if you're doing pickup groups, that's what you want. The alternate advancement in EQ2 offers very respectable customization and the player can begin it from lvl 10 (not 50) - and it runs parallel normal xp, not in place of, so you level up as you refine your skills. That's a nice improvement. I spent my points in the "chronomancer" line, a special enchanter-only ability that allows my spells to cast faster. I'm not trying to convince anyone here to play EQ2 so much as i'm just looking to express that certain griefs from EQ1 are vindicated in EQ2. I've only noticed it as i've become serious about playing a coercer. For example - in EQ1, when i charmed anything (and every time i had a spell that would charm the mobs i was fighting, which is most levels but not all [ugh!], i would...) i would have to *stare* at the charm- pet window because it could break any second. Is that fun? To be on edge so much? I didn't think so. What was fun was the fact that very few people would be as diligent with their pets as i was, and as a result i had a reputation as an excellent charmer. In EQ2, we have the same risk - random charm breaks (though the AA to keep charms holding longer is available from much earlier on [woohoo!]). But when charm is wearing off, we get notice. It's about 3 seconds where the screen color-shifts for a split second and then the mob is stunned for a random duration, usually just enough time to cast a stun or a root. Is it less fun that charming is easier? Nope. It just shifts my focus onto the world around me, the conversation, the cat that jumps on the keyboard, etc. Why did it have to be a staring contest to be a good charmer? I feel better =P Fennin.Faza (Befallen.Fazo) <---- who the HELL took "Faza" on my server?! > Most classes from EQ1 splintered into a good/evil > version, where typically the divide is on "light" vs "dark" magic, not > offense versus defense. That distinction is rooted in the genre of > fantasy itself, so you can check it out without hearing my > editorializing. I'm glad to hear you found something you enjoy. I'm curious about the good/evil divide in EQ2. I understand that the classes branch apart, so a "good" enchanter has different abilities than an "evil" enchanter, for example. I also understand that the "good" and "evil" characters have different home cities (Qeynos vs. Freeport). How deep does the divide go? By choosing "evil", how much have you been alienated from "good" players? Do you have common quests? For example, in World of Warcraft, the Alliance (humans, dwarves, etc.) and Horde (orcs, trolls, etc.) are totally unable to group together or even communicate. If I roll a human in WoW, and my friend rolls a troll, for all practical purposes, we may as well be on different servers. How much does this exist in EQ2? - Prelgor > > Most classes from EQ1 splintered into a good/evil > > version, where typically the divide is on "light" vs "dark" magic, not > > offense versus defense. That distinction is rooted in the genre of > > fantasy itself, so you can check it out without hearing my > > editorializing. > How deep does the divide go? By choosing "evil", how much have you > been alienated from "good" players? Do you have common quests? For [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > > - Prelgor It's really not a very deep division. I would say my class has about 80% the abilities of its opposite. At least, that's an approximation - I don't know the other classes well enough. I'm pretty sure for Pally/ SK it might be more like 40%, and for Templar/Inquisitor (cleric) it might be closer to 90%. Oh - for Monk/Bruiser, for lvls 1-50 the difference is about 4 skills in the lineup of dozens (50+ i don't know if they're further divergent). But most importantly, there is no alienation other than newbie zones. You don't want to enter an enemy city unless you have the resources to survive there, but anything you can't have is a clone of what you already have in your own city. Most "action" quests are centered around combat zones, which are nondiscriminatory (race-wise). My girlfriend plays only evil characters (should i be reading into that?) and i've been meeting her in the lvl 5+ areas (1-5 is too close to guards) or higher and we'll do common quests together (dungeon exploration, etc). A very interesting wrinkle is that at the outskirts of every major city there is a small camp somewhere with representatives of that city's enemies. Outside kelethin is a tent with darkelves, tucked away under a huge fungus. That enemy camp offers a betrayal quest where the player can sabotage a part of the city or assassinate a public figure and shred their present class to receive the opposite. I'm pretty sure it can only be done once, and i think the difficulty of the task is related to the level the player is when accepting the quest (such that most people do the quest before 20th level). Betraying strips all skills/spells; they don't convert. I don't know the details, but i hear it's worth experiencing at least once. Fennin.Faza / Befallen.Fazo > A very interesting wrinkle is that at the outskirts of every major > city there is a small camp somewhere with representatives of that [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > skills/spells; they don't convert. I don't know the details, but i > hear it's worth experiencing at least once. I did this before I quit playing EQ2 for WoW when it came out in the UK. (So quite a while ago - things might have changed) When I did it I'm fairly sure that you couldn't do it once you'd chosen your level 20 class. steve.kaye > I did this before I quit playing EQ2 for WoW when it came out in the > UK. (So quite a while ago - things might have changed) When I did it > I'm fairly sure that you couldn't do it once you'd chosen your level > 20 class. > > steve.kaye It used to be that everyone would start as a precursor class: fighter, priest, mage, and maybe a "tank" one or maybe those were fighters too. Upon reaching 20, you'd choose which version you wanted - something like that. I don't know much about how it was, but presently the class you pick when you roll the character is the one you keep, unless you betray. > > A very interesting wrinkle is that at the outskirts of every major > > city there is a small camp somewhere with representatives of that [quoted text clipped - 12 lines] > I'm fairly sure that you couldn't do it once you'd chosen your level > 20 class. True. Also, I remember it was a very difficult (by difficult I mean tedious) and very inconvenient. Part of the evil to good quest involved killing 500 gnolls and several named mobs in the sub-20 level area around Qeynos - a city you could not enter for resupply until you had completed the quest, and even then many merchants gave you a hard time. Plus, just *getting* to the lands around Qeynos from Freeport was a lengthy and harrowing trek, so it wasn't like you were going to make trips back and forth while working on the quest. I tried out several different classes in EQ2. I really liked the enchanter classes and the necromancer, but I just couldn't stand the "pant suits" all the robe-wearing casters were stuck with. They looked retarded. -- Rich Carpenter > So i like all of that, but it made me think EQ2 was just >dumbed-down EQ1. It is, but it's still more fun than EQ1. That's a non- >raider's point of view The problem is it has *absolutly* no depth. Took me 6 weeks to make four chars which are now 29,30,35,54,also around 150 AAs all in all,oh this was with experience locked,one of the best features in EQ2 or I would have been max level in a week. ;) Leveling is so uncredibly easy,not to mention one gets AAs along with no effort just by running through zones,that there is absolutly no feeling of an achievement once one reaches a certain level like in EQ1. The only thing slightly challenging is the user interface. In the 6 weeks I activly played I didnt manage to get familiar with the clumsy and overburdened interface and this after 6 years EQ1.Even long time players have problems finding certain functions as I found out after I asked if there is something like "hitmodes" in EQ1,asked several times in world chat without repsonse or people telling me they dont know what I mean although the function exists after I found out after a longish search. For me this is an absolute joke,and has nothing to do with the game being made for the "casual" gamer,its more made for the average lamer with the attention span of a fly and the socializing skills of an eremite. I also hate the concept of a MMORPG for soloists,I am not there to be ones background sound tapestry,I suggest one plays Oblivion or something like that,joining MMORPGs to solo destroys them. Tecnical its the same old sh.t which made me quit EQ1,instable with lots of server downtime,which inevitable leads me to the conclusion SOE continues to drive the game on the cheapest hardware possible with the lowest possible number of employees working on it. As in EQ1 year old bugs stay unfixed and SOE still impertinently tries to blame the customers or even MS. Fortunatly a rl friend let me play on his account so I didnt had to shove another handful of Dollars into SOE's fat a.s. All in all I am disgusted with the direction the MMORPG genre took the last years,reminds me of TV,along with becoming more and more spread out,the content became dumb more and more also. On Jan 13, 1:08 pm, Ula...@hotmail.com wrote: > On Mon, 7 Jan 2008 15:01:20 -0800 (PST), c > [quoted text clipped - 24 lines] > the last years,reminds me of TV,along with becoming more and more > spread out,the content became dumb more and more also. Blah blah blah. First up, sure, it's not perfect. I'm saying i had fun, and for most people who play eq1, eq2 will be fun ...IF... it's enjoyed with fun people, which is 1/2 of what made eq1 fun. The other 1/2, the game itself, is really solid. That's why i posted, i was surprised. I really didn't believe it and i hated the idea of playing eq-lite. It's not eq-lite, it's [eq-pretty and] eq-not-tedious but it's got substance. And if you have all those characters with all those levels, did YOU play it like a soloist? Did you make friends or join a friendly guild or anything? That makes the experience rich. For me, eq1 is the lonely game. I logged in Faza and ran around LOIO and laughed out loud when the erudite professor in the windmill asked me what i was doing in such far off, deserted lands. LOIO used to be a wonderland of groups and dangers and fun. I'm sure i don't even know what the level 20's are doing nowadays, if there are any. Did paludal caverns ever get replaced, or is it the latest twink factory? Not that i haven't leveled my twinks there too... Sony online isn't anyone's favorite. Ancient software bugs really aren't justifiable, but hardware-wise ... they do their updates quickly, downtime is sparse, and it's announced or at least predictable. Don't just whine. Unless it's about MMO's in general, then i'm with ya ... the genre needs to grow! >On Jan 13, 1:08 pm, Ula...@hotmail.com wrote: >> On Mon, 7 Jan 2008 15:01:20 -0800 (PST), c [quoted text clipped - 53 lines] >predictable. Don't just whine. Unless it's about MMO's in general, >then i'm with ya ... the genre needs to grow! Played on a rl friends account,after my experiences with EQ1(which I left mostly cause they lie and hold out their *paying* customers ( AB instance server hardware not sufficient for the playerbase for a year) SOE wont see a nickel from me ever again). That's the weird thing,found a wonderful small guild which was (and still is) growing rapidly. Seems to be much easier to make or find a group as in EQ1 even at low levels. My playtime was all in all half solo/half grouped where I didnt make much xp grouped,was with guild making mostly grey heritage quests for status and guild xp. Cant follow you with "not eq-lite" and "eq-not-tedious". I already covered the "lite" aspect with the sheer unbeleivable speed of leveling,also the non existant death penalty would fit well in this category.(I already thought the corpse summoner in EQ1 was game breaking,but in EQ2 death has become a means of transportation). All the quests are tedious,it feels like an endless LDoN to me with very little variation,90% is "kill x mobs" and "collect 15 of these". On Jan 17, 8:43 am, Ula...@hotmail.com wrote: > Played on a rl friends account,after my experiences with EQ1(which > I left mostly cause they lie and hold out their *paying* customers ( [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > Seems to be much easier to make or find a group as in EQ1 even > at low levels. Didn't realize you played the euro server. I have no doubt that was more uncomfortable. > Cant follow you with "not eq-lite" and "eq-not-tedious". > I already covered the "lite" aspect with the sheer unbeleivable speed [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > All the quests are tedious,it feels like an endless LDoN to me with > very little variation,90% is "kill x mobs" and "collect 15 of these". How does the game really change if leveling is easier or harder? Is the fun in the leveling? There are many accomplishments to shoot for and not all of them are simple or time-consuming. But i'm with you 100% on the death thing, though it's silly in all games except the first 1/2 of eq1. Still, just because the penalty isn't dire doesn't mean it isn't an improvement (albeit silly). If your party dies while creeping through a dungeon, you have to start from the beginning. You're not as connected to your avatar, admittedly; they're transient and you, the player, are trying to beat a level, the same as in every other video game. That's what it is, really. If the role-playing (connection to avatar) is more important to you, play an eq classic server or play a game where "death" means actual death. Some game where you can't play your character after dying unless you are revived. Is that more fun? It's always silly, and the fact that the "video game" version of punishment is cheaper here is not worse than it is in any other game. |
Reply to this Message |
 Sign In
 Join
 My Latest Posts My Monitored Threads My Blog My Photo Gallery My Profile My Homepage Start New Thread Enable EMail Alerts Rate this Thread
|
©2009 Advenet LLC Privacy Policy - Terms of Use
This website includes both content owned or controlled by Advenet as well as content owned or controlled by third parties.