Other SOE games...namely Everquest 2

Dehner

Just wondering if other SOE games are worthwhile...I ask this as my subscription to MXo is coming to an end soon and I will be looking for other possibilities on the station access if it proves worthwhile.

First off...is Everquest 2 worth while, I know the graphics are alright and stuff but does it have the content to keep someone engaged well after the first few levels?

SWG, although I am sure it is alright for the diehards the graphics and the age of the game do not attract me in any way. For me the graphics if they are poor or indifferent take away from the presentation and the seriousness of the game.

Please kindly let me know if any of these games, minus SWG, are worth your hard earned dollar and could keep you occupied for any length of time, thank you.

Culann

In a word:

No.

SOE has a very bad tradition of not listening to their playerbase, and
doing things which huge chunks of their playerbase find unpleasant,
disregarding the fact the players express this rather vocally.
They are prone to letting bugs get by their Q&A regularly..even
after test server players feedback them.

Best bet is to look at something outside the SOE banner, if you are leaving MxO.

sirius

Honestly your opinions on SWG are a little off, Most of the Die-hards left after the combat upgrade, and it has some of the best graphics of any MMO, try running it at full detail if your computer can handle it...there are not many that can.

Offl1ne

EQ2 has a massive amount of content. It's not going to cost you a
lot to try it either, you can grab the free trial and if you like it
then go but the game. Desert of Flames here in the UK can be had
for £15 and contains the original game too.

As for the poster saying they ignore the large part of the player base,
I'd like to know where you get your figures from. It's well known
that the forums of most games are populated by a very small fraction of
actual players, usually the most vocal ones at that.

Offl1ne.

Godel

I actually like eq2 and as an MMO (that is not considering the setting and story) it's the best IMHO (it lacks strong pvp, yeah, expansionless it lacks ANY pvp, but I'm not the pvp type), so it's worth a try

Culann

Offl1ne wrote:
EQ2 has a massive amount of
content. It's not going to cost you a lot to try it either, you
can grab the free trial and if you like it then go but the game.
Desert of Flames here in the UK can be had for £15 and contains the
original game too.
As for the poster saying they ignore the large
part of the player base, I'd like to know where you get your figures
from. It's well known that the forums of most games are populated
by a very small fraction of actual players, usually the most vocal ones
at that.

Offl1ne.

Well..you opened a can of worms there..so I'll go ahead and close it
for you..just hope you haven't fallen in by the time the lid goes on.

I've been in EQ2 since day 1 of release. Been through all the
half-arse patches, the mistakes, and seen all the wordsmithing and
evasion by Moorgard over there until they finally pulled him cause of
the heat. (Him becoming a dev was reassignment FYI)

I have a live server character, and a test server character as
well..I've been there for the combat changes, the incessant pleas the
Carpenter TS class had in trying to get fixes..been on the receiving
end of all the hate and discontent the Alchemists went through before
they were axed in three. My live character is a Paladin, and I
was there for the horse nerfing as well. In ALL of these cases,
there is a revolving and unique issue that keeps rising to the
surface:

In each of these cases, PLAUSIBLE changes are put onto Test server..and
tested at length, with a LOT of feedback given to Devs and alot of bug
reports. Changes are made during a patch, generally daily, until
things seem pretty much okay to move to Live from Test. This does
not, FYI, include those bugs which are /bugged daily, sometimes
multiple times by people on Test.

The result? Usually, the day the patch goes over to live servers,
it is NOTHING like what we tested on the test server prior..absolutely
not even close. The best example I can give you..the most
current..is the infamous combat revamp in EQ2, which screwed up so many
things, including raid content, it's patently ridiculous. And the
thing that keeps surfacing was that people DID report the problems in
the test server process..did feedback a dislike of the changes...and ya
know? SOE does it anyway. Recently there was a post by
Moorgard on forums over there that said in so many words, they were
going to leave it the way it was and they weren't changing it..they may
tweak it here and there, but it was the way they wanted.
Now..with that in mind..go take a good hard look at the Guardian
sub-boards there..they are hurting for some fixes, and SOE, in typical
track record form, tries to tell them they are okay, when they KNOW
they aren't. Hellfire, the Paladin I had and the one I have now
isn't even close..my best attacks were either nerfed despite feedback
that they were too low damage for even the new combat scale, or they
are NUKES. On a Paladin? A tanking class?
Nuking? Think here..there's something very wrong with a Holy
Warrior in heavy plate armor..nuking a mob.

In summary..yes...SOE has a hideously large and infamous track record
of doing things they way they feel it should be done, and largely if
not utterly ignoring the playerbase in the process. Next time
you're in EQ2, and you are sick and tired of a bug or you find a
ungodly new one right after a patch, ask yourself, "Was this so
gamestopping or so irritating that someone else could have found it on
test and /bugged it?" Then follow it with "Why am I experiencing it on
live still?"

Yer answer is probably due to SOE, not the testers, who did their part, and were ignored, regardless.

Dehner

Cool thanks for all the informative feedback, I think I'll just stay
away from other SOE games due to the fanfare I heard and from talking
to people I know. Besides nothing beats World of Warcraft in my
opinion about content and variety of gameplay. Thanks once again
for taking the time to respond to my post! :smileyhappy:

Offl1ne

Culann wrote:

Offl1ne wrote:
EQ2
has a massive amount of content. It's not going to cost you a lot
to try it either, you can grab the free trial and if you like it then
go but the game. Desert of Flames here in the UK can be had for
£15 and contains the original game too.
As for the poster saying
they ignore the large part of the player base, I'd like to know where
you get your figures from. It's well known that the forums of
most games are populated by a very small fraction of actual players,
usually the most vocal ones at that.

Offl1ne.

Well..you opened a can of worms there..so I'll go ahead and close it
for you..just hope you haven't fallen in by the time the lid goes on.

I've been in EQ2 since day 1 of release. Been through all the
half-arse patches, the mistakes, and seen all the wordsmithing and
evasion by Moorgard over there until they finally pulled him cause of
the heat. (Him becoming a dev was reassignment FYI)

I have a
live server character, and a test server character as well..I've been
there for the combat changes, the incessant pleas the Carpenter TS
class had in trying to get fixes..been on the receiving end of all the
hate and discontent the Alchemists went through before they were axed
in three. My live character is a Paladin, and I was there for the
horse nerfing as well. In ALL of these cases, there is a
revolving and unique issue that keeps rising to the surface:

In each of these cases, PLAUSIBLE changes are put onto Test server..and
tested at length, with a LOT of feedback given to Devs and alot of bug
reports. Changes are made during a patch, generally daily, until
things seem pretty much okay to move to Live from Test. This does
not, FYI, include those bugs which are /bugged daily, sometimes
multiple times by people on Test.

The result? Usually,
the day the patch goes over to live servers, it is NOTHING like what we
tested on the test server prior..absolutely not even close. The
best example I can give you..the most current..is the infamous combat
revamp in EQ2, which screwed up so many things, including raid content,
it's patently ridiculous. And the thing that keeps surfacing was
that people DID report the problems in the test server process..did
feedback a dislike of the changes...and ya know? SOE does it
anyway. Recently there was a post by Moorgard on forums over
there that said in so many words, they were going to leave it the way
it was and they weren't changing it..they may tweak it here and there,
but it was the way they wanted. Now..with that in mind..go take a
good hard look at the Guardian sub-boards there..they are hurting for
some fixes, and SOE, in typical track record form, tries to tell them
they are okay, when they KNOW they aren't. Hellfire, the Paladin
I had and the one I have now isn't even close..my best attacks were
either nerfed despite feedback that they were too low damage for even
the new combat scale, or they are NUKES. On a Paladin?
A tanking class? Nuking? Think here..there's
something very wrong with a Holy Warrior in heavy plate armor..nuking a
mob.

In summary..yes...SOE has a hideously large and infamous
track record of doing things they way they feel it should be done, and
largely if not utterly ignoring the playerbase in the process.
Next time you're in EQ2, and you are sick and tired of a bug or you
find a ungodly new one right after a patch, ask yourself, "Was this so
gamestopping or so irritating that someone else could have found it on
test and /bugged it?" Then follow it with "Why am I experiencing it on
live still?"

Yer answer is probably due to SOE, not the testers, who did their part, and were ignored, regardless.

No, the issue I raised was one of where you got your supporting data
from and saying that the forum population is the large part of the
playerbase is totally ignorant. Everything else is pure
opinion. I personally think the combat change in EQ2 is great,
but then I play a Ranger who was shockingly bad before the change went
live.

Culann

Offl1ne wrote:

Culann wrote:

Offl1ne wrote:
EQ2
has a massive amount of content. It's not going to cost you a lot
to try it either, you can grab the free trial and if you like it then
go but the game. Desert of Flames here in the UK can be had for
£15 and contains the original game too.
As for the poster saying
they ignore the large part of the player base, I'd like to know where
you get your figures from. It's well known that the forums of
most games are populated by a very small fraction of actual players,
usually the most vocal ones at that.

Offl1ne.

Well..you opened a can of worms there..so I'll go ahead and close it
for you..just hope you haven't fallen in by the time the lid goes on.

I've been in EQ2 since day 1 of release. Been through all the
half-arse patches, the mistakes, and seen all the wordsmithing and
evasion by Moorgard over there until they finally pulled him cause of
the heat. (Him becoming a dev was reassignment FYI)

I have a
live server character, and a test server character as well..I've been
there for the combat changes, the incessant pleas the Carpenter TS
class had in trying to get fixes..been on the receiving end of all the
hate and discontent the Alchemists went through before they were axed
in three. My live character is a Paladin, and I was there for the
horse nerfing as well. In ALL of these cases, there is a
revolving and unique issue that keeps rising to the surface:

In each of these cases, PLAUSIBLE changes are put onto Test server..and
tested at length, with a LOT of feedback given to Devs and alot of bug
reports. Changes are made during a patch, generally daily, until
things seem pretty much okay to move to Live from Test. This does
not, FYI, include those bugs which are /bugged daily, sometimes
multiple times by people on Test.

The result? Usually,
the day the patch goes over to live servers, it is NOTHING like what we
tested on the test server prior..absolutely not even close. The
best example I can give you..the most current..is the infamous combat
revamp in EQ2, which screwed up so many things, including raid content,
it's patently ridiculous. And the thing that keeps surfacing was
that people DID report the problems in the test server process..did
feedback a dislike of the changes...and ya know? SOE does it
anyway. Recently there was a post by Moorgard on forums over
there that said in so many words, they were going to leave it the way
it was and they weren't changing it..they may tweak it here and there,
but it was the way they wanted. Now..with that in mind..go take a
good hard look at the Guardian sub-boards there..they are hurting for
some fixes, and SOE, in typical track record form, tries to tell them
they are okay, when they KNOW they aren't. Hellfire, the Paladin
I had and the one I have now isn't even close..my best attacks were
either nerfed despite feedback that they were too low damage for even
the new combat scale, or they are NUKES. On a Paladin?
A tanking class? Nuking? Think here..there's
something very wrong with a Holy Warrior in heavy plate armor..nuking a
mob.

In summary..yes...SOE has a hideously large and infamous
track record of doing things they way they feel it should be done, and
largely if not utterly ignoring the playerbase in the process.
Next time you're in EQ2, and you are sick and tired of a bug or you
find a ungodly new one right after a patch, ask yourself, "Was this so
gamestopping or so irritating that someone else could have found it on
test and /bugged it?" Then follow it with "Why am I experiencing it on
live still?"

Yer answer is probably due to SOE, not the testers, who did their part, and were ignored, regardless.

No, the issue I raised was one of where you got your supporting data
from and saying that the forum population is the large part of the
playerbase is totally ignorant. Everything else is pure
opinion. I personally think the combat change in EQ2 is great,
but then I play a Ranger who was shockingly bad before the change went
live.

You brought up the forums..I never specified them directly...sorry but
you can't fly with those wings. To reiterate my first post
explicitly:

SOE has a very bad tradition of not listening to their playerbase, and
doing things which huge chunks of their playerbase find unpleasant,
disregarding the fact the players express this rather vocally.
They are prone to letting bugs get by their Q&A regularly..even
after test server players feedback them.

I just don't see the word 'forum' in there anywhere, do you?
In regards to the forums, nothing was ever said until YOU brought it
up. You will note I never said anything about the forum
population being the large part of the playerbase or ignorant either
way.

Insfoar as Rangers go..there was nothing wrong with them..the
success of the character was based on player skill, like any character
is. However it was generally accepted that the Scouts whined so
MUCH about the tank types doing as much DPS as they did that that's
where the nerf to Fighter DPS came from.

Sorry..but you fell in the can mate..and yeah, I'm putting the lid on.

Offl1ne

Yes I did mention the forums, it was a supposition and I never
explicitly stated that you mentioned it, but seeing as you still have
yet to answer the question of where you are getting your information
from it's a moot point.

Is there something wrong with having a constructive discussion without
the need for trying to put other people down and criticize their
playing skills?

Offl1ne.

Culann

Offl1ne wrote:
Yes I did mention the
forums, it was a supposition and I never explicitly stated that you
mentioned it, but seeing as you still have yet to answer the question
of where you are getting your information from it's a moot point.

Is there something wrong with having a constructive discussion without
the need for trying to put other people down and criticize their
playing skills?

Offl1ne.

A) I answered the question plainly..pehaps you cannot perceive the answer?

B) Who's putting anyone down? Or is this another supposition ? (chuckle)

FYI, I have actually gotten some input from people who work for SOE, if
you want it spelled out more clearly than stating than as a member of
the playerbase and being a tester, I'm almost continually ignored as a
body alongside my peers whom also test. The person is a member of
Q/A for SOE, and has stated on multiple attempts when it's gotten to
the individual and they start finding bugs, almost inevitably there's
never enough time alloted for Q/A to do their jobs sufficiently, and
get the problems they find, fixed. SOE's general directive is to
go ahead and ship with a mountain of bugs, because the majority of
their sales, are NOT subscriptions despite people's belief, but BOX
SALES...and if they can sell you a mountain of glitched code with a
vaporware promise to patch it later and get your $25 or $50 or
whatever, then they have succeeded.

The prior paragrah here sounds a awfully lot like my post prior to this
one, regarding the ignoring of bugs and moving things to Live from Test
doesn't it?

So....just how MUCH plainer do you want this stated?

Offl1ne

Yes thats a lot better thanks, it might sound the same but it isn't,
you managed to give some real information on how you get your data, but
I'm still curious as to how you equate players on test to 'huge chunks'
of the player base? Last I read there was bemoaning about the lack of
players on test, forgive me if I'm wrong as I admit I have not read the
test boards for a while or is this unofficial information from someone
who works for SOE?

Also, how is it that SOE ignore the player base yet at the same time
take action over the 'whining' from the scout class? You're
contradicting yourself there SMILEY

As for the put down, it was just a little curious you decided to equate
my opinion of the Ranger class into bad play, you can surely understand
my mistake of taking it to heart SMILEY

Offl1ne.

Hijax

i have been an all access subscriber ever since eqlive and PS were the only 2 games offered and the deal was worth it then.....

i hop from eq2 to swg to PS and now to mxo, its great because i dont burn out on 1 specific game {lol there are those that would say great so you burn out on 4 of them in their turn}.....not really at all

eq2 is a great cloak and dagger game, PS is awesome for pvp and built specificly for it, swg is fun but admittedly i have trouble getting used to the ui and somewhat cant really figure out the "what do i do next" thing

when mxo was added the coolest thing was i bought it for 20 bucks and it adds zilch to my recurring subscription price, and i love the game {i will be glad to see daylight ingame agn after the halloween blackout-tired of running into bldgs...}

anyway all access is great for variety, all the games being live always dont please all the peeps all the time, never will, i was also in eq2 beta, i have watched them literally change the game fairly drasticly for soloers and small groups, its changed hugely since launch, aside from all the tweekings in beta, and btw all access peeps get 10 chars instead of 8 in eq2, and you can get 8 more on test if you want...

anyway im glad they added mxo its a blast, and im sure ill be jacking in for a long long time...

edit---->aslong as its fun for me...it doesnt have to be perfect....i hate whiners

Message Edited by Hijax on 11-01-2005 04:48 AM
Message edited by Hijax on 11/01/2005 04:48:07.

adonai

I've been playing EQ2 since I left my 50 full load out toon on MXO.

Ultimately it's not about who is making these games, its about what you want for your money.

Some people like to be the caped crusader, others want to wield flashy disco glowsticks, and others want to play Everquest.

Personally I have played alot of MMOG's from the early days, but I always missed the boat on EQ, it was always why bother with a character now, I'm X amount of expansions behind, but I was always curious why the game had such broad and long lasting appeal, what did those players know that I didnt.

At first with EQ2 I found the game boring, the zoning destroyed any immersion, and the whole world both evil and good seemed empty. The character creation, customization, class archtypes, all seemed so plain for what I thought was going to be the holy grail of MMOG's.

Everything was going downhill as far as my EQ2 time, I was grinding away at a Warlock and Bruiser and I wonder *CENSORED* all the fuss was about this game didn't compel me to play, and my existance and actions where entirely irrelevant to the world.

And then I raided.

Epic mobs both Instanced and Contested is what Everquest is all about; for me anyway. There is a ton of content out there, as far as lore and missions, but its all static crap, and once you have seen the grass is indeed greener on the other side, the only reason to do static quests is if you need access into another zone.

If you aren't into raiding, tons of static quests, and a serious grind in a elfy dwarfy world, then pass on this game, give it a wide bearth.

But for me taking down impossible mobs, with concentrated team work, cunning stratefy and ultimately being rewarded with that in a meaningful way in terms of loot, makes this game my daily for the immediate future.

When the grind has a goal, other than just a number, it becomes much easier to bear.

If you have a few bucks you can pick up some well developed toons for extremely cheap prices using the station exchange offered by SOE. Just research what type of character you want to play, before you pay, some class types have been hammered with the new updates, not that there is any pattern to the swinging nerf bat.

AMDME

4 mmos other than mxo in favourite order. 4.Eve 3.WoW 2.PlanetSide 1. and the best mmo imo FFXI