*LOL*... each and every time one of these new "EQ Killer" games is released everyone swears they are leaving EQ for good because the newest game on the block RUL3Z!1!!! It was done when Anarchy Online came out, it was done when Guild Wars came out and it was done when World of Warcraft came out. Where do you stand as far as those games are now?
I'm no angel. I tried each one of those games and for the first few months they were great. I didn't think too much about EQ. Then as I got deeper into each one I wondered why it didn't have such and such option like EQ or why the progression wasn't more like EQ or why class roles aren't as defined as EQ. Eventually I would end up going back to EQ and it was like being with an old friend again. It's dependable, it's predictable, but more importantly, it's still fun after all these years.
Vanguard being the next "EQ Killer" to me is laughable. Big deal, Brad McQuaid. Whoopee. Same assclown that didn't believe downtime should be shorter. Same assclown who felt timesink after timesink was completely warranted and necessary to balance the game. I want to play this guy's newest creation why? Sorry, no thanks. SOE is slowly fixing the clusterf*ck he left behind when he left the EQ team.
Reports I am hearing from friends in beta are saying the game is a chore to play. The combat system is sucktastic. It's more work than it is fun. I would figure it is supposed to be the other way around isn't it? They are in beta 3 right now and still can't decide how many ppl should be in group... 4, 6, 8,... hello? Shouldn't this have been figured out in ALPHA? They're just now trying to balance classes and group size and are aiming for a Summer 2006 release? Don't think so.
I'd also like to touch on this:
Quote:
V(SoH) is going to be run with Microsoft ( I know there are alot of Anti microsoft people who will say thats a bad thing) So i expect pretty tight programming, because despite what the haters say Microsoft programming is as good as it gets generally.
Let me remind you about a sucktastic game that used to be known as Asheron's Call 2. The graphic lag, bugs, balance and itemization in that game had me cancel after the first 2-3 months. The game was so bad that they actually shut down the servers and the game is no more. Strangely enough Asheron's Call 1 is still going strong.
Case in point, all this flashy crap that they feel is necessary in games now a days does not beat out the tried and true mechanics of their predecessors. AC1 still, to this day, has about the best customizable character creation templates in any game I have played. No one has taken a queue from that and I have no idea why.
EQ1 vs EQ2? How many people left EQ2 to go back to EQ1 because EQ2 is a barren ghost town of a game. I ran around in Freeport for well over an hour without seeing another single person. It might as well be a single player game.
I'll admit that WoW had me for a few months but once I reached endgame that thing just got as sucktastic as all the rest of these games. No strategy. Raids were nothing but a Zergfest. It didn't matter if you had a priest because you had a druid. It didn't matter if you had a warrior because you could let the shaman tank. WTF were they thinking when they were supposed to be defining class roles. At least EQ has this one right for the most part.
I have tried just about every MMORPG game there is out there save for D&D Online (which I didn't even need to beta because the reviews on it were so dismal that I didn't need to even pick up the box and read it). Guess what game I am still playing? Yeah, Everquest, since November of '99. It's rare that someone gets it right the first time. AC1 and EQ1 have managed that. Some of these other companies should really take some notes and do some homework on things that work.