Quote:
houses. a flop in every game that has them.
UO.
As far as the rest of your quibbles, I don't think you're the target audience for Vanguard. I'm not at all sure that McQuaid wants to pander to the ultra-casual player, as WoW has done.
I'll play Vanguard, but I expect it to be more along the lines of EQ1 than WoW, which means that with my current work schedule I may never see the end game. As long as it's a great game with plenty to do, I don't care. I accept that casual players won't be gods in Vanguard.
EQ's interdependence did one thing that WoW has yet to manage. It built commumities where reputation mattered, and friendships had time to evolve. I've been playing WoW for eight months and have maybe one friend I've met there. In EQ it was a much different story, because it had to be.
EQ's relative difficulty discouraged the ADHD set. I won't miss them in Vanguard, where they will doubtless spawn 8 characters under level 20 before posting "this game SUX!" and leaving, to return to WoW where they'll ***** endlessly about their sub-god status at level 60.
EQ needed more quests at all levels, absolutely. It needed a better tradeskill interface. I hope they get that right. But the class interdependence and death penalties appeal to the kind of gamer who understands their use and plans to stay around for a while, as opposed to the drive-thru approach of WoW.