WoW v EQ2

[WayAbvPar]

I have played neither. I am itching for a MMOG to play (like the rest of you, I am dumb like that). I would like to see some of you who have played both to compare and contrast the systems- things like character customization, style of gameplay, soloing opportunities/viability, casual v catass focii, etc.

Darniaq said the following in the EQ2 Beta thread that piqued my interest-

This is fine. Some will like it. Most won't though, particularly those who've played WoW and see how differently that handles it. You can choose where to specialize, if you want to broaden, each class has more options within it than even EQlive has, and most are useful.

TIA for your input. My gaming dollars and time are at STEAK!!11!!1!

[El Gallo]

Skill Customization:  EQ2 just raidcally switched its position on character customization (or, if you believe them, announced something they *cough* always planned on doing), so it isn't really possible to compare the games on that aspect yet.  WoW is a class system with "talent trees" that add custom skills or skill modifiers.  The talents add a fair amount of customization at the price of a fair number of intra-class balance balance problems.

Appearance Customization: EQ2 obliterates WoW here.  But in both games, your character looks pretty much like your gear does in the end.  

Soloing for xp: is *WAY* more efficient in WoW vs EQ2.  In WoW, solo xp is usually even faster than group xp.  In EQ2, you are looking at 1/2 or less xp gain while soloing vs being in a group.  Soloing in EQ2 is very doable though, it is just slower.  Both games have a ton of solo quests available.  If killing rats to collect guts so Ms. Knev'Vutak'k'Thaxh back in noobtown can make ratgut pie is much more thrilling to you than killing rats just because you like killing rats, both games can satisfy your urge.

Soloing for loot: in WoW, you can solo for all the loot you'll ever need to solo, but if you want the ph@t l3wtz, you need to hit the instances, and that means grouping.  In EQ2, I haven't gotten past level 16 and frankly I don't know enough about the equipment system to have a final opinion.

Casual v catass focii: Too early to tell.  The levelling up process in WoW is more casual because it is more soloable, I guess.  Both games are very low downtime (EQ2's percentage based regeneration out of combat = teh smart).  The question is, what will you be doing once you hit max level, get the easily attainable gear and do the attainable quests.  In WoW, it looks like the answer is twinks, raids, and PvP.  In EQ2, it looks like the answer is twinks and raids.  However, WoW's PvP system has not been implemented yet, and neither game's end raids have been either, so it's too early to judge.

[Venkman]

Totally my impressions here.

General

The games are systematically the same. I skip the graphics becausen they are both great, just different. WoW scales way down, and looks great. EQ2 scales only up, and will only look good on a computer you buy in two months.

[*]You hunt
[*]You kill
[*]You gain XP
[*]You unlock new abilities along the way
[*]You get new foozles along the way
[*]There's a crafting system only some will be interested in
[*]There's a crapload of questing. Same stuff as always: hunt, collect, harvest, deliver. [/list:u]

How you do these things are slightly different.

WoW

I played WoW for the 10 day Stress Test only, and have all-but ignored it except through folks commenting here and elsewhere. I don't need more than that because the game won me over within a few minutes. It's very fun, like CoH fun. I didn't play it nearly long enough to know if it has more staying power for me though.

You gain XP and you can Quest for it. Questing is worth your time and it's rewarding.

Your classes are much less rigid. There's only 8, but each is a breath of fresh air against the likes of fascist forced specialization. Every class has primary, secondary, tertiary, fourthiary, fifthiary (or whatever) abilities. Plus you can focus those with Talents. Plus you can do quests that give rewards in the form of limited-use items that give you abilities your class won't ever get, for a time.

Gameplay is fast and frenetic. Fights are fun.

The game is very soloable. May be too soloable. The game appeals to a lot of people who've never played an MMORPG before, so don't have the conditioning to seek out other people to get a job done. They'll be even less inclined to do so if they join the game with friends. Because WoW is so soloable, I project it will be soloed liberally. Until later, when players either learn to group or quit because they have to.

Solo++
Graphics+
Fun++
PvP Optional

EQ2

I've been in EQ2 for almost six weeks. It look me a lot longer than a few minutes to like the game. First, it looked like shit on the settings I needed to run it. A few cumulative hours of adjusting later, and it finally looks good. Nowhere near as good as screenshots, but I don't keep my computer on the cutting edge and won't start now. Second, there's a few roadblocks to "fun" that don't exist in WoW.

You start with less abilities and learn them slower. You also don't get quests that give you temporary abilities. You also choose a sub-class, but that choice is irrelevant because you can't undo it.  I've written a long proposal on how the Hallmark (level 10 and 20 class-choice quests) Quests should be modified. That was a month ago. Nothing has been said since, and I highly doubt they'll change. The Hallmark quests theoretically give you insight into your sub class options. They don't. That plus the lack of respecing means you'll most likely research before making the choice and basically back into the path you need to take to get to the class you want to be anyway. Just like EQlive, earlier DAoC and earlier CoH.

The world is huge and has an impressive granduer to it. Very immersive. Voiceovers are cool too. If you care about that sorta thing.

Solo+
Graphics++ (depending)
Fun++ (add a + for catassing)
PvP-

Conclusion

Seek WoW for immediate fun, seek EQ2 because you're interested to see if SOE has learned anything in six years. Don't expect either to have any staying power and you can therefore be pleasantly surprised if they do :)

[AlteredOne]

Being somewhat of an F13 newbie, why the preferred term catass?  I guess it reminds me of certain EQ addicts I knew, who did not change their cat litter very often...

[Soukyan]

Being somewhat of an F13 newbie, why the preferred term catass?  I guess it reminds me of certain EQ addicts I knew, who did not change their cat litter very often...

Bingo. I believe it actually refers back to an UO player who was interviewed and the interviewer stated in his write-up that the apartment smelled of "catass" because the litter hadn't been changed in a month. Something like that...

[edit]Aha! I was right the first time, it was UO. Thanks for the link Gallo. I couldn't remember the Wiki address.[/edit]

[Rasix]

Being somewhat of an F13 newbie, why the preferred term catass?  I guess it reminds me of certain EQ addicts I knew, who did not change their cat litter very often...

A famous story/article involving exactly that theme...

More info

Edit: Haha. If you Google "eq catass" it comes up with the thread from my WoW article. In fact, a lot of f13/corp stuff pops up.

[El Gallo]

trivia: the original story was about a UO player. http://wiki.onlinegamers.org/index.php?diff=catass

[AlteredOne]

Aha, little did I realize there was a dedicated Lum Wiki dictionary!  Well, I can definitely confess to having witnessed EQ catass firsthand, so clearly the term has legs (and even a rear).

Back to our scheduled EQ2 vs. WoW discussion...

Everything I see and hear says WoW is the better bet, but then again I enjoy team-based PvP, which will be entirely absent from EQ.

[HaemishM]

EQ2 vs. WoW

Neither. Just about all of you motherfuckers know you'll be sick to death of both of them in about 2 months after release. WoW because you'll have done most of the interesting stuff, and EQ2 because you'll still be trying to figure out what goddamn class you want to be then redoing the character because that class is boring drek.

Wait until both come out, then resubscribe to City of Heroes. There'll be enough new stuff that it'll feel like a new game all over again.

[Rasix]

Wait until both come out, then resubscribe to City of Heroes. There'll be enough new stuff that it'll feel like a new game all over again.

I'd so subscribe to CoH if there was a single archetype I liked.  Their class design out EQ'd EQ as far as restrictiveness.

[Rasix]

My own slant based on what I find important:

Eye candy/Style/Customization

EQ2 is a prettier game, there's no doubt about that.  It truly looks like a second gen mmorpg to me.  The enviroments are crisp. The character and mob models are detailed with a fairly high poly count.    

The character customization is leaps and bound better.  You don't really have many options in WoW, which basically just boils down to you picking hair, skin tone, and a distinguishing mark.  That being said, EQ2's character customization still has some holes like not being able to choose different scale patterns for Iksar or not being able to make a non fruity looking humanoid male.

Style I'd say is a tossup, but this is where WoW's graphics skate by as passible.  The game has a distinct cartoony look to it which may endear it to some and may turn others off. I like it, and actually even my wife likes it ("do the troll dance again!!").  It works and doesn't get in the way of the game.  EQ2 just has the same style that EQ1 had going for it.  These guys know how to put together a well themed zone.  Freeport feels like EVIL Freeport. The snozberries taste like snozberries.

Edge: EQ2

Performance

Wow doesn't hurt my computer. EQ2 does at times.  

For reference I'm on a Athlon XP 2500+, 1 gig ram, GF4 Ti 4200 128mb.  I felt like I needed an upgrade to enjoy EQ2 to its fullest.  Now, it ran better than I thought it would, which impressed me.  But there were several times when it went into slow-as-lumpy-gravy mode.

If WoW didn't run well, I'd be concerned.  Lowballing your graphics should make your game run well (unless you're a Fallout dev) and it does for WoW.

Edge: WoW

Quests

Both have tons. Both have varied types of quests.

EQ2 quests have better style due to the voice acting and conversation trees.  They're also better written in most cases.  There's about an order of magitude more of them.  EQ2 quest are a bit harder to find since the NPCs don't exactly have glowing exclamation points over their heads (WoW does).

WoW's quest journal and quest management are much better.  The cons for the quest difficulty seem to be better done in WoW's case.  Some EQ2 light blue con quests could still clean my clock.  WoW more clearly defines what quests are intended for group only, while EQ2 does not.

Edge: Tie.  

Note: EQ2 isn't as far along in their development cycle, so this could change.

Gameplay/Class design

I dislike EQ2's class design.  If I want to be a monk, a defiler or a swashbuckler, I WANT TO BE ONE FROM DAY FUCKING ONE.  No goddamn training wheels classes. Playing a more generic, watered down version of your future self is in now way entertaining.  What compounds this, is once you select your subclass quest, that's your subclass. When the bridge keeper asks you your favorite color, you better damn well know.

WoW's class design isn't exactly inspirational, but it works.  Most classes are fairly fleshed out and can be played different based on their talent trees.  A couple of classes are still hurting and there's not much time left. Some classes like the hunter have arguable group value.

Edge: WoW.

Advancement

In WoW, advancement is primarly quest based.  As has been said, soloing is as fast if not faster than grouping.  However, most top equipment will be obtained from instances which are group based and somewhat lengthy in time.  The level cap seems reachable for a casual like myself in less than half a year.  

All impressions from my limited time in EQ2 is that a group will progress at a much higher pace.  I've already read some wacky shit like the level cap is like 200?  Please tell me my eyes were just blurry or something. I can't even see hitting a cap in an SOE EQ product in a year.  

Edge: WoW for me. EQ2 for others.

PVP

EQ2 has none.  WoW's, while largely untested and potentially damaging to the PvE, at least is there.  So, there's potentially good PvP for me in WoW, no real such chance in EQ2 as it stands.

Edge: WoW.

--------------

Overall edge: WoW.

Right now it's a better game for what I'm looking for.  I'm a casual player that likes to solo.  I group but time constraints in most situations can prevent me from doing so.

I've spent more time in WoW, so my opinions on it are based less on impressions and more on experience.  I'm trying to progress farther in EQ2 to get a better feel for the game, but I don't really think my impressions will change much.

I'll likely play WoW at release.  I'd give it about a 50% chance of lasting longer than 2 months.   I'd play EQ2 also if I was swarming with cash.  The atmosphere of the game at times is worth wandering around in.

[kaid]

I'd so subscribe to CoH if there was a single archetype I liked.  Their class design out EQ'd EQ as far as restrictiveness.

I have a question what the flaming hell are you talking about? Please I am very curious for you to describe how COH's archtype power selection is even similar to the way everquest does its classes.

[Rasix]

I'd so subscribe to CoH if there was a single archetype I liked.  Their class design out EQ'd EQ as far as restrictiveness.

I have a question what the flaming hell are you talking about? Please I am very curious for you to describe how COH's archtype power selection is even similar to the way everquest does its classes.

It's the way they play.  

You have the big burly tank.  He soaks up damage and makes stuff angry at him.

You have the light tank that does lots of damage and tanks OK.

You have the glass cannon that dishes out buttloads of damage but is about as durable as a paper bag.

You have the crowd control specialist that does dick for damage (early on).

Defenders were a different wrech in the paradigm, but their lack of real damage production didn't make them attractive to me.

I'm sorry, but none of these really appealed to me at a low level in CoH.  I rolled about 8 toons to level 10 and didn't like a single one.  I felt far more restricted in my flexibility with each class than I have in most MMORPGs I've ever played.  I couldn't find a single fucking combo I liked, after a while I just gave up.  

Edit: Removed inflamatory ending.  If you care to disagree with my assesment, fine. I will not play battle the fanboy.

[doubleplus]

This thread hasn't been started before by EVERYONE. No, not at all.

Here's a hint: they both fucking suck. Can we close this one now?

[Riggswolfe]

Disclaimer: I have not played EQ2 at this point. My opinion of it is based on answers to questions I have asked, reading the beta boards, reading reviews by f13ers, talking to people I work with in the beta, etc...

I'll try to break things down into several categories like others have done.

Graphics:

As has been mentioned WoW is a lower polygon but arguably artistic/stylistic game. Some people will like this some will not. I love it but I do wonder how well it will age.

From what I've seen of EQ2 it is going for hyperrealistic graphics. I haven't seen them in action other than in preview movies however, so I wonder if the animation still looks stiff as it did earlier.

Edge: Eq2 Longevity may be longer


Sound:

WoW has pretty standard sound, good music in some spots, nothing outrageous. EQ2 has voice acting. Christoper Lee gives them the win if nothing else in this category.

Edge: EQ2

Immersiveness:

I cover this next because graphics and sound play a part but so do intangibles. While EQ2s graphics have a longer life, WoW's very much fit the gameworld as seen in the earlier RTS. I'd call this part a tie. EQ2 soundwise gets big points because of the voice overs. WoW gets big points for one big reason. No zones. No loading screens except when going into an instance. Even travelling in WoW is done ingame rather than through a loading screen.

Edge: WoW (no zones for the win)

PvP:

I don't enjoy PvP so I'll make this one conditional
WoW has it
EQ2 doesn't

Edge: WoW (if you like PvP)

Gameplay:

I don't feel I can speak much about this for very obvious reasons. I will say that everything I have heard indicates
1) EQ2 isn't very friendly to soloers/casual players
2) EQ2 takes longer to get into the "meat" of the game.

WoW is quite solofriendly in the early to mid levels. (Post 40 groups become more necessary). Eacg class has an abundance of skills and ways to customize.

EQ2 sounds like it has some as well and more planned.

Edge: WoW (Because I like soloability) but this is highly conditional on what  I see when I get a chance to play EQ2. Currently it is based on feedback from other people mostly.

Character customization:

This one really depends on what you mean by character customization. If you mean initial character creation, then EQ2 is the clear winner. If you mean later with equipment and skill choices and such I'd say it is more of a tie.

Edge: EQ2 (if early game) Tie (if overall).

Fun factor:

This is another that all I know about EQ2 is feedback from other people. I suspect though that WoW has the slight edge in this category from what I have heard. This is extremely subjective and subject to change however.

Edge: WoW

Overall the numbers look somewhat tied. EQ2 at 3, WoW at 4, with one or two of those being conditional. However, the categories where I gave WoW a conditional win make alot of difference. At this point I am planning to try EQ2 just in case, but will probably be playing WoW for the long term.

Take it for what its worth. If/when I try EQ2 I will try to update this. Again, keep in mind that most of my EQ2 knowledge is from feedback from other people.

[WayAbvPar]

This thread hasn't been started before by EVERYONE. No, not at all.

Here's a hint: they both fucking suck. Can we close this one now?

I had some specific questions that I thought the posters here could answer. Please feel free to ignore the thread if it offends your sensibilities. And thanks for the bump!

Jackass.

[schild]

Way, he was right about one thing. They both are completely lackluster for NEXT GEN!(!*&@#*@&#*&**!@&#&*@# But yea, double - don't assault threads like that. Not Cool. Particularly not on-topic gaming threads.

[Riggswolfe]

Way, he was right about one thing. They both are completely lackluster for NEXT GEN!(!*&@#*@&#*&**!@&#&*@# But yea, double - don't assault threads like that. Not Cool. Particularly not on-topic gaming threads.

I am not sure either of them are next gen. More like 1.5 or so.

[doubleplus]

Apologies to both of you. Lately, I've been seeing WoW/EQ2 and seeing red. It's just sad they both have the followings they do. But that's for another thread.

[Merusk]

My own slant based on what I find important:

Eye candy/Style/Customization

EQ2 is a prettier game, there's no doubt about that.  It truly looks like a second gen mmorpg to me.  The enviroments are crisp. The character and mob models are detailed with a fairly high poly count.    

The character customization is leaps and bound better.  You don't really have many options in WoW, which basically just boils down to you picking hair, skin tone, and a distinguishing mark.  That being said, EQ2's character customization still has some holes like not being able to choose different scale patterns for Iksar or not being able to make a non fruity looking humanoid male.

Style I'd say is a tossup, but this is where WoW's graphics skate by as passible.  The game has a distinct cartoony look to it which may endear it to some and may turn others off. I like it, and actually even my wife likes it ("do the troll dance again!!").  It works and doesn't get in the way of the game.  EQ2 just has the same style that EQ1 had going for it.  These guys know how to put together a well themed zone.  Freeport feels like EVIL Freeport. The snozberries taste like snozberries.

Edge: EQ2

I disagree with Rasix here, but then I'm an art whore and not a poly whore when it comes to eyecandy.  I think WoW is much more beautiful from an art stantpoint, because they have absolutly fantastic skins.  Yes, the polycount is so low it makes EQ-luclin-era models look high-end, but the textures & skins more than make up for it.

  In addition everything is rendered in the "Blizzard Fantasy" style of Samwise, their art guy.  His stuff leans toward old school fantasy artists like Caldwell, Eddings, Parkinson & the Hildebrants.

EQ2's fantasy is more along the lines of the "new" generation of fantasy artists like Lockwood, Wood, DeSeve, Kunz & Foster.  While they're great art, they don't do anything for me stylisticly. Too many exaggerated proportions & the colors are way too muted for my liking.

We're talking art though, and that's purely personal tastes.  I don't like many Picassos either.

Performance
Edge: WoW

Without a dobut this is the case.  I also think it was the smarter way to go if you're making a "casual" game.  Casual gamers haven't updated their rigs in a few years.  No time, need or cash to do so. Hell, I'm a gamer and I'm beginning to slip into the "I have a lot better things to do with $1400 than buy a new machine" group.

  Of course this is a pitfall the whole computer industry has missed, since they're all geeks & can't fathom not having the biggest CPU-peen.

If you think I'm wrong, then recall the bitching from people when EQ stopped supporting Win 95. People see computers like TVs & Consoles. They bought the thing, it was damed expensive, what do you mean they have to ditch it because, "Wow, it's 4 years old? That's fucking ancient!"

Quests
Edge: Tie.  

Note: EQ2 isn't as far along in their development cycle, so this could change.

I'd actually give EQ2 the edge except the quests are so hard to complete it gives me flashbacks to EQ1.  Fucking hell I hate playing "find the hidden mob!"

With wonderful clues like "Find something interesting in the Commonlands." and "Speak to So-and-so in the Commonlands" and players as helpful as those from EQ1 when you ask questions I've still got a level 7 quest in my book.  And since you can't actually delete quests from the log, it'll be there until find someone willing to tell me where the hell these things are, or I run the length & breadth of the Commonlands, which isn't doable at level 10 I'm told.

Gameplay/Class design
Edge: WoW.

Can't disagree here at all.  EQ2's system sounded cool, but since it takes so long to get to 20 it's just a fucking joke.  Like so many "good" ideas it fails in execution.

Advancement
Edge: WoW for me. EQ2 for others.

This is really what sold me the hardest on WoW.  I had about 30-40 hours played in the 10 days of the stress test, mainly because I had nothing to do most of those two weekends.   I managed to hit level 22 on one character and piddle with 3 others enough to get them to 10.  Oh my god, and endgame I can see and participate in sooner than 3 years after it's released?! AND I can have a life still?! Count me in.

EQ2's "200" levels is what they planned for, from what I remember.  They wanted to avoid the huge clusterfuck that was the imbalance created by EQ's level cap raising at Kunark. It's only supposed to ship with around 50-75, I believe.

PVP

EQ2 has none.  WoW's, while largely untested and potentially damaging to the PvE, at least is there.  So, there's potentially good PvP for me in WoW, no real such chance in EQ2 as it stands.

Edge: WoW.

It WAS no chance in EQ2, ever.  It was a good decision, IMO and would have helped avoid some of the cross-class whining.  Some folks seem to indicate this has changed, but I haven't seen a link to a dev quote or interview where they say they're planning on adding it in.    

I'll likely play WoW at release.  I'd give it about a 50% chance of lasting longer than 2 months.   I'd play EQ2 also if I was swarming with cash.  The atmosphere of the game at times is worth wandering around in.

I'm not sure how long I'll wind-up playing WoW.  I'm pretty sure I won't be playing EQ2 ever, unless I can get it really cheap.  The world's familiar to me, which gives it's own "oh neat" moments when you find parts of the lore out, but we all know how much lore matters to SOE MMOs.

Really, in the end I think it'll be nice to split time between CoH & WoW vs having to spend all my time in EQ2 to try and get anywhere.

[Faust]

SEO = Pay to Beta.
WoW = Nearing "Release Candidate".

[Moroni]

WoW = Nearing "Release Candidate".

From what I have heard from friends in the beta, that is not a good thing at all. I know they are trying to beat EQ2 out the door but pretty much everyone (not counting the official boards) has really backed off on the fervor for the game.

[jpark]

EQ2 vs. WoW

Wait until both come out, then resubscribe to City of Heroes. There'll be enough new stuff that it'll feel like a new game all over again.

While I am attracted to the new shiney's this is a good point - CoH is really impressive.  The "core" of what it does well - is steadily expanding.

I indulged my Alt-holic activity yesterday and found some changes in low level missions - entire areas of the mission map on fire - hard to see in some hallways - doors that had to opened with baddies that pounced from the other side.  Not only are they improving this game - they seem to do so at all levels.

[Morfiend]

A famous story/article involving exactly that theme...

More info

Hah, thats my definition that I added to Urban Dictionary.

[Kageru]

WoW is pre-ordered. Most of the underlying game mechanics show some evidence of thought and the game looks to be fun and approachable. Neither game will ship with enough content, no MMORPG ever will, but WoW is a better foundation to build content on. The graphics are going to be an issue for some, those poly counts are so agressively minimal, but it wins over on style. Is it a true Nth generation game? who cares, it's far superior to the current PvE market leader (EQ1).  If it gets obsoleted or consumed in a year that's fine, there'll be other games to play at that point.

EQ2 is a game constructed by a commitee. Every gameplay mechanic seems to have been structured to the lowest common denominator and their primary design goal was "fix the stuff people whined about in EQ1". As a result they've got lots of negative gameplay restrictions but left out the positives. You only need to go and read the class lists to see this, the WoW classes have a strong and exciting identity, the Eq2 classes feel like they've been generated by computer.

But they're not really in conflict. People say WoW is fun now, EQ2 in the long term. If they're right then the optimal response is play WoW now, play EQ2 later (once they've gone through their payed beta and proven themselves).

And finally EQ2 lore is just the saddest excuse. Any race, any class just makes races pointless. The world is split into good and evil (lame), the world only has two cities (lame) and the citizens of those communities ignore it anyway and regularly hang out together. Meanwhile the gods are purely oppositional, not something you can use as a basis for character growth. Heck, if there's no god's on side then wtf is up with paladins and priests? Watching the lore, which they inhereited from the days when EQ1 designers cared about such things, get dragged out of the crypt and abused again is just painful. Then again SOE management and SOE's game designers (assuming they have some) are the very best reason to distrust EQ2 on principle.

[El Gallo]

Save yourself the money on CoH by downloading the free character creation disk that EQ preorders got, it has about 99% of the gameplay CoH does.

[Venkman]

Just about all of you motherfuckers know you'll be sick to death of both of them in about 2 months after release

Yea, but that's four months of gaming (2+2) until Guild Wars and/or City of Villains :)

[chinslim]

Speaking of catasses, it's nice to see how many things can be traced back to UO.  Does anyone remember where the term "care bear" originated from?  If memory serves me right, it started on the XRoads message board by roleplayers on my server(Chesapeake) in response to a PK guild I was associated with.  Fun times.

[Alkiera]

Does anyone remember where the term "care bear" originated from?

My avatar doesn't like PvP.

--
Alkiera

[Joe]

Was it that, or the taunt Darktide denizens used for the non-pvp AC servers?

[Gong]

as a former Darktide player, I am pretty sure that it originated on Darktide, Joe.

[Riggswolfe]

Speaking of catasses, it's nice to see how many things can be traced back to UO.  Does anyone remember where the term "care bear" originated from?  If memory serves me right, it started on the XRoads message board by roleplayers on my server(Chesapeake) in response to a PK guild I was associated with.  Fun times.

There is a long and quite entertaining story about its origins on UO. It boils down to this:

A hardcore PvP/griefer guild had been terrorizing one of the shards
An anti-PK guild decided to wipe them out.
They made a bunch of throwaway characters and attacked the PK guilds castle.
These characters while weak, were armed with poison weapons. (or something similiar, it's been along, long time since I've heard the story)
They killed the PK players until their guild boss came out to attack them.
They killed him and discovered he had the keys to the castle on him.
They looted the castle and made copies of the key passing them out to everyone who wanted them.
Now finally, the carebear bit. To piss off/humiliate this hardcore PK guild they named their group of lowbie characters the carebears.

Somehow overtime PvPers twisted the name and used it to embarass PvE players. I suspect if you do enough research on this you can find some of the original people involved. Or at least a much more indepth account of the situation than I was able to give here.

[chinslim]

Yep, that's pretty much the story :)

Only except it wasn't a castle, or even a tower - it was a small house.

[Riggswolfe]

Yep, that's pretty much the story :)

Only except it wasn't a castle, or even a tower - it was a small house.

It cracks me up that PvPers now use the term carebear to embarass PvE players. It's probably one of the biggest bits of spin doctoring I've ever seen pulled off.

[Dren]

Way, he was right about one thing. They both are completely lackluster for NEXT GEN!(!*&@#*@&#*&**!@&#&*@# But yea, double - don't assault threads like that. Not Cool. Particularly not on-topic gaming threads.

Thank you.

I do not take the developers and distributors' word on their products being Next Gen.  That way I'm not so dissappointed I go around message boards telling people to stop discussing them because you've decided they suck. (Not directed at any one person, just this type of activity.)

I respect actual reasons games suck, not that you think they suck.  Basically because those same reasons you think they suck, I might think are good.

For the most part this thread has been very enlightening and I appreciate the input people have made.  Thank you.