EQ2 Goes Free to Play too

[Hawkbit]

They are monitoring feedback and responding in a few instances.  One glaring issue is that if your account had a maximum number of characters and each of them are locked, literally your only recourse would be to delete a character, buy a character slot or start a new account.  So some people's accounts are completely locked up.  They're supposedly discussing options for that, which means they're looking at feedback. 

There is this interesting mix of people at the EQ2 forums, generalized into the 'locked established characters is wrong' crew and the 'you just want everything for free' SOE defender mouthbreathers.  The latter group is intriguing.  I can't fathom why it matters to them that F2P folks feel cheated. 

[Mrbloodworth]

Can you pay a subscription any more for this title at all? Or is that all gone?

You would however think they would have grandfathered Vets with some of this stuff.

[Numtini]

You can still play as a sub. It's just retitled as "gold level" and includes 500SC a month.

[Mrbloodworth]

So, locked toons and slots only affect F2P players. I thought it was people paying Subs that had locked toons.

[Sky]

If for some reason I was to go back and play EQ2, I'd just sub up for it. Not only would most of my slots be locked anyway, it would really bother me to hit pay walls after playing the game for so many years.

But that ship has sailed.

On the other hand, if I were unemployed, it would really tick me off that I wouldn't be able to play any of my characters.

[Hawkbit]

Looking at this model and everything I would need to get my main character going, I'm simply much better off subscribing.  Which somewhat defeats the purpose of the F2P model.  

Not to mention that my 55SK only has access to 11plat of his 50-ish that he has saved (20gp/lvl cap).  He is so severely limited for broker use because mudflation has driven basic prices up to levels greater than the he can collect due to the cap.  

The whole model is punitive and non-sustainable.  While I won't go so far as to say it will be gone in six months, I think they will have to quickly reassess this model or they will lose any chance at gaining a decent playerbase.  

Maybe this is their whole tactic to get people wanting to play EQ3 somehow.  

[Numtini]

No if you want to sub, that's what they want. The rest is just a poison pill fake free to play.

My favorite "feature" on the chart for the free and $5/month is "frequent popups suggesting you upgrade."

[Modern Angel]

Right exactly. The way you're supposed to do it is to spread the money you have to spend out so it's as diffuse as possible. Contrast with LOTRO, where you nab a quest zone for three bucks or whatever; if you're casual, that might last you a damn month of playtime. You also break it up as a la carte as possible; I don't need three races at 7.50 but I do need one race at a third of that. Guess which one I'm willing to play as a not terribly invested player?

The problem with logging into EQ2 right now, as a former subscriber, isn't that I have to pay. It's that the entry price is too steep.

[HaemishM]

The problem with logging into EQ2 right now, as a former subscriber, isn't that I have to pay. It's that the entry price is too steep.

The entry price being basically a subscription - which again, is what SOE is really wanting out of this. You can nickel and dime yourself, but you'd really be paying more than a sub price if you want to try it as an MT game. It's a really long, less restrictive free trial if you try to play F2P, but that's obviously ok with SOE because all they want is to continue the subscription gravy train. From a marketing standpoint, F2P is a lot better attraction than the old free trial.

In other words, it's SOE. They fucked up a Star Wars MMOG. Twice by all accounts. They could fuck up anything.

[Sky]

They should try fucking up, and in fucking that up, deliver the proper goods!

Someone at Sony HIRE ME NOW! I HAS A PLAN!

[Rokal]

They announced that all characters created prior to Age of Discovery would be grand-fathered in and unlocked.

http://forums.station.sony.com/eq2/posts/list.m?topic_id=510914

Pretty nice gesture.

[Hawkbit]

Not sure I'd call it a gesture.  It is the correct thing to do for business, that's for sure. 

I'll have to check it out now that my SK is unlocked, but I suspect it still won't be viable due to bag slots locked and the cash cap.  We'll see.

[Numtini]

They will make a lot more money if people can log in and start getting nickel and dimed than if they push a big up front cost on everyone and they don't log in. Still, I have faith in SOE. They'll screw it up somehow!

Wonder if the dungeon finder works yet. It's been a couple of months.

[Zephyr]

I gave it a try, but all my gear on the 90 coercer was locked and a good portion of it was stuck in locked bags.  It gave me the option of unlocking the gear at 150 SC per 5 items and I didn't bother to check on the cost for the bags.  I am currently uninstalling.

[Simond]

Given that reading three posts up seems to be beyond you, that's probably for the best. 

[Numtini]

Wow. What a joke. It's simply not playable at all without a full sub other than as a lower level trial.

Yah, I knew I had to unlock my gear, but I didn't expect to find half of it in containers I can't do anything with. There's no way to unlock as far as I can tell--the docs say F2P has 4 containers and Paid has 6, but in reality everyone has 6, F2P just has two locked and in my case full of all m stuff. I can join a guild! Wee! But I can't say anything in guild chat.  And virtually all equipment at my level is more expensive than the allowable plat.

[Reg]

Pretty dumb of them to do it like this. Even if they make more things free so that it becomes playable, chances are anyone who has been driven off at this point won't be back to see.

[Hawkbit]

...anyone who has been driven off at this point won't be back to see.

Yes.  I can't get back into it.  Partially from my changing taste in games lately, partially from EQ2 being 7 years old and partially from how they implemented the F2P.

If you release a brand new game that is F2P, there's not much issue if you want to nickel and dime your customers from the start.  They either choose to pay, deal with the hindrance or quit.

Any game that goes F2P after being a sub model needs to ensure that as much of the base game to which the subscriber had access remains there post-subscription.  I disliked that LotRO took away my quests that I already had, then tried to charge me to unlock them.  EQ2 is even more punitive, requiring me to unlock gear, broker access, spell tier access, classes and races, just to name a few.  Focus on retaining services that your existing customers have, and find ways to get them to pay for NEW services.  That's the trick, and it is what would make me pay.  Otherwise I'll just go elsewhere.

[HaemishM]

I can join a guild! Wee! But I can't say anything in guild chat. 

According to the matrix, you can talk in guild chat at both Free and Silver levels, just not create your own guild.

[Sky]

I wonder what that means to my character, which was GM of BC...

[Numtini]

According to the matrix, you can talk in guild chat at both Free and Silver levels, just not create your own guild.

Someone forgot to tell the game. I was trying to ask about how to unlock things and nothing.

[HaemishM]

According to the matrix, you can talk in guild chat at both Free and Silver levels, just not create your own guild.

Someone forgot to tell the game. I was trying to ask about how to unlock things and nothing.

It's SOE. This shouldn't surprise anyone. 

[koro]

Apparently another thing the F2P matrix fails to mention is that you can't shift around how much of your XP goes into AA, which kinda sucks.

[Kageru]

I'm somewhat enjoying exploring the world, but both visually and mechanically it's pretty ugly and clunky. There's no surprise in my mind at all that Blizzard pretty much stole their thunder.

[Rokal]

I reinstalled the game since my two level 25 characters were unlocked. I finally have a nice enough computer to just max settings and leave them there, whereas every time I tried the game previously I had to play with settings for an hour to get them to a place where I was happy with performance vs. appearance. The results? Man... the game is just really ugly. There is no getting around it. It was even more striking than the last time I played it (~4 years ago) because we've seen games like Rift come out that do a more realistic style with good performance.  Even on Ultra, EQ2 was still ugly plastic textures and weird armor pop in on all the NPCs and characters around you. It's not just the graphics, the UI also feels clunky as hell. Every item has like 4-5 description fields that ought to just be hidden from players.  It's the sort of polish you'd expect from a nameless low-budget Korean F2P MMO. The entire game feels like it was made by a company that doesn't know how to make games.

I've always treated EQ2 like a game that could be salvaged.

"Maybe if they toned down the spell effects"
"Maybe if they reduced some of the ability overlap"
"Maybe when I get a nicer computer"
"Maybe if it goes F2P without some of the silly restrictions"

I'm out of 'maybe ifs', and I just don't think the game is ever going to be something I'll enjoy.

[Modern Angel]

Truth. I want to love it so much. There are so many systems I love. I love the crafting. I love most of the classes. I love the scale of the world. And I'm totally not a graphics whore. But goddamn, I cannot get past how ugly the game is.

[Kageru]

The crafting is actually quite decent. That little mini-game is a reasonable balance of choking crafting production / automation without being too incredibly tedious. They've really put a lot of work into it.

The combat doesn't have nearly the same degree of love. The sluggishness of the controls, the way an arrow does its damage and then plays the animation (or doesn't, when the server was loaded animations would fail to play), the way the abilities become just grist for the combo wheel (which fires off cataclysmic level effects even for a warrior) and others means combat just doesn't feel right. Which is sort of a shame as you'll be doing a lot of it. And that AA tree is a monstrosity (as is AA). And they've also retained the EQ level design of bad textures, blocky maps, broad plains with a thick sprinkling of identical mobs. The original EQ halas felt more like a city than this one, I think because it was less directed both in development and intended play.

The houses are cool... but pretty much game-play neutral as far as I can see. They probably only really make sense as rooms in a guild space. A solo house is really just an exaggerated UI for achievement display that only you will see.

[RhyssaFireheart]

I must be looking at a different game when I play, because I'm totally missing the ugly.

Is it the prettiest thing out there?  No, but compared to the neon cartoon that was WoW, I was happy to go back to EQ2. 

Disclaimer: I've not played more recent games such as Skyrim, Rifts, et al because of lack of interest and/or funds, so take that as you will.

[Modern Angel]

It's got zero unifying style. I can point to every single MMO I've ever played for longer than a week and describe the style. I can't do that with EQ2. Besides fugly.

[Kageru]

I must be looking at a different game when I play, because I'm totally missing the ugly.

You are very lucky, and should not risk losing that advantage.

[Sky]

I always loved the graphics (though the style was often underwhelming), the stuff they did with the old tech was amazing. Even with the stylish graphics, I cannot abide WoW's blocky awfulness.

But after Rift, I jumped into the new newbie area (around Halas?) and now that the graphics engine has aged, it's showing. I hadn't really played since 2009 (when I still liked the graphics), so they're finally dated imo. Had a nice 5yr on-and-off run with it, though.

[RhyssaFireheart]

Oh yeah, I'll agree the graphics are getting dated, the game did come out in 2004 after all.  But calling it downright ugly is what I have a problem with.  Course my standards may be a bit low since I did play AC for over 4 years, so what do I know?

[Mrbloodworth]

Original areas: Stunning, well crafted, consistent. New areas: 90's scan line rendering.

[Ingmar]

Oh yeah, I'll agree the graphics are getting dated, the game did come out in 2004 after all.  But calling it downright ugly is what I have a problem with.  Course my standards may be a bit low since I did play AC for over 4 years, so what do I know?

I found it ugly at release personally, let alone now. Especially the character models. Hideous.

[Kageru]

It's interesting that EQ1 is still both alive and not f2p, wonder how the numbers are going.

Is the New Halas area original EQ2 or a recent "new experience" addition? Because it's quite WoW in how much of a linear theme-park it is. Every mob is there because it has quests to kill it and the whole island is basically one spiral path, with the islands breaking it into content chunks. And new halas itself is weird, full of alien creatures (like arctic frogloks) and houses made up of boulders, neon tubes and engraved steel beams. I'm pretty sure the original had the rough hewn caves and wooden structures that felt a lot more like a barbarian outpost on the ass-end of a huge continent than this (plus snow effects unless my memory fails me).

Did get to experience an ancient EQ2 bug though. My griffon evaporated on zoning leaving me swimming deep in the ocean far from anywhere. EQ1 used to have terrible issues with its boats too.