Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
April 07, 2020, 09:15:56 AM

Login with username, password and session length

Search:     Advanced search
*
Home Help Search Login Register
f13.net  |  f13.net General Forums  |  The Gaming Graveyard  |  Everquest 2  |  Topic: Why I don't enjoy this game. 0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 ... 6 Go Down Print
Author Topic: Why I don't enjoy this game.  (Read 43278 times)
Miasma
Terracotta Army
Posts: 5283

Stopgap Measure


Reply #35 on: January 16, 2007, 09:43:46 AM

I chose conjurer for my first character because I loves me some robed caster with a pet.  My toon started with a beetle for a minion.  Granted, it was big for a beetle, but a beetle nonetheless.  So, I dived into quests, looking forward to the next summoning spell.  At 12th level, I finally got it and the first conjuration yielded a damned centipede.
EQ2's spell system has an apprentice -> adept -> master system.  The pets usually look different as you buy or get the higher level spells.  I got an adept for my first pet which changed him from that dull beetle into a fairly gnarly looking spider (which was also much stronger).  Here is a link with most of the pictures.  Necromancers have pretty good looking pets but that's mainly because they are evil.

I mainly played a conjuror in EQ2 and I really liked it, you can solo with your own tanks (tellurian line) or group and bring out an AoE or scout type pet and do great DPS.
Bandit
Terracotta Army
Posts: 604


Reply #36 on: January 16, 2007, 10:21:15 AM

Looks like I am the sole poster that actually enjoys EQ2 round here.  So many points made against it, but many of these points are ridiculous to me - just nitpicking.  Sorry you don't get your pointy hat right away, sorry you don't get the earth elemental pet right away, sorry your staff was not what you hoped....yes you actually have to work for shit. I just can't defend these points, nor should I have to. 

Just to touch on the number of classes issue.  The obvious answer why this to me is a strength, choice.  At first, it may seem over-the-top, but if you play longer than the trial you quickly realize what the strengths and weaknesses are.  Each class is pretty distinctive, with obvious similarities between sub-classes (crusaders, bards, mages, etc.).  Once you have a solid understanding of each class, you can tailor your gaming experience to that strength.  Want a tank that groups almost exclusively? - Guardian, hands down best group/raid tank, but I wouldn't dare going around soloing with a Guardian, possible but very slow.  Want a tank that can solo? choose a monk or bruiser - Want a tank that does a little of both? than choose a Paladiin or Shadowknight.

You talk about class balancing. Yes, it can be problematic with 24 classes...obviously.  But this is not fucking WoW, again let me repeat...not WoW.  Not every class can effectively solo to 60 in 2 weeks.  You are not forced to group in EQ2, but it is heavily encouraged.  I see class balancing as overrated anyway.  I like unqiue experiences for each class.  My newer main, is a troubadour, and can't solo at all really, but total bad-ass and groups and it is very satisfying for me to see how much more efficient a group is with a troubadour mixed in.  Yes, EQ2 has "niche" classes.  Do some classes still have something to be desired? For me yes, but there are people that swear by classes like defilers, which both you and I find pretty boring, but some just see defilers as the best debuffers/warders in the game.  That's their preference, it just come down to choice.

The argument of WoW vs. EQ2 is getting old.  It is frustrating for EQ2 players to see WoW Fanboy's jump in and say that EQ2 sucks, when it is obvious that they really don't have a fine understanding of the game.  Most people I know, many who have migrated from WoW, are amazed at the pure amount of content available...and that's what people stay for and enjoy about it.  EQ2 definitely has it's issues, but alot of these issues seem to be the focal point for future development (such as armour variety).  It comes down to a matter of preference, plain and simple.  The number of subscribers of a game doesn't dictate my preferences, it is a good generalization that WoW has more mass appeal, but for those of us EQ2 players - that really doesn't mean shit.

Not likely to change your perspective on it at all, but that's your choice - and you can keep talking shit about it and I hope you get satisfaction out of seeing yourself as a legitamite game critic.  I just see some of your nitpicking as laughable, and have to jump in once in a while to defend it.  Sorry bout the rant :P

Nebu
Terracotta Army
Posts: 17613


Reply #37 on: January 16, 2007, 11:01:06 AM

Sorry you don't get your pointy hat right away, sorry you don't get the earth elemental pet right away, sorry your staff was not what you hoped....yes you actually have to work for shit.

You just missed the point of gaming right there.  It's a game, not a job.  I want to have fun, not "work for shit".  Character development is one thing, mindless grinds to "earn" the right so do more is a bad gaming model.  If players are having fun, they will jump through the hoops to get to the endgame.  When it starts feeling like a job to get there, there's something seriously wrong. 

Forced grouping, minimal character customization, and timeless grinds all render this game less than what it could be.  The complete lack of an enjoyable endgame further limits potential.  I really like what this game was trying to do, but there just aren't enough gameplay options. Especially for casual and solo-minded gamers.

"Always do what is right. It will gratify half of mankind and astound the other."

-  Mark Twain
Bandit
Terracotta Army
Posts: 604


Reply #38 on: January 16, 2007, 11:26:44 AM

Sorry you don't get your pointy hat right away, sorry you don't get the earth elemental pet right away, sorry your staff was not what you hoped....yes you actually have to work for shit.

You just missed the point of gaming right there.  It's a game, not a job.  I want to have fun, not "work for shit".  Character development is one thing, mindless grinds to "earn" the right so do more is a bad gaming model.  If players are having fun, they will jump through the hoops to get to the endgame.  When it starts feeling like a job to get there, there's something seriously wrong. 

Forced grouping, minimal character customization, and timeless grinds all render this game less than what it could be.  The complete lack of an enjoyable endgame further limits potential.  I really like what this game was trying to do, but there just aren't enough gameplay options. Especially for casual and solo-minded gamers.


Not sure I missed the point of gaming - might have miscontrued my point.  You don't get those spells or upgrades right away, not really work, but actual playing of the game.  You don;t get some of those things at level 1, just like any other game. The Earth Elemental pet comes in time, not sure what level...but its just a simple pet upgrade coming through regular levelling.   The pointy hat, is on the other hand part of a high level quest line.  Not sure I undertand your point at all, no you don't get a level 65+ hat right away, sorry.  Has to be something to look forward to.

Minimal Character customization? I didn't even get into Achievement Lines, plenty of options to customize your character.  Want more DPS out of that Guardian than select achievement points that increase DPS, at the cost of not increasing defence. Pretty simple.  Pick 1 of 24 characters that best fits you - add achievement points for new abilities to further refine for customization. Its actually getting pretty good with Achievement lines.

Timeless grinds? Not at all.  Started my troub week before Christmas, at level 50 now, with 50 achievement points.  There is no "grind", not once am I forced to stand in place and down mobs for XP...there is ALWAYS a quest to do, whether it be solo or grouped.  So there is no "grind" or "forced" grouping....plenty of content for both.  Your just not going to see the same rewards soloing, or all the content - but you do have the option of buying some of the better equipment while soloing.  I soloed a fury about 95% of the time to the end game.

And the comment about End Game? No there is not there is not a limitless amount of end game.  But from my perspective, it has more end game than the majority of MMO's out there.

What you are doing is proving my past point - It is easy to armchair critic the game, but it seems you don't really have an understanding of the game in it's entirity.

EDIT - I am done with my rants and crusading for EQ2, not really my style.  Just wanted to jump in defence of a really good game, not a perfect game, but it has kept me coming back for a year and a half anyways (with a stint of WoW in between).  Either play the game or play another game, just tired of seeing the same unjustified statements.
« Last Edit: January 16, 2007, 11:30:50 AM by Bandit »
trias_e
Terracotta Army
Posts: 1296


Reply #39 on: January 16, 2007, 11:42:59 AM

Quote
Once you have a solid understanding of each class, you can tailor your gaming experience to that strength.

So about how many new characters should you have to get to level 30 before you can expect to have a solid understanding of each class?

The game is a grind because combat IS, NOT, FUN.  It wasn't fun for a bruiser, wasn't fun for a defiler, wasn't fun for a paladin, wasn't fun for a swashbuckler.

How many times do I have to restart to find the class that is fun for me?  Playing 1-20 over and over again also isn't fun by any stretch of the imagination.  I'm guessing a troubador or an enchanter would be a much more fun class for me to play, presenting more tactical options and less mindless skill cycling.  Obviously it's my bad for thinking that all classes should involve more than mindless cycling button smashing.  And if getting to level 25 three times and quitting out of boredom each time isn't giving the game a chance, I don't know what is.

I'd much rather have 10 classes that are A) more distinct, and B) more customizable to different gameplay styles (although I agree that the AA system is cool, especially with EoF and KoS combined), than 24 classes that I don't really know what I'm getting myself into with, whose jobs meld with each other in odd ways.


Finally...A grind is only a grind if it's not fun to play.  WoW and EQ2 are very similar in what they present at this point (lots of quests/mini-achievement, both solo and group challeneges), so in theory, they should be about the same in terms of grind.  But they aren't for me.  I don't care to play WoW much these days.  But I did get to level 60 with a character and never felt a need to start over because the class didn't suit me.  And honestly, based on my knowledge of WoW classes and talent trees, I'm confident that I could have leveled any class to 60 the first time around without quitting out of boredom.

I think that is better design than having a class for every type of player (while said player, if a noob, has absolutely no way of figuring out what that class might be, or any reason of suspecting this is the case).

My statements here are about as justified as you can get.  Get over it, go play your fun class.  I'm glad you found the one or two out of 24 that was right for you.
« Last Edit: January 16, 2007, 11:45:06 AM by trias_e »
Nebu
Terracotta Army
Posts: 17613


Reply #40 on: January 16, 2007, 11:51:57 AM

And the comment about End Game? No there is not there is not a limitless amount of end game.  But from my perspective, it has more end game than the majority of MMO's out there.

What you are doing is proving my past point - It is easy to armchair critic the game, but it seems you don't really have an understanding of the game in it's entirity.

Endgame = raiding for gear.  That's it.  What's the rest of it? 

As for the rest, be careful what assumptions you make.  I was in EQ2 beta.  Played SEVERAL characters to 50 and higher.  Perhaps it's the fact that I've been playing online games since there were online games to play and am tired of the same old systems.  EQ2 offers nothing that I haven't already seen.  In some places it has done things better (lots of quests and abilities, improved crafting, collection quests, player housing) and many it hasn't improved (too few armor skins, steep treadmill after 40, linked encounters to easily determine baf, etc).

"Always do what is right. It will gratify half of mankind and astound the other."

-  Mark Twain
Bandit
Terracotta Army
Posts: 604


Reply #41 on: January 16, 2007, 02:59:17 PM

I have often wondered many times if player housing was an often requested feature in WoW?  Not that player housing is ground breaking by any means, but can be cool to have a trophy room, even if it is too show off to yourself.

Quote
linked encounters to easily determine baf

Not sure exactly what this statement means, but I assume (the bring along friends) social aggro mechanics in EQ2. The mechanics were changed a few updates ago. The Aggro system was changed to a more "social" aggro system.  Humanoid mobs will aggro other humanoid mobs (calling for help concept), so some encounters are a little bit trickier nowaday. After the haphazard update, some areas were insane.  One taunt or arrow pull  would pull an entire room or half a zone.  It was a welcomed change for me though, now pulling is become a bit of an art form again.  Tanks are learning to body pull, Templars can actually use thier pacifies, chanters must be on the lookout for difficult pulls, etc.  So I am not sure what your present understanding is, but it has changed.

Sky
Terracotta Army
Posts: 30624

I love my TV an' hug my TV an' call it 'George'.


WWW
Reply #42 on: January 17, 2007, 11:43:35 AM

Quote from: Bandit
just tired of seeing the same unjustified statements.
Sumbitch.

You need to understand you can't understand what most of us are saying if you levelled to 50 in under a month. You are Different. Just because someone is different, doesn't make their statements unjustified. My view of the flaws of EQ2 are totally justified, and I actually do think it's a good game, except for those flaws. And I do play another game, so what's the point?

The point is that the flaws in the game that I otherwise like deter me from playing, thus justifying my statements. I'd assume others that take exception to portions of EQ2 feel similarly.

Bandit
Terracotta Army
Posts: 604


Reply #43 on: January 17, 2007, 12:30:40 PM

I agree the statement was harsh, and unjustified in itself.  Frustration getting to me a bit, that's always why I prefer to lurk and avoid posting.
Soln
Terracotta Army
Posts: 4709

the opportunity for evil is just delicious


Reply #44 on: January 17, 2007, 02:26:18 PM

FWIW I'm playing EQ2 with my gf as our full time MMO until LOTRO starts up to try.   I'm Scupper on Oasis.

Nebu
Terracotta Army
Posts: 17613


Reply #45 on: January 17, 2007, 02:40:20 PM

I agree the statement was harsh, and unjustified in itself.  Frustration getting to me a bit, that's always why I prefer to lurk and avoid posting.

The people here are very wary of the details.  I find that posting around them has helped my writing a lot.  Don't let me or anyone discourage you.  Different opinions make this place more interesting... especially when people are able to properly articulate them.

"Always do what is right. It will gratify half of mankind and astound the other."

-  Mark Twain
WindupAtheist
Army of One
Posts: 7028

Badicalthon


Reply #46 on: January 18, 2007, 01:50:02 PM

EQ2 is one of those games the abject failure of which I outright enjoy and view as positive for the genre.

"OMG this isn't WoW u cant solo to 60!!!"

Fine, then it can go sit in the subscription cellar.  Nobody will miss it.

"You're just a dick who quotes himself in his sig."  --  Schild
"Yeah, it's pretty awesome."  --  Me
trias_e
Terracotta Army
Posts: 1296


Reply #47 on: January 18, 2007, 02:12:15 PM

Meh.  It's actually a pretty solo-friendly game.
rk47
Terracotta Army
Posts: 6236

The Patron Saint of Radicalthons


Reply #48 on: January 18, 2007, 02:13:56 PM

Hm? I wanted to give it a chance last year and gave the trial isle a whirl....too short..I spent less time playing it than downloading.  Heartbreak  I hope Play the Fag trial has bigger zone to explore for the trial people so they can decide better.

Colonel Sanders is back in my wallet
Damn Dirty Ape
Terracotta Army
Posts: 302


Reply #49 on: January 18, 2007, 04:12:59 PM

Frustration getting to me a bit, that's always why I prefer to lurk and avoid posting.

That's too bad as your avartard is a big ol' jar of lol-lipops.
Damn Dirty Ape
Terracotta Army
Posts: 302


Reply #50 on: January 18, 2007, 04:16:51 PM

Meh.  It's actually a pretty solo-friendly game.

Surprisingly, it is.  Lots more better than EQ back in the day ever was.  My only complaint is EQ2 is too "1st level D&D n00b"-centric.  Don't make me go through dinky-dom yet one more time, kthxbye.
Sky
Terracotta Army
Posts: 30624

I love my TV an' hug my TV an' call it 'George'.


WWW
Reply #51 on: January 19, 2007, 10:33:04 AM

Though I really have a strong dislike for the way EQ2 excludes solo players from dungeons and from killing some of the cooler names mobs in the overworld, it had /really/ improved from release when I was playing last winter. There are enough quests, and many of them are actually interesting, to keep me going to level 30 twice (once good, once evil). Soloing with my wizard was tricky, as always, but my shadowknight did pretty good. I do miss the 'old' feign death, it was my single favorite thing in EQ.

jpark
Terracotta Army
Posts: 1538


Reply #52 on: January 21, 2007, 04:30:38 AM

So...

I am going to give Vanguard a whirl when it comes out.  I appreciate what EQ2 has strived for - but missed in execution.  Maybe Vanguard might have success there.

1.  No doubt you're a nice guy but I have no interest in your specific likes or dislikes per se.  Or anyone else who posts on f13...

Dude, why do you post on a community website if that's your attitude?  I'm not trolling: I'm interested.



The short answer is that I look at this as a series of business cases and look at the outcome in the market based on revenue generation.  It is of no interest to me if guys enjoyed that game.  If everyone posts that a game is awful - but I see it has good market share / revenue generation - then that latter is more relevant to me.  I do enjoy the passion shown here for said products - but the market and product dynamics are what interest to me.
« Last Edit: January 21, 2007, 04:35:30 AM by jpark »

"I think my brain just shoved its head up its own ass in retaliation.
"  HaemishM.
Sky
Terracotta Army
Posts: 30624

I love my TV an' hug my TV an' call it 'George'.


WWW
Reply #53 on: January 23, 2007, 11:11:55 AM

The short answer is that I look at this as a series of business cases and look at the outcome in the market based on revenue generation.  It is of no interest to me if guys enjoyed that game.  If everyone posts that a game is awful - but I see it has good market share / revenue generation - then that latter is more relevant to me.  I do enjoy the passion shown here for said products - but the market and product dynamics are what interest to me.

undecided

Britney Spears pwns!

Furiously
Terracotta Army
Posts: 7198


WWW
Reply #54 on: January 24, 2007, 04:47:24 PM

Someone above really hit the nail on the head for me.

In wow, I can play my priest as a shadow priest or a holy priest and it gives me a different experience.

In EQ2 or COH, I hit the same 4 buttons and that's it. Sure I may have 3 bars of buttons in EQ2. But one row is big damage against X monster type, 1 row is my buffs, and 1 row is my attacks.

In WOW every button is something special. It's me doing something. In EQ2 and COH/V - I have to be hitting those buttons or I am doing no damage. I get carpal tunnel playing EQ2 it's pure button smashing. Same with COH.

WOW is button smashing, but mostly it's me moving my mouse around to say, ok... Bless, Judge, Bless, oh shit, heal, oh shit, purge. It's a bit more involved. Not hugely, but enough that it's more interesting to me.

Velorath
Contributor
Posts: 8254


Reply #55 on: January 25, 2007, 01:37:06 AM

I think I made it to around lv. 50 something not long after the decline of Bat Country.  I took a break from the game fully intending to come back when Echoes of Faydwer released (and of course I never ended up going back).  Now I can barely remember anything about the game (save for that one time we had a Bat Country group going and kept trying to do some quest that involved an instance on a boat with several waves of fairies or something attacking us, and then the boss would invariably kill us at the end every time we tired).  Literally, almost nothing about the game has stuck with me.

And that's about all I can say about the game.  It's the most forgetable experience I've ever had in an MMO.
Miasma
Terracotta Army
Posts: 5283

Stopgap Measure


Reply #56 on: January 25, 2007, 08:36:19 AM

I remember almost every heritage quest I did, those were great.
shiznitz
Terracotta Army
Posts: 4268

the plural of mangina


Reply #57 on: January 25, 2007, 11:19:11 AM

(save for that one time we had a Bat Country group going and kept trying to do some quest that involved an instance on a boat with several waves of fairies or something attacking us, and then the boss would invariably kill us at the end every time we tired). 

Enchanted Lands access quest final fight. This and the Zek one are optional now.

I have never played WoW.
Velorath
Contributor
Posts: 8254


Reply #58 on: January 25, 2007, 12:01:43 PM

(save for that one time we had a Bat Country group going and kept trying to do some quest that involved an instance on a boat with several waves of fairies or something attacking us, and then the boss would invariably kill us at the end every time we tired). 

Enchanted Lands access quest final fight. This and the Zek one are optional now.

I'm pretty sure it was optional when we did it too.  We just didn't want to give up at the end.
Surlyboi
Terracotta Army
Posts: 10060

eat a bag of dicks


Reply #59 on: January 25, 2007, 01:28:18 PM

Totally optional.

I soloed it at 50. Just 'cause that boss had to FUCKING DIE on my watch.

As for non-memorable, that's exactly the way I feel about WoW. Not one quest is memorable. The only thing I do remember about the game is the stupid Cow NPCs saying "Strength and honor" a lot. That and the twink-heavy PvP.

Tuned in, immediately get to watch cringey Ubisoft talking head offering her deepest sympathies to the families impacted by the Orlando shooting while flanked by a man in a giraffe suit and some sort of "horrifically garish neon costumes through the ages" exhibit or something.  We need to stop this fucking planet right now and sort some shit out. -Kail
shiznitz
Terracotta Army
Posts: 4268

the plural of mangina


Reply #60 on: January 25, 2007, 01:51:51 PM

I have to disagree about memorable-ness in EQ2. The Heritage Quests were all fun, but they have been mentioned. Half their fun may have been the fact that I was getting an EQ1 item, though.

I remember the nights our guild dinged level 10, 20 and 30 pretty clearly since half the guild was out grinding writs together and watching the guild level bar.

I remember my first fight against Lord Everling because several of us completed multiple HQs as a result.

I remember our first few frustrating attempts at Deathfist Citadel - once again, HQ related.

I remember taking over 2 hours fighting down through the depths of Solusek to talk to Nagafen. Talk about amazing content almost no one sees. Too bad.

Like most MMOs, the strongest memories involves others, either with or against them. At least for me. I am not surprised that someone (and I am not claiming that Vel did this) who solos 95% of their time in EQ2 doesn't have strong memories about the game. I would argue that most powerful RL memories do not involve being alone, too.

I have never played WoW.
Soln
Terracotta Army
Posts: 4709

the opportunity for evil is just delicious


Reply #61 on: January 25, 2007, 01:54:45 PM

I'm enjoying EQ2 now, but I'm getting tired fast of only having 30FPS at "extreme performance" while every other game like Oblivion flies on my PC at high quality levels.  I think SOE may have shot themselves in the foot over  having custom graphic dlls when they probably should've just licensed Unreal or Alchemy etc.   Lot more stable.  And it sounds stupid, but laggy and poor graphics are wearning at my fun.
eldaec
Terracotta Army
Posts: 11066


Reply #62 on: January 26, 2007, 04:18:52 AM

In EQ2 or COH, I hit the same 4 buttons and that's it. Sure I may have 3 bars of buttons in EQ2. But one row is big damage against X monster type, 1 row is my buffs, and 1 row is my attacks.

In WOW every button is something special. It's me doing something. In EQ2 and COH/V - I have to be hitting those buttons or I am doing no damage. I get carpal tunnel playing EQ2 it's pure button smashing. Same with COH.

WOW is button smashing, but mostly it's me moving my mouse around to say, ok... Bless, Judge, Bless, oh shit, heal, oh shit, purge. It's a bit more involved. Not hugely, but enough that it's more interesting to me.

I find it interesting that people see a difference in this regard between eq2 and other games. And I suspect it's not because of the combat mechanics, but because you didn't find what was going on around you interesting.

As an eq2 priest-class in a combat situation, you are still choosing between short term buff, short term debuff, direct damage or dot, cure effects, efficient specialist heal (ward, hot, reactive etc), or inefficient direct heal.

Plus if your cat herder is good enough you have the HO-fu thing going on as well.

I'm not saying this makes you wrong to say that it felt like button mashing to you, but the underlying mechanics are basically the same. Which just leaves the context you are doing it in.


I do think it's fair to say you have to work harder to find interesting instances/dungeons/encounters than in other MMOGs; but I think that is about design of the environment, not design of the combat mechanics. One problem with the typical EQ battle is that they are either too easy, or flat out impossible, it's hard to find battles that are challenging - not least because many of the most efficient xp spots that groups will drag you to are well known static spawns with repetitive and uninteresting combat.

"People will not assume that what they read on the internet is trustworthy or that it carries any particular ­assurance or accuracy" - Lord Leveson
"Hyperbole is a cancer" - Lakov Sanite
Bandit
Terracotta Army
Posts: 604


Reply #63 on: January 26, 2007, 08:31:35 AM

As stated, I don't really find the combat mechanics uninteresting.....I like the vast array of subtle effects, with a few big ones to add to the mix.

Quote
One problem with the typical EQ battle is that they are either too easy, or flat out impossible, it's hard to find battles that are challenging

I think you really nailed it with that statement.  Either a breeze, or flat out can't win.  I think they are trying to address it a bit, by making the orange cons a bit easier, and greens and blues a bit harder. 

It should proably be more down the lines of specific mob abilities that exploit or play to character strengths and weaknesses.  Heavier debuffs, and reliance on specific resistances (ie divine, mential etc.) might make it more interesting.  One character might wipe the floor with them, others might have really trouble beating them.
shiznitz
Terracotta Army
Posts: 4268

the plural of mangina


Reply #64 on: January 26, 2007, 08:51:21 AM

As stated, I don't really find the combat mechanics uninteresting.....I like the vast array of subtle effects, with a few big ones to add to the mix.

Quote
One problem with the typical EQ battle is that they are either too easy, or flat out impossible, it's hard to find battles that are challenging

I think you really nailed it with that statement.  Either a breeze, or flat out can't win.  I think they are trying to address it a bit, by making the orange cons a bit easier, and greens and blues a bit harder. 

It should proably be more down the lines of specific mob abilities that exploit or play to character strengths and weaknesses.  Heavier debuffs, and reliance on specific resistances (ie divine, mential etc.) might make it more interesting.  One character might wipe the floor with them, others might have really trouble beating them.

I have a quibble with this. EQ2 is no different than any other MMO that I have played in this regard. Players (either groups or solo) hunt in areas where exp will be maximized - either through mob exp or quest exp. That means picking battles one can win. MMOs are designed to enable this (level segregated content.) Occasionally, while fighting safely, someone may overpull or get a re-pop or wanderer. When that happens, a group will succeed or fail based upon the class makeup (crowd control) and/or player skill/luck (does the zerk have rampage+open wounds available? does the scout have evac available? does the guardian have his AE taunt available?) unless the addition encounter is an epic mob, in which case, yeah, you are going to lose. That is not a flaw in the game. It is a "flaw" in the players. They are inherently conservative.


I have never played WoW.
Sky
Terracotta Army
Posts: 30624

I love my TV an' hug my TV an' call it 'George'.


WWW
Reply #65 on: January 26, 2007, 09:36:40 AM

I agree totally. In a way, I like it. A lot of 'underutilized' zones are my favorite areas in games. Quirky, exotic, not mainstream because the risk/reward is off, and I base my gameplay on fun and interest, not risk/reward.

But I don't like it when designers start to develop content around that conservative mindset, because then you start being required to play that way.

Oh, saying WoW combat is more interesting than CoH/V combat? That's crazy talk!

eldaec
Terracotta Army
Posts: 11066


Reply #66 on: January 26, 2007, 10:55:35 AM

As stated, I don't really find the combat mechanics uninteresting.....I like the vast array of subtle effects, with a few big ones to add to the mix.

Quote
One problem with the typical EQ battle is that they are either too easy, or flat out impossible, it's hard to find battles that are challenging

I think you really nailed it with that statement.  Either a breeze, or flat out can't win.  I think they are trying to address it a bit, by making the orange cons a bit easier, and greens and blues a bit harder. 

It should proably be more down the lines of specific mob abilities that exploit or play to character strengths and weaknesses.  Heavier debuffs, and reliance on specific resistances (ie divine, mential etc.) might make it more interesting.  One character might wipe the floor with them, others might have really trouble beating them.

I have a quibble with this. EQ2 is no different than any other MMO that I have played in this regard. Players (either groups or solo) hunt in areas where exp will be maximized - either through mob exp or quest exp. That means picking battles one can win. MMOs are designed to enable this (level segregated content.) Occasionally, while fighting safely, someone may overpull or get a re-pop or wanderer. When that happens, a group will succeed or fail based upon the class makeup (crowd control) and/or player skill/luck (does the zerk have rampage+open wounds available? does the scout have evac available? does the guardian have his AE taunt available?) unless the addition encounter is an epic mob, in which case, yeah, you are going to lose. That is not a flaw in the game. It is a "flaw" in the players. They are inherently conservative.

The majority of players' conservative mental approach is outside your sphere of influence as a developer - so complaining about it would be stupid and pointless.

If the most xp efficient thing to do is boring, then players will do that, people who want to do anything else will fail to get a group, your game will fail, and you will die alone and miserable in a debtors prison.

At the launch of CoH, the most efficient way to get xp was to do circuit patrols in city zones. Dull as dishwater, but efficient, so that is what most groups did. Cryptic fixed the problem by giving greater rewards for things that are more fun (missions). Later on, they realised that players were avoiding the more unusual or challenging villian groups - because variety introduced risk, and it was harder to optimise your character for a wider range of villians. Solution? More xp for whatever villian groups don't get killed often enough - like with missions, this pretty much removed the bias players had against missions featuring DE, rikti, longbow etc.

"People will not assume that what they read on the internet is trustworthy or that it carries any particular ­assurance or accuracy" - Lord Leveson
"Hyperbole is a cancer" - Lakov Sanite
shiznitz
Terracotta Army
Posts: 4268

the plural of mangina


Reply #67 on: January 26, 2007, 01:33:32 PM

I didn't know CoH did that. Very cool idea.

I have never played WoW.
Damn Dirty Ape
Terracotta Army
Posts: 302


Reply #68 on: January 26, 2007, 08:39:27 PM

Oh, saying WoW combat is more interesting than CoH/V combat? That's crazy talk!

Indeed.  While I love WoW, Co* pulls down its pants and pattles its little behind in the dynamic animation of combat, particularly for melee toons.  I played tankers solo in Co* and had fun smashing.  I can't stomach melee types in WoW or its kin.  Animation in fantasy settings are typically skewed in favor of casters, so that's what I wind up playing.  EQ2's berserkers are kinda-sorta fun, though.
Margalis
Terracotta Army
Posts: 12335


Reply #69 on: January 27, 2007, 03:03:52 PM

Quote
Yeah, so what I never got past level 25?  That doesn't mean my point isn't valid.  Maybe EQ2 becomes fun once you get to level 40 or 50.  Fine:  My character should start at that level then, thanks.

So many people don't get this. A game is supposed to be fun from the first minute. That's why most people hate long, boring tutorials. 25 levels to get to the fun? No thanks.

I agree about the EQ2 combat from what little I played. (Up to level 18 or so) It was just an optimization problem, do your skills as fast as you can to maximize damage. It is the illusion that you are doing more without actually doing more.

In FFXI you can do very little during combat, fight for a full minute without using any special ability. But when you do use them they tend to matter. Or if you play a Red Mage and try to solo you are using an ability every 5 seconds and they *all* matter. Basically depending on your class you might not do much but when you do it means something.

EQ2 feels easily reduced to a simple optimization problem. I have 3 special attacks, with cooldown X, Y and Z and damage A, B and C. My mission: spam them as fast as possible. That's it. As a fighter I had IIRC 3 different attack specials: a kick, a slash, and a slash that hit multiple targets. There was really no difference between any of them if you are fighting a single MOB, other than damage and cooldown.

Note that doing things like adding different damage types or elemental weaknesses doesn't really address this, it is still a simple repeatable optimization problem only now it is a bit different for different mob types. That's just another way of increasing apparent complexity without adding any real depth.

The number of abilities you have doesn't really matter, what matters is how differentiated they are. A kick and a slash that both do damage might as well be the same attack. Now make it so that the kick can interrupt an enemy special attack but does a lot less damage and you may have something.

vampirehipi23: I would enjoy a book written by a monkey and turned into a movie rather than this.
Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 ... 6 Go Up Print 
f13.net  |  f13.net General Forums  |  The Gaming Graveyard  |  Everquest 2  |  Topic: Why I don't enjoy this game.  
Jump to:  

Powered by SMF 1.1.10 | SMF © 2006-2009, Simple Machines LLC