| |
View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
OnyxRaven
Grand Master
|
 Post subject: MyGuyGames WoW vs EQII comparison critique Posted: Tue Nov 16, 2004 05:01 am |
 |
|
The MyGuy Games article (subsequent parts can be found in links at the bottom of the article) takes on the hard job of trying to compare the two giants, World of Warcraft and EverQuest II. They took some input from a couple high level beta characters and then drew conclusions of their own.
Good idea... but here's the problem. Some of the EQII information is based on old stuff - before the last few patches in beta even. There are more problems, so let me give a detailed explanation.
- Both players are asked about 'the grind' as if it is necessarily a bad thing - I don't think thats a question that is universally true for everyone.
- Related, the WoW player says there is no grind in WoW... which would be 'false' - at least as far as I could tell. I have not really seen a MMOG without a grind at some point or another. Yes, it may be disguised with 'quests' but you're still grinding out xp on a certain number of monsters.
- Questions for the EQII player were based on some assumptions - "Is EQII a big improvement over EQ1", for example... why was this question not asked of the WoW player? Its almost of the same validity.
- The WoW player talked about EQII, where the EQII player only talked about EQII. It makes the WoW player look as if they are on the defensive, and really feels way too much like the lame 'name calling' in the presidential debates. Talk about your own issues! If you can't find more to talk about your own issues, maybe you should just shut up!
- WoW Guy says "I looked at the class list from the screenshots, and 75% of them were healer based classes. There was one Scout base out of nearly 30-40 people. In WoW, that doesn't exist. Every class brings something to the table and thus every class is useful." - Ahem... I severely doubt that a class was created without 'something to bring to the table'. That the screenshots this fellow looked at showed a lot of healers or casters is not necessarily the case that everyone plays a healer. I mean, I don't play one, I know plenty of people who don't play one. In fact, they're still in demand and feel 'shorthanded' at times. Scouts, Fighters, Mages, they all have numerous people playing. The WoW guy goes on to talk about the WoW classes, and I found my self thinking 'gee, this is exactly what the archetype->class->subclass system is for too! omg!
- The comparisons start with the graphics. Art styles aside (a pure opinion really), little is said about performance other than EQII looks good on high detail. Frankly I would say that the EQII engine has more power and more expandability than the WoW engine by design. Now, this comes with the cost of higher requirements, but I wouldnt say my desktop or my laptop are state of the art, and they can still run the game, I can play and have fun, and it still looks good.
- Not all the EQII subclasses are divided by evil/good - so you cant say you only have 6 choices after choosing the archetype.
- The reviewer forgets to mention a big thing about item damage upon death - that is, your weapons will always be repairable to 100%, even if they're damaged to unusability. This is a big gripe and misunderstanding of folks coming from DAoC or SWG, where items can be lost to damage. Also, if you do not retrieve a shard, your stats are lower until the shard is retrieved or it is 'auto retrieved' after 72 hours.
- Camping of spawns is not totally eliminated from EQII via instancing, in no shape or form. Most zones do fill up and new instances only seem to come up on very very loaded zones. Some dungeons are instanced, usually only at the boss mob fight, but again, not every dungeon. It gets rid of many of those 'get on the list' moments. WoW does have zones, they're just 'transparent'. AC2, that didn't have zones - zone boundaries were lines across the landscape technically - in WoW there are still doorways and paths that will zone you. In this way, it is still similar to EQII, except that zoning is automatic and instant. WoW uses instances much in the same way EQII does, as I understand it, but only for dungeons. EQII can instance heavily loaded 'regular' zones as well.
- EQII has a full featured 'player finder' for searching out members to fill a group. I'm not convinced that Solo play at all levels is a 'good' thing - yes, its nice to be able to do things on a whim without waiting for a group, but as far as I can tell, EQII has that as well. There will still be waiting for groups in WoW.
- The travel part of the comparison seemed a bit lacking - both the WoW and EQII sections were a bit sparse on information - Race specific mounts are great, but really, its still only one mount type for each person, right? I've heard good things about EQII boat rides too.
- I wouldn't say that the comparison was completely unbiased - no writing really is, especially a comparison such as this. There was a bit of leaning towards the casual player (not necessarily a bad thing, but still a bias), and no leaning towards the more dedicated player.
Some things the articles did not compare that I wish they would have: - Tradeskills - EQII has a active, deep tradeskill system with a seperate advancement path built in - there is quite a bit of tradeskill-class interdependence, as well as adventurer/artisan class interdependence. A tradeskiller almost need not do anything else in the game and still have plenty of quests to do, with plenty of interaction. WoW has a good tradeskill system with 'instant' creation of items. There is some interdependence but it seems much of it can be done by one player themselves. It is not as interactive (you can have the components for 20 items and click 'repeat' and set the counter to 20 and go have a sandwich) Both have a good resource gathering system in the world as well. Both necessitate going into dangerous areas for the really good materials. Verdict: EQII, for having an active, interesting tradeskill and artisan system. WoW may be better for folks who are doing tradeskills very casually (or are bots... I mean...).
- Economy and Trade - EQII has an interesting market system - An item on the market can be bought from the player themselves, through a broker in the city, or even through the 'black market' which spans both cities. I am certainly NOT a fan of the necessity of being inactive in your house to be able to put goods on the market. There are consigners, however, which can sell your wares for a price. WoW has an auction house much like that of FFXI - you set a minimum price, and folks from around the same area can bid on that item and recieve it. EQII does not currently have a mail system to send items to other players who may be offline or just in another area. WoW has this. Verdict: I have to say WoW... I just can't get past the fact that you have to be in your house... not doing anything else. It seems unnecessary. The Auction house and mail system I loved in FFXI, and its here again in WoW, making life easier.
- Music and Sound - This is not focusing on voiceovers and such - but combat sounds and ambient music - Both games have great sound - effects during combat and out of combat fit the action, and aren't annoying. EQII's alerts (like someone joined your group, or you got a tell) are even nicer - smooth almost soothing sounds. WoW's alert sounds weren't apparent to me... Music is one of those things that can easily get repetitive, and both games have great music that doesn't get immediately repetitive, but stay in any place too long and you notice this is the 208th time you've heard this song repeat. Usually I can ignore it and go on, and be pleasantly suprised by some new area, but some people certainly cant, and turn off the music. Verdict: This is really a draw, because both have great quality music and sound, which fit in with the surroundings. I'm glad music has come such a long way and really finds a great place in games.
- User Interface - In EQII, every window, bar, icon, etc can be moved, resized, adjusted for transparency, and sometimes hidden or duplicated. All in all its very customizable even in the default skin. XML skins are available already, and more will come as folks get acquainted with the system. Hotkeys are plentiful and macros are pretty easy to make for siple tasks. The icons are very clear representations of the action they're going to execute. The letterbox'd interface you see is merely an option, and can be resized or gotten rid of completely. Each font and indicator can be resized, color changed, or removed. The UI can look almost exactly how you would want it for whatever situation you're in. In WoW, you're stuck with a bar along the bottom for your hotkeys, pack slots, and buttons. This provides for a quick to learn interface, but is quickly outgrown. The chat box interface is locked in place and size, though the fonts can be cahnged. You cant have two (or more) chat boxes. The Cosmos UI addition brings a lot of customization and automation to the game using LUA scripting, and provides some features that powergamers as well as casual players will appreciate, but it is not supported by Blizzard and it seems every patch breaks it. Verdict: EQII, hands down. The interface WoW takes on reminds me a lot of AC2, with its ease of use, but its ultimate shortcomings.
My overall verdict? I can't say I'm unbiased (like Mike Mikucki of MyGuyGames seems to think he can) because I've played much more EQII than WoW. I saw merits in both - WoW is fun; its a fast, low impact game. But I have to say that EQII feels... deeper, fuller, more alive than WoW. Its all the parts put together, graphics, sound, art, combat, interactions, etc, its all there and its all awesome.
Again, obviously I'm a bit biased towards EQII (I mean heck, look what site I run! Give me a break!), but I still see merit in what WoW is trying to do. They're sort of the 'outlier' in the MMOG world at this point, a game studio that hasn't attempted this scale of game yet, and they're a bit more free to do things. EQII may be a bit hindered by that "2", I think. A lot of it is perception that it will be EverQuest again. This means they weren't able to go to the places that WoW might be able to go because it wouldn't fit in with the expectations. Its too bad, and hopefully down the line people will be able to recognize that this isn't just a sequel, and look past the "2" into the actual game, because it's a new world there, folks.
All of the above being said, the comparison did have a lot of good points, for both games, and I commend the writer for taking on such a daunting and potentially contravercial task. This really is just a great month for gaming in general, and these types of reviews are still wanted. I just wanted to point out some things that I found wrong with the article, and wanted to add. |
_________________
OnyxRaven :: Chaotic Good Elf Ranger Fighter
"If you can't do it with a sword, do it with a fireball. If you can't do it with a fireball, it isn't worth doing. " |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Griller
Newbie
|
| Post subject: Posted: Wed Nov 17, 2004 09:13 pm |
|
|
As some background, I have been in WoW beta for almost a year now and got EQ2 at release and am up to lvl 16 (not much)
| Quote: |
| Related, the WoW player says there is no grind in WoW... which would be 'false' - at least as far as I could tell. I have not really seen a MMOG without a grind at some point or another. Yes, it may be disguised with 'quests' but you're still grinding out xp on a certain number of monsters. |
Actually, there were times when it was way more worthwhile to grind for 1/4-1/2 lvl on mobs. Not just killing quest monsters, but finding something that you could take down fairly easily for your class and just non-stop killing. The rest system helps here. Essentially, for every day/hour/week you are off-line, you accrue bonus experience. This allows for double experience for the next kills (amount of which is determined by the length of time off-line). If you are a regular player, every day to 3 days, this rested state is only a small amount. It becomes nice when you are say, out of town for a week. Then you have a nice free 1/2 level of experience waiting for you. This also encourages switching among alts as you can have alts resting and then burn their rest state and set them back to resting. Rest accrues significantly more in the inns scattered around the world.
| Quote: |
| Every class brings something to the table and thus every class is useful. |
While true in theory, there is really only one class that can tank (warrior), one class that can crowd control (mage), and one shared class that can heal and rez (priest). Shamen can heal and rez but they are horde only and druids can't rez (don't even mention pallies as healer, please).
| Quote: |
| The reviewer forgets to mention a big thing about item damage upon death - that is, your weapons will always be repairable to 100%, even if they're damaged to unusability. |
WoW and EQ2 have almost the same durability mechanisms. I couldn't name a difference off the top of my head.
WoW has excellent music and sound. Already in EQ2 I have noticed the fight music. Noticing ambient music is never a good thing. It would end abruptly and then start back on the loop. This was very noticable to me. WoW just had seemless ambient sounds/music that was enjoyable and never distracting. <<== All opinion there though.
| Quote: |
| The chat box interface is locked in place and size, though the fonts can be cahnged. You cant have two (or more) chat boxes. |
I haven't played WoW since I got EQ2, but IIRC I had two separate chat windows, each with their own filters and sized how I wanted with the transparency I wanted. Maybe your chat windows were locked (similar to how you can lock location, size, etc. on EQ2 chat windows).
| Quote: |
| EverQuest II: At every level, your character will acquire new skills |
I can't tell you how anti-climactic it is to get a new level and not get a new skill as in WoW. IMO WoW really has 25 levels as the odd levels are really non-events unless they give you the talent point you need to get that cool new ability.
And finally, here is an email I sent to some EQ1 friends: (WARNING it was not edited for grammar/spelling and was written early on, but the points are still valid)
I have created 3 chars and played two of them to lvls 7 and 8. They have both been fighters as I started one on an east coast server and wanted to restart on a west coast (and rp preferred) server -- Lucan D'Lere.
This is just two nights of play so far, one night for each character. There is no carryover from EQ1 other than general knowledge and commands. Everything else is different. Qeynos is now about 10 zones. I have not left it yet. I have completed 40 quests with my lvl 8 char -- about 5 of those were on the island of refuge. The Island is like a noob starter area which will get you to lvl 3-6. I left a bit early at lvl 4. Of my quests, only about 1/3 have had to do with killing things. The rest have been delivery, talking, etc. You are able to have 50 quests active at once. I have had up to around 25. This can get a bit confusing as there is no real way of knowing what quests you are doing without reading the quest text. I got used to it in short order. There is also a waypoint button on the quest dialog, but I don't know how to use it yet as it is always greyed out. A waypoint system could make managing a lot of quests very much easier.
Combat in EQ2 is somewhat similar to WoW. As a fighter I have a number of abilities. I fire off the abilities when they become available and in a sequence that is most advantageous to me. EQ2 abilities all run off of power. Each char has power determined by their base attribute. The only time I have ever come close to running out of power was when sprinting (which is a constant power drain). This is much different from the various mechanics of WoW. In WoW a warrior has rage (which needs to be built up during battle) for using his abilities. A rogue in WoW has energy which gets used up and replenished quickly. All the rest of the characters have mana, which is very similar to power in EQ2.
Pacing wise the combat is fairly similar between the two. The real difference in pacing is the lack of means to quickly recover hit points in EQ2 as a fighter. In WoW, one merely had to eat some relatively cheap food. In EQ2, you sit. Recovery is fairly quick compared to EQ1, but nowhere near most other new games. Maybe I am missing something on this front. Advancement pacing is difficult to say at such an early stage. Add a priest to your group though and you can mow through mobs pretty much all day. This makes EQ2 much more group oriented. Groups have been fairly easy to come by in both games, sometimes even with proficient players  Short term pick up groups are the order of the day in WoW and that sort of gameplay also surfaces in EQ2 (although to a lesser extent). This is a result of having a robust quest system. It is easy to go to where you are hunting something and just walk up to someone and say "hey, you hunting snakes too?". Next thing you know you have a group for hunting the snakes you need for your quest. After you kill them, sometimes it is hasta la vista, and sometimes it is "hey, you want to kill the bears next?". EQ2 has a way of seeing what quests each party member shares with you, so figuring out what to do is easy.
Speaking of groups, both EQ2 and WoW have the idea of monsters which are specifically targeted for groups. They are elite in WoW and group in EQ2. Try to fight a blue or even con one of these alone and you will get waxed. I am not too excited about this development, but I guess they needed it to prevent some other design catastrophe and since both have it, it is a non issue.
If I had to guess, I would say that EQ2 advancement is about 50% the pace of WoW advancement. This didn't bother me at this stage in the game. I was actually happy when I did level in EQ2. It was more of an event than WoW. Compared to the first char I ever leveled to 10 in WoW I am probably advancing at about 3x the pace, but that was a whole different WoW and I was a major noob in WoW then. The number of enemies you have to kill in each game to level seems about the same so far. Somewhere around 100 even cons. That said, it seems like EQ2 gives a noticable amount of exp via quests, because I have killed nowhere near 500 monsters. In fact I have killed only 135 and a fair number of those were probably blues. I have only died twice and completed 28 quests, so you do the math on advancement.
Back to combat pacing. EQ2 is just slightly slower than WoW and allows you to actually type something short during combat even if you aren't a 120 wpm typist. You can pretty much forget that in WoW. Combat is locked in EQ2, I'll let you read up on everything that means, but essentially, once you engage an enemy, you get all npcs that are linked with it. Sometimes that is zero, sometimes that is a group of four. For example, the final quest on the Island of Refuge has you go into and instanced cave (one room). In there are 6 monsters. You have to fight the first three as a group while the second 3 hang back. Once you finish the first 3, the named and his two minions rush you (after some dialog). It is a very controlled environment and not at all unpleasant or intrusive IMO.
Graphics, graphics, graphics. Hmm, how good is your system? Well mine is kinda mediocre at an athlon 2700, 1G ram, Radeon 9600pro. As such I can run at 1280x1024 and one step toward performance on the performance/quality scale in EQ2. Changing these values has a large effect on how the system runs and how the gameplay looks. This is truly a next generation gaming engine (at least with respect to hardware). Settings in WoW were almost maxed out and my machine still ran fairly well. Overall, the settings in WoW made little difference one way or another on both visual quality and on performance. max quality in EQ2 is absolutely amazing, but currently it is fairly close to a slide show if you are doing anything. Style wise, WoW is cartoony with excellent textures and low res models (which you don't notice that much due to the excellent textures); EQ2 is realistic and therefore has a somewhat drabber color scheme, but very good textures and models both. I don't think the animation is any better or worse in either game. It looks smoother in WoW due to the low poly count on the models. EQ2 is somewhat stiffer, but I wonder if it is because it looks so realistic that we expect more -- which is the case with me.
They are two different games and should appeal to different people. I don't think there is an easy way to judge who would like what without each individual so, here is my pros/cons list (conclusions below)
WOW PRO
Great smooth graphics
Varied class styles
Great and easy to use quest system
Quick advancement (although it is slowing down now post 30)
PvP built in, even some factional and consensual PvP on PvE servers(if you like that)
Lots of stuff soloable early on and advancement solo is easy
EQ2 PRO
Hugely deep rich world with familiar lore and locations (that have also been changed enough to be new)
Balanced class tree where everyone should be wanted in a group
Huge amount of character customization, from visual to flavor
Factional, political and guild meta game
Feels more like a real roleplaying game where I can connect with my character
Lots of varied quests
Player and guild housing
WOW CON
Only one class can tank well (warrior)/heal-rez well (priest)/cc well(mage)
No reason to role-play or do anything other than dungeon crawl
Lots of promised stuff NYI (not yet implemented) - heroes, battlegrounds, lots of raid stuff. Some of this might make release.
Could be filled with annoying bnet kiddies
Almost no character customization
To complete lots of quests later on and get any good loot, you need to group.(rumored)
EQ2 CON
Slower advancement and lack of viable soloing throughout
Run by SOE (some people have a real problem with this, I don't)
I am sure there is still a lot of content that what promised/changed at the last minute and not tested thoroughly or just not delivered. (guess)
Quest system interface could use some improvement
Need mega or future computer to get the full effect from all settings
I have played WoW for about 1 year now. At this point I am pretty much burnt out on it. It is a fabulous game and should hold even the most jaded gamers interest for the amount of time it takes to get up to lvl 50-60. Overall, it is fairly shallow and currently doesn't have a lot to entice past that point. All of this should be coming soon however. Whether it fufills its promise or not, I don't know. The biggest current issue with WoW is how it morphs as you go through the game from a casual, easy, fun game to a more difficult, time extensive game where you may sit LFG for a while if you are the wrong class.
Now, I am not saying that EQ2 is any better, especially since I have so very little experience in it. My impressions are like this: If these were first person shooters, WoW would be Unreal tournament death match. It is wonderful looking (if alien), fast paced and a blast. EQ2 would be a campaign of half life. More realistic, more involving, slower paced but more connection with the character. |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Sturme
Seasoned Member
|
| Post subject: Posted: Tue Nov 30, 2004 10:42 pm |
|
|
| Quote: |
| The chat box interface is locked in place and size, though the fonts can be cahnged. You cant have two (or more) chat boxes. |
Yes, this is incorrect...
| Quote: |
Every class brings something to the table and thus every class is useful.
While true in theory, there is really only one class that can tank (warrior), one class that can crowd control (mage), and one shared class that can heal and rez (priest). Shamen can heal and rez but they are horde only and druids can't rez (don't even mention pallies as healer, please). |
Near release, Druids got rezzes and Paladins got more effective in general... Other than that yeah, it is a little limitting, although until 30 I've had no problems levelling with some friends with no tank...
| Quote: |
EverQuest II: At every level, your character will acquire new skills
I can't tell you how anti-climactic it is to get a new level and not get a new skill as in WoW. IMO WoW really has 25 levels as the odd levels are really non-events unless they give you the talent point you need to get that cool new ability.
|
Anticlimactic yes... But I find getting abilities every .8 levels in EQ2 distracting and annoying, especially since by the end of the game I potentially could have to look forward to 4 hotbutton banks clogging my screen... I've always felt that going overboard with giving characters too many abilities with not enough complexity in the content for it to be used is a major gameplay flaw, and an often made one, especially on console games... Making a class with 8-12 class abilities should be just fine - the main focus should be a variety of encounters for them to be used in and in creative new ways... This is one of the few things I like a lot more about EQ1 than EQ2... Out of the 30ish abilities my character may have, I end up using maybe 15 in an average night, and my hotbutton banks have long since been overcrowded with numerous abilities I never need and have stuck forever on bank 1 or 2...
I just hope SoE doesn't go the EQ1 route and making up dumb reasons to have certain things later on (like the lovely AEs in Anguish in EQ1 where you need Alcohol Tolerance)...
So far, I have yet to really hear a review of either game that I have completely agreed or disagreed with... I enjoy both, play both, have qualms about both, and take no prisoners with the companies when they totally screw things up... But so far, the reviews as far as the most important things - gameplay and long-lasting interest - have been completely diametric going both ways... One person says WoW is incredibly deep and EQ2 is bland and repetitious, someone else says WoW is shallow and EQ2 has more character interaction... I basically believe now that it's so completely academic at this point in both games' lives and utterly based on what kinds of gameplay people prefer when they step up to the plate that it's not even worth arguing about anymore...
There is no clear winner because both games have gameplay that clearly appeals to very different tastes on such small levels that while having the same target market they manage to garner completely identical yet opposing personal opinions... It seems to me really that this means both games allow for an incredible amount of variety depending on what the player brings to the game themselves, and really, I think that probably means both games must be doing their jobs and doing it well... |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|
|
Forum Index
FAQ
Search
Usergroups
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
