Become a fan of Slashdot on Facebook

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
×
Role Playing (Games) PC Games (Games)

Everquest 2 Launches 305

Though it's being drowned out by the Halo 2 news, Everquest 2 officially launches today. RPG Vault has a review available for perusal, GamerFeed has a hands on look, and if you're looking for crunchy, low fat coverage Gamespy has an interview with Heather Graham about her role in the game. If you're already tripping the light fantastic in Qeynos check out GamerGod's Qeynos Quest feature, or just cut out the middle man and look forward to the first content on Allakhazam. Finally, F13 provides usefully cynical commentary about the beta and launch of the game.
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Everquest 2 Launches

Comments Filter:
  • by rogabean ( 741411 ) on Monday November 08, 2004 @07:21PM (#10760781)
    Let me warn most of you who were not in the Beta that this game is far from ready. They rushed it to market to beat out WoW.

    I've been telling most people to wait till the beginning of next year to play it after a few patches...

    This live launch will basically be like a "paid beta". Expect to see alot of server downtime for a few months as they fix the things they didn't get to in time to beat WoW.

    On the other hand I just shutdown my EQ1 account after the announcement that despite Beta tester's please they decided to rush it out the door. And decided to not follow through with my preorder of EQ2.

    4 years... time to go see what the outside world looks like I guess.
  • Bugs and Nerfing (Score:3, Interesting)

    by Grendol ( 583881 ) on Monday November 08, 2004 @07:21PM (#10760786)
    I think I will wait till sony has the bugs and all the nerfing worked out for the 'game balance'. But even then I will likely stay with EQ1 as they are supposed to compete against each other as separate business units of SONY. -Zazerzing Wizard 50 seasons, Bertoxxolus
  • by ActionJesus ( 803475 ) on Monday November 08, 2004 @07:25PM (#10760821)
    By a coincedence, Ive been looking at the warcraft game today, dreaming about playing it. Probably dont have the time or money at the moment, but it looks pretty shiny.

    But answer me this: Everquest 2 will, one would assume, appeal to all the EQ addicts already out there. But the EQ addicts are already playing EQ: so whats this trying to achieve? Why should I play this over, say, world of warcraft or city of heros (which ive heard is meant to be excellent)

    I have no doubt that this will be massively popular, but honestly whos the intended audience? Do old EQ players get to transfer their characters over, or is it start again from scratch for all?
  • EQ2 and WoW (Score:5, Interesting)

    by TexVex ( 669445 ) on Monday November 08, 2004 @07:31PM (#10760872)
    I found out last weekend that WoW will run pretty well on my two year old laptop with rather unspectacular video hardware. The integrated video hardware has some 3D accelleration and 32 MB of memory on it. That machine can't run Star Wars Galaxies, and no way will it run EQ2.
  • Get in early (Score:5, Interesting)

    by Solitude ( 30003 ) on Monday November 08, 2004 @07:32PM (#10760900)
    I already warned my future ex-girlfriend that this was coming out. I was there on week one of Everquest. Sold my account 18 months later for $2,250. You gotta get there early to get the good stuff before they turn off the overpowered items drops.
  • Re:To speak freely: (Score:3, Interesting)

    by rogabean ( 741411 ) on Monday November 08, 2004 @07:36PM (#10760926)
    You are 100% right Upaut. The game can not support the players coming. It couldn't support us beta testers. I say Ho's will be off within 5 minutes. Lagtonica down in 2 hours (people gotta find their way there) Commonlands in about 1 hour. Client/Server patch in 3.2 hours that will take about 4 hours to download... (if you are VERY lucky) seriously... what are they thinking? they wanted to beat blizzard to market to capture market share, but this is going to hurt them getting there before blizzard with an unplayable game in its current state. I hope the live players have as much fun in the chat rooms as we did... constantly.
  • no contest for WoW (Score:5, Interesting)

    by sinner0423 ( 687266 ) <sinner0423&gmail,com> on Monday November 08, 2004 @07:46PM (#10761023)
    Sorry.. but World of Warcraft [worldofwarcraft.com] is simply going to destroy EQ2.

    EQ2 only took almost 6 years to be released after the original - way too long, imo. I hear it isn't ready, and they rushed it to compete with WoW. Sony is probably nervous.. and for a good reason.

    Blizzard is poised to win big with this game. They've had HUGE success with Warcraft, an extensive fanbase, and the MMO really does immerse you. I was part of the limited beta(s) and it's been quite a trip.

    The graphical stylings of WoW (and the sheer attention to detail) really make it a contender. Sorry to come across sounding like a fanboy, I probably won't play due to the fact that i'm broke and i've got other things [halflife2.net] on my plate. But if I had the time & money, i'd be on my troll shaman right now.

    I urge any MMO fan to give Blizzard's new project a shot, it's worth your cash. Oh, and play on Sargeras, cause I said so.
  • Pfft. (Score:3, Interesting)

    by oGMo ( 379 ) on Monday November 08, 2004 @08:10PM (#10761216)
    I've been playing FFXI since the US PS2 release, and it's very solid. Very solid economy, connections, etc. The only real issue I can remember is the report of people having trouble connecting during an update, and that was supposedly fixed. Of course you have the occasional lag-disconnect, or lag in areas with a lot of action, but that's the nature of the network.
  • by Ironica ( 124657 ) <pixel@bo o n d o c k.org> on Monday November 08, 2004 @08:13PM (#10761242) Journal
    But answer me this: Everquest 2 will, one would assume, appeal to all the EQ addicts already out there. But the EQ addicts are already playing EQ: so whats this trying to achieve? Why should I play this over, say, world of warcraft or city of heros (which ive heard is meant to be excellent)

    EQ was amazing when it came out, but the code is just way too kluged together for it to ever be "modernized" sufficiently to compete against newer games. Since they had to rebuild from the ground up anyway, they decided to make it a whole new game (it's at a different time point in the EQ universe), so that hard-core addicts would have to subscribe to *both* games.

    That being said, SOE doesn't seem to have learned anything whatsoever from all their long experience, so even though I have 2.5 years in Norrath under my belt, I have no interest at all in EQ2.

    I'm chomping at the bit for WoW, though... when my husband started playing the beta back in April or so, it was *already* closer to release-ready than SWG was when I quit playing several months after release.
  • by Tobias Luetke ( 707936 ) on Monday November 08, 2004 @09:13PM (#10761695)
    The way people compare EQ2 with WOW is flattering to EQ all by itself.

    I can understand that many people don't realize blizzard for what it is. Blizzard is a game developers DREAM.

    Everyone in the industry dreams of working for blizzard, they employ the best artists the best game designers and some of the best programmers. Next to id, valve, bungee and bioware they have the unique position of taking any amount of time they like for their games. Every single of their games so far already payed for its development in pre orders, publishers will not mess with this track record.

    Blizzard South decided to make an MMO game and from day one It was clear that this game will be remarkable. What they delivered is not only a excellent game but it is also embarrasses the other contenders in this genre with its. There is no way that this game wouldn't have been on the shelf half a year ago if it would have come from any other developer, instead they kept it in beta till it fulfilled the "blizzard vision" of the perfect MMO.

    Check out their trackrecord :

    http://www.gamerankings.com/itemrankings/simpler at ings.asp?companyid=361&sort=0
  • Re:Slashdot usage (Score:3, Interesting)

    by DarkSarin ( 651985 ) on Monday November 08, 2004 @10:01PM (#10762064) Homepage Journal
    No, I would rather they drop the price to $25, and the subscription to a measly $5/month. I can hack $5. I can usually convince my wife that $5/mo is an acceptable amount.

    That said, I won't be purchasing everquest 2, just like I didn't purchase everquest 1. When I am finally out of grad school, have disposable income, and am NOT worried about spending too little time with my kids and wife, THEN I will consider games that require a monthly fee. At that point, my kids will want to play them too, and I'll have to monitor the content of the games as well (I self-monitor as well--I figure if they shouldn't play it, then I shouldn't either (this has limits, but to a certain point, it is a good philosophy, especially as kids move into teen years)).

    To those who decry parental censorship--buzz off. It is within my rights, and necessary to a large extent. Good parenting would solve a lot of problems in this world!
  • by VanillaBabies ( 829417 ) on Monday November 08, 2004 @10:54PM (#10762405)
    I'm pretty sure the "role" from Role Playing Game falls under one of the following:
    role

    n 1: the actions and activities assigned to or required or expected of a person or group; "the function of a teacher"; "the government must do its part"; "play its role" [syn: function, office, part]

    2: an actor's portrayal of someone in a play; "she played the part of Desdemona" [syn: character, theatrical role, part, persona]

    3: what something is used for; "the function of an auger is to bore holes"; "ballet is beautiful but what use is it?" [syn: function, purpose, use]

    4: normal or customary activity of a person in a particular social setting; "what is your role on the team?"

  • by Anonymous Coward on Monday November 08, 2004 @10:58PM (#10762443)
    I ordered two copies of the Collector's Edition (one for me, one for spouse) from Sony at $90 a pop and paid for next day delivery.

    Not only will I be getting it after the folks at EB Games (which is okay), but I probably won't be getting it tomorrow, either. And probably not even Wednesday. As far as I can tell, Sony haven't shipped it yet. All they can offer me is an email address to apply for a refund on the shipping charges.

    What a nice way to treat your loyal customer base, Sony!

    I'd like to cancel the order right now, but they won't let me.
  • by Taliseian ( 827973 ) on Tuesday November 09, 2004 @02:04AM (#10763499)
    I've had a chance to play both EQ2 and WoW.

    IMHO EQ2, while it still has some bugs in it, is a good overall game.

    SoE made alot of interesting decisions this time around.

    First off, the graphic engine is designed to be flexible and able to be upgraded as time and new developments in video come along. They say that EQ2 will still look top of the line in five years.

    Secondly, the game itself is supposed to be able to scale up to Level 200 (only the first 50 levels are in now, and more will be added as expansions are made). This gives them a chance to really expand the mobs, gear, and abilities if they really have thought that far out. EQLive has just reached Level 70 with its latest expanion "Omens of War", and it just seems like a serious case of mudflation in the type and amount of items that are coming off of "yard trash" (ie the common mobs that spawn all over the zone).

    Every Online Game can and should be considered a "Paid Beta", since from Day One they will be patching, fixing exploits (no team of beta testers, even fanbois, will find every exploit -- they will come), adding new features and features that should of really been there at launch but were put on the back burner, and more content (quests, mobs, zones, etc) which may or may not break code somewhere else and will need even more patching.

    EQ2 is not perfect, but I'm looking forward to their overall story arc.

    When I had a chance to beta test WoW, I was impressed with what Blizzard has done. I was never a real-time strat game fan, but I have played some Warcraft and I enjoyed Diablo I and II. I know that Blizzard can write a good story and does have a long history of good games as well as support (both patches and new content) that is second to none outside of the Online Game Industry.

    WoW has gone a completely different way with its graphics. It went for more of a cartoony look than EQ2, and it is a freshing change of pace. The graphics are sharp and clean as well as being able to perform well on older machines.

    The play is just what you would expect from any MMORPG -- make character, get quests (can be optional), fight mobs, loot mobs, get more powerful. But WoW makes it alot easier to find out who has quests for you -- there is a glowing question mark above their heads. I find it nice to be able to see who has quests as compared to having to talk to every NPC in the zone to find them.

    Both games will appeal to a different crowd. To those who are long time fans of Warcraft, while WoW may not scratch the itch of RTS'ing, it will keep them in the story line and I can see tie-ins to new Warcraft games easily coming out of WoW. EQ2 has alot more depth in my opinion. It was made for those who really want to explore a world and delve deeper into its mysteries. I really feel that it was designed for the long haul and will not really come into its own until further down the road when the major story arcs start to play out. But even until then it will be an interesting experience.

    T
  • by Alban ( 86010 ) on Tuesday November 09, 2004 @04:57AM (#10764086)
    Well, I work in the games industry (for a company that has a few AAA titles), and while I respect blizzard (I actually have a friend who works there), not every developer wants to spend 5 years on a single game. Their games are always super polished though, so the extra time does pay off.

    As for id, yes they have some really impressive talent, but again, 4 years for a game like doom 3, well...

    Bungee is totally awesome though. Although not everyone likes their games (well almost everyone does!), they do deliver them in a timely fashion! Halo was an exception but it's understandable since they changed target platforms a few times and were acquired in the process.

    Except for a MMO, no project should take longer than 3 years.

    You forgot to mention Naughty Dog by the way. These guys are incredible. Again, you may not like platformers, but the technology for Jak and Daxter + the game itself were developed in 3 years. And many many sony 2nd party games have been using that engine. Naughty Dog is probably one of the best (if not the best) north american console studios.

2.4 statute miles of surgical tubing at Yale U. = 1 I.V.League

Working...