Why should I choose VG over EQ2?

[AnomalousSilence]

I am having a terrible time deciding between the two.

EQ2 has diverse races... VG races all look the EXACT same (even though EQ2 is switching to a same skeletal system like VG)
EQ2 has mediocre classes... VG classes are unique
EQ2 has beautiful graphics... VG has decent graphics unless you have a mega monster computer (even then I think EQ2's are better)
EQ2 has a lot of interesting lore... VG has a little lore that is somewhat interesting
EQ2 has an OK world... VG has an amazing world where you can see for long distances and go wherever you want
EQ2 combat is faster... VG combat is slower
EQ2 doesn't have flying mounts... VG does SMILEY:P

Meh, I could go on and on, but... *shrug*

What are some reasons I should choose Vanguard over EverQuest II? I can't decide for the life of me. X_x

Something I also really need to know...

Are there "little things" in VG?

EQ2, for example...

As a troll, a rat in the city will follow you.
There's ghostly voices in the sewers.
A group of birds will fly if you are near them.
If you are climbing a wall, and don't move for a bit, your character gets a cramp and moves their arm to shake it off.
NPC emotes when you talk to them.

Those are just a few I can think of; are there these really neat little things in VG?

VG pwns EQ2 in character customization... but races look the same minus skin color and a new head glued on. Even tails for animal races wouldn't make a difference. EQ2 is switching to a uni-skeletal system, and keeping their races the way they are. Frogloks will still be bents, etc. The new PC Sarnak with the new expansion uses the human skeleton, and you never would have guessed it. Anyone know what the technical differences are between the two skeletal systems?

*sigh* I remember when I was such a huge vanboi. What happened? Gah.

Anywho, thanks all for the help! *huggles all* ^_^

[MagicNumbers]

Who cares

[Brikk]

Video games are not an either/or decision unless you have money problems. Play them both and then decide. You shouldn't ask people what 'you' should play. Do you ask people what 'you' should wear, eat, drive?

[rhagz]

Video games are not an either/or decision unless you have money problems. Play them both and then decide. You shouldn't ask people what 'you' should play.

Maybe not a money problem, but a time problem. Most people find it difficult to devote themselves to 2 involved MMOGs at once and still have a job/family/etc.

Do you ask people what 'you' should wear, eat, drive?

All the time. Do you never read reviews of cars? Never ask a friend who owns one what the pros and cons of it are? Never asked someone what they thought of a certain resteraunt? Never asked someone how this shirt looks on you or do these jeans make my butt look big?


To the OP, I'd say EQ2. It's more stable, more fleshed out and more populated.

[Grizzlebeard]

Play FFXI.

[Brikk]

Maybe not a money problem, but a time problem. Most people find it difficult to devote themselves to 2 involved MMOGs at once and still have a job/family/etc.

Quite aware of this, I chose to play two games at a time. Some MMO type and then some FPS type. It takes me all of about 3 days to decide if I like a game or not. If I feel like I have to make myself play it then I don't play it.


All the time. Do you never read reviews of cars? Never ask a friend who owns one what the pros and cons of it are? Never asked someone what they thought of a certain resteraunt? Never asked someone how this shirt looks on you or do these jeans make my butt look big?

No I don't. I just bought a new car last week because I liked it. If I would of asked other people they probably would of told me not to buy it since it gets 14 MPG. Clothes and restaurants I try myself before making a decision. In fact I'll give a place 3 chances before I either ban it or decide to eat there again.

So again, try things out yourself unless you know 100% that you wouldn't like something... for example I know I wouldn't like a MiniVan so you will never see me test driving one of these.

[rhagz]

No I don't.

Just like playing VG, part of a very tiny minority. Good for you. So if you don't have any advice to offer the OP then don't post!

Still have to say EQ2 if you have the only 2 options, otherwise there are plenty of other better options. FFXI was an interesting suggestion and there is always WoW or EVE or LotRO or one of the upcoming games like TR and HG:L.

[Brikk]

Just like playing VG, part of a very tiny minority. Good for you. So if you don't have any advice to offer the OP then don't post!

I gave him advice, play them both and then decide. Or I guess he could not play either and just post on message forums about not playing.

[Whatthe]

EQ2 is the safer investment of your time, and much less frustrating to play.

[AsheMan]

Having played both, EQ2 is the way to go. (I don't play either currently so that's not a factor in my advice)

[trouser03]

I'm in the same boat as you OP. I've been in Vanguard since beta 3 and have stuck with it playing at a very slow pace. My highest toon is lvl 27. I recently got the mail from SOE that was inviting me back to EQ2 with free download of the expansions i was missing.

Here are my feelings after playing EQ2 again for a few days and my pro's and cons for VG

First thing that jumps out at me is that EQ2 is a much more pollished and profesionally done. I'd equate it almost like a Hollywood produced movie vs a well done B movie. Or should i say a "potentially" well done B movie that was realease too eary. The ironic part is i'm pretty sure VG cost more to make, being only second to WoW.

The lore in EQ2 is 1000 times better but it has the advantage of having a back story. It's a lot of little things that make EQ2 feel more ... alive i guess. The voice overs, the lore, the activity in the towns, i like the music better (although VG's is nice too). The only problem i've run into in going back was that i did not want to go back through the Antonica/Freeport leveling paths. I started a toon in a newer area (Kelethin) and am having trouble finding where to go at my level (12) that is still in the newer area.

Ok VG Pros (IMO):
1. Large Open World and great WORLD graphics. Although a little more
variation would be nice
2. Good armor and wep graphics
3. Horses at low lvls, Boats (which i guess are token items now) flying
mounts (one of these days)
4. Newer game so you don't feel as far behind
5. and my personla favorite ... the train wreck factor. I'm just curious to see if this train wreck can be salvaged and where they take it. Also being in game to be a part of it could be fun (or most likely a big waste of time).
6. Classes: I've played a Cleric, Necro, Ranger, and Dread Knight. All of them were fun and pretty unique and with the cool armor and weopons they are just fun to advance and outfit.
7. Community. This is a pro and con too in a way. The VG community seems very active and vocal, the /ooc channel is always moving, while in my short return to EQ2 it seemed quiet. There are more people around though in EQ2. The only negative i've noticed about the VG community is if anyone complains in /ooc or mentions that something is too hard/difficult/time consuming you get a lot of "go back to Wow". That bothers me becuase VG needs more players.

VG Cons:
1: My biggest con is i guess the lack on confidence in the people/resources behind it. They are still playing catch up as far as i'm concerned getting the game to a point where it should have been at release. I doubt there is much thought going into plans way down the road and i fear things will just be kind of done on the fly without too much thought or imagination.

2: Performance. This is actually a pro and con for me as it has gotten quite a bit better. The hitching is quite annoying though. As far as pure FPS i actually get higher numbers in VG than EQ2 and VG is more detailed/complex.

3: Character graphics/animation: They are ok actually, but i find EQ2's much better and love the animations in EQ2. Textures are better in VG though.

4: Quests: I'm not a big of the task quests in any of the modern MMO's. I find it easier to read the text (or listen) in EQ2 as it ties in with the lore very well. A lot of quests in VG give some nice rewards but some can be quite "grindy"

5. Spell graphics are pretty poor, almost unnoticable.


I think i've personally decided to stay with Vanguard as i'm just too far behind in EQ2 and i have not been too affected by bugs as some people seem to be. That and i'm just curious to see where it goes. Then again, there is always the station pass which i might consider as my play style is very slow and don't feel the need to rush through content.

[Muggi]

Having played eq2 for 2 years and VG for roughly 1 (with Beta and Live), I'd say eq2.

VG does have some really amazing elements but..as I read someone post once, VG seems an awful lot like they built this big beautiful world and forgot to put the game in it.

eq2 or WoW are sure bets. Both good games with good enough graphics, interesting storylines, dungeons and a "full" world. That's one thing you'll find in a lot of areas in VG..they're great to look at, but there's absolutely no reason to be there.

EDIT: and raiding.

[Puffy]

Quite aware of this, I chose to play two games at a time. Some MMO type and then some FPS type. It takes me all of about 3 days to decide if I like a game or not. If I feel like I have to make myself play it then I don't play it.



No I don't. I just bought a new car last week because I liked it. If I would of asked other people they probably would of told me not to buy it since it gets 14 MPG. Clothes and restaurants I try myself before making a decision. In fact I'll give a place 3 chances before I either ban it or decide to eat there again.

So again, try things out yourself unless you know 100% that you wouldn't like something... for example I know I wouldn't like a MiniVan so you will never see me test driving one of these.


Dude, you need to get some friends.

[shadowrelm]

to the OP,

EQ2 is way more polished right now than Vanguard. from the small things to the big things.
vanguard is probably half the size with no where near the content. everything from the voices you mentioned to NPCs in the city, to armor quests, to mounts, everything.

Vanguard has more defined classes i thnk. they are certainly more interesting. the necromancer for instance, who wants a bug for a pet when you can have a really really cool monster?

Vanguard has better classes IMO, and a more plesant world to play in. but that is where it stops. EQ2 is better at every thing else. as far as how long a fight takes, they are the same. the game play is the same too IMO.

Vanguard might be better than EQ2 someday, but not today. not this year. probably not next year either. and untill SOE gets off this "group only" content kick they have been on since EQ1, neither one will ever have a very populated world like WoW does.

if its about the world and classes, go with Vanguard. if its about a more complete and finnished game, its EQ2 hands down.

the game play in both is almost identical. begging for groups to finnish quests that almost never happen, but happen more frequently in EQ2, or grinding levels to get to the top for whatever reason you feel you need to get to the top.

class+world vs finished game with all the bells and whistles.

[AnomalousSilence]

Thanks to the couple or so helpful posts! ^_^

What about the "little things" that I mentioned about EQ2; are there neat "little things" in VG?

[VoiceOfReason]

to the OP,

EQ2 is way more polished right now than Vanguard. from the small things to the big things.
vanguard is probably half the size with no where near the content. everything from the voices you mentioned to NPCs in the city, to armor quests, to mounts, everything.

Vanguard has more defined classes i thnk. they are certainly more interesting. the necromancer for instance, who wants a bug for a pet when you can have a really really cool monster?

Vanguard has better classes IMO, and a more plesant world to play in. but that is where it stops. EQ2 is better at every thing else. as far as how long a fight takes, they are the same. the game play is the same too IMO.

Vanguard might be better than EQ2 someday, but not today. not this year. probably not next year either. and untill SOE gets off this "group only" content kick they have been on since EQ1, neither one will ever have a very populated world like WoW does.

if its about the world and classes, go with Vanguard. if its about a more complete and finnished game, its EQ2 hands down.

the game play in both is almost identical. begging for groups to finnish quests that almost never happen, but happen more frequently in EQ2, or grinding levels to get to the top for whatever reason you feel you need to get to the top.

class+world vs finished game with all the bells and whistles.

Very well said.

[trouser03]

Ahh one more pro for VG and something that might qualify as a "cool little thing" is that you can cast or shoot an arrow while moving, you do slow down a bit. I found it annoying in EQ2 after being used to VG.

[gamer88]

[QUOTE=AnomalousSilence;322063]I am having a terrible time deciding between the two.

EQ2 has diverse races... VG races all look the EXACT same (even though EQ2 is switching to a same skeletal system like VG)
EQ2 has mediocre classes... VG classes are unique
EQ2 has beautiful graphics... VG has decent graphics unless you have a mega monster computer (even then I think EQ2's are better)
EQ2 has a lot of interesting lore... VG has a little lore that is somewhat interesting
EQ2 has an OK world... VG has an amazing world where you can see for long distances and go wherever you want
EQ2 combat is faster... VG combat is slower
EQ2 doesn't have flying mounts... VG does SMILEY:P

Meh, I could go on and on, but... *shrug*

What are some reasons I should choose Vanguard over EverQuest II? I can't decide for the life of me. X_x

Ugh come on. That isn't even eq2. I played that game for hell since it started. And the damn thing crashed hourly.

Now as I still don't know about this game completely in its current state this is the main reasons.

Eq2 the classes are the same, the same. Brawlers, scouts, mages, healers, they're all dmg dealers. Even the damn wardens who are main group healers have been revamped into ass kicking melee dmg dealers.

The last time I played this every class has its use. Well almost every. Some really sucked.

eq2 population. That equals a crap load of level 70's or 60's Take a stroll in ant, ts, nek, cl's, el, zek, LS, EF, their all dead or near it. The main population is up there waiting daily for the next expansion to hit 80 which they're doing now I believe. So unless your in a guild, and even in a guild, have fun lfg for hours while soloing because the entire game is solo based except for raiding, and some dungeons.

Now granted vanguard didn't have that many people either since the old crew just ****ed the game up. But at least their was grouping for quests. Quests really meant something to. Not just ok lets solo names, and heroics and level up and get uber gear.

heh and combat systems. eq2 say hello to your best friend named resist.

Anyway eq2 equals a wow tried recreate. It is solo no matter how you look at it. Classes, same. Content, same. Level after level, the same. Crafting, well crafting sucks considering treasured is either the better or the same as anything a crafter can make in that game

Vanguard or at least VG as it was the last I played it. The mobs could fight back, some could kick your ass, the content was their, the classes all had their own useage, leveling means something as you can't just gear up at some level and go "oh ya im ready to rape everything. And crafting means something as well. You can make boats, gear, damn near everything that is needed. Mounts, flying mounts, everything is earned not well we just got 100 plat lets take this level 10 char here and pimp em out. Best steed, best fabled gear, house, everything.

eq2 is easy, vanguard was more difficult. It wasn't hard, but it took at least some type of a thought of using any type of brainpower to concentrate on it.

So you want an easy game or if your just a really casual player looking to solo and achieve stuff and make progress in a pretty game eq2. If you want something more difficult to occupy time vanguard.

[lomiller]

I’m a little biased because I think EQ2 is the best fantasy MMO on the market at the moment. Vanguard is still a troubled game and that goes below the surface stuff like bugs, performance, etc. IMO Vangaurd has never really established an identity.

For example EQ2 has established itself as a middle ground between casual and more hardcore play with outstanding lore and quest content it’s achieved a fairly good level of polish. Even though it has some very good solo content it’s definitely a group game where the best lore and quests is only accessible via groups & raids but it makes it viable to accomplish things within the timeframes a casual player can meet. Unlike WoW it maintains this character throughout. I.E. it doesn’t switch from a solo super-causal game to a hardcore raid&grind game the second you hit max level. Clearly, even though EQ2 is clear successor to Everquest lore wise, it’s not a true successor in the style of game. It’s aimed at people who like the world of Norath but didn’t really like some of the mechanics in Everquest.

Vanguard was supposed to recapture some of that EQ1 style, but it’s never really managed to do it. Part of this is certainly due to the changing landscape in MMOs. Millions of new players who have never played anything but WoW don’t quite understand why it’s important for making accomplishments hard come by, and it doesn’t help when the rewards for hard come by accomplishments seem meh. Many other players though the negative aspects of the EQ1 style outweighed the positive, even they the frequently felt other games were missing that certain something and couldn’t identify what it was.

This is just another example of the bad management decisions that plagued Vanguard from the start. They didn’t understand who their market was, didn’t understand that it was more or less an niche market, at least until they could get the game running and allow people to see it in action. Finally of course they completely failed to execute and waffled on the style.

EQ2 is easy, it’s a know quantity, it has found its identity, if that identity suits you then play it. Vanguard is tougher because it’s still working on technical issues and even though it’s primary appeal was initially as a hardcore EQ1 style game is that even something it’s remaining subscribers want. For me at least, this makes it tough to say to people “Vanguard is the game for you”, but if you are already playing and liking Vanguard this isn’t an issue.

If you are playing Vanguard and having fun there is your reason for choosing Vanguard over EQ2. If you are not and the EQ2 style suits you there is your reason for playing EQ2. If neither of the above is true then you are best looking for something else and not trying to impose your tastes on either game.

[slayde]

ok wait a second brotha... Let me clarify something real quick. The combat in EQ2 is NOT faster than VG's,,not even by a longshot. I've played EQ2 at release for 4 months,,then again for a couple months during the summer, and VG from Beta 2 until May of this year. VG's solo combat fights + group combat fights are definitely faster than EQ2 solo battles + group battles.

I'd be playing EQ2 right now If they took out the silly melee combat animations along with the absurd combat wheel. VG's combat system is much better, faster, realistic, and more conveniently fun than EQ2.. Thats reason alone to try VG out.

[AnomalousSilence]

Thanks for the awesome post, lomiller! :)

Basically, I want a fun game where things aren't easy but not "OMG KILL URSELF" hardcore. I want to group 70-80% of the time but I love soloing too, and I love exploring.

And I especially want a game with...

D
E
P
T
H

.

[shadowrelm]

Vanguard was supposed to recapture some of that EQ1 style, but it’s never really managed to do it.
------------------------------------------------------------

here is where you miss the mark. they DID capture it, but the gamming community has long since moved on. EQ1 was basically a game designed from the ground up for a small group of adventureres. a concept made popular by the D&D game. it focused on team work, class interdependancy, and a carrot on a string to keep you moving foward.....levels and loot.

Vanguard NAILED it. so did D&D online and SWG and EQ2 also when they launched.

guess what? most gamers dont want to group. and even the ones that do still prefer to solo more than half the time. even in EQ1, SOE was constantly trying to nerf abilitiies to stop people from soloing and play the game as intended. where do you think kiting first started, and more importantly, WHY is started?

even in the origonal game, most players would rather solo. so much so, some would buy 2,3 or more accounts so they could SOLO their own group. they STILL DO.
---------------------------------------------------------------

you want top group 70 to 80 percent of the time. well, i dont care what game you play, EQ1, EQ2, SWG, Vanguard, WoW, any of them, if you dedicate yourself to grouping 70 to 80 percent of your playtime, you will be spending 50 to 60 percent of your playtime begging for a group that rarely happens. in ANY game. EQ2 and Vanguard included. even people in GROUPING games DONT GROUP.

and any game is as hard or as easy as you want it to be. for instance, you can grind green con mobs, well below your level, all the way to level 75 if you want, or you can fight higher level mobs for more challenge. even in WoW, take your level 30 toon and go into a level 34 dungon and you will feel just like you are playing EQ2 or EQ1.

the biggest differance in all the games is, WoW will let you take the easy path and still allow you to advance at a decent rate where as, EQ1 and EQ2 will significantly reduce your advancement if you dont fight more chellenging mobs. in other words, the rest will punnish you for not taking the hard path, and WoW will reward you no matter what path you choose to take.

there is little to no grouping in EQ2. there is little to no grouping in Vanguard. there is little to no grouping in WoW. and not because there isnt plenty of people in any of them to group with, but because even the people playing grouping games prefer not to group.

grouping is dead.

dont hate the messenger. just pointing out the obvious. dont have to take my word for it either. buy EQ2 and play it. and no matter how little grouping you experience there, Vanguard is worse. EQ1 is worse. just remember that much.

so, more powergamer, more casual, its all bullsheit. there are a hoste of games that are very unsolo friendly, and there is WoW. that is why they have 9 million subscribers and all the resy combines have less than 10 percent that number.

ANY game can be as hard or as easy as you want it to be. only WoW rewards you no matter what you do.

EQ2 is by far a better game right now than Vanguard. even though i think Vanguard does have better developed classes and a more enjoyable world to play in. your not going to group much in either if them though. good luck with that.

[lomiller]

Thanks for the awesome post, lomiller! :)

Basically, I want a fun game where things aren't easy but not "OMG KILL URSELF" hardcore. I want to group 70-80% of the time but I love soloing too, and I love exploring.



.

Thx. But I guess there is some things I should add. The best content and best way to level is certainly to group but a lot of the established player base has already progress passed a lot of the content. Since there is a total (not per server) cap on characters it can sometimes be hard to find people at lower levels. Picking the right server and finding the right guild/friends and having the required social and group finding/making skills is essential.

ok wait a second brotha... Let me clarify something real quick. The combat in EQ2 is NOT faster than VG's,,not even by a longshot. I've played EQ2 at release for 4 months,,then again for a couple months during the summer, and VG from Beta 2 until May of this year. VG's solo combat fights + group combat fights are definitely faster than EQ2 solo battles + group battles.

I'd be playing EQ2 right now If they took out the silly melee combat animations along with the absurd combat wheel. VG's combat system is much better, faster, realistic, and more conveniently fun than EQ2.. Thats reason alone to try VG out.

My guess is you simply haven’t played EQ2 long enough to see how fast the combat really is. It isn’t as bad at lower levels where people tend not waste money on spell/equipment (except on PvP servers) but once you reach the higher levels it’s ridiculous.

When I do solo writs with my Wizard in EQ2 every second fight is literally a 1-hit kill, the mob doesn’t even get to enter combat before it dies. If I’m grouped with skilled players it’s basically a mad rush to get a nuke off before the mob is dead. This hectic pace is nice once and a while, it’s far too prevalent for my liking.

[gamer88]

Vanguard was supposed to recapture some of that EQ1 style, but it’s never really managed to do it.
------------------------------------------------------------


there is little to no grouping in EQ2. there is little to no grouping in Vanguard. there is little to no grouping in WoW. and not because there isnt plenty of people in any of them to group with, but because even the people playing grouping games prefer not to group.

grouping is dead.

dont hate the messenger. just pointing out the obvious. dont have to take my word for it either. buy EQ2 and play it. and no matter how little grouping you experience there, Vanguard is worse. EQ1 is worse. just remember that much.



haha true. Why group when you can 2 box it or solo. Main reason why I still play ffxi. you can try as hard as you might, become a god in gear, their isnt a chance in hell your gonna take that IT mob and live, or at least not spend less than a half an hour hacking at it. They make you need groups for anything. mwahaha

[lomiller]

Vanguard was supposed to recapture some of that EQ1 style, but it’s never really managed to do it.
------------------------------------------------------------

here is where you miss the mark. they DID capture it, but the gamming community has long since moved on. EQ1 was basically a game designed from the ground up for a small group of adventureres. a concept made popular by the D&D game. it focused on team work, class interdependancy, and a carrot on a string to keep you moving foward.....levels and loot.

Vanguard NAILED it. so did D&D online and SWG and EQ2 also when they launched.

guess what? most gamers dont want to group. and even the ones that do still prefer to solo more than half the time. even in EQ1, SOE was constantly trying to nerf abilitiies to stop people from soloing and play the game as intended. where do you think kiting first started, and more importantly, WHY is started?

even in the origonal game, most players would rather solo. so much so, some would buy 2,3 or more accounts so they could SOLO their own group. they STILL DO.


No it really didn’t. First of all you are flat out wrong about grouping being dead. Most people go where the rewards are, and play the way that’s “most efficient”. If it’s “more efficient” to solo that’s what most will do, if it’s “more efficient” to group then that’s what they will do. Yes the time it takes to find a group plays into this but at the end of the day, if it’s more efficient to spend that time getting a group people will do it.

For example, consider City of Heroes, it was one of the first games to readily embrace solo play, and has better support for it then any game I can think of. Despite this, *everyone* groups. If you are solo and don't go anon you will be spammed with random group invites even when you are not looking. This is because groups are much more efficient then soloing.

Second, there are big “features” that are often disliked in EQ1 that are a major factor in why it was fun. One key one was the amount of downtime. Downtime gives you a chance to socialize, something you don’t have nearly the same opportunity to do in today’s games. It’s also what ultimately builds the friendship bonds that keeps a game fun over long periods of time. It's one of the key places where Vanguard diverged from EQ1 game play IMO.

Third, while I agree people set their own difficulty to some degree, they are more likely to set their own efficiency. I.E. they do easy content because it’s the most effective way to get the things they want. In EQ1 for the most part easy content was ok for xp but you also needed loot, and that required you to do things that were more time consuming or difficult.

In many games this is inverted, I.E. the best way to get rewards of any type are to cherry pick the easy stuff, and while I haven’t played recently IMO this is just as true of Vanguard. (In large part due to a general lack of distinctive, powerful and difficult to obtain rewards)

[AnomalousSilence]

I am NOT a SOE-hater. I generally like SOE. However, I worry about VG with SOE having full control. I am worried it is going to change into a completely different game (or fail all together). And those 7+ years of expansion Brad had planned? I was so excited... will SOE still do this?

I don't know. I guess I'm afraid.

And over a MMORPG. Shows how much a nerd I am. :P

[Jordan Jax]

Vanguard was supposed to recapture some of that EQ1 style, but it’s never really managed to do it.
------------------------------------------------------------

here is where you miss the mark. they DID capture it, but the gamming community has long since moved on. EQ1 was basically a game designed from the ground up for a small group of adventureres. a concept made popular by the D&D game. it focused on team work, class interdependancy, and a carrot on a string to keep you moving foward.....levels and loot.

Vanguard NAILED it. so did D&D online and SWG and EQ2 also when they launched.

guess what? most gamers dont want to group. and even the ones that do still prefer to solo more than half the time. even in EQ1, SOE was constantly trying to nerf abilitiies to stop people from soloing and play the game as intended. where do you think kiting first started, and more importantly, WHY is started?

even in the origonal game, most players would rather solo. so much so, some would buy 2,3 or more accounts so they could SOLO their own group. they STILL DO.
---------------------------------------------------------------

you want top group 70 to 80 percent of the time. well, i dont care what game you play, EQ1, EQ2, SWG, Vanguard, WoW, any of them, if you dedicate yourself to grouping 70 to 80 percent of your playtime, you will be spending 50 to 60 percent of your playtime begging for a group that rarely happens. in ANY game. EQ2 and Vanguard included. even people in GROUPING games DONT GROUP.

and any game is as hard or as easy as you want it to be. for instance, you can grind green con mobs, well below your level, all the way to level 75 if you want, or you can fight higher level mobs for more challenge. even in WoW, take your level 30 toon and go into a level 34 dungon and you will feel just like you are playing EQ2 or EQ1.

the biggest differance in all the games is, WoW will let you take the easy path and still allow you to advance at a decent rate where as, EQ1 and EQ2 will significantly reduce your advancement if you dont fight more chellenging mobs. in other words, the rest will punnish you for not taking the hard path, and WoW will reward you no matter what path you choose to take.

there is little to no grouping in EQ2. there is little to no grouping in Vanguard. there is little to no grouping in WoW. and not because there isnt plenty of people in any of them to group with, but because even the people playing grouping games prefer not to group.

grouping is dead.

dont hate the messenger. just pointing out the obvious. dont have to take my word for it either. buy EQ2 and play it. and no matter how little grouping you experience there, Vanguard is worse. EQ1 is worse. just remember that much.

so, more powergamer, more casual, its all bullsheit. there are a hoste of games that are very unsolo friendly, and there is WoW. that is why they have 9 million subscribers and all the resy combines have less than 10 percent that number.

ANY game can be as hard or as easy as you want it to be. only WoW rewards you no matter what you do.

EQ2 is by far a better game right now than Vanguard. even though i think Vanguard does have better developed classes and a more enjoyable world to play in. your not going to group much in either if them though. good luck with that.


You just broke the all-time internet record for the highest number of posts by one poster to make the exact same point.

And you get a bonus prize for that one point being wrong.

[Spirit]

You just broke the all-time internet record for the highest number of posts by one poster to make the exact same point.

And you get a bonus prize for that one point being wrong.

He has

wii want to play
grouping is dead
WoW lets you
9 million players

all hotkeyed.

[QforQ]

I'd choose EQ2. Its got a brighter future, from all accounts a better, more polished, finished game...and its been getting a lot of great reviews/comments lately.

[MagicNumbers]

I am NOT a SOE-hater. I generally like SOE. However, I worry about VG with SOE having full control. I am worried it is going to change into a completely different game (or fail all together). And those 7+ years of expansion Brad had planned? I was so excited... will SOE still do this?

I don't know. I guess I'm afraid.

And over a MMORPG. Shows how much a nerd I am. :P

I wouldn't kid yourself. SOE saved VG from disappearing completely.

[gamer88]

oh hell either or isn't a god send. soe screwed eq2 itself by not even having a poster in a gaming store for advertisement. Vangaurd ****ed itself by being 1 of the cheapest dam penny pinching management for an mmo i've ever seen.

So why choose? Heres the answer. Choose whichever game you like to play. If your playing a game because someone tells you to, what the hell is the sense in playing it.

[dwarfman420]

To OP:

Sounds like you like EQII more then Vanguard but you wish to play VG an not miss out if it becomes a hit.

For this I'd suggest a station pass an play either depending on which you feel like when you log on.

[AnomalousSilence]

I think my problem is that I think VG should "survive" but I am afraid that it won't. SOE cut the team to a mere 14-18, and there's... what... 80 or 90k subscribers?

[Caldis]

I think my problem is that I think VG should "survive" but I am afraid that it won't. SOE cut the team to a mere 14-18, and there's... what... 80 or 90k subscribers?

Not a chance. There's somewhere between 20 and 40 k subscribers. Based on the who all counts I've heard ranging between 1500 and 2000 at prime time, they estimate 25% on during that time, multiple by 4 servers and there you go.

They admitted the game had 250 k sold boxes at release and that they dropped to around 90k subscribers in about a month. AT that time the servers felt more populated and there were 13 of them.

[Arkwyn]

Hard to say really. EQ2 was utter garbage when it launched, much like Vanguard. EQ2 was more ready for release but it lacked content at all levels and it ran like crap. On the highest performance settings, everything looked like play-do, or old polygons that make the N64 look amazing. At least highest performance on VG you can still make out the faces of the player models.

EQ2 has come a long way though and is much more polished. It wasn't until the Echoes of Faydwer expansion that it really started going the right direction. So right now, EQ2 is doing quite well, and the latest expansion is looking really good. Though, they still have the problem where the old content and older expansions are bad. But that's just my opinion.

Vanguard is on recovery, just like EQ2 was. Though Vanguard launched with 3 times as many bugs as EQ2, it had 3 times the content up to the high 30's. It slowed down in the 40's but they eventually pushed out some more content to dig your teeth in to for a while. but it still needs more, and it lacks raiding.

Speaking of raiding, EQ2 had some raiding when it launched, but it was utter %&@!. It picked up alot though with Kingdom of Sky expansion, and form what I hear now, it's doing great in that area. Vanguard is about to introduce it's first raiding dungeon. From what the testers are saying, it's amazing and a whole different game.

EQ2 currently has more direct lore. It better for being a sequel to one of the best MMO's to date. Vanguard has lore, but it's currently hidden through Diplomacy, which I might add is a nice addition to MMOs to do when you can't find a group. It's a card game and is a lot of fun. EQ2 hits you in the face with the lore, so you don't miss out on it. It's not top-notch imo, since some of it doesn't make sense compared to EQ1 lore, but it's good enough.

Combat goes hands down to Vanguard. Vanguard has two features that I just love. Move while casting, and dual targetting ( Offensive target and Defensive target). I go to play other MMO's and I feel so restricted and I don't want to play any games without those features.

Also, speaking of restrictions, I feel more restricted when i play EQ2 than VG. There's alot fo stupid things that hold you back in EQ2, such as, almost everything in the game is locked to you or your group. No one outside can help you. And when you are engaged, your movement speed buffs are nulled until combat is over. Plus the in-combat running animations make me feel like I , well, I just do not have much freedom in moving. I quit right before EoF expansion, so this may have changed. Vanguard has alot more freedom than EQ2. And a much more beautiful world.

My recommendation, is to try them both and see what you like. Station Pass is great for that. But if you must choose, then choose EQ2. It's more polished and is already kicking. Vanguard has a good future, and I say this because the latest patch did amazing things for performance and the rumors of how great raiding is.

So play EQ2 now, if you must choose one. If you can, try them both. Or try Vanguard when they have their relaunch.

[Arkwyn]

Oh, and one more thing, anyone who says EQ2 has better graphics is crazy. Just look at this panoramic screenshot (http://img181.imageshack.us/img181/7559/tehatamanijd3.jpg) that was taken by a VG player the Egyptian themed area. Freaking amazing! You won't find anything like that in EQ2.

[Brikk]

oh hell either or isn't a god send. soe screwed eq2 itself by not even having a poster in a gaming store for advertisement. Vangaurd ****ed itself by being 1 of the cheapest dam penny pinching management for an mmo i've ever seen.

So why choose? Heres the answer. Choose whichever game you like to play. If your playing a game because someone tells you to, what the hell is the sense in playing it.

That was entertaining to read. It made little to no sense but it was entertaining nonetheless.

[ShadeVice]

You should play both. Spend 1 week on VG then 1 week on EQ2.

EQ2 is a more polished game. Also has a lot more subs then VG which means more stable development.

If I had to choose without playing either first?

EQ2.

[AsheMan]

... and there's... what... 80 or 90k subscribers?

They haven't seen 80-90k subscribers since the second month of release.

[gamer88]

lol thats true if theres even 20 they're doing a good job of hiding.

And I saw the full screen shot of that in the tech forums. Freaking awesome shot

[Cobalty2004]

My 2cp, is wait for Age of Conan. EQ2 sux and so does Vanguard.

[Joodah]

My 2cp, is wait for Age of Conan. EQ2 sux and so does Vanguard.


It's going to be a laugh riot when it turns out that game isn't the second coming of jesus either. :D

[AsheMan]

It's going to be a laugh riot when it turns out that game isn't the second coming of jesus either. :D

You're right and that's why I'm keeping all my expectations low from now on. I totally learned that lesson with Vanguard.

[Joodah]

You're right and that's why I'm keeping all my expectations low from now on. I totally learned that lesson with Vanguard.


hopefully everyone has, sort of what Diakatana did for fps' :D

[carmineluper]

Lets see here, first off I think they are both great games eq2 and VG that is.

VG is less polished, but more vast. Spell graphics are imo- pretty horrid, some are done well, but others are just plain.

I would choose eq2, over Vg at the moment, and I pre-ordered ruins of kunark, simply because it gives me a month free as well as all the expansions for just 39$.... which is a great deal.

For future games I am looking into both Warhammer online as well as AOC. I have been in beta for warhammer, so I know what that will be like, pretty awsome heh, as for AOC, I am not in that beta so I don't know what is in store for that game, I hear it is pretty awsome from one of my friends though.

[MagicNumbers]

Lets see here, first off I think they are both great games eq2 and VG that is.

VG is less polished, but more vast. Spell graphics are imo- pretty horrid, some are done well, but others are just plain.

I would choose eq2, over Vg at the moment, and I pre-ordered ruins of kunark, simply because it gives me a month free as well as all the expansions for just 39$.... which is a great deal.

For future games I am looking into both Warhammer online as well as AOC. I have been in beta for warhammer, so I know what that will be like, pretty awsome heh, as for AOC, I am not in that beta so I don't know what is in store for that game, I hear it is pretty awsome from one of my friends though.

Most of the reviews on FoH have said that warhammer is terrible which is why they closed down beta until december or so.

[Gecon]

No idea, I dont know EQ2.


EQ2 has diverse races... VG races all look the EXACT same (even though EQ2 is switching to a same skeletal system like VG)

Thats obviously wrong.


EQ2 has mediocre classes... VG classes are unique

Again, cant say anything about EQ2. VG has currently 15 classes, and some more through subclassing. I think the classes of VG are a strong point; they are complex and challenging and allow for a lot of different tactics.


EQ2 has beautiful graphics... VG has decent graphics unless you have a mega monster computer (even then I think EQ2's are better)

I dont have any unfulfilled wishes in respect to VGs graphics.


EQ2 has a lot of interesting lore... VG has a little lore that is somewhat interesting

No idea. Vanguards lore is only available to people who do diplomacy. The others are somewhat excluded from its lore.


EQ2 has an OK world... VG has an amazing world where you can see for long distances and go wherever you want

Which is why I consider Vanguards graphics perfect.


EQ2 combat is faster... VG combat is slower

Now what would that mean.


EQ2 doesn't have flying mounts... VG does SMILEY:P

Not permanent ones, yet, nope.

[Jaon]

Why choose ? I play both ; as someone said in another post it is not that expensive, a movie lasts less than 2 hours and cost almost as much.
For that price I can play VG for hours and enjoy my little sorcerer. and I can also raid in EQ2 with my wizard, and it is really fine having both games.
EQ2 : RAIDS, we will soon kill the stupid dragoooon in EH (sorry, we are only a good casual guild, not uber at all, but not so bad...) And new quests, new levels, new places incoming in 2 weeks (let's say 4).
VG : I harvest (dunno why but I find it relaxing) I solo (not much, boring for me, I train to AE kiting just for the fun of it) I group (when I find people) I will soon (when 50) explore dungeons where I never could go (no group) .. hehe I really enjoyed when a guy told me 2 days ago that I knew my job pretty well ... better to hear than contrary, right ? no one in my EQ2 guild will tell that (NO, it is not because I suck, it is because we all are used to each other).