More EQ2 bashing. Is it just me…?

Something I ran across today while browsing around some blogs. This just floored me. I mean I read it and had to re-read it to make sure the comment was about EQ2 like I thought it was.

By Jason, a comment left on The Server is Down,

“Like many other folks out there…I am sort of a MMO “whore”, for lack of a better word. I have played them all and most to max level and some raiding. I have to honestly say I think EQ2 offers the most complete package. From lore to looks it has the most and does it very well.”

So we know Jason has played a lot of MMOs; how do you see stuff like WoW, LoTRO, DDO, EVE, even random stuff like SoTNW, and end up saying EQ2 offers the most in terms of looks? I mean seriously now, how does that happen? Put EQ2 and LoTRO screens next to each other, and you are going to honestly tell me EQ2 looks better? No matter what setting you have them at, LoTRO will look better, even with LoTRO turned down and EQ2 at max I’m not sure even then EQ2 looks better. I really must be missing something here. Maybe EQ2 looks really good on a small monitor or something, or on some odd screen size that fits it just right… something… like I said, this just shocked me.

About SynCaine

Former hardcore raider turned casual gamer.
This entry was posted in DDO, EQ2, EVE Online, Lord of the Rings Online, World of Warcraft. Bookmark the permalink.

18 Responses to More EQ2 bashing. Is it just me…?

  1. Nigh says:

    I couldn’t agree more. It’s not the 3d engine but the artistic quality that I really found poor in comparison when I tried out EQ2. Icons, textures, models, nothing was up to the same standards that WoW or LOTRO have.

  2. Keen says:

    Personally I think some parts of EQ2 look better than LOTRO and the same can be said for some parts of LOTRO looking better than some parts of EQ2. The art styles are apples and oranges. You can compare them only to a certain extent and have a preference of one style over the other but you really can’t say one is “better” than the other.

  3. syncaine says:

    Keen what part of EQ2 looks better than LoTRO?

    As for apples to oranges, I don’t think thats exactly true. Both games are in a fantasy setting, with somewhat standard elves/dwarves and such. Both go closer to the realism approach than WoW does, which is why I did not compare EQ2 to WoW. Compare the skeleton mobs in LoTRO vs the ones in EQ2, or even the starting armor on a character in EQ2 and one in LoTRO.

    Or how about this for a comparison, the auto-attack icon between EQ2 and WoW. The one in EQ2 looks like something from the early 90s, and it’s sad that the ‘effect’ to know it’s on is the little shadow around the edge, which at 1900×1200 is almost impossible to see. Compare that to WoW’s icon of your currently equipped weapon, with an animated glow effect when its on. Just no comparison.

  4. rulez says:

    WoW and LotRO both look cheap compared to EQ2. The cheap look emphasises mostly in the character models and animation and spell effects.

    LotRO has some nice looks concerning backround and environment (sky, atmosphere, landscape, etc.). But as soon as you look to where you spend most of the time (combat), WoW and LotRO are way behind of EQ2.

    At least LotRO has some basic *working* shadows, a field where both WoW and EQ2 should be whacked so hard until they get the point LOL.

    LotRO is graphically superiour to WoW but still behind EQ2 in the long term (when you really play it for a couple of weeks and don’t just compare screenshots LOL), in the non landscale spheres (models, animation, spell effects, combat etc.)


  5. rulez says:

    Oh and I play all these games including EVE, SWG and GW on a 24′ widescreen in color :P

  6. AverageJoe says:

    You can look as good as you want, but content must follow a cosmetically attractive game. Have the best 3D engine and it’s crap without a great team behind it working on all cylinders to make it come together. Quests, Storylines, difficulty, support, etc… Just because something looks amazing, doesn’t necessarily make it “look good”.

    Just my opinion. Enjoyed the thread so far.

  7. mantees says:

    I have to say that I agree with rulez. And I would like also to add my two cents about quantity of things to see.
    In most MMORPG out there the world is made of repeated “tiles”. EQ2 is the only MMORPG full of uniques buildings, monuments etc.
    Sure in some games you have an unique tower here or there, but in EQ2 you have hundreds, or probably thousands of art pieces that can only be found in a specific spot and are not repeated anywhere else. EQ2 is explorers paradise.

  8. syncaine says:

    Rulez, so you are saying the character models are better in EQ2 than LoTRO? I mean I’m sorry, but I just don’t see it, especially once you throw armor and weapons into the mix. Ignoring the style differences, just going by things like hair, eyes, muscle structure, all of these things I think LoTRO slaughters EQ2. I think what really irks me here is I don’t even think its close, which is why this topic is of such great interest to me.

    I will give EQ2 credit for the animations, I think they are great. The head tracking, the attack animations, all great.

    Spell effects I think are a wash. If we compare them to truly great graphic games, like Oblivion, MMO’s fall far short. If we compare EQ2 spell effects to that of WoW or LoTRO, I don’t know, nothing really shocking for any game. I would say they are serviceable, although each has example of both great and weak effects.

    Mantees just to keep the discussion simple, I ignored anything outside of the graphics. It’s an entirely different debate if we want to talk about content, gameplay, etc.

    The exploring is somewhat limited by two factors however. One is the overabundance of mobs. Every step you take in EQ2 is full of mobs, many with long agro ranges. At least in LoTRO it is possible to travel around without bringing a village of mobs down on you. The other factor, and this is perhaps a personal grip, is that EQ2 is zoned, with each zone looking radically different than the one next to it. Zoning back and worth really breaks the illusion of a virtual world, which I think is a key component to enjoying the exploration aspect of a game. Might be just me on that one though.

  9. Talyn says:

    No, it’s not just you. EQ2 seems more like GW in that respect (and though I’m a fan of GW, I don’t mean it as a compliment when talking about EQ2). Or perhaps an old-school FPS where each map was different, rather than the Half-Life style of a continuous environment that has to load each section.

    EQ2 has great character models and animations. As I mentioned in your first EQ2 post though, the mob animations are just downright embarrassing. I’ve only managed to stay interested long enough to complete the noob isle and get into Freeport, a few of its connecting zone like the graveyard but the environmental graphics are just horrid. And bland, but mainly horrid. Combine that with some of the worst claymation mob animations (and mob graphics for that matter) and my own character really looks out of place since he looks and moves so nice and gracefully in a zone (can’t really call this a “world”) where everything else is pixelated claymation.

    Add the most retarded and stupid concept of ranged combat, and other very arcadey gameplay elements and I just can’t stand playing the game. Like I said in my first post on your other thread, EQ2 is a popular game with tons of content. But with such a downright horrible experience for new players, I’m failing to see how or why anyone stuck with it long enough to finally find the new stuff, because so far EQ2 has been turning me off and pushing me away at every turn.

  10. Akely says:

    Which looks better LotRO or EQ2? First one must realize this is OPINION, so there is no true answer. It is a matter of taste.

    I love LotRO’s nature, It looks awesome. I really dislike its lack of reflections on water or shiny surfaces. It really sucks with multiple light-sources and shadowing. (Go into the Hunters cabin and stand in front of the fire and notice the light still dancing on the wall, sans your shadow – you do not even block out the light!

    EQ2 has much better texture and lighting. But the engine is a hog. The engine is also way to CPU dependent, a fact made worse from EQ2’s lack of multithreading support.

    And…. those are my opinions.

  11. Jason says:

    Wow, I posted a quick and simple opinion and imagine my surprise to find it on someone’s blog while crusing posts! Like many have said…what looks better is mostly OPINION. It is like calling someone an idiot for liking Pepsi. That being said, my point was not that EQ2 looks better, but it offers more complete package. This is a sum of its parts, not a clear win in any one part.

    I played LOTRO and it did nothing for me. It has some charm to it, but feels like it rides the LOTR IP. The graphics feel WoW cartoonish to me. I know a lot of people say they love the way it looks…that is cool, that is why there are more than one game.

    Putting the post in context, it was in reply to someone thinking about coming back to EQ2. This is someone that has played…and ejoyed EQ2 before. The game offers a lot more since they last played…so yes I think they would have a great time coming back to EQ2…more so than starting a lot of other MMO’s offered.

  12. Jason says:

    I went back and read some other posts now that I am at home and have more time. Syncaine, I have to agree about EQ2 not feeling like a world. The devs had admitted to this mistake and have made moves to fix it. EoF expansion was the first step and RoK is the next step. Much less zoning and more natural progression to different areas.

    That being said, Vanguard very much feels like a world. But because of is harder to pull off refreshing and new art styles or environments. There seems to be very few “surreal enrionments” in VG.

    Anyway, good discussion. My only big beef about EQ2 is that most the combat is “whack-a-mole”. There is some skill and strategy, but it just isn’t as deep as I would like it to be.

  13. Mike says:

    This is such an old discussion. Everyone has different tastes. i don’t know why you have to stir the pot with this kind of post.

  14. syncaine says:

    Why do I stir the pot… it’s what blogging is all about :)

    Plus, everyone discovers games at different times, and when we do, we comment on them. Just part of blogging really…

  15. Openedge1 says:

    I am from the camp that EQ2 looks better in my opinion…the big difference is..

    The combat animations are kludgy in LOTRO, and in EQ2 more realistic…dodging out of the way, the way a weapon is swung, the animations to cast spells…just all look much better to me..

    Also, the character models look kinda dopey in LOTRO…and really…if you have the right machine, performance is better in EQ2 also…I had too many issues with LOTRO hitching and stuttering, and is the only game that does this on my system…quite telling…

    I left LOTRO 3 months ago, and have been playing EQ2 for 2…and the experience just feels more rewarding…to me!

  16. Fever says:

    the day SoE get the WoW engine licensed and convert the EQ2 to it
    is the day that SoE makes 10 million /year from EQ2

  17. Phenoum says:

    @ fever – ROFLMAO…… i really dont know what to say….. i thought ppl like you were up for nominations for the Darwin awards…….

  18. Fre[s says:

    Lotro has great terrain graphics. Combat animations look quite stiff, and unnatural. Both EQ2 and AoC have better ones, with AoC the clear winner.

    Spell animations in EQ and EQ2 have always amazed me. I find Lotro’s to be rather uninspiring.

    What really bothers me about Lotro however, are the really goofy/nerdy clothing textures for males. In most cases guys just look like gaylords unless they’re wearing heavy armor.

Comments are closed.