Everquest 2 high end system verses WoW high end system..

[mczern]

When I played EQ2 it ran fine on my machine, I could run it with 4xaa and 8xaf no problem even at release. The only time I ever saw my FPS drop was near the fighter/caster guild in FP the first week of release when there was easily 100+ people standing around, but once you turn down the ammount of high quality models there were it ran really great.

[ChrisRay]

Server overhead, and whatnot should not be anymore CPU demanding then any other MMO guys, they all (MMO's) have heavy overhead when it comes to all the stuff egbtmagus mentioned. It's more likely that EQ2 has a ****ty T&L implementation and far to much geometry is being procesed on the CPU rather then GPU as it should be, they may have done this so it scales "Better" with slower video cards, but they dident do us high end folks any favors, thats for sure. And EQ1 ALWAYS ran better then EQ2. Im not expecting to run the game at max details and settings, never was. I can't get what I consider exceptable performance out of "Balenced" with water set to fast update and shadows off. For a long time in EQ1 I was forced to use the old models. But the game still ran well enough. When I first got EQ1 in 99 I was on a Celeron 300a @464 with a TNT1. The game performed great in comparison to EQ2 at the time. I dident start having problems until Kunark, at which point I got a Celeron 566@935 and a Voodoo 2. This also ran the game quite well up until Luclin when I got a 1.4 Ghz Thunderbird and Geforce 2. etc etc.. Your comparison is invalid, EQ'2s not doing somthing right, obviously when it comes to Geometry, it should not require the CPU load it does, somthing's not being offloaded like it should be.

Regards,
Mike

You really have no understanding of how MMORPGs are programmed do you?? WoW does the exact same thing that EQ 2 does when it comes to rendering polygons. For the longest time WoW engine synced its texturing with the CPU as well. Everquest 1 did the exact same thing until last year as well. They finally implemented true geometry assist with the DX 9.0 update.

Only for powergamers. Casual players enjoy the fact that they are rewarded for their time investment. I can't imagine how anyone could enjoy a game that they put over a hundred hours into and have only reached level 10, but maybe that's just me.


This is not how EQ 2 is at all. There are level 50's in EQ 2 as well as level 60's in WoW. There are actually plenty of them as well. EQ 2's level 20's are comparable to WoW higher level 30's and the 40's are comparable to low 30's high 20's on EQ 2.

I have been playing EQ 2 a whole week and I started over a new server. I am a already a level 21 monk and I only have played 3-4 hours a day. Thats also including a a reroll of a charactor at level 13 because I was un satisfied with the charactor customization. As a matter of fact. Everquest 2 vitality system is far more forgiving than WoW's rest system. 9 hours offline will give you 50% level vitality. This is because EQ 2's vitality system just gives you double experience to a certain point in your level. WoW's rest system gives you a percentage of rest experience based upon your current level. So It actually makes sense to play different toons and build up vitality in EQ 2 verses WoW.

Neither of these games are problem free. And they both have some problems which can really hinder your enjoyment of the game.

[Elderblaze]

Chris, please don't insult my inteligence, im sure you sir, have a degree in computer science eh? This is the end of my response to this thread. We will have to respectfully agree to disagree. But keep this in mind, when Vanguard comes out with 2x the performance looking better, i'll grin and say "Told you so". Unreal> EQ2 crap tech.

Regards,
Mike

[ChrisRay]

I dont need a technical degree in science to understand what I am talking about. You havent offered any rebuttal other than. "OMG EQ IS TEH SUCK" which really doesnt leave you a leg to walk on. Half the comments you utter are issues which "I" discovered and posted here and over at the EQ 2 forums. Then you twists those discoveries around to a completely false and inaccurate portrayal of the situation. I have gone out of my way to help people with the EQ 2 engine in the past. I have been in contact with some key elements regarding the game and I have a pretty good understanding of when and how this game is limited.

[|MaguS|]

Chris, please don't insult my inteligence, im sure you sir, have a degree in computer science eh? This is the end of my response to this thread. We will have to respectfully agree to disagree. But keep this in mind, when Vanguard comes out with 2x the performance looking better, i'll grin and say "Told you so". Unreal> EQ2 crap tech.

Regards,
Mike

I have a BA in CS...

[pingu2]

I have a PhD in EQ! :afro2:

[Sgt_Pitt]

im actually glad 1.5 million people are over at WoW, thats 1.5 million less tards to deal with in Eq2 :D

[Tyr-Sog]

im actually glad 1.5 million people are over at WoW, thats 1.5 million less tards to deal with in Eq2 :D


oh and trust me, "tards" is actually a complement. :D

[ChrisRay]

It just depends the servers you play on IMO. I played on a role play server in WoW and now am playing on a RP server in EQ 2 again. IMO it vastly improves the quality of players. I am actually moving my SK and Defiler over to a RP server on EQ 2 very soon.

[Severian126]

I'm currently playing both WoW and EQ2 and both games are pretty good. I've been on WoW since it's release and have a few high lvled characters to sate my pvp cravings. I just picked up EQ 2 days ago and am trying it out. Currently I'm a lvl 4 High Elven mage who has repeatedly gotten his ass kicked in the Isle of Refuge a few gazillion times. :) Anyway, I just wanted to throw in my 2 cents on this whole WoW vs. EQ 2 frome a *technical standpoint*. Understand I have very little knowledge of computer programming and the intricacies of the technicale workings of MMORPGs. I love both games, but from what I see, EQ 2's graphics, while good, does not justify the insane system specs required to enjoy this game in all its glory. I love the game, but I find it amusing when I looked in my box again and pulled out an ad sheet saying how the game is better played with NVIDIA cards. From what I read in this thread, this seems like an outright lie as the performance I'm getting off my 6800 Ultra (on a P4 3.4 with 2 Ghz of ram) is pretty dismal at best and comparable to my older PC running a 9800 pro.

I see some of you defending this game from a gameplay standpoint, and that's cool, because I'm in that boat as well. I like the game (for all 2 days I've been playing it off and on), but it's pretty annoying that I have to work really hard to adjust the game's graphic to have a decent frame-rate. So far, the game is a walking slide-show and it's a shame, because the game does have some beautiful graphics. From what I see, I think Sony did a pretty poor job when designing this game (and that's an opinion of someone who has a Masters in the field of Finance rather rather than a computer science degree, so it probably doesn't account for much...). Sure, the game is very CPU bound, but like I mentioned before, it's a shame that the graphics, although pretty, does not justify the amount of money required in the future to get some decent performance. And to top it off, Sony should not advertise that the game will run better on NVIDIA based card. It sure doesn't for me :D If this seems like a rag on EQ 2 as a whole, it's not - I'm just griping on how the developers went about creating the game's graphic engine, because all things considered, it isn't very inefficient. At least make the game much prettier and more colorful if the system requirement is going to be *that* steep. I know some of you have the advantage over others in terms of PC prowess, but understand that many who playes these games do not. WoW ay not be as graphically intensive (though it does look better overall, in my opinion, because of the insance art style and use of color), but it "clicks" with many people I guess. It's just sad that a few people might be turned off by EQ due to its technical demands, and it's not fair as EQ is a very good game (case in point: I've already tried getting some of my buddies on, but they don't have the rig for it, and even if they do get the game, the settings they will have to play at will make the game FAR worse than any other MMORPG out there). EQ just demands way too much from a technical standpoint - and buying said company's video card doesn't sate that demand. :(

OK, I just wanted to vent some frustration I'm having with this game's performance. I'm going back to playing the game in the setting below the defualt "Balanced" (forgot the name, heh) and try to turn my mage into something respectable. :P

Hopefully Sony will implement a patch to fix all this. *crosses fingers* I'm tired of playing with no shadows and no foliage.

[gameangel91]

From the following site and statistic showed,you may tell which game is popular among players.
http://www.alexa.com/data/details/traffic_details?q=&url=www.mmosite.com :)

[carkis]

DDO isn't even live and it has more hits than EQ2. I couldn't say much with those stats.

[Arioch]

WoW looks great in stereo 3-D - too bad I am burned out on the game now.

[angshuman]

FWIW Guild Wars runs on my A64 3000+, 6600GT system at a more or less steady 60+ fps at 1280x1024 with 4xAA, even in towns. And it looks Gorgeous. I haven't tried any other MMORPGs, so I wouldn't know about them. Guild Wars, though, simply amazes me. It is probably the most *polished* game I have ever seen.

[|MaguS|]

GW isn't a MMORPG first off so the amount of people on screen is limited (You will never have 200+ poeple on screen at once, I hit 400+ people in a single zone in EQ1), as for how good it looks. its graphics as simplistic compared to even EQ1s current state. The models lack any close detail and are blocky when upclose, the world is barren and so are the towns.

[angshuman]

I woundn't argue with the 200+ people point, it's probably perfectly valid. For the purposes of this post, I will ignore this factor. If this factor is the sole reason for EQ2's higher *graphical* demands, then I have nothing more to say. Incidentally, I did mention that my GW framerate holds up even in towns (typically ~5-20 *visible* people on-screen per frame, I'd say, with maybe upto ~50 people in town total).

As far as high-polygon count is concerned, I don't care. To me, GW looks gorgeous AND runs extremely well on my hardware. A game that has very high detail but does not run well does not interest me. I have not played EQ2, but judging from the screenshots, it was nothing out-of-the-world. It may have more detail at its highest quality settings, but if that means I would have to play at 15 fps, then sorry, that's a no-deal.

Since you seem to have played both these games, could you answer the following question: EQ2 is supposed to have a very "scalable" engine. Let's say I lower EQ2's quality/poly settings to a level such that you can play it at 60 fps on a 6600GT with ~5-20 characters visible on screen at an instant. Would the game look as good as GW does? If yes, I rest my case.

If not, this is what I have to say: Stating that your highest quality setting can only be handled by future hardware (which is what EQ2 does) is a classic case of selling a bug as a feature. This simply means that you did not put enough effort into optimizing your engine for current and near-past hardware. If this optimization implies reduction in polygon count, so be it. However, if this reduction in poly count results in your game looking horrible, then you have to find other ways to make the game look pleasing.

I have nothing against EQ2. Like I said, I haven't even played the game. For all I know, the engine may be exceptional. That dreaded highest-quality setting may just provide unnecessary detail levels. Maybe the game looks gorgeous even at playable quality settings. If it does, that's awesome. That's what every game should be like.

[ChrisRay]

If not, this is what I have to say: Stating that your highest quality setting can only be handled by future hardware (which is what EQ2 does) is a classic case of selling a bug as a feature. This simply means that you did not put enough effort into optimizing your engine for current and near-past hardware. If this optimization implies reduction in polygon count, so be it. However, if this reduction in poly count results in your game looking horrible, then you have to find other ways to make the game look pleasing.


A Bug as a feature? What on earth are you talking about? I have Both Guild Wars and EQ 2. And the difference between the two are not even comparable. EQ 2 is loaded with normal maps. So its texture quality is tied in with the capabilities the shader core. This is easily seen by turning down complex shader distance and watch your texture detail die. Everything in guild wars is flat (IE a texture). This tends to be made up for by the fact the textures are fairly detailed.

In EQ 2 the normal maps give greater quality the textures and enviromental details. You can run the game at Quality Textures with normal maps/lighting turned off and the game wont look as good. But the actual game wont look bad either. Just turn off complex shader distance and keep textures at high. As texture performance is not the bottleneck in EQ 2. Other than possible texture video memory footprint. Which is alleviated by other bottlenecks such as geometry skinning anyway.

The problem with EQ 2 is you simply cant reduce polygon count significantly. Not to terrain and nearby areas. You can do minor adjustments to geometry far away. But not significant. The geometry in EQ 2 is very complex paticularly in areas such as docks such as qeynos/north freeport. Besides after all geometry is skinned. Normal maps are applied to textures.

Guild wars Is not even remotely as complex ((or scalable) as the EQ 2 graphic engine. And comparing the 2 engines is really comparing apples to oranges. I think its about time for someone(They know who they are) to queue in and say
EQ 2 sucks because its a SM 1.1 game and data is offloaded to CPU"

EQ 2s biggest problem and most important problem is reducing memory overhead of the game and getting rid of that awful memory leak. The game is scalable towards the future because as I have steadily upgraded my PC over the last 7 months ((4 upgrades so far) The game and performance has improved. EQ 2 looks like crap at the lowest detail settings. But it looks pretty ok at medium detail. And fantastic at moderately high detail. And even better at settings my system cant play.

[|MaguS|]

/sigh

I soooo miss the game (and the original)... seriously... if I didn't have some pride I would go back to playing it but I will not cave in! SOE betrayed me, so they can suck eggs!

EQ2 ran amazing on my setup at high quality settings (with some AA/AF on) so the game is pretty dam well optimized, sure it has problems but every game has issues. I got stuck on geometry in GW and had to reboot the client to get off it.

[angshuman]

EQ 2 looks like crap at the lowest detail settings. But it looks pretty ok at medium detail. And fantastic at moderately high detail. And even better at settings my system cant play.
If that's the case, and the moderately high details are playable on midrange hardware, I don't have any complaints at all :).

[ChrisRay]

If that's the case, and the moderately high details are playable on midrange hardware, I don't have any complaints at all :).

To be honest. Moderately expensive hardware ((GPU wise anyway) runs the game fairly well since the minimums are usually geometry/CPU limitations. So performance was pretty acceptable on my 6600GT (In SLI and not single GPU rendering))

Keep in mind though. The performance isnt great either. But its acceptable.

[Badash]

Everquest 2 runs great for me. 6 months after release this game got really good, I like it now hated it in beta.

[gameangel91]

Why don't u always talk about EQ2?I WISH to get more DDO information.Thank you very much.


Http://www.mmosite.com/

[gameangel91]

Planetwide Games and MMOSITE announces RYL: Path of the Emperor Screenshot contest!
Planetwide Games and MMOSITE would like to challenge you to submit our best screenshot ever! Go dig through your dusty screenshot folder and find that screenshot of you funniest moment, boss kills, rare items, friends, or scenery in RYL and have a chance to win RYL game time and RYL merchandises!
For complete details about the Contest, please visit www.ryl.net or MMOSITE! :angel:

[UDawg]

WoW has one huge flaw in it and its name is Iron Forge. The IF lock up KILLS ME! I wish they could link another AH to spread the population over two areas. Put one in SW by the bank but does Blizzard listen to me? NOOOooooo...

[DaveW]

MMORPGs are bottlenecked by CPU because they have so much more background opperations. They have to calculate all the math during combat, plus locations of objects and characters constantly. Its not like Doom 3 that only needs to calculate 4 things on screen at once, it needs to do 50 or more random objects (wether it be a player running by or another NPC near by) at any given time.


Umm no, in a MMORPG your CPU is not doing the math during combat. Its would be too open to hacking. All your PC does is tell the server "okay, I am attacking this person now". And server goes through all the process of determining when each sword swipe or arrow twang is done, what damage is rolled, how much damage is reduced to armor resistance etc. Your PC basically just sits back and reports the numbers as it gets them from the server. Seeing you char actually swing his sword or shoot an arrow is just mindless graphical effect added on top.

Also, I don't know what EQ2 is like, but with WoW most of the world is static, its all just part of the map. Only a few things like NPCs and player chars actually move, and there is no collision detection on them. E.g. you can't drop a box infront of an NPC and watch him kick it or walk around it. Infact in WoW you can stand infront of an NPC or player and he will just walk straight through you.

There is a network bottleneck when you are in a city with hundreds of players and NPCs around you. The server has to update you with their location several times a second. This is probably why most NPCs in cities don't move. Still, network lag should not affect your framerate. They should be in different threads and independant processes. E.g. in a high load situation you should expect to see characters move in a jerky manner, but you can still rotate your FoV and look around the world with a good framerate.