World of Warcraft boasts to have 2 million paying subscribers as of the end of June 2005. Does any one have recent numbers for EverQuest II? Quick google search only gives the number of 330k active players as of February, which is of course a bit outdated and not directly comparable. -- Itinerant1 8 July 2005 04:24 (UTC)
- Nevermind, found a good resource: http://www.mmogchart.com/ -- Itinerant1 8 July 2005 04:39 (UTC)
- I'm curious how many people actively play and how many servers EQ2 has now. I stopped playing after there first server consolidation.
Sorry MMOGChart is not accurate in the slightest. It has been proven time and again by industry leaders that the webmaster basically pulls numbers out of the air. Still many fans takes these bogus figures as gospel. The only real numbers we have had about EQ II subscriptions has been from the 2007 fanfest which said that at that time EQ II had over 1 million active U.S. subscribers.
Martinj63 22:48, 20 July 2007 (UTC)Martinj63
- Where exactly is this "proof" that the industry leaders claim that the mmogchart.com site is incorrect? In this case, it seems rather odd that EverQuest 2 is said to possess over one million subscribers, yet SoE has consolidated the servers due to a lack of player population. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 198.103.167.20 ( talk) 16:59, August 24, 2007 (UTC)
You mean besides common sense that The Webmaster have no hard numbers, or empirical evidence to base their claims? Unless they have acsess to the developers Billing databases they simply are guessing, this was discussed at last years Fanfaire. Along with how easy it is to portray yourself as a expert on the Internet. Further; the Consolidation happened over two years ago, since then the player population has been steadily growing, if you would bother to read the patch notes they just implemented a patch to help lessen lag in the more crowded city areas. EQ II is actuallysurpassing the initial sales and population projections, keep in mind that before WoW 1 million subscribers equaled a huge sucsess. Martinj63 21:58, 27 August 2007 (UTC) 21:58, 27 August 2007 (UTC)
- I've investigated the website, and it seems as though the individual running it has done his homework in regards to how he obtains his figures, including things such as official corporate data. If there is solid proof that can meet Wikipedia's verifiable policy and demonstrate that the website's owner is indeed lying, by all means please provide it. By the way, I do not play EverQuest 2 myself, so I wouldn't have access to the patch notes. I'm simply interested in clearing up matters, that's all. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 198.103.167.20 ( talk) 22:28, August 27, 2007 (UTC)
I would be interested to know what investigative techniques you used besides reading how he claims to get his numbers, which is pseudo science at best..invention at worst. The you can't prove that I'm lying so I must be telling the truth argument is at best a non-sequitur. In SOE's case he can't use Official corperate data because SOE doesn't publish subscriber numbers. True they have to disclose profit and loss to thier share holders but that is a far cry from we have x many players playing Y game. When in doubt take the company that develops the game numbers over some fan sites speulation.
Martinj63 23:59, 27 August 2007 (UTC)
Anyone want to post all the live update information? :P maybe not even worth it? - -- Kamic A'kota 20:16, 16 December 2005 (UTC)
Does anyone have a source for the recently added paragraph on Gamania's support of EQII terminating? I've looked for a press release or news item from a gaming news site, but can't find anything. I'd like to clean up the grammar of that paragraph (written by a native Mandarin speaker) but I don't feel comfortable doing so until I can get a source. Powers 15:04, 27 March 2006 (UTC)
For those of us that aren't Everquest II players (which, I imagine is a large portion of people visiting the wiki page) - what is the difference between an Adventure pack and Expansion - anyone mind editing in a description?
- There really isn't much difference. Adventure packs are smaller, cheaper, and only available via digital download. They both add new content in the form of zones, items, and quests. -- Onorem 11:43, 16 August 2006 (UTC)
- Adventure Packs add content whereas Expansion Packs add new features as well (such as the climbing surfaces introduced in Desert of Flames, or Achievement system from Kingdom of Sky). —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 64.37.153.190 ( talk • contribs) .
- Thanks for the clarification. Warthog32 21:33, 21 August 2006 (UTC)
The gameplay section reads more like a comparison to Everquest than an introduction of gameplay to general readers. For those people who haven't played either game, shouldn't this section should be reworded as if EQ2 is a standalone game (which it really is?) Perhaps for EQ1 players, a subsection should exist for comparison?
- I have gone trough a lot of the article to make EQ2 itself the basis of the article with comparisons to the original as secondary. Not actually having played EQ2, there is probably mroe that could be done 207.69.137.7 15:19, 7 October 2007 (UTC)
Common usage has EverQuest II as a sequel to EverQuest. It's based in the same world, with the same basic gameplay (kill stuff for XP) and is set at time after the original. Most sources call it a sequel (here's one: [1]). However, Moorgard, when EQ2 was in development, has said "We're not making a sequel; we're making a separate game." [2] I see what he meant, but I don't think that matches with the common usage of the word "sequel". No one suggests that watching The Godfather Part II is in any way a replacement for The Godfather. It's a separate film that continues the story of the original. EQ2 is analogous; "sequel" is thus a perfectly accurate term, Moorgard's attempt at clarification aside. Powers T 15:55, 4 September 2006 (UTC)
Everquest 2 is slated not as a sequal to Everquest as game world is not set purely after Everquest. It has been said that the game world of EQ2 exists in an alternate future, thereby allowing EQ1 to remain active and never hit a lore point where it would hit the start of EQ2. 193.34.100.34 11:09, 20 August 2007 (UTC)
This article was obviously baseed on the way EQ2 played at launch. There have been serious changes that completely invalidate some of the information, such as the Archetype/Class/SubClass heirarchy. When I have the time I will undertake to update this article. I also intend to add a paragraph at the top making more clear the setting in relation to the original EverQuest. Bill W. Smith, Jr. 13:45, 8 October 2006 (UTC)
- Your contributions are welcome. =) Just keep in mind that history is sometimes as important as the current state of the game, and that the Archetype/Class/Subclass hierarchy is still extant, even if characters don't progress down through it anymore. =) Powers T 23:55, 9 October 2006 (UTC)
There is a wiki for EverQuest II, EQ2i. Is it permissable to link game-specific terms to this outside wiki? Transparency Note I am a major contributor to EQ2i. Bill W. Smith, Jr. 14:12, 8 October 2006 (UTC)
- It would probably be best to just link the EQ2 wiki once, in the External Links, rather than link each term. If there are any terms that need defining, they should be defined in the prose of this article. Powers T 23:55, 9 October 2006 (UTC)
I totally redid Race and Artisan Class into tables. I made some minor changes to the colors on the Class table, but VERY soon I will redo this into a more horizontal table. -- Bill W. Smith, Jr. 04:34, 10 October 2006 (UTC)
Ah! I have discovered the proper use of the preview button. Will use it from now on. My apologies for all the extra history log entries. :( -- Bill W. Smith, Jr. 12:32, 10 October 2006 (UTC)
OK, I have finished what I wanted to do for now. After making the race and artisan info into tables, today I reformatted the class table to go horizontal instead of vertical, so it makes the articles less tall and leaves less white space. -- Bill W. Smith, Jr. 23:45, 11 October 2006 (UTC)
I just followed the link from the archived page, and I found it a fairly well done site. Sure, they may not be 100% complete, but then neither is Wikipedia! I vote to restore the link... -- Bill W. Smith, Jr. 16:23, 24 October 2006 (UTC)
Does anyone know how many subscribers EQ2 currently has?
According to eq2census EQ2 currently has 2,166,507 characters. According to MMOGChart current paid EQ2 subscribers is just under 200,000. -- Bill W. Smith, Jr. 20:49, 3 November 2006 (UTC)
It should be noted that MMOGChart isn't very accurate in their numbers, as there is no empirical evidence to base their numbers upon. During the 2007 Fanfest it was stated that EQ II had well over 1 million active U.S. subscribers. My opinion is that unless SOE puts up hard numbers about population it should be considered hearsay. It is a given that fans of other MMORPG's will low-ball the subscription numbers, this is particularly true of the webmaster of MMOGChart as he has been proven to have extreme bias against any SOE product.
Martinj63 22:39, 20 July 2007 (UTC)Martinj63
A recent survey of eq2players.com (the sony player portal for EQ2)1.47m toons based on a sum of all toons by race type (which would include old toons that are still under level 20 and have not been played since the archetype/class/subclass questline updates). The 2.1 number is either way off or their own website is wrong. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 65.249.26.250 ( talk) 21:44, 10 October 2007 (UTC)
The first sentence or so states that EQ2 has vastly updated graphics and gameplay over its predecessor. Surely that's open for argument. Hell, I'd argue, but that isn't the point. Is there any way to argue this that isn't a PoV thing? Methulah 01:37, 3 December 2006 (UTC)
- Gameplay features from the original EverQuest were adapted into use in EverQuest II. "Updated" doesn't necessarily mean "better". Powers T 16:04, 4 December 2006 (UTC)
I removed this section this morning because it appeared to be written based soley on the editor's opinions. A criticisms section might be a good idea to add to the article, but it would need to have some
reliable sources. The deleted text said...
There are some in-game flaws that should be mentioned for those interested in purchasing. One major flaw that just rips you away from all the efforts put into making the game more cinimatic to draw you in, is the continuity between zones (game is made up of several 'zones' you load to and from) You can pass from rich green plains into a dark musky swamp. Ecology is just all wrong.
Another flaw that people don't mention is the tradeskill sub class. Though some might say it was where EQII really differed from EQLIVE it would prove to be nothing more than a button mashing session. You dont exaclty do anything but hit one or two buttons otherwise the game takes full control and leaves you with a linear way to make things.
Also one more thing that really upset most players was the watering down of the game system in which other players interact, in EQLIVE you had the constant difficulty of people trying to take a kill from you and win the loot, or you could be hanging out with buddies and somone will run by with a large amount of monsters running after him, he could do many things here that could cause the monsters chasing him to stop and turn to the inocent bystander. Also the lvling in this game takes about 1/3rd the time it took to level in EQLIVE. Thus making this game look more like WoW (easy to play for children) and less like EQLIVE (More difficulty for the extreme gammer).
If this section is to be readded, please discuss it here first. -- Onorem 11:38, 8 December 2006 (UTC)
- It does sound really biased. -- Sydius 19:37, 8 October 2007 (UTC)
Who the heck linked all the classes in the Class table? This makes little or NO sense, really, unless we are gonna create separate pages here for every class, or a single page with short descriptions of each class in subheadings! I strongly suggest we unlink all the classes! -- Bill W. Smith, Jr. 21:54, 29 December 2006 (UTC)
- I'm not sure why they were added. I removed them since many weren't linking to relevant information. -- Onorem 15:13, 4 January 2007 (UTC)
Hi I was wondering if this article should include that old EQ players could gain an advantage over normal players by leaving Everquest and joining Everquest 2. -- Cazamus 15:00, 4 January 2007 (UTC)
- In what way do you think that EQ1 players gain an advantage? Are there any reliable sources that support that claim? -- Onorem 15:13, 4 January 2007 (UTC)
- In some small ways that may have been true when EQ2 first launched, and for MAYBE a month past that. EQ1 players knew the basics of lore and history, but EQ2 was a totally new game. In fact, I would even go so far as to asy that total noobs had an advantage over EQ1 players because they had nothing to un-learn. -- Bill W. Smith, Jr. 22:17, 4 January 2007 (UTC)
- Well I remember hearing about a transfer account thing, that if an older EQ member signed up for EQ-2, then they recieved a small prize, like a helmet or weapon. Im just curious if anyone thinks that its worth mentioning? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Cazamus ( talk • contribs) 10:48, 12 January 2007 (UTC).
- Now that I'm thinking about it, I seem to recall there was something in the old-old promo material for the game about extra stuff for EQ1 players, from the site in 02/03 - "Subscribers to both games will have 'exclusive cross-over quests zones in each game' allowing them to 'gain access to hidden treasures.' Additional rewards will be announced in the months to come." In the end it didn't make it into the game. The only thing ex-EQ1 players got were a server title that could be claimed (and now that's a three year vet reward anyway). -- Delameko 17:46, 18 March 2007
Where did this pieace of lore came from: "The Ralosian Empire placed a bomb on Norrath to explode it, but through Divine intervention, it was placed on Luclin."? Last time I checked, it was still unclear, what exactly caused Luclin to explode. Besides, this doesn't seem to fit the timeline - how could Rallosian Empire place such bomb, if it lost long before Luclin exploded?
They did not, and I will remove it. As I understand it, the portals on Luclin were destoyed as some part of a mission by one side or the other. This destruction released unstable arcane energies that resulted in the destruction of Luclin. -- Bill W. Smith, Jr. ( talk/ contribs) 19:40, 23 February 2007 (UTC)
- The entire "Story" section is rife with errors, not least of them that it claims a connection between the destruction of the Combine spires and the Shattering of Luclin. I've gotta take an axe to that when I get a chance. Powers T 23:53, 29 April 2007 (UTC)
- The fact of the spires destruction leading to the destruction of Luclin is described in the opening movie that plays when you create a new toon. -- Bill W. Smith, Jr. ( talk/ contribs) 03:56, 30 April 2007 (UTC)
- OK, I just watched that sequence and there was no mention made of the Combine spires being destroyed at all. The Nexus was destroyed (or otherwise rendered useless) about 400 years before EQ2. The Shattering of Luclin was about 15 years before EQ2. Unless the Combine spires were somehow destroyed during or after the Rending (about 100 years before EQ2), I don't see how there could be any connection.
Powers
T 18:42, 1 May 2007 (UTC)
- I misspoke and you are correct, it was the Nexus that was destroyed. It also mentions, IIRC, that many believe that the resulting release of arcane forces tore the moon apart. --
Bill W. Smith, Jr. (
talk/
contribs) 01:21, 2 May 2007 (UTC)
- I thought it might as well, but when I reviewed it, it did not. There may be other available in-game lore that suggests a connection, but as far as I know it's merely speculation. Anyway, it was just an example of the errors present in that section of the article, as well as apparently an apt example of the difficulties in separating actual lore from supposition, rumor, and fan fiction. =) Powers T 18:57, 2 May 2007 (UTC)
- I misspoke and you are correct, it was the Nexus that was destroyed. It also mentions, IIRC, that many believe that the resulting release of arcane forces tore the moon apart. --
Bill W. Smith, Jr. (
talk/
contribs) 01:21, 2 May 2007 (UTC)
- OK, I just watched that sequence and there was no mention made of the Combine spires being destroyed at all. The Nexus was destroyed (or otherwise rendered useless) about 400 years before EQ2. The Shattering of Luclin was about 15 years before EQ2. Unless the Combine spires were somehow destroyed during or after the Rending (about 100 years before EQ2), I don't see how there could be any connection.
Powers
T 18:42, 1 May 2007 (UTC)
It has been a long time since I viewed the opening but I was positive they said it there... I am certain I did NOT just see it in a forum post, so where did I get it? Perhaps it was in one of the in-game books? -- Bill W. Smith, Jr. ( talk/ contribs) 04:47, 3 May 2007 (UTC)
- The only thing I've found is from the Official Lore that came out before the game was released, a set of Twelve Chapters that covered the history between EQ and EQ2. Chapter 11 is about the shattering and a character mentions, when speaking about possible causes, "Others speak of an invasion that happened there long ago and claim this is the result." As you can see, it was only a theory advanced by unknown "others" in the immediate aftermath of the event. To the best of my knowledge, no one on Norrath knows exactly what happened on Luclin or why.
Powers
T 14:31, 6 May 2007 (UTC)
- Link to Chapter 11 (archived at EQ2 Stratics) here: http://eq2.stratics.com/content/lore/lore_tod_chapter11.php Powers T 14:32, 6 May 2007 (UTC)
I was looking at the table and they have changed how classes are distributed since then (on the character creation screen... just not with Achievement) so I updated the table to reflect that. Feel free too change it back if you want to. I also was wondering: Is it better to have the full history of Everquest II's changes (AKA having the article say there were no ports when the game came out but they were added with EOF) or would it be better for people to read if it basically said Ports were added into the game with EOF and leave off all of the stuff from before.
Oh and sorry if any of my other changes were screwy... I will be getting a wikipedia account soon... (If the name Josgar can be made) Josgar 16:46, 28 May 2007 (UTC)
...and merged with the pre-existing eq2.wikia.com that was already there. The lag and other problems so often complained about with the previous hosting service should now be non-existent. -- Bill W. Smith, Jr. ( talk/ contribs) 21:46, 22 July 2007 (UTC)
I noticed that wasn't added to the resources section, should it be?
Martinj63 21:33, 23 July 2007 (UTC)Martinj63
anyone interested in writing something about the new game-card system "Legend of Norrath"? -- LC.Lau 00:49, 31 August 2007 (UTC)
Already created the article feel free to add to it. Martinj63 01:17, 1 September 2007 (UTC)
It's been proposed that we merge the articles for EQ2 expansions into one article. I was wondering where I could discuss and debate this proposal. Cheers. Methulah ( talk) 22:14, 21 November 2007 (UTC)
I think someone should put if you have to pay or not, because I don't Know Jabbafett ( talk) 23:04, 11 December 2007 (UTC)
- From the business section:
- Like the original and other commercial MMORPGs, EQ2 requires a monthly fee (as of October 2007, US$14.99/month) to play the game. A free play period of 30 days are included with the purchase price of the game. Subscribers can opt to pay an additional monthly fee for extended services, such as an online item database or hosting of guild websites.
- Not really too much more to add...unless I misunderstood what you were asking. -- Onorem♠ Dil 00:47, 12 December 2007 (UTC)
Per Wikipedia:External links, we should always be striving to keep the number of external links very low. In service to that, one rule of thumb I've used is to only include web sites that are specific to EverQuest II -- that is, no Allakhazam, no IGN, no TenTonHammer, because they have sites for all major MMOs. This is just a rule of thumb, though; exceptions can certainly be discussed here. Powers T 13:39, 30 January 2008 (UTC)
I feel thats a very poor rule of thumb, rather a quality standard should be set, not just basing on whether it is part of a network or a large site.
58.69.195.242 (
talk) 18:16, 31 January 2008 (UTC)
- That's why it's a rule of thumb. Setting a quality standard isn't easily applicable, and it introduces all sorts of POV and original research concerns. If you have specific objections, feel free to make the case here on the talk page. Powers T 20:05, 31 January 2008 (UTC)
I fail to see why you would not allow links to sites like Allakhazam and TTH, but allow links to wikia, which also supports a multitude of games. ( http://gaming.wikia.com/wiki/Wikia_Gaming) If you allow one you should allow the others. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 206.174.32.82 ( talk) 23:37, 13 July 2008 (UTC)
are there any 3'rd party sources for this 'controversy' over station cash that we can use for a cite? If it really is a controversy then I'd expect that some sites would be covering it and i haven't seen any coverage (granted i don't real too many MMO news sites). I don't think people complaining on a forum is notable enough for a cite, people complain about EVERYTHING on forums and i haven't seen a news story anywhere talking about unhappy players. harlock_jds ( talk) 17:05, 7 January 2009 (UTC)
Isn't the features section too difficult to read, I'm not sure what would be easier either dividing things into different subheadings or perhaps rewriting the whole thing into standard paragraphs. Salle81 ( talk) 04:03, 10 March 2009 (UTC)
The business section reads "Like the original and other commercial MMORPGs, EQ2 requires a monthly fee...". Really?! I suppose for every commercial MMORPG that comes with a monthly subscription fee I could find one that doesn't. If these aren't weasel words trying to imply legitimity for SOE to rip off users, then I don't know what weasel words are... 81.96.127.72 ( talk) 13:08, 28 June 2009 (UTC)
- rip⋅off /ˈrɪpˌɔf, -ˌɒf/ noun Slang. 1. an act or instance of ripping off another or others; a theft, cheat, or swindle. 81.96.127.72 ( talk) 13:31, 28 June 2009 (UTC)
- Er, if a MMORPG does not make a charge, surely it is not a commercial MMORPG? Also, ignoring the non-commercial MMORPGs, most appear to make a monthly charge. Your use of the word rip off suggests that there is a bit of a COI going on here. DiverScout ( talk) 14:11, 28 June 2009 (UTC)
- COI as in conflict of interest? Not at all, I am not affiliated in any way with any game or production/development/distribution company. I simply refuse to buy any game that requires a subscription fee because I consider it a rip-off, or greed at the very least. But beyond my personal tastes and decisions, please bear in mind that games like Guild Wars don't require such a fee. 81.96.127.72 ( talk) 14:17, 28 June 2009 (UTC)
- It's hardly a rip-off to request payment for ongoing services. And regardless of whether you feel it's an unjustified expense or not, that in no way means that stating such in the article is intended to provide cover for said rip-off. All that said, I would have agreed with you if you simply said "it's not necessary to say that most MMORPGs charge a monthly fee". By going further and claiming that it's a weasel-worded attempt to make SOE look better (when most major MMORPGs do charge a monthly fee), you only hurt your own argument. Powers T 14:32, 28 June 2009 (UTC)
- I can assure you from personal experience that in some countries (quite a few actually) the monthly subscription fee for internet access is less than what SOE charges for this game. That is, for ALL the traffic up to several tenths of GB a month, not just access (and data transfer) to/from a gaming server. In some cases you even get extra services (ranging from telephone access, some free TV channels to storage on the provider's servers). Make of it what you wish, but if you think 15 bucks a month is actually a reasonable fee for "ongoing services" (particularly when the said services are used by hundreds of thousands if not millions hence the potential for cost savings), then I'll have to rest my case. It is, after all, the naive, the desperate and the generous that make these companies get away with it, even thrive on it. You're right, there's no question of weasel words, you (or the author) actually believe this is fair, just because it is - allegedy or not - common practice!! 81.96.127.72 ( talk) 17:37, 29 June 2009 (UTC)
- If you think it's a rip-off to pay for access to a game, don't play it. There's nothing unreasonable with charging people to play any more than it would be to charge them to see a movie (which, for someone who plays two hours a day, is thirty times more expensive). And you're not just paying for the costs of running the server, but for the developers to continue updating the game and adding more content. If SOE wants to tell me that the only way I can play EQ2 is to pay them $15 a month, then I'll happily do so since I find the game quite fun. It's their game, so they can do what they want with it, and they're under no obligation to give their work away for free. True, there are MMOs out there that are free, but many of them are either lower quality or require payment for items. PaulGS ( talk) 01:04, 30 June 2009 (UTC)
- If you think Guild Wars is lower quality then you're either biased or deluded. 81.145.166.130 ( talk) 11:37, 30 June 2009 (UTC)
- I think we've established that you have something against SOE and EQ2. I think we've also established that people don't agree with your weasel words accusation. If you want to discuss the merits of various MMORPGs, I'd suggest that there are forums designed for that purpose and that Wikipedia is not the correct place for that debate to take place. DiverScout ( talk) 20:05, 30 June 2009 (UTC)
I have a problem with this paragraph. I don't mean to discount the complaints of the Chinese players, but I'm afraid that the paragraph grants significantly undue weight to the problem. First, we have no reliable sources that state there is actually a problem (the author notes that the sources are in Chinese, but those would be better than none at all). Second, even if there is a problem, is it really worth a whole paragraph? This really doesn't seem to be on anyone's radar, and it's not Wikipedia's place to publicize such things. Powers T 02:29, 19 July 2009 (UTC)
- 1) I acknowledge that few official news agency would report on the connection issues of a computer game. And almost all information only can be retrieved from SOE official support forum and other fun sites.
- 2) So asking for a absolutely "reliable" source is in itself an unbalanced game. But please consider point 3) and 4).
- 3) Google "EQ2 41780", which contains even no Chinese keyword, the results of the first page are almost all related to this issue, with half of them in Chinese (half in Chinese suggests this is mainly an issue for Chinese players, even if you cannot read Chinese).
- 4) Check the links to the SOE official support forum again. Note that they're there to support a commercial game, for which the quality and speed of their response is of crucial importance. But for this issue, in multiple threads, SOE choose not to answer this question. Why? You can speculate and know it but not say it loud.
- 5) I think for most of you people there, to be sure, the only way is to get a friend who you personally know and happened to be in China to have a test?
- 6) I accept 3rd party to modify my paragraph, but at least some fact (like in point 3 and 4?) should be kept.
- Hiker Hauk ( talk) 11:38, 20 July 2009 (UTC)
- Your items 3) and 4) would constitute original research; we need someone else to undertake that research and publish it so that we can report on it. Powers T 13:34, 20 July 2009 (UTC)
- Reading the first post on a Google search for "EQ2 41780" shows a user "sharing" an account, who then reveals that they have access to additional accounts. These are violations of the terms of use for EQ2, and also suggests to me like the person may actually be a plat farmer/leveller. Could this be a block being used by SoE to close suspect accounts? This argument is then included in one of the forums being used as a reference - but it is still original research. One of the sources, yet another forum, so no use for Wikipedia, seems to show that a user had this problem simply as he had not run the patcher. There appears to be no suitable references for this complaint to be included on Wikipedia and I move that it be deleted as non-notable, non-verifiable until such sources (such as a magazine article) are provided. DiverScout ( talk) 08:09, 24 July 2009 (UTC)
Article isn't too bad, but is heavily weighted towards the primary source. I suggest interested parties should start a "critical reception" section from available reviews. These sources can also be used to verify areas that are currently OR, such as the "gameplay differences" section. Marasmusine ( talk) 20:48, 25 July 2009 (UTC)
Has this lawsuit over Everquest II been mentioned anywhere?
I don't see it in the article. Is it somewhere else?
A blind guy sued Sony because he has trouble playing Everquest II. http://games.slashdot.org/story/09/11/07/1622230/Visually-Impaired-Gamer-Sues-Sony http://www.eq2flames.com/general-gameplay/54856-visually-impaired-gamer-sues-sony-online.html
Are you ready for IPv6? ( talk) 21:23, 9 November 2009 (UTC)
- According to GameSpot (which is a secondary source, unlike tertiary sources Slashdot and EQ2Flames), the lawsuit does not mention any specific game; the plantiff could be suing over any of Sony's MMORPGs, or all of them. Powers T 14:15, 10 November 2009 (UTC)
One of the recent changes was that all good races can start in any good city (Qeynos, Kelethin), the neutral races in any city and the evil races in any evil city (Freeport, Neriak, Growyn). I updated the section regarding this. -- Chillispike ( talk) 20:21, 14 January 2010 (UTC)
Recently SOE has removed the restriction of trial characters to level 20. I have updated the page with this change. 97.85.90.143 ( talk) 02:27, 28 April 2010 (UTC)
This rumour had been directly refuted by SoE game developer. [1] DiverScout ( talk) 07:00, 28 July 2010 (UTC)
- It's not a rumor. The official EQII website has entire pages devoted to announcing it and that it's now in beta:
http://everquest2.com/free_to_play/extended_faq. You're misinterpreting the forum post that you clumsily attached using ref tags, ensuring that no one can read or click unless they switch the page to edit mode.
12.233.146.130 (
talk) 18:59, 2 August 2010 (UTC)
- Oh, give it a rest. DiverScout ( talk) 18:31, 3 August 2010 (UTC)
Its finally happening, EQ2 is going F2P using a similar model to EQ2X. Freeport and Bazaar are merging, same with Vox and Nagafen. More info is available on www.everquest2.com. The merge is expected within the next few days during the first week or so of December. So to all of us EQ2 and EQ2X players, here's to having the best of both wrapped up nicely before Frostfell! Thanks Sony. WolfMoonstar 04:15, 30 November 2011 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 65.170.41.5 ( talk)
I have to ask, what happened to EQ 2 extended? I can't see anything official when I google "Eeverquest 2 Extended". Is it gone to make room for Everquest 2 Live or something? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 89.120.65.238 ( talk) 18:34, 9 January 2012 (UTC)
- As above, there is now just Everquest 2. You can choose which payment model you want, includinf f2p. DiverScout ( talk) 17:08, 10 January 2012 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just added archive links to one external link on
EverQuest II. Please take a moment to review
my edit. If necessary, add {{
cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{
nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
- Added archive http://web.archive.org/web/20050830092013/http://everquest2.station.sony.com:80/pizza/ to http://everquest2.station.sony.com/pizza/
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{
Sourcecheck}}).
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).
- If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
- If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.
Cheers.— cyberbot II Talk to my owner:Online 00:59, 21 March 2016 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 6 external links on EverQuest II. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
- Added
{{ dead link}}tag to http://eq2players.station.sony.com/news_archive_content.vm?month=012009&id=2043 - Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20100922093217/http://everquest2.com/free_to_play/extended_faq to http://everquest2.com/free_to_play/extended_faq
- Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20080819000651/http://eq2players.station.sony.com/news_archive_content.vm?id=1851 to http://eq2players.station.sony.com/news_archive_content.vm?id=1851
- Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20090629060215/http://everquest2.station.sony.com/expansions/sentinelsfate/index.vm to http://everquest2.station.sony.com/expansions/sentinelsfate/index.vm
- Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20071011094551/http://eq2players.station.sony.com/game_updates_details.vm?id=35 to http://eq2players.station.sony.com/game_updates_details.vm?id=35
- Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20071011101509/http://eq2players.station.sony.com/game_updates_details.vm?id=32 to http://eq2players.station.sony.com/game_updates_details.vm?id=32
- Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20060221091203/http://stationexchange.station.sony.com/ to http://stationexchange.station.sony.com/
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).
- If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
- If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 06:26, 9 January 2018 (UTC)
 | This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||
| ||||||||||||||||||||||
World of Warcraft boasts to have 2 million paying subscribers as of the end of June 2005. Does any one have recent numbers for EverQuest II? Quick google search only gives the number of 330k active players as of February, which is of course a bit outdated and not directly comparable. -- Itinerant1 8 July 2005 04:24 (UTC)
- Nevermind, found a good resource: http://www.mmogchart.com/ -- Itinerant1 8 July 2005 04:39 (UTC)
- I'm curious how many people actively play and how many servers EQ2 has now. I stopped playing after there first server consolidation.
Sorry MMOGChart is not accurate in the slightest. It has been proven time and again by industry leaders that the webmaster basically pulls numbers out of the air. Still many fans takes these bogus figures as gospel. The only real numbers we have had about EQ II subscriptions has been from the 2007 fanfest which said that at that time EQ II had over 1 million active U.S. subscribers.
Martinj63 22:48, 20 July 2007 (UTC)Martinj63
- Where exactly is this "proof" that the industry leaders claim that the mmogchart.com site is incorrect? In this case, it seems rather odd that EverQuest 2 is said to possess over one million subscribers, yet SoE has consolidated the servers due to a lack of player population. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 198.103.167.20 ( talk) 16:59, August 24, 2007 (UTC)
You mean besides common sense that The Webmaster have no hard numbers, or empirical evidence to base their claims? Unless they have acsess to the developers Billing databases they simply are guessing, this was discussed at last years Fanfaire. Along with how easy it is to portray yourself as a expert on the Internet. Further; the Consolidation happened over two years ago, since then the player population has been steadily growing, if you would bother to read the patch notes they just implemented a patch to help lessen lag in the more crowded city areas. EQ II is actuallysurpassing the initial sales and population projections, keep in mind that before WoW 1 million subscribers equaled a huge sucsess. Martinj63 21:58, 27 August 2007 (UTC) 21:58, 27 August 2007 (UTC)
- I've investigated the website, and it seems as though the individual running it has done his homework in regards to how he obtains his figures, including things such as official corporate data. If there is solid proof that can meet Wikipedia's verifiable policy and demonstrate that the website's owner is indeed lying, by all means please provide it. By the way, I do not play EverQuest 2 myself, so I wouldn't have access to the patch notes. I'm simply interested in clearing up matters, that's all. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 198.103.167.20 ( talk) 22:28, August 27, 2007 (UTC)
I would be interested to know what investigative techniques you used besides reading how he claims to get his numbers, which is pseudo science at best..invention at worst. The you can't prove that I'm lying so I must be telling the truth argument is at best a non-sequitur. In SOE's case he can't use Official corperate data because SOE doesn't publish subscriber numbers. True they have to disclose profit and loss to thier share holders but that is a far cry from we have x many players playing Y game. When in doubt take the company that develops the game numbers over some fan sites speulation.
Martinj63 23:59, 27 August 2007 (UTC)
Anyone want to post all the live update information? :P maybe not even worth it? - -- Kamic A'kota 20:16, 16 December 2005 (UTC)
Does anyone have a source for the recently added paragraph on Gamania's support of EQII terminating? I've looked for a press release or news item from a gaming news site, but can't find anything. I'd like to clean up the grammar of that paragraph (written by a native Mandarin speaker) but I don't feel comfortable doing so until I can get a source. Powers 15:04, 27 March 2006 (UTC)
For those of us that aren't Everquest II players (which, I imagine is a large portion of people visiting the wiki page) - what is the difference between an Adventure pack and Expansion - anyone mind editing in a description?
- There really isn't much difference. Adventure packs are smaller, cheaper, and only available via digital download. They both add new content in the form of zones, items, and quests. -- Onorem 11:43, 16 August 2006 (UTC)
- Adventure Packs add content whereas Expansion Packs add new features as well (such as the climbing surfaces introduced in Desert of Flames, or Achievement system from Kingdom of Sky). —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 64.37.153.190 ( talk • contribs) .
- Thanks for the clarification. Warthog32 21:33, 21 August 2006 (UTC)
The gameplay section reads more like a comparison to Everquest than an introduction of gameplay to general readers. For those people who haven't played either game, shouldn't this section should be reworded as if EQ2 is a standalone game (which it really is?) Perhaps for EQ1 players, a subsection should exist for comparison?
- I have gone trough a lot of the article to make EQ2 itself the basis of the article with comparisons to the original as secondary. Not actually having played EQ2, there is probably mroe that could be done 207.69.137.7 15:19, 7 October 2007 (UTC)
Common usage has EverQuest II as a sequel to EverQuest. It's based in the same world, with the same basic gameplay (kill stuff for XP) and is set at time after the original. Most sources call it a sequel (here's one: [1]). However, Moorgard, when EQ2 was in development, has said "We're not making a sequel; we're making a separate game." [2] I see what he meant, but I don't think that matches with the common usage of the word "sequel". No one suggests that watching The Godfather Part II is in any way a replacement for The Godfather. It's a separate film that continues the story of the original. EQ2 is analogous; "sequel" is thus a perfectly accurate term, Moorgard's attempt at clarification aside. Powers T 15:55, 4 September 2006 (UTC)
Everquest 2 is slated not as a sequal to Everquest as game world is not set purely after Everquest. It has been said that the game world of EQ2 exists in an alternate future, thereby allowing EQ1 to remain active and never hit a lore point where it would hit the start of EQ2. 193.34.100.34 11:09, 20 August 2007 (UTC)
This article was obviously baseed on the way EQ2 played at launch. There have been serious changes that completely invalidate some of the information, such as the Archetype/Class/SubClass heirarchy. When I have the time I will undertake to update this article. I also intend to add a paragraph at the top making more clear the setting in relation to the original EverQuest. Bill W. Smith, Jr. 13:45, 8 October 2006 (UTC)
- Your contributions are welcome. =) Just keep in mind that history is sometimes as important as the current state of the game, and that the Archetype/Class/Subclass hierarchy is still extant, even if characters don't progress down through it anymore. =) Powers T 23:55, 9 October 2006 (UTC)
There is a wiki for EverQuest II, EQ2i. Is it permissable to link game-specific terms to this outside wiki? Transparency Note I am a major contributor to EQ2i. Bill W. Smith, Jr. 14:12, 8 October 2006 (UTC)
- It would probably be best to just link the EQ2 wiki once, in the External Links, rather than link each term. If there are any terms that need defining, they should be defined in the prose of this article. Powers T 23:55, 9 October 2006 (UTC)
I totally redid Race and Artisan Class into tables. I made some minor changes to the colors on the Class table, but VERY soon I will redo this into a more horizontal table. -- Bill W. Smith, Jr. 04:34, 10 October 2006 (UTC)
Ah! I have discovered the proper use of the preview button. Will use it from now on. My apologies for all the extra history log entries. :( -- Bill W. Smith, Jr. 12:32, 10 October 2006 (UTC)
OK, I have finished what I wanted to do for now. After making the race and artisan info into tables, today I reformatted the class table to go horizontal instead of vertical, so it makes the articles less tall and leaves less white space. -- Bill W. Smith, Jr. 23:45, 11 October 2006 (UTC)
I just followed the link from the archived page, and I found it a fairly well done site. Sure, they may not be 100% complete, but then neither is Wikipedia! I vote to restore the link... -- Bill W. Smith, Jr. 16:23, 24 October 2006 (UTC)
Does anyone know how many subscribers EQ2 currently has?
According to eq2census EQ2 currently has 2,166,507 characters. According to MMOGChart current paid EQ2 subscribers is just under 200,000. -- Bill W. Smith, Jr. 20:49, 3 November 2006 (UTC)
It should be noted that MMOGChart isn't very accurate in their numbers, as there is no empirical evidence to base their numbers upon. During the 2007 Fanfest it was stated that EQ II had well over 1 million active U.S. subscribers. My opinion is that unless SOE puts up hard numbers about population it should be considered hearsay. It is a given that fans of other MMORPG's will low-ball the subscription numbers, this is particularly true of the webmaster of MMOGChart as he has been proven to have extreme bias against any SOE product.
Martinj63 22:39, 20 July 2007 (UTC)Martinj63
A recent survey of eq2players.com (the sony player portal for EQ2)1.47m toons based on a sum of all toons by race type (which would include old toons that are still under level 20 and have not been played since the archetype/class/subclass questline updates). The 2.1 number is either way off or their own website is wrong. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 65.249.26.250 ( talk) 21:44, 10 October 2007 (UTC)
The first sentence or so states that EQ2 has vastly updated graphics and gameplay over its predecessor. Surely that's open for argument. Hell, I'd argue, but that isn't the point. Is there any way to argue this that isn't a PoV thing? Methulah 01:37, 3 December 2006 (UTC)
- Gameplay features from the original EverQuest were adapted into use in EverQuest II. "Updated" doesn't necessarily mean "better". Powers T 16:04, 4 December 2006 (UTC)
I removed this section this morning because it appeared to be written based soley on the editor's opinions. A criticisms section might be a good idea to add to the article, but it would need to have some
reliable sources. The deleted text said...
There are some in-game flaws that should be mentioned for those interested in purchasing. One major flaw that just rips you away from all the efforts put into making the game more cinimatic to draw you in, is the continuity between zones (game is made up of several 'zones' you load to and from) You can pass from rich green plains into a dark musky swamp. Ecology is just all wrong.
Another flaw that people don't mention is the tradeskill sub class. Though some might say it was where EQII really differed from EQLIVE it would prove to be nothing more than a button mashing session. You dont exaclty do anything but hit one or two buttons otherwise the game takes full control and leaves you with a linear way to make things.
Also one more thing that really upset most players was the watering down of the game system in which other players interact, in EQLIVE you had the constant difficulty of people trying to take a kill from you and win the loot, or you could be hanging out with buddies and somone will run by with a large amount of monsters running after him, he could do many things here that could cause the monsters chasing him to stop and turn to the inocent bystander. Also the lvling in this game takes about 1/3rd the time it took to level in EQLIVE. Thus making this game look more like WoW (easy to play for children) and less like EQLIVE (More difficulty for the extreme gammer).
If this section is to be readded, please discuss it here first. -- Onorem 11:38, 8 December 2006 (UTC)
- It does sound really biased. -- Sydius 19:37, 8 October 2007 (UTC)
Who the heck linked all the classes in the Class table? This makes little or NO sense, really, unless we are gonna create separate pages here for every class, or a single page with short descriptions of each class in subheadings! I strongly suggest we unlink all the classes! -- Bill W. Smith, Jr. 21:54, 29 December 2006 (UTC)
- I'm not sure why they were added. I removed them since many weren't linking to relevant information. -- Onorem 15:13, 4 January 2007 (UTC)
Hi I was wondering if this article should include that old EQ players could gain an advantage over normal players by leaving Everquest and joining Everquest 2. -- Cazamus 15:00, 4 January 2007 (UTC)
- In what way do you think that EQ1 players gain an advantage? Are there any reliable sources that support that claim? -- Onorem 15:13, 4 January 2007 (UTC)
- In some small ways that may have been true when EQ2 first launched, and for MAYBE a month past that. EQ1 players knew the basics of lore and history, but EQ2 was a totally new game. In fact, I would even go so far as to asy that total noobs had an advantage over EQ1 players because they had nothing to un-learn. -- Bill W. Smith, Jr. 22:17, 4 January 2007 (UTC)
- Well I remember hearing about a transfer account thing, that if an older EQ member signed up for EQ-2, then they recieved a small prize, like a helmet or weapon. Im just curious if anyone thinks that its worth mentioning? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Cazamus ( talk • contribs) 10:48, 12 January 2007 (UTC).
- Now that I'm thinking about it, I seem to recall there was something in the old-old promo material for the game about extra stuff for EQ1 players, from the site in 02/03 - "Subscribers to both games will have 'exclusive cross-over quests zones in each game' allowing them to 'gain access to hidden treasures.' Additional rewards will be announced in the months to come." In the end it didn't make it into the game. The only thing ex-EQ1 players got were a server title that could be claimed (and now that's a three year vet reward anyway). -- Delameko 17:46, 18 March 2007
Where did this pieace of lore came from: "The Ralosian Empire placed a bomb on Norrath to explode it, but through Divine intervention, it was placed on Luclin."? Last time I checked, it was still unclear, what exactly caused Luclin to explode. Besides, this doesn't seem to fit the timeline - how could Rallosian Empire place such bomb, if it lost long before Luclin exploded?
They did not, and I will remove it. As I understand it, the portals on Luclin were destoyed as some part of a mission by one side or the other. This destruction released unstable arcane energies that resulted in the destruction of Luclin. -- Bill W. Smith, Jr. ( talk/ contribs) 19:40, 23 February 2007 (UTC)
- The entire "Story" section is rife with errors, not least of them that it claims a connection between the destruction of the Combine spires and the Shattering of Luclin. I've gotta take an axe to that when I get a chance. Powers T 23:53, 29 April 2007 (UTC)
- The fact of the spires destruction leading to the destruction of Luclin is described in the opening movie that plays when you create a new toon. -- Bill W. Smith, Jr. ( talk/ contribs) 03:56, 30 April 2007 (UTC)
- OK, I just watched that sequence and there was no mention made of the Combine spires being destroyed at all. The Nexus was destroyed (or otherwise rendered useless) about 400 years before EQ2. The Shattering of Luclin was about 15 years before EQ2. Unless the Combine spires were somehow destroyed during or after the Rending (about 100 years before EQ2), I don't see how there could be any connection.
Powers
T 18:42, 1 May 2007 (UTC)
- I misspoke and you are correct, it was the Nexus that was destroyed. It also mentions, IIRC, that many believe that the resulting release of arcane forces tore the moon apart. --
Bill W. Smith, Jr. (
talk/
contribs) 01:21, 2 May 2007 (UTC)
- I thought it might as well, but when I reviewed it, it did not. There may be other available in-game lore that suggests a connection, but as far as I know it's merely speculation. Anyway, it was just an example of the errors present in that section of the article, as well as apparently an apt example of the difficulties in separating actual lore from supposition, rumor, and fan fiction. =) Powers T 18:57, 2 May 2007 (UTC)
- I misspoke and you are correct, it was the Nexus that was destroyed. It also mentions, IIRC, that many believe that the resulting release of arcane forces tore the moon apart. --
Bill W. Smith, Jr. (
talk/
contribs) 01:21, 2 May 2007 (UTC)
- OK, I just watched that sequence and there was no mention made of the Combine spires being destroyed at all. The Nexus was destroyed (or otherwise rendered useless) about 400 years before EQ2. The Shattering of Luclin was about 15 years before EQ2. Unless the Combine spires were somehow destroyed during or after the Rending (about 100 years before EQ2), I don't see how there could be any connection.
Powers
T 18:42, 1 May 2007 (UTC)
It has been a long time since I viewed the opening but I was positive they said it there... I am certain I did NOT just see it in a forum post, so where did I get it? Perhaps it was in one of the in-game books? -- Bill W. Smith, Jr. ( talk/ contribs) 04:47, 3 May 2007 (UTC)
- The only thing I've found is from the Official Lore that came out before the game was released, a set of Twelve Chapters that covered the history between EQ and EQ2. Chapter 11 is about the shattering and a character mentions, when speaking about possible causes, "Others speak of an invasion that happened there long ago and claim this is the result." As you can see, it was only a theory advanced by unknown "others" in the immediate aftermath of the event. To the best of my knowledge, no one on Norrath knows exactly what happened on Luclin or why.
Powers
T 14:31, 6 May 2007 (UTC)
- Link to Chapter 11 (archived at EQ2 Stratics) here: http://eq2.stratics.com/content/lore/lore_tod_chapter11.php Powers T 14:32, 6 May 2007 (UTC)
I was looking at the table and they have changed how classes are distributed since then (on the character creation screen... just not with Achievement) so I updated the table to reflect that. Feel free too change it back if you want to. I also was wondering: Is it better to have the full history of Everquest II's changes (AKA having the article say there were no ports when the game came out but they were added with EOF) or would it be better for people to read if it basically said Ports were added into the game with EOF and leave off all of the stuff from before.
Oh and sorry if any of my other changes were screwy... I will be getting a wikipedia account soon... (If the name Josgar can be made) Josgar 16:46, 28 May 2007 (UTC)
...and merged with the pre-existing eq2.wikia.com that was already there. The lag and other problems so often complained about with the previous hosting service should now be non-existent. -- Bill W. Smith, Jr. ( talk/ contribs) 21:46, 22 July 2007 (UTC)
I noticed that wasn't added to the resources section, should it be?
Martinj63 21:33, 23 July 2007 (UTC)Martinj63
anyone interested in writing something about the new game-card system "Legend of Norrath"? -- LC.Lau 00:49, 31 August 2007 (UTC)
Already created the article feel free to add to it. Martinj63 01:17, 1 September 2007 (UTC)
It's been proposed that we merge the articles for EQ2 expansions into one article. I was wondering where I could discuss and debate this proposal. Cheers. Methulah ( talk) 22:14, 21 November 2007 (UTC)
I think someone should put if you have to pay or not, because I don't Know Jabbafett ( talk) 23:04, 11 December 2007 (UTC)
- From the business section:
- Like the original and other commercial MMORPGs, EQ2 requires a monthly fee (as of October 2007, US$14.99/month) to play the game. A free play period of 30 days are included with the purchase price of the game. Subscribers can opt to pay an additional monthly fee for extended services, such as an online item database or hosting of guild websites.
- Not really too much more to add...unless I misunderstood what you were asking. -- Onorem♠ Dil 00:47, 12 December 2007 (UTC)
Per Wikipedia:External links, we should always be striving to keep the number of external links very low. In service to that, one rule of thumb I've used is to only include web sites that are specific to EverQuest II -- that is, no Allakhazam, no IGN, no TenTonHammer, because they have sites for all major MMOs. This is just a rule of thumb, though; exceptions can certainly be discussed here. Powers T 13:39, 30 January 2008 (UTC)
I feel thats a very poor rule of thumb, rather a quality standard should be set, not just basing on whether it is part of a network or a large site.
58.69.195.242 (
talk) 18:16, 31 January 2008 (UTC)
- That's why it's a rule of thumb. Setting a quality standard isn't easily applicable, and it introduces all sorts of POV and original research concerns. If you have specific objections, feel free to make the case here on the talk page. Powers T 20:05, 31 January 2008 (UTC)
I fail to see why you would not allow links to sites like Allakhazam and TTH, but allow links to wikia, which also supports a multitude of games. ( http://gaming.wikia.com/wiki/Wikia_Gaming) If you allow one you should allow the others. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 206.174.32.82 ( talk) 23:37, 13 July 2008 (UTC)
are there any 3'rd party sources for this 'controversy' over station cash that we can use for a cite? If it really is a controversy then I'd expect that some sites would be covering it and i haven't seen any coverage (granted i don't real too many MMO news sites). I don't think people complaining on a forum is notable enough for a cite, people complain about EVERYTHING on forums and i haven't seen a news story anywhere talking about unhappy players. harlock_jds ( talk) 17:05, 7 January 2009 (UTC)
Isn't the features section too difficult to read, I'm not sure what would be easier either dividing things into different subheadings or perhaps rewriting the whole thing into standard paragraphs. Salle81 ( talk) 04:03, 10 March 2009 (UTC)
The business section reads "Like the original and other commercial MMORPGs, EQ2 requires a monthly fee...". Really?! I suppose for every commercial MMORPG that comes with a monthly subscription fee I could find one that doesn't. If these aren't weasel words trying to imply legitimity for SOE to rip off users, then I don't know what weasel words are... 81.96.127.72 ( talk) 13:08, 28 June 2009 (UTC)
- rip⋅off /ˈrɪpˌɔf, -ˌɒf/ noun Slang. 1. an act or instance of ripping off another or others; a theft, cheat, or swindle. 81.96.127.72 ( talk) 13:31, 28 June 2009 (UTC)
- Er, if a MMORPG does not make a charge, surely it is not a commercial MMORPG? Also, ignoring the non-commercial MMORPGs, most appear to make a monthly charge. Your use of the word rip off suggests that there is a bit of a COI going on here. DiverScout ( talk) 14:11, 28 June 2009 (UTC)
- COI as in conflict of interest? Not at all, I am not affiliated in any way with any game or production/development/distribution company. I simply refuse to buy any game that requires a subscription fee because I consider it a rip-off, or greed at the very least. But beyond my personal tastes and decisions, please bear in mind that games like Guild Wars don't require such a fee. 81.96.127.72 ( talk) 14:17, 28 June 2009 (UTC)
- It's hardly a rip-off to request payment for ongoing services. And regardless of whether you feel it's an unjustified expense or not, that in no way means that stating such in the article is intended to provide cover for said rip-off. All that said, I would have agreed with you if you simply said "it's not necessary to say that most MMORPGs charge a monthly fee". By going further and claiming that it's a weasel-worded attempt to make SOE look better (when most major MMORPGs do charge a monthly fee), you only hurt your own argument. Powers T 14:32, 28 June 2009 (UTC)
- I can assure you from personal experience that in some countries (quite a few actually) the monthly subscription fee for internet access is less than what SOE charges for this game. That is, for ALL the traffic up to several tenths of GB a month, not just access (and data transfer) to/from a gaming server. In some cases you even get extra services (ranging from telephone access, some free TV channels to storage on the provider's servers). Make of it what you wish, but if you think 15 bucks a month is actually a reasonable fee for "ongoing services" (particularly when the said services are used by hundreds of thousands if not millions hence the potential for cost savings), then I'll have to rest my case. It is, after all, the naive, the desperate and the generous that make these companies get away with it, even thrive on it. You're right, there's no question of weasel words, you (or the author) actually believe this is fair, just because it is - allegedy or not - common practice!! 81.96.127.72 ( talk) 17:37, 29 June 2009 (UTC)
- If you think it's a rip-off to pay for access to a game, don't play it. There's nothing unreasonable with charging people to play any more than it would be to charge them to see a movie (which, for someone who plays two hours a day, is thirty times more expensive). And you're not just paying for the costs of running the server, but for the developers to continue updating the game and adding more content. If SOE wants to tell me that the only way I can play EQ2 is to pay them $15 a month, then I'll happily do so since I find the game quite fun. It's their game, so they can do what they want with it, and they're under no obligation to give their work away for free. True, there are MMOs out there that are free, but many of them are either lower quality or require payment for items. PaulGS ( talk) 01:04, 30 June 2009 (UTC)
- If you think Guild Wars is lower quality then you're either biased or deluded. 81.145.166.130 ( talk) 11:37, 30 June 2009 (UTC)
- I think we've established that you have something against SOE and EQ2. I think we've also established that people don't agree with your weasel words accusation. If you want to discuss the merits of various MMORPGs, I'd suggest that there are forums designed for that purpose and that Wikipedia is not the correct place for that debate to take place. DiverScout ( talk) 20:05, 30 June 2009 (UTC)
I have a problem with this paragraph. I don't mean to discount the complaints of the Chinese players, but I'm afraid that the paragraph grants significantly undue weight to the problem. First, we have no reliable sources that state there is actually a problem (the author notes that the sources are in Chinese, but those would be better than none at all). Second, even if there is a problem, is it really worth a whole paragraph? This really doesn't seem to be on anyone's radar, and it's not Wikipedia's place to publicize such things. Powers T 02:29, 19 July 2009 (UTC)
- 1) I acknowledge that few official news agency would report on the connection issues of a computer game. And almost all information only can be retrieved from SOE official support forum and other fun sites.
- 2) So asking for a absolutely "reliable" source is in itself an unbalanced game. But please consider point 3) and 4).
- 3) Google "EQ2 41780", which contains even no Chinese keyword, the results of the first page are almost all related to this issue, with half of them in Chinese (half in Chinese suggests this is mainly an issue for Chinese players, even if you cannot read Chinese).
- 4) Check the links to the SOE official support forum again. Note that they're there to support a commercial game, for which the quality and speed of their response is of crucial importance. But for this issue, in multiple threads, SOE choose not to answer this question. Why? You can speculate and know it but not say it loud.
- 5) I think for most of you people there, to be sure, the only way is to get a friend who you personally know and happened to be in China to have a test?
- 6) I accept 3rd party to modify my paragraph, but at least some fact (like in point 3 and 4?) should be kept.
- Hiker Hauk ( talk) 11:38, 20 July 2009 (UTC)
- Your items 3) and 4) would constitute original research; we need someone else to undertake that research and publish it so that we can report on it. Powers T 13:34, 20 July 2009 (UTC)
- Reading the first post on a Google search for "EQ2 41780" shows a user "sharing" an account, who then reveals that they have access to additional accounts. These are violations of the terms of use for EQ2, and also suggests to me like the person may actually be a plat farmer/leveller. Could this be a block being used by SoE to close suspect accounts? This argument is then included in one of the forums being used as a reference - but it is still original research. One of the sources, yet another forum, so no use for Wikipedia, seems to show that a user had this problem simply as he had not run the patcher. There appears to be no suitable references for this complaint to be included on Wikipedia and I move that it be deleted as non-notable, non-verifiable until such sources (such as a magazine article) are provided. DiverScout ( talk) 08:09, 24 July 2009 (UTC)
Article isn't too bad, but is heavily weighted towards the primary source. I suggest interested parties should start a "critical reception" section from available reviews. These sources can also be used to verify areas that are currently OR, such as the "gameplay differences" section. Marasmusine ( talk) 20:48, 25 July 2009 (UTC)
Has this lawsuit over Everquest II been mentioned anywhere?
I don't see it in the article. Is it somewhere else?
A blind guy sued Sony because he has trouble playing Everquest II. http://games.slashdot.org/story/09/11/07/1622230/Visually-Impaired-Gamer-Sues-Sony http://www.eq2flames.com/general-gameplay/54856-visually-impaired-gamer-sues-sony-online.html
Are you ready for IPv6? ( talk) 21:23, 9 November 2009 (UTC)
- According to GameSpot (which is a secondary source, unlike tertiary sources Slashdot and EQ2Flames), the lawsuit does not mention any specific game; the plantiff could be suing over any of Sony's MMORPGs, or all of them. Powers T 14:15, 10 November 2009 (UTC)
One of the recent changes was that all good races can start in any good city (Qeynos, Kelethin), the neutral races in any city and the evil races in any evil city (Freeport, Neriak, Growyn). I updated the section regarding this. -- Chillispike ( talk) 20:21, 14 January 2010 (UTC)
Recently SOE has removed the restriction of trial characters to level 20. I have updated the page with this change. 97.85.90.143 ( talk) 02:27, 28 April 2010 (UTC)
This rumour had been directly refuted by SoE game developer. [1] DiverScout ( talk) 07:00, 28 July 2010 (UTC)
- It's not a rumor. The official EQII website has entire pages devoted to announcing it and that it's now in beta:
http://everquest2.com/free_to_play/extended_faq. You're misinterpreting the forum post that you clumsily attached using ref tags, ensuring that no one can read or click unless they switch the page to edit mode.
12.233.146.130 (
talk) 18:59, 2 August 2010 (UTC)
- Oh, give it a rest. DiverScout ( talk) 18:31, 3 August 2010 (UTC)
Its finally happening, EQ2 is going F2P using a similar model to EQ2X. Freeport and Bazaar are merging, same with Vox and Nagafen. More info is available on www.everquest2.com. The merge is expected within the next few days during the first week or so of December. So to all of us EQ2 and EQ2X players, here's to having the best of both wrapped up nicely before Frostfell! Thanks Sony. WolfMoonstar 04:15, 30 November 2011 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 65.170.41.5 ( talk)
I have to ask, what happened to EQ 2 extended? I can't see anything official when I google "Eeverquest 2 Extended". Is it gone to make room for Everquest 2 Live or something? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 89.120.65.238 ( talk) 18:34, 9 January 2012 (UTC)
- As above, there is now just Everquest 2. You can choose which payment model you want, includinf f2p. DiverScout ( talk) 17:08, 10 January 2012 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just added archive links to one external link on
EverQuest II. Please take a moment to review
my edit. If necessary, add {{
cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{
nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
- Added archive http://web.archive.org/web/20050830092013/http://everquest2.station.sony.com:80/pizza/ to http://everquest2.station.sony.com/pizza/
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{
Sourcecheck}}).
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).
- If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
- If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.
Cheers.— cyberbot II Talk to my owner:Online 00:59, 21 March 2016 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 6 external links on EverQuest II. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
- Added
{{ dead link}}tag to http://eq2players.station.sony.com/news_archive_content.vm?month=012009&id=2043 - Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20100922093217/http://everquest2.com/free_to_play/extended_faq to http://everquest2.com/free_to_play/extended_faq
- Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20080819000651/http://eq2players.station.sony.com/news_archive_content.vm?id=1851 to http://eq2players.station.sony.com/news_archive_content.vm?id=1851
- Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20090629060215/http://everquest2.station.sony.com/expansions/sentinelsfate/index.vm to http://everquest2.station.sony.com/expansions/sentinelsfate/index.vm
- Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20071011094551/http://eq2players.station.sony.com/game_updates_details.vm?id=35 to http://eq2players.station.sony.com/game_updates_details.vm?id=35
- Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20071011101509/http://eq2players.station.sony.com/game_updates_details.vm?id=32 to http://eq2players.station.sony.com/game_updates_details.vm?id=32
- Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20060221091203/http://stationexchange.station.sony.com/ to http://stationexchange.station.sony.com/
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).
- If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
- If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 06:26, 9 January 2018 (UTC)