Do people have any hope left for Vanguard?

[Mystery Chocolate]

I'm just wondering if the people here stick around because they believe Vanguard will get better, or believe the game deserves as much bad rap for being a total disaster. Personally I don't know anymore. I mean reading the official forums..it doesn't look too good. SOE seem agonizingly slow to bring out any drastic changes the game needs, so slow I'm wondering if they're planning to shut down the game instead. Yeah server mergers but like that is gonna do much...the population is so pitifully small it seems pointless trying to support it with its damaged reputation. Then there's a trial island that is going to be released, which I think is being stingy couldn't they do something right like WoW giving you 10 free days to play the actual game but not being able to trade...etc.

But in 3+ years the game could become amazing like what SOE did to EQ2...but at the same time 3+ years is way too long and there are other games like WAR, AoC etc. coming out to steal even more people's attention away.

Anyway, what do people think about Vanguard these days? Do you have hope the game has a chance, and stick around or is it too late?

[Chae668]

hurray, another thread that is going to turn into a flame debate, and a 500 page debacle.

thank you sir for starting another pointless thread.

:volcano:

oh, and to answer your question, i stay here to follow the game. i re-subbed, after a 3 month break. it was a nice change of pace. not saying anything bad about it, but not saying anything good either.

my 2 cents.

[Guru]

Anyway, what do people think about Vanguard these days?
rip off and debacle

Do you have hope the game has a chance, and stick around or is it too late?
there is no hope, it is too late.



.

[Canard]

hope dies last they say...

besides that VG is more or less fine. At least inGame :) as luckily whiners dont pay their subs :D

[Aamir Khann]

Here is my take.

I have been playing since beta 2.5 or so. I was happy to play the game at release, and it seemed that with the vast number of quests and things to do, that the future was pretty sure.

Now, after being here this long, and watching the most steady and noticeable decline that I have ever seen in ANY game, ( and I'm even comparing this to Horizons ) My hope has all but disappeared.

The game looks very cool. I love that I can swim, ride mounts, levitate, and be invisible. But with NOBODY to group with in a game that is groupcentric... Well, I am just very tired of being alone. So to me it is too little too late.

I'm gonna stick around till after merge... if after that the decline continues, then I will most likely move on.

[apasserby]

I also had been in beta and was totally amazed at release time of population numbers.But as issues were not dealt with,content not added,people started dropping.That could be expected as normal for any game,a certain percentage would try it,move on.Well..it got to the point where even devoted players had enough.Vanguard had a great opportunity,customer wise,to create the game people were waiting years for..and they blew it.After the disaster that was created I cannot see where its possible to get peoples trust to come back in the numbers that would make the game viable.The good from all this..whos to say..possibly other developers learned a good lesson from this.IMHO..which is worthless...Sony should shut it down..rework it totally,add the huge 4th continent,then re-release.But theres a double edge issue with this..would sony gain from having people leave EQ mode to join Vanguard mode?Bottom line from talking to other players...people would really like another go at Vanguard,but will wait and see what others say first before getting bit again.This is also my feelings...soo disappointed.

[shadowrelm]

I'm just wondering if the people here stick around because they believe Vanguard will get better, or believe the game deserves as much bad rap for being a total disaster. Personally I don't know anymore. I mean reading the official forums..it doesn't look too good. SOE seem agonizingly slow to bring out any drastic changes the game needs, so slow I'm wondering if they're planning to shut down the game instead.
--------------------------------------------------------------

BINGO.

first, let me say, i have hope for Vanguard.

the graphics are awsome. just awsome. i havent seen better graphics in any game. you have your genaric level grinds in more than one level, like all mmorpgs to date. you have your staple fantasy classes that we all love and know. you have quests that are marked for class/level/faction like all the newer games. you have a large world, and very well done dungons.

the foundation is there for a really good game. minus a top end game, it is already a complete game.

a heads up, a lack of a top end game is not why 90 percent of its player base walked. most of them walked long before getting there. bugs are not why 90 percent of its player base walked. all games have bugs and we all know that. including EQ1 who still to this day cant launch a patch that doesnt need an emergancy patch to fix. WoW has bugs and fixes for them every week. all games have bugs.

grouping is why they walked. once the powergamers blasted past the low and mid levels, the grouping came to a screeching halt. mainstream players do not play long enough to start groups or keep them going. that takes up the majority of their playtime. it is powergamers that start groups and keep them going. the mainsream players jump on, join a group for an hour or so, and leave. it is the powergamers that keep them together.

grouping is dead for mainstream players. 90 percent of the market are mainstream players. they are the majority of the players that walked.

-------------------------------------------------------------------

SOE is at a cross roads. anyone can see Vangurd has a solid foundation ready to build from for a mmorpg. but their choices are,
1. the vision tm. launch yet another group orientated game as it was intended.

the downside is, mainstream players are going to shun it just like they shun EQ1, EQ2, and SWG, the other 3 titles SOE owns. additionally, even if Vanguard does support itself in this format, chances are, the players that they gain will come from their other 3 titles and not the massive mainstream player base.

2. back peddle it a little like they did with EQ2 and SWG. offer more mainstream content.

the downside again is splitting their own gamers. mabe no net gain in subscription numbers for the money spent when you consider all their online titles as a whole.

3. totally rewrite the game for the mainstream players similar to WoW type playstyle.

the downside is totally destroying whats left of Vanguards player base, and possibly bleeding that sentiment back through their other titles.

there is no 100 percent win win decision they can make for the game. number 3 offers the highest chance of sucess money wise, but the greatest risk. number one and two might not add customers, but atleast they wont loose any. number 3 guarentees they WILL loose customers on a dice toss they MIGHT gain even more later on.

the best wasy to proceed is to do what they want to do, but say little to nothing about it. STALL their player base. anything they say will produce negative feed back from someone.

the corperate "cover my arse" decision for the executive assigned to Vanguard? fix it s intended and pray enough people come back to make it profitable. if they come from EQ1 and EQ2, who cares, thats not my arse, thats theirs.

the big picture decision, totally rewrite the game. keep the current game as it is with bug fixes, server combines, and minimal staff to keep money flowing in, then either,

1. relaunch the game as a mainsteram game, or

2, shut it down if they decide the risk isnt worth the investment.

so, you are waiting to find out if your going to get the "cover my arse" decision and end up with a small niche game to add to the station pass, or the big picture decision which will either rewrite the game totally or shut it down.

if they wanted to shut it down, they would have.

either way, it is in their best interest to say nothing untill they are ready to go with their decision. so stop asking. its pointless. you will get what they intend on giving when they are ready to give it. they are not going to tell you so half of you that are left will piss and moan and walk away.

if you like the game as it is, play on. if you dont, cancell, play something else, check back after christmass.

[Choctaw]

You need to move on from the "grouping is dead" argument. I'm not saying it's not true, it's just that we have all heard it from you before. Many times.

Oh and *I* did quit because of the bugs and the performance. And I really don't think I'm in a minority group of people. Not all games have the lack of polish and playability that this game did at launch. WoW was certainly more playable at launch.

[acrobat]

Personally I think its at an end. I know a lot less than other people here though, so thats just my uneducted guess.

But I think some people are here because they still play, and some people are here because they quit but still wonder if it may some day turn around. But I also know that I am here, because I know the game has gone down the crapper, and I am just here to watch the whole process like watching a car crash.

I am interested to know what other people think caused it. And does a game like this go to game heaven or game hell when it dies? And I'm interested to see what happens to the once highly respected Brad + Jeff. Do people still respect them? Are they considered the biggest failures in gaming history? Who blames who? Do they take responsibility for the failure. If this was such a complete failure, does that suggest Everquest just a fluke? How much of the $30 million is left to be paid back? Who where the investors, and have any of them jumped out of their office windows? Have any of them lost it and threatened to take Brad's sports cars as payment? Was the road just slippery and the car span out of control and hit a tree? Did Blizzard spill oil on the road when they saw the car coming? Etc...

Its just kind of interesting to me, but very sad too.

[Chae668]

I am interested to know what other people think caused it. And does a game like this go to game heaven or game hell when it dies? And I'm interested to see what happens to the once highly respected Brad + Jeff. Do people still respect them? Are they considered the biggest failures in gaming history? Who blames who? Do they take responsibility for the failure. If this was such a complete failure, does that suggest Everquest just a fluke? How much of the $30 million is left to be paid back? Who where the investors, and have any of them jumped out of their office windows? Have any of them lost it and threatened to take Brad's sports cars as payment? Was the road just slippery and the car span out of control and hit a tree? Did Blizzard spill oil on the road when they saw the car coming? Etc...
.
c'mon man.. you cant seriously have these questions. just read the posts here, and at FOH. pretty much sums up the community. but if your still not convinced, go to the official forums. all those answers you already know. just go search for them.

[acrobat]

c'mon man.. you cant seriously have these questions. just read the posts here, and at FOH. pretty much sums up the community. but if your still not convinced, go to the official forums. all those answers you already know. just go search for them.

This is the only Vanguard forum I've read really. I would like to know the answers but, not really enough to start hunting down the answers. Its kind of depressing too, so it makes me a bit wary of even finding the answers too.

But yeah, I've learned a lot about it from this forum alone. But some things I still don't really know. And a lot of the time, everyone has a completely different opinion. For example, some people blame SOE, and some people blame Sigil. And some people blame neither and think the game is great... So its hard to figure anything out really.


---------------------adding stuff----------------------

my god.. I looked at that "FOH" forum and wow.. those people really say what they think! I think if Vanguard was a person and read what I just read... little Vanguard would be sitting in the corner crying, with its face in its hands. And it would have a big wet patch in its crotch area.

[Chae668]

my god.. I looked at that "FOH" forum and wow.. those people really say what they think! I think if Vanguard was a person and read what I just read... little Vanguard would be sitting in the corner crying, with its face in its hands. And it would have a big wet patch in its crotch area.
rofl, aye.

pretty much sums it up:)

[Spirit]

grouping is dead for mainstream players. 90 percent of the market are mainstream players. they are the majority of the players that walked.

Incorrect. The players that walked can be categorised thus:

* The people that were originally attracted to the deliberately out of date and misleading FAQ and promises of "kunark, velious, that sort of challenge".
* The people that couldn't either run VG at all, or weren't going to accept the bugs it has
* The people that discovered the game was two years away from being complete

The knock on effect when these people left meant people couldn't find groups, and soloing your way to 50 is freaking boring. So the gradual bleed continues because of those factors.

[Qandow]

Incorrect. The players that walked can be categorised thus:

* The people that were originally attracted to the deliberately out of date and misleading FAQ and promises of "kunark, velious, that sort of challenge".
* The people that couldn't either run VG at all, or weren't going to accept the bugs it has
* The people that discovered the game was two years away from being complete

The knock on effect when these people left meant people couldn't find groups, and soloing your way to 50 is freaking boring. So the gradual bleed continues because of those factors.

That is fairly accurate in my opinion.

Frankly, group centric does not work. Forced grouping does not work. Not any more. That was pretty obvious even back in EQ although players did not have the options they have today. How many times have you seen " I only group with guildies" or "I never do PUG's". Add to that folks who like to solo, or duo/trio with friends and there isn't that much to feed a mandated grouping environment these days.

Some people are looking at the server mergers as a solution to turn things around. I sincerely doubt that the mergers will achieve that goal. I fully expect the merged servers to continue bleeding as well. First to go will be those who thought the mergers would solve their problems.

The problem is far deeper. It is a huge world with content sprinkled here and there. There is nothing compelling or cohesive about it. There is nothing novel about it either. With compelling content and some "omg" moments maybe folks would have endured the crappy performance and all the bugs, CTD's. However, folks aren't enduring that for same old, same old.

[VoiceOfReason]

Incorrect. The players that walked can be categorised thus:

* The people that were originally attracted to the deliberately out of date and misleading FAQ and promises of "kunark, velious, that sort of challenge".
* The people that couldn't either run VG at all, or weren't going to accept the bugs it has
* The people that discovered the game was two years away from being complete

The knock on effect when these people left meant people couldn't find groups, and soloing your way to 50 is freaking boring. So the gradual bleed continues because of those factors.

There is some truth in all of those things. People walked for all of those reasons and some for none of them probably.

Here is the bottom line though - If the crash/chunk/town bugs aren't fixed, the game will die.

If they are, the game will live. If they fix the bugs, add content and make make smart decisions, the game has a good chance to become a significant success.

[rhagz]

Wow, it's all so simple. I can't believe they never thought of that!

Fix bugs, add content and make smart decisions. Brilliant!

Dur, the whole crux of the issue is that they are unable to fix bugs, they are unable to add content and almost none of the decisions they have ever made could be considered smart.

[Quadrophenia]

I still don't have any idea if it is dead or not and I play every day.

I have come 180 degrees on one point, however. Grouping as in EQ1 is gone. I didn't want to admit it. I thought I wanted it once again and fully supported Brad, Sigil's, and even SOE's view of grouping as recently as this spring.

My wife and I were talking one day and she commented that she didn't think much of anyone wanted to group anymore, that players today were different. Maybe it's younger people that supposedly won't play that way....maybe it's players that have more RL responsibilities......maybe it's that we learned how to play mmo's......maybe it's all these and more. But the simple fact is that people do not play the EQ1 grouping style anymore. You can not like a fact, but it's still a fact.

Thus we have lots of soloing, some duoing, and a few small groups, probably couples and RL friends. Why did 2 boxing become so very prevalent in EQ1? Because people could play their way. You needed close to a full group and multi boxing gave it without needing 6 different people. If you ever 2 boxed, you are NOT for grouping, no matter what you want to claim.

Back to hope for Vanguard? I still play because this world is exactly how i want my mmo to look. It's a world!! And the traditional classes are all here. The pc and npc races are great. Even the lore is pretty damn good. That's it.

The gameplay is terrible, the dot/dungeon system takes dungeon play out of the game. Playing is watching the UI, not the action. Let me repeat that. This game is watch the UI. That's not why one plays a 3d game! Crafting and diplomacy have some nice ideas that were never finished for reasons we all know. And they became grindfests.

I am overwhelmingly in favor of the earlier comment in this thread to rip the game apart and start over. Keep the world, the races and classes. That's it. I'll wait for another year. In fact, if I really believed in the outcome, I'd continue subscribing for a year with no game to play just to support the development.

This world is flat out fantastic. Start over and give us a fun game to play.

[tdewey10]

There may be hope for the game but not without an entirely new team at the top.

They should move the whole group to SOE's main offices and then replace lead desgin, management, class design and etc.

Classes need to be un-nerfed, Bosses need to be much more interesting, Itemization must be totally redone (less, better items -- a la EQ1). And of course -- lore must be integrated into the game from day one to raids to class abilities. It needs more epic quests and less kill 10 dune crawlers for antenna. It needs more bossees like the stronghold grandmaster and Hruk and less like all the gimp bosses in the Xenn areas (AF excluded). In short the game needs to go back to its EQ1 roots.

I disagree that grouping is entirely gone -- I grouped almost everyday when I played VG. And that's what I loved most about the game. No more WoW -- soloing all the time.

[starsailor]

I disagree that grouping is entirely gone -- I grouped almost everyday when I played VG. And that's what I loved most about the game. No more WoW -- soloing all the time.

I think you have to have both. With Wow, you could get away with not grouping at all, and cope with ok gear from solo quests, or solo drops etc, or at the least from the AH. The best items still came from groups though. LORTO, although it seems more soloing, actually changes to be more group centric at the higher lvls.

So I think you need both. The market has changed. Even for old school EQ players. If I'm logging on for 30mins, or 2hrs, then I want to feel I can do something worthwhile.

[acrobat]

My wife and I were talking one day and she commented that she didn't think much of anyone wanted to group anymore, that players today were different. Maybe it's younger people that supposedly won't play that way....maybe it's players that have more RL responsibilities......maybe it's that we learned how to play mmo's......maybe it's all these and more. But the simple fact is that people do not play the EQ1 grouping style anymore.I agree. I personally think its the latter - "all of the above". Infact, I felt like this was the case, even before Vanguard had reached beta. But I assumed that there would be just enough people left who still wanted stuff like that. And I assumed those people would all flock to Vanguard, to relive that experience they saw before in EQ.

But that didn't work out quite so simply. I actually stumbled across a whole bunch of people I hadn't seen since early Everquest! So it definitely seemed to work almost like I expected. But something went wrong. And although a lot of people gave it a try, they didn't stay.



Thus we have lots of soloing, some duoing, and a few small groups, probably couples and RL friends. Why did 2 boxing become so very prevalent in EQ1? Because people could play their way. You needed close to a full group and multi boxing gave it without needing 6 different people. If you ever 2 boxed, you are NOT for grouping, no matter what you want to claim.Yeap.


Back to hope for Vanguard? I still play because this world is exactly how i want my mmo to look. It's a world!! And the traditional classes are all here. The pc and npc races are great. Even the lore is pretty damn good. That's it.

The gameplay is terrible,Absolute bingo... Thats exactly how I felt too. It is frustrating. I really loved the world and its locations. I loved the graphics and sounds. The spell effects where improving etc. The classes where all there, and they where in an archetype system which, although I am still sceptical about, seems like the most logical way of arranging classes in a game like this. So I loved it and I was convinced it was going to be great.

But..... no matter how good the graphics are, and no matter how much I enjoyed exploring places like Bordinars which gave me a real sense of remoteness and isolation... and going over the planes north east of Veskals Exchange and seeing that awesome sight of the smoke rising from the area to the east.... all that means nothing if the gameplay itself sucks. And the gameplay sucked :( In my opinion atleast.

So I feel real sorry for myself hahah. Because these guys made me think they where geniuses, because they had made Everquest. So I saw the graphics and the world and loved it, and I just figured, if they can shoe horn some great gameplay into the package, it would be amazing. But thats where it all fell apart for me :( Oh well.


the dot/dungeon system takes dungeon play out of the game. Playing is watching the UI, not the action. Let me repeat that. This game is watch the UI. That's not why one plays a 3d game!Again... bingo! I don't feel so bad about never visiting Vanguard forums now, if other people are already saying what I think :)

I think you have to have both. With Wow, you could get away with not grouping at all,

So I think you need both. The market has changed. Yes thats exactly what I think too. It needs both.

This is why I never visited the official forum during beta. (The one that Sigil used to host). I went on there once or twice, and posted about how I thought it was so important to allow soloing as much as grouping. And nobody from Sigil acknowledged my post, and probably 80% of the players who responded to my post, basically told me to "stfu and go play baldurs gate or something".

I knew right then, that the game would probably struggle. I could understand the developers not having time to respond to some post by some unknown guy on a forum. But if the majority of "fans" didn't appreciate my thoughts either, and infact thought the exact opposite, then I just knew the game would have problems.

I have only played WoW for about 1 week (a trial). But still, I have read a lot about it. EQ was my game. I played it for about 5 years on and off. I knew how important soloing was. Some people even soloed 100% of the time. People can say all they want about it being pointless paying a monthly fee to play a massively-MULTIPLAYER-online game, and then soloing the whole time... But there MUST be a reason for it, or people wouldn't play would they? The truth is, there is a reason why people soloed so much. And in addition to that, even the people who grouped most of the time, could solo if they ever felt like it too. Or could solo when they where waiting for their friends to log in.

When I was invited in Vanguard beta, I had been playing the game for about 2 to 3 minutes, and I asked something in /say to a nearby player. He said, "Why don't you join me?". So I did. For the next few hours, I was basically stuck in a group with this guy and his friend. It was fun at first, but I screwed something up, and then I had to run back to town and sell some junk I had collected and also learn a new skill. In the time it took me to do that, this guy had progressed onto the next quest and didn't wait for me. So I spent the next few hours doing quests by myself, while watching this guy, "Lol"'ing about stuff with his friend in group chat, even although I couldn't see him or what he was talking about.

The next few days I soloed which was great. And I had plenty more soloing for a while. But then at about level 18, I found the place called "Hillsbury Manor" and I wanted to go inside. As a former EQ addict, it just reminded me of Mistmoore/Unrest/etc, and I wanted to go in and look around and probably get chased out by a beetle :) There where two gargoyles on the enterence who conned about even to me - but the developers had linked them together... So I couldn't go inside.

About a week later, I was nearby, and someone shouted, "Psi and Warrior looking for more for Hillsbury". I thought it was my lucky day, I would finally get to see inside this cool looking place.... We killed those two gargoyles at the entrance, but then what happened? The path leading to the manor had about 8 angry mobs linked together too. The Psi said, "I don't like the look of this... I can maybe mez a couple". The warrior said, "It'll be ok, I dont think they will all come". He fired his bow, and all hell broke lose and about 90 mobs attacked us.

So they basically ruined the one place I most wanted to visit.. :(

By the time I actually did manage to get inside, I was level 22, so everything was too easy for me anyway. And because it took a full group... we where ganking stuff left and right with no challenge at all. The inside was tiny too. It was basically 3 rooms with a token basement room. We just ran from room to room slaughtering everything. It was too easy, there was no sense of danger, no sense of awe. It was nothing like the amazing Unrest/Mistmoore experience at all.

What a complete and utter failure...

Thats not the reason I quit the game, but that is one of the main reasons. I am still dumbfounded, that these guys made Everquest, and yet they failed to even identify what made EQ good, and what made it bad. They removed all the things I enjoyed the most, and added a bunch of things I never wanted to see.

[Zarkov]

Playing is watching the UI, not the action. Let me repeat that. This game is watch the UI. That's not why one plays a 3d game!

So far, I've only tried a handful of MMORPGs (EQ, EQ2, AC2, WoW, some freeware stuff), but what you say seems to be more or less true for all of them.

The cool 3d graphics more or less gets reduced to being only a fancy visual representation of the actual game, which basically is whack-a-mole.

That's probably why - in the MMORPGs that I've tried - if it wasn't for the ubiquitous progress element, I think most people would have quit within the first hour of gameplay.

[acrobat]

So far, I've only tried a handful of MMORPGs (EQ, EQ2, AC2, WoW, some freeware stuff), but what you say seems to be more or less true for all of them.

The cool 3d graphics more or less gets reduced to being only a fancy visual representation of the actual game, which basically is whack-a-mole.

That's probably why - in the MMORPGs that I've tried - if it wasn't for the ubiquitous progress element, I think most people would have quit within the first hour of gameplay.Yeah it is usually similar. But some games are much better. It was not bad for me, in Everquest. I did look at it quite a lot. But I felt that I was forced to look at my UI in Vanguard, about 80% more than in Everquest. And that is quite ridiculous when you consider that one of the only few improvements from Everquest, is the graphics (which I was missing because I was looking at the UI the whole time).

[danbala]

Anyway, what do people think about Vanguard these days? Do you have hope the game has a chance, and stick around or is it too late?


I think its clear at this point that many (if not most) of the game's supposed features where just vaporware. I haven't seen any evidence to suggest that Sony will make the major investment needed to keep those promises. And as you noted by the time they did it would be years too late.

My best guess is that VGs best fate is to limp along in its current state to fill out the back corners of the station pass. Sony has stopped actively promoting it and we begin to increasing focus on newer titles with more promise like Gods & Heroes and Pirates of the Burning Sea.

[rhagz]

I think its clear at this point that many (if not most) of the game's supposed features where just vaporware. I haven't seen any evidence to suggest that Sony will make the major investment needed to keep those promises. And as you noted by the time they did it would be years too late.

My best guess is that VGs best fate is to limp along in its current state to fill out the back corners of the station pass. Sony has stopped actively promoting it and we begin to increasing focus on newer titles with more promise like Gods & Heroes and Pirates of the Burning Sea.

You can take Gods and Heroes off that list.

http://www.mmorpg.com/gamelist.cfm?BHCP=1&LOADNEWS=8503&bhcp=1

[Joodah]

You can take Gods and Heroes off that list.

http://www.mmorpg.com/gamelist.cfm?BHCP=1&LOADNEWS=8503&bhcp=1

Not really:

SOE Senior Brand Manager Debysue Wolfcale characterized the move as clarification of the actual roles each company play in the development of the game. SOE continues to handle marketing and retail distribution for the title, the same roles they held before this move.

The altered relationship clarifies for the community and the press that SOE has no active role in the development of Gods and Heroes, SOE explained, and that all credit should go to Perpetual Entertainment. Wolfcale also mentioned that she believes it is important, given this is Perpetual's rookie project, that they receive maximum exposure. The change in label provides that.

Far as I know, it will still be on the menu of SOE hosted games.

[rhagz]

Ah, well that's a shame. I do find it funny that companies have to go out of their way to distance themselves from SOE as much possible, even while working with them.

The altered relationship clarifies for the community and the press that SOE has no active role in the development of Gods and Heroes,

Not that any of it matters, GnH is not going to be much competition for EQ or EQ2 which is all SOE cares about.

[Joodah]

Ah, well that's a shame. I do find it funny that companies have to go out of their way to distance themselves from SOE as much possible, even while working with them.



Not that any of it matters, GnH is not going to be much competition for EQ or EQ2 which is all SOE cares about.

It looked nice at FF but I'm more interested in PotBS heh

[shadowrelm]

You need to move on from the "grouping is dead" argument. I'm not saying it's not true, it's just that we have all heard it from you before. Many times.

Oh and *I* did quit because of the bugs and the performance. And I really don't think I'm in a minority group of people. Not all games have the lack of polish and playability that this game did at launch. WoW was certainly more playable at launch.
------------------------------------------------------------------

will be glad to "move on" from the grouping is dead argument...just as soon as i stop seeing posts proclaiming "vanguard died because the caved in to casual gamers" or "vanguard died because it was buggy".

not all games have a lack of polish this one did at launch?

ROFL. this must be your first game. or maby you played WoW because thats the only one i know of that was any better than Vanguard at launch.

EQ1 was a nightmare. it crached every day for the first week or so. it was down more often than it was up for the first month for craches, patches and emergancy patched. EQ2 crashed alot too for the first couple weeks. and they had loads of problems with its equipment requirements. they even had to resort to providing links to drivers for various video cards that just wouldnt work out of the box with the game.

you certainly were not there for AO launch. i was. slide show. all im gona say, and every one who was there knows what im talking about. DOAC has some major clipping problems. walking into stairs instead of up them then getting stuck in them? they added a /stuck command just to stop all the petitioning.

infact, the ONLY games i have played that launched smoothly and relativly bug free is WoW and LOTR. D&D online launched smooth, but there were alot of bugs in the instances that had to be worked out. adn how long was it before crafting was fixed in SWG?

if you wont play a game with bugs......better stop playing. Vanguard had a few but over all, i would give them an 8 out of 10 for reliability compared to the other titles on the market. AO, i will say, was the worst, WoW the best. and for comparison, EQ1 i would give a 4 for the first month. Vanguard was significantly better than EQ1 at launch.

it is the mainstream players that walked mostly. most of the powergamers left too because there was no top end game, but ALL of the powergamers put together would only be around 10 percent of the 200,000 people who opened an account.

forced grouping is why Vanguard is combining servers. forced grouping is why D&D online has fewer players than Vanguard. SWG and EQ2 both faced a mass exodus too for the same reason. EQ2 was a little quicker to add mainstream content than SWG was though. EQ1 still hasnt. thats why they have 300 awsome zones full of outstanding content sitting.....totally empty.

dont get me wrong. im not an anti grouping person. i prefer to group. but no game maker to date has created grouping mechanics that make grouping time freindy for most gamers. yes, casual gamers are MOST gamers. some tried. DOAC made 8 person groups, that helped a little. Shadowbane increased exp by 80 percent for every person in the group so there was no way to level half as fast, that helped a little too. WoW lets you summon people from anywhere in the world, still, there is very little grouping there either, even though the team pvp is always packed.

untill someone finds a way to make grouping more time friendly, grouping is dead for mainstream players. and if SOE tried to relaunch Vanguard as it was, a forced grouping game, they will get the same response, bug fixes and top end content or not.

server combines are not going to do it. bug fixes wont either. add all the top end content you want, its not going to do it, just look at EQ1 for proof. more top end content than most games combined and yet.......an empty world full of empty zones and what few people who do play, outside of raiding, not much grouping going on there either by the POWER GAMERS. even they would rather double/triple box than put up with other people most of the time.

grouping may work in linnage, or guildwars or any of the other japna games open to the asian market, but it doesnt work here. never has. it was in EQ1 that "farming" and "double boxing" was invented. the mother of grouping games spawned inventive ways to SOLO. it was so prevelant that they actually had to level restrict dragons to keep people from soloing them. they had to restrict spells to force people to group, like fear for example.

this market has NEVER embraced grouping. we may all love the concept, but the majority of gamers, even the powergamers, would rather solo. they may SAY they prefer to group, but they dont group much. talk is cheap.

its dead. infact, it was never alive.

blizzard saw that. multuiply 15 bucks by 9 million dollars a month. thats the reward they are getting for acting on it.

but go ahead. relaunch vanguard again. talk like it was the bugs, or the lack of top end content. Blizzard is winning the lottery every month because they understood what no one here wants to admit......

grouping is dead.

[Chae668]

holy block of text batman.
try using the quote button too. works better than typing the whole quote out.

ooo... you can compare other games, and tell people what they have and have not played. you must be a mind reader. comparing games... pish posh. get some original material, then try and post something constructive. like me:D

;)

[Choctaw]

You need to move on from the "grouping is dead" argument. I'm not saying it's not true, it's just that we have all heard it from you before. Many times.

Oh and *I* did quit because of the bugs and the performance. And I really don't think I'm in a minority group of people. Not all games have the lack of polish and playability that this game did at launch. WoW was certainly more playable at launch.
------------------------------------------------------------------

will be glad to "move on" from the grouping is dead argument...just as soon as i stop seeing posts proclaiming "vanguard died because the caved in to casual gamers" or "vanguard died because it was buggy".

not all games have a lack of polish this one did at launch?

ROFL. this must be your first game. or maby you played WoW because thats the only one i know of that was any better than Vanguard at launch.

EQ1 was a nightmare. it crached every day for the first week or so. it was down more often than it was up for the first month for craches, patches and emergancy patched. EQ2 crashed alot too for the first couple weeks. and they had loads of problems with its equipment requirements. they even had to resort to providing links to drivers for various video cards that just wouldnt work out of the box with the game.

you certainly were not there for AO launch. i was. slide show. all im gona say, and every one who was there knows what im talking about. DOAC has some major clipping problems. walking into stairs instead of up them then getting stuck in them? they added a /stuck command just to stop all the petitioning.

infact, the ONLY games i have played that launched smoothly and relativly bug free is WoW and LOTR. D&D online launched smooth, but there were alot of bugs in the instances that had to be worked out. adn how long was it before crafting was fixed in SWG?

if you wont play a game with bugs......better stop playing. Vanguard had a few but over all, i would give them an 8 out of 10 for reliability compared to the other titles on the market. AO, i will say, was the worst, WoW the best. and for comparison, EQ1 i would give a 4 for the first month. Vanguard was significantly better than EQ1 at launch.

it is the mainstream players that walked mostly. most of the powergamers left too because there was no top end game, but ALL of the powergamers put together would only be around 10 percent of the 200,000 people who opened an account.

forced grouping is why Vanguard is combining servers. forced grouping is why D&D online has fewer players than Vanguard. SWG and EQ2 both faced a mass exodus too for the same reason. EQ2 was a little quicker to add mainstream content than SWG was though. EQ1 still hasnt. thats why they have 300 awsome zones full of outstanding content sitting.....totally empty.

dont get me wrong. im not an anti grouping person. i prefer to group. but no game maker to date has created grouping mechanics that make grouping time freindy for most gamers. yes, casual gamers are MOST gamers. some tried. DOAC made 8 person groups, that helped a little. Shadowbane increased exp by 80 percent for every person in the group so there was no way to level half as fast, that helped a little too. WoW lets you summon people from anywhere in the world, still, there is very little grouping there either, even though the team pvp is always packed.

untill someone finds a way to make grouping more time friendly, grouping is dead for mainstream players. and if SOE tried to relaunch Vanguard as it was, a forced grouping game, they will get the same response, bug fixes and top end content or not.

server combines are not going to do it. bug fixes wont either. add all the top end content you want, its not going to do it, just look at EQ1 for proof. more top end content than most games combined and yet.......an empty world full of empty zones and what few people who do play, outside of raiding, not much grouping going on there either by the POWER GAMERS. even they would rather double/triple box than put up with other people most of the time.

grouping may work in linnage, or guildwars or any of the other japna games open to the asian market, but it doesnt work here. never has. it was in EQ1 that "farming" and "double boxing" was invented. the mother of grouping games spawned inventive ways to SOLO. it was so prevelant that they actually had to level restrict dragons to keep people from soloing them. they had to restrict spells to force people to group, like fear for example.

this market has NEVER embraced grouping. we may all love the concept, but the majority of gamers, even the powergamers, would rather solo. they may SAY they prefer to group, but they dont group much. talk is cheap.

its dead. infact, it was never alive.

blizzard saw that. multuiply 15 bucks by 9 million dollars a month. thats the reward they are getting for acting on it.

but go ahead. relaunch vanguard again. talk like it was the bugs, or the lack of top end content. Blizzard is winning the lottery every month because they understood what no one here wants to admit......

grouping is dead.


I played WoW, LotR, CoH, and GW at launch. All were better than this at launch by a large margin. I also played DDO and while it wasn't that buggy, the game itself wasn't that hot. You also need to understand that I personally group bugs with overall game performance. Chunking deaths, t-port deaths, lost corpses, ending up under the world, horrid fps...I consider these all under the general bugs/performance blanket. Having one quest giver not update my quest is annoying. Having all the other things listed on top of that annoyance is a game killer.

[Aamir Khann]

try using the quote button too. works better than typing the whole quote out.

ooo... you can compare other games, and tell people what they have and have not played. you must be a mind reader. comparing games... pish posh. get some original material, then try and post something constructive. like me:D

;)

Pish posh Chae688.

The guy is right. Taking choice away from players even though you hide it well, by making the game "groupcentric" is still forcing players to group to achieve higher level goals.

The thing that disappoints me most about vanguard is not the graphics, not the bugs, not the quests, not grind... it is simply that there are very few players to play with now, and it is not gonna change just cuz they moved everyone to fewer servers to simulate better populations.

I would wager that within one week after merge, that it will still be very hard to get a group because the steady bleed of players will have only become more noticeable because of being merged and we now will know what others servers feel too.

[danbala]

ROFL. this must be your first game. or maby you played WoW because thats the only one i know of that was any better than Vanguard at launch.
.

It wasn't the bugs that killed VG, it was the performance issues. There were many bugs but as you said people can play throiugh them. The CTDs and the 5-10 FPS was the reason most people dropped the game.

[Skazz]

But in 3+ years the game could become amazing like what SOE did to EQ2...but at the same time 3+ years is way too long and there are other games like WAR, AoC etc. coming out to steal even more people's attention away.


Considering that there are only 20K people left playing the game, do you not think that SOE should try and re-release the game 2 or 3 years later?

[starsailor]

:eek: Considering that there are only 20K people left playing the game, do you not think that SOE should try and re-release the game 2 or 3 years later?

Nothing will change in that time other than peoples systems will be better and cope with it. Vanguards problems were beyond that. The engine never worked, performance was poor, and more importantly, the fundamental mechanics of the game were such that it wasn't fun or enjoyable.

[Jordan Jax]

ahhh...gotta love the internet. Everybody knows why the game has low subs, everyone thinks they are right, but everyone has a different opinion.

For the record, i don't believe it had anything to do with "forced grouping" because this game doesn't force you to group. There are several good solo classes, and lately the game has been made so unbelievably easy some classes can solo 5-dots (which were originally intended to be tough for full groups), and any combination of 2 or 3 classes can take down just about anything in this game.

I believe it was a combination of performance issues along with lack of high-end content that is keeping subs low right now, along with a general lack of direction on what the games wants to be. SOE says they want to keep it a challenging game but the moves they are making say the opposite. Therefore you scare away the casual crowd while the people who want a more challenging "sandbox" type game get more disappointed with every GU. That's my opinion, and i could be wrong ;)

SOE really needs to figure out a long-term plan, market to the crowd they want, and go for it. The world is in place, i think a lot of the base mechanics of the game are fun, just pick a direction and get things done, improve performance as much as possible and get in some of those elements of the game currently missing that will flesh out the world, make it deeper etc. They are making some progress adding guild halls etc. but have a long long way to go.

I'm still having a lot of fun in the game because I have very little time to play so haven't even made it to level 30 yet. My hope is that by the time i reach mid-40s some high-end content is added, APW is ready to go, and SOE keeps some of the challenge in the game. If high-end content is lacking still and/or SOE keeps simplifying the game/making it easier etc. i'll leave. /shrug

[Chae668]

Pish posh Chae688.

The guy is right. Taking choice away from players even though you hide it well, by making the game "groupcentric" is still forcing players to group to achieve higher level goals. you dont have to group to get to lv 50. has been stated many times before, and the guy is not right. true. i didnt read his block text. nor did i really reference anything that he wrote. was mainly just writing cause i could at the time.

The thing that disappoints me most about vanguard is not the graphics, not the bugs, not the quests, not grind... it is simply that there are very few players to play with now, and it is not gonna change just cuz they moved everyone to fewer servers to simulate better populations. having more players is better than no players. there are 4 servers merging to 1 on the regular servers. thats a ton of peeps. even at this state of the game, im a healer. i have no prob getting groups. yesturday i didnt even have a lfg tag on. i was crafting. got a group for 3 hours. it still happens. when i do put up my lfg tag, i sit and craft, or help guildies until i get one. never once do i put my name out there on ooc. so, when the merger does hit, it should be that much easier for everyone (including me)

I would wager that within one week after merge, that it will still be very hard to get a group because the steady bleed of players will have only become more noticeable because of being merged and we now will know what others servers feel too.
yea. the bleed may still be there, but im seeing alot of my other friends that quit the game come back (including me). i think when the servers merge (and they fix problems that always arise with anything they try and change) the bleed may become "almost" <-- notice the word almost. i do mean almost here. i dont want to be told i meant never. it definatly is almost. nonexsistant. alot of peeps had probs with no grouping. they will give it a shot. alot of peeps had probs with performance (totally me) it has gotten better. nothing will ever be perfect in this game. that was never an issue. nothing will ever be the way it was. but with GU2 and the server merge, it had me curious, and i resubbed. i think others will too.

[Aidon]

not all games have a lack of polish this one did at launch?

ROFL. this must be your first game. or maby you played WoW because thats the only one i know of that was any better than Vanguard at launch.

EQ1 was a nightmare. it crached every day for the first week or so. it was down more often than it was up for the first month for craches, patches and emergancy patched.

One would hope that in the what, eight years now, since EQ's launch, the developers might have learned something...suggesting that a "3rd" generation game be excused because it was only almost as buggy as the "1st" generation game smacks of moronicism.

EQ2 crashed alot too for the first couple weeks. and they had loads of problems with its equipment requirements. they even had to resort to providing links to drivers for various video cards that just wouldnt work out of the box with the game.

And EQ2 was on the verge of going the way of Vanguard. They managed to turn it around. People left EQ2 in the early days in droves because of the buggy PoS that it was.

you certainly were not there for AO launch. i was. slide show. all im gona say, and every one who was there knows what im talking about. DOAC has some major clipping problems. walking into stairs instead of up them then getting stuck in them? they added a /stuck command just to stop all the petitioning.

I was at that one as well...and, yet again, people quit that game left right and center. AO survived only because it essentially relaunched a year later and was the first to start offering free trials in order to entice people back.

infact, the ONLY games i have played that launched smoothly and relativly bug free is WoW and LOTR. D&D online launched smooth, but there were alot of bugs in the instances that had to be worked out. adn how long was it before crafting was fixed in SWG?

And there is a reason why they were successful out of the box. oh, you can also add in CoH for relatively bug free.

There is a clear and obvious relationship between the health of a game and the smoothness of its launch. EQ1 was an anomoly because it was the 1st and there were no other options.

by the by, the reason most people left was because Vanguard was a buggy piece of shit which crashed constantly and had shitty FPS even when it was stable for an hour. Few people quit because it was too hardcore. Even fewer people quit because they made the gameplay more accessible to people with lives. People quit because the game would CTD 1-4 times per hour.

I liked the VG gameplay, for the most part, and the graphics were groovy, but the game was a buggy PoS which had been optimized by a drunk ass smack-addict chimpanzee.

I've recently upgraded some of my hardware and if VG would activate my account for 10 days for free, I'd probably give it a shot again, but I won't pay them to alpha test their game any more.

if you wont play a game with bugs......better stop playing. Vanguard had a few but over all, i would give them an 8 out of 10 for reliability compared to the other titles on the market. AO, i will say, was the worst, WoW the best. and for comparison, EQ1 i would give a 4 for the first month. Vanguard was significantly better than EQ1 at launch.

it is the mainstream players that walked mostly. most of the powergamers left too because there was no top end game, but ALL of the powergamers put together would only be around 10 percent of the 200,000 people who opened an account.

forced grouping is why Vanguard is combining servers. forced grouping is why D&D online has fewer players than Vanguard. SWG and EQ2 both faced a mass exodus too for the same reason. EQ2 was a little quicker to add mainstream content than SWG was though. EQ1 still hasnt. thats why they have 300 awsome zones full of outstanding content sitting.....totally empty.

dont get me wrong. im not an anti grouping person. i prefer to group. but no game maker to date has created grouping mechanics that make grouping time freindy for most gamers. yes, casual gamers are MOST gamers. some tried. DOAC made 8 person groups, that helped a little. Shadowbane increased exp by 80 percent for every person in the group so there was no way to level half as fast, that helped a little too. WoW lets you summon people from anywhere in the world, still, there is very little grouping there either, even though the team pvp is always packed.

untill someone finds a way to make grouping more time friendly, grouping is dead for mainstream players. and if SOE tried to relaunch Vanguard as it was, a forced grouping game, they will get the same response, bug fixes and top end content or not.

server combines are not going to do it. bug fixes wont either. add all the top end content you want, its not going to do it, just look at EQ1 for proof. more top end content than most games combined and yet.......an empty world full of empty zones and what few people who do play, outside of raiding, not much grouping going on there either by the POWER GAMERS. even they would rather double/triple box than put up with other people most of the time.

grouping may work in linnage, or guildwars or any of the other japna games open to the asian market, but it doesnt work here. never has. it was in EQ1 that "farming" and "double boxing" was invented. the mother of grouping games spawned inventive ways to SOLO. it was so prevelant that they actually had to level restrict dragons to keep people from soloing them. they had to restrict spells to force people to group, like fear for example.

this market has NEVER embraced grouping. we may all love the concept, but the majority of gamers, even the powergamers, would rather solo. they may SAY they prefer to group, but they dont group much. talk is cheap.

its dead. infact, it was never alive.

blizzard saw that. multuiply 15 bucks by 9 million dollars a month. thats the reward they are getting for acting on it.

but go ahead. relaunch vanguard again. talk like it was the bugs, or the lack of top end content. Blizzard is winning the lottery every month because they understood what no one here wants to admit......

grouping is dead.[/QUOTE]

[Arch Magi]

Do people have any hope left for Vanguard?

In short, yes. I have hope that Vanguard will get better.

It already has since Beta 2, since Retail Release, and since SoE took over.

I see nothing but Vanguard getting better and better with time.

[TheSteelValley]

1. the vision tm. launch yet another group orientated game as it was intended.

the downside is, mainstream players are going to shun it just like they shun EQ1, EQ2, and SWG, the other 3 titles SOE owns. additionally, even if Vanguard does support itself in this format, chances are, the players that they gain will come from their other 3 titles and not the massive mainstream player base.

Being a group oriented game was why SWG had a good community. Pre CU I was able to find groups with ease, and those were the days of 20 man groups. The thing that killed SWG was SOE's mentality of making big changes instead of fixing existing bugs. They also made the mistake of thinking that SWG players wanted balanced professions. We only ever wanted the choice to be a powerful fighter, a not so powerful fighter with crafting skills, a doctor, a weak entertainer or even a bio engineer.

2. back peddle it a little like they did with EQ2 and SWG. offer more mainstream content.

I can't speak for EQ2, but to say they back peddled a bit on SWG has to be the understatement of the decade. Removing most of the professions and completely changing the combat system doesn't really qualify as back peddling. It's called Dumbed Down.

the downside again is splitting their own gamers. mabe no net gain in subscription numbers for the money spent when you consider all their online titles as a whole.

I don't know what VSOH needs to become the game that was promised, but I can promise you that you DO NOT want SOE to do anything even remotely close to what they did to SWG.

[Chae668]

but go ahead. relaunch vanguard again. talk like it was the bugs, or the lack of top end content. Blizzard is winning the lottery every month because they understood what no one here wants to admit......

grouping is dead.
its funny how you say grouping is dead cause blizzard doesnt do it...

but then what is the raids? they are still groups. and you still need them. so blizzard still feels it necessary.

but, then you have the group dungeons... those are still groups, so again blizzard still feels it necessary.

and yes.

blizzard still has group quests. just your choice if you want to do them.

so dont tell me that grouping is dead, when EVERY MMO of this genre has a grouping system and peeps have to use it.

[rhagz]

Forced grouping to make any progress is dead. Optional grouping is not. There is a difference. No one wants to find 5 people to hold their hand every time they walk out of town.. but they don't mind working with others when it comes time to slay the dragon.

[Jordan Jax]

Forced grouping to make any progress is dead. Optional grouping is not. There is a difference. No one wants to find 5 people to hold their hand every time they walk out of town.. but they don't mind working with others when it comes time to slay the dragon.

OK, forced grouping is dead. What game are you talking about that has forced grouping?...because it certainly isn't Vanguard.

[rhagz]

OK, forced grouping is dead. What game are you talking about that has forced grouping?...because it certainly isn't Vanguard.

Everquest, and the stigma that followed Vanguard was that it was made by the people who made Everquest and would be a spiritual successor to it. This made the game a non-option to many people.

[Poke]

Yes. I still have hope the game can rebound. I am going back to check it out after the merge. Even if the game is still not completely up to par so to speak I will still watch it if only because there is not another MMO that is great right now. There are other great games such as Bioshock but not another MMO that is great enough to lose hope in VG yet.

[Chae668]

agreed. if i wasnt here to watch the game progress than i would have never re subbed to a game that i did like.

[Skazz]

I don't know what VSOH needs to become the game that was promised, .

Errr a miracle? While I have no doubt Vanguard will get better and better. It will never be the game that sigil promised.

[Chae668]

Errr a miracle? While I have no doubt Vanguard will get better and better. It will never be the game that sigil promised.
lol. thats because sigil couldnt make a game that sigil promised.

[Draemorr]

Well I think VG has only one way to go and that is up. SOE has proven it can turn a game around by example of EQ 2 and even EQ 1 was and still has tons of peeps playing. I resubbed today so I hope the merges will make things turn around.

[Aidon]

its funny how you say grouping is dead cause blizzard doesnt do it...

but then what is the raids? they are still groups. and you still need them. so blizzard still feels it necessary.

but, then you have the group dungeons... those are still groups, so again blizzard still feels it necessary.

and yes.

blizzard still has group quests. just your choice if you want to do them.

so dont tell me that grouping is dead, when EVERY MMO of this genre has a grouping system and peeps have to use it.


That wasn't my quote, I messed up my quotation =D You're quoting whoever the original guy was.

Though I tend to agree that enforced grouping is dead and should go the way of the dodo. Certain things within a game should always require a group...but a game that does not allow real and meaningful progress via soloing is doomed to failure.

[shadowrelm]

I played WoW, LotR, CoH, and GW at launch. All were better than this at launch by a large margin. I also played DDO and while it wasn't that buggy, the game itself wasn't that hot. You also need to understand that I personally group bugs with overall game performance. Chunking deaths, t-port deaths, lost corpses, ending up under the world, horrid fps...I consider these all under the general bugs/performance blanket. Having one quest giver not update my quest is annoying. Having all the other things listed on top of that annoyance is a game killer.
---------------------------------------------------------------

anyone taken the boat in EQ1 lately? i have. 8 years and they still cant get the boat through oot without some kind of problem. take a look at the EQ2 alla site. notice the threads about performace problems and bugs created by fixes for other bugs. i just droped a quest in WoW this week after 5 attempts adn it wouldnt update.

ALL games have bugs. Vanguard wasnt really that bad, and thats comparing it to the games i have played. EQ1, EQ2, AO, AC2, Shadowbane, D&D online, WoW, LOTR, Earth and beyond, Guild Wars, SWG, DAoC, planetside, and a couple others im sure i have forgotten.

never played CoH. tights and capes on men just dont do it for me. have some friends that play and they like the whole badge thing, but it just never interested me.

its the grouping.

someone mentioned you dont need to group to get to 50 in Vanguard. he is correct. but if you dont, you WILL spend 50 levels of grinding in out door areas that all look alike after a while and never finnish a quest that will give you a decent item, not to mention never finnish over 60 percent of the quests at all.

we did that in EQ1 when it was new because there was nowher else to go. now there is. so now we dont. and thats why Vanguard is combining servers along with EQ1 and EQ2 and swg looks like a ghost town in the low and mid level areas.

Forced grouping would be fine if groups were available. forced grouping would be fine if it didnt take the better part of an hour to get one going. your average mainstream player barely plays more than an hour at a time.

but people are not going to do it any more, because they dont have to anymore.

thats why Blizzard is thowing a party for going from 8 million to 9 million subscribers in just the last 6 to 8 months and talking about expanding in China while EQ1 and Vanguard are combining servers, and EQ2 is spitting out expansions fats and furious just to keep the people they do have from leaving.

they gained more players in the last 6 months than EQ1, EQ2, SWG and Vanguard have all combined. there is a friggin huge market chomping at the bit for new games, but game makers are still stuck in the forced grouping mode. WoW isnt that great of a game. the graphics are cartoonish, the quests are not any better than any of the other games, and the classes are knock offs of the fantasy staples we see in every other game. they dont even have player built housing of any kind.

the ONLY thing WoW and their 9 million subscribers have that all the rest do not have is access to 90 percent of their content for mainstream players.

thats it. its not rocket science. its not a big mystery.

no forced grouping to access the majority of the content ......IS......the differance between folding up servers or adding ANOTHER million paying subscribers.

if Vanguard relaunches with the forced grouping mindset again....it will fail again. im not saying that, the 9 million people playing WoW are.

[Spirit]

...

[ikaoma420]

I played WoW, LotR, CoH, and GW at launch. All were better than this at launch by a large margin. I also played DDO and while it wasn't that buggy, the game itself wasn't that hot. You also need to understand that I personally group bugs with overall game performance. Chunking deaths, t-port deaths, lost corpses, ending up under the world, horrid fps...I consider these all under the general bugs/performance blanket. Having one quest giver not update my quest is annoying. Having all the other things listed on top of that annoyance is a game killer.
---------------------------------------------------------------

anyone taken the boat in EQ1 lately? i have. 8 years and they still cant get the boat through oot without some kind of problem. take a look at the EQ2 alla site. notice the threads about performace problems and bugs created by fixes for other bugs. i just droped a quest in WoW this week after 5 attempts adn it wouldnt update.

ALL games have bugs. Vanguard wasnt really that bad, and thats comparing it to the games i have played. EQ1, EQ2, AO, AC2, Shadowbane, D&D online, WoW, LOTR, Earth and beyond, Guild Wars, SWG, DAoC, planetside, and a couple others im sure i have forgotten.

never played CoH. tights and capes on men just dont do it for me. have some friends that play and they like the whole badge thing, but it just never interested me.

its the grouping.

someone mentioned you dont need to group to get to 50 in Vanguard. he is correct. but if you dont, you WILL spend 50 levels of grinding in out door areas that all look alike after a while and never finnish a quest that will give you a decent item, not to mention never finnish over 60 percent of the quests at all.

we did that in EQ1 when it was new because there was nowher else to go. now there is. so now we dont. and thats why Vanguard is combining servers along with EQ1 and EQ2 and swg looks like a ghost town in the low and mid level areas.

Forced grouping would be fine if groups were available. forced grouping would be fine if it didnt take the better part of an hour to get one going. your average mainstream player barely plays more than an hour at a time.

but people are not going to do it any more, because they dont have to anymore.

thats why Blizzard is thowing a party for going from 8 million to 9 million subscribers in just the last 6 to 8 months and talking about expanding in China while EQ1 and Vanguard are combining servers, and EQ2 is spitting out expansions fats and furious just to keep the people they do have from leaving.

they gained more players in the last 6 months than EQ1, EQ2, SWG and Vanguard have all combined. there is a friggin huge market chomping at the bit for new games, but game makers are still stuck in the forced grouping mode. WoW isnt that great of a game. the graphics are cartoonish, the quests are not any better than any of the other games, and the classes are knock offs of the fantasy staples we see in every other game. they dont even have player built housing of any kind.

the ONLY thing WoW and their 9 million subscribers have that all the rest do not have is access to 90 percent of their content for mainstream players.

thats it. its not rocket science. its not a big mystery.

no forced grouping to access the majority of the content ......IS......the differance between folding up servers or adding ANOTHER million paying subscribers.

if Vanguard relaunches with the forced grouping mindset again....it will fail again. im not saying that, the 9 million people playing WoW are.

This person on the official boards seems to disagree with you ;)

I'm staying at the character select...perhaps this will save me having to get through the World Server Gate with about a million people trying to get to char select at once...just one less server to log into.

[Cobalty2004]

a million? lol

[Tomcrit]

Part of the problem with grouping in the newer style of game including VG is the pace of the game. For all the complaints about spawn times, camping and waiting for mana in older games the time waiting allowed groups to actually talk to each other.
Most of the groups i have been in in VG (very few) and back at the start in WoW, the talk in groups is minimal you just don't seem to get the time.

Woe betide anyone trying to type out a little quip or mention that such and such football team just won, when as you start typing the group of mobs you just killed starts respawning on you.

Maybe it is me getting old but it all seems just to darned quick. Players pull very fast but for the most part that isn't a problem because mana is fast to regen. Often they need to pull fast to keep moving in VG, sometimes it is just plain hurrying to get something done quick.

I just find that without those little chat periods where you poke fun at the caster who used an AoE by mistake and woke up mezzed mobs or just plain chat like "where are you from" etc you don't actually get to know anyone so easily, so when the group breaks up often quite quickly because you just did XXX quest together you haven't had time to chat and form an opinion of one another except possibly gameplay quality/style.

I know most of the above can still happen with groups of friends (often not when in dungeon type areas) but it used to happen with PUGs as well, and was a nice way to add to guilds and your friends list along with finding people to regularly group with.

I have met a few in VG who i enjoyed playing with and who are decent folk (don't bail and leave you to do your own CR etc) but after 3 hours of manic killing we have probably not exchanged 20-30 lines of text not battle related (get the healer 1st, type of text)

After all isn't that what grouping is really about. Yes sure you need a group to finish XXX quest and that is ok but you can always go later when you are a little higher solo, or with 1 other. But the main reason to group, indeed to play online games is to be sociable and this just doesn't seem to happen often.

[ikaoma420]

Part of the problem with grouping in the newer style of game including VG is the pace of the game. For all the complaints about spawn times, camping and waiting for mana in older games the time waiting allowed groups to actually talk to each other.
Most of the groups i have been in in VG (very few) and back at the start in WoW, the talk in groups is minimal you just don't seem to get the time.

Woe betide anyone trying to type out a little quip or mention that such and such football team just won, when as you start typing the group of mobs you just killed starts respawning on you.

Maybe it is me getting old but it all seems just to darned quick. Players pull very fast but for the most part that isn't a problem because mana is fast to regen. Often they need to pull fast to keep moving in VG, sometimes it is just plain hurrying to get something done quick.

I just find that without those little chat periods where you poke fun at the caster who used an AoE by mistake and woke up mezzed mobs or just plain chat like "where are you from" etc you don't actually get to know anyone so easily, so when the group breaks up often quite quickly because you just did XXX quest together you haven't had time to chat and form an opinion of one another except possibly gameplay quality/style.

I know most of the above can still happen with groups of friends (often not when in dungeon type areas) but it used to happen with PUGs as well, and was a nice way to add to guilds and your friends list along with finding people to regularly group with.

I have met a few in VG who i enjoyed playing with and who are decent folk (don't bail and leave you to do your own CR etc) but after 3 hours of manic killing we have probably not exchanged 20-30 lines of text not battle related (get the healer 1st, type of text)

After all isn't that what grouping is really about. Yes sure you need a group to finish XXX quest and that is ok but you can always go later when you are a little higher solo, or with 1 other. But the main reason to group, indeed to play online games is to be sociable and this just doesn't seem to happen often.

That's why me and my group of friends use teamspeak.

[Caldis]

Vanguard doesnt force grouping but the best and most interesting content is available only to groups. Couple that with the levelling system that makes killing things a few levels lower than you not worth the effort. It all means that you need to be in a group doing quests/dungeons that are the right level for you and that are close. Huge travel times really kill a game session.

[Jordan Jax]

Vanguard doesnt force grouping but the best and most interesting content is available only to groups. Couple that with the levelling system that makes killing things a few levels lower than you not worth the effort. It all means that you need to be in a group doing quests/dungeons that are the right level for you and that are close. Huge travel times really kill a game session.

Huge travel times? Again, what game are you talking about because it isn't VG. With all the portals all over and quick ground mounts available it shouldn't take you over 5 or 10 minutes to get anywhere in the game unless you haven't hit lvl 20 yet. (which you can make in a week)

[Clumsy]

To answer the question of the OP, there is still hope. I do not play VG. Why do I still come here and read and see what is going on with a game that I do not play? I followed the game from 2003 and I still HOPE things will turn around from what I have been following from various online sources as well as friends that play/played VG.

As an outsider looking in, it seems that stability and bugs are high on the list of reasons why "most" left VG or never entered. These things surely affect some less than others. I just HOPE the game I waited for, for so long can recover and thrive. Yes I could play it anyway like some of my friends, but I do not even want to experience it in the shape that it appears to be in. I want to experience it when it's closer to what I had in mind for it from '03 to '07 release.

[Caldis]

Huge travel times? Again, what game are you talking about because it isn't VG. With all the portals all over and quick ground mounts available it shouldn't take you over 5 or 10 minutes to get anywhere in the game unless you haven't hit lvl 20 yet. (which you can make in a week)

5 or 10 minutes times the 4 or 5 people you are waiting to group with means up to an hour of wait time beyond the shouting and waiting for a response. Plus you have repairs, quest turn ins, training, all things that waste time and force you to travel away from the dungeon you are trying to adventure in. The game makes grouping the best form of play, then it makes it hard to group unless you have unlimited time to play.

[Chae668]

5 or 10 minutes times the 4 or 5 people you are waiting to group with means up to an hour of wait time beyond the shouting and waiting for a response. Plus you have repairs, quest turn ins, training, all things that waste time and force you to travel away from the dungeon you are trying to adventure in. The game makes grouping the best form of play, then it makes it hard to group unless you have unlimited time to play.
oh, boo hoo.

gimme a break dude. what game DOESNT have wait for groups times?

your telling me that you dont want to have quests, dont like the repairs, dont want to get new abilities/spells cause its all a waste of time?

[Aidon]

anyone taken the boat in EQ1 lately? i have. 8 years and they still cant get the boat through oot without some kind of problem. take a look at the EQ2 alla site. notice the threads about performace problems and bugs created by fixes for other bugs. i just droped a quest in WoW this week after 5 attempts adn it wouldnt update.

There are bugs and then there are bugs. People will deal with boats that don't work (providing they are, as in EQ1, essentially pointless anyways). People will deal with the occasional quest not working (though in Vanguard, I recall literally half of my quests in the lvl 11-15 village area being broken such that they couldn't be completed, which is a far cry from having a half dozen scattered broken quests over the course of a few years in a game. These were a half dozen quests in just one area broken from the time I started playing until I quit playing a few months later).

People won't deal with single digit FPS and CTDs every 15 minutes.

ALL games have bugs. Vanguard wasnt really that bad, and thats comparing it to the games i have played. EQ1, EQ2, AO, AC2, Shadowbane, D&D online, WoW, LOTR, Earth and beyond, Guild Wars, SWG, DAoC, planetside, and a couple others im sure i have forgotten.

Every game you listed I've played with the exception of D&D, LOTR, AC2, and GW, and others beside. Vanguard was far less playable than any of them except AO (infamous for arguably the worst launch ever) and EQ. All of those games had problems, but being unplayable due to buggy performance on solid machines was not one of them.

never played CoH. tights and capes on men just dont do it for me. have some friends that play and they like the whole badge thing, but it just never interested me.

Game was a shining example of how smooth a game could launch. On the other hand, it was less complicated than most standard MMOs, though they mastered PC flight.

its the grouping.

While I agree that forced grouping for day to day advancement sucks, Vanguard was making noticable moves to mitigate their initial flaws in that regard. Without a doubt the initial "hardcore" contingent scared away many players and they lost, or failed to ever attract, many subscribers due to the grouping issue; however, the primary issue which caused the massive failure of Vanguard were the performance issues. Frequent CTDs. Crappy FPS. Insane graphical lag if the UI had to update data for 5+ mobs at once (exacerbated by various UI mods, but demonstrating the poor coding underlying the UI). Mobs vanishing during combat, yet still hitting you. Toss in the originally brutal death penalties for deaths caused by the crappy state of the game and it bred a sense of "**** this game".

someone mentioned you dont need to group to get to 50 in Vanguard. he is correct. but if you dont, you WILL spend 50 levels of grinding in out door areas that all look alike after a while and never finnish a quest that will give you a decent item, not to mention never finnish over 60 percent of the quests at all.

As an aside, you aren't doing any solo dungeon delving in WoW either, unless you're level is so much higher than the intended range for that instance that its fairly pointless.

What WoW does have is a plethora of quests which are suitable for solo or groups for levellling which provide gear sufficient to maintain that level of play. Vanguard did need that at well, though some of that aspect was just poor class design. As a cleric, I was able to solo (albeit very slowly) many quests that other classes needed to group for. All classes should have been able to solo such quests.

we did that in EQ1 when it was new because there was nowher else to go. now there is. so now we dont. and thats why Vanguard is combining servers along with EQ1 and EQ2 and swg looks like a ghost town in the low and mid level areas.

Forced grouping would be fine if groups were available. forced grouping would be fine if it didnt take the better part of an hour to get one going. your average mainstream player barely plays more than an hour at a time.

but people are not going to do it any more, because they dont have to anymore.

thats why Blizzard is thowing a party for going from 8 million to 9 million subscribers in just the last 6 to 8 months and talking about expanding in China while EQ1 and Vanguard are combining servers, and EQ2 is spitting out expansions fats and furious just to keep the people they do have from leaving.

they gained more players in the last 6 months than EQ1, EQ2, SWG and Vanguard have all combined. there is a friggin huge market chomping at the bit for new games, but game makers are still stuck in the forced grouping mode. WoW isnt that great of a game. the graphics are cartoonish, the quests are not any better than any of the other games, and the classes are knock offs of the fantasy staples we see in every other game. they dont even have player built housing of any kind.

the ONLY thing WoW and their 9 million subscribers have that all the rest do not have is access to 90 percent of their content for mainstream players.

thats it. its not rocket science. its not a big mystery.

no forced grouping to access the majority of the content ......IS......the differance between folding up servers or adding ANOTHER million paying subscribers.

if Vanguard relaunches with the forced grouping mindset again....it will fail again. im not saying that, the 9 million people playing WoW are.


Your thinking is all correct and I've previously made the same arguments when discussing gameplay in Vanguard. However, it is a mistake to suggest that the group/solo paradigm of Vanguard played a primary proximal role in its essential demise. Had they not been making changes to the game to ameliorate these problems, perhaps I'd have agreed with you...but they had started making those changes...and sufficient people were willing to wait it out, perhaps. What cause the plummet from poor performance to "life support" status was the astonishingly shittacular performance

In the end, its somewhat moot. Vanguard was like a brilliant student with the potential for greatness who got involved with drugs and ended up living in a van down by the river with his teeth falling out because of all the meth.

[Aidon]

Huge travel times? Again, what game are you talking about because it isn't VG. With all the portals all over and quick ground mounts available it shouldn't take you over 5 or 10 minutes to get anywhere in the game unless you haven't hit lvl 20 yet. (which you can make in a week)

The majority of players who quit VG did so before they implemented the portal system.

I, myself, quit the day they implemented it (because I was sick of CTDing every 15-45 minutes, which had nothing to do with the portal system)

[Chae668]

I, myself, quit the day they implemented it (because I was sick of CTDing every 15-45 minutes, which had nothing to do with the portal system)
aye, and that was about the time the CTD's really took off.

[Jordan Jax]

5 or 10 minutes times the 4 or 5 people you are waiting to group with means up to an hour of wait time beyond the shouting and waiting for a response. Plus you have repairs, quest turn ins, training, all things that waste time and force you to travel away from the dungeon you are trying to adventure in. The game makes grouping the best form of play, then it makes it hard to group unless you have unlimited time to play.

eh? 5 or 10 minutes time the 4 or 5 people you are waiting for? lol...ok. with that kind of reasoning i can see why some people are intimidated by those hour-long wait times.

[VoiceOfReason]

Wow, it's all so simple. I can't believe they never thought of that!

Fix bugs, add content and make smart decisions. Brilliant!

Dur, the whole crux of the issue is that they are unable to fix bugs, they are unable to add content and almost none of the decisions they have ever made could be considered smart.

Finally got around to replying to this tripe. Wow, use absolutes much? We have an "unable", another "unable" and a "none". Your claims are manifestly untrue. They are fixing bugs, they are adding content and as for decisions being smart... surely SOME of them are.

Vanguard was released before it was ready (yeah it should have been ready but it was mismanaged). Anybody who knows anything about software development - hell anybody with any common sense, would expect a huge project like this to have serious problems. That doesn't mean that the people making the game will never be able to make it right. THAT remains to be seen - but your assertion that nothing is ever fixed, added or decided correctly is patently absurd.

[rhagz]

Wow, I am honored that you graced my 'tripe' with such a wonderful response. Truly this is a glorious day in my little world. :rolleyes:

[Tomcrit]

Most of the recent changes have just made the game more similar to EQ2 I.E BOE/BOP on pretty much everything rested xp (like leveling is that hard? and is there anything to do at upper levels) dropping the EE etc.
So what we have now is a game called Vanguard similar to early EQ2 where most hadware at that time couldn't play it well, until hardware managed to catch up to the required spec.
I guess they felt that us masochists played EQ2 on machines that struggled so maybe that was the way forward with VG:D

[Caldis]

oh, boo hoo.

gimme a break dude. what game DOESNT have wait for groups times?

your telling me that you dont want to have quests, dont like the repairs, dont want to get new abilities/spells cause its all a waste of time?



I'm saying the way they implemented them wastes time and makes play less enjoyable. Take Trengal's Keep. A big long quest line that could be great content. But they force you to leave the keep every time you complete a quest to turn it in and get the next stage. Why dont they just let the quest auto update and let you move on to the next stage? Instead you end up wasting time fighting your way through mobs you've already killed a dozen times to try and get to where you need to be.

Training is the same, travel 5-10 minutes away to get your new abilities. People wanting to run off and train makes groups break up, forcing you back into search mode and waiting for groups is the most annoying thing in any mmo.

[Spirit]

Training is the same, travel 5-10 minutes away to get your new abilities. People wanting to run off and train makes groups break up, forcing you back into search mode and waiting for groups is the most annoying thing in any mmo.

You have a good point there. The beta community was very fond of the idea of making the abilities buyable, like spell scrolls. As soon as you dinged the appropriate level, you could pull your scroll from your backpack and scribe it. No need to run to the trainer, you just have to remember to buy them before you head out if you think your gonna ding soon.

Unfortunately, transitory grouping is a feature of quest-centric games. So it's going to happen no matter what.

[VoiceOfReason]

Wow, I am honored that you graced my 'tripe' with such a wonderful response. Truly this is a glorious day in my little world. :rolleyes:

Oh, I am so pwnd by your eye rolling and sarcasm. Oh, I will be so intimidated in the future and perhaps not dare to risk such things by replying to your posts.

Deflection is the refuge of the person at the loosing end of an argument.

[rhagz]

The fact that you keep responding says otherwise.

[Lonestryder]

I logged in, did a level's worth of parlays in Khal, then logged out again for yet another few months. The lag with what is supposed to be the "intended" server load was so bad I coundn't even parlay.

I can't even imagine combat, as I gave up that when I realized the mobs were meant to be beaten silly by 2-man groups.

[Aidon]

Oh, I am so pwnd by your eye rolling and sarcasm. Oh, I will be so intimidated in the future and perhaps not dare to risk such things by replying to your posts.

Deflection is the refuge of the person at the loosing end of an argument.

Except that his points are valid. Thus far neither Sigil nor SoE has managed to show themselves capable of breaking out of this tailspin of disaster. You can always claim "they might" or "they will", but thusfar its been clearly demonstrated that no one has been able to fix jack shit in the game.

I can't believe there are still Vanbois...

[TheSteelValley]

You have a good point there. The beta community was very fond of the idea of making the abilities buyable, like spell scrolls. As soon as you dinged the appropriate level, you could pull your scroll from your backpack and scribe it. No need to run to the trainer, you just have to remember to buy them before you head out if you think your gonna ding soon.

Unfortunately, transitory grouping is a feature of quest-centric games. So it's going to happen no matter what.

I liked the concept of being able to learn abilities from players who have said ability in SWG. In order to master a top tier profession, you had to have so many apprentice points which were earned by teaching skills to other players. I don't know how it would work in VG since I never played, just a curious onlooker.

[Joodah]

Except that his points are valid. Thus far neither Sigil nor SoE has managed to show themselves capable of breaking out of this tailspin of disaster. You can always claim "they might" or "they will", but thusfar its been clearly demonstrated that no one has been able to fix jack shit in the game.
I can't believe there are still Vanbois...

They've fixed thousands of things, pay attention to the game updates much?

[Joodah]

I liked the concept of being able to learn abilities from players who have said ability in SWG. In order to master a top tier profession, you had to have so many apprentice points which were earned by teaching skills to other players. I don't know how it would work in VG since I never played, just a curious onlooker.

Yeh a lot of us missed the apprentice system alot :cry:

[Aidon]

They've fixed thousands of things, pay attention to the game updates much?

No, they've made alot of changes. Noone has yet to demonstrate that they've actually managed to fix the issues which caused the game to becoming a running punch line.

Given the history of the companies involved...over the course of a few different games now that I've played by the folks who comprised Verant and 989 and then SOE and then Sigil and SOE, I don't put any faith in patch notes which state "We've fix X" or "We've improved optimization" etc. etc. etc.

Considering that the only people still playing are those rare few who didn't experience massive issues or are so in love with the idea of Vanguard that they can't tell shit from shinola, that leaves me in a position of going on past performances until such time as they offer me a 14 day trial in order to try and entice me back to the game.

[Chae668]

Take Trengal's Keep. they force you to leave the keep every time you complete a quest to turn it in and get the next stage. Why dont they just let the quest auto update and let you move on to the next stage? Instead you end up wasting time fighting your way through mobs you've already killed a dozen times to try and get to where you need to be.
ok. tell me a game that lets you auto update EVERY single quest? none. getting quests are just that... getting.

ok, so lets do an analogy like you did. you get a letter in the mailbox. its a bill. now, everytime that bill comes in the mail, you have to write out a check, and send it back. there is no direct deposite for this bill. so, should you really have to pay it over and over, cause its no fun and tedious?
Training is the same, travel 5-10 minutes away to get your new abilities. People wanting to run off and train makes groups break up, forcing you back into search mode and waiting for groups is the most annoying thing in any mmo.
ok. so you would rather have people not get spells and abilities? i dont know of any game that doesnt have you buy abilities in this genre. most people (and i use that loosely) should have bind stones at places where they can upgrade. that way, all they have to do is run back. i dont do that. i will wait for the group to be over.

personally, ive only once or twice had a group that disbanded over abilities/spells. maybe it was just the server you were on.

[Chae668]

Considering that the only people still playing are those rare few who didn't experience massive issues had that, and now playing. or are so in love with the idea of Vanguard that they can't tell shit from shinola, saw the shit from shinola, and decided to give it a shot.that leaves me in a position of going on past performances until such time as they offer me a 14 day trial in order to try and entice me back to the game.
.

[Joodah]

No, they've made alot of changes. Noone has yet to demonstrate that they've actually managed to fix the issues which caused the game to becoming a running punch line.



Um, yes they have. I guess we could sit here all day and debate the exsistance of the pages upon pages of fixes in the past 2 updates, but why bother. They have posted the bug fix lists each time. If you choose to deny that is the case, be my guest. :rolleyes:

[shadowrelm]

Part of the problem with grouping in the newer style of game including VG is the pace of the game. For all the complaints about spawn times, camping and waiting for mana in older games the time waiting allowed groups to actually talk to each other.
Most of the groups i have been in in VG (very few) and back at the start in WoW, the talk in groups is minimal you just don't seem to get the time.

Woe betide anyone trying to type out a little quip or mention that such and such football team just won, when as you start typing the group of mobs you just killed starts respawning on you.
---------------------------------------------------------

people typed because they WERE BOARD TO TEARS. thats also why they left, 80 percent of them anyway. when they had no where to go, they typed. when they did, they logged off for good. i understand what your saying. there is a serious lack of community bonding in all of the other games on the market. something was definatly lost in the fast and furious games of today.

however, the masses have clearly chosen PLAY over TALK. sims online puncuated that statment with its dismal failure.

Vanguard improved significantly in just the first few weeks. lag was constantly getting better, the memory leak problem crashing computers was getting better and better, and by my second toon, i could do all but 1 or 2 quests in the three rivers area without any bugs. by the time i left, it was running fine on both of my computers, one a AMD duel core,the other an older AMD 3000 series with a 128 mb radeon agp video card.

i left in my mid thirties because after the second "double xp" week end, all the powergamers blasted past the low and mid levels and grouping stopped in its tracks. i spent 3 weeks wandering from area to area, and then from server to server with new toons and never had a group the entire time.

i started soloing. then one day, while i was deleting quests, starting with any that involved a dungon, which was most of them.....i got really really board. memories of sitting in some corner in EQ for weeks grinding out levels with crappy gear, begging for a group the whole time came flooding back.

something hit me. a feeling i havent had since i left EQ. fustraition and bitterness when i died, or when i deleted a quest i couldnt do alone, or when i got a duo with someone just to have them bolt after the 5 minutes it took me to help them finnish one of their quests.

fustraition and bitterness.

two things i swore i would never tolerate again in.....a GAME.

by by.

back to WoW. a new expansion launched i hadnt seen yet. the promis of being able to compete with anyone in the game, the promise of being able to complete 90 percent of the quests i found, the promise of being able to upgrade my gear without grinding for coin to buy it somewhere.

playtime. still dont like the graphics. not real fond of what they did with the classes. but it was playtime. no grief. no fustraition. no bitterness. no sence of being left behind. no sitting in some zone/chunk begging for a group that doesnt happen for most of my playtime. just playtime.

we typed in EQ1 becuase untill mana regen items became popular, there was more downtime than PLAYTIME but we had no where else to go. when we did, most of us left.

most of us, the 500,000 people who jumped on EQ2 left also when we couldnt find groups, thus couldnt complete quests, thus couldnt upgrade equipment without buying it, thus started spending most of our time solo grinding for crap loot just for the levels....just like we HAD to do in EQ1.

a mass exodus. SOE was quick to start adding casual content though. faster than they were in SWG anyway. so they only lost a little over half of the people they started with. same thing happened with SWG too, only they were not quick enough. they lost most of theri players, and they didnt come back either.

Vanguard is suffering the same problem that plagued EQ2 adn SWG at launch, and one that plagues EQ1 still today. access to content for mainstream players.

access to content for mainstream players IS WHY WoW has 9 million people and EQ1 has around 100k and EQ2 has around 200k and Vanguard has around 20k.

people want to play. Wii want to play, not be forced into second class citizenry by.....a GAME.

Wii will not put up with it anymore. Wii will take or fat arse dollars and give them to someone who will let us PLAY the way we WANT to play. Wii will no longer give our entertainmet dollars to be OPPRESSED or FORCED into the "vision tm".

Wii have the big bucks. you want it, come get it. but dont waste our time with another republican style wet dream game where only the no-lifers get to PLAY and the rest of us just get to watch.

relaunch Vanguard. Wii will pay for it if Wii get to PLAY....our way.

or keep trying to sell it to the smallest portion of gamers on the planet. Wii will give our money to someone else just as easily. just ask Blizzard if you dont beleive me.

[Spirit]

In regards to the notion that people typed because mana regen was slow in EQ1.

Yeah, mana regen was slow in EQ1, this is true. But there was a lot of idiot Wizzies/Mages/insertcasterhere who'd blow their load on every pull and break out the big guns every time the Inferno shock gem refreshed or aoe'ing on singles. Their penalty for not using mana efficiently was to park their arse on the floor. When a group works efficiently and interacts correctly, there is very little down time. There is still some, but it's greatly reduced when you play your class correctly.

[VoiceOfReason]

Except that his points are valid. Thus far neither Sigil nor SoE has managed to show themselves capable of breaking out of this tailspin of disaster. You can always claim "they might" or "they will", but thusfar its been clearly demonstrated that no one has been able to fix jack shit in the game.

I can't believe there are still Vanbois...

Really? Let me quote him again here for you:

"Dur, the whole crux of the issue is that they are unable to fix bugs, they are unable to add content and almost none of the decisions they have ever made could be considered smart."

First, his claims are horribly extreme. They ARE fixing bugs, they ARE adding content. These things are undeniable. They're decision making could be open for debate but the first two points are simply a matter of record.

Now, perhaps Rhagz is merely guilty of hyperbole, but I am sick of seeing the overly negative and extremely biased attacks made by small number of maltcontents on this board, so I spoke up. Some folks are kicking this game evey chance they get - a positive comes out and they just find some new negative thing to trumpet about.

I am not fan boy - I don't even LIKE SOE much. I never cared for Brad either (although I admit he was a genius in some areas). No, I am simply trying to balance the scales. The game is much better than the reputation it has on this board. Having said that, I do harbor concerns about the ability of the current team to correct what appear to be problems related to architectural decisions. This may be their undoing in the end, because there are still too many CTDs and chunking is still poorly handled and towns are still not performant until information is cached. I do see definite improvements - I'd say they are about 50% there. Will they go the other 50%? I sure hope so, because I think the game, other than that and other than some high end content issues, simply rocks.

It boils down to this:
1. The game was a terribly flawed gem.
2. They are starting to polish it up. If they continue, it could really shine.
3. Why not give them the chance to do so instead of trying to take that chance away by continually concentrating on negatives and poison the boards?

[rhagz]

Now, perhaps Rhagz is merely guilty of hyperbole, but I am sick of seeing the overly negative and extremely biased attacks made by small number of maltcontents on this board, so I spoke up.

So when I use a slight exagerration (and it is only slight, I challenge you to point to any significant content added that wasn't merely unfinished half-assed content from launch) it's the devil's work.. but I guess when someone claims that VG is the most superior game on the market and will have a million subs next year it's okay?

Talk about double standards.

So yeah, how 'bout those flying mount quests.. fun stuff for an uber reward eh? And I just love my new helmet graphics.. they are amazing!

The whole reason I made that post in the first place is because you are terribly naive. "Just fix bugs, add content and be smart!" Well no shit sherlock. This is how you make and tune every single piece of software ever. You are a freaking genious. If it was so easy, then why is Vanguard the laughing stock of the online world?

[VoiceOfReason]

So when I use a slight exagerration (and it is only slight, I challenge you to point to any significant content added that wasn't merely unfinished half-assed content from launch) it's the devil's work.. but I guess when someone claims that VG is the most superior game on the market and will have a million subs next year it's okay?

Talk about double standards.

So yeah, how 'bout those flying mount quests.. fun stuff for an uber reward eh? And I just love my new helmet graphics.. they are amazing!

lol, what about the lack of tails? Horrible.

Actually, our positions are closer than one might think by reading our discussion. I don't think it game is the most superior game on the market. A million subs at some point would not completely surprise me though. Nor would a complete shutdown. It's hanging by a handful of threads and trying to get a grip. The big difference between you and folks that take your position is that it seems you want to cut those threads, whereas I want to throw these guys a /rope. I WANT the game to succeed. Many here do not.

Since this is a site supposedly about Vanguard, not about trying to destroy Vanguard, I think my attempts at injecting some fairness into the discussions are justified. I suppose I do fall a little to the biased positive side, but I try not to put on the rose colored glasses too much. I wish some of the haters here would take off their brown colored ones.

[Reven]

lol, what about the lack of tails? Horrible.

Actually, our positions are closer than one might think by reading our discussion. I don't think it game is the most superior game on the market. A million subs at some point would not completely surprise me though. Nor would a complete shutdown. It's hanging by a handful of threads and trying to get a grip. The big difference between you and folks that take your position is that it seems you want to cut those threads, whereas I want to throw these guys a /rope. I WANT the game to succeed. Many here do not.

Since this is a site supposedly about Vanguard, not about trying to destroy Vanguard, I think my attempts at injecting some fairness into the discussions are justified. I suppose I do fall a little to the biased positive side, but I try not to put on the rose colored glasses too much. I wish some of the haters here would take off their brown colored ones.

You have an ironic name, for someone so gullible. It's laughable that you are trying to portray yourself as some level headed, unbiased MMO player when every comment you make, ever response you type is soaked in unabashed VG love. No question, you deserve VG and VG deserves you.

[Reven]

I'm in two other MMO betas, and even with the servers being up only specific times during a week, both games are more complete, more fun, performs better, and more polished than VG currently is, it frankly amazing that people still defend this steaming pile of virtual sh!t.

[VoiceOfReason]

So when I use a slight exagerration (and it is only slight, I challenge you to point to any significant content added that wasn't merely unfinished half-assed content from launch) it's the devil's work.. but I guess when someone claims that VG is the most superior game on the market and will have a million subs next year it's okay?

Talk about double standards.

So yeah, how 'bout those flying mount quests.. fun stuff for an uber reward eh? And I just love my new helmet graphics.. they are amazing!

The whole reason I made that post in the first place is because you are terribly naive. "Just fix bugs, add content and be smart!" Well no shit sherlock. This is how you make and tune every single piece of software ever. You are a freaking genious. If it was so easy, then why is Vanguard the laughing stock of the online world?

Hmmm, had to go back. I forget to address your "challenge" and for some reason the spewage you wrote at the bottom of your post didn't rankle me properly the first time through.

As to the challenge. The new raid zone comes to mind as being totally new content. There is also the trial island - granted not released yet, but close. Perhaps there could have been more content but really, they were concentrating on bugs first, and I think we can agree that this was truly needed first.

As to this spewage you wrote:

*** quote starts here ***
The whole reason I made that post in the first place is because you are terribly naive. "Just fix bugs, add content and be smart!" Well no shit sherlock. This is how you make and tune every single piece of software ever. You are a freaking genious. If it was so easy, then why is Vanguard the laughing stock of the online world?
*** quote ends here ***

With 17 years of software development experience under my belt, by definition alone, your accusation of naivity is hollow. I know that fixing bugs, adding content and making smart development decisions could be taken as a fairly generic approach to success. You are exactly right, Sherlock.... and although you are certainly not a genious, you MIGHT be a genius. Yup, that's all they gotta do, the standard stuff. They are lucky that they have some fantastic positives to build on though. I can think of quite a few products that I simply don't like even though they are relatively bug free and have plenty of features.

As to why Vanguard is the alleged laughing stock of the online world, well ... I've already answered that for you but I'll summarize for you once more. They got off ot a bad start through head in the clouds management. Then when time and money were running short, they tried to get practical. They have made a start at correcting the problems and the game is playable and enjoyable to many people. So why don't you and the other haters just back off? If they truly continue to fumble, then sure say so, but don't LOOK for excuses to bitch and quit rehashing the same old tired songs.

[VoiceOfReason]

I'm in two other MMO betas, and even with the servers being up only specific times during a week, both games are more complete, more fun, performs better, and more polished than VG currently is, it frankly amazing that people still defend this steaming pile of virtual sh!t.

Reven, your posts make me throw up in my mouth a little bit.

[ikaoma420]

I see the looting bug is back. Thought they squashed that bug a while ago. I wonder how many other old bugs popped back up since the merger or update 2...

[Reven]

Reven, your posts make me throw up in my mouth a little bit.

I understand, I would definitely be disgusted with myself too if I were you.

[Arclan]

I happen to support VoiceOfReason's posts. And for a naysayer, Rhaz does crack me up.

Shadowrelm, you have some very valid points. But I disagree that WoWs superior gameplay is what brought 9mil customers. It was two things. The globally established Blizzard brand name and massive advertising. Notice how most web pages have some kind of advertisement for WoW? Ya advertising pays very well; just look at Pepsi, Coke, some of the planet's biggest advertisers. Advertising coupled with the already familiar Blizzard brand name = gold mine.

SOE seems to rely on word of mouth instead of advertising.

I'm glad you like to solo. I do too. I solo all the time in CivIV, Star Wars Empires at War, Rome Total War, etc., etc., But regarding MMOs, well, let's just say I don't pay a monthly subscription to play by myself.

[rhagz]

Psst, those ads are much more recent than the game itself. Plus they are based on actual activity. The reason you see so many WoW ads is because they actually generate more interest. When the site first went to the UG format you would see many games listed, VG, EQ2, WoW and even some offline stuff. Now you just see WoW and the occassional EQ2 or LotRO ad.. because they actually get hits.

And I am 100% positive that if WoW sucked people wouldn't play it just because of the Blizzard name. The name gets a few people in the door.. the awesome party inside gets them to stay and call up their friends to come party too.

[Spirit]

Then when time and money were running short, they tried to get practical.

Bear something in mind here.

Time and money are /still/ in short supply. SOE hasn't dropped a ton of money onto VG if you'll notice. Maybe when the relaunch happens we'll see some fmv and a lot of advertising, but moving some of the most experienced staff VG has into other games doesn't fill me with confidence. VG gets interns.

[Joodah]

You have an ironic name, for someone so gullible. It's laughable that you are trying to portray yourself as some level headed, unbiased MMO player when every comment you make, ever response you type is soaked in unabashed VG love. No question, you deserve VG and VG deserves you.

Much like how every post you make is the reverse. Guess you guys are even huh? :D

As usual in this forum, it's okay to bash the game. Not ok to be positive about it. Talk about hypocrisy of the most blatant kind, but that's business as usual here.

[VoiceOfReason]

I understand, I would definitely be disgusted with myself too if I were you.

If you were me, you'd be right. But you aren't - and you're not.

[VoiceOfReason]

Much like how every post you make is the reverse. Guess you guys are even huh? :D

As usual in this forum, it's okay to bash the game. Not ok to be positive about it. Talk about hypocrisy of the most blatant kind, but that's business as usual here.

I wish I'd have made such a crushing and reasoned response instead of the weak sauce I offered up this time. Thanks Joodah.

[dwarfman420]

Do you have hope the game has a chance, and stick around or is it too late?


Too late.
Grouping is not dead (It's the game and lack of community that makes it feel like grouping is dead in this game).

The only people left playing are those who still subscribe to mediocrity and a dream that has long since vanished. Welcome to Sony's new inhouse competitor to Matrix Online for lowest subs.

[VoiceOfReason]

Too late.
Grouping is not dead (It's the game and lack of community that makes it feel like grouping is dead in this game).

The only people left playing are those who still subscribe to mediocrity and a dream that has long since vanished. Welcome to Sony's new inhouse competitor to Matrix Online for lowest subs.

>> ... lack of community ...

Irony anyone?

[VoiceOfReason]

Bear something in mind here.

Time and money are /still/ in short supply. SOE hasn't dropped a ton of money onto VG if you'll notice. Maybe when the relaunch happens we'll see some fmv and a lot of advertising, but moving some of the most experienced staff VG has into other games doesn't fill me with confidence. VG gets interns.

It is kinda scary yeah. However, they did shell out to buy the game, so that shows some degree of commitment.

[Spirit]

Whatever the subs numbers are/will be, SOE's decision to buy the game came with some additional goodies (even though the game was mismanaged, the Sigil staff are valuable assets).

[VoiceOfReason]

Whatever the subs numbers are/will be, SOE's decision to buy the game came with some additional goodies (even though the game was mismanaged, the Sigil staff are valuable assets).

I agree with this, though you can hire talent without having to pay a bunch of money up front.

Interestingly, other posters on this board have gone on record as saying that all VG coders suck and all the designers are beginners. I held the position that such posts were trash and your comments seem to support this. Although of course, I guess it could have been the artistic talent that was desirable.

[Spirit]

I think there's one or two who aren't suitable. I won't say any more than that. But there was a lot of skilled and/or experienced staff at Sigil. To work on a project from it's inception to release is an achievement in an of itself. A lot of teams fold before they even get half way. That experience counts for a lot, even if the game doesn't make much of an impact.

[VoiceOfReason]

I think there's one or two who aren't suitable. I won't say any more than that. But there was a lot of skilled and/or experienced staff at Sigil. To work on a project from it's inception to release is an achievement in an of itself. A lot of teams fold before they even get half way. That experience counts for a lot, even if the game doesn't make much of an impact.

You know, I haven't always agreed with you, but it is a pleasure to speak with someone who makes reasoned, level-headed posts.

[Caldis]

It is kinda scary yeah. However, they did shell out to buy the game, so that shows some degree of commitment.

I wonder how much they paid for the game. Did they have to payback the full $30 mil that Microsoft put into it or did they just write a large chunk of it off and let Sigil walk with the pitiful bits of a game he had?

Was it a big investment for SOE or did they get a cheap deal on a partially developed game that they could develop into a money maker?

Who knows.

[Audio]

I wonder how much they paid for the game. Did they have to payback the full $30 mil that Microsoft put into it or did they just write a large chunk of it off and let Sigil walk with the pitiful bits of a game he had?

Was it a big investment for SOE or did they get a cheap deal on a partially developed game that they could develop into a money maker?

Who knows.


Were talking about Smed here and we have a track record on his behavior in the MMO business.

To me that means he got VG for the least amount of capitol possible offering Sigil employees the least amount of benefits and/or stock options as they were willing to take. Moving the best of Sigil on to the recieving end of MUO in development by cryptic studios. The company behind City of Heros.

[Caldis]

Were talking about Smed here and we have a track record on his behavior in the MMO business.

To me that means he got VG for the least amount of capitol possible offering Sigil employees the least amount of benefits and/or stock options as they were willing to take. Moving the best of Sigil on to the recieving end of MUO in development by cryptic studios. The company behind City of Heros.

The real question though is how did Microsoft handle the failure of the game when they cut ties with Sigil? How much were they owed and what if anything did they get back? Then how much did Brad sell to SOE for? It's possible this was a real sweet deal for SOE and they dont have much cash invested in it.

[VoiceOfReason]

The real question though is how did Microsoft handle the failure of the game when they cut ties with Sigil? How much were they owed and what if anything did they get back? Then how much did Brad sell to SOE for? It's possible this was a real sweet deal for SOE and they dont have much cash invested in it.

As Brad was hardly dealing from a position of strength, I am certain SOE got a good deal. Nonetheless, we must realize that they had to have invested some significant amount of cash to buy Sigil and of course they committed to an ongoing investment for again, at least a significant amount of time.

All of this discussion was regarding SOE's probable level of commitment and I guess it is hard to quantify that exactly. I do believe we can say that the doors of VG aren't going to close any time in the near future. SOE and the team will have their chance to make VG a profitable game, if not a resounding success.

[rhagz]

It'll be a resounding success right after Planetside and Matrix Online take off..

[Dragon-RD]

I have hope for Vanguard. I left the game sometime ago but yet I still find myself reading these forums. And i'm sure alot of people who left do the same as I do.

I can't put my finger on why I keep coming back but everytime I do I just wanna re-sub to the game. Guess I miss it somewhat.

Plus I doubt sony would have brought sigil if they had plans to leave it dying :)

[Kayd]

I would suspect SOE got Vanguard for a song. Microsoft switched managment to a team that really hadn't much MMORGP experience and they were probably getting bad reports from them. They were also probably able to see that people weren't logging into a free beta, and I know that would concern me. Put that together with a "this isn't where we want to focus our energy now" attitude and I can guess SOE got a great deal.

Asheron's call managed to scrape by for years on a fairly pitiful subscription level and release monthly stories and radical content changes at the same time. UO did not have stellar subscription numbers either and managed to stay alive. SOE has several online games, some many years old, that probably don't interest very many subscribers. Baring another mass exodus that thins the population to unacceptible levels, I can't why they would ever feel the need to shut down Vanguard. What I can see is them cutting development to the point where little can be done.

I have some hope left for Vanguard. The recent changes to rest experience were encouraging. I was pretty much opposed to it, imagining people leveling twice as fast. I was wrong, they offered the feature in a way that was not totally imbalancing. In fact I can see how it might take some people longer to level now because it could encourage them to spend time on crafting or diplomacy to eat up the rest experience in that area. They have a ways to go yet. Classes really need balance. At level 18 I can kill things in my sleep and at that level the game just shouldn't be a cakewalk. Content at all levels needs help low level content is better than in beta but could be better still, and raid content is non-existant. Address those basic issues and continue to work on performance and I think you coul find people coming to Vanguard and staying because it's fun. The real issue is whether it turns some kind of corner in the next 6 months or so. If it does we could se a resurgance of interest, if not expect it to limp along in a very minimal way for a long time.

[shadowrelm]

In regards to the notion that people typed because mana regen was slow in EQ1.

Yeah, mana regen was slow in EQ1, this is true. But there was a lot of idiot Wizzies/Mages/insertcasterhere who'd blow their load on every pull and break out the big guns every time the Inferno shock gem refreshed or aoe'ing on singles. Their penalty for not using mana efficiently was to park their arse on the floor. When a group works efficiently and interacts correctly, there is very little down time. There is still some, but it's greatly reduced when you play your class correctly.
---------------------------------------------------------------

EQ1 was the appitimy of EARNED rewards. what the developers envisioned was not the mass slaughter people played, but an encounter where a small group went out to explore, encountered a small camp, dispatched it, then moved on to explore more.

what they didnt count on was people. people take the path of least resistance. thus camping. and grinding low blues in mass vs challenging mobs. and......soloing. something that was never envisioned in EQ1. they have been fighting these things since its release. nerfing classes, nerfing equipment, adn super charging the mobs. mixing undead with live to make invis tricky, putting in more wanderers, you name it, they have tried it.

to this day, they still are not sucessfull in that respect.

you are looking at it from one perspective. the perspective of the "vision tm". the whole "if you played your class correctly" should be changed to "if you played you class as intended".

EQ1 was the master of giving you something that would have been usefull 5 levels ago. tossing you a cookie that looks and sounds great, but when you bite into it, it is stale. dire charm? rofl. how about the necro epic? a free lower level darkness spell with a longer cast time to a class that doesnt have mana issues?

you complain about wizards blowing their load. in the origonal game, a level 50 wizard could take out a mob at half life....with one spell. they didnt have to saw away at it like their spells were swords. a wizard SHOULD be able to use the tolls available to him. but the monsters have been soo supercgarged to discorage soloing, they can only take a little bite at a time.

a wizard has devolved into a melee class without hitpoints and ac.

EQ1 is a tiny little niche game now because its developers are still trying to force people to play the game "as intended" instead of "as desired". they have been trying to do that since release. remember the great nerf wars after the launch of kunark? it was all about "this class SOLOS better than that class."

SOEs answer was to nerf ANY class that could solo well. the necros were at the top of the list. they got hit the hardest. all casters got hit. and melee classes saw a huge increase in damage, ac, and hitpoints because every one was playing classes that could......SOLO well.

all in an effort to force people to play "as intended".

all of their effort as cumulated into a massively huge game with over 300 totally empty zones no one ever goes too and an abandoned low and mid level game.

thats what you get when you try and force people to "play their class right" and they have the option of going someplace that says "play their class as you want" like Blizzard did.

thats why Vanguard fell on its face.

thats why Vanguard will continue to fall on its face.

people have a choice now. they dont have to do it the way its scripted to be done.

one of the biggest draws of EQ1 at release was freedom. no liniar progression. you could log on and play as you wanted, when you wanted, where you wanted. there were more people soloing in EQ1 atrelease than grouping. unfortunatly, EQ1 has been trying to force them to play in groups ever since instead of catering to the playstyle most people prefered. instead of offering a supply to the greatest demand, they tried to force demand to take their supply....as intended.

Vanguard is a stunning game to look at. they fleshed out their classes very well in my opneion. i feel they nailed the necromancer to a tee.

but they again tried to force people to play as intended.

people are not going to do that any more. here is the funny part, they have NEVER embraced grouping. EVER. even in EQ1, they soloed more than they grouped. and again, its about freedom and time. doing what you want, when you want, where you want.

we want freedom and time friendly game play. we will not be herded into another "vision tm" ever again. and people are chomping at the bit for something new. that is why there is so much interest here. but everyone is still trying to offer up a "vision tm" instead of freedom.

every one but blizzard and their 9 million subscribers who are getting it THEIR way.

Vanguard never had a chance. no forced grouping game does. no forced ANYTHING game does. that includes pvp and all of its variations, DOAC, planetside, AO, shadowbane, AC2 anyone? if its any consolation, Warhammer is going to fall on its face for the very same reson.

Vanguard, with its current forced grouping agenda, can only hope to split the smallest portion of players and become yet another little niche game. just like EQ1 and EQ2. those customers will probably come from those games too, resulting in ZERO net gain for SOE.

good luck with that.

[Mortiferous]

Not much hope if any. Just cancelled subscription (again).

[Spirit]

the same old stuff

You can say the same thing, over and over and over again. Won't change a damn thing. The fact remains, not everyone likes WoW. And not every developer wants to cater to that type of playstyle.

EQ1 and EQ2 are on modest subscription numbers yet they're still turning a tidy enough profit, certainly more than enough to thrive. EQ1's up to it's.. 15th? expansion now. I would imagine there's money to be made, and a player base substantial enough to offer it. Even after 8 years!

I look forward to the future, and hope there's always going to be alternatives, development teams that are looking to offer people something a little different than the current status quo. I want to see risk takers produce low budget quality worlds and build on success. I want to see revolutionary concepts, not tried and tested rehashed shite. Vanguard failed, and it had /nothing/ to do with forcing people to group.

9 million players and monster MMO's with collectable cards and bendy toys? You can keep that shit and eat it up all you like. There's always going to be people like me in substantial enough numbers who opt for an alternative, whether it's EQ1, EQ2, Age Of Conan or WAR. And that's the bottom line. No amount of "Wii want to play" hyperbole is going to change that, because "Wii" isn't everyone.

[Chae668]

You can say the same thing, over and over and over again. Won't change a damn thing. The fact remains, not everyone likes WoW. And not every developer wants to cater to that type of playstyle.

EQ1 and EQ2 are on modest subscription numbers yet they're still turning a tidy enough profit, certainly more than enough to thrive. EQ1's up to it's.. 15th? expansion now. I would imagine there's money to be made, and a player base substantial enough to offer it. Even after 8 years!

I look forward to the future, and hope there's always going to be alternatives, development teams that are looking to offer people something a little different than the current status quo. I want to see risk takers produce low budget quality worlds and build on success. I want to see revolutionary concepts, not tried and tested rehashed shite. Vanguard failed, and it had /nothing/ to do with forcing people to group.

9 million players and monster MMO's with collectable cards and bendy toys? You can keep that shit and eat it up all you like. There's always going to be people like me in substantial enough numbers who opt for an alternative, whether it's EQ1, EQ2, Age Of Conan or WAR. And that's the bottom line. No amount of "Wii want to play" hyperbole is going to change that, because "Wii" isn't everyone.
Amen!

[Champ]

I want to see risk takers produce low budget quality worlds and build on success. I want to see revolutionary concepts, not tried and tested rehashed shite. Vanguard failed, and it had /nothing/ to do with forcing people to group.

All gamers want to see risks taken and boundaries broken and redefined. But VG doesn't come anywhere near satisfying either of those. It had a quality world, but low budget ... I don't think so. Playing VG in a group was it's most redeeming feature (assuming the group/mob pathing/rendering/lag mechanics worked as intended) because it was fun. A non-stop rush of excitement.

However, playing VG solo was like stabbing yourself in the thigh with a fork for hours on end. Eventually, you can get to some good meat that way but the trade-offs are painfully obvious.

[Spirit]

All gamers want to see risks taken and boundaries broken and redefined. But VG doesn't come anywhere near satisfying either of those. It had a quality world, but low budget ... I don't think so.

Yeah, I know. I was referring to future MMO's when I said those things, not Vanguard. And I disagree with your assertion that Vanguard's world is 'quality'. It isn't. It's graphically impressive, but it isn't anywhere near approaching quality. Theres way too many features that are missing, such as baking, fishing, languages, scripted city NPC's that add flavour, dynamic content etc.

The world, if it is anything, is sterile and vacuous. Bugs and performance issues are only a fraction of what needs addressing before SOE can call the game ready.

[shadowrelm]

You can say the same thing, over and over and over again. Won't change a damn thing. The fact remains, not everyone likes WoW. And not every developer wants to cater to that type of playstyle.

EQ1 and EQ2 are on modest subscription numbers yet they're still turning a tidy enough profit, certainly more than enough to thrive. EQ1's up to it's.. 15th? expansion now. I would imagine there's money to be made, and a player base substantial enough to offer it. Even after 8 years!
-------------------------------------------------------

its true. not everyone likes woW. i dont really, but its the only game on the market that offers gaming that is familey friendly, ie, you can still have a familey.

not every one wants that type of game play either. infact, its only about......90 PERCENT......of online gamers that do. and thats my point. thats also why Vanguard fell on its face, and EQ1 has around 1 percent of the online market right now.

not every developer wants to make a game like that. its also true. but all of them want to MAKE MONEY. something Sigil learned the hard way dosnt involve forced grouping.

there is room in the huge market for people who like forced grouping and raids. but if you are going to go down that path, and target less than 10 percent of the gamer market, you had better have the best content in that market.

Vanguard didnt offer ANYTHING that wasnt already available in other games and what they did offer wasnt BETTER than what is available. EQ2 already has a better grouping game and content. EQ1 already has a better top end game. if they want a piece of that market, one raid isnt going to cut it. they would have to add a couple full expansions of just raid content to even start to compete.

but they didnt. and there isnt anything to suggest they plan on it either any time soon.

yes, there is a market for tiny little niche games that make money. and a company can make a living off of offering up a hoste of tiny little niche games. Vanguard can certainly be another tiny little niche game added to the station pass along with SOE,s other tiny little niche games.

enjoy.

the other 90 percent of the market will not buy into it though. not ever again. those 500,000 accounts EQ1 used to have was the penicle of subscribers forced grouping games is ever going to see. its possible to make a super big forced grouping game with more raids than EQ1 and more grouping content than EQ2 and draw all the hard core players away from all the other games into just one super game.

possible. but even if you mananged to do that, you would still have a tiny little niche game with less than 500,000 players while blizzard is hosting a party to celebrate reaching 10 million accounts.

its not always easy to show hard headed people the path to riches.

and look at it logistically. in EQ1 you have 90 percent of the players playing in 3 or 4 zones not counting the grinders in various zones. you could still have everything that interest powergamers in a WoW type game just by dedicating a small percentage of the content for that type of playstyle.

but, you can not have any part of the casual gamer crowd unless you have the majority of the content available to them.

you can have both in one game. no one has done that yet, but it is possible. Vanguard didnt give anyone anything. the casual gamers fled the forced grouping and the powergamers fled the total lack of powergamer content. unless they add one or the other, relaunching is a waste of time and money.

you can have a tiny bit of OCD(obsessive compulsive disorder) type content and still please the massive casual gamer market. EQ1 has over 300 zones, but all those powergamers only use 3 or 4 of them. thats alot of WASTED bandwidth that could be put to better use for the other 90 percent of the market.


it doesnt have to be one or the other. but if you want a very sucessfull game, you MUST include the casual gamer market. like wise, you dont necessarily have to include the powergamer market to be sucessfull. think about that as your spitting out "powergamer or die" in your posts. Vanguard didnt please either market. relaunching it isnt going to change that, and ONE raid isnt going to get the OCD types to come play for very long either.

the next hightly sucessfull game is going to cater to the mainstream players, weather it has OCD type game play in it or not. end of story.

[Spirit]

its true. not everyone likes woW. i dont really, but its the only game on the market that offers gaming that is familey friendly, ie, you can still have a familey.

So, it's not possible for someone to maintain a relationship with their family if they're playing an MMO other than WoW. Why am I even taking you seriously at this point?

**** this noise, I'm gonna play Bioshock.

[Cobalty2004]

So, it's not possible for someone to maintain a relationship with their family if they're playing an MMO other than WoW. Why am I even taking you seriously at this point?

**** this noise, I'm gonna play Bioshock.

Great game, you beat it yet?

[Spirit]

Great game, you beat it yet?

Nah, I'm taking it slow. I just came across the bunny ears recording :twisted:

[Skazz]

Its really hard to believe that SOE can turn Vanguard around when they can’t even spell the name right.


http://vgplayers.station.sony.com/newsArchive.vm?id=242&section=News:rolleyes:

[AsheMan]

Its really hard to believe that SOE can turn Vanguard around when they can’t even spell the name right.


http://vgplayers.station.sony.com/newsArchive.vm?id=242&section=News:rolleyes:

Haha, Vangyard.

[Atoyota]

Haha, Vangyard.

yup i saw it.... hehehe :)

[Loampounder]

LOL, an over-emphasis on the housing in VG?

"sorry, cannot group for VT, gotta go home and mow the cyberyard."

[Damain]

I only visit SV for the hardware sections. I've all but stopped reading these forums because of posts like this.

From launch, most posts on this forum were mostly about bashing the game, and it continues even today. It's probably from dispationate people who have nothing better to do than bash another game.

I read the official forums daily, sometimes, hourly. And, believe it or not, there's very little VG bashing. Read the newbie yard section, there's plenty of people joining every day. Players are having a good time. The official forums actually inspire me to log on more. I'm level 50, and having a blast. I don't even play my alts much.

I can understand the OP's need to feel negative about something, and these forums on SV provide an outlet for him or her to vent. She or he enjoys the flames; it's addictive drama, akin to a mid-day serial on TV.

I feel true pitty for the OP. Get some help. Don't stay introverted forever. All you do is try to bring down others with you in your sad little world of disontent.

[ikaoma420]

I only visit SV for the hardware sections. I've all but stopped reading these forums because of posts like this.

From launch, most posts on this forum were mostly about bashing the game, and it continues even today. It's probably from dispationate people who have nothing better to do than bash another game.

I read the official forums daily, sometimes, hourly. And, believe it or not, there's very little VG bashing. Read the newbie yard section, there's plenty of people joining every day. Players are having a good time. The official forums actually inspire me to log on more. I'm level 50, and having a blast. I don't even play my alts much.

I can understand the OP's need to feel negative about something, and these forums on SV provide an outlet for him or her to vent. She or he enjoys the flames; it's addictive drama, akin to a mid-day serial on TV.

I feel true pitty for the OP. Get some help. Don't stay introverted forever. All you do is try to bring down others with you in your sad little world of disontent.

If you think SV forums bash Vanguard you should read the FOH boards.

http://www.fohguild.org/forums/mmorpg-general-discussion/30417-vanguard-server-consolidation.html

Compared to how they treat the game SV is carebear about Vanguard. As I said in a previous post about the only place you're going to find anything positive about Vanguard is on the official forums.

[Joodah]

If you think SV forums bash Vanguard you should read the FOH boards.

http://www.fohguild.org/forums/mmorpg-general-discussion/30417-vanguard-server-consolidation.html

Compared to how they treat the game SV is carebear about Vanguard. As I said in a previous post about the only place you're going to find anything positive about Vanguard is on the official forums.

Well let's be honest here, FOH has a huge, MASSIVE axe to grind over VG since they put so much stock into the game pre-launch and after, and Brad/Sigil sort of gave them "Favored" status only to have it crumble in on them, heh

[Spirit]

Well let's be honest here, FOH has a huge, MASSIVE axe to grind over VG since they put so much stock into the game pre-launch and after, and Brad/Sigil sort of gave them "Favored" status only to have it crumble in on them, heh

I don't think they put much stock into VG at all. The vocal people over there (Utnayan in particular) gave Brad a really rough time.

Interesting to note that, even through his madman rantings, Utnayan was more right about VG than anybody.

[rhagz]

Well let's be honest here, FOH has a huge, MASSIVE axe to grind over VG since they put so much stock into the game pre-launch and after, and Brad/Sigil sort of gave them "Favored" status only to have it crumble in on them, heh

No axe to grind, they just don't care for smoke being blown up their lower orifices. They call it like they see it and they see Vanguard as a massive failure.. same as everyone but the 20k people left playing it.

[Champ]

I only visit SV for the hardware sections. I've all but stopped reading these forums because of posts like this.

From launch, most posts on this forum were mostly about bashing the game, and it continues even today. It's probably from dispationate people who have nothing better to do than bash another game.

I read the official forums daily, sometimes, hourly. And, believe it or not, there's very little VG bashing. Read the newbie yard section, there's plenty of people joining every day. Players are having a good time. The official forums actually inspire me to log on more. I'm level 50, and having a blast. I don't even play my alts much.

I can understand the OP's need to feel negative about something, and these forums on SV provide an outlet for him or her to vent. She or he enjoys the flames; it's addictive drama, akin to a mid-day serial on TV.

I feel true pitty for the OP. Get some help. Don't stay introverted forever. All you do is try to bring down others with you in your sad little world of disontent.

Haven't played VG in months but the best part of Vanguard was always the forum discussions. Straight PVP, hardcore ruleset and most of all, passion and fun. Honestly, it's all the ingredients the actual game lacked (recent updates and bug fixes not withstanding because I just don't know if it's better now or not).

Now, if Sigil/SOE could manage to monetize the forums, apart from the official kool-aid ones, I'd have to resubscribe just to keep up. Meanwhile, love you all, keep up the posts, and I'll keep reading.

[Champ]

Yeah, I know. I was referring to future MMO's when I said those things, not Vanguard. And I disagree with your assertion that Vanguard's world is 'quality'. It isn't. It's graphically impressive, but it isn't anywhere near approaching quality. Theres way too many features that are missing, such as baking, fishing, languages, scripted city NPC's that add flavour, dynamic content etc.

The world, if it is anything, is sterile and vacuous. Bugs and performance issues are only a fraction of what needs addressing before SOE can call the game ready.

By quality world I meant that it was graphically impressive (with often poor texturing), the missing systems IMO have nothing to do with the world itself but a lack of foresight in designing the total whole. Otherwise, I agree with you completely.

[Solid]

I'm just wondering if the people here stick around because they believe Vanguard will get better, or believe the game deserves as much bad rap for being a total disaster. Personally I don't know anymore. I mean reading the official forums..it doesn't look too good. SOE seem agonizingly slow to bring out any drastic changes the game needs, so slow I'm wondering if they're planning to shut down the game instead. Yeah server mergers but like that is gonna do much...the population is so pitifully small it seems pointless trying to support it with its damaged reputation. Then there's a trial island that is going to be released, which I think is being stingy couldn't they do something right like WoW giving you 10 free days to play the actual game but not being able to trade...etc.

But in 3+ years the game could become amazing like what SOE did to EQ2...but at the same time 3+ years is way too long and there are other games like WAR, AoC etc. coming out to steal even more people's attention away.

Anyway, what do people think about Vanguard these days? Do you have hope the game has a chance, and stick around or is it too late?

Vanguard might get better (it couldnt exactly get any worse) but it will never be the game it was supposed to be. It doesnt even look next gen anymore with all the visuals missing.

It may be a good game but it will never be an amazing game.

[Aidon]

Um, yes they have. I guess we could sit here all day and debate the exsistance of the pages upon pages of fixes in the past 2 updates, but why bother. They have posted the bug fix lists each time. If you choose to deny that is the case, be my guest. :rolleyes:

Evidently I was not clear enough. Allow me to elucidate:

Through long association with Sony and/or those people who comprised Sigil, as a subscriber to various games, I've long since understood that just because they claim to have fixed or improved something, by no means does that mean they actually have; indeed, it usually takes them two or three tries before they successfully fix anything.

I don't care what the patch notes say has been fixed. I don't believe them.

[Aidon]

Much like how every post you make is the reverse. Guess you guys are even huh? :D

As usual in this forum, it's okay to bash the game. Not ok to be positive about it. Talk about hypocrisy of the most blatant kind, but that's business as usual here.

You've been "positive" about the game for months now...

As the game was descending into ever decreseasing depths of ineptitude, you were on here posting about how great it was.

When people were commenting that the subs were dropping like flies, you were on here posting about how we were all wrong.

When people were suggesting that the game was buggy and that their performance was lag-ridden and CTD prone, you were insisting that it was the fault of our hardware or our config, since you were playing just fine.

So now, the servers are merged, 20k would be an optimistic guess as sub numbers (and I'd guess that most of those are station pass accounts), and the the world at large has acknowledged that Vanguard was an abortion, and still you sit here wearing the worlds rosiest glasses claiming all is well.

I'm still of the opinion that you're payed by SOE, noone else could so blithely ignore the myriad flaws.

[Joodah]

No axe to grind, they just don't care for smoke being blown up their lower orifices. They call it like they see it and they see Vanguard as a massive failure.. same as everyone but the 20k people left playing it.

Funny how most people get over stuff like that instead of having a 6 month temper tantrum about the game's alleged injustices to everyone. But of course you and many others on this forum will never get that - heck, what would you do with your day if you couldn't beat the dead horse continuously? After all, reminding everyone on a forum how bad a game failed 6 months after launch is IMPORTANT BUSINESS. :rolleyes:

[Joodah]

I don't care what the patch notes say has been fixed. I don't believe them.

That's your problem.

[rhagz]

Funny how most people get over stuff like that instead of having a 6 month temper tantrum about the game's alleged injustices to everyone. But of course you and many others on this forum will never get that - heck, what would you do with your day if you couldn't beat the dead horse continuously? After all, reminding everyone on a forum how bad a game failed 6 months after launch is IMPORTANT BUSINESS. :rolleyes:

Temper tantrum? Lol, okay. Cheap entertainment is more like it. I can drop in for a few minutes every so often and be assured of comedy gold. That's too good to pass up imo.

I don't think anyone really cares about VG at this point other than the few people playing it and everyone else who likes to laugh at it like it's a nutshot video on YouTube.

[VoiceOfReason]

You've been "positive" about the game for months now...

As the game was descending into ever decreseasing depths of ineptitude, you were on here posting about how great it was.

When people were commenting that the subs were dropping like flies, you were on here posting about how we were all wrong.

When people were suggesting that the game was buggy and that their performance was lag-ridden and CTD prone, you were insisting that it was the fault of our hardware or our config, since you were playing just fine.

So now, the servers are merged, 20k would be an optimistic guess as sub numbers (and I'd guess that most of those are station pass accounts), and the the world at large has acknowledged that Vanguard was an abortion, and still you sit here wearing the worlds rosiest glasses claiming all is well.

I'm still of the opinion that you're payed by SOE, noone else could so blithely ignore the myriad flaws.

Aidon and people of your ilk:

As the game has shown signs of improvement (performance, bug fixes, beginning raid content) you have ever looked for the negative. When you couldn't find sufficient material for your negativity you'd rehash old material in a snide, smug way.

It is a fact that the game had serious problems at launch. The 20 thousand have gotten over that.

It is also a fact that thus far, things seem to be improving. You 20 or so haters need to get over that fact.

[Jordan Jax]

Temper tantrum? Lol, okay. Cheap entertainment is more like it. I can drop in for a few minutes every so often and be assured of comedy gold. That's too good to pass up imo.

I don't think anyone really cares about VG at this point other than the few people playing it and everyone else who likes to laugh at it like it's a nutshot video on YouTube.

I'll never understand why so many people have a serious complex with anyone who actually likes this game. If we like it we're either 1) stupid, 2) gullible, 3) retarded, or 4) one of a 5 or 6 normal people on this planet that still like the game for some unexplainable reason.

I understand there are a lot of people who don't like the game for various reasons including performance, stability, missing features, too hardcore, too softcore etc. And i have no problem with those people. I understand the game isn't what they wanted it to be so they moved on. Or at least, most of them did.

The others stick around all the various message boards continuously ripping the game to shreds, sniffing out any remotely positive post and trolling the sh&t out of that thread until nothing remotely positive remains - with many of those psychos also feeling the need to rip the people that like the game to shreds as well. I don't understand what is going on in their heads. Do you not understand the people who like the game will continue to like it, and the people who don't won't? What are you trying to accomplish other than fagging up a bunch of message boards with crap that nobody other than your VG-ripping buddies want to read so they can feel vindicated that, yes, there are people out there who feel exactly like i do about VG?? woohoo!! Does that comfort you? Give you a better sense of self-worth? I honestly don't understand this mentality...never have and never will.

For the record, i like this game because, despite it's gradual move towards an easier, simpler game it still provides the closest thing out there to my ideal mmorpg (huge world, no instancing, ton of content albeit not at high levels yet, more challenging than other mmrpgs - even though i wish it were even more challenging, different spheres with some good ideas like diplomacy that admittedly need to be more fully integrated into the world, and still a ton of potential that hopefully will be realized to some extent in the future as the game grows), along with the fact i have a rig that can, for the most part, handle it pretty well. I guess that means i'm a raving vanboi or incredibly gullible that i like such an obviously inferior piece of crap, or maybe both?

[Joodah]

I'll never understand why so many people have a serious complex with anyone who actually likes this game. If we like it we're either 1) stupid, 2) gullible, 3) retarded, or 4) one of a 5 or 6 normal people on this planet that still like the game for some unexplainable reason.

I understand there are a lot of people who don't like the game for various reasons including performance, stability, missing features, too hardcore, too softcore etc. And i have no problem with those people. I understand the game isn't what they wanted it to be so they moved on. Or at least, most of them did.

The others stick around all the various message boards continuously ripping the game to shreds, sniffing out any remotely positive post and trolling the sh&t out of that thread until nothing remotely positive remains - with many of those psychos also feeling the need to rip the people that like the game to shreds as well. I don't understand what is going on in their heads. Do you not understand the people who like the game will continue to like it, and the people who don't won't? What are you trying to accomplish other than fagging up a bunch of message boards with crap that nobody other than your VG-ripping buddies want to read so they can feel vindicated that, yes, there are people out there who feel exactly like i do about VG?? woohoo!! Does that comfort you? Give you a better sense of self-worth? I honestly don't understand this mentality...never have and never will.

For the record, i like this game because, despite it's gradual move towards an easier, simpler game it still provides the closest thing out there to my ideal mmorpg (huge world, no instancing, ton of content albeit not at high levels yet, more challenging than other mmrpgs - even though i wish it were even more challenging, different spheres with some good ideas like diplomacy that admittedly need to be more fully integrated into the world, and still a ton of potential that hopefully will be realized to some extent in the future as the game grows), along with the fact i have a rig that can, for the most part, handle it pretty well. I guess that means i'm a raving vanboi or incredibly gullible that i like such an obviously inferior piece of crap, or maybe both?

Well said :cool:

[shadowrelm]

hey, people still play UO too. there is a game for everyone.

regualrdless of what direction Vanguard takes, i hope they do well. if not, game developers might start shying away from creating them, or they will all end up clones of one another, which, ironically, they seem to be already.

there are alot of angry people because there are alot of OCD types that have already blown through everything on the market, and are board to tears, and angry Vanguard didnt alleviate them from their delima. they will get over it.

play what you like. i do.

if your having fun, thats all that counts. if not, play something else.

if your not having fun, but refuse to play something else.......go see a shrink.

[VoiceOfReason]

I'll never understand why so many people have a serious complex with anyone who actually likes this game. If we like it we're either 1) stupid, 2) gullible, 3) retarded, or 4) one of a 5 or 6 normal people on this planet that still like the game for some unexplainable reason.

I understand there are a lot of people who don't like the game for various reasons including performance, stability, missing features, too hardcore, too softcore etc. And i have no problem with those people. I understand the game isn't what they wanted it to be so they moved on. Or at least, most of them did.

The others stick around all the various message boards continuously ripping the game to shreds, sniffing out any remotely positive post and trolling the sh&t out of that thread until nothing remotely positive remains - with many of those psychos also feeling the need to rip the people that like the game to shreds as well. I don't understand what is going on in their heads. Do you not understand the people who like the game will continue to like it, and the people who don't won't? What are you trying to accomplish other than fagging up a bunch of message boards with crap that nobody other than your VG-ripping buddies want to read so they can feel vindicated that, yes, there are people out there who feel exactly like i do about VG?? woohoo!! Does that comfort you? Give you a better sense of self-worth? I honestly don't understand this mentality...never have and never will.

For the record, i like this game because, despite it's gradual move towards an easier, simpler game it still provides the closest thing out there to my ideal mmorpg (huge world, no instancing, ton of content albeit not at high levels yet, more challenging than other mmrpgs - even though i wish it were even more challenging, different spheres with some good ideas like diplomacy that admittedly need to be more fully integrated into the world, and still a ton of potential that hopefully will be realized to some extent in the future as the game grows), along with the fact i have a rig that can, for the most part, handle it pretty well. I guess that means i'm a raving vanboi or incredibly gullible that i like such an obviously inferior piece of crap, or maybe both?

Got to agree with Joodah, this is very well said. I've been trying to say the same thing myself for over a month, but I think you said it better here than I ever did.

[Caldis]

regualrdless of what direction Vanguard takes, i hope they do well. if not, game developers might start shying away from creating them, or they will all end up clones of one another, which, ironically, they seem to be already.


That's my biggest problem with the way Vanguard has turned out, it is a virtual cookie cutter of EQ mixed with a little WoW. They made everything the same but a little bigger with a few more classes and races. What they havent done is improved on the gameplay, and thats a huge fault.

Brad talked about a lot of nifty features, turned out he was a snake oil salesman and none of them were happening in this game. The content is very mild and requires little to no thought. Ship combat, mounted combat, diplomacy that's actually meaningful, an actual economic system, none of these are happening any time soon.

I'll give credit where it's due, the server merges have really helped the game. The game is enjoyable when you get groups going and do a dungeon or two. However it's not really any more interesting than WOW or EQ or LOTRO. There's nothing about this game that makes it stand out as something different or better then the pack.

[rhagz]

I'll never understand why so many people have a serious complex with anyone who actually likes this game.

I'll never understand plasma cosmology. :(

[kcxiv]

For what they were aiming for, Vanguard never had to be better then the pack. It had to be good enough. It had to be something a tad different then from whats out there right now. IMO they did accomplish that. What they didnt accomplish was a somewhat polished game. Thats what i think really hurt the game. Everyone that i know that played Vanguard liked the game, but it was just to damn buggy.

There's just no way you can keep customers when 80 percent of them were suffering from CTD's every 20 min.

[danbala]

I'll never understand why so many people have a serious complex with anyone who actually likes this game. If we like it we're either 1) stupid, 2) gullible, 3) retarded, or 4) one of a 5 or 6 normal people on this planet that still like the game for some unexplainable reason.

I understand there are a lot of people who don't like the game for various reasons including performance, stability, missing features, too hardcore, too softcore etc. And i have no problem with those people. I understand the game isn't what they wanted it to be so they moved on. Or at least, most of them did.


I don't understand the point of the haters at this late date either. VG is pretty much a moot issue at this point. Its like bashing Nixon. Who cares, right?

On the other hand, I do understand the car wreck idea. I personally find myself coming back to these boards out of morbid curiousity. Will SoE finally pull the plug? Or will things limp along? I am geniuely curious to find out how long this will go on. (This doesn't mean I have anything against anyone playing it.)

[Fingis]

i hope they do well. if not, game developers might start shying away from creating them,

There's got to be some punishment for creating a dud.

Not a lot but some.

I hope Brad makes a comeback some day, this is America, the land of second chances. But I don't think he should escape scott free either. He should feel shame for what he did.

[Jordan Jax]

There's got to be some punishment for creating a dud.

Not a lot but some.

I hope Brad makes a comeback some day, this is America, the land of second chances. But I don't think he should escape scott free either. He should feel shame for what he did.

It's a freakin' video game. A game that some people even like no less.

Some people take this sh&t way too seriously.

[VoiceOfReason]

There's got to be some punishment for creating a dud.

Not a lot but some.

I hope Brad makes a comeback some day, this is America, the land of second chances. But I don't think he should escape scott free either. He should feel shame for what he did.

The big pin-spotter of life always does it's thing.... sometimes it just takes awhile. Brad will get exactly what he deserves sooner or later.

As to what he deserves, opinions probably vary widely. I think he deserves recognition as a visionary, and some credit for EQ1 as well as some even for VG. I also think he proved himself incompetent to lead the development of a project as ambitious as this one was. All of these are pretty much self-evident facts. So, will he work in the game industry again? I'd guess the answer is "very likely". Will he have complete control ever again? Not likely, unless he funds it.

[Choctaw]

The big pin-spotter of life always does it's thing.... sometimes it just takes awhile. Brad will get exactly what he deserves sooner or later.

As to what he deserves, opinions probably vary widely. I think he deserves recognition as a visionary, and some credit for EQ1 as well as some even for VG. I also think he proved himself incompetent to lead the development of a project as ambitious as this one was. All of these are pretty much self-evident facts. So, will he work in the game industry again? I'd guess the answer is "very likely". Will he have complete control ever again? Not likely, unless he funds it.

I disagree with the part where he'll work in the industry again.

NGE happened a long time ago. There is still a very large and very vocal population out there that will forever hate SOE for that. Whether you think it was their fault or not is irrelevant. Those people exist and will never forgive them for that.

McQuaid is now in that same category. I would personally never touch a game he made for a host of reasons, the least of which would be his management skills. I believe there are a lot of people like me who simply will never trust anything he puts his name to ever again.

If I was a developer of a game I wouldn't want that group of people excluded from my game (even if you think it's unreasonable) at the get go. Heck, I'd try to keep as many people "included" in possible customers as I could.

[VoiceOfReason]

I disagree with the part where he'll work in the industry again.

NGE happened a long time ago. There is still a very large and very vocal population out there that will forever hate SOE for that. Whether you think it was their fault or not is irrelevant. Those people exist and will never forgive them for that.

McQuaid is now in that same category. I would personally never touch a game he made for a host of reasons, the least of which would be his management skills. I believe there are a lot of people like me who simply will never trust anything he puts his name to ever again.

If I was a developer of a game I wouldn't want that group of people excluded from my game (even if you think it's unreasonable) at the get go. Heck, I'd try to keep as many people "included" in possible customers as I could.

Well, it's all guesswork, granted. I'm thinking he has a huge win in his credits for EQ1. I'm also thinking that VG will in the long term, become at least a modest success. If this is so, then I think he's got a good shot at another shot. :)

Some folks are definitely turned off to Brad forever. I myself would think twice. Remember, there were a lot of people (I was one of them) that detested him for the screw-you-nerfings in EQ1. But there are a LOT of people in the world, and more becoming of gaming age every year that never heard of Brad. I'm, thinking that 1.5 out of 2 is a pretty good track record in an industry that sees so many failures.

[Mreynolds]

Well, it's all guesswork, granted. I'm thinking he has a huge win in his credits for EQ1. I'm also thinking that VG will in the long term, become at least a modest success. If this is so, then I think he's got a good shot at another shot. :)

Some folks are definitely turned off to Brad forever. I myself would think twice. Remember, there were a lot of people (I was one of them) that detested him for the screw-you-nerfings in EQ1. But there are a LOT of people in the world, and more becoming of gaming age every year that never heard of Brad. I'm, thinking that 1.5 out of 2 is a pretty good track record in an industry that sees so many failures.

IF and its a IF VG becomes modestly successful most will give all credit to SOE. Brad will work again I am sure. We may not know he is working on it due to the initial negative publicity but I am sure he is lurking somewhere out there.

[Kayd]

I think people really underestimate how quickly people forget. Brad will work again, if he wants too, though I can't see why he'd want to. And, yea some people won't forget and will never play any game he makes again, but you have to realize how incredibly long 5 years is in the gaming world, who the people really into games will be then and how many people will even remember Vanguard. Look at Asheron's Call. Never realy took off as a MMORPG, and just squeaked along for years, but even so Turbine got several new projects.

Take an objective look at Raph Koster. UO came out well before EQ and could have dominated the market, but lost big time. Yet who got picked to make SWG. Abother case, SOE who made EQ1 bombed big time with EQ2 (compared to what they excpected to do). It wouldn't suprise me to see Brad back in a few years, or even less, and get pretty good backing. It's particularly easy for Brad to make the case to potential investors that the events that caused the most problems during Vanguard development were out of the hands of Sigil, who were often under economic pressures they hadn't anticipated. Vanguard is already widely viewed as being released way way too early. It could still survive and manage some degree of success if it hangs in there and improves, which would then reflect well on Brad rather than poorly.

The bottom line is it's way to early to tell what Vanguard will turn into, or how that end product will be received. For better or worse, it is the future which will determine whether Vanguard is ultimatly a success, and if it manages to turn things around that success will reflect on Brad, even if he isn't involved.

[rhagz]

With the death of Vanguard comes the death of a generation of gamers who give two shits about Brad, much less know who he is. He may work again, but the simple fact he is working on a game will not be the selling point that Sigil used to peddle Vanguard. He will just be a guy with some ideas, but then again those guys are a dime a dozen. There is no shortage of creativity in the MMO industry, only a shortage of capable implementation.

[Champ]

It wouldn't suprise me to see Brad back in a few years, or even less, and get pretty good backing. It's particularly easy for Brad to make the case to potential investors that the events that caused the most problems during Vanguard development were out of the hands of Sigil, who were often under economic pressures they hadn't anticipated. Vanguard is already widely viewed as being released way way too early. It could still survive and manage some degree of success if it hangs in there and improves, which would then reflect well on Brad rather than poorly.

The bottom line is it's way to early to tell what Vanguard will turn into, or how that end product will be received. For better or worse, it is the future which will determine whether Vanguard is ultimatly a success, and if it manages to turn things around that success will reflect on Brad, even if he isn't involved.

Wrong. VG had one of the biggest budgets in PC game history and five years to make the game. There were no economic pressures in VG's development. There were only performance, production, and quality pressures. The same pressures that all first, second, and third party studios face in the games biz. Please stop perpetuating the lie that Vanguard needed more time and more money to hit it's stride. It does all competent developers and paying customers a disservice.

[Choctaw]

Wrong. VG had one of the biggest budgets in PC game history and five years to make the game. There were no economic pressures in VG's development. There were only performance, production, and quality pressures. The same pressures that all first, second, and third party studios face in the games biz. Please stop perpetuating the lie that Vanguard needed more time and more money to hit it's stride. It does all competent developers and paying customers a disservice.

/agree

Completely.

[kcxiv]

Need to just let this debate/arguement whatever you wanna call it go. Its been argued/debated to death on every MMO website x10.


VG isnt going to go anywhere, and the people who do enjoy it will continue to enjoy it. It wont ever be a huge game, but it can still be fun.

[Jordan Jax]

Need to just let this debate/arguement whatever you wanna call it go. Its been argued/debated to death on every MMO website x10.


VG isnt going to go anywhere, and the people who do enjoy it will continue to enjoy it. It wont ever be a huge game, but it can still be fun.

but...but...Rhagz says VG is dead! It must be so!!

[rhagz]

but...but...Rhagz says VG is dead! It must be so!!

Well.. it is. It's braindead and on life support and it isn't getting better no matter how many operations SOE performs. Let me know when you break that 50k barrier then we can talk about recovery.

[Aidon]

That's your problem.

Not really, seeing as I'm not trying to get them to subscribe to me.

[Aidon]

Aidon and people of your ilk:

As the game has shown signs of improvement (performance, bug fixes, beginning raid content) you have ever looked for the negative. When you couldn't find sufficient material for your negativity you'd rehash old material in a snide, smug way.

It is a fact that the game had serious problems at launch. The 20 thousand have gotten over that.

It is also a fact that thus far, things seem to be improving. You 20 or so haters need to get over that fact.

I'll believe it when I see it...and I'll see it when they activate my account for a couple weeks for free.

Until then, its still a festering piece of crap mockery of everyone who paid to play.

[Fingis]

It is a fact that the game had serious problems at launch. The 20 thousand have gotten over that.

20K?

Maybe if you count the 16K who have station pass but are actually playing EQ2.

[Alawi]

I have station pass which is the only reason why i log into Vanguard every once in a while, but for all practical purposes the game is dead really. I like lore and atmosphere and raiding and decent UI - the game is lacking all of that and I realize Sony is working hard but I am enjoying myself in EQ2 now, doing Sword of Destiny series, raiding with friends, its so refreshing to have a stable, polished environment to play in, with great icing on the cake like a great broker system (not a 10 item limit lol), a great UI and recruitment tool and chat windows, etc etc.

Kunark expansion will be released in November, that should be a great bonus as well to us - as for Vanguard I dont expect any major positive changes until the summer at least, judging by the pace they are going at.

Let me put it this way, if I wasnt a Station Pass owner I'd have cancelled VG. But I can afford to wait cause I aint paying for it. The tragedy of it though is the friendships and guildies who have been split up due to the abysmal game launch and preceding months.

[warakus]

Hmm I still log into vanguard. Im not going to put any opinion of how the game is going to do.. I just know that for me personally I have been playing planetside. the fast paced pvp and squad centric goals are fun and exciting. I have played better shooters but hey its on my station pass so I dont lose anything really.
I started planetside up while playing vanguard.. slowly I migrated to playing PS more and more and vanguard less and less. Dreading the grind on vanguard of harvesting/farming/factioning I just dont really care about my characters so much there. I dont feel attached to them but I do have fun if I play them but only a few hours a week. I have alts which are fun too either pvp or pve but not enough to keep me on for long.
After the merge it was a giant PVP fest.. that was fun but things seem to be dwindling down as others seem to have found other things to do as well. I noticed they seemt o be highlighting guild halls.. great for them.. I never had any real interest in a guildhall that really doesnt offer anything but a little prestige to guilds.
Now having logged in mains and different level alts.. the zones dont seem to populated.. maybe just a little more then pre merge but there doesnt seem to be an influx of new players.
I once got a friend to start playing.. now honestly without criticizing anything if someone ask me if they should get it I first ask them if they palyed eq2... then if they havent I tell them to try that until Vanguard gets more to do in game (unless they are a die hard crafter diplo type then sure vanguard would hold em over a bit)
Ive been on PVP sicne beginning. Its had its fun moments... but over the last 3 months its just something to do.. i find myself willing to try anything that comes out next that has PVP.. from Darkfall to AOC or warhammer. Honestly in my opinion I think if any game comes out with PVP right now Sartok will die a quick death. I could be wrong but over half my original guild left and are waiting for whatever comes next... Im hoping they make a shadowbane part 2 with some content and a better engine.. Some really nice ideas in that game... too bad they didnt get vanguards budget.

[VoiceOfReason]

With the death of Vanguard comes the death of a generation of gamers who give two shits about Brad, much less know who he is. He may work again, but the simple fact he is working on a game will not be the selling point that Sigil used to peddle Vanguard. He will just be a guy with some ideas, but then again those guys are a dime a dozen. There is no shortage of creativity in the MMO industry, only a shortage of capable implementation.

>> There is no shortage of creativity in the MMO industry. ...
Got to disagree.

>> ... a shortage of capable implementation.
I agree with this to an extent.

[rhagz]

Ideas are a dime a dozen. I can sit here and rattle off the best sounding MMO ever concieved. Getting it done is another matter entirely. This is simply the way it is. Anyone with half a brain that knows what an elf is can come up with ideas.

[VoiceOfReason]

Ideas are a dime a dozen. I can sit here and rattle off the best sounding MMO ever concieved. Getting it done is another matter entirely. This is simply the way it is. Anyone with half a brain that knows what an elf is can come up with ideas.

And yet there is a tiresome semblance between most examples of each genre. Just throwing elves into your game does not make it a new idea.

[rhagz]

Pretty sure I didn't say it did.. your name is very unfitting as you have no clue as to what reason is.

[danbala]

Need to just let this debate/arguement whatever you wanna call it go. Its been argued/debated to death on every MMO website x10.


VG isnt going to go anywhere, and the people who do enjoy it will continue to enjoy it. It wont ever be a huge game, but it can still be fun.

My bet is that VG does go some where. I think by next summer it will go to theplace Auto Assaut went -- and at the same time offers will be extended to try EQ2 at a reduced rate. (By that point, EQ2s numbers will be starting to spiral down as well).

[VoiceOfReason]

Pretty sure I didn't say it did.. your name is very unfitting as you have no clue as to what reason is.

>> Anyone with half a brain that knows what an elf is can come up with ideas.

Pretty sure you said the above. This is a reasoned argument? So anyone - anyone in the world who understands what an elf is can come up with ideas that are suitable for successful computer games?

And I think I understand logic and reason just fine - certainly others here have agreed with at least some of my reasoning.

As for names, I'll admit that you certainly live up to yours.

[VoiceOfReason]

My bet is that VG does go some where. I think by next summer it will go to theplace Auto Assaut went -- and at the same time offers will be extended to try EQ2 at a reduced rate. (By that point, EQ2s numbers will be starting to spiral down as well).

lol, humorously put.

You might be right. If the current team does not execute, you probably are right. Time will tell. Success is there's for the taking if they will step up and do it.

[rhagz]

Pretty sure you said the above. This is a reasoned argument? So anyone - anyone in the world who understands what an elf is can come up with ideas that are suitable for successful computer games?


Sigh, I guess I need to talk like I am addressing a 10 year old around here.

You need half a brain to come up with ideas and you need to know what an elf is to come up with some fantasy ideas. That doesn't mean you need elves, it means you know what fantasy is comprised of. We are talking about fantasy MMOs here right, isn't that what Vanguard is? Your reasoning skills are lacking in your haste to attack and rebut everything I say on a literal level.

[Cobalty2004]

My bet is that VG does go some where. I think by next summer it will go to theplace Auto Assaut went -- and at the same time offers will be extended to try EQ2 at a reduced rate. (By that point, EQ2s numbers will be starting to spiral down as well).

Lets see. WAR, AoC, TR, and numerous bad ass single player games will be out by then.

So yea, Vanguard = AA unless the planets and the sun and all the moons line up....

[Kayd]

Wrong. VG had one of the biggest budgets in PC game history and five years to make the game. There were no economic pressures in VG's development. There were only performance, production, and quality pressures. The same pressures that all first, second, and third party studios face in the games biz. Please stop perpetuating the lie that Vanguard needed more time and more money to hit it's stride. It does all competent developers and paying customers a disservice.
People who win the lottery can still blow it all. I would call that money problems. There were economic pressures on Sigil or they wouldn't have released when they did. If you wouldn't call running out of money and economic pressure then what do you call it? If they didn't release early because they didn't have more money why did they release early? Having a big budget doesn't mean you won't run out of money, Vanguard is proof of that.

It isn't a lie that Vanguard needed more time and money to finish the work they started. It is pretty much the truth. What is also the truth is that they should have had the money to make a decent game. They should have seen economic problems coming and scaled back the project so they had the resources to finish. I'm not saying you're wrong, but you are being overly simplistic. I can make a game in my basement for no money, but nobody is going to want to buy it because on my own I haven't the resources to produce anything anyone wants to see. Conversly, if you're trying to make Wow, and you don't have a fraction of the budget Blizzard did you're going to run out of money. Where Sigil failed is in reconciling what needed to be done with what had to be done and the money available to do it. They ran out of money because they mismanaged the money, manpower, and scope of the project.

Competent managers would have managed the money, manpower and scope of the project so they were able to release a finished polished product.

[Champ]

People who win the lottery can still blow it all. I would call that money problems. There were economic pressures on Sigil or they wouldn't have released when they did. If you wouldn't call running out of money and economic pressure then what do you call it? If they didn't release early because they didn't have more money why did they release early? Having a big budget doesn't mean you won't run out of money, Vanguard is proof of that.

It isn't a lie that Vanguard needed more time and money to finish the work they started. It is pretty much the truth. What is also the truth is that they should have had the money to make a decent game. They should have seen economic problems coming and scaled back the project so they had the resources to finish. I'm not saying you're wrong, but you are being overly simplistic. I can make a game in my basement for no money, but nobody is going to want to buy it because on my own I haven't the resources to produce anything anyone wants to see. Conversly, if you're trying to make Wow, and you don't have a fraction of the budget Blizzard did you're going to run out of money. Where Sigil failed is in reconciling what needed to be done with what had to be done and the money available to do it. They ran out of money because they mismanaged the money, manpower, and scope of the project.

Competent managers would have managed the money, manpower and scope of the project so they were able to release a finished polished product.

Okay, I'm going to need clarification on your post because I'm confused. You seem to be disagreeing with me right up 'til the end where you completely validated my previous post. While I wait, I'd like to make a couple observations from your post.

Remember that VG and WoW development overlapped for a time. So, there was no 'We're trying to make WoW on a fraction of their buget' nonsense. Also, if there had ever been an inkling that Brad wanted to make WoW after it's success was clear, that would've spawned the most epic thread ever. I'd probably still be reading it.

Finally, VG did in fact have a fraction of WoW's budget. Which sounds bad at first until you realize that 3/4ths of an obscene figure is still a very large figure.

[VoiceOfReason]

Sigh, I guess I need to talk like I am addressing a 10 year old around here.

You need half a brain to come up with ideas and you need to know what an elf is to come up with some fantasy ideas. That doesn't mean you need elves, it means you know what fantasy is comprised of. We are talking about fantasy MMOs here right, isn't that what Vanguard is? Your reasoning skills are lacking in your haste to attack and rebut everything I say on a literal level.


I have no "haste" to attack you. YOU have haste to attack VG. You and others of your ilk frequently slip into hyperbole and distort truths to try and support your arguments. I am gonna call you on that if I am taking a counter stance, which I often do because I started posting here to try to inject some balance here.

As for failure to use reason.... insinuating that I think on the level of a ten year old is not only silly but it is also a sign that you yourself are unable to bring enough reason to the table to support your arguments and must resort to inane personal attacks.

Another thing. The definition of reason in the context that we are using it here is something like the ability to think and communicate in a logical and rational way. Just because I don't agree with you doesn't mean I am not reasoning - i.e., Because I interpret reality differently than you, does not mean I am "ignoring it" as you posted earlier.

In closing, let me say that I have already admitted that I was in the wrong or partially wrong about a couple of posts that I made. This shows that I have the ability to see reality, to "reason" if you will, as new information presents itself.
.... I don't recall you ever doing that - oh yeah, probably you are never wrong.

[rhagz]

Well it's a good thing Vanguard has you to defend it because the game certainly can't defend itself. Hell, it doesn't even have a helmet to mitigate the blow. ;)

[kcxiv]

My bet is that VG does go some where. I think by next summer it will go to theplace Auto Assaut went -- and at the same time offers will be extended to try EQ2 at a reduced rate. (By that point, EQ2s numbers will be starting to spiral down as well).

Possible. I just dont like EQ2, WoW and EQ1 for me is hard to go back. Its just very old and i have pretty much accomplished all there was to accomplish in that game when i was a hardcore player.


I like what VG can become, thats why i havent canceled it. I played it for a while i may as well see what they can do now that they have money to put into it to try to fix it.


Again, its nothing we all havent said 100 times now.

[Cobalty2004]

This game will be the shit....

http://www.ageofconan.com/conan/frontend/files/CONTENT/GCSiege.jpg

... but after this video Female Models (http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-7783979152870361001&hl=en) lots of idiots will be running around topless /sigh

[Grizzlebeard]

This game will be shit....

Fixed that for you.

Plus side I suppose is it'll keep all the drooling tit-obsessed tard overflow from WoW busy for a few months and out of my current game.

[Cobalty2004]

Fixed that for you.

Plus side I suppose is it'll keep all the drooling tit-obsessed tard overflow from WoW busy for a few months and out of my current game.

Hmm, another Vanboi?

Conan > McQuaid

When Funcom and Mythic shuts Vanguard down, I will be laughing my ass off.

Oh and according to a few sources, there seems to be little lag, something the coders at Sigil couldn't accomplish. And look how nice the game looks.

[rhagz]

Plus side I suppose is it'll keep all the drooling tit-obsessed tard overflow from WoW busy for a few months and out of my current game.

I don't think that is what is keeping people out of your current game.. your current game does well enough on its own at keeping people away.

[Mreynolds]

I don't think that is what is keeping people out of your current game.. your current game does well enough on its own at keeping people away.

Ya know if its true opposites attract, you and joodah would make one hell of a good couple. One hates the game beyond what any normal person should emotionally feel and the other would slurp any drivel the devs gave off the floor of a gas station rest room in Mexico.

[rhagz]

That would be true if I hated the game.. but I don't. Pointing out the obvious doesn't require emotion.

[Mreynolds]

That would be true if I hated the game.. but I don't. Pointing out the obvious doesn't require emotion.

come on it was a lil funny :D

[Cobalty2004]

Ya know if its true opposites attract, you and joodah would make one hell of a good couple. One hates the game beyond what any normal person should emotionally feel and the other would slurp any drivel the devs gave off the floor of a gas station rest room in Mexico.

I thought Joodah was Brad? :eek:

[Mreynolds]

I thought Joodah was Brad? :eek:

Nah Joodahs post are only like 2 lines long mostly. If it was Brad we would still be reading it next week.

[Grizzlebeard]

Hmm, another Vanboi?

Conan > McQuaid

Couldn't be farther from the truth.

I just don't believe AoC will be anywhere near as good as people expect. I'm surprised people still haven't learned to temper their excitement after VG.

[Grizzlebeard]

I don't think that is what is keeping people out of your current game.. your current game does well enough on its own at keeping people away.

You really shouldn't be so eager to jump to conclusions. Your obsessional hatred of VG is leading you to make incorrect assumptions.

[rhagz]

No more incorrect than your assumption that a mature theme is going to keep 'tit-obsessed tard WoW overflow' or what the hell ever you said out of 'your game'. People are going to play what's good, no matter how many tits are in it.

[Cobalty2004]

Couldn't be farther from the truth.

I just don't believe AoC will be anywhere near as good as people expect. I'm surprised people still haven't learned to temper their excitement after VG.

Oh I learned my lesson.

But you have to remember, Vanguards pre-release media is so far mediocre at best compared to some of the things I have seen from AoC.

Granted the screenshots of titties and a 2foot demons penis are interesting. The best ones are the fatalities, realism of their archery system, and the artwork/architecture.

[nuandy]

No more incorrect than your assumption that a mature theme is going to keep 'tit-obsessed tard WoW overflow' or what the hell ever you said out of 'your game'. People are going to play what's good, no matter how many tits are in it.

The only TiTs in VG are those left playing(only brits might get that one)

Cancled again gaveit another shot still tuns like shit on my high end PC no decent high end content no challange classes still suck comunity still full of wankers no raiding and none in sight X2 raids are not worth the Bother population not much better than june archlord has better subs than VG
So nope no hope its a dead duck

[Cobalty2004]

The only TiTs in VG are those left playing(only brits might get that one)

Cancled again gaveit another shot still tuns like shit on my high end PC no decent high end content no challange classes still suck comunity still full of wankers no raiding and none in sight X2 raids are not worth the Bother population not much better than june archlord has better subs than VG
So nope no hope its a dead duck

His reference to tits was the females in AoC.

But agree with your post overall.

[nuandy]

His reference to tits was the females in AoC.

But agree with your post overall.

Point is AoC runs like a deam on my PC as dose Bioshock in hight detail i was very disapointed after reading a good few post on here and the SoE forums about great perforamance inprovments in VG

here are my system
Asus P5K3 Deluxe
ntel Core 2 Duo E6700
2X OCZ Technology 2GB KITT 240DIMM PC3-10666 1333MHz DDR3
EVGA GeForce 8800GTX BP 768MB GDDR3
Creative SoundBlaster X-Fi Xtreme Gamer Fatal1ty Pro
X2 Seagate Barracuda 750GB (7200rpm) 16MB Buffer Serial ATA II Hard Disk Drive
Antec Nine Hundred/Ultimate Gamer Case
OCZ Technology 850W Active PFC GameXSt PSU
i have a XP pro and Vista duel bootup so use both
i can raid in EQ2 on almost max settngs with no trouble in VG more then a group close by and FPS nose dives

[Kriptical]

Hmmm...brad will work again I'm sure..hell we elected Bush twice....heh...can't get much dumber than that. As for the game /shrug. After being a 50 hr per week mmo player for the last 6ish years now I havent played anything in months. I do miss logging into EQ though. AoC...Warhammer..I dunno, I'll probably pick em up to check out but Im not getting excited.

Its pretty dissapointing to be a PC gamer atm. Bioshock is 'neat' but I absolutly hate the first person perspective. I realize that Im in hte minority there but hey..what can ya do...its a deal breaker for me and has been for decades now. Sports games are so incredibly underwhelming its stunning. EA sports have become virtual monopolies in hockey and golf and have put out buggy as hell, shoddy products that havent changed since I quit playing all that stuff for EQ back in the day ><

So basically its just sit around for 6 months and hope that AoC's last second 30 million infusion is allowing them to get a handle on their issues(LOL to somone who said 30m was alot for a 6 year project.) And that warhammer would be cool... Thing is PVP bores the snot out of me. I know, I know minority too..but still it is what it is...Vg was kind of my only hope as a nice, cool casual ish MMO but ... meh ...


....oh well least the wife's happy lately...

[Cobalty2004]

Point is AoC runs like a deam on my PC as dose Bioshock in hight detail i was very disapointed after reading a good few post on here and the SoE forums about great perforamance inprovments in VG

here are my system
Asus P5K3 Deluxe
ntel Core 2 Duo E6700
2X OCZ Technology 2GB KITT 240DIMM PC3-10666 1333MHz DDR3
EVGA GeForce 8800GTX BP 768MB GDDR3
Creative SoundBlaster X-Fi Xtreme Gamer Fatal1ty Pro
X2 Seagate Barracuda 750GB (7200rpm) 16MB Buffer Serial ATA II Hard Disk Drive
Antec Nine Hundred/Ultimate Gamer Case
OCZ Technology 850W Active PFC GameXSt PSU
i have a XP pro and Vista duel bootup so use both
i can raid in EQ2 on almost max settngs with no trouble in VG more then a group close by and FPS nose dives

Damn thats quite a ****ing system there...

Not being able to run VG on max with no more than 12 players on the screen is pathetic... (with your system anyway)

Mind if I borrow your system when Crysis comes out? :D

[nuandy]

Damn thats quite a ****ing system there...

Not being able to run VG on max with no more than 12 players on the screen is pathetic... (with your system anyway)

Mind if I borrow your system when Crysis comes out? :D

will be building one for the wife at the end of this month bonues allowing also helps to have a very good old friend with their own PC compnonents buisness http://www.rlsupplies.co.uk/ so i get a lot at cost price

I tend to upgrade every 12months kids getting the old system this is the first rig in 5-6 years where i went intel
when EQ2 was released performace was the pits as well even on high end machines i was sorted in a lot less then 9 months though

[Clumsy]

Couldn't be farther from the truth.

I just don't believe AoC will be anywhere near as good as people expect. I'm surprised people still haven't learned to temper their excitement after VG.

I agree. That is why I am hopeful, but I am not going to say that this is sure to be the next game that holds my attention for a while. From 2003 until 2007 I followed VG with excitement, but fortunately I was not excited enough to spend a lot buying a new rig just for the purpose of VG. Therefore, I followed beta reviews and release reviews, but I still have not purchased the game. I hang around because I still follow the game and i am still "hopeful" that it will at least become something that i can play at a later time.

I do feel that AoC is going to be better at present because a while back when I signed up for beta and told a couple of friends that beta signups were open, the ones I told were accepted. From what I have gathered, there are not a huge number of complaints similar to those that leaked out during VG beta...

I just going to wait and see what happens. Still hope VG makes a turn around, just because of the excitement it once gave me. Otherwise, we all have numerous options forthcoming.

[asdfjkl]

After being a 50 hr per week mmo player for the last 6ish years now I havent played anything in months.

Are you really admitting that you spent about 30% of your life over the last 6 years playing video games? Please seek professional help.

[Poke]

After being a 50 hr per week mmo player for the last 6ish years now I havent played anything in months.

How is it possible to play 50 hours/week? I am not judging you but, just wonder how your job/school, family situation allows for so much free time.

[Kayd]

Okay, I'm going to need clarification on your post because I'm confused. You seem to be disagreeing with me right up 'til the end where you completely validated my previous post. While I wait, I'd like to make a couple observations from your post.

Remember that VG and WoW development overlapped for a time. So, there was no 'We're trying to make WoW on a fraction of their buget' nonsense. Also, if there had ever been an inkling that Brad wanted to make WoW after it's success was clear, that would've spawned the most epic thread ever. I'd probably still be reading it.

Finally, VG did in fact have a fraction of WoW's budget. Which sounds bad at first until you realize that 3/4ths of an obscene figure is still a very large figure.

I don't think we disagree, we would just put it differently. I would separate management from design and development and say Sigil was mismanaged. The ideas, the plan, the development, I think were good, but the money end of things, manpower, tools were a totaly disaster, obviously.

I think there were people on the team that wanted a more Wow style game who had convinced Brad to lean some in that direction, where they could convince him it was keeping within the spirit of the game. In beta there were clear changes to the message that had been put out all along, and I think it was due to trying to reconcile the desire to integrate some Wow "improvements" into a game basically founded on EQ. It's hard to say that Wow hasn't influenced every game in development. I wouldn't say Vanguard wanted to be Wow, but it's hard to take Brads sudden proclomation that Vanguard had become expensive enough to develop that they needed to appeal to a broader audience as anything but a statement that they needed to appeal more to the Wow player base. Especially when the same statement included direct references to percentages of the Wow playerbase they might be able to attract.

There are things we can both agree on. Sigil got a pitiful amount done for the dollars invested. Some of this is attributable to mismanagement (failure to use more modern methods of production such as good scripting tools), some is attributable to changing whole systems midstream and having still not recovered from the decision to change after 6 months. My thought when those kinds of changes occured were "OK... I guess they know what their doing," clearly they didn't because the money ran out long before the game was finished. Game developers usualy don't have the luxury of scrapping whole systems and rebuilding them during development and Vanguard combat, harvesting, and crafting all underwent total revamps.

[Kriptical]

We run our own company, the wife mob and I, we're together 24/7(seriously, aside from a hour or so in the AM and maybe 1 hr in the PM, this includes car time). While alot of people couldn't do that we get along great and have a blast. Been doing it for 10 years, married 7 of em :D In fact 7th anniversary was yesterday!:eek: Work like dogs though lol...

As for keeping play time up, its actually kind of easy, you just have to set up your PC in the den(We dont have kids thats a big part of it.) So we sit there and chat and such while we both had our respective distractions. Raids were 6:30 till 12ish depending. Earlier on weekdays, longer on weekends(if we were raiding on the weekends. Went off and on over the years) I tried to log on early on Sunday as well to help people get flags etc.

Far as a social life goes...errr...hrm...try being self employed. Your life = poof! That may not be the case for salesmen types but for those of us who have // run a plant/store etc (wholesale fish processing in my case) things get icky. Can't tell you how many times we've had to drop everything and run b/c a compressor went down, or a customer needed something. End of the day, I didn't game at all in college, or high school really. That was the time for being social. I had my fun. Now its stay at home, work lots and be married and try to save as much as possibe. Let me tell ya, there is nothing cheaper than being enthralled in a mmo. We still hang out with a few friends here and there but really not missing too much as we all have career's and family's. It should be noted that I did burn out. It was just too much being an EQ clr, raidleader and officer, I held on for about a year but just couldn't keep it up \ Doing it all day and all night = :volcano:

p.s. why can't microsoft get wireless things as well as Logitech...this keyboard is perfectly shaped but damn if it doesn't decide to act all chuggy and lame often ><

[Choctaw]

Are you really admitting that you spent about 30% of your life over the last 6 years playing video games? Please seek professional help.

As opposed to those people who spend 30% of their life watching TV and movies. You know, like most Americans do. Ya know, that's okay though. They're probaly watching Jerry and Oprah and getting the help they need.

[Cobalty2004]

As opposed to those people who spend 30% of their life watching TV and movies. You know, like most Americans do. Ya know, that's okay though. They're probaly watching Jerry and Oprah and getting the help they need.

Back when I played Vanguard I probably played 50hrs a week, if not more.

Ever since I was a senior in HS I haven't really watched TV at all.

I go to the movies here and there, but TV just doesn't have anything that interests me other than the evening news.

[Kriptical]

Back when I played Vanguard I probably played 50hrs a week, if not more.

Ever since I was a senior in HS I haven't really watched TV at all.

I go to the movies here and there, but TV just doesn't have anything that interests me other than the evening news.

Dont watch TV either, since about 8 or 9. But then it was playing ice hockey and traveling for that all the time. Then it was prep school, then it was chasing tail in college. All of them > TV

[Joodah]

Bah, tv is great, like games it's all about balance. Simpsons, South Park, Family Guy, Robot Chicken, ATHF, Dave Chapell, Harvey Birdman - nuff said. :)

[Cobalty2004]

Bah, tv is great, like games it's all about balance. Simpsons, South Park, Family Guy, Robot Chicken, ATHF, Dave Chapell, Harvey Birdman - nuff said. :)

And then you play Vanguard for about 30min a week and claim its the best game ever...

[Joodah]

And then you play Vanguard for about 30min a week and claim its the best game ever...


Um.... yeh. :rolleyes: Anyhoo.

[VoiceOfReason]

They're probably watching Jerry and Oprah and getting the help they need.

ROFL

[ikaoma420]

Tivo FTW!!

[Kriptical]

Bah, tv is great, like games it's all about balance. Simpsons, South Park, Family Guy, Robot Chicken, ATHF, Dave Chapell, Harvey Birdman - nuff said. :)

lol ya, we watch a few show's. Tivo(or in our case ghetto comcast Tivo..best 10$ a month ;p) is > all. Its nice to be able to watch the few show's we do like with our <3 schedules. We're up around 3:45-415ish depending and put in 10 hour day's, minimum. So after missing so much late night stuff over the years, things are pretty sweet now. As for not watching TV as a kid, Im pretty happy about that, and if I spawn and offspring we probably would keep it to a minimum. Its funny this comes up here. Often I wonder how people do it while in college etc. But then again I was always playing sports etc. Crew in the off season to stay in shape and all. Skiing when possible...wonder if gaming would have bit me as hard as it did w/out 2 knee surgeries to slow me down. Oh well, water under the bridge and all ..

One thing, alot of people don't realize this, high level raidng = high level sports for the most part. Sure there are differences but the societies are very very similar. At the end of my recoup EQ and raiding was discovered which really scratched an itch(needed to compete in something baddly as I was a gimp for a bit ><) and the harmony, work ethic, organization was a wonderful thing to feed from. Particularly as EQ's raids evolved, forshadowing in GoD what would be great fun in MPG, Anguish, Dreadspire and beyond. But anyway this isn't about EQ its about choosing a flavor of entertainment which is stimulating and interactive vs one that is passive. Nothing wrong with either some like chocolate, other's vanilla. Now a day's with so much going on in life my hardcore days are in the past... for now...but look out once retirement hits =x

[Kayd]

As opposed to those people who spend 30% of their life watching TV and movies. You know, like most Americans do. Ya know, that's okay though. They're probaly watching Jerry and Oprah and getting the help they need.

There's a huge difference. It's socially acceptable to watch TV 30 hours a week. If you play video games 30 hours a week there must be something wrong with you :)

[rhagz]

It wasn't that long ago that that much TV watching was just as taboo. Games are starting to gain more acceptance as time goes on.

[Atoyota]

It wasn't that long ago that that much TV watching was just as taboo. Games are starting to gain more acceptance as time goes on.

There are pro's and cons, TV vrs Internet (gaming) as far as entertainment is concerned.

TV is capable of entertaining while educating, while games mainly just entertain.

The time argument is the same for both though...
Too much time indoors as opposed to time spent outside and active. Thats the reason for concern. That's the no life stigma that once was used to describe couch potatos, and now can include internet gamers.

Games are becoming more popular for people that have nothing better to do, as a way to relax after a workday. But for kids they (games) just replace TV because they would do one or the other if they were so inclined. Meaning if they prefered that over playing out side with friends.

Thats how I see it.

[rhagz]

TV is capable of entertaining while educating, while games mainly just entertain.



I couldn't begin to tell you how many crossword puzzles, or word games I have completed that I credit to Everquest or something. Torpor? How many people who aren't geniuses or MMO players know wtf topor means?

[wolfen66]

There's a huge difference. It's socially acceptable to watch TV 30 hours a week. If you play video games 30 hours a week there must be something wrong with you :)

There are several things that are socially acceptable that are not good for you. Its not the best way to gauge if something is good or bad for you. Anything to excess is likely bad for you.

[Cobalty2004]

There's a huge difference. It's socially acceptable to watch TV 30 hours a week. If you play video games 30 hours a week there must be something wrong with you :)

That depends on what you watch. (TV)

And what you do on the computer.

If you watch Baywatch reruns for 8hrs a day compared to researching various titles on the internet for 8hrs a day... hmmmm?

[Choctaw]

That depends on what you watch. (TV)

And what you do on the computer.

If you watch Baywatch reruns for 8hrs a day compared to researching various titles on the internet for 8hrs a day... hmmmm?


What if I'm watching Baywatch re-runs *on* my computer?!?!?! :eek:

[Dllshock]

I check back every month or so to try to keep myself updated with this game. I gave up on it before it was ever released, for obvious reasons.

playing Everquest for free on an EMU server is the best. I'm surprised others haven't even tried them.

[Gecon]

Meh.

I'm focussing almost 100% into crafting and harvesting now and wait for the relaunch that hopefully attracts more players again.

So no, naturally I havent lost hope. Otherwise I wouldnt read this forum, would I ?

[Gecon]

There's a huge difference. It's socially acceptable to watch TV 30 hours a week. If you play video games 30 hours a week there must be something wrong with you :) Disagree.

Watching 30 hours a week TV on a regular basis is a really bad idea.

Playing a game 30 hours a week is very different, as its active.

[Pixi]

I couldn't begin to tell you how many crossword puzzles, or word games I have completed that I credit to Everquest or something. Torpor? How many people who aren't geniuses or MMO players know wtf topor means?

Hehe true that.

I think most games are "educational" in one way or the other. To different degrees, of course. Just the fact that they're interactive and not passive (like watching TV) is activating your brain. While you might not learn maths or get better at spelling you might hone your reaction capabilities or the art of thinking tactically.

[UnchainedAcolyte]

I couldn't begin to tell you how many crossword puzzles, or word games I have completed that I credit to Everquest or something. Torpor? How many people who aren't geniuses or MMO players know wtf topor means?

You also need to add the pen & paper RPG folks in there regarding torpor:

http://www.milsims.com.au/images/categories/rpwvampm.jpg


Torpor
From World of Darkness Wiki

In both Vampire: The Masquerade and Vampire: The Requiem the word torpor refers to the state of deep slumber that vampires enter into for prolonged periods of time. Torpor may be entered into voluntarily, such as when one seeks to escape the monotony of eternal life and awaken in a different age, or, more commonly, involuntarily when a vampire starves, is staked, or suffers damage sufficient to kill a mortal. The amount of time one spends in torpor depends on the reason for hibernating and the vampire's strength against the Beast.
[edit]
Differences between VtM and VtR

In VtM, torpor is merely a deeper state of stasis compared to the sleep vampires normally experience during daylight hours. Though it is stated that ancient vampires often feel the need to enter voluntary torpor, or the sleep of ages, rules for this were not described until the Dark Ages Storytellers Companion p 75. Torpor is described as a relatively dreamless state where the vampire's body is preserved (unless suffering from lack of blood) and does not require sustenance. Sufficiently strong-willed individuals may maintain some degree of consciousness, and a few high-level Disciplines can be used from torpor.

In VtR, torpor is often a disturbing experience where the vampire's mind wanders through memories of one's requiem and her mortal existence. These events are relived over and over, each time seeing different outcomes, different participants, different precedents. This can cloud a vampire's memory to such an extent that they cannot clearly remember events that occurred before their last stint of torpor, an effect called the Fog of Eternity.

During this time the body swiftly dries out and takes on the appearance of being mummified. The skin contracts around the bones, the eyes dry out and sink into their sockets, hair become fine and brittle. The muscles of one's mouth retreat, forming a rictus around the teeth. To all appearances, the vampire is a long dead corpse.
Retrieved from "http://wiki.white-wolf.com/worldofdarkness/index.php/Torpor"

[Thurind]

You also need to add the pen & paper RPG folks in there regarding torpor:

http://www.milsims.com.au/images/categories/rpwvampm.jpg

Quick its a vampire stake it. lol

Didnt know there were too many still playing WoD after the new abortion whitewolf came up with.

So you mean Vanguard needs new blood?

[Choctaw]

Quick its a vampire stake it. lol

Didnt know there were too many still playing WoD after the new abortion whitewolf came up with.

So you mean Vanguard needs new blood?


Sigh, I miss VTM...you know...before WW pulled a SWG on it. :)

[Thurind]

Sigh, I miss VTM...you know...before WW pulled a SWG on it. :)

Me too the next move theyll make is to turn it into a D20 system.

/sigh pen and paper players are a dying breed (mostly because we are older lol)

I lost most of my pen and paper friends to Everquest and then to WoW.

I joined this MMO bacause RPG is like an addiction you get the jones for it and you cant shake it. Sadly this is a pale imitation of the real thing but it keeps the addiction pangs down.

That being said for me Vanguard is all there is thats really worth playing bugs and all. EQ might be worth it but everyone is max level there and i hate moving in on a really matured MMO cause the economies screwed and noone wants you in thier guild or groups cause your a noob and too low and dont have uber gear.

My personal feeling is get in on the ground floor or dont bother. If Vangaurd tanks its AoC here i come and im really not looking forward to that lol. Its that or crack open my oblivion copy i abandoned for vanguard without even playing it much.