Last updated: 2006-05-08 10:07:01

[ sharable link ]

---

Sigil retains their Vision on what Vanguard will be.
SOE is helping to distribute and market the title.

These are the key points:

1. We found an incredible opportunity: the opportunity to purchase the publishing rights from Microsoft and become our own publisher.

2. We now own both the IP (the intellectual property) of Vanguard and the publishing rights.

3. This gives us more control and autonomy than we have ever had before. We are no longer just a developer.

4. Microsoft was TOTALLY cool with this. They are still very happy about Vanguard and looking forward to it bolstering their Windows platform. Vanguard will be an XP game, but also a Vista game, offering both 32 bit and 64 bit clients. We will continue to work closely with them and with Vista's focus on entertainment/games/graphics, as well as online, Vanguard is key.

5. SOE was TOTALLY cool with this. They are excited to have the people who designed and worked on the original EQ and EQ expansions provide a game for them. They need a game like Vanguard next year -- it gives them a variety of games from which players can choose from, or players can just play Vanguard.

6. We continue to have total control over the game's design, how it is marketed, the community, customer service -- everything that is important to us and I think important to all of you.

7. Things like running game servers, getting ads (that we design and/or approve) into magazines, getting boxes into stores, etc., all of which SOE is great at doing, they can do while we focus on finishing up the game and on beta.

8. This also gives us more time to launch the game when it is truly ready.

9. edit: Also, Vanguard will *NOT* be part of SOE's 'buy and sell items for real world money'. Our hard line position against this for a game like Vanguard remains as strong as ever.

If there are any other concerns or questions about this -- that's what I'm here for. I know this is a big change and it takes a moment to wrap one's head around it, but bottom line is that it's the best thing for Vanguard, for Sigil, and for you, our future players.

---

Last updated: 2006-05-08 10:08:42

[ sharable link ]

---

NCsoft is great and I have a lot of respect for them. But having worked at SOE before and having lots of friends there, plus their vacinity, plus the fact we are familiar with their operations and so moving over to them will be easy... SOE made the most sense.

I realize some of you really don't like SOE.

But I need to make something very clear here, and some of you might not like it, but I am who I am, and I am honest and will always be with you guys:

1. I have not agreed with some of the design decisions SOE has made with some of their games. Some of them are not what I would have done (while others are). This is simple disagreement in terms of philosophy. This doesn't make me dislike anyone, or think poorly of anyone.

2. I think SOE has made good games since I left. Again, I would have perhaps made them somewhat different had I remained there, but that doesn't make their games not good. If you guys don't like them, or how they've changed, then that's fine too. It's all about choice. And in this case, since we retain creative control over Vanguard, not only are there more choices, but there is no danger of Vanguard being changed into something else (or, for that matter, EQ 2 being changed into something else because of Sigil).

3. Many people at SOE are my personal friends, including Smed, who is one of my best friends. If some of you are so filled with hate that you are going to just insult people, some of whom are my friends, then Nick and other moderators are going to intervene and I am not going to answer questions from people who include hate in their posts.

4. I am very excited about the opportunity to work with many of my old friends again and think that Vanguard brings a lot to the suite of games they already have, but is also a very different game. So this helps SOE.

5. I think SOE hosts games very well -- perhaps the best out there. I know Vanguard will be taken care of in terms of operations and support at SOE. So this, combined with an opportunity to work with old friends, combined with the opportunity for Sigil to become a co-publisher is a HUGE opportunity and good for Sigil.

---

Last updated: 2006-05-08 10:10:53

[ sharable link ]

---

SoE cannot touch the gameplay.

What we have done is become the publishers of our own game. We now have even more control and authority over Vanguard, how it is made, how it is designed, and how it is marketed than we ever had with Microsoft.

I realize there are lots of different feelings about SOE and their games. But whatever those feelings, the fact of the matter is that they know operations and distribution. They will make sure our beta runs the way it needs to, that our game is widely marketed, and that our game is available all over, in all channels.

That is SOE's role in this new partnership with them. Sigil remains Sigil, able to focus now moreso on what we do best -- design, implement, conduct betas, build community, and market.

Vanguard will not leave the dream and visions of Sigil and its current developers. I give you my word. And this move insures that the above remains true by giving us total authority over the design of the game, community, customer service, etc.

To put your mind at ease.. this is Sigil's game and it's staying that way. Brad and the Sigil team have done a phenomenal job.. they don't need any gameplay advice.

---

Last updated: 2006-05-08 10:12:37

[ sharable link ]

---

We are totally different entities. Sigil is still its own company. Our employees are our employees, and SOE's theirs. There are no plans for anyone at SOE to work on Vanguard in any way. If someone from SOE did want to work on Vanguard, they would quit and join Sigil. Likewise, if someone from Sigil wanted to work for SOE, they'd quit and work for SOE. It's a free country And it's happened before, both ways (people have left SOE to work for Sigil and people have left Sigil to work for SOE, not to mention to and from a lot of other MMOG developers).

SOE is not buying Sigil. Sigil remains Sigil.

I left SOE years ago because I wasn't in a position to be hands on making games anymore. That's why Sigil was founded.

Selling out would put me back in the same place I was before: not making games. Making MMOGs makes me happy. I love Vanguard and intend to see the game through, long past launch. We have so much planned for the game after launch -- I've hinted at much of it.

Why would I do anything to jeoprodize what I have now? This new deal now even gives us (which includes me) even MORE authority and autonomy. This makes me even happier.

Seriously, think about what you are saying -- it doesn't make sense and it doesn't fit my track record and personality.

---

Last updated: 2006-05-08 10:13:55

[ sharable link ]

---

[/source=Brad McQuaid May 6, 2006]....We remain good friends with the folks at Microsoft and look forward to creating a AAA MMOG for them, even though it will be a 3rd party Windows game now, and not a first party. We had some differences, but the biggest catalyst here was that we found the opportunity to buy the publishing rights back, which is good for Sigil no matter what else did or didn't happen.

Like I have been saying, this gives us even more (perhaps even unprecedented with a game this far along and this big) control, a chance to be a co-publisher, and to all around have more influence on how Vanguard turns out. Even were things perfect (and things are never perfect), it was an opportunity that couldn't be passed up on.

So we are still a 3rd party windows title and an important MMOG for Microsoft from a platform perspective -- short term as an XP game and long term as a game that is perfect for highlighting and taking advantage of what Vista will offer users. Vanguard is a perfect game, again thinking long term, to take advantage of Vista's more entertainment-centric approach, increased use of graphics and tools for game developers. Online gaming is also very important for Vista. Lastly, Vanguard screams for a native 64 bit client at some point because of its seamless world. When the time comes for a 64 bit client, when graphics cards are even more powerful but also cheaper, when RAM prices go down, etc. we will be able to access more than 2 gigs with a 64 bit client and then load up a huge amount of the world at one time. Right now you can see 4+ km in the game -- which creates views and an immersiveness that MMOG gamers love. With a 64bit client and a lot of RAM, we will be able to load up much more of the world at one time and the way we have architected the engine ahead of time, knowing where technology, operating systems, etc. are going to go in the future, it will be very easy to create vistas in the game (pardon the pun) where you could see 10, 15, maybe even more km. So the switch from being a first to third party windows title still helps Microsoft out, especially longer term with Vista. This is one of the key reasons they were fine with our asking them if we could exit from the deal if we found funding to do so.

For SOE, who already has quite a few games, many of them online and several of them massively multiplayer, having lots of options for their station pass is a good thing. Players want options, and while many MMOG players focus on only one game at a time, many others do not and like to be able to either play several (the more hard core player), or even focus on one but dabble with others.

For those people, the Station Pass is really neat because they can play Planetside, EQ 2, EQ 1, etc. all for one price. Now add Vanguard into the mix. While it is a high fantasy MMOG and in many ways similar to EQ 1 and 2, it is also very different in terms of design philosophy and target audience, and it also has technology in it that is cutting edge (beyond any other MMOG of which I am aware). Plus, lots of new ideas like diplomacy, but built on a solid proven MMOG foundation (such that regardless of how popular, say, diplomacy turns out, the game remains a great game, because it's not a house of cards -- if some of the more revolutionary ideas in Vanguard don't pan out as well as we hope, while there is inter-sphere dependence built into the game, the game still plays fine). So anyway, despite the similarities at the superficial level, EQ 1, EQ 2, and Vanguard have a lot of core differences which again is good for SOE because it offers more choices to players, and it also allows them to attract that many more players with differing tastes. Contrast this to, say, Blizzard, who has but one choice, and I think SOE is really onto something. Now, don't take that the wrong way -- not only is WoW a great game, it's plainly obvious it is also very successful from a financial standpoint. But still, when thinking about the long term, having a suite of online titles to offer your playerbase, many of which are MMOGs that each have different target audiences (e.g. due to their design and mechanics appeal to different types of MMOG players) there is a strong argument for strength in numbers. So adding Vanguard to the mix I think filled a spot for them that was empty -- EQ 2 is more casual, and EQ 1 getting older (though still going strong) and having been around for so long, and having been changed so much, I think a newer game like Vanguard that is a bit more hard core makes a lot of sense for them.

Anyway, another long winded post, as is my wont What I am basically trying to illustrate in detail is that this was an opportunity for Sigil that was very attractive to us, but also a case in which Microsoft still benefits even though we're going from first to third party, and also a case where SOE benefits. So you have a win-win-win scenario, which is why it all worked out.

Sure, there is speculation here and on other boards that are more negative, that something went terribly wrong between Sigil and Microsoft, that they were ditching a bad game, or that we had a major disagreement that led to a nasty departure, or that SOE has some nefarious plan to gobble up Vanguard and change it into different game, etc. etc. (all of which are not accurate). But really if you look at the situation, again it was an opportunity that benefited Sigil first, that didn't hurt Microsoft, and that also helps SOE with their suite of titles and long term plan of leading the market with many choices as opposed to focusing only on one game (e.g Blizzard). Complex to describe, but actually simple if you look at it all -- it was something that just made sense for all parties given their interests, needs, where they wanted to focus short term, etc. Hence the amicable nature of the whole thing and our ability to make something like this work.

I certainly am super excited about it. We stay friends with Microsoft and get to take advantage of some of the cool tech and software that is coming in the future that I think gamers will really like. We get to become a co-publisher and have the control we feel we need to really achieve all of the ambitious plans we have for Vanguard, both before and after launch, and with fewer pressures from outside entities to change this or that, or to scale back this or that. And then a chance to work again with our old friends at SOE and instead of competing with them, compliment them because of their station pass/suite of games strategy (whereas other publishers, unless they were specifically looking for a high fantasy MMOG, would likely be less interested in doing something like this).

It all makes sense from a business standpoint, and then also from a personal standpoint. Some people say don't mix business and pleasure, but really, in the gaming industry, that old adage not only isn't applicable, it's actually a bad one. The industry is small and you never know what opportunities might arise and who you might be working with again in some capacity. And then the MMOG subset of the gaming industry is even that much smaller. So maintaining relationships is important. And becoming friends with the people with whom you work is basically unavoidable -- making these games are very collaborative -- long gone are the days of Richard Garriott cranking out Ultima 1 by himself So to succeed you end up realizing that being able to work closely with other people in a team environment is paramount. That creates then a community and friendships are then formed. And when you get to know people well enough and spend so much time with them, those friendships really mean something, because you know whether or not you enjoy working with that person or that group and if working with that person or group is productive. So we remain friends with the people at Microsoft, even though we've parted ways now, because we worked together for so long and because we realize it's likely we'll find ourselves working together in the future in some capacity. And this is proven with the deal that's just happened, because here we are again working with our old friends at SOE. I worked with Smed and others for 7 years. That's a lot of time. We went through all sorts of times, good and bad, tough and easy, challenging and rewarding. And when that happens, bonds form, and those bonds don't go away.

So there you have the business explanation as to why all of this happened and how it is good for all three parties. But you also have the human or personal component which is arguably almost or as important. When people have asked, say on this thread, why SOE? Why didn't you partner with somebody else? Well, in addition to the business sense of it all, which I hope I explained, there is the very real personal side of it. Competition is quickly forgotten. Disagreements in philosophy are quickly brushed aside. A natural desire to work with people whom you know, with whom you formed bonds with years ago, kicks in and becomes a very real component in addition to the purely business side of things.

I'm looking forward then to working with Smed and everyone else over there again, as are many others at Sigil, even though, say, 2 years ago we thought of each other as competitors and at times didn't try to hide it And the same may be true with Microsoft. In another few years or so, it may make sense to do something with them again, or even if not as a group, again since it is a small industry, perhaps we'll end up working with some of them, but they may be working in a different area, or even for a different company. Again, though, in such a scenario, all that we've gone through with them, good and bad, ups and downs, bonds formed and we know each other, both professionally and personally due to the nature of the business.[/source]

---

Last updated: 2006-05-08 10:15:24

[ sharable link ]

---

SOE owns distribution, marketing, data center operations, and *technical* support (ie - when you have trouble installing the client, or a scratched disk from the retail box).

Sigil owns everything related to development, in-game customer service, live teams, and on-going content development.

And the relationship is setup, both organizationally and financially, to reinforce those roles.

We actually did account for this ... what people need to realize is that the over structure of the new publishing arrangement will enable us (Sigil) to make Vanguard a fundamentally better game. We are now in complete control of the budget, the schedule, etc.

We would ask people to, at least, take a wait and see approach ... if we end up breaching your trust with the quality of the game or its on-going operation - then you have every right to tell us to "talk to the hand".

---

Last updated: 2006-05-08 10:16:45

[ sharable link ]

---

I realize some of you really don't like SOE.

But I need to make something very clear here, and some of you might not like it, but I am who I am, and I am honest and will always be with you guys:

1. I have not agreed with some of the design decisions SOE has made with some of their games. Some of them are not what I would have done (while others are). This is simple disagreement in terms of philosophy. This doesn't make me dislike anyone, or think poorly of anyone.

2. I think SOE has made good games since I left. Again, I would have perhaps made them somewhat different had I remained there, but that doesn't make their games not good. If you guys don't like them, or how they've changed, then that's fine too. It's all about choice. And in this case, since we retain creative control over Vanguard, not only are there more choices, but there is no danger of Vanguard being changed into something else (or, for that matter, EQ 2 being changed into something else because of Sigil).

3. Many people at SOE are my personal friends, including Smed, who is one of my best friends. If some of you are so filled with hate that you are going to just insult people, some of whom are my friends, then Nick and other moderators are going to intervene and I am not going to answer questions from people who include hate in their posts.

4. I am very excited about the opportunity to work with many of my old friends again and think that Vanguard brings a lot to the suite of games they already have, but is also a very different game. So this helps SOE.

5. I think SOE hosts games very well -- perhaps the best out there. I know Vanguard will be taken care of in terms of operations and support at SOE. So this, combined with an opportunity to work with old friends, combined with the opportunity for Sigil to become a co-publisher is a HUGE opportunity and good for Sigil.

---

Last updated: 2006-05-08 10:17:31

[ sharable link ]

---

No, we're still running in-game CS.

---

Last updated: 2006-05-08 10:18:28

[ sharable link ]

---

Yes - you will be able to subscribe just to Vanguard, as well as getting a Station Pass.

---

Last updated: 2006-05-08 10:20:21

[ sharable link ]

---

The motivation is that Sigil will now have more control over Vangaurd from the development, operations and marketing perspectives, and will participate much more greatly in the revenue that Vanguard generates (and that revenue enables the funding of the development/control that we've gained).

That's the root of it - and that's about as much as we can say about it.

So the news about Vanguard has hit clearly hit the community by storm today and I would like to take the time to say a few words to the community.
I know many of you are confused and have a lot of questions. Some of those questions I can answer and some I simply can not. As for the most burning question: Why? I can only offer a few words.
Publishing/Developer relationships often change. The reasons for the change are usually confidential and the splits can take a positive or negative turn. The Sigil-Microsoft split is a positive one and both companies have and will continue to have mutual respect for each other.

Now I know what your thinking – that’s a standard corporate PR line; rest assured it is not. I am one of many people at Microsoft that has shed sweat, blood, and tears for this title. And I command the respect and friendship of many people at Sigil. I have worked on Vanguard since the beginning. When Sigil only had 12 employees; which means I have worked on this game longer than most of the current people at Sigil! That said given my enormous personal investment in this project: I want it to succeed. And succeed it will! I know many of you are wary of Sony but as I have stated in the past you need to continue to trust Brad and Jeff’s leadership. They know what they are doing and they won’t do anything to endanger the success of the vision.

This is how the game industry works folks. Corporate relationships often don’t work out just like interpersonal relationships. I can look at cases where Microsoft has parted ways with a developer and that developer moved on to be successful. And in every case the people at Microsoft were happy to see that success.

I don’t post very often, but those of you that are familiar with my posts know I am always honest and direct. And speaking on behalf of the production team at Microsoft we publicly wish Sigil the best. And we are going to do everything we can to insure that success. Our roles are going to change but we’ll continue to add value as experience beta testers and look forward to the games release.

---

Last updated: 2006-05-08 10:21:45

[ sharable link ]

---

About the same amount of time before California annexes Nevada.

Read: there is nothing to either enable it or prevent it, but it ain't likley.

We have no plans to sell and are committed to Sigil and Vanguard.

---

Last updated: 2006-05-08 10:22:55

[ sharable link ]

---

Vanguard will *NOT* be part of SOE's 'buy and sell items for real world money'. Our hard line position against this for a game like Vanguard remains as strong as ever.

---

Last updated: 2006-05-08 10:23:42

[ sharable link ]

---

1. Because it would take far too much money to become a full blown publisher/distributor.

2. Because we don't want to be a company responsible for operating thousands of server boxes and dealing with all of the operations issues of keeping machines up and running. Rather, we want to make games.

3. Because it takes more than money to develop all of the relationships and deals we would need with distributors to make all of this work, and even if we wanted to be distributors, the time and effort it would take to make all of those relationships would draw us away from doing again what we love to do: making MMOGs.

---

Last updated: 2006-05-08 10:24:29

[ sharable link ]

---

I've seen posts like this and first I want to say I respect where you guys are coming from and you have every right to vote with your dollar.

But if I may I'd like to make a few points:

1. This move was best for Vanguard. We've always promised you guys to do the best for Vanguard, that we would do everything in our power to make sure the vision behind it wasn't altered, or the game rushed out, etc.

2. When we found ourselves in a situation where in order to uphold our commitment to you (#1 above) we needed to assume even more control over the game, we did that by buying the publishing rights from Microsoft.

3. I've listed out in detail in several posts why SOE was the right choice as a co-publisher and distributor and how working with them also insures we have the best chance of both finishing, launching, and the building/expanding Vanguard according again to #1 above.

4. While SOE does make a royalty from Vanguard, Sigil pulls in the vast majority of money made by the game.

By making the decision to not buy Vanguard because of your feelings about SOE, you are basically saying that your feelings about not see *ANY* of your money going to SOE outweigh, for you, the importance of us holding true to our commitment to all of you (#1 above). Again, that's your call, but with all due respect, I have to question then your prioritities... is making sure SOE doesn't get a penny from you truly more important than making sure that Vanguard turns out to be the game we all want it to be, dev and player alike?

In one sense, you are telling me (Sigil) that in order to get your business I should have made a decision that would have resulted in a worse Vanguard. Are you sure that's the message you want me to receive?

---

Last updated: 2006-05-08 10:25:23

[ sharable link ]

---

SOE is NOT funding the game -- we are. We are getting funding and buying the publishing rights from Microsoft. SOE is a co-publisher/distributor, with Sigil as the publisher as well. They can focus on what they do well (mentioned above -- someone quoted one of my posts from the official boards) and we can now focus with even more authority on making Vanguard into the game we want it to be and believe our audience is looking for.

---

Last updated: 2006-05-08 10:25:53

[ sharable link ]

---

Yes, nothing with beta is going to change.

---

Last updated: 2006-05-08 10:26:31

[ sharable link ]

---

We get paid based on how much the game is played, if it's played on the Station pass. If a person has the pass, but spends 100% of his time playing Vanguard, then we get all of that money, minus a small royalty to SOE.

---