Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!

Fuzzy Avatars Solved! Please re-upload your avatar if it was fuzzy!

vanguard is alive and thriving

2

Comments

  • boojiboyboojiboy Hudson, WIPosts: 1,535Member
    Originally posted by atticusbc
    i don't suppose they took away the gear restrictions that made it almost pointless to play?

    They really loosened up the F2P restrictions... you should be able to experience the majority of the game now on a F2P basis.

    As to the original poster, I agree.  I've returned after nearly a 2 year absence and I am amazed  at how many people are playing and at how active all the different questings areas around the world.  I hope it stays at this level.

  • EndDreamEndDream orange county, CAPosts: 1,152Member
    Originally posted by neobahamut20
    Originally posted by Vorthanion
    Originally posted by neobahamut20

    1) Its Sony. Still not as bad as EA though.

    2) Paying members have advantages over free players. This is pay to win, not free to play.

    3) Traitors to humanity; Sony, like many other corps, thinks that what you buy from them still belongs to them. Until they allow people to tinker with the products they purchase, they are not worthy of my wallet.

    Freeloaders should and I mean SHOULD never get the same advantages that paying customers do.  If you actually invest in the game without paying a subscription, you do actually come out the same in the end, but true non-paying players are as they should be, second rate and second class.

    Agreed, however, the game states free to play. Not extended free trial or free to try. Free to play games are supposed to be completely free and when it is pay to win, it ceases to be completely free.

    IE: Teenturd McShitster's SuperRPG made with RPGMaker is Free to Play because he does not charge nor give any advantage to players. Sure, those types of games are usually not MMOs. 

    So:

    If the game gives an advantage to players over others only if they pay, its Pay to Win.

    If the game runs advertisements, its ad-supported

    If the game costs something so you can play, its Buy to play

    If the game is given to you, for free, with no strings attached, only then is it Free To Play.

    If the game comes with the source code, its opensource.

    Understand now?

    but..... you can play the game.... for.... free....

    Remember Old School Ultima Online

  • SavageHorizonSavageHorizon ParisPosts: 2,085Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by justtires
    True story past week has been awesome and getting better daily. Houses are plentiful boats are packed in docks people everywhere!!!! About time hope this trend continues!!!

    Mate i'm glad you are enjoying the game, word of advice though. Don't bother waste your time posting a thread on this site saying you are enjoying the game. As you can see by many of the reply to your thread their are some lonely frustrated people on this site.

    Enjoy your game my friend and just laugh at the replies.

    Coolermaster Cosmos II Case
    Corsair AX1200W Modular PSU
    Intel Core i7 3970X OC 4.50GHz
    Asus P9X79 PRO Intel X7
    16GB (4x4GB) DDR3 PC3-1866MHz
    840 Series 250GB SSDs
    Seagate Barracuda 2TB HDDs
    EVGA SuperClocked GTX TITAN 6GB GDDR5 SLi

  • OzivoisOzivois Phoenix, AZPosts: 598Member

    {removed}

  • OzivoisOzivois Phoenix, AZPosts: 598Member
    Originally posted by neobahamut20
    Originally posted by Vorthanion
    Originally posted by neobahamut20

    1) Its Sony. Still not as bad as EA though.

    2) Paying members have advantages over free players. This is pay to win, not free to play.

    3) Traitors to humanity; Sony, like many other corps, thinks that what you buy from them still belongs to them. Until they allow people to tinker with the products they purchase, they are not worthy of my wallet.

    Freeloaders should and I mean SHOULD never get the same advantages that paying customers do.  If you actually invest in the game without paying a subscription, you do actually come out the same in the end, but true non-paying players are as they should be, second rate and second class.

    Agreed, however, the game states free to play. Not extended free trial or free to try. Free to play games are supposed to be completely free and when it is pay to win, it ceases to be completely free.

    IE: Teenturd McShitster's SuperRPG made with RPGMaker is Free to Play because he does not charge nor give any advantage to players. Sure, those types of games are usually not MMOs. 

    So:

    If the game gives an advantage to players over others only if they pay, its Pay to Win.

    If the game runs advertisements, its ad-supported

    If the game costs something so you can play, its Buy to play

    If the game is given to you, for free, with no strings attached, only then is it Free To Play.

    If the game comes with the source code, its opensource.

    Understand now?

    I disagree; all games in the "free-to-play" category require you buy something if you want to be fully successful in the game. Try giving me one example of a game that is truly free and doesn't require spending any money to keep up with the paying customers.

    "Pay to win" is applicable in pvp arguments so since Vanguard doesn't have pvp this shouldn't even be up for discussion.

  • neobahamut20neobahamut20 ste-julie, QCPosts: 336Member
    Originally posted by Ozivois
    Originally posted by neobahamut20
    Originally posted by Vorthanion
    Originally posted by neobahamut20

    1) Its Sony. Still not as bad as EA though.

    2) Paying members have advantages over free players. This is pay to win, not free to play.

    3) Traitors to humanity; Sony, like many other corps, thinks that what you buy from them still belongs to them. Until they allow people to tinker with the products they purchase, they are not worthy of my wallet.

    Freeloaders should and I mean SHOULD never get the same advantages that paying customers do.  If you actually invest in the game without paying a subscription, you do actually come out the same in the end, but true non-paying players are as they should be, second rate and second class.

    Agreed, however, the game states free to play. Not extended free trial or free to try. Free to play games are supposed to be completely free and when it is pay to win, it ceases to be completely free.

    IE: Teenturd McShitster's SuperRPG made with RPGMaker is Free to Play because he does not charge nor give any advantage to players. Sure, those types of games are usually not MMOs. 

    So:

    If the game gives an advantage to players over others only if they pay, its Pay to Win.

    If the game runs advertisements, its ad-supported

    If the game costs something so you can play, its Buy to play

    If the game is given to you, for free, with no strings attached, only then is it Free To Play.

    If the game comes with the source code, its opensource.

    Understand now?

    I disagree; all games in the "free-to-play" category require you buy something if you want to be fully successful in the game. Try giving me one example of a game that is truly free and doesn't require spending any money to keep up with the paying customers.

    "Pay to win" is applicable in pvp arguments so since Vanguard doesn't have pvp this shouldn't even be up for discussion.

    I like to think of "free to play" as a complete lie, a marketting term. Simply put, there are no real free to play games. We could always extend it and consider Guild Wars 1 & 2 as F2P ... where free as in freedom and not free of charge since you are not forced to play a part of the game that you dont want to play. However, I consider the term free to play to mean devoid of the need to spend any money. Kinda like GW2 said they would try in their manifesto.

    Pay to win is not solely reserved for pvp. The fact is, you always compete with others for loot and ressources. Vanguard restricts certain items from being equipped by free players, giving paying players an advantage. Now only if the gear has no stats and is for good looks only does this point not apply to Vanguard. If there is any type of competition, pay to win may apply.

    Now you may say that the competition is an illusion of sorts, or a hallucination, however, dont all games rely on the players living a delusion of some degree so that he can imagine to be playing in a world rather than with colored pixels?

    Boycotting EA. Why? They suck, even moreso since 2008.

  • birkenbirken Fort Covinton, NYPosts: 122Member
    As i read all these peoples post now i know. Vanguard is F2P 100% not p2w anything u can get in cash shop u can get on auction house  with in game money if that mean u have to farm alittle more ohh well. You dont pay yet u want everything handed to you on a gold plate LAZY. Vanguard is doing great so troll all you want. I would rather not have the azzhat troll go to such a great community. I will see vanguard fans in game :). I
  • mgilbrtsnmgilbrtsn belleville, ILPosts: 1,710Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by neobahamut20

    1) Its Sony. Still not as bad as EA though.

    2) Paying members have advantages over free players. This is pay to win, not free to play.

    3) Traitors to humanity; Sony, like many other corps, thinks that what you buy from them still belongs to them. Until they allow people to tinker with the products they purchase, they are not worthy of my wallet.

    I don't understand what you mean by allowing players to tinker with their products.  Are you talking Macro's or something else? Most games I know don't allow you to 'tinker' with them.

    Concentrate on enjoying yourself, and not on why I shouldn't enjoy myself.

  • DizzlerDizzler Raleigh, NCPosts: 231Member
    You are all defeating the original post. This is not a thread for I hate soe or it is or isn't free.... Take it elsewhere. Why are you eving trolling this forum if you hate soe so much? This thread is about vanguard being packed with people if you have ever wanted to try it now is the time. It is running smooth they have come a long way. The depth of the game is incredible. The player base is growing daily with what seems to be lots of subscribers myself included after many years of not playing this game since launch always hoping it would make it. Finally there is some sort of hope for one of the best mmos to date. 

    image
  • neobahamut20neobahamut20 ste-julie, QCPosts: 336Member
    Originally posted by mgilbrtsn
    Originally posted by neobahamut20

    1) Its Sony. Still not as bad as EA though.

    2) Paying members have advantages over free players. This is pay to win, not free to play.

    3) Traitors to humanity; Sony, like many other corps, thinks that what you buy from them still belongs to them. Until they allow people to tinker with the products they purchase, they are not worthy of my wallet.

    I don't understand what you mean by allowing players to tinker with their products.  Are you talking Macro's or something else? Most games I know don't allow you to 'tinker' with them.

    Sony will sue you if you modify a playstation, vita, etc. as if you were modifying something that belongs to them under the heavily lobbied and corrupt DMCA. So since they essentially do not respect your right to ownership, they are betraying you (Article 17 of declaration of human rights). I see no reason to support a company that thinks it owns the world.

    Boycotting EA. Why? They suck, even moreso since 2008.

  • neobahamut20neobahamut20 ste-julie, QCPosts: 336Member
    Originally posted by justtires
    You are all defeating the original post. This is not a thread for I hate soe or it is or isn't free.... Take it elsewhere. Why are you eving trolling this forum if you hate soe so much? This thread is about vanguard being packed with people if you have ever wanted to try it now is the time. It is running smooth they have come a long way. The depth of the game is incredible. The player base is growing daily with what seems to be lots of subscribers myself included after many years of not playing this game since launch always hoping it would make it. Finally there is some sort of hope for one of the best mmos to date. 

    Actually the free thing is settled, people just had misconceptions and got caught by the marketting.

    Its about values and morals and if you support the values and morals that Sony's actions propose. I don't and I let others know why since they inquired. Also, your idea of trolling is wrong. You might want to meet a troll to learn what it is instead of throwing it around like the censorfreaks do.

    Boycotting EA. Why? They suck, even moreso since 2008.

  • MaelwyddMaelwydd CrawleyPosts: 1,123Member
    Originally posted by neobahamut20

    Sony will sue you if you modify a playstation, vita, etc. as if you were modifying something that belongs to them under the heavily lobbied and corrupt DMCA. So since they essentially do not respect your right to ownership, they are betraying you (Article 17 of declaration of human rights). I see no reason to support a company that thinks it owns the world.

    Stop posting, you are giving Nerdy Virgins the world over a bad name!

  • CasualMakerCasualMaker Somerset, NJPosts: 870Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by neobahamut20
    Agreed, however, the game states free to play. Not extended free trial or free to try. Free to play games are supposed to be completely free and when it is pay to win, it ceases to be completely free.
    ...

    Understand now?

    Yes: you are making up your own definitions. "Free to play" means that you don't have to pay money to play it, nothing more. The phrase has nothing to do with how the hosting company plans to make the money needed to keep it going.

  • VengeSunsoarVengeSunsoar Posts: 5,316Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by neobahamut20
    Originally posted by mgilbrtsn
    Originally posted by neobahamut20

    1) Its Sony. Still not as bad as EA though.

    2) Paying members have advantages over free players. This is pay to win, not free to play.

    3) Traitors to humanity; Sony, like many other corps, thinks that what you buy from them still belongs to them. Until they allow people to tinker with the products they purchase, they are not worthy of my wallet.

    I don't understand what you mean by allowing players to tinker with their products.  Are you talking Macro's or something else? Most games I know don't allow you to 'tinker' with them.

    Sony will sue you if you modify a playstation, vita, etc. as if you were modifying something that belongs to them under the heavily lobbied and corrupt DMCA. So since they essentially do not respect your right to ownership, they are betraying you (Article 17 of declaration of human rights). I see no reason to support a company that thinks it owns the world.

     Well the issue is not the modified playstation itself. It's that the modded playstation allows people to run pirated software. 

    And I disagree with your definition of free to play.  It has never meant that everything is free, it only means that I can play the game for free, that I am not required to spend money on it.  Not that I can't spend money, just that I don't need to.  And I don't, therefore it's f2p.

    Quit worrying about other players in a game and just play.

  • AkulasAkulas GoldcoastPosts: 1,619Member Uncommon
    They merged all the servers?

    This isn't a signature, you just think it is.

  • WalterWhiteWalterWhite CardiffPosts: 394Member Uncommon
    I tried it out this week and already uninstalled it. I'm glad that I did try it out as it made me appreciate what i'm playing now much more ;)

    image

  • darkhalf357xdarkhalf357x Brooklyn, NYPosts: 1,164Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by neobahamut20

    1) Its Sony. Still not as bad as EA though.

    2) Paying members have advantages over free players. This is pay to win, not free to play.

    3) Traitors to humanity; Sony, like many other corps, thinks that what you buy from them still belongs to them. Until they allow people to tinker with the products they purchase, they are not worthy of my wallet.

    This isnt a F2P game.  This is a P2P game with sub that has a F2P option to try it out.  you like then sub.  Otherwise deal with the restrictions. But dont get upset becasuse you cant do everything you want under the F2P model.  That's not its inferred intention.

    image
  • darkhalf357xdarkhalf357x Brooklyn, NYPosts: 1,164Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by neobahamut20
    Originally posted by Ozivois
    Originally posted by neobahamut20
    Originally posted by Vorthanion
    Originally posted by neobahamut20

    1) Its Sony. Still not as bad as EA though.

    2) Paying members have advantages over free players. This is pay to win, not free to play.

    3) Traitors to humanity; Sony, like many other corps, thinks that what you buy from them still belongs to them. Until they allow people to tinker with the products they purchase, they are not worthy of my wallet.

    Freeloaders should and I mean SHOULD never get the same advantages that paying customers do.  If you actually invest in the game without paying a subscription, you do actually come out the same in the end, but true non-paying players are as they should be, second rate and second class.

    Agreed, however, the game states free to play. Not extended free trial or free to try. Free to play games are supposed to be completely free and when it is pay to win, it ceases to be completely free.

    IE: Teenturd McShitster's SuperRPG made with RPGMaker is Free to Play because he does not charge nor give any advantage to players. Sure, those types of games are usually not MMOs. 

    So:

    If the game gives an advantage to players over others only if they pay, its Pay to Win.

    If the game runs advertisements, its ad-supported

    If the game costs something so you can play, its Buy to play

    If the game is given to you, for free, with no strings attached, only then is it Free To Play.

    If the game comes with the source code, its opensource.

    Understand now?

    I disagree; all games in the "free-to-play" category require you buy something if you want to be fully successful in the game. Try giving me one example of a game that is truly free and doesn't require spending any money to keep up with the paying customers.

    "Pay to win" is applicable in pvp arguments so since Vanguard doesn't have pvp this shouldn't even be up for discussion.

    I like to think of "free to play" as a complete lie, a marketting term. Simply put, there are no real free to play games. We could always extend it and consider Guild Wars 1 & 2 as F2P ... where free as in freedom and not free of charge since you are not forced to play a part of the game that you dont want to play. However, I consider the term free to play to mean devoid of the need to spend any money. Kinda like GW2 said they would try in their manifesto.

    Pay to win is not solely reserved for pvp. The fact is, you always compete with others for loot and ressources. Vanguard restricts certain items from being equipped by free players, giving paying players an advantage. Now only if the gear has no stats and is for good looks only does this point not apply to Vanguard. If there is any type of competition, pay to win may apply.

    Now you may say that the competition is an illusion of sorts, or a hallucination, however, dont all games rely on the players living a delusion of some degree so that he can imagine to be playing in a world rather than with colored pixels?

    Somewhat agree.  Nothing is actually free otherwise they would run out of money to survive.  The 'need' to spend comes from a person's decision not because its forced.  How does not having an item equipped make a game P2W?  Who is your competition in PVE?    The only thing you (typically) lose in F2P is time.  It will take you longer to do something than someone who has a sub.  Doing something faster is not an ADVANTAGE.  Its a CONVENIENCE.  Theres a difference.

    If there is a point where you can no longer recieve gear to progress (which I doubt but for argument's sake) then you sub.  Obviously since you made it as far as F2P would go it woul suggest some form of interest.  

    What you are actually saying is you are mad that you cant continue playing the game completely FREE and you refuse to sub.  That sounds selfish.

    image
  • darkhalf357xdarkhalf357x Brooklyn, NYPosts: 1,164Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by Ozivois
    Originally posted by neobahamut20
    Originally posted by Vorthanion
    Originally posted by neobahamut20

    1) Its Sony. Still not as bad as EA though.

    2) Paying members have advantages over free players. This is pay to win, not free to play.

    3) Traitors to humanity; Sony, like many other corps, thinks that what you buy from them still belongs to them. Until they allow people to tinker with the products they purchase, they are not worthy of my wallet.

    Freeloaders should and I mean SHOULD never get the same advantages that paying customers do.  If you actually invest in the game without paying a subscription, you do actually come out the same in the end, but true non-paying players are as they should be, second rate and second class.

    Agreed, however, the game states free to play. Not extended free trial or free to try. Free to play games are supposed to be completely free and when it is pay to win, it ceases to be completely free.

    IE: Teenturd McShitster's SuperRPG made with RPGMaker is Free to Play because he does not charge nor give any advantage to players. Sure, those types of games are usually not MMOs. 

    So:

    If the game gives an advantage to players over others only if they pay, its Pay to Win.

    If the game runs advertisements, its ad-supported

    If the game costs something so you can play, its Buy to play

    If the game is given to you, for free, with no strings attached, only then is it Free To Play.

    If the game comes with the source code, its opensource.

    Understand now?

    I disagree; all games in the "free-to-play" category require you buy something if you want to be fully successful in the game. Try giving me one example of a game that is truly free and doesn't require spending any money to keep up with the paying customers.

    "Pay to win" is applicable in pvp arguments so since Vanguard doesn't have pvp this shouldn't even be up for discussion.

    You must buy something if you want to compete.  Success has nothing to do with it.  I dont care if someone else can do something I can't.  Im not playing with them anyway.

    I can see you case in PvP but I dont do that either.

    Games I played completely for free, never spent a dime and enjoyed - Eden Eternal.

    image
  • William12William12 Saint paul, MNPosts: 680Member
    It's America man its how kids are raised now days free free free.
  • DizzlerDizzler Raleigh, NCPosts: 231Member

    BTW Vanguard is alive and thriving... also it is 100% free to play you are never forced to pay money. and if you wanted to the cost is trivial compared to most 14.99$ a month games. Someone has to pay to keep the game running.

     

     

    image
  • superniceguysuperniceguy AnchorheadPosts: 2,278Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by winter
    Originally posted by justtires
    Originally posted by winter
    Originally posted by justtires
    True story past week has been awesome and getting better daily. Houses are plentiful boats are packed in docks people everywhere!!!! About time hope this trend continues!!!

     True story I've seen the same statement about this game every 6 months since its been released. When they were shutting down servers people were posting how the population was growing etc.

       If your having fun good for you, but I think the constant need to state the game is growing when over the years its been shown time and time again just to be a temporary slight increase at best before returning to low pop is getting old.

    No need to hate. This is the most people I have seen online since launch. Actually looking good this time. The problem was everyone always waiting for more people just try it for yourself it's free you have nothing to lose. By far the most in depth mmo out and one of the most beautiful. 

     its not hate what I said is fact. (I'm sure you could search here and find numerous threads claming vanguard pop is up every year since its been out. and all the time they have only closed more servers.) However if you can show me proof that the population is up for a sustained amount of time i'll happy say good for vanguard. You know like if the pop was up enough and for long enough that SOE decided they should add a server.

     

    https://www.soe.com/status/

    A server has not closed for 2 or 3 years, and the population on Telon right now is reading medium, and no doubt more will be on later. For 2 years prior to F2P, I have never seen any of them say higher than "low", so it does look like its has risen but considering it is free, then not surprising.

     

  • birkenbirken Fort Covinton, NYPosts: 122Member
    Originally posted by Scummyman
    I tried it out this week and already uninstalled it. I'm glad that I did try it out as it made me appreciate what i'm playing now much more ;)

    Yea alot of people go back to mindless easy to play game. It just show  that alot of people stop using there heads for games after click to win game came in.

  • birkenbirken Fort Covinton, NYPosts: 122Member
    It is so hard to explain to people that just want to troll. There are no items in this game that you cant use with f2p  Non  just go to your local auction house and buy item unlock. I am tired of reading stupid peoples post that have no idea what they are talking about. 
  • DirkinDirkin Manassas, VAPosts: 78Member

    Well there's no reason to not be civil in this thread.

     

    If you have tried Vanguard and did not like it, that's fine. Not all people will like the game, or even the genre. If you much prefer the themepark approach, then you will probably much prefer GW2 or a similar game over Vanguard, though as a VG fan I'd still want everyone to try it regardless at least once. But if you don't like it, that's your opinion and your pereference, and nobody should argue it.

     

    That said, I can't help but disagree with folks who say that Vanguard's f2p limitation are super restrictive. The single restriction of consequence is the restriction on rare or above items. Other than that, the gold member bonus provides only conveniences, not actual advantages. Even with the item restriction in place, you will never hit a wall where you can no longer play the game as a f2p player like some people are suggesting. You can level up to max and be a valuable member of the community in all blue gear. The item unlockers are cheap off the cash shop, and can also be bought off the ing-ame auction house for in-game currency. So technically, you don't have to pay real money at all if you buy your item unlocks with gold.

     

    Obviously, I'd like folks to sub to the game. I like it. But unless you want to see all the game's raid content at max level, there's really no need to. If you like the old school style of MMO and aren't too put off by 6 year old models and animations, then give it a try. The game is healthy and doing well.

2
Sign In or Register to comment.