It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!
It's a good game i would love to play more of.
But the very poor animations and slow as hell combat turns me off it every time i want to get into it.
while I don't play it on a regular basis, when it went f2p I got the client again just to have it lol I played it a lot back in the day but after wow came out I moved to it.
I still log on and play my old toons when the Rift servers are down for updates. still LOVE the game
but after playing so many other MMOs, the character animations could use some updating lol
I hated the Itemization and Questing of Vanguard. Fix how itemization worked and remove questing; instead make enough dungeons (starting at early levels) for us to delve into solo or with others (lots of static content; solo, due, group dungeons and area of interests).
I also dislike 3rd Person View but I guess it wouldn't bother me if everything else was good.
Originally posted by azarhal Originally posted by Gdemami Originally posted by Loktofeit Originally posted by olepi Do you mean it launches with updated graphics? If so, then yes, I'd play it. But if it launched today with the existing graphics? Probably not.
EVE overhauled their graphics engine with the Trinity update (2007). After that all these expansion had graphical updates (for ship, UI, astral bodies): Quantum Rise (2008), Tyrannis (2010), Crucible (2011) and Inferno (2012).
Yep, I was being sarcastic.
The truth is, graphics is a huge part of game appeal. The problem is, concept of standard MMO makes graphics overhauls somewhat difficult/inefficient/expensive.
It was easier with EVE due space theme, yet I still wonder how much would it cost to update character models and animations of ie. LOTRO.
Originally posted by Margulis It's an alternate universe far far away and the horrible launch and quick death of Vanguard never happened...... Actually it never even released and is coming out this upcoming year....... It is in a finished state, not rushed, not full of bugs, and has a large development team that will stay with the game......... and the mmo community in this day and age is wanting more and more something different than the generic themepark clones we have been fed for 10 years......... Seriously folks, would this game released properly in this day and age not get you excited? I've played so many mmo's where people will talk about things that they wish someone would make in an mmo and I've thought how Vanguard already has that. Yeah in some aspects it was still a theme park but anyone who really played the game knows it was way more than just that. Update - this is a list of current features Vanguard already has, there seemed to be some confusion over this: 2. No instancing at all in the giant game world 3. Open world housing (also non instanced) 4. Ship building and sailing 5. Fishing that is actually interactive and deep like the crafting system 6. Group focused content 7. Diplomacy system 8. Harvesting system that is interactive and incorporates group harvesting 9. Challenging content, corpse runs, etc. 10. Tons of class and race options. 11. Giant world that creates a sense of wonder and immersion. 12. Over 120 non instanced dungeons
if it was a sandbox, updated graphics, smooth engine....then yes.
"going into arguments with idiots is a lost cause, it requires you to stoop down to their level and you can't win"
Originally posted by Nevulus of course. My only problem with that game is the rigid character animations (slow combat), models, and the god awful stuttering between chunks. I still think it's one of the better mmos out there for exploration and difficulty.
100% agree. I love the core of this game, and it keeps bringing me back because I love the world and classes, but after a month or so I just can't take the animations and lacklustre performance anymore. If there was a game with Vanguard core gameplay, and Blade and Soul style movement and graphics, I would be in heaven.
The Fantasy-MMO-Genre is overcrowded by Mainstreamgames + Nichegames - i dont feel that VG would stand out enough to be commercial viable and avoid to invest Time + Money.
"Torquemada... do not implore him for compassion. Torquemada... do not beg him for forgiveness. Torquemada... do not ask him for mercy. Let's face it, you can't Torquemada anything!"
MWO Music Video - What does the Mech say: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FF6HYNqCDLIJohnny Cash - The Man Comes Around: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y0x2iwK0BKM
Originally posted by Margulis Update - this is a list of current features Vanguard already has, there seemed to be some confusion over this: 2. No instancing at all in the giant game world 3. Open world housing (also non instanced) 4. Ship building and sailing 5. Fishing that is actually interactive and deep like the crafting system 6. Group focused content 7. Diplomacy system 8. Harvesting system that is interactive and incorporates group harvesting 9. Challenging content, corpse runs, etc. 10. Tons of class and race options. 11. Giant world that creates a sense of wonder and immersion. 12. Over 120 non instanced dungeons
2 to 8: Couldn't care less. I play Heroic Fantasy games for the heroic fantasy, not in order to mine coal or knock out bolts of cloth or build a dinky little house full of knick-knacks.
9 and 10: Sounds OK
11: It seemed bland to me, frankly.
12: God no! I don't want my dungeons full of other people running around all over the place. It makes a long-lost ruin filled with mystery and danger feel more like rush hour in a city centre.
So, that's a resounding "no" from me then.
Originally posted by LauraFrost I hated the Itemization and Questing of Vanguard. Fix how itemization worked and remove questing; instead make enough dungeons (starting at early levels) for us to delve into solo or with others (lots of static content; solo, due, group dungeons and area of interests). I also dislike 3rd Person View but I guess it wouldn't bother me if everything else was good.
Umm yeah not sure where to start with this:
1) Questing hubs and linear pathways (the golden path) were added much later (during the first attempt to revive Vanguard). The original game had quests, but they were fairly random in distribution and not the easiest way to level.
2) Enough dungeons? Vanguard has the most levelling dungeons out of any game I know, starting at Level 5. Seriously, go check out this list:
This isn't even a full list, there are still nooks of heroic content that many people haven't undertaken. One thing that Vanguard is not lacking in is levelling content.
3) You can use a First Person View in Vanguard....
I skate to where the puck is going to be, not where it has been -Wayne Gretzky
Nope because the game smacks of Everquest. A game I truly despised. So glad I was brought up on a good MMO like Asheron's Call.
Sandbox means open world, non-linear gaming PERIOD!
Subscription Gaming, especially MMO gaming is a Cash grab bigger then the most P2W cash shop!
Bring Back Exploration and lengthy progression times. RPG's have always been about the Journey not the destination!!!
Originally posted by kadepsyson Once quests became useless compared to just grinding in a dungeon to level and gain equipment, I was done with the game. Releasing in 2014 wouldn't change the grind.
thats cute how you think a paragraph of "story" attached to kill x of y task somehow magically makes the experience better.
you're the reason MMOs are in the sorry state they are in. when you're so easily led along by pointless little illusions that there is some deeper meaning behind grinding; just cuz it has dialog boxes and extra sound effects tacked on. hilarious.
The End---------------------------i don't expect to like Darkfall, altho i may like it MORE than other MMOs. i know it is gonna have a very frustrating level of grind to it, even if its significantly less than most. waiting for a pure FAST action virtual world. dice rolling & character levels (even "skills") IN COMBAT should have never carried over from pencil & paper to a computer that can reasonably model 3D spaces and objects
Originally posted by Quirhid No. It was rather uninspired. A stereotypical MMORPG. Nothing that stands out. Made no improvements to the genre.
Yeah the crafting depth, diplomacy, fishing complexity, ship building, full world without instancing etc - nothing new had all been done before definitely. See that all the time. Now what game would you say has stood out and made improvements to the genre, and is not stereotypical again?
Originally posted by Margulis Originally posted by Quirhid No. It was rather uninspired. A stereotypical MMORPG. Nothing that stands out. Made no improvements to the genre.
Amongst other things like brotherhoods, caravans, critical skill combos, counterskills etc. Just ignore them, ignorant posts from people who never played it enough to know what set it apart from the others at launch.
Crafting was annoying minigame grind. It should give you a hint when they took measures against scripts/bots with the UI. It is boring as hell! Diplomacy was a lack-luster cardgame. Fishing was fishing i.e. boring. You didn't use the ships you built for anything - that is, I saw no-one doing anything worthwhile with them. People just built them and just played around ... And a "full world" without instancing is not an improvement. The world was filled with bland quests, grind and suffered from a chronic case of the "static world syndrome". I was bored to tears within 3 weeks.
Its not enough that you have crafting, or diplomacy, or fishing, or ship building. Games are not a feature list pissing contest. It actually matters how those things are implemented.
Like I said, nothing in the game stood out. It had the same sort of bloated number of classes and races games before did. It used a hotkey + hard trinity combat like 95% of all MMORPGs out there. It had mounts but no mounted combat. It had ships but I didn't see any ship combat.
Sorry, but I don't see what the fuzz is all about. I don't like generic MMORPGs.
Originally posted by Quirhid Originally posted by Margulis Originally posted by Quirhid No. It was rather uninspired. A stereotypical MMORPG. Nothing that stands out. Made no improvements to the genre.
This is where I think the current divide between gamers are these days. Not trying to offend anyone, but that type of mentality is what I see is having come from the console shooter crowd wanting to play mmo's and seeing combat and combat only as the sole purpose of the game, whereas the other half are expecting fullblown immersive worlds to spend their time in. Every item you listed negatively is exactly why I have played the game since beta, still play today and am hoping another developer will eventually give us something akin to Vanguard in the future. One-click crafting systems are the most boring, useless mechanics placed into modern games, making it almost pointless.
No - I played VG from launch for solid 18 months.
I've been there done that, did raids, just done with it. So unless they changed the entire game (including content) - updated graphics are not gonna do squat for me.
I play games for GAMEPLAY, graphics are not the primary factor.
Some of the best games I play don't have flashy graphics, some are even 2D.
Originally posted by LlexX Originally posted by Margulis 1. Deep, interactive crafting system. 2. No instancing at all in the giant game world 3. Open world housing (also non instanced) 4. Ship building and sailing 5. Fishing that is actually interactive and deep like the crafting system 6. Group focused content 7. Diplomacy system 8. Harvesting system that is interactive and incorporates group harvesting 9. Challenging content, corpse runs, etc. 10. Tons of class and race options. 11. Giant world that creates a sense of wonder and immersion. 12. Over 120 non instanced dungeons
This sounds exactly like ArcheAge.
Ontopic, with a graphic/engine overhaul i would gladly play Vanguard.
Except that ArcheAge has an open class system (120 classes depending on which skills you chose) - and after level 30 the game shifts focus to PvP/Guild vs Guild territory war with sieges.
VG is very much a PvE game in the end, AA is very much a Guild v Guild game in the end.
Originally posted by Hanthos Originally posted by Quirhid
Sorry, I am not one of the "console shooter crowd" either. What further divides people is the use of such ludicrous stereotypes and assumptions.
I get that you want good make-believe rather than a good game. And while those are not mutually exclusive, I'm really in it for the game. If the game is not good, no amount of make-believe is going to keep me playing. If I want that make-believe, I'd rather play a P&P RPG with friends.
Even without the bugs and problems, I didn't see Vanguard as a very good game.
Maybe. But, only if they got rid of the quest hubs:
1. Put NPCs back where they were, rather than in their current circle-jerk formation. 2. Remove the exclamation point helmets. 3. Greatly reduce the xp/gear rewards. 4. Remove the quest compass. 5. Remove out of combat regen.
SOE, so I heard, are to thank for forcing Sigil to implement those WOWification features.
Quest hubs transformed an exploration style game into a busy-work style game. It removed for the players the need to wonder, "what am I going to do today."
Quest hubs are boring as shit; but since is the best xp and gear in the game; everyone does them. I'd LOVE to play Vanguard with a guild where quest hub usage is not allowed. Sign me up for that. The more I think about it; I would truly enjoy Vanguard in that guild.
Other things I want changed (were they copied from WoW?):1. Show combat text in a dedicated window; the flying numbers were meaningless.2. Make chained abilities fire automatically; rather than forcing the player to click them when they light-up.
/edit - some folks mention that VG quest hubs were added later. You must be thinking of the beta because Quest hubs were there on day 1 of release, and everyone I crossed paths with utilized them.
Luckily, i don't need you to like me to enjoy video games. -nariusseldon.In F2P I think it's more a case of the game's trying to play the player's. -laserit