It's Very simple for Vanguard. They did "blow it", because they forgot the basic rule - give people what they want.
UO had pet handling, and people loved them for it. UO improved on that system over time, and kept a lot of customers.
SWG (pre NGE) had pet handling. People loved it, but then the dark times came and we all know what happened next.
WoW has a UO style pet class, and people love it. You only have to look, huge numbers of people play creature handlers in WoW.
Vanguard has no true pet handling class. They blew it, right there and then, by following the EQ design of "half pets" rather than pets tamed and trained from the wild. Many, many, well ok millions, of people want proper pet handler classes. The only game currently that really gives them that is WoW; oddly enough WoW is doing quite nicely. What a co-incidence ...
Oh and the NPC's do have pet handling classes in Vanguard, like the spider tamers and guards with pet wolves (who are not Shamen). So "proper" pet handling classes are in the cannon of Telon a la Vanguard, they just didn't give them to players, probably because it would have been too much effort to code. Big mistake.
I'm having a problem buying that WoW was the success that it was because Hunters could tame some animals. And given the recent normalization passes, and how much they pissed off the hunter community, so by your logic the game should be shutting down any minute now.
Your post also glazes over how people left in hordes and droves from UO with the advent of Felluca/Trammel, Elves, Ninjas & Samurai, while all the while, taming has remained pretty much the same.
SWG has the Creature Handler profession, yet the game was hardly a success. In fact I'd say it was an abysmal failure, given the IP.
There's a lot of piss poor design decisions you can blame the games poor financial performance on, but I don't think not including Pokemon: Telon Edition is one of them.
Of course, my next door neighbor tried to get me to play auto assault too and that's his number one most favorite game ever.
Hey now, No dissing the Auto Assault! It's an awesome game!
...auto assault is worse than Vanguard lolnot true ...
PC Gamer
7/1/2006
79 out of 100
79.0%
Avg Ratio: 72%
I wonder if you honestly even believe what you type, or if you live in a made up world of statistics, facts and figures you select for yourself from the garbage avialible on the web. that made me chuckle "a made up world of facts" lol
and it made me laugh that you said chuckle.
seriously, why bother to hide behind semantics? do you honestly beleive VG is worse than AA? have you personally played both games?
as for my use of the word fact- I can gather a million completely wrong facts from the internet, so yes, in context I leave the word where it is.
edit: if you would like to further debate my use of the language, please continue, or feel free to PM me about my 'mistakes.' If you would rather continue to debate the topic, please don't be scared to return to your own thread, and try.
Of course, my next door neighbor tried to get me to play auto assault too and that's his number one most favorite game ever.
Hey now, No dissing the Auto Assault! It's an awesome game!
...auto assault is worse than Vanguard lolnot true ...
PC Gamer
7/1/2006
79 out of 100
79.0%
Avg Ratio: 72%
I wonder if you honestly even believe what you type, or if you live in a made up world of statistics, facts and figures you select for yourself from the garbage avialible on the web. that made me chuckle "a made up world of facts" lol
and it made me laugh that you said chuckle.
seriously, why bother to hide behind semantics? do you honestly beleive VG is worse than AA? have you personally played both games?
as for my use of the word fact- I can gather a million completely wrong facts from the internet, so yes, in context I leave the word where it is.
edit: if you would like to further debate my use of the language, please continue, or feel free to PM me about my 'mistakes.' If you would rather continue to debate the topic, please don't be scared to return to your own thread, and try.
sorry, i was watching the sun come up in a different game
Sigil blew it. They had the chance to create something beyond anything we've ever played, but the bottomline , we played every element in vanguard already. I played enough card games to know , I don't like card game ( played Star Trek Next Gen Card game)
So The card game part is a a"bleh" , Grinding for xp, done it thousands of times. Light switch day and night atmosphere, seen hundred times. Life less npcs , been there already. Traveling time sinks, I avoid wasting time as much as possible , I want action , not a 30 minute run to die and have to run another 30 minutes , waste of your life type of game play, Evercracks is over , and so is Brad Mcquaids game development life span.. The weapons looked the same as I kept upgrading , the armor stuck to you player like a cheap polyster shirt, the same for the mages. The quests same old crap + an added bonus of 0 story or lore. and very linear because of the lack of instancing,
Instancing is not a bad thing, it gives game worlds a dynamic pocket of world space that a designer can cut loose in.
The who game is been there done that type of ssenerio, so yah 30 million wasted imho. I will even kick it up a notch and say the entire game concept and design is worthless for this era of pc gaming.
Of course, my next door neighbor tried to get me to play auto assault too and that's his number one most favorite game ever.
Hey now, No dissing the Auto Assault! It's an awesome game!
...auto assault is worse than Vanguard lolnot true ...
PC Gamer
7/1/2006
79 out of 100
79.0%
Avg Ratio: 72%
I wonder if you honestly even believe what you type, or if you live in a made up world of statistics, facts and figures you select for yourself from the garbage avialible on the web. that made me chuckle "a made up world of facts" lol
and it made me laugh that you said chuckle.
seriously, why bother to hide behind semantics? do you honestly beleive VG is worse than AA? have you personally played both games?
as for my use of the word fact- I can gather a million completely wrong facts from the internet, so yes, in context I leave the word where it is.
edit: if you would like to further debate my use of the language, please continue, or feel free to PM me about my 'mistakes.' If you would rather continue to debate the topic, please don't be scared to return to your own thread, and try.
sorry, i was watching the sun come up in a different game
Sigil blew it. They had the chance to create something beyond anything we've ever played, but the bottomline , we played every element in vanguard already. I played enough card games to know , I don't like card game ( played Star Trek Next Gen Card game)
So The card game part is a a"bleh" , Grinding for xp, done it thousands of times. Light switch day and night atmosphere, seen hundred times. Life less npcs , been there already. Traveling time sinks, I avoid wasting time as much as possible , I want action , not a 30 minute run to die and have to run another 30 minutes , waste of your life type of game play, Evercracks is over , and so is Brad Mcquaids game development life span.. The weapons looked the same as I kept upgrading , the armor stuck to you player like a cheap polyster shirt, the same for the mages. The quests same old crap + an added bonus of 0 story or lore. and very linear because of the lack of instancing,
Instancing is not a bad thing, it gives game worlds a dynamic pocket of world space that a designer can cut loose in.
The who game is been there done that type of ssenerio, so yah 30 million wasted imho. I will even kick it up a notch and say the entire game concept and design is worthless for this era of pc gaming.
this rant has what to do with the post you quoted? nothing.
rants don't equate to conversation my friend. move on.
I wonder if you honestly even believe what you type, or if you live in a made up world of statistics, facts and figures you select for yourself from the garbage avialible on the web.
that made me chuckle "a made up world of facts" lol
Hehe, the funniest thing I have read in a long time, I just got myself a new Sig, Xplororors old quote had to go, and I have had that one for a looong time.
"made up world of facts", now there is an oxymoron if tere ever was one, thank you.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Originally posted by Jerek_
I wonder if you honestly even believe what you type, or if you live in a made up world of facts. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Of course, my next door neighbor tried to get me to play auto assault too and that's his number one most favorite game ever.
Hey now, No dissing the Auto Assault! It's an awesome game!
...auto assault is worse than Vanguard lolnot true ...
PC Gamer
7/1/2006
79 out of 100
79.0%
Avg Ratio: 72%
I wonder if you honestly even believe what you type, or if you live in a made up world of statistics, facts and figures you select for yourself from the garbage avialible on the web. that made me chuckle "a made up world of facts" lol
and it made me laugh that you said chuckle.
seriously, why bother to hide behind semantics? do you honestly beleive VG is worse than AA? have you personally played both games?
as for my use of the word fact- I can gather a million completely wrong facts from the internet, so yes, in context I leave the word where it is.
edit: if you would like to further debate my use of the language, please continue, or feel free to PM me about my 'mistakes.' If you would rather continue to debate the topic, please don't be scared to return to your own thread, and try.
Actually, I have played both Vanguard and AA and I prefer AA and think it is the better game right now. Now in a year when Vanguard gets its polish? Dunno, doubt AA will be better then but right now, Yes.
Originally posted by MrVicchio Vanguard is a case study in how to blow thirty million dollars. A case study in how NOT to make an MMO. There are lessons here that I think will lead to better games in the future. Things like real challenge not "harsh DP" Vanguard I think, will be the last corpse run game. Starting areas will not be spread across the four corners of the game.
And the thing I think will be most learned from Vanguard? People pay good money to have fun, and having fun does not include being annoyed to death.
I know there are people that swear by this game, and I have to wonder why? Of course, my next door neighbor tried to get me to play auto assault too and that's his number one most favorite game ever. I guess there is a game for everyone.
Like you I'm an old school EQ player. I didn't expect to relive my hay days of EQ, however I did expect a little more from Brad than what was delivered. You mention that it was a waste of 30 million, I don't know how those numbers fit, but suffices to say that what makes this an even more bitter pill to swallow is Brad HAD all other games around him to base what worked, what people were looking for and was missing from MMO's. It wasn't as though this were a new venture for him.
As far as him making a new game, what does it really matter, he's already cracked the edges of his reputation and tarnished it. I'm willing to forgive, but I don't get how with all the information about other MMO's that is out there he couldn't have been more prepared? I'm going to speculate that SOE will at some point buy Sigil out, this would be the only avenue for escape on what could have been a potentially successful game. I'm sure the game will keep a certain number of players, but I don't see an influx of players that it could have had.
The Old Timers Guild Laid back, not so serious, no drama. All about the fun!
www.oldtimersguild.com An opinion should be the result of thought, not a substitute for it. - Jef Mallett
I *do* get a chuckle every time I hear someone say that Vanguard was released "early" though.
Vanguard was released *WAAAAAY* late.
What they mean is that Vanguard was released with significant bugs that affected game-play, huge gaps in content and a with a lot of broken promises. It is embarrassing for Sigil, really, the state the game was in at launch.
Microsoft was right to abandon Sigil.
I guess they know a "boil the ocean" software-project-disaster-in-the-making when they see one.
I have to say that I find AA to be a much more polished and professional game than Vanguard. Whether or not it is your kind of game, at least it runs well, isn't a bug-fest and delivers the game it was hyped to be.
I think if you look around, you will find several gaming review sites that agree. I am not saying that their word makes it true, just that it isn't as unreasonable as this dude says it is.
I honestly can't believe we are having this discussion. For what it's worth, Vanguard was rushed out and that is no fault of Sigil or Brad's. If you put that much passion into developing a game of this caliber, you would want it to go out as good as it can be. I also think SOE gets a bad rap all the time, but I believe that they did rush this out - the reasoning is beyond me. But, this game has the potential to be a truely awesome game and to present the closest thing to a real world as we've ever seen in online gaming. As with EQ2, it took a while for people to catch up with the requirements it took to run it, and the same will hold true with Vanguard. If everyone grows up and quits whining about every little thing and actually contributes feedback, it will become truly awesome. I hope those that can run and play this game seize the opportunity to help shape this game before the masses catch up to it so they'll have something they can really sink their teeth into. I love EQ2, but it's a classic example of people bailing, whining and failing to open their mouths and give their feedback.
So, we're left with people backing things like AA, a game that only requires a mindless teen with no intent on having to think about anything in order to play) and WoW. Let's put this to rest on the WoW subject now and why it's so popular. People can play the game with the lowest form of computer possible, and gives the average non-gamer something they can play and easily achieve in with no thought, which makes it attractive to everyone - instant gratification. Just because millions of people are playing WoW doesn't mean it has everything we've all been looking for in our online gaming, nor does it do anything to contribute further to the future of gaming and the realistic worlds we want to play in. It also doesn't make it the best. It will make game developers more complacent and unwilling to churn out challenging MMOs.
Games like EQ2 and Vanguard missed this mark only because they were/are unaccessible to the casual gamer, and were/are designed to be above the rest graphically as their creators hoped to push the envelope to take fantasy gaming further. I intend to play Vanguard in the very near future, and I hope that those that are shelving their copies return in a year or so and find something they've finally been looking for.
Games like EQ2 and Vanguard missed this mark only because they were/are unaccessible to the casual gamer, and were/are designed to be above the rest graphically as their creators hoped to push the envelope to take fantasy gaming further. I intend to play Vanguard in the very near future, and I hope that those that are shelving their copies return in a year or so and find something they've finally been looking for.
I find your statement very interesting. By your own definition, "unaccessible to the casual gamer," is saying these games are for elitist. That is tacky to say someone can't get anything done with in a certain time frame. Myself, was able to level to 20 in a day and a half, but yet I found flaws in the over all design and concept in the title , which has been cemented by reviews on major media outlets.
Your a victim of brainwashing, it is an amazing tool that can subtly be implemented with a word play like "core." What word did they use for Everquest ? This brainwashing has either 2 elements , one is excepting the offering as it is presented, usually leads to a righteous attitude and a disregard to common opinion of any negative view. The second reaction is a violent , negative with harsh rejection of the offering.
The kind of marketing that these people Mcquaid and Butler created is very subtle and I really didn't pin point it until now when I was writing this post. You will disagree with my theory, but look at the forums and other forums around the web, it is a either / or , with very few people in the middle ground , it is that sharp of a line.
Think about it , play the game WITHOUT constantly thinking you are a core (hardcore) mmo player. Cleanse yourself and continue to play Vanguard and see if you notice any difference.
I know this is probably the strangest post and or theory you ever read , but that is what I am and do, Strange theory man .
Originally posted by Mars505 I find your statement very interesting. By your own definition, "unaccessible to the casual gamer," is saying these games are for elitist.
So if you play VG your an elitist? Wow, this forum is constantly changing the definitions of words that I thought I knew the meaning of. I always thought that elitist was more of an attitude that your better then everyone else not someone who liked to play challenging games that you had to spend more then 5 minutes in to accomplish something.
PS: For the record, VG is not as hardcore as the Vanbois are proclaiming. It used to be but it isn't anymore.
I find your statement very interesting. By your own definition, "unaccessible to the casual gamer," is saying these games are for elitist.
So if you play VG your an elitist? Wow, this forum is constantly changing the definitions of words that I thought I knew the meaning of. I always thought that elitist was more of an attitude that your better then everyone else not someone who liked to play challenging games that you had to spend more then 5 minutes in to accomplish something.
PS: For the record, VG is not as hardcore as the Vanbois are proclaiming. It used to be but it isn't anymore.
It is the second time I read peoples statements as being elitist. "unaccessible" is an odd word to describe, Are casual players unable to decide what is a quality game ?
Comments
UO had pet handling, and people loved them for it. UO improved on that system over time, and kept a lot of customers.
SWG (pre NGE) had pet handling. People loved it, but then the dark times came and we all know what happened next.
WoW has a UO style pet class, and people love it. You only have to look, huge numbers of people play creature handlers in WoW.
Vanguard has no true pet handling class. They blew it, right there and then, by following the EQ design of "half pets" rather than pets tamed and trained from the wild. Many, many, well ok millions, of people want proper pet handler classes. The only game currently that really gives them that is WoW; oddly enough WoW is doing quite nicely. What a co-incidence ...
I'm having a problem buying that WoW was the success that it was because Hunters could tame some animals. And given the recent normalization passes, and how much they pissed off the hunter community, so by your logic the game should be shutting down any minute now.
Your post also glazes over how people left in hordes and droves from UO with the advent of Felluca/Trammel, Elves, Ninjas & Samurai, while all the while, taming has remained pretty much the same.
SWG has the Creature Handler profession, yet the game was hardly a success. In fact I'd say it was an abysmal failure, given the IP.
There's a lot of piss poor design decisions you can blame the games poor financial performance on, but I don't think not including Pokemon: Telon Edition is one of them.
I wonder if you honestly even believe what you type, or if you live in a made up world of statistics, facts and figures you select for yourself from the garbage avialible on the web. that made me chuckle "a made up world of facts" lol
and it made me laugh that you said chuckle.
seriously, why bother to hide behind semantics? do you honestly beleive VG is worse than AA? have you personally played both games?
as for my use of the word fact- I can gather a million completely wrong facts from the internet, so yes, in context I leave the word where it is.
edit: if you would like to further debate my use of the language, please continue, or feel free to PM me about my 'mistakes.' If you would rather continue to debate the topic, please don't be scared to return to your own thread, and try.
I wonder if you honestly even believe what you type, or if you live in a made up world of statistics, facts and figures you select for yourself from the garbage avialible on the web. that made me chuckle "a made up world of facts" lol
and it made me laugh that you said chuckle.
seriously, why bother to hide behind semantics? do you honestly beleive VG is worse than AA? have you personally played both games?
as for my use of the word fact- I can gather a million completely wrong facts from the internet, so yes, in context I leave the word where it is.
edit: if you would like to further debate my use of the language, please continue, or feel free to PM me about my 'mistakes.' If you would rather continue to debate the topic, please don't be scared to return to your own thread, and try.
sorry, i was watching the sun come up in a different gameSigil blew it. They had the chance to create something beyond anything we've ever played, but the bottomline , we played every element in vanguard already. I played enough card games to know , I don't like card game ( played Star Trek Next Gen Card game)
So The card game part is a a"bleh" , Grinding for xp, done it thousands of times. Light switch day and night atmosphere, seen hundred times. Life less npcs , been there already. Traveling time sinks, I avoid wasting time as much as possible , I want action , not a 30 minute run to die and have to run another 30 minutes , waste of your life type of game play, Evercracks is over , and so is Brad Mcquaids game development life span.. The weapons looked the same as I kept upgrading , the armor stuck to you player like a cheap polyster shirt, the same for the mages. The quests same old crap + an added bonus of 0 story or lore. and very linear because of the lack of instancing,
Instancing is not a bad thing, it gives game worlds a dynamic pocket of world space that a designer can cut loose in.
The who game is been there done that type of ssenerio, so yah 30 million wasted imho. I will even kick it up a notch and say the entire game concept and design is worthless for this era of pc gaming.
who me ?
I wonder if you honestly even believe what you type, or if you live in a made up world of statistics, facts and figures you select for yourself from the garbage avialible on the web. that made me chuckle "a made up world of facts" lol
and it made me laugh that you said chuckle.
seriously, why bother to hide behind semantics? do you honestly beleive VG is worse than AA? have you personally played both games?
as for my use of the word fact- I can gather a million completely wrong facts from the internet, so yes, in context I leave the word where it is.
edit: if you would like to further debate my use of the language, please continue, or feel free to PM me about my 'mistakes.' If you would rather continue to debate the topic, please don't be scared to return to your own thread, and try.
sorry, i was watching the sun come up in a different gameSigil blew it. They had the chance to create something beyond anything we've ever played, but the bottomline , we played every element in vanguard already. I played enough card games to know , I don't like card game ( played Star Trek Next Gen Card game)
So The card game part is a a"bleh" , Grinding for xp, done it thousands of times. Light switch day and night atmosphere, seen hundred times. Life less npcs , been there already. Traveling time sinks, I avoid wasting time as much as possible , I want action , not a 30 minute run to die and have to run another 30 minutes , waste of your life type of game play, Evercracks is over , and so is Brad Mcquaids game development life span.. The weapons looked the same as I kept upgrading , the armor stuck to you player like a cheap polyster shirt, the same for the mages. The quests same old crap + an added bonus of 0 story or lore. and very linear because of the lack of instancing,
Instancing is not a bad thing, it gives game worlds a dynamic pocket of world space that a designer can cut loose in.
The who game is been there done that type of ssenerio, so yah 30 million wasted imho. I will even kick it up a notch and say the entire game concept and design is worthless for this era of pc gaming.
this rant has what to do with the post you quoted? nothing.
rants don't equate to conversation my friend. move on.
Hehe, the funniest thing I have read in a long time, I just got myself a new Sig, Xplororors old quote had to go, and I have had that one for a looong time.
"made up world of facts", now there is an oxymoron if tere ever was one, thank you.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Originally posted by Jerek_
I wonder if you honestly even believe what you type, or if you live in a made up world of facts.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I wonder if you honestly even believe what you type, or if you live in a made up world of statistics, facts and figures you select for yourself from the garbage avialible on the web. that made me chuckle "a made up world of facts" lol
and it made me laugh that you said chuckle.
seriously, why bother to hide behind semantics? do you honestly beleive VG is worse than AA? have you personally played both games?
as for my use of the word fact- I can gather a million completely wrong facts from the internet, so yes, in context I leave the word where it is.
edit: if you would like to further debate my use of the language, please continue, or feel free to PM me about my 'mistakes.' If you would rather continue to debate the topic, please don't be scared to return to your own thread, and try.
Actually, I have played both Vanguard and AA and I prefer AA and think it is the better game right now. Now in a year when Vanguard gets its polish? Dunno, doubt AA will be better then but right now, Yes.As far as him making a new game, what does it really matter, he's already cracked the edges of his reputation and tarnished it. I'm willing to forgive, but I don't get how with all the information about other MMO's that is out there he couldn't have been more prepared? I'm going to speculate that SOE will at some point buy Sigil out, this would be the only avenue for escape on what could have been a potentially successful game. I'm sure the game will keep a certain number of players, but I don't see an influx of players that it could have had.
The Old Timers Guild
Laid back, not so serious, no drama.
All about the fun!
www.oldtimersguild.com
An opinion should be the result of thought, not a substitute for it. - Jef Mallett
I *do* get a chuckle every time I hear someone say that Vanguard was released "early" though.
Vanguard was released *WAAAAAY* late.
What they mean is that Vanguard was released with significant bugs that affected game-play, huge gaps in content and a with a lot of broken promises. It is embarrassing for Sigil, really, the state the game was in at launch.
Microsoft was right to abandon Sigil.
I guess they know a "boil the ocean" software-project-disaster-in-the-making when they see one.
I have to say that I find AA to be a much more polished and professional game than Vanguard. Whether or not it is your kind of game, at least it runs well, isn't a bug-fest and delivers the game it was hyped to be.
I think if you look around, you will find several gaming review sites that agree. I am not saying that their word makes it true, just that it isn't as unreasonable as this dude says it is.
-----Zero Punctuation Eve Online Review-----
So, we're left with people backing things like AA, a game that only requires a mindless teen with no intent on having to think about anything in order to play) and WoW. Let's put this to rest on the WoW subject now and why it's so popular. People can play the game with the lowest form of computer possible, and gives the average non-gamer something they can play and easily achieve in with no thought, which makes it attractive to everyone - instant gratification. Just because millions of people are playing WoW doesn't mean it has everything we've all been looking for in our online gaming, nor does it do anything to contribute further to the future of gaming and the realistic worlds we want to play in. It also doesn't make it the best. It will make game developers more complacent and unwilling to churn out challenging MMOs.
Games like EQ2 and Vanguard missed this mark only because they were/are unaccessible to the casual gamer, and were/are designed to be above the rest graphically as their creators hoped to push the envelope to take fantasy gaming further. I intend to play Vanguard in the very near future, and I hope that those that are shelving their copies return in a year or so and find something they've finally been looking for.
Your a victim of brainwashing, it is an amazing tool that can subtly be implemented with a word play like "core." What word did they use for Everquest ? This brainwashing has either 2 elements , one is excepting the offering as it is presented, usually leads to a righteous attitude and a disregard to common opinion of any negative view. The second reaction is a violent , negative with harsh rejection of the offering.
The kind of marketing that these people Mcquaid and Butler created is very subtle and I really didn't pin point it until now when I was writing this post. You will disagree with my theory, but look at the forums and other forums around the web, it is a either / or , with very few people in the middle ground , it is that sharp of a line.
Think about it , play the game WITHOUT constantly thinking you are a core (hardcore) mmo player. Cleanse yourself and continue to play Vanguard and see if you notice any difference.
I know this is probably the strangest post and or theory you ever read , but that is what I am and do, Strange theory man .
Enjoy Vanguard
who me ?
So if you play VG your an elitist? Wow, this forum is constantly changing the definitions of words that I thought I knew the meaning of. I always thought that elitist was more of an attitude that your better then everyone else not someone who liked to play challenging games that you had to spend more then 5 minutes in to accomplish something.
PS: For the record, VG is not as hardcore as the Vanbois are proclaiming. It used to be but it isn't anymore.
So if you play VG your an elitist? Wow, this forum is constantly changing the definitions of words that I thought I knew the meaning of. I always thought that elitist was more of an attitude that your better then everyone else not someone who liked to play challenging games that you had to spend more then 5 minutes in to accomplish something.
PS: For the record, VG is not as hardcore as the Vanbois are proclaiming. It used to be but it isn't anymore.
It is the second time I read peoples statements as being elitist. "unaccessible" is an odd word to describe, Are casual players unable to decide what is a quality game ?who me ?