Originally posted by Vengeful Originally posted by jonaku Originally posted by pingofdeath "vision" is sort of a long running in house joke, actually. started back when he worked on EQ1. it means design plan, btw.
The absurd and horrifying thing about it is that the fanbois at VSOH do NOT see it as a joke. They take the "vision" very, very, very seriously.
LoL I've noticed that too =P
I love Woody at GU's take on "The Vision". It's a large rolled up piece of paper with eyes and a mouth that works at Sigil.
That comic was funny as hell. Woody knows how to lay it out.
Shayde - SWG (dead) Proud member of the Cabal.
It sounds great, so great in fact, I pitty those who canceled - Some deluded SWG fanboi who pities me. I don't like it when you say things. - A Vanguard fan who does too. 09f911029d74e35bd84156c5635688c0
Oiingo 572+ days played and holy cow Beastlord class isn't that old in EQ
Chloris 572+ days played
Yep, bet these people do a whole lot other then play EQ must have really busy and responsible lives outside EQ .
Sebbon-12 days played 63rd level and 10AA's, got off the stupid train when I saw EQ headed to the raid or your gear sucks dumper, raiding sux. Yea, 12 days to make 63rd, I am 100 times a better player then these guys.
If you have any questions please ask. I have moved on to WoW from eq and no longer have any desire to play a dead game. Thank you. (posted by another selling his account in EQ1)
Originally posted by jonaku He's telling all these casuals "Come into Vanguard, it's not hard core, it's for 'core gamers'. You casuals are almost like 'core gamers' so you'll enjoy my little game." But you know what's gonna happen? All these casuals will join the game and freak out at the XP loss upon death, impossible-to-solo corpse runs, mind deadening level grinding solo, no way to teleport out of a dungeon if you're unexpectedly called for dinner, and so forth. Then the casuals will start whining that the game is too hard.
I consider myself a very casual player. I play for short sessions, I'm not in any particular hurry to get to the top/endgame of any game I play, and yet those game mechanics completely fail to freak me out. In fact, I sort of miss them. I must be too old school.
... This is where I draw the line: __________________.
jonaku I wouldn't worry about it. Hard core or not its all about money. EQ2 was more hardcore then it is now and look whats happened to it. DDO was more hardcore and look whats about to happen to it. Hardcore is already a small group..but that group is going to be split between some fierce upcoming competition. Age of Conan, Warhammer, Gods and Heroes..just to name a few. Brad, nor is ''Vision'' (tm) is going to get 100% of the hard core market. And if Causels do buy this game and start dropping out faster then you can say subscribtion cancelled. What do you really think is going to happen? I know he's pushing for 400k..I think in the beginning he might get it but I dont think he'll keep it just on the hardcore crowd with all the competition.
And this is a business. Yes he's out to make a game..but he's out to make a profit first.. game second.
"It is better to die on one's feet than to live on one's knees,"
Originally posted by synergi jonaku I wouldn't worry about it. Hard core or not its all about money. EQ2 was more hardcore then it is now and look whats happened to it. DDO was more hardcore and look whats about to happen to it. Hardcore is already a small group..but that group is going to be split between some fierce upcoming competition. Age of Conan, Warhammer, Gods and Heroes..just to name a few. Brad, nor is ''Vision'' (tm) is going to get 100% of the hard core market. And if Causels do buy this game and start dropping out faster then you can say subscribtion cancelled. What do you really think is going to happen? I know he's pushing for 400k..I think in the beginning he might get it but I dont think he'll keep it just on the hardcore crowd with all the competition.
And this is a business. Yes he's out to make a game..but he's out to make a profit first.. game second.
first, there is no way that this game with its sadomasochistic death penalty and other features will get anywhere close to 400 K. i'm betting more like 100 to 200 K.
second, i agree the hard cores will be split up against much better games that will be coming out.
third, my point is that it's flat out deliberate lie to say this game is for "core gamers", they are intentionally misleading the public and the massive number of casuals out there that they will enjoy the game. they won't. they will hate it. and vanguard knows it. their game is meant only for hard core gamers who can play 10 hours a day so they can feel superior to the nubs who only play 2 hours a day.
Originally posted by jonaku Originally posted by synergi jonaku I wouldn't worry about it. Hard core or not its all about money. EQ2 was more hardcore then it is now and look whats happened to it. DDO was more hardcore and look whats about to happen to it. Hardcore is already a small group..but that group is going to be split between some fierce upcoming competition. Age of Conan, Warhammer, Gods and Heroes..just to name a few. Brad, nor is ''Vision'' (tm) is going to get 100% of the hard core market. And if Causels do buy this game and start dropping out faster then you can say subscribtion cancelled. What do you really think is going to happen? I know he's pushing for 400k..I think in the beginning he might get it but I dont think he'll keep it just on the hardcore crowd with all the competition.
And this is a business. Yes he's out to make a game..but he's out to make a profit first.. game second.
first, there is no way that this game with its sadomasochistic death penalty and other features will get anywhere close to 400 K. i'm betting more like 100 to 200 K.
second, i agree the hard cores will be split up against much better games that will be coming out.
third, my point is that it's flat out deliberate lie to say this game is for "core gamers", they are intentionally misleading the public and the massive number of casuals out there that they will enjoy the game. they won't. they will hate it. and vanguard knows it. their game is meant only for hard core gamers who can play 10 hours a day so they can feel superior to the nubs who only play 2 hours a day.
Seems like most of you people confuse "Core Gamer" with "Majority"
The "Core" gamer is not casual, 10 hrs/week, 1-3 man groups all the time....
Originally posted by Vengeful One....more....time. You want to casual, you want to play by yourself? I'd like to introduce you to Oblvion, or Morrowind. Great games. You'll love them, and you can play them at your own pace. You can even save!!!! =O I think I love you. Sincerely. I hate the way the casual gamers moan and complain if anything requires a group, requires them to actually figure it out or learn something new, or takes longer then 30 mins to achieve. I hate the way they are driving this hobby into the realms of Saturday morning cartoons, when it should be classic fantasy. Secondly... We've already been told you can solo to max Level, you just are only going to see 20% of the content available. That's your play style. That's your choice. 60% of the content will be for Groups, and last time I checked....that's about the population of people who group regularly is. So everyone is happy. Absolutely. I *so* tired of casual gamers and 8 year olds, who want the same thing after all, dictating the nature of the *hobby we created*. The constant demand for ever more solo content is a prime example of this. As well as diverting vital developing resources away from the community that choose to play an MMO to *actually* play with other people in a social environment, this game model is destroying that same community by ensure that noone actually needs anyone else for anything else. It's probably hard for anyone who has only played WoW to imagine, but the communities in these games used to be something special. Before WoW blew the doors off this hobby and took it into the not-so-demanding mainstream, it just seemed that more then $$$$$$ mattered in game design. Sure, they were successful, but on their own terms. Now everyone else wants to be the next WoW and I am very happy that some Devs like Brad out there wanna buck the trend to provide something challenging and risky, as well as being fun. Something that we can invest our time into. Somthing that we can feel proud of 'beating'. WoW is just dumbed down MMO porn that appeals to the lowest common denominator to turn a buck, Vanguard is at least trying to be better then that. MMO communities are becoming just like services like XBox 'Live'... Horrible. I miss the old school days of EQ when people actually needed each other and relied on a good rep to succeed in the game. Thirdly... I play MMOs to play with my friends, my girlfriend, and other people I may meet. I play MMOs to play with other people, and I play games to have a little challenge. If I wanted mindless, I'd play Tetris, if I wanted only story, I'd watch a movie or read a book. Absolutely. Even though "Casual" brings about more $$$ because it is more accessable to the public, GAMERS don't want to play casual games. You know...the people who identify ourselves with games. The ones that rent a game and beat it in one 6 hour sitting for a nice night in. Or break out the Xbox and Halo2 it up when all the friends are over. These are the people that Brad and company are targeting their game for. Not these "Casual" players. /salute to Brad & Co. I will support this game simply because it has an aim above fleecing people of their money. Sure, they want a profit, but you can do this and still make the game you love to play. You can still have integrity. I mean, I've played games casually. I'm casually playing EQII right now while I'm waiting for Vanguard to come out or a Beta. I'm also in the process of moving and other such distractions. I log on an hour or so a day, maybe a couple for a dungeon crawl on the weekend. Just something to get my mind of things and have a little fun. But I don't expect 100% of the content to be accessable by me. I don't expect the game to be aimed at players like me. Its a CASUAL AFFAIR!!!!! If 100% of the content IS accessable by me....I wouldn't notice. Likewise would I notice that it wasn't....because well....I don't see that content. o.O /nod And really...grouping isn't as hard as some people make it out to be. It takes like 10 minutes max to find a group to do something in almost any MMO i've played in, even barren ol' DDO...and if these "Casual" players would only stop bitching about how hard it is to find a group and actually try to, they'd be grouping and having fun before they new it. Grouping is always made easier if you can actually form social networks and participate in a community. I will end here by echoing what has been said above. if you wanna play a solo game, buy a solo game. Avoid *Massively* *Multiplayer* games. The clue is in the title.
first, there is no way that this game with its sadomasochistic death penalty and other features will get anywhere close to 400 K. i'm betting more like 100 to 200 K. second, i agree the hard cores will be split up against much better games that will be coming out.
third, my point is that it's flat out deliberate lie to say this game is for "core gamers", they are intentionally misleading the public and the massive number of casuals out there that they will enjoy the game. they won't. they will hate it. and vanguard knows it. their game is meant only for hard core gamers who can play 10 hours a day so they can feel superior to the nubs who only play 2 hours a day.
second, i agree the hard cores will be split up against much better games that will be coming out.
third, my point is that it's flat out deliberate lie to say this game is for "core gamers", they are intentionally misleading the public and the massive number of casuals out there that they will enjoy the game. they won't. they will hate it. and vanguard knows it. their game is meant only for hard core gamers who can play 10 hours a day so they can feel superior to the nubs who only play 2 hours a day.
Jonaku,
You have no idea what a "sadomasochistic" death penalty is. This one has no item loot, no loss of level, no permadeath, etc. What it does include a "silvery cord" leading you right back to your corpse, access to secondary gear so you dont have to do the corpse run naked, etc. Just because you call that "sadomasochistic" to make your point doesnt mean that it is.
As for your main argument in this thread, I would like you to give my the official "recognized by all" definition of a core gamer, a casual gamer, and a hardcore gamer. You claim that Sigil is "intentionally misleading the public and the massive number of casuals...". Based on how I would define those catagories, I would say that Sigil is accurate in it's claims. You, on the other hand, seem to be off base. Ultimately, you should just recognize that they are subjective terms (besides, your posts seem to suggest that you equate "core" gamers with casuals).
Sigil has laid all this out:
1. 20% of content towards solo/"Casual" players.
2. 60% of content toward group/"Core" players.
3. 20% of content toward raid/"Hardcore" players.
I fail to see where the confusion or the intentional misleading of the public lies.
Core Gamer = Guilds who raids. If I ever see anyone stating that raiding appeal to hardcores, I think I will laugh soo much that it will hurt, now does anyone want to hurt old Ano? Mean mean you...raiding is for casuals socialising noobs with too much time, ready to chat and willing to follow a few real achievers (which have my respect for achieving and bearing all these noobs).
Hardcore are busy playing hardcores games, be them PvP or PvE. For example, Vanguard will never even be a third of how hardcore a game like Saga of Ryzom is, now that is some hardcore game, so hardcore I ask myself if I was a casual in their world of Atys...as to PvP, virtually any game with real PvP will be more hardcore than Vanguard.
The Vision(tm) is developped to appeal to the "overwhelming" majority of peoples who enjoy raiding, even if I hardly ever see 5% of peoples raiding at any given time. *shrug*
I wish them good luck. I am no longer bitter, angry or whatever...at least a MMO is answering my needs and hopes. Granted it will be in a LONG time, but BioWare are the shining knights coming to the rescue...I just hope I won't be playing CoH for 5 years until they rescue me! Before BioWare shows up, I was argumenting that much because Vanguard's specific server rules were my best hope for silver plating, but now I see gold plating coming with BioWare, doesn't care that much at all anymore for silver!
PS: If you are getting extremely jealous of my devotion to BioWare, just hope the staff open a forum for BioWare, I will spent most of my time there when not in the CoH section! BioWare will rule!!! And even SIGIL knows it (Sigil is the city of Splendors in Planescape: Torment...a product developped by BioWare) All praise to the all mighty BioWare, real RPG devs at work!
- "If I understand you well, you are telling me until next time. " - Ren
Originally posted by vesavius Originally posted by Vengeful One....more....time. You want to casual, you want to play by yourself? I'd like to introduce you to Oblvion, or Morrowind. Great games. You'll love them, and you can play them at your own pace. You can even save!!!! =O I think I love you. Sincerely. I hate the way the casual gamers moan and complain if anything requires a group, requires them to actually figure it out or learn something new, or takes longer then 30 mins to achieve. I hate the way they are driving this hobby into the realms of Saturday morning cartoons, when it should be classic fantasy. Secondly... We've already been told you can solo to max Level, you just are only going to see 20% of the content available. That's your play style. That's your choice. 60% of the content will be for Groups, and last time I checked....that's about the population of people who group regularly is. So everyone is happy. Absolutely. I *so* tired of casual gamers and 8 year olds, who want the same thing after all, dictating the nature of the *hobby we created*. The constant demand for ever more solo content is a prime example of this. As well as diverting vital developing resources away from the community that choose to play an MMO to *actually* play with other people in a social environment, this game model is destroying that same community by ensure that noone actually needs anyone else for anything else. It's probably hard for anyone who has only played WoW to imagine, but the communities in these games used to be something special. Before WoW blew the doors off this hobby and took it into the not-so-demanding mainstream, it just seemed that more then $$$$$$ mattered in game design. Sure, they were successful, but on their own terms. Now everyone else wants to be the next WoW and I am very happy that some Devs like Brad out there wanna buck the trend to provide something challenging and risky, as well as being fun. Something that we can invest our time into. Somthing that we can feel proud of 'beating'. WoW is just dumbed down MMO porn that appeals to the lowest common denominator to turn a buck, Vanguard is at least trying to be better then that. MMO communities are becoming just like services like XBox 'Live'... Horrible. I miss the old school days of EQ when people actually needed each other and relied on a good rep to succeed in the game. Thirdly... I play MMOs to play with my friends, my girlfriend, and other people I may meet. I play MMOs to play with other people, and I play games to have a little challenge. If I wanted mindless, I'd play Tetris, if I wanted only story, I'd watch a movie or read a book. Absolutely. Even though "Casual" brings about more $$$ because it is more accessable to the public, GAMERS don't want to play casual games. You know...the people who identify ourselves with games. The ones that rent a game and beat it in one 6 hour sitting for a nice night in. Or break out the Xbox and Halo2 it up when all the friends are over. These are the people that Brad and company are targeting their game for. Not these "Casual" players. /salute to Brad & Co. I will support this game simply because it has an aim above fleecing people of their money. Sure, they want a profit, but you can do this and still make the game you love to play. You can still have integrity. I mean, I've played games casually. I'm casually playing EQII right now while I'm waiting for Vanguard to come out or a Beta. I'm also in the process of moving and other such distractions. I log on an hour or so a day, maybe a couple for a dungeon crawl on the weekend. Just something to get my mind of things and have a little fun. But I don't expect 100% of the content to be accessable by me. I don't expect the game to be aimed at players like me. Its a CASUAL AFFAIR!!!!! If 100% of the content IS accessable by me....I wouldn't notice. Likewise would I notice that it wasn't....because well....I don't see that content. o.O /nod And really...grouping isn't as hard as some people make it out to be. It takes like 10 minutes max to find a group to do something in almost any MMO i've played in, even barren ol' DDO...and if these "Casual" players would only stop bitching about how hard it is to find a group and actually try to, they'd be grouping and having fun before they new it. Grouping is always made easier if you can actually form social networks and participate in a community. I will end here by echoing what has been said above. if you wanna play a solo game, buy a solo game. Avoid *Massively* *Multiplayer* games. The clue is in the title.
Wow, so because I don't want to group 24/7 when playing a MMO. I'm labeled an 8 year old, right off the bat? I'm still baffled where this idea of MMORPG = Forced Grouping, originated from. I thought Massively Multiplayer was a reference to the number of people participating in a game world.... go figure.
In War - Victory. In Peace - Vigilance. In Death - Sacrifice.
Originally posted by Roin Originally posted by vesavius Originally posted by Vengeful One....more....time. You want to casual, you want to play by yourself? I'd like to introduce you to Oblvion, or Morrowind. Great games. You'll love them, and you can play them at your own pace. You can even save!!!! =O I think I love you. Sincerely. I hate the way the casual gamers moan and complain if anything requires a group, requires them to actually figure it out or learn something new, or takes longer then 30 mins to achieve. I hate the way they are driving this hobby into the realms of Saturday morning cartoons, when it should be classic fantasy. Secondly... We've already been told you can solo to max Level, you just are only going to see 20% of the content available. That's your play style. That's your choice. 60% of the content will be for Groups, and last time I checked....that's about the population of people who group regularly is. So everyone is happy. Absolutely. I *so* tired of casual gamers and 8 year olds, who want the same thing after all, dictating the nature of the *hobby we created*. The constant demand for ever more solo content is a prime example of this. As well as diverting vital developing resources away from the community that choose to play an MMO to *actually* play with other people in a social environment, this game model is destroying that same community by ensure that noone actually needs anyone else for anything else. It's probably hard for anyone who has only played WoW to imagine, but the communities in these games used to be something special. Before WoW blew the doors off this hobby and took it into the not-so-demanding mainstream, it just seemed that more then $$$$$$ mattered in game design. Sure, they were successful, but on their own terms. Now everyone else wants to be the next WoW and I am very happy that some Devs like Brad out there wanna buck the trend to provide something challenging and risky, as well as being fun. Something that we can invest our time into. Somthing that we can feel proud of 'beating'. WoW is just dumbed down MMO porn that appeals to the lowest common denominator to turn a buck, Vanguard is at least trying to be better then that. MMO communities are becoming just like services like XBox 'Live'... Horrible. I miss the old school days of EQ when people actually needed each other and relied on a good rep to succeed in the game. Thirdly... I play MMOs to play with my friends, my girlfriend, and other people I may meet. I play MMOs to play with other people, and I play games to have a little challenge. If I wanted mindless, I'd play Tetris, if I wanted only story, I'd watch a movie or read a book. Absolutely. Even though "Casual" brings about more $$$ because it is more accessable to the public, GAMERS don't want to play casual games. You know...the people who identify ourselves with games. The ones that rent a game and beat it in one 6 hour sitting for a nice night in. Or break out the Xbox and Halo2 it up when all the friends are over. These are the people that Brad and company are targeting their game for. Not these "Casual" players. /salute to Brad & Co. I will support this game simply because it has an aim above fleecing people of their money. Sure, they want a profit, but you can do this and still make the game you love to play. You can still have integrity. I mean, I've played games casually. I'm casually playing EQII right now while I'm waiting for Vanguard to come out or a Beta. I'm also in the process of moving and other such distractions. I log on an hour or so a day, maybe a couple for a dungeon crawl on the weekend. Just something to get my mind of things and have a little fun. But I don't expect 100% of the content to be accessable by me. I don't expect the game to be aimed at players like me. Its a CASUAL AFFAIR!!!!! If 100% of the content IS accessable by me....I wouldn't notice. Likewise would I notice that it wasn't....because well....I don't see that content. o.O /nod And really...grouping isn't as hard as some people make it out to be. It takes like 10 minutes max to find a group to do something in almost any MMO i've played in, even barren ol' DDO...and if these "Casual" players would only stop bitching about how hard it is to find a group and actually try to, they'd be grouping and having fun before they new it. Grouping is always made easier if you can actually form social networks and participate in a community. I will end here by echoing what has been said above. if you wanna play a solo game, buy a solo game. Avoid *Massively* *Multiplayer* games. The clue is in the title.
Wow, so because I don't want to group 24/7 when playing a MMO. I'm labeled an 8 year old, right off the bat? I'm still baffled where this idea of MMORPG = Forced Grouping, originated from. I thought Massively Multiplayer was a reference to the number of people participating in a game world.... go figure.
No, I didnt call you an 8 year old... I stated that 8 year olds and casual gamers want the same things from MMOs, and that those things are basically community destroyers.
Also, I agreed above that *some* solo content is fine. It's the excessive focus on it that is diverting precious Dev time away from the group focused game that is the life and heart of these games.
erm... yeah... Massively Multiplayer does indeed refer to the number of people in the game world... but if you are gonna lock yourself away in instances all the time and support non-dependent play etc whats the point in having more then one?
Originally posted by vesavius Originally posted by Roin Originally posted by vesavius Originally posted by Vengeful One....more....time. You want to casual, you want to play by yourself? I'd like to introduce you to Oblvion, or Morrowind. Great games. You'll love them, and you can play them at your own pace. You can even save!!!! =O I think I love you. Sincerely. I hate the way the casual gamers moan and complain if anything requires a group, requires them to actually figure it out or learn something new, or takes longer then 30 mins to achieve. I hate the way they are driving this hobby into the realms of Saturday morning cartoons, when it should be classic fantasy. Secondly... We've already been told you can solo to max Level, you just are only going to see 20% of the content available. That's your play style. That's your choice. 60% of the content will be for Groups, and last time I checked....that's about the population of people who group regularly is. So everyone is happy. Absolutely. I *so* tired of casual gamers and 8 year olds, who want the same thing after all, dictating the nature of the *hobby we created*. The constant demand for ever more solo content is a prime example of this. As well as diverting vital developing resources away from the community that choose to play an MMO to *actually* play with other people in a social environment, this game model is destroying that same community by ensure that noone actually needs anyone else for anything else. It's probably hard for anyone who has only played WoW to imagine, but the communities in these games used to be something special. Before WoW blew the doors off this hobby and took it into the not-so-demanding mainstream, it just seemed that more then $$$$$$ mattered in game design. Sure, they were successful, but on their own terms. Now everyone else wants to be the next WoW and I am very happy that some Devs like Brad out there wanna buck the trend to provide something challenging and risky, as well as being fun. Something that we can invest our time into. Somthing that we can feel proud of 'beating'. WoW is just dumbed down MMO porn that appeals to the lowest common denominator to turn a buck, Vanguard is at least trying to be better then that. MMO communities are becoming just like services like XBox 'Live'... Horrible. I miss the old school days of EQ when people actually needed each other and relied on a good rep to succeed in the game. Thirdly... I play MMOs to play with my friends, my girlfriend, and other people I may meet. I play MMOs to play with other people, and I play games to have a little challenge. If I wanted mindless, I'd play Tetris, if I wanted only story, I'd watch a movie or read a book. Absolutely. Even though "Casual" brings about more $$$ because it is more accessable to the public, GAMERS don't want to play casual games. You know...the people who identify ourselves with games. The ones that rent a game and beat it in one 6 hour sitting for a nice night in. Or break out the Xbox and Halo2 it up when all the friends are over. These are the people that Brad and company are targeting their game for. Not these "Casual" players. /salute to Brad & Co. I will support this game simply because it has an aim above fleecing people of their money. Sure, they want a profit, but you can do this and still make the game you love to play. You can still have integrity. I mean, I've played games casually. I'm casually playing EQII right now while I'm waiting for Vanguard to come out or a Beta. I'm also in the process of moving and other such distractions. I log on an hour or so a day, maybe a couple for a dungeon crawl on the weekend. Just something to get my mind of things and have a little fun. But I don't expect 100% of the content to be accessable by me. I don't expect the game to be aimed at players like me. Its a CASUAL AFFAIR!!!!! If 100% of the content IS accessable by me....I wouldn't notice. Likewise would I notice that it wasn't....because well....I don't see that content. o.O /nod And really...grouping isn't as hard as some people make it out to be. It takes like 10 minutes max to find a group to do something in almost any MMO i've played in, even barren ol' DDO...and if these "Casual" players would only stop bitching about how hard it is to find a group and actually try to, they'd be grouping and having fun before they new it. Grouping is always made easier if you can actually form social networks and participate in a community. I will end here by echoing what has been said above. if you wanna play a solo game, buy a solo game. Avoid *Massively* *Multiplayer* games. The clue is in the title.
Wow, so because I don't want to group 24/7 when playing a MMO. I'm labeled an 8 year old, right off the bat? I'm still baffled where this idea of MMORPG = Forced Grouping, originated from. I thought Massively Multiplayer was a reference to the number of people participating in a game world.... go figure.
No, I didnt call you an 8 year old... I stated that 8 year olds and casual gamers want the same things from MMOs, and that those things are basically community destroyers.
Also, I agreed above that *some* solo content is fine. It's the excessive focus on it that is diverting precious Dev time away from the group focused game that is the life and heart of these games.
erm... yeah... Massively Multiplayer does indeed refer to the number of people in the game world... but if you are gonna lock yourself away in instances all the time and support non-dependent play etc whats the point in having more then one?
Go figure.
10 mins to build a group huh? What game are you playing.... Diablo?
IDK, i had to wait an hour for a 75 red mage to spawn last night in FFXI...
If you've played MMOs before and actually payed attention, and read the Vanguard FAQ, you have all of the information you need to realize that what I've said is true. Well, that's not entirely correct. Either the game is being designed from the ground up for uber raider egos, or Brad is so ignorant of the fundamentals of human nature and MMO design that he is accidently creating a game that will heavily favor raiding guilds at everyone else's expense. Since I do not think Brad is an idiot, I assume that the design is deliberate. This has nothing to do with how long it takes to grind up to max level, and it has nothing to do with death penalties, or even travel time. It has to do with things like:
No instanced content: Having non instanced dungeons means the dungeons will be camped, period. Just like in Everquest, and Final Fantasy XI, and world bosses in WoW, spawns will be camped by large guilds who have the man power to control those spawns, and those guilds will dictate who is "allowed" to have access to that content. This has happened in -every- MMO that has non instanced, important (loot wise) content, bar none.
Item Centric: The Vanguard FAQ flat out states "Vanguard will be a very item acquisition-centric game... questing, crafting, and adventuring to obtain items that enhance your character will be key". Combine "item centric" with "no instances" and you get exactly what I outlined in my previous paragraph.
Highly diversified roles and complex crafting requirement To create the high end items in Vanguard, you must have a large number of players, all highly specialized in different tasks. High end crafters who have mastered the high end crafting recipes. High end harvesters to harvest the raw materials, which Brad has stated must be harvested in some cases by full raid groups for the rare materials needed to create high end items. Combine this with the fact that there is no global trading system, and the result is very easy to forsee: only highly organized raid guilds with dedicated, specialized players will be able to create high end gear.
So, only the high end raid groups will be able to marshal the forces necessary to gather the rare materials needed for highly skilled crafters to construct the good items in the game, and character progression is highly item dependent. This leads directly to the logical conclusion that only high end raid guilds will be able to generate enough revenue to partake in another facet of the game: guild constructed housing.
Once again, the faq lists all sorts of huge advantages the guilds that can generate the resources necessary to construct villages, including decreased travel time and increased storage.
You really can't see where this is going yet? High end raid guilds will build villages very close to the non instanced dungeons that must be raided in order to get the materials to construct quality items, and because the guilds will be living right next to these dungeons, they will control who gets access to them, period.
Anyone who believes casual, group based players (as opposed to raiders) have any place in the world Sigil is creating (other than serving as peasants and consumers for the raiding guilds) is seriously kidding themselves, and if Brad honestly thinks he is making a game that will be fun for raiders and group players alike, he is deluded.
=======================================
Grape wrote this:
This game will not be for soloists. It's written all over and twice. Be prepared for being in a guild and having to schedule yourself for this game.
1-2 hours getting a group together. hour or two adventuring cleric leaves
Originally posted by jonaku Originally posted by Vengeful Originally posted by jonaku Originally posted by Vengeful -_- I am sooooo about done with this site. I think you would feel more comfortable with a game like WOW. You know...you're SOOooooo right. I meant I'm about down with MMORPG.com It's always priceless when someone doesn't get sarcasm. You just can't buy that kind of entertainment.
i know how you feel man, don't let all the trolls get to you. just remember vanguard is getting alot of attention from not only fans but haters as well, this is normal for such a high profile game.
some people try relentlessly to discourage people from liking a game that rivals their favorite game, its kind of stupid if you ask me but thats just the way it is i guess.
Originally posted by jonaku Originally posted by Vengeful Originally posted by jonaku Originally posted by Vengeful -_- I am sooooo about done with this site. I think you would feel more comfortable with a game like WOW.
You know...you're SOOooooo right. I meant I'm about down with MMORPG.com It's always priceless when someone doesn't get sarcasm. You just can't buy that kind of entertainment.
i know how you feel man, don't let all the trolls get to you. just remember vanguard is getting alot of attention from not only fans but haters as well, this is normal for such a high profile game.
some people try relentlessly to discourage people from liking a game that rivals their favorite game, its kind of stupid if you ask me but thats just the way it is i guess.
Some people like to make vague insulting statements about some people instead of actually having a conversation directly with people they disagree with, because it's easier to grandstand and showboat than to have an honest discussion with someone who disagrees with them.
So, who are these "some people" who are trying to "discourage people from liking a game that rivals their favorite game", and what are the games these "some people" are so worried about protecting from the juggernaut that is the mighty Vanguard: Saga of Heroes?
Here's my personal take on Vanguard, from what I know of the game so far: if the game is "sound" (the engine works well, the game plays well, it feels "right", all that good stuff) then it will be paradise for people who miss the days of pre-instance Everquest, when the biggest and most well organized guilds could control the resources in the game world and dictate who was allowed to do what when. If that's your gig, more power to you, and I hope you enjoy your game.
On the flip side, I think all of the statements that Vanguard is somehow going to be like Everquest, yet solve all the problems associated with that style of game, without resorting to mechanics like instancing that clearly do solve those problems (yet admitedly introduce new, different problems) will be proven to false, and that anyone interested in casual play, small group play, solo play, etc, who ends up trying Vanguard will leave it very quickly for games that fit that style of play better.
Because of this, I think Vanguard's subscription numbers will always be low, and in the new post-WoW era, it will not be a "hit". That's ok though, games such as EVE have shown that a small company can survive and even flourish without "WoW" level subscription numbers. Hopefully SOE won't step in and drastrically revamp the game and pull the rug out from under Sigil when the numbers are low.
If you disagree, fine. People disagree with each other about all sorts of things. Personally, I enjoy the discussion and the sharing of ideas. However, "some people" seem to get all bent out of shape when the product they've chosen to self identify with comes under criticism. Usually the strongest reactions come from people who want to be loyal to the product but are harboring their own doubts about it.
Obviously, the 'some people' are people like you who take basic facts, like what the developers have said will be in the game, and make simple extrapolations about how the game will function in practice. What a terrible person you are for doing such a thing! You're almost as bad as someome who points out that if you don't raid you'll be a second class citizen in the game.
Originally posted by vendris Some people like to make vague insulting statements about some people instead of actually having a conversation directly with people they disagree with, because it's easier to grandstand and showboat than to have an honest discussion with someone who disagrees with them.So, who are these "some people" who are trying to "discourage people from liking a game that rivals their favorite game", and what are the games these "some people" are so worried about protecting from the juggernaut that is the mighty Vanguard: Saga of Heroes?Here's my personal take on Vanguard, from what I know of the game so far: if the game is "sound" (the engine works well, the game plays well, it feels "right", all that good stuff) then it will be paradise for people who miss the days of pre-instance Everquest, when the biggest and most well organized guilds could control the resources in the game world and dictate who was allowed to do what when. If that's your gig, more power to you, and I hope you enjoy your game.On the flip side, I think all of the statements that Vanguard is somehow going to be like Everquest, yet solve all the problems associated with that style of game, without resorting to mechanics like instancing that clearly do solve those problems (yet admitedly introduce new, different problems) will be proven to false, and that anyone interested in casual play, small group play, solo play, etc, who ends up trying Vanguard will leave it very quickly for games that fit that style of play better. Because of this, I think Vanguard's subscription numbers will always be low, and in the new post-WoW era, it will not be a "hit". That's ok though, games such as EVE have shown that a small company can survive and even flourish without "WoW" level subscription numbers. Hopefully SOE won't step in and drastrically revamp the game and pull the rug out from under Sigil when the numbers are low.If you disagree, fine. People disagree with each other about all sorts of things. Personally, I enjoy the discussion and the sharing of ideas. However, "some people" seem to get all bent out of shape when the product they've chosen to self identify with comes under criticism. Usually the strongest reactions come from people who want to be loyal to the product but are harboring their own doubts about it.
i cant say that i disagree with most of what you wrote except that i think you may be underestimating vanguards fan base and potential.
sure alot of people don't like the tedium that eq had and that vanguard may end up having but there is alot of people that like that style of game play,.
i predict vanguard having 200-300k at launch and depending how soothe it goes it could rise or fall from there, hopefully rise though...hopefully to 400k or more but i know alot of people would disagree with me.
Some people like to make vague insulting statements about some people instead of actually having a conversation directly with people they disagree with, because it's easier to grandstand and showboat than to have an honest discussion with someone who disagrees with them.So, who are these "some people" who are trying to "discourage people from liking a game that rivals their favorite game", and what are the games these "some people" are so worried about protecting from the juggernaut that is the mighty Vanguard: Saga of Heroes?Here's my personal take on Vanguard, from what I know of the game so far: if the game is "sound" (the engine works well, the game plays well, it feels "right", all that good stuff) then it will be paradise for people who miss the days of pre-instance Everquest, when the biggest and most well organized guilds could control the resources in the game world and dictate who was allowed to do what when. If that's your gig, more power to you, and I hope you enjoy your game.On the flip side, I think all of the statements that Vanguard is somehow going to be like Everquest, yet solve all the problems associated with that style of game, without resorting to mechanics like instancing that clearly do solve those problems (yet admitedly introduce new, different problems) will be proven to false, and that anyone interested in casual play, small group play, solo play, etc, who ends up trying Vanguard will leave it very quickly for games that fit that style of play better. Because of this, I think Vanguard's subscription numbers will always be low, and in the new post-WoW era, it will not be a "hit". That's ok though, games such as EVE have shown that a small company can survive and even flourish without "WoW" level subscription numbers. Hopefully SOE won't step in and drastrically revamp the game and pull the rug out from under Sigil when the numbers are low.If you disagree, fine. People disagree with each other about all sorts of things. Personally, I enjoy the discussion and the sharing of ideas. However, "some people" seem to get all bent out of shape when the product they've chosen to self identify with comes under criticism. Usually the strongest reactions come from people who want to be loyal to the product but are harboring their own doubts about it.
i cant say that i disagree with most of what you wrote except that i think you may be underestimating vanguards fan base and potential.
sure alot of people don't like the tedium that eq had and that vanguard may end up having but there is alot of people that like that style of game play,.
i predict vanguard having 200-300k at launch and depending how soothe it goes it could rise or fall from there, hopefully rise though...hopefully to 400k or more but i know alot of people would disagree with me.
It's entirely possible I'm underestimating the size of the fan base. If Vanguard ends up being a well made game, then I hope Sigil finds it's audience and gets enough subscribers to sustain it. I also hope SOE understands that Sigil is making a game targeted at a niche market, and that from a corporate perspective that so long as the game is profitable, it doesn't need to be a "WoW" killer to be worth maintaining.
In spite of my personal feelings about the game, and my opinion that Sigil is greatly exagerrating the game's appeal to non "hardcore" gamers, I wouldn't want to see a small independent MMO company fail. Brad has given a lot to gaming and to this genre and I wish him success... I just also wish he'd stop getting non hardcore gamers excited by claiming the game has casual appeal, because from what I can tell from Sigil's statements about the game design, it won't.
In spite of my personal feelings about the game, and my opinion that Sigil is greatly exagerrating the game's appeal to non "hardcore" gamers, I just also wish he'd stop getting non hardcore gamers excited by claiming the game has casual appeal, because from what I can tell from Sigil's statements about the game design, it won't.
Exactly. I think it's unconscionable and fraudulent and misleading for Brad to keep deluding casuals and mid-tier players who only have 2 hours a night to play that they will enjoy the game. They won't. Only hard core 8 hours a day raiders will pwnz and everyone else will get absolutely nowhere and experience absolutely nothing. They will be treated like second class citizens and be stuck at a mid-tier level unable to grind up to the level cap. They'll find the process mind numblingly frustrating.
Comments
LoL I've noticed that too =P
I love Woody at GU's take on "The Vision". It's a large rolled up piece of paper with eyes and a mouth that works at Sigil.
That comic was funny as hell. Woody knows how to lay it out.
Shayde - SWG (dead)
Proud member of the Cabal.
It sounds great, so great in fact, I pitty those who canceled
I don't like it when you say things. - A Vanguard fan who does too.
09f911029d74e35bd84156c5635688c0
Vanguard type players:
Goodurden 682+ days played
Oiingo 572+ days played and holy cow Beastlord class isn't that old in EQ
Chloris 572+ days played
Yep, bet these people do a whole lot other then play EQ
must have really busy and responsible lives outside EQ 
.
Sebbon-12 days played 63rd level and 10AA's, got off the stupid train when I saw EQ headed to the raid or your gear sucks dumper, raiding sux. Yea, 12 days to make 63rd, I am 100 times a better player then these guys.
If you have any questions please ask. I have moved on to WoW from eq and no longer have any desire to play a dead game. Thank you. (posted by another selling his account in EQ1)
I consider myself a very casual player. I play for short sessions, I'm not in any particular hurry to get to the top/endgame of any game I play, and yet those game mechanics completely fail to freak me out. In fact, I sort of miss them. I must be too old school.
...
This is where I draw the line: __________________.
And this is a business. Yes he's out to make a game..but he's out to make a profit first.. game second.
"It is better to die on one's feet than to live on one's knees,"
first, there is no way that this game with its sadomasochistic death penalty and other features will get anywhere close to 400 K. i'm betting more like 100 to 200 K.
second, i agree the hard cores will be split up against much better games that will be coming out.
third, my point is that it's flat out deliberate lie to say this game is for "core gamers", they are intentionally misleading the public and the massive number of casuals out there that they will enjoy the game. they won't. they will hate it. and vanguard knows it. their game is meant only for hard core gamers who can play 10 hours a day so they can feel superior to the nubs who only play 2 hours a day.
first, there is no way that this game with its sadomasochistic death penalty and other features will get anywhere close to 400 K. i'm betting more like 100 to 200 K.
second, i agree the hard cores will be split up against much better games that will be coming out.
third, my point is that it's flat out deliberate lie to say this game is for "core gamers", they are intentionally misleading the public and the massive number of casuals out there that they will enjoy the game. they won't. they will hate it. and vanguard knows it. their game is meant only for hard core gamers who can play 10 hours a day so they can feel superior to the nubs who only play 2 hours a day.
Seems like most of you people confuse "Core Gamer" with "Majority"
The "Core" gamer is not casual, 10 hrs/week, 1-3 man groups all the time....
Jonaku,
You have no idea what a "sadomasochistic" death penalty is. This one has no item loot, no loss of level, no permadeath, etc. What it does include a "silvery cord" leading you right back to your corpse, access to secondary gear so you dont have to do the corpse run naked, etc. Just because you call that "sadomasochistic" to make your point doesnt mean that it is.
As for your main argument in this thread, I would like you to give my the official "recognized by all" definition of a core gamer, a casual gamer, and a hardcore gamer. You claim that Sigil is "intentionally misleading the public and the massive number of casuals...". Based on how I would define those catagories, I would say that Sigil is accurate in it's claims. You, on the other hand, seem to be off base. Ultimately, you should just recognize that they are subjective terms (besides, your posts seem to suggest that you equate "core" gamers with casuals).
Sigil has laid all this out:
1. 20% of content towards solo/"Casual" players.
2. 60% of content toward group/"Core" players.
3. 20% of content toward raid/"Hardcore" players.
I fail to see where the confusion or the intentional misleading of the public lies.
OP, you are wrong.
Core Gamer = Guilds who raids. If I ever see anyone stating that raiding appeal to hardcores, I think I will laugh soo much that it will hurt, now does anyone want to hurt old Ano? Mean mean you...raiding is for casuals socialising noobs with too much time, ready to chat and willing to follow a few real achievers (which have my respect for achieving and bearing all these noobs).
Hardcore are busy playing hardcores games, be them PvP or PvE. For example, Vanguard will never even be a third of how hardcore a game like Saga of Ryzom is, now that is some hardcore game, so hardcore I ask myself if I was a casual in their world of Atys...as to PvP, virtually any game with real PvP will be more hardcore than Vanguard.
The Vision(tm) is developped to appeal to the "overwhelming" majority of peoples who enjoy raiding, even if I hardly ever see 5% of peoples raiding at any given time. *shrug*
I wish them good luck. I am no longer bitter, angry or whatever...at least a MMO is answering my needs and hopes. Granted it will be in a LONG time, but BioWare are the shining knights coming to the rescue...I just hope I won't be playing CoH for 5 years until they rescue me!
Before BioWare shows up, I was argumenting that much because Vanguard's specific server rules were my best hope for silver plating, but now I see gold plating coming with BioWare, doesn't care that much at all anymore for silver! 
PS: If you are getting extremely jealous of my devotion to BioWare, just hope the staff open a forum for BioWare, I will spent most of my time there when not in the CoH section! BioWare will rule!!! And even SIGIL knows it (Sigil is the city of Splendors in Planescape: Torment...a product developped by BioWare) All praise to the all mighty BioWare, real RPG devs at work!
- "If I understand you well, you are telling me until next time. " - Ren
Wow, so because I don't want to group 24/7 when playing a MMO. I'm labeled an 8 year old, right off the bat? I'm still baffled where this idea of MMORPG = Forced Grouping, originated from. I thought Massively Multiplayer was a reference to the number of people participating in a game world.... go figure.
In War - Victory.
In Peace - Vigilance.
In Death - Sacrifice.
Wow, so because I don't want to group 24/7 when playing a MMO. I'm labeled an 8 year old, right off the bat? I'm still baffled where this idea of MMORPG = Forced Grouping, originated from. I thought Massively Multiplayer was a reference to the number of people participating in a game world.... go figure.
No, I didnt call you an 8 year old... I stated that 8 year olds and casual gamers want the same things from MMOs, and that those things are basically community destroyers.
Also, I agreed above that *some* solo content is fine. It's the excessive focus on it that is diverting precious Dev time away from the group focused game that is the life and heart of these games.
erm... yeah... Massively Multiplayer does indeed refer to the number of people in the game world... but if you are gonna lock yourself away in instances all the time and support non-dependent play etc whats the point in having more then one?
Go figure.
Wow, so because I don't want to group 24/7 when playing a MMO. I'm labeled an 8 year old, right off the bat? I'm still baffled where this idea of MMORPG = Forced Grouping, originated from. I thought Massively Multiplayer was a reference to the number of people participating in a game world.... go figure.
No, I didnt call you an 8 year old... I stated that 8 year olds and casual gamers want the same things from MMOs, and that those things are basically community destroyers.
Also, I agreed above that *some* solo content is fine. It's the excessive focus on it that is diverting precious Dev time away from the group focused game that is the life and heart of these games.
erm... yeah... Massively Multiplayer does indeed refer to the number of people in the game world... but if you are gonna lock yourself away in instances all the time and support non-dependent play etc whats the point in having more then one?
Go figure.
10 mins to build a group huh? What game are you playing.... Diablo?
IDK, i had to wait an hour for a 75 red mage to spawn last night in FFXI...
Rites of the Four Horsemen
http://www.rotfh.com
Vendris wrote this:
If you've played MMOs before and actually payed attention, and read the Vanguard FAQ, you have all of the information you need to realize that what I've said is true. Well, that's not entirely correct. Either the game is being designed from the ground up for uber raider egos, or Brad is so ignorant of the fundamentals of human nature and MMO design that he is accidently creating a game that will heavily favor raiding guilds at everyone else's expense. Since I do not think Brad is an idiot, I assume that the design is deliberate. This has nothing to do with how long it takes to grind up to max level, and it has nothing to do with death penalties, or even travel time. It has to do with things like:
No instanced content: Having non instanced dungeons means the dungeons will be camped, period. Just like in Everquest, and Final Fantasy XI, and world bosses in WoW, spawns will be camped by large guilds who have the man power to control those spawns, and those guilds will dictate who is "allowed" to have access to that content. This has happened in -every- MMO that has non instanced, important (loot wise) content, bar none.
Item Centric: The Vanguard FAQ flat out states "Vanguard will be a very item acquisition-centric game... questing, crafting, and adventuring to obtain items that enhance your character will be key". Combine "item centric" with "no instances" and you get exactly what I outlined in my previous paragraph.
Highly diversified roles and complex crafting requirement To create the high end items in Vanguard, you must have a large number of players, all highly specialized in different tasks. High end crafters who have mastered the high end crafting recipes. High end harvesters to harvest the raw materials, which Brad has stated must be harvested in some cases by full raid groups for the rare materials needed to create high end items. Combine this with the fact that there is no global trading system, and the result is very easy to forsee: only highly organized raid guilds with dedicated, specialized players will be able to create high end gear.
So, only the high end raid groups will be able to marshal the forces necessary to gather the rare materials needed for highly skilled crafters to construct the good items in the game, and character progression is highly item dependent. This leads directly to the logical conclusion that only high end raid guilds will be able to generate enough revenue to partake in another facet of the game: guild constructed housing.
Once again, the faq lists all sorts of huge advantages the guilds that can generate the resources necessary to construct villages, including decreased travel time and increased storage.
You really can't see where this is going yet? High end raid guilds will build villages very close to the non instanced dungeons that must be raided in order to get the materials to construct quality items, and because the guilds will be living right next to these dungeons, they will control who gets access to them, period.
Anyone who believes casual, group based players (as opposed to raiders) have any place in the world Sigil is creating (other than serving as peasants and consumers for the raiding guilds) is seriously kidding themselves, and if Brad honestly thinks he is making a game that will be fun for raiders and group players alike, he is deluded.
=======================================
Grape wrote this:
This game will not be for soloists. It's written all over and twice. Be prepared for being in a guild and having to schedule yourself for this game.
1-2 hours getting a group together.
hour or two adventuring
cleric leaves
log off
-_-
I am sooooo about done with this site.
You know...you're SOOooooo right.
I meant I'm about down with MMORPG.com
You know...you're SOOooooo right.
I meant I'm about down with MMORPG.com
It's always priceless when someone doesn't get sarcasm. You just can't buy that kind of entertainment.
i know how you feel man, don't let all the trolls get to you. just remember vanguard is getting alot of attention from not only fans but haters as well, this is normal for such a high profile game.
some people try relentlessly to discourage people from liking a game that rivals their favorite game, its kind of stupid if you ask me but thats just the way it is i guess.
i know how you feel man, don't let all the trolls get to you. just remember vanguard is getting alot of attention from not only fans but haters as well, this is normal for such a high profile game.
some people try relentlessly to discourage people from liking a game that rivals their favorite game, its kind of stupid if you ask me but thats just the way it is i guess.
Some people like to make vague insulting statements about some people instead of actually having a conversation directly with people they disagree with, because it's easier to grandstand and showboat than to have an honest discussion with someone who disagrees with them.
So, who are these "some people" who are trying to "discourage people from liking a game that rivals their favorite game", and what are the games these "some people" are so worried about protecting from the juggernaut that is the mighty Vanguard: Saga of Heroes?
Here's my personal take on Vanguard, from what I know of the game so far: if the game is "sound" (the engine works well, the game plays well, it feels "right", all that good stuff) then it will be paradise for people who miss the days of pre-instance Everquest, when the biggest and most well organized guilds could control the resources in the game world and dictate who was allowed to do what when. If that's your gig, more power to you, and I hope you enjoy your game.
On the flip side, I think all of the statements that Vanguard is somehow going to be like Everquest, yet solve all the problems associated with that style of game, without resorting to mechanics like instancing that clearly do solve those problems (yet admitedly introduce new, different problems) will be proven to false, and that anyone interested in casual play, small group play, solo play, etc, who ends up trying Vanguard will leave it very quickly for games that fit that style of play better.
Because of this, I think Vanguard's subscription numbers will always be low, and in the new post-WoW era, it will not be a "hit". That's ok though, games such as EVE have shown that a small company can survive and even flourish without "WoW" level subscription numbers. Hopefully SOE won't step in and drastrically revamp the game and pull the rug out from under Sigil when the numbers are low.
If you disagree, fine. People disagree with each other about all sorts of things. Personally, I enjoy the discussion and the sharing of ideas. However, "some people" seem to get all bent out of shape when the product they've chosen to self identify with comes under criticism. Usually the strongest reactions come from people who want to be loyal to the product but are harboring their own doubts about it.
Obviously, the 'some people' are people like you who take basic facts, like what the developers have said will be in the game, and make simple extrapolations about how the game will function in practice. What a terrible person you are for doing such a thing! You're almost as bad as someome who points out that if you don't raid you'll be a second class citizen in the game.
oops i meant to quote venge on that last post, my bad.
i cant say that i disagree with most of what you wrote except that i think you may be underestimating vanguards fan base and potential.
sure alot of people don't like the tedium that eq had and that vanguard may end up having but there is alot of people that like that style of game play,.
i predict vanguard having 200-300k at launch and depending how soothe it goes it could rise or fall from there, hopefully rise though...hopefully to 400k or more but i know alot of people would disagree with me.
i cant say that i disagree with most of what you wrote except that i think you may be underestimating vanguards fan base and potential.
sure alot of people don't like the tedium that eq had and that vanguard may end up having but there is alot of people that like that style of game play,.
i predict vanguard having 200-300k at launch and depending how soothe it goes it could rise or fall from there, hopefully rise though...hopefully to 400k or more but i know alot of people would disagree with me.
It's entirely possible I'm underestimating the size of the fan base. If Vanguard ends up being a well made game, then I hope Sigil finds it's audience and gets enough subscribers to sustain it. I also hope SOE understands that Sigil is making a game targeted at a niche market, and that from a corporate perspective that so long as the game is profitable, it doesn't need to be a "WoW" killer to be worth maintaining.
In spite of my personal feelings about the game, and my opinion that Sigil is greatly exagerrating the game's appeal to non "hardcore" gamers, I wouldn't want to see a small independent MMO company fail. Brad has given a lot to gaming and to this genre and I wish him success... I just also wish he'd stop getting non hardcore gamers excited by claiming the game has casual appeal, because from what I can tell from Sigil's statements about the game design, it won't.
Exactly. I think it's unconscionable and fraudulent and misleading for Brad to keep deluding casuals and mid-tier players who only have 2 hours a night to play that they will enjoy the game. They won't. Only hard core 8 hours a day raiders will pwnz and everyone else will get absolutely nowhere and experience absolutely nothing. They will be treated like second class citizens and be stuck at a mid-tier level unable to grind up to the level cap. They'll find the process mind numblingly frustrating.
For shame Brad. For shame.