All games have problems with alll graphic cards. Sorry that vanguard couldn't live up to your impossible needs. The game works amazingly great on my 8800. I've seen ppl post that it works fine on there 6200. Maybe it does work on most graphics card.
Remember there are hundreds of thousand of ppl playing this game. Seeing a few hundred posts of gpu problems is meaningless.
Yah , Fuck those people who can't get it to run, who the fuck do they think they are ! Costumers? Fuck em , we just want the money anyways. We are fucking kings of development, we don't even need a complete game and these freaks will by the pos anyways. That is how i read your statement ...
inreply to this :
All games have problems with alll graphic cards. Sorry that vanguard couldn't live up to your impossible needs. The game works amazingly great on my 8800. I've seen ppl post that it works fine on there 6200. Maybe it does work on most graphics card. Remember there are hundreds of thousand of ppl playing this game. Seeing a few hundred posts of gpu problems is meaningless.
That really is Sony's thought process, they suck and as long as they get your money they don't care.
They will dictate all terms and change them as they see fit and theres nothing you can do about it.
I went and played EQ for a couple of months and then quit, it took me 4 moths to get them to stop charging my credit card.
they just would not take I quit seriously and trying to work with customer support was as bad as pulling out my own teeth with pliers.
Really really painful
I knew right when they said Sony was going to be backing them the game would not deliver on its promises but I did hope for the best.
Vanguard aside I never believe the "minimum" system requirements on the box. As a rule of thumb I alwyas look at "recommended" and still assume it'll run "okay" but not 100% with all bells and whistles. Why? Because in the case of other games I have met those requirements and couldn't play the game. In these cases, there are two, both were pretty good games by their own account but I had problems with each that made the game unplayable. They "started" but I wasn't going anywhere by any means.
So anyhow if you're going to pickup a game that everyone and their dog is saying has really nice graphics and is a MMO then why the heck would you believe the minimum req's? Does it suck that companies seem to be acting "not so upfront" with their requirements?but this is not something new.
At least for me anyways.
Though I am just cynical and jaded by nature perhaps from past MMO and other software experiences but seriously we have:
1) a game released 6 months too early.
2) a game with serious eye candy and a huge world that claims to be seemless.
And you think a 2.4 ghz and a 128M video is gonna cut it even if it "says so" on the box?
I am not telling anyone to buy a new PC or upgrade but do some reading and research into software before you buy it and don't believe everything the retailer/developer tells you. They are trying to sell games after all.
Do I agree with PC's that meet the min spec's not playing a game as per those spec's? Not at all but this is something I have come to expect from games now a days in general.
As for those with high end machines, well you just got fucked
Originally posted by thomas.hart Remember there are hundreds of thousand of ppl playing this game. Seeing a few hundred posts of gpu problems is meaningless.
Hundreds of thousands? Sure.... They haven't even released a statement that said they sold 100k yet. The game is already 150ish and 500ish on the amazon games top selling list.
Sorry but their subs are probably sub 100k or close to it.
I wasn't stating facts. I was trying to make a point they you've missed. Even if theres 50,000 ppl playing a few hundred posters moaning about poor performance doesn't mean much.
Asus P5N32-E SLI Motherboard with Nvidia 680i Chipset E6600 Core 2 Duo CPU 4GB Kingston Ballistix 800Mhz DDR2 Memory Evga 8800GTX PCIe Video Card Soundblaster X-FI Gamer Extreme Fatal1ty Sound Card Western Digital Caviar 500 GB SATA II 3GB/S Hard Drive Both Windows XP 64 and Windows Vista 32bit This game does not run well in High Quality or Balanced Quality and it continually and consistently crashes every 30 minutes. This is a high end system, maybe not bleeding edgte, but certainly better than average. People are not complaining out of their asses just because they don't have a top notch system. If it meets minimum requirments, then Sigil has an obligation to make the game run well on those systems, let alone a high end one.
Try getting rid of 2gig. Once again, as mentionned in the thread, VG seems to have problems with the 8800.
Just so you know, here`s my setup:
6300 core 2 duo
2g DDR2 (667 i think)
X1300 AGP 512mo (read shit)
IDE 40go hard drive
It's not great, but i can live with it. I don't crash every 30 min like you stated so i guess there is something wrong with VG and you setup.
ROFL do you know how many hundreds (or thousands?) of 8800GTX cards were bought by folks upgrading for VG??? That would be a shame if it were true. My EVGA 8800GTX runs smoothly at 1920 x 1200, high quality. and very smoothly at balanced.
That guy above you listed a system too ahead of its time. 4GB ram is more problematic than 2GB. And that you have two operating systems, both 64 bit and on the same hard drive is not good. Your system is a clustered mess, I'm sorry to say. Get rid of Vista for now. Time to reformat your hard drives and install XP cleanly.
Luckily, i don't need you to like me to enjoy video games. -nariusseldon. In F2P I think it's more a case of the game's trying to play the player's. -laserit
Asus P5N32-E SLI Motherboard with Nvidia 680i Chipset E6600 Core 2 Duo CPU 4GB Kingston Ballistix 800Mhz DDR2 Memory Evga 8800GTX PCIe Video Card Soundblaster X-FI Gamer Extreme Fatal1ty Sound Card Western Digital Caviar 500 GB SATA II 3GB/S Hard Drive Both Windows XP 64 and Windows Vista 32bit This game does not run well in High Quality or Balanced Quality and it continually and consistently crashes every 30 minutes. This is a high end system, maybe not bleeding edgte, but certainly better than average. People are not complaining out of their asses just because they don't have a top notch system. If it meets minimum requirments, then Sigil has an obligation to make the game run well on those systems, let alone a high end one.
I have practically the same setup except instead of an asus i have an evga680i and corsair ram.
On balanced outside of towns i was hitting 100+fps and on the highest settings about 65-70fps.
Although i don't play anymore(cause its a snooze fest) im not too sure why all these people with good rigs are having such a hard time.
Originally posted by Agent_X7 That is, without a doubt, the dumbest review I have ever read. The authors ranting leads me to believe that they are: (...) B - Technically incompetent. You can't get the game to install? Nowhere does he mention any sort of troubleshooting on his end other than trying to install it a few times and not having any luck.(...)
Actually the "reviewer" did not have enough space to install Vanguard (strike 1) so he went & bought an extern(!) harddrive (strike 2). My guess his harddrive is full of porn or something else that is vital to his job... Going ahead & posting a review when he didnt even play it (strike 3) is just plain stupid.
(Then you have the issue that he bungled up entering a cd-key in the correct place, something tells me its (unfortunately) not just SOE's fault. The line with "Firmware = PSP" is just jaw-dropping & un-forgivingly stupid for a PC-game reviewer)
Seen bad reviews like this but that was player-submitted ones on Gamespot (but even they play the games they review), makes you even appreciate IGN reviews.
I wasn't stating facts. I was trying to make a point they you've missed. Even if theres 50,000 ppl playing a few hundred posters moaning about poor performance doesn't mean much. How about you stop trying to flame!
He was responding, not flaming. If you took his remarks as flaming you must think everyone in the world flames you. How did he flame you in particular? He just stated how he didn't think the number you said was accurate. That's not a flame it is called "discussion".
It may not mean much to you the posts about poor performance. Trust me, for people who are deciding whether to try out the game right now, it most certainly does.
All games have problems with alll graphic cards. Sorry that vanguard couldn't live up to your impossible needs. The game works amazingly great on my 8800. I've seen ppl post that it works fine on there 6200. Maybe it does work on most graphics card. Remember there are hundreds of thousand of ppl playing this game. Seeing a few hundred posts of gpu problems is meaningless.
Am running a 8800GTX and it runs great for me with every setting maxed at 1920x1200 and i even have it running on my sons computer thats about a 2ghz intel 1 gig pc2700 ram and a 9600 pro he was quite happy playing , yup in cities it is bad but he still has fun , My wife is running it on my old system which is AMD 64 3200 2 gigs ram and a x850 xt it runs on the game on highest qaulity default settings with clouds off and shadows turned down to 20 % and it looks great too
That is, without a doubt, the dumbest review I have ever read. The authors ranting leads me to believe that they are:
(...)
B - Technically incompetent. You can't get the game to install? Nowhere does he mention any sort of troubleshooting on his end other than trying to install it a few times and not having any luck.(...)
Actually the "reviewer" did not have enough space to install Vanguard (strike 1) so he went & bought an extern(!) harddrive (strike 2). My guess his harddrive is full of porn or something else that is vital to his job... Going ahead & posting a review when he didnt even play it (strike 3) is just plain stupid.
(Then you have the issue that he bungled up entering a cd-key in the correct place, something tells me its (unfortunately) not just SOE's fault. The line with "Firmware = PSP" is just jaw-dropping & un-forgivingly stupid for a PC-game reviewer)
Seen bad reviews like this but that was player-submitted ones on Gamespot (but even they play the games they review), makes you even appreciate IGN reviews.
Exactly why I said he probbaly just needed to defrag. He said he moved a bunch of stuff to the external drive. Great, but did you bother to defrag the drive after that, or did you just leave it all fragmented to hell?
I agree with you 100% that it seems more like a fan-submitted review than anything.
Again, don't get me wrong, I'm not a Vanboi. Vanguard is OK, but it's certainly not close to the best MMORPG out there. I still have hope for Heroe's Journey and Age of Conan.
Agent_X7 AKA J Star [/URL] Notice: The views expressed in this post are solely those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the views of MMORPG.com or its management.
And how to review a product you can't play? Well if you buy a car and it has no engine and you can't drive it, you can still review it and say I can't drive it because it has no engine so I am giving it x.
How does a MMO developer release a unfinished game and people still buy it? The review is a unfinished review of a unfinished game. Ironic isn't it? Vanguard like review of Vanguard.
Oh shut up already. I'm so sick of the stupid ass car analogies, be more original cause it's getting damn lame reading posts like this.
IF YOU CAN'T GET VG TO RUN ON YOUR COMP THEN GODDAMNIT LEARN HOW TO UPGRADE YOUR PC!
I tell ya. I am so shocked and awed by the amount of sheer stupidity I've been wittness to in the past couple of weeks that it's starting to depress me. Why do people seem to think that is the developers responcebility to ensure that a piece of software is able to run on older hardware? Why should they not be able to take advantage of the latest technology available to them? Why should I have to suffer with PS2 quality graphics. I wan't to play games that look as good as a PS# or 360; that's what I payed for. I didn't buy a console this year because my PC is capable of more then any of the consoles out. AND I DEMAND DEVELOPERS TO RELEASE SOFTWARE TAHT TAKES ADVANTAGE OF THE CRAP IN THIS BOX NEXT TO ME AND THE HELL WITH YOU IF YOU CAN'T RUN IT.
120-150 bucks is about what i would cost for a Gfx card that will run VG fine. I recomend the 1300 by ATI or the 7xxx by Nvidia. Either of those cards will do till you can jump to the 7950+ or the 1950+ in the future. If your running a comp with PC busses then you take that to the back yard and burn it; then go to the store and buy an emachine, some ram, and a vid card for your fastest and possible cheapest gameing rig. You'll need about 500 bills for that, or about the cost of a PS3 or 360 with a harddrive. Funny how that works isn't it.
*I am aware that some people are having trouble with cards like the 8800. Vista, 3gb ram, DX10 and an 8800=VG not ready yet. Buggy drives blah blah blah.
And I've had a bad day so my bad.
Anger issues? If the computer meets minimum requirements, IT SHOULD RUN THE GAME. DUH! And who established minimum requirements? Oh yeah, Sigil did. I guess it is their responsibility after all. Go figure.
Min requirements means you can insall and run the game. No min. requirements state that you will get 20fps. The min. may only get you 5, but it's still running and that's all it's got to do. Poor performance is poor performance and that's that. If anyone says they can't install the game on with just the minimum then theyre lying.
I have yet to see someone post that they couldn't run it AT ALL with the min. just a bunch of wining that the 5 year old vid card and 512mb of ram wont get over 5fps. No kidding.
It's not anger. It's annoyance.
SOFTWARE AND HARDWARE DRIVE EACH OTHER.
If you think that PC games shouldn't require upgrading then we wouldn't be playing PC games today. The industry would have died because no one would upgrade, no one would get better systems or produce hardware demanding games. We would be playing in DOS with atari graphics because we shouldn't have to upgrade.
UPGRADING IS A PART OF PC GAMING. Is and always was; will always be. If you could upgrade a console you would be doing that every couple of years instead of just buying an entire new system.
For less then buying a new console to get state of the art graphics you can upgrade your pc and get the same graphics. You can get them out of VG in fact. For a little more money you can make your PC run better and do more then todays consoles can. You think that's not affordable?
IF IT WASN'T VG IT WOULD HAVE BEEN ANOTHER GAME. Every couple of generations a game comes along and requires some upgrading; been that way for years.
Asus P5N32-E SLI Motherboard with Nvidia 680i Chipset E6600 Core 2 Duo CPU 4GB Kingston Ballistix 800Mhz DDR2 Memory Evga 8800GTX PCIe Video Card Soundblaster X-FI Gamer Extreme Fatal1ty Sound Card Western Digital Caviar 500 GB SATA II 3GB/S Hard Drive Both Windows XP 64 and Windows Vista 32bit This game does not run well in High Quality or Balanced Quality and it continually and consistently crashes every 30 minutes. This is a high end system, maybe not bleeding edgte, but certainly better than average. People are not complaining out of their asses just because they don't have a top notch system. If it meets minimum requirments, then Sigil has an obligation to make the game run well on those systems, let alone a high end one.
I have practically the same setup except instead of an asus i have an evga680i and corsair ram.
On balanced outside of towns i was hitting 100+fps and on the highest settings about 65-70fps.
Although i don't play anymore(cause its a snooze fest) im not too sure why all these people with good rigs are having such a hard time.
Well.
XP doesn't recognize more then 2gb. of RAM, and vista with the 8800 dx10 and all the drivers aren't quite ready for VG.
Something also tells me that running the 2 instances of windows, plus the drivers needed for each (can't imagine they take the same drivers) could be causing a problem.
But I guess that's sigils fault. Can't possibly be in the set up. Nope, couldn't be incompatable drivers somewhere. All sigil.
Asus P5N32-E SLI Motherboard with Nvidia 680i Chipset E6600 Core 2 Duo CPU 4GB Kingston Ballistix 800Mhz DDR2 Memory Evga 8800GTX PCIe Video Card Soundblaster X-FI Gamer Extreme Fatal1ty Sound Card Western Digital Caviar 500 GB SATA II 3GB/S Hard Drive Both Windows XP 64 and Windows Vista 32bit This game does not run well in High Quality or Balanced Quality and it continually and consistently crashes every 30 minutes. This is a high end system, maybe not bleeding edgte, but certainly better than average. People are not complaining out of their asses just because they don't have a top notch system. If it meets minimum requirments, then Sigil has an obligation to make the game run well on those systems, let alone a high end one.
I have practically the same setup except instead of an asus i have an evga680i and corsair ram.
On balanced outside of towns i was hitting 100+fps and on the highest settings about 65-70fps.
Although i don't play anymore(cause its a snooze fest) im not too sure why all these people with good rigs are having such a hard time.
Well.
XP doesn't recognize more then 2gb. of RAM, and vista with the 8800 dx10 and all the drivers aren't quite ready for VG.
Something also tells me that running the 2 instances of windows, plus the drivers needed for each (can't imagine they take the same drivers) could be causing a problem.
But I guess that's sigils fault. Can't possibly be in the set up. Nope, couldn't be incompatable drivers somewhere. All sigil.
Nothing like being snide when you don't know what you are talking about. It's called dual-booting, and it has nothing to do with system performance, since each version of Windows occupies it's own partition. The drivers are not compatible, which also doesn't matter, since you only run one set at a time, depending on which Windows version is up.
Vista also isn't using DX10 with Vanguard, since Vanguard is a DX9 game. DX10 is not backwards compatible with DX9, so therefore Vista uses it's own version of DX9 to run Vanguard.
Agent_X7 AKA J Star [/URL] Notice: The views expressed in this post are solely those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the views of MMORPG.com or its management.
Hehe, makes one wonder when people claim to be techies yet don't know the first thing about dual operating systems on seperate partitions. On top of that, you should also know that XP 64 bit is capable of recognizing much more than 4 GB of memory. I also did not say that the game ran horribly, just that the game doesn't run as well as it should for all the power I have under the hood. The constant crashing has been noted as a problem by Sigil and they say they are working on a fix. It seems to be primarily a Vanguard issue rather than operating system or drivers.
The point of the matter is that the game WAS and IS not ready for release and it completely boggles my mind that people are willing to defend such shoddy workmanship and are even willing to justify this kind of business practice. I don't care if Sigil was running out of money, that's not the consumer's problem, at least not till they get shafted wtih a crappy product. I am utterly amazed at the sheer number of enablers to be found in the MMORPG community. Do you really want developers to think we'll eat their shit and ask for more?
With PvE raiding, it has never been a question of being "good enough". I play games to have fun, not to be a simpering toady sitting through hour after hour of mind numbing boredom and fawning over a guild master in the hopes that he will condescend to reward me with shiny bits of loot. But in games where those people get the highest progression, anyone who doesn't do that will just be a moving target for them and I'll be damned if I'm going to pay money for the privilege. - Neanderthal
Since this thread (along with most others on this site) has been hijacked, back on topic:
This has been added to the website/"review:"
"Amended to the review (links all still work)
"Editor's Note: We are not in the habit of publishing reviews without finishing a game, however in this instance Sony sent us a review copy and we obviously were obliged to provide a review of our experience with the game. What follows is the story of one reviewer's experience with the game, and subsequently with Sony's tech support and PR. The review score should be viewed as such. Some players may not experience the same difficulties. Another reviewer who was able to get the game running is currently working on a full review and that will be published in due course."
You can't review a game properly if you've never even played it. The review has ZERO value. The reviewer "reviewed" a game he did NOT play.
What he SHOULD have done is called it an editorial and left the score off, or if he wanted to write an article blasting SOE for crappy CS then do so. Blasting a game he couldn't get to work is like reviewing a movie that you didn't watch.
This review was very unprofessional and you CANNOT accurately review a game without actually playing it. I can understand his anger and frustration, but I've never read a game review by a respectable organization where the writer personally lashed out at the game and company because of a failed install. That's when the writer's supposedly "unbiased" demeanor gets thrown out the window and just the fact that he gave the game a 20%, instead of a 0% like he should have given his GAMEPLAY experience, show's that he didn't take his job seriously.
What should he have done? Given the game a 0 or N/A, expressed his unsatisfactory reasons, and left his personal attacks out.
But what I do I know? *shrug* I'm just a bottom feeder consumer that has no valid opinion.
SOE's Customer Service does suck though. Sigil's however, I have no problems with on account of I can understand the amount of issues they need to respond to currently.
Editor's Note: We are not in the habit of publishing reviews without finishing a game, however in this instance Sony sent us a review copy and we obviously were obliged to provide a review of our experience with the game. What follows is the story of one reviewer's experience with the game, and subsequently with Sony's tech support and PR. The review score should be viewed as such. Some players may not experience the same difficulties. Another reviewer who was able to get the game running is currently working on a full review and that will be published in due course.
Comments
And again, the vanbois flame a review that doesnt give their precious escape from life a 100% or 5/5, no matter how justified the reviewer is.
Dance vanbois, dance! Your pattern has become more predictable than san diego weather.
"Freedom is just another name for nothing left to lose" - Janis Joplin
.jpg)
All games have problems with alll graphic cards. Sorry that vanguard couldn't live up to your impossible needs. The game works amazingly great on my 8800. I've seen ppl post that it works fine on there 6200. Maybe it does work on most graphics card.
Remember there are hundreds of thousand of ppl playing this game. Seeing a few hundred posts of gpu problems is meaningless.
And Blizzard staff will suffer from heart attacks,
Peoples playing other MMOs will go to the welfare.
And finally, peoples not enjoying Vanguard will go to Hell cause according to the holy Bible, Vanguard is to be cheerished!
- "If I understand you well, you are telling me until next time. " - Ren
"Freedom is just another name for nothing left to lose" - Janis Joplin
.jpg)
That really is Sony's thought process, they suck and as long as they get your money they don't care.
They will dictate all terms and change them as they see fit and theres nothing you can do about it.
I went and played EQ for a couple of months and then quit, it took me 4 moths to get them to stop charging my credit card.
they just would not take I quit seriously and trying to work with customer support was as bad as pulling out my own teeth with pliers.
Really really painful
I knew right when they said Sony was going to be backing them the game would not deliver on its promises but I did hope for the best.
Vanguard aside I never believe the "minimum" system requirements on the box. As a rule of thumb I alwyas look at "recommended" and still assume it'll run "okay" but not 100% with all bells and whistles. Why? Because in the case of other games I have met those requirements and couldn't play the game. In these cases, there are two, both were pretty good games by their own account but I had problems with each that made the game unplayable. They "started" but I wasn't going anywhere by any means.
So anyhow if you're going to pickup a game that everyone and their dog is saying has really nice graphics and is a MMO then why the heck would you believe the minimum req's? Does it suck that companies seem to be acting "not so upfront" with their requirements?but this is not something new.
At least for me anyways.
Though I am just cynical and jaded by nature perhaps from past MMO and other software experiences but seriously we have:
1) a game released 6 months too early.
2) a game with serious eye candy and a huge world that claims to be seemless.
And you think a 2.4 ghz and a 128M video is gonna cut it even if it "says so" on the box?
I am not telling anyone to buy a new PC or upgrade but do some reading and research into software before you buy it and don't believe everything the retailer/developer tells you. They are trying to sell games after all.
Do I agree with PC's that meet the min spec's not playing a game as per those spec's? Not at all but this is something I have come to expect from games now a days in general.
As for those with high end machines, well you just got fucked
Sorry but their subs are probably sub 100k or close to it.
I wasn't stating facts. I was trying to make a point they you've missed. Even if theres 50,000 ppl playing a few hundred posters moaning about poor performance doesn't mean much.
How about you stop trying to flame!
"Freedom is just another name for nothing left to lose" - Janis Joplin
.jpg)
Just so you know, here`s my setup:
6300 core 2 duo
2g DDR2 (667 i think)
X1300 AGP 512mo (read shit)
IDE 40go hard drive
It's not great, but i can live with it. I don't crash every 30 min like you stated so i guess there is something wrong with VG and you setup.
ROFL do you know how many hundreds (or thousands?) of 8800GTX cards were bought by folks upgrading for VG??? That would be a shame if it were true. My EVGA 8800GTX runs smoothly at 1920 x 1200, high quality. and very smoothly at balanced.
That guy above you listed a system too ahead of its time. 4GB ram is more problematic than 2GB. And that you have two operating systems, both 64 bit and on the same hard drive is not good. Your system is a clustered mess, I'm sorry to say. Get rid of Vista for now. Time to reformat your hard drives and install XP cleanly.
Luckily, i don't need you to like me to enjoy video games. -nariusseldon.
In F2P I think it's more a case of the game's trying to play the player's. -laserit
"Freedom is just another name for nothing left to lose" - Janis Joplin
.jpg)
I have practically the same setup except instead of an asus i have an evga680i and corsair ram.
On balanced outside of towns i was hitting 100+fps and on the highest settings about 65-70fps.
Although i don't play anymore(cause its a snooze fest) im not too sure why all these people with good rigs are having such a hard time.
"Freedom is just another name for nothing left to lose" - Janis Joplin
.jpg)
(Then you have the issue that he bungled up entering a cd-key in the correct place, something tells me its (unfortunately) not just SOE's fault. The line with "Firmware = PSP" is just jaw-dropping & un-forgivingly stupid for a PC-game reviewer)
Seen bad reviews like this but that was player-submitted ones on Gamespot (but even they play the games they review), makes you even appreciate IGN reviews.
He was responding, not flaming. If you took his remarks as flaming you must think everyone in the world flames you. How did he flame you in particular? He just stated how he didn't think the number you said was accurate. That's not a flame it is called "discussion".
It may not mean much to you the posts about poor performance. Trust me, for people who are deciding whether to try out the game right now, it most certainly does.
Pentium D 2.8
1 gig ddr2 ram
radion x1950 pro
winxp
Runs ok at high about 25/30fps I run it at balanced for the extra fps
(Then you have the issue that he bungled up entering a cd-key in the correct place, something tells me its (unfortunately) not just SOE's fault. The line with "Firmware = PSP" is just jaw-dropping & un-forgivingly stupid for a PC-game reviewer)
Seen bad reviews like this but that was player-submitted ones on Gamespot (but even they play the games they review), makes you even appreciate IGN reviews.
Exactly why I said he probbaly just needed to defrag. He said he moved a bunch of stuff to the external drive. Great, but did you bother to defrag the drive after that, or did you just leave it all fragmented to hell?
I agree with you 100% that it seems more like a fan-submitted review than anything.
Again, don't get me wrong, I'm not a Vanboi. Vanguard is OK, but it's certainly not close to the best MMORPG out there. I still have hope for Heroe's Journey and Age of Conan.
Agent_X7 AKA J Star
[/URL]
Notice: The views expressed in this post are solely those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the views of MMORPG.com or its management.
And how to review a product you can't play? Well if you buy a car and it has no engine and you can't drive it, you can still review it and say I can't drive it because it has no engine so I am giving it x.
How does a MMO developer release a unfinished game and people still buy it? The review is a unfinished review of a unfinished game. Ironic isn't it? Vanguard like review of Vanguard.
Oh shut up already. I'm so sick of the stupid ass car analogies, be more original cause it's getting damn lame reading posts like this.
IF YOU CAN'T GET VG TO RUN ON YOUR COMP THEN GODDAMNIT LEARN HOW TO UPGRADE YOUR PC!
I tell ya. I am so shocked and awed by the amount of sheer stupidity I've been wittness to in the past couple of weeks that it's starting to depress me. Why do people seem to think that is the developers responcebility to ensure that a piece of software is able to run on older hardware? Why should they not be able to take advantage of the latest technology available to them? Why should I have to suffer with PS2 quality graphics. I wan't to play games that look as good as a PS# or 360; that's what I payed for. I didn't buy a console this year because my PC is capable of more then any of the consoles out. AND I DEMAND DEVELOPERS TO RELEASE SOFTWARE TAHT TAKES ADVANTAGE OF THE CRAP IN THIS BOX NEXT TO ME AND THE HELL WITH YOU IF YOU CAN'T RUN IT.
120-150 bucks is about what i would cost for a Gfx card that will run VG fine. I recomend the 1300 by ATI or the 7xxx by Nvidia. Either of those cards will do till you can jump to the 7950+ or the 1950+ in the future. If your running a comp with PC busses then you take that to the back yard and burn it; then go to the store and buy an emachine, some ram, and a vid card for your fastest and possible cheapest gameing rig. You'll need about 500 bills for that, or about the cost of a PS3 or 360 with a harddrive. Funny how that works isn't it.
*I am aware that some people are having trouble with cards like the 8800. Vista, 3gb ram, DX10 and an 8800=VG not ready yet. Buggy drives blah blah blah.
And I've had a bad day so my bad.
Anger issues? If the computer meets minimum requirements, IT SHOULD RUN THE GAME. DUH! And who established minimum requirements? Oh yeah, Sigil did. I guess it is their responsibility after all. Go figure.
Min requirements means you can insall and run the game. No min. requirements state that you will get 20fps. The min. may only get you 5, but it's still running and that's all it's got to do. Poor performance is poor performance and that's that. If anyone says they can't install the game on with just the minimum then theyre lying.
I have yet to see someone post that they couldn't run it AT ALL with the min. just a bunch of wining that the 5 year old vid card and 512mb of ram wont get over 5fps. No kidding.
It's not anger. It's annoyance.
SOFTWARE AND HARDWARE DRIVE EACH OTHER.
If you think that PC games shouldn't require upgrading then we wouldn't be playing PC games today. The industry would have died because no one would upgrade, no one would get better systems or produce hardware demanding games. We would be playing in DOS with atari graphics because we shouldn't have to upgrade.
UPGRADING IS A PART OF PC GAMING. Is and always was; will always be. If you could upgrade a console you would be doing that every couple of years instead of just buying an entire new system.
For less then buying a new console to get state of the art graphics you can upgrade your pc and get the same graphics. You can get them out of VG in fact. For a little more money you can make your PC run better and do more then todays consoles can. You think that's not affordable?
IF IT WASN'T VG IT WOULD HAVE BEEN ANOTHER GAME. Every couple of generations a game comes along and requires some upgrading; been that way for years.
Get over it. It's a part of owning a PC.
I have practically the same setup except instead of an asus i have an evga680i and corsair ram.
On balanced outside of towns i was hitting 100+fps and on the highest settings about 65-70fps.
Although i don't play anymore(cause its a snooze fest) im not too sure why all these people with good rigs are having such a hard time.
Well.
XP doesn't recognize more then 2gb. of RAM, and vista with the 8800 dx10 and all the drivers aren't quite ready for VG.
Something also tells me that running the 2 instances of windows, plus the drivers needed for each (can't imagine they take the same drivers) could be causing a problem.
But I guess that's sigils fault. Can't possibly be in the set up. Nope, couldn't be incompatable drivers somewhere. All sigil.
I have practically the same setup except instead of an asus i have an evga680i and corsair ram.
On balanced outside of towns i was hitting 100+fps and on the highest settings about 65-70fps.
Although i don't play anymore(cause its a snooze fest) im not too sure why all these people with good rigs are having such a hard time.
Well.
XP doesn't recognize more then 2gb. of RAM, and vista with the 8800 dx10 and all the drivers aren't quite ready for VG.
Something also tells me that running the 2 instances of windows, plus the drivers needed for each (can't imagine they take the same drivers) could be causing a problem.
But I guess that's sigils fault. Can't possibly be in the set up. Nope, couldn't be incompatable drivers somewhere. All sigil.
Nothing like being snide when you don't know what you are talking about. It's called dual-booting, and it has nothing to do with system performance, since each version of Windows occupies it's own partition. The drivers are not compatible, which also doesn't matter, since you only run one set at a time, depending on which Windows version is up.
Vista also isn't using DX10 with Vanguard, since Vanguard is a DX9 game. DX10 is not backwards compatible with DX9, so therefore Vista uses it's own version of DX9 to run Vanguard.
Agent_X7 AKA J Star
[/URL]
Notice: The views expressed in this post are solely those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the views of MMORPG.com or its management.
Hehe, makes one wonder when people claim to be techies yet don't know the first thing about dual operating systems on seperate partitions. On top of that, you should also know that XP 64 bit is capable of recognizing much more than 4 GB of memory. I also did not say that the game ran horribly, just that the game doesn't run as well as it should for all the power I have under the hood. The constant crashing has been noted as a problem by Sigil and they say they are working on a fix. It seems to be primarily a Vanguard issue rather than operating system or drivers.
The point of the matter is that the game WAS and IS not ready for release and it completely boggles my mind that people are willing to defend such shoddy workmanship and are even willing to justify this kind of business practice. I don't care if Sigil was running out of money, that's not the consumer's problem, at least not till they get shafted wtih a crappy product. I am utterly amazed at the sheer number of enablers to be found in the MMORPG community. Do you really want developers to think we'll eat their shit and ask for more?
With PvE raiding, it has never been a question of being "good enough". I play games to have fun, not to be a simpering toady sitting through hour after hour of mind numbing boredom and fawning over a guild master in the hopes that he will condescend to reward me with shiny bits of loot. But in games where those people get the highest progression, anyone who doesn't do that will just be a moving target for them and I'll be damned if I'm going to pay money for the privilege. - Neanderthal
Since this thread (along with most others on this site) has been hijacked, back on topic:
This has been added to the website/"review:"
"Amended to the review (links all still work)
"Editor's Note: We are not in the habit of publishing reviews without finishing a game, however in this instance Sony sent us a review copy and we obviously were obliged to provide a review of our experience with the game. What follows is the story of one reviewer's experience with the game, and subsequently with Sony's tech support and PR. The review score should be viewed as such. Some players may not experience the same difficulties. Another reviewer who was able to get the game running is currently working on a full review and that will be published in due course."
You can't review a game properly if you've never even played it. The review has ZERO value. The reviewer "reviewed" a game he did NOT play.
What he SHOULD have done is called it an editorial and left the score off, or if he wanted to write an article blasting SOE for crappy CS then do so. Blasting a game he couldn't get to work is like reviewing a movie that you didn't watch.
This review was very unprofessional and you CANNOT accurately review a game without actually playing it. I can understand his anger and frustration, but I've never read a game review by a respectable organization where the writer personally lashed out at the game and company because of a failed install. That's when the writer's supposedly "unbiased" demeanor gets thrown out the window and just the fact that he gave the game a 20%, instead of a 0% like he should have given his GAMEPLAY experience, show's that he didn't take his job seriously.
What should he have done? Given the game a 0 or N/A, expressed his unsatisfactory reasons, and left his personal attacks out.
But what I do I know? *shrug* I'm just a bottom feeder consumer that has no valid opinion.
SOE's Customer Service does suck though. Sigil's however, I have no problems with on account of I can understand the amount of issues they need to respond to currently.
Editor's Note: We are not in the habit of publishing reviews without finishing a game, however in this instance Sony sent us a review copy and we obviously were obliged to provide a review of our experience with the game. What follows is the story of one reviewer's experience with the game, and subsequently with Sony's tech support and PR. The review score should be viewed as such. Some players may not experience the same difficulties. Another reviewer who was able to get the game running is currently working on a full review and that will be published in due course.