GameRevolution Reviews Vanguard C+

Stoneysilenc

http://www.game-revolution.com/review/pc/vanguard

Deathstiny

good review. Pretty much sums up my experience with the game.

Stoneysilenc

Originally posted by parrotpholk

He doesnt even seem to know that the game is made by Sigil and not SOE so his review is automatically shit canned. Also looks more like he read the back of the box and just filled in some blanks. Bad review and pointless.

His review came across to me as he was kinda immature, and a WoW PvP freak type.  Lots of people see SOE and that's as far as they look.  People blame SOE for LucastArts decision to butcher SWG, now they blame SOE for Vanguard.  Nothing new.

Salvatoris

I thought it was a fair review.  C+ is higher than I would have given it, and I think most of what he had to say about it was pretty accurate.  He could have been a little more clear on the SOE involvement in the game, but there were a few other parts of his review that echoed what I would have to say about the game...

"Vanguard has been in development for five years now, but it doesn’t really show. Sure, there’s a boatload of quests in a massive world, but much of the game was still buggy as of release day. MMOs are obviously works in progress, as they should be, but that’s no excuse not to ship solid code to begin with. Furthermore, there are no community forums aside from a tech support thread crammed with player issues, so expect some bumps in the road."

I think this one sums it up pretty good...

...you could give Vanguard a shot, but don’t cry to us when you’re stuck in a tree fighting an invisible wolf, naked, with nothing but a deck of talking cards.

Fargol

Originally posted by parrotpholk

He doesnt even seem to know that the game is made by Sigil and not SOE so his review is automatically shit canned. Also looks more like he read the back of the box and just filled in some blanks. Bad review and pointless.

Are you sure you're not sh!t canning it because he didn't give it an A+?



The review is pretty much exactly what I think of the game.

Deathstrike2

Originally posted by parrotpholk

He doesnt even seem to know that the game is made by Sigil and not SOE so his review is automatically shit canned. Also looks more like he read the back of the box and just filled in some blanks. Bad review and pointless.

LMAO!  Is this becoming the standard response for all reviews? 

Viktaal

Bravo, someone had the balls to give an honest reveiw.



 It  looks like SoE/Sigil forgot to include them in the "bought and paid for" list. Oh well, they can't buy them all I guess.

monoth

 

The newest patched fixed the Invisable Mobs... And i'm not sure what he's talking about being stuck in a tree...  His review was right about some things but his review came off as being jaded for some reason...   I would say he went into reviewing this game with a grudge against it.

Originally posted by Salvatoris


I thought it was a fair review.  C+ is higher than I would have given it, and I think most of what he had to say about it was pretty accurate.  He could have been a little more clear on the SOE involvement in the game, but there were a few other parts of his review that echoed what I would have to say about the game...
"Vanguard has been in development for five years now, but it doesn’t really show. Sure, there’s a boatload of quests in a massive world, but much of the game was still buggy as of release day. MMOs are obviously works in progress, as they should be, but that’s no excuse not to ship solid code to begin with. Furthermore, there are no community forums aside from a tech support thread crammed with player issues, so expect some bumps in the road."
I think this one sums it up pretty good...
...you could give Vanguard a shot, but don’t cry to us when you’re stuck in a tree fighting an invisible wolf, naked, with nothing but a deck of talking cards.

random11

Alright I read it. And just to put rumors to rest, the guy KNOWS that Sigil developed it, and SOE only publishes it. All he said, is that when SOE is involved, nothing is granted.

takaris7

Originally posted by Viktaal

Bravo, someone had the balls to give an honest reveiw.



 It  looks like SoE/Sigil forgot to include them in the "bought and paid for" list. Oh well, they can't buy them all I guess.

An honest review is something you agree with right? That is what makes it honest?

Rejor

I think the review does show what the game is currently. However, in a way I disagree with this review. Sure, it's buggy, but Sigil also just patched the game that addressed the invisible monster bug, as well as fixed a bunch of quests and other things.

For the way the game currently is, okay fine. The review is O.K. Nothing more, nothing less.

One thing I want to state is the fact that all MMOs are buggy at launch. SWG didn't even have a launch on launch date. WoW was buggy, UO was buggy... pretty much every MMO out there was buggy at launch. Guild Wars? Probably the only game that didn't have as many bugs as most others have.

I do think that Sigil really needs to tweak it's graphical stuff though. They seem to have started fixing the memory leaks with this patch at least I did notice a bit of improvement.

Viktaal

Originally posted by takaris7

Originally posted by Viktaal

Bravo, someone had the balls to give an honest reveiw.



 It  looks like SoE/Sigil forgot to include them in the "bought and paid for" list. Oh well, they can't buy them all I guess.

An honest review is something you agree with right? That is what makes it honest? umm, no. An honest review is one that will tell a consumer the good, the bad and the ugly side of a game. A review that holds no punches and will tell the flaws along with the good. I wouldn't consider a review honest when they sing all praises and fail to mention OBVIOUS flaws etc. For example, some reveiws gave VG a 9. Well, to me that was bought and paid for because NOWHERE did they mention any of the glaring flaws. To me, that is misleading a consumer for monetary gains , get my drift oh wise one?

Lukain

Originally posted by parrotpholk

He doesnt even seem to know that the game is made by Sigil and not SOE so his review is automatically shit canned. Also looks more like he read the back of the box and just filled in some blanks. Bad review and pointless.

 

It does state at the top that SEO are the Publishers & Sigil the Developers.. & yes he does mention SWG at the end .. SOE is alot more involved then we are lead to believe ..

also I was wondering where he got his player numbers

PLAYERS

:

1- 32767

Invidious

LOL some of you people just slay me. A good review? His handling of Diplomacy is to essentially say that it isn't worth reviewing! "

" The process of learning what to do with the four color gauges, the little purple disk, and the word-bubble numbers is so painful and so repetitive, I’m just going to tell you it’s lame so we can get back to the fights."

You're going to learn what about diplomacy from this statement? Other than the fact that he didn't like it of course. Understand that the point of a review isn't to merely say "I liked this. I didn't like that." You're supposed to be informing!

Reviews of this type are no better than those that pop up on myriad message boards from the random gamer. He just has a memorable domain to post his "reviews" exclusively.

Invidious

Originally posted by Viktaal

Originally posted by takaris7

Originally posted by Viktaal

Bravo, someone had the balls to give an honest reveiw.



 It  looks like SoE/Sigil forgot to include them in the "bought and paid for" list. Oh well, they can't buy them all I guess.

An honest review is something you agree with right? That is what makes it honest? umm, no. An honest review is one that will tell a consumer the good, the bad and the ugly side of a game. A review that holds no punches and will tell the flaws along with the good. I wouldn't consider a review honest when they sing all praises and fail to mention OBVIOUS flaws etc. For example, some reveiws gave VG a 9. Well, to me that was bought and paid for because NOWHERE did they mention any of the glaring flaws. To me, that is misleading a consumer for monetary gains , get my drift oh wise one?

Anyone can "be honest." Here's my review of Eve Online: It sucks. Now that's honesty and I didn't sugarcoat it. Told you exactly what I think. Only, what have you learned? A legitimate review is supposed to inform. This review does not. This is merely a lazy dolt who dismisses one whole sphere by telling you that because he didn't like it he's not going to review it. Oh, and what did he have to say abou the third sphere, crafting? NOTHING aside from saying that you get crafting experience via crafting (useful nugget!).

Invidious

Originally posted by Lukain

Originally posted by parrotpholk

He doesnt even seem to know that the game is made by Sigil and not SOE so his review is automatically shit canned. Also looks more like he read the back of the box and just filled in some blanks. Bad review and pointless.

 

It does state at the top that SEO are the Publishers & Sigil the Developers.. & yes he does mention SWG at the end .. SOE is alot more involved then we are lead to believe ..

also I was wondering where he got his player numbers

PLAYERS

:

1- 32767

Out of his ass, which might be the best source of information he has.

Grunch

Wow, great review. He pretty much nailed it.

 

Invidious your acting like a ravenous fanbio.

Invidious

Originally posted by Grunch

Wow, great review. He pretty much nailed it.

 

Yeah I found his review of crafting especially insightful. Oh wait, he didn't review the crafting sphere. If I'm into crafting and want to know something about how VG handles it, I'm gonna love this thing. GREAT REVIEW.

Invidious

Originally posted by Deathstrike2

Originally posted by parrotpholk

He doesnt even seem to know that the game is made by Sigil and not SOE so his review is automatically shit canned. Also looks more like he read the back of the box and just filled in some blanks. Bad review and pointless.

LMAO!  Is this becoming the standard response for all reviews? 

Maybe we should save it for those done by people who 1) install the game and 2) tell us something about all three spheres rather than ignoring them?

Grunch

Well lets say you were looking at a house to buy and you want to move into it the same day. You notice it has an ok bathroom (crafting) and the rest of the house hasnt been built yet. Would you really give a shit if the bathroom is nice?

Unknown

The guy is a total idiot.

I guess he thinks that Sigil made SWG:

Vanguard: Saga of Heroes might be a far better game in a few months time, but coming from the company that questionably destroyed one of its most popular MMOs (Star Wars Galaxies), nothing is guaranteed.

Invidious

Originally posted by Grunch

Well lets say you were looking at a house to buy and you want to move into it the same day. You notice it has an ok bathroom (crafting) and the rest of the house hasnt been built yet. Would you really give a shit if the bathroom is nice?

I wasn't aware that adventuring hadn't "been built." Really? They haven't put it in yet? Wow. Good to know. Yeah, that's the ticket guys. Crafting and diplomacy shouldn't be reviewed in a review if the reviewer isn't satisfied with adventuring. Yay!

BTW, there are people who spend more than half their time in these games crafting i.e. they live in bathrooms. How does your dumbfuck logic construct another beautiful analogy for the toilet dwellers?

Grunch

My "dumbfuck logic" says I will not pay $15 a month to play a game that should still be in beta.

OBK1

Grunch, the last patch fixed a lot of the remaining bugs, the game is now pretty stable. Sure bugs left but not more than in any other new MMO. Trolls trolls trolls, you love this board don't you? Anyone who has ever read a real review takes this bullshit for what it is. If you just say diplomacy is lame and then nothing else then you can't expect to be taken seriously.

If you want a decent and pretty fair review go read the one Gamespot did.

DMEnoc

Well the reviewer didn't play past launch day, so that pretty much sums up the review for me. He wrote a review on his BETA experience (and yes you can tell if only by the "as of release day" statement). Kinda says a lot about how honest of a review it was.

Also I loved how one of the con's is a "lame diplomacy system". What is he comparing it to that is so great? (BTW I'm not a diplomacy fan, I find it rather irritating)

Torak

Originally posted by Viktaal

Bravo, someone had the balls to give an honest reveiw.



 It  looks like SoE/Sigil forgot to include them in the "bought and paid for" list. Oh well, they can't buy them all I guess.

What are you talking about? This game is getting its arse kicked in reviews. Every one of them has bonked this game for releasing to early and having to many technical issues.

http://www.gamespot.com/pc/rpg/vanguard/review.html?mode=web&om_act=convert&om_clk=stats

Shoulda stayed in beta and finished it.