To balance it up a little, there's also a "Why does everyone hate WoW?" thread on the Worlds of Warcraft forums. Which says more about some of the people who post here, than it does about the games. So to answer your question it seems that any game can inspire "venom" these days if its not to someone's taste.
i hear a lot of people talking about being rightious haters. "we hate because we once loved" or "we hate cause it makes them try harder" think what you want of yourself. but you know a lot of the "THIS GAME BLOWS MY BALLS I R NOT MAX LEVEL WOW IS SO MUCH BETTER LOLZX" makes up for most of the hating comments. what i'd really like to know is what exactly are people thinking of in a 3rd generation MMO?
I'd like to reply to this.
1) Combat
I'd like advances in the combat system. Counters, saves, they're just dumbed down versions of what players have done in the past. Now, instead of timing your skills properly based on the mob's movement, you have an "easy button" that tells you what to use and when to use it. I'm tired of timed swings, fixed delays, and non-target based combat. How can a 3rd gen improve this? Adopt a targeting system similar to the Fallout series. Swing at an enemy's eyes, and you blind them. Break the enemy's arms, and they're unable to use certain skills, etc etc. Give enemies weak points similar to Phantasy Star Universe. These are all adaptations that need to be in the so called "3rd generation" of MMORPG's. They've existed on the single player front for years, and there's no excuse for the laziness and lack of innovation from modern MMO developers.
2) Economies
I'd like to see more player-run, "efficient" economies. Limited resources for limited crafted goods. Territories yielding said resources, which could contribute to factional warfare in a bi-weekly/monthly manner. Boycotts, trade routes, caravans, smugglers, black markets. Complex? Yes. This is a must for some serious advancement in the genre.
3) Races
I've said it in a debate before, but I want new races. I'm sick and tired of Tolkien, and having 5-20 humanoid races which play exactly the same, aside from minor cosmetic differences and skins.
4)The World
I grow weary of "dead" worlds. What I'd REALLY love to see in MMORPG's is actual dev involvement. Have them host events where they raid towns as a giant boss monster. Create some random, unplanned, unexpected festival for the hell of it. Semi-intelligent creatures, that don't wander mindlessly in 5-7 meter circles for hours on end.
That's off the top of my head. That's what I would consider advancement to a new generation of MMORPG's. Find me a dev team who wants to make my game, and I'll show you all pure gaming gold.
This is also why I think so many dislike the game. McQuaid ran his damned mouth about creating this epic gaming experience, and he ended up producing a re-hash of Everquest. There's literally nothing about it that screams "play me" in my opinion, but with all the hype and promises made, along with the mind-numbingly weak "vision", the bar was set high. When you hear about the first title from the "3rd generation", and you see Vanguard, well, you're left with an empty, disappointed feeling, as well as little expectations for the rest of the titles coming out this year.
That, in my opinion, is why this game inspires such venom. It's one thing to fall short of folk's expectations, it's another to crush their hopes for other titles that are in the same category.
Vanguard inspires venom because of SOE's involvement. People will swear up and down about how they have played it and it's uninspired blah blah blah... B.S. it's because tons of people hate SOE for what they did to SWG (and whatever other game they pick) and they can't get over it.
And saying Vanguard is a rehash of EQ is just showing how truly little you know about the game itself. You don't like the game, we get it. Your opinion is worth nothing more than any other account on this site. For a staff writer you sure do have a bug up your rug for this game.
So I don't hate SOE, but I do have tons of complaints about Vanguard. Never played EQ, so can't call Vanguard a rehash. It's definitely first-gen in a lot of ways though.
How do you know it's first gen? You never played EQ.
Have you ever played a MMO on day 1 or even beta? EQ was suddenly the only first-gen MMO?
I played Ultima Online; not day one.
Dark Age of Camelot I beta'd and played day one, Asheron's Call, City of Heroes, so on and so on; your typical beta jumper and first-free month junkie in the second-gen.
But as for the 'ways' Vanguard is first-gen in a lot of aspects. Dark Age of Camelot for example, it launched with better animations; character movement and spell effects than Vanguard. So if Vanguard isn't up to par with the second-gen, I call that particular aspect first-gen.
Should I go further? Back in 1997, Origin figured out that if your character got hit with a sword, he should react through animations accordingly. I was wrong, some aspects of Vanguard aren't even first-gen if one was to get nitpicky.
To balance it up a little, there's also a "Why does everyone hate WoW?" thread on the Worlds of Warcraft forums. Which says more about some of the people who post here, than it does about the games. So to answer your question it seems that any game can inspire "venom" these days if its not to someone's taste.
Not only is there one now, but a new one pops up about once a month. It is true that it does say something about the posters on this site and MMOs in general. I have a rather low view of the general rationality of the whole thing. It is very much like sports teams. The social aspect of the whole thing makes it all about my team versus your team, us against them. It makes me sad.
Yet some games and their communities evoke more venom than others. And I do not think it can be denied that Vanguard has had a lot of trash talking from various Vanbois. "Go back to WoW" and "This game is not for you" and all the stuff about how other games are easy mode. It provokes people in an otherwise already highly charged and adversarial environment. Its dismissive and arrogant and unfounded. Everyone likes to see elisits dragged down, especially other elitists.
i hear a lot of people talking about being rightious haters. "we hate because we once loved" or "we hate cause it makes them try harder" think what you want of yourself. but you know a lot of the "THIS GAME BLOWS MY BALLS I R NOT MAX LEVEL WOW IS SO MUCH BETTER LOLZX" makes up for most of the hating comments. what i'd really like to know is what exactly are people thinking of in a 3rd generation MMO?
I'd like to reply to this.
1) Combat
I'd like advances in the combat system. Counters, saves, they're just dumbed down versions of what players have done in the past. Now, instead of timing your skills properly based on the mob's movement, you have an "easy button" that tells you what to use and when to use it. I'm tired of timed swings, fixed delays, and non-target based combat. How can a 3rd gen improve this? Adopt a targeting system similar to the Fallout series. Swing at an enemy's eyes, and you blind them. Break the enemy's arms, and they're unable to use certain skills, etc etc. Give enemies weak points similar to Phantasy Star Universe. These are all adaptations that need to be in the so called "3rd generation" of MMORPG's. They've existed on the single player front for years, and there's no excuse for the laziness and lack of innovation from modern MMO developers.
2) Economies
I'd like to see more player-run, "efficient" economies. Limited resources for limited crafted goods. Territories yielding said resources, which could contribute to factional warfare in a bi-weekly/monthly manner. Boycotts, trade routes, caravans, smugglers, black markets. Complex? Yes. This is a must for some serious advancement in the genre.
3) Races
I've said it in a debate before, but I want new races. I'm sick and tired of Tolkien, and having 5-20 humanoid races which play exactly the same, aside from minor cosmetic differences and skins.
4)The World
I grow weary of "dead" worlds. What I'd REALLY love to see in MMORPG's is actual dev involvement. Have them host events where they raid towns as a giant boss monster. Create some random, unplanned, unexpected festival for the hell of it. Semi-intelligent creatures, that don't wander mindlessly in 5-7 meter circles for hours on end.
That's off the top of my head. That's what I would consider advancement to a new generation of MMORPG's. Find me a dev team who wants to make my game, and I'll show you all pure gaming gold.
This is also why I think so many dislike the game. McQuaid ran his damned mouth about creating this epic gaming experience, and he ended up producing a re-hash of Everquest. There's literally nothing about it that screams "play me" in my opinion, but with all the hype and promises made, along with the mind-numbingly weak "vision", the bar was set high. When you hear about the first title from the "3rd generation", and you see Vanguard, well, you're left with an empty, disappointed feeling, as well as little expectations for the rest of the titles coming out this year.
That, in my opinion, is why this game inspires such venom. It's one thing to fall short of folk's expectations, it's another to crush their hopes for other titles that are in the same category.
Vanguard inspires venom because of SOE's involvement. People will swear up and down about how they have played it and it's uninspired blah blah blah... B.S. it's because tons of people hate SOE for what they did to SWG (and whatever other game they pick) and they can't get over it.
And saying Vanguard is a rehash of EQ is just showing how truly little you know about the game itself. You don't like the game, we get it. Your opinion is worth nothing more than any other account on this site. For a staff writer you sure do have a bug up your rug for this game.
So I don't hate SOE, but I do have tons of complaints about Vanguard. Never played EQ, so can't call Vanguard a rehash. It's definitely first-gen in a lot of ways though.
How do you know it's first gen? You never played EQ.
Have you ever played a MMO on day 1 or even beta? EQ was suddenly the only first-gen MMO?
I played Ultima Online; not day one.
Dark Age of Camelot I beta'd and played day one, Asheron's Call, City of Heroes, so on and so on; your typical beta jumper and first-free month junkie in the second-gen.
But as for the 'ways' Vanguard is first-gen in a lot of aspects. Dark Age of Camelot for example, it launched with better animations; character movement and spell effects than Vanguard. So if Vanguard isn't up to par with the second-gen, I call that particular aspect first-gen.
Should I go further? Back in 1997, Origin figured out that if your character got hit with a sword, he should react through animations accordingly. I was wrong, some aspects of Vanguard aren't even first-gen if one was to get nitpicky. Sorry if i used EQ as an example.
The real 1st gen MMOs are UO and EQ (should i put Merridian in there?). All the others are 2nd gen. Including VG.
No 3rd gen MMOs exist and the upcomming (LOTRO, AoC, WAR) ones aren't going to be 3rd gen either.
As for your last point about UO. Sure, but they forgot the fact that you could still hit even when reacting from a sword hit.
That's my favorite thing about this game's community.
I LOVE nothing more than being told why I hate a game. It's like...
Vanguard critic: I don't like the game because it's buggy.
Vanguard fan: Hey, the hell with the reasons you've listed as to why you like/dislike a game, not only are you wrong, but I know better.
That's the type of arrogance I've come to expect when I discuss this game.
Some facts about me:
- Yes I played SWG, and for a little while (7 months, tops)
- Yes, I hated the NGE and the CU equally
- Yes, I hated what SOE did to the game, but really, I hate Lucas Arts, and not SOE
- I am NOT an SOE anti-fan, I actually enjoyed a game which many hated: Planetside
- My first MMO was UO, and though I hated it, I still started with it.
It's really awesome to be condescended when I wasn't even flaming the game. Hell, what I did was answer the question of MY expectations for a 3rd gen game. It wasn't really up for debate...that's the criteria I've laid down for the evolution of the genre, period.
I dislike the game because it's over-rated and has the most ravenous fans I've seen since the days of Fallout 2.
I don't care, not one bit, that SOE is involved. Sorry.
Waiting for something fresh to arrive on the MMO scene...
That's my favorite thing about this game's community.
I LOVE nothing more than being told why I hate a game. It's like...
Vanguard critic: I don't like the game because it's buggy.
Vanguard fan: Hey, the hell with the reasons you've listed as to why you like/dislike a game, not only are you wrong, but I know better.
That's the type of arrogance I've come to expect when I discuss this game.
Some facts about me:
- Yes I played SWG, and for a little while (7 months, tops)
- Yes, I hated the NGE and the CU equally
- Yes, I hated what SOE did to the game, but really, I hate Lucas Arts, and not SOE
- I am NOT an SOE anti-fan, I actually enjoyed a game which many hated: Planetside
- My first MMO was UO, and though I hated it, I still started with it.
It's really awesome to be condescended when I wasn't even flaming the game. Hell, what I did was answer the question of MY expectations for a 3rd gen game. It wasn't really up for debate...that's the criteria I've laid down for the evolution of the genre, period.
I dislike the game because it's over-rated and has the most ravenous fans I've seen since the days of Fallout 2.
I don't care, not one bit, that SOE is involved. Sorry.
You started SWG when? I think it's release was WORST then VG. Still, people think (i think too) that it was the best. The best area IMO, was before the holocron stupidity. But even when you started, SWG was a bug heaven. SWG was also over hyped. Remember that Player city, space and mounts/speeders where supposed to make it to release (read hype) and it did not.
Microsoft was smart to unload when they did. I too had high hopes for the game, have played it and am terribly disappointed. yes I went back to WOW until VG gets its act together and/or Tabula Rasa is released. /shrug that's how the cookie crumbles I guess. MMO's are products/services, I think many people lose sight of that. No way one would buy a defective, unfinished car without demanding their money back from the manufacturer yet they are fine doing it with an MMO. I think its desperation...many people were starving for this type of MMO experience and VG is the closest a game has come to a challenging, drawn out gaming experience in years. Good luck and I truly hope that VG fulfills its highest vision of itself. but as a consumer buying a service, it simply doesnt cut it in the current state.
I think everyone here hit the nails on the head already about why the game inspires so much hate/hating/haters so I wont regurgitate it. I will say that to me VG was going to be "THE GAME to end all games" and am terribly disappointed in what I see as a buggy, unfinished game, that lacks imagination. Thats not hate, just the word of this small consumer and MMO affecionado.
Cymdai on your criteria VG and nothing else coming out in the near future is remotely 3rd gen I'd certianly agree there. In terms of advances or depth, UO still puts most games to shame, why can't I group with a friend who's just started playing even if I have been playing three years, the level system versus skillsbase has always been a step back. Plus where is the housing and your own npc vendors and quality of PvP and having your friends get on your boat and drive them around, or come visit your house and kick back. Where's the treasure hunting or taming of animals. Why can't you make your own class up from the skills you choose, rather than be perma concreted into one playstyle forever unless you reroll, etc etc Vanguard is actually a step back in the right direction on alot of those points, we'll have to wait and see how fully it's realised.
I would pick apart your point 4) the world though, are you prepared to actually pay the fees for a live team large enough to devote events to you run by humans, would you pay a 50k a year sub to pay the wages? Either they have to invent AI to accomplish GM controlled events, or the playerbase has to do it for themselves (NWN persistant worlds built run and administrated by their own fans is the only real example of this).
i hear a lot of people talking about being rightious haters. "we hate because we once loved" or "we hate cause it makes them try harder" think what you want of yourself. but you know a lot of the "THIS GAME BLOWS MY BALLS I R NOT MAX LEVEL WOW IS SO MUCH BETTER LOLZX" makes up for most of the hating comments. what i'd really like to know is what exactly are people thinking of in a 3rd generation MMO?
I'd like to reply to this.
1) Combat
I'd like advances in the combat system. Counters, saves, they're just dumbed down versions of what players have done in the past. Now, instead of timing your skills properly based on the mob's movement, you have an "easy button" that tells you what to use and when to use it. I'm tired of timed swings, fixed delays, and non-target based combat. How can a 3rd gen improve this? Adopt a targeting system similar to the Fallout series. Swing at an enemy's eyes, and you blind them. Break the enemy's arms, and they're unable to use certain skills, etc etc. Give enemies weak points similar to Phantasy Star Universe. These are all adaptations that need to be in the so called "3rd generation" of MMORPG's. They've existed on the single player front for years, and there's no excuse for the laziness and lack of innovation from modern MMO developers.
2) Economies
I'd like to see more player-run, "efficient" economies. Limited resources for limited crafted goods. Territories yielding said resources, which could contribute to factional warfare in a bi-weekly/monthly manner. Boycotts, trade routes, caravans, smugglers, black markets. Complex? Yes. This is a must for some serious advancement in the genre.
3) Races
I've said it in a debate before, but I want new races. I'm sick and tired of Tolkien, and having 5-20 humanoid races which play exactly the same, aside from minor cosmetic differences and skins.
4)The World
I grow weary of "dead" worlds. What I'd REALLY love to see in MMORPG's is actual dev involvement. Have them host events where they raid towns as a giant boss monster. Create some random, unplanned, unexpected festival for the hell of it. Semi-intelligent creatures, that don't wander mindlessly in 5-7 meter circles for hours on end.
That's off the top of my head. That's what I would consider advancement to a new generation of MMORPG's. Find me a dev team who wants to make my game, and I'll show you all pure gaming gold.
This is also why I think so many dislike the game. McQuaid ran his damned mouth about creating this epic gaming experience, and he ended up producing a re-hash of Everquest. There's literally nothing about it that screams "play me" in my opinion, but with all the hype and promises made, along with the mind-numbingly weak "vision", the bar was set high. When you hear about the first title from the "3rd generation", and you see Vanguard, well, you're left with an empty, disappointed feeling, as well as little expectations for the rest of the titles coming out this year.
That, in my opinion, is why this game inspires such venom. It's one thing to fall short of folk's expectations, it's another to crush their hopes for other titles that are in the same category.
Vanguard inspires venom because of SOE's involvement. People will swear up and down about how they have played it and it's uninspired blah blah blah... B.S. it's because tons of people hate SOE for what they did to SWG (and whatever other game they pick) and they can't get over it.
And saying Vanguard is a rehash of EQ is just showing how truly little you know about the game itself. You don't like the game, we get it. Your opinion is worth nothing more than any other account on this site. For a staff writer you sure do have a bug up your rug for this game.
So I don't hate SOE, but I do have tons of complaints about Vanguard. Never played EQ, so can't call Vanguard a rehash. It's definitely first-gen in a lot of ways though.
How do you know it's first gen? You never played EQ.
Have you ever played a MMO on day 1 or even beta? EQ was suddenly the only first-gen MMO?
I played Ultima Online; not day one.
Dark Age of Camelot I beta'd and played day one, Asheron's Call, City of Heroes, so on and so on; your typical beta jumper and first-free month junkie in the second-gen.
But as for the 'ways' Vanguard is first-gen in a lot of aspects. Dark Age of Camelot for example, it launched with better animations; character movement and spell effects than Vanguard. So if Vanguard isn't up to par with the second-gen, I call that particular aspect first-gen.
Should I go further? Back in 1997, Origin figured out that if your character got hit with a sword, he should react through animations accordingly. I was wrong, some aspects of Vanguard aren't even first-gen if one was to get nitpicky. Sorry if i used EQ as an example.
The real 1st gen MMOs are UO and EQ (should i put Merridian in there?). All the others are 2nd gen. Including VG.
No 3rd gen MMOs exist and the upcomming (LOTRO, AoC, WAR) ones aren't going to be 3rd gen either.
As for your last point about UO. Sure, but they forgot the fact that you could still hit even when reacting from a sword hit. Yes they will.
Just because Vanguard failed to be third-gen, doesn't mean others this year will, as convenient it'd be as always if Vanguard's shortcomings were industry-wide shortcomings; no different than Vanguard's launch being any worse than WoW's years back eh?
People want it to fail cause they want the currently prevailing concept of MMOs to fail, so hopefully a game emerges that caters to their needs specifically. Everyone went all excited about this years "3rd Generation" of MMOs. But lo and behold! Vanguard is retouched 1st gen (though I prefer that over stupid solo fests), LotR:O is a mix of DDO and AC doing everything safe and as usual, WAR is starting to look like a very generic Shadowbane/DAOC crossover with nothing new, aside from gathering the successful PvP elements into one game..... leaves Conan and Spellborn, and Conan recently has been called "getting more generic" too.
People who hate the current MMO market want, they NEED, vanguard and its peers to fail, and possibly WoW to stumble, just so we dont get another 5 years of high-fantasy big-seller MMOs, and a few niche games that, while interesting, fail to attract more than a small crowd of people seeking for something unconventional. They die shortly after anyway, as you cannot please those "I want something new and dynamic every day" people, so why bother?
i hear a lot of people talking about being rightious haters. "we hate because we once loved" or "we hate cause it makes them try harder" think what you want of yourself. but you know a lot of the "THIS GAME BLOWS MY BALLS I R NOT MAX LEVEL WOW IS SO MUCH BETTER LOLZX" makes up for most of the hating comments. what i'd really like to know is what exactly are people thinking of in a 3rd generation MMO?
I'd like to reply to this.
1) Combat
I'd like advances in the combat system. Counters, saves, they're just dumbed down versions of what players have done in the past. Now, instead of timing your skills properly based on the mob's movement, you have an "easy button" that tells you what to use and when to use it. I'm tired of timed swings, fixed delays, and non-target based combat. How can a 3rd gen improve this? Adopt a targeting system similar to the Fallout series. Swing at an enemy's eyes, and you blind them. Break the enemy's arms, and they're unable to use certain skills, etc etc. Give enemies weak points similar to Phantasy Star Universe. These are all adaptations that need to be in the so called "3rd generation" of MMORPG's. They've existed on the single player front for years, and there's no excuse for the laziness and lack of innovation from modern MMO developers.
2) Economies
I'd like to see more player-run, "efficient" economies. Limited resources for limited crafted goods. Territories yielding said resources, which could contribute to factional warfare in a bi-weekly/monthly manner. Boycotts, trade routes, caravans, smugglers, black markets. Complex? Yes. This is a must for some serious advancement in the genre.
1. I wanted to expand on your thread a bit. Combat in Vg is far from 3rd gen, or even 2nd gen. If you want 2nd or maybe 3rd gen combat, LOTR has made a good stab at it. Some mobs will run behind you and backstab you. Some will run and hide behind trees. Not perfect, but an improvement. Asheron's Call (first release in 1999) has a more advance combat system than VG does.
2. Economy in VG is the same old standard stuff, with a few money sinks to keep people as broke as possible, with such things as item degradation. Not real original. A true 3rd generation MMO would have a REAL economy something like what EVE Online has. One real trading, trading ships, trade caravans, that kind of thing. No other MMO has come close to having a real economy, but EQ2, UO and SWG have come closer than most. And VG is far behind any of those in the economy factor. Of all mmo's that exist, EVE is the only one that really approaches having anything like a 3rd gen economic system.
There are many other things that could have been done, instead of spending thousands of hours on that boring and lame diplomacy system, like Medieval style crafting guilds, where similar crafters cooperate, Like the ability to build things like permanent roads, bridges,and tunnels (toll of course). Like setting up real farms and/or ranches to perhaps raise and sell scarce commodities.
There are many other things that could have been done, but apparently was not even under consideration. Brad's Vision (tm) seems to have overridden any really new ideas.
First off if you really want to see venom directed at a game, look no further then WoW, that over-hyped garbage of a game. Second, the majority of the people spitting out this "venom" are WoW players who feel VG is not the new darling of the gaming world -which it is-and its taking the attention WoW gets. They don't realize all this does is bring more attention and curiosity to those who will then come try out VG. Oh, and btw I do dislike SoE immensely but you have to call it like you see it.
To be blunt, Bull Feces.
If WOW is garbage, then it is garbage with 8 million subscribers, more than VG could ever hope for. And I don't think WOW is garbage.
Second, the majority of people spitting out venom here (like me) are NOT WOW players. In fact I have never played WOW. I started with Meridian 59, went to Asheron's Call in 1999, to EQ1 in 2001, to DAOC, to EQ2, back to EQ1 for a long time, then to back to EQ2, and a while in Eve online. So don't give me that "WOW fanboi" line of crap.
Cymdai on your criteria VG and nothing else coming out in the near future is remotely 3rd gen I'd certianly agree there. In terms of advances or depth, UO still puts most games to shame, why can't I group with a friend who's just started playing even if I have been playing three years, the level system versus skillsbase has always been a step back. Plus where is the housing and your own npc vendors and quality of PvP and having your friends get on your boat and drive them around, or come visit your house and kick back. Where's the treasure hunting or taming of animals. Why can't you make your own class up from the skills you choose, rather than be perma concreted into one playstyle forever unless you reroll, etc etc Vanguard is actually a step back in the right direction on alot of those points, we'll have to wait and see how fully it's realised.
I would pick apart your point 4) the world though, are you prepared to actually pay the fees for a live team large enough to devote events to you run by humans, would you pay a 50k a year sub to pay the wages? Either they have to invent AI to accomplish GM controlled events, or the playerbase has to do it for themselves (NWN persistant worlds built run and administrated by their own fans is the only real example of this).
I never played it so this is hearsay: But EQL did have special servers where you paid $50 (a bit too expensive when normal sub was $10) a month I think it was to have this kind of stuff happen.
BUT AC1 did it way before EQL did and they did it for free, every month. I would easily pay $20 a month rather than $15 a month to have the chance to have a team of GM's show up as mobs and raid a city and do different things every night on each server. So each server at least one night of the month had a GM event of some sort. An extra $5 a month with 100k subs is $500k a month (6 mil a year) to pay a pretty good staff to do this. Even if they paid them 50k a year, they could have a staff of 100+.
I started SWG at release, played for 4 months, quit for a bit, and came back a little while later, then played before the CU.
I've never, not once, professed SWG to be a good game. However, I found it fun. The community was old Star Wars fans, and even though the game itself was broken, it incorporated a lot of elements that built a strong, tightly-knit fan-base. This fan-base had loyalty similar to Vanguard's, however, it was not as adamant in it's preachings about it being the best game ever.
That's a difference between SWG and VG to me: fun.
Also, Neverwinter Nights has perhaps the most intelligent system I've seen to date, in regards to player-run content. I hope more games will follow it's lead, allowing more in-depth dev involvement. Heck, if salaries were a factor, I'm willing to bet you could EASILY have a contest where players could substitute for the GM's/devs, and there'd be little conflict.
Again, by my standards, nothing out or coming out has truly advanced the genre.
Waiting for something fresh to arrive on the MMO scene...
Or maybe people just dont like being lied to. - Like being told SOE isnt funding the development - when it turns out they were. - Like being told SOE has no effect on the development of the game, they are just the publishers - when SOE kicked the game out the door in a BETA state. I would call that having an effect on the development.
Actually no you are wrong.
SOE did NOT fund the development.
Real facts are hard to comeby in the secret world of mmo finance, but the general consensus is that Sigil ran way over budget and way over time, so Microsoft gave them a "release or leave" option. Since the game at that time was still in beta 2, there was no possibility of it being released. So then Sigil/McQuaid had to find a saviour, since they were out of money. SOE stepped in and infused enough cash to at least get it released. And it was NOT SOE that kicked the game out - it was the incompetence and lack of organization at Sigil that caused that. Even SOE would not put up with going yet another 8 months of beta.
Without SOE, it is quite likely the game never would have been released at all.
People want it to fail cause they want the currently prevailing concept of MMOs to fail, so hopefully a game emerges that caters to their needs specifically. Everyone went all excited about this years "3rd Generation" of MMOs. But lo and behold! Vanguard is retouched 1st gen (though I prefer that over stupid solo fests), LotR:O is a mix of DDO and AC doing everything safe and as usual, WAR is starting to look like a very generic Shadowbane/DAOC crossover with nothing new, aside from gathering the successful PvP elements into one game..... leaves Conan and Spellborn, and Conan recently has been called "getting more generic" too.
People who hate the current MMO market want, they NEED, vanguard and its peers to fail, and possibly WoW to stumble, just so we dont get another 5 years of high-fantasy big-seller MMOs, and a few niche games that, while interesting, fail to attract more than a small crowd of people seeking for something unconventional. They die shortly after anyway, as you cannot please those "I want something new and dynamic every day" people, so why bother?
Heh well this is an interesting take on things and not without merit. However Vanguard did/does promise some more sandboxy type stuff. However I think a lot of people see it as fluff and not genuine. I know I do. Certainly can't compare to placing an armed system defense satellite that require periodic resupply like Eve has.
Got to agree with you on NWN Cymdai. If a MMORPG came out with a system where you could DM and design your own dungeons. I'd be all over it. IF it was polished and not beta.
Anyways...back to the subject at hand. Just thought I'd chime in on that point you made.
Never be afraid of choices. More choices are always good things.
Venom? I think that there are some people that are so fanatical about things that Brad McQuaid has a hand in that they take any criticism as being venomous. Most fo the "against" crowd here have been pretty honest in their assessment of the game. Most of the criticisms laid against vanguard are things that the beta community were talking about a year ago. If anything I think the "provanguard" people have been far too accepting of the hype and the misrepresentations of the game by the dev team and the senior producer of the game. Far too often I read, between here and different reviews, oh give it 5 months, give it 6 months, you cant judge an mmo by the first year of its release, oh its only been released for a couple weeks, oh its only been out a month, etc etc etc.
Personally I can care less if Vanguard, Sigil, or SOE ever fail. (Even though it would be hard to not say that SOE failed with SWG) SOE is becoming the Kmart/Walmart/Price Club of the mmo genre and there is room for them without a doubt. If you really look closely most of the venom is directed towards the people that criticize the game, not from the critics.
Well Ryzom ring is the only example to date of a developer trying to actually harness the creative power of it's fans in a MMO, NWN is the best example of building admin dm-ing the whole shebang but servers creak badly with more than 50 people online so they're hardly massive.
I started SWG at release, played for 4 months, quit for a bit, and came back a little while later, then played before the CU.
I've never, not once, professed SWG to be a good game. However, I found it fun. The community was old Star Wars fans, and even though the game itself was broken, it incorporated a lot of elements that built a strong, tightly-knit fan-base. This fan-base had loyalty similar to Vanguard's, however, it was not as adamant in it's preachings about it being the best game ever.
That's a difference between SWG and VG to me: fun.
Also, Neverwinter Nights has perhaps the most intelligent system I've seen to date, in regards to player-run content. I hope more games will follow it's lead, allowing more in-depth dev involvement. Heck, if salaries were a factor, I'm willing to bet you could EASILY have a contest where players could substitute for the GM's/devs, and there'd be little conflict.
Again, by my standards, nothing out or coming out has truly advanced the genre.
i hear a lot of people talking about being rightious haters. "we hate because we once loved" or "we hate cause it makes them try harder" think what you want of yourself. but you know a lot of the "THIS GAME BLOWS MY BALLS I R NOT MAX LEVEL WOW IS SO MUCH BETTER LOLZX" makes up for most of the hating comments. what i'd really like to know is what exactly are people thinking of in a 3rd generation MMO?
I'd like to reply to this.
1) Combat
I'd like advances in the combat system. Counters, saves, they're just dumbed down versions of what players have done in the past. Now, instead of timing your skills properly based on the mob's movement, you have an "easy button" that tells you what to use and when to use it. I'm tired of timed swings, fixed delays, and non-target based combat. How can a 3rd gen improve this? Adopt a targeting system similar to the Fallout series. Swing at an enemy's eyes, and you blind them. Break the enemy's arms, and they're unable to use certain skills, etc etc. Give enemies weak points similar to Phantasy Star Universe. These are all adaptations that need to be in the so called "3rd generation" of MMORPG's. They've existed on the single player front for years, and there's no excuse for the laziness and lack of innovation from modern MMO developers.
2) Economies
I'd like to see more player-run, "efficient" economies. Limited resources for limited crafted goods. Territories yielding said resources, which could contribute to factional warfare in a bi-weekly/monthly manner. Boycotts, trade routes, caravans, smugglers, black markets. Complex? Yes. This is a must for some serious advancement in the genre.
3) Races
I've said it in a debate before, but I want new races. I'm sick and tired of Tolkien, and having 5-20 humanoid races which play exactly the same, aside from minor cosmetic differences and skins.
4)The World
I grow weary of "dead" worlds. What I'd REALLY love to see in MMORPG's is actual dev involvement. Have them host events where they raid towns as a giant boss monster. Create some random, unplanned, unexpected festival for the hell of it. Semi-intelligent creatures, that don't wander mindlessly in 5-7 meter circles for hours on end.
That's off the top of my head. That's what I would consider advancement to a new generation of MMORPG's. Find me a dev team who wants to make my game, and I'll show you all pure gaming gold.
This is also why I think so many dislike the game. McQuaid ran his damned mouth about creating this epic gaming experience, and he ended up producing a re-hash of Everquest. There's literally nothing about it that screams "play me" in my opinion, but with all the hype and promises made, along with the mind-numbingly weak "vision", the bar was set high. When you hear about the first title from the "3rd generation", and you see Vanguard, well, you're left with an empty, disappointed feeling, as well as little expectations for the rest of the titles coming out this year.
That, in my opinion, is why this game inspires such venom. It's one thing to fall short of folk's expectations, it's another to crush their hopes for other titles that are in the same category.
Now this is what loads of people are wanting and expecting out of a 3rd Gen MMO. Well said. Not rehashed EQ with a few minor changes pretending to be a 3rd gen MMO. I especially agree with the combat part; I want full control over how I attack and where I attack it would add so much stratgedy. The combat system in MMOs haven't really evolved out of the boring "auto-attack plus a special combo every now and then" system that encourages sleeping on the keyboard.
Originally posted by _Shadowmage Or maybe people just dont like being lied to. - Like being told SOE isnt funding the development - when it turns out they were. - Like being told SOE has no effect on the development of the game, they are just the publishers - when SOE kicked the game out the door in a BETA state. I would call that having an effect on the development.
Actually no you are wrong. SOE did NOT fund the development. Real facts are hard to comeby in the secret world of mmo finance, but the general consensus is that Sigil ran way over budget and way over time, so Microsoft gave them a "release or leave" option. Since the game at that time was still in beta 2, there was no possibility of it being released. So then Sigil/McQuaid had to find a saviour, since they were out of money. SOE stepped in and infused enough cash to at least get it released. And it was NOT SOE that kicked the game out - it was the incompetence and lack of organization at Sigil that caused that. Even SOE would not put up with going yet another 8 months of beta. Without SOE, it is quite likely the game never would have been released at all.
Exactly - SOE funded the last 6 months of development, as well as providing the funds to payout Microsoft. Despite Brad lying by saying Sony was in no way involved in the funding of the game, and they were just hired to publish it.
I could care less that its Sony funding the game, I have never played one of their online games, never had a bad experience with their billing or customer support and I dont hate them.
What I do hate is being lied to. So my venom is inspired by the lies of Brad and thats why I wont be playing Vanguard - ever. That doesnt mean other people shouldnt play the game
And on the kicking the game out the door - Well it was release in its current state so Sony could recoup its investment, or write off the $?? Million dollars they spent on it.
Personally I think if games aren't ready to be released when the money runs out - then the game/company should go under. Sorry to be harsh but thats how I feel.
It's because at it's core, it has nothing to do with a video game. If you actually feel betrayed by a video game, perhaps it's time to step back and reevaluate your priorities.
I read a reply early this morning by someone telling one of the people that replied to his post to go die of an overdose.
People have moved past bashing the game to attacking the people playing it.
The only thing missing is someone invoking Godwin's.
1) Combat I'd like advances in the combat system. Counters, saves, they're just dumbed down versions of what players have done in the past. Now, instead of timing your skills properly based on the mob's movement, you have an "easy button" that tells you what to use and when to use it. I'm tired of timed swings, fixed delays, and non-target based combat. How can a 3rd gen improve this? Adopt a targeting system similar to the Fallout series. Swing at an enemy's eyes, and you blind them. Break the enemy's arms, and they're unable to use certain skills, etc etc. Give enemies weak points similar to Phantasy Star Universe. These are all adaptations that need to be in the so called "3rd generation" of MMORPG's. They've existed on the single player front for years, and there's no excuse for the laziness and lack of innovation from modern MMO developers.
Put this into an MMO and your looking at no one having the processor power to play. Can't wait for this game. However, I do think combat needs an overhaul (not just VG). I actually liked SWG's twitch combat and no sticky targeting.
2) Economies I'd like to see more player-run, "efficient" economies. Limited resources for limited crafted goods. Territories yielding said resources, which could contribute to factional warfare in a bi-weekly/monthly manner. Boycotts, trade routes, caravans, smugglers, black markets. Complex? Yes. This is a must for some serious advancement in the genre.
So Basically you want the first people to play the game to control the economy and make it completely impossible for new comers to have a chance?
3) Races I've said it in a debate before, but I want new races. I'm sick and tired of Tolkien, and having 5-20 humanoid races which play exactly the same, aside from minor cosmetic differences and skins.
Actually kind of agree but I hardly think that this counts towards a 3rd gen concept. More of a personal opinion here.
4) The World I grow weary of "dead" worlds. What I'd REALLY love to see in MMORPG's is actual dev involvement. Have them host events where they raid towns as a giant boss monster. Create some random, unplanned, unexpected festival for the hell of it. Semi-intelligent creatures, that don't wander mindlessly in 5-7 meter circles for hours on end.
Totally agree.
That's off the top of my head. That's what I would consider advancement to a new generation of MMORPG's. Find me a dev team who wants to make my game, and I'll show you all pure gaming gold.
No. Get off your butt and FIND your own dev team to make your pure gold like McQuaid did. Here's the problem with most of these people whining about what a game needs. They have all these great ideas but no motivation to put their own butts out on the line. They would much rather sit back and just tell other people what is wrong with their product.
As far as some of what else has been in this thread:
1) "VG fanbois" were actually created by you haters. If someone came over to your house and started telling you about how horrible your home is, how long would it take you to throw that person out, swear at him and tell him not to ever come back? I'm willing to bet about 5 seconds. We can take criticism but it needs to be done maturely. You can't just say 'your game sux crap and so do you for playing it'.
2) The VG community is not as bad as people want you to think guys. Most of us are actually very helpful. Every gaming community is going to have their asshats and unfortunately most of them are very vocal about it. Maybe they are trying to compensate for something, who knows.
3) Most people playing VG agree w/ you about their being a lot of bugs. Some are severe like lost items, crashes and lost corpses. However most of us agree that it'll be worth waiting out the bugs. Once again however, when you tell us that game a was flawless and ours is the worst ever, we are going to throw you out of our house because you are NOT being objective.
I started SWG at release, played for 4 months, quit for a bit, and came back a little while later, then played before the CU.
I've never, not once, professed SWG to be a good game. However, I found it fun. The community was old Star Wars fans, and even though the game itself was broken, it incorporated a lot of elements that built a strong, tightly-knit fan-base. This fan-base had loyalty similar to Vanguard's, however, it was not as adamant in it's preachings about it being the best game ever.
That's a difference between SWG and VG to me: fun.
Also, Neverwinter Nights has perhaps the most intelligent system I've seen to date, in regards to player-run content. I hope more games will follow it's lead, allowing more in-depth dev involvement. Heck, if salaries were a factor, I'm willing to bet you could EASILY have a contest where players could substitute for the GM's/devs, and there'd be little conflict.
Again, by my standards, nothing out or coming out has truly advanced the genre.
What game are you playing to have fun right now? Well, it's currently a beta, but I find it very enjoyable.
It's actually more functional then the last 5 released MMO's I've played too.....
When the NDA is lifted, I'll be happy to talk about it
Waiting for something fresh to arrive on the MMO scene...
Comments
1) Combat
I'd like advances in the combat system. Counters, saves, they're just dumbed down versions of what players have done in the past. Now, instead of timing your skills properly based on the mob's movement, you have an "easy button" that tells you what to use and when to use it. I'm tired of timed swings, fixed delays, and non-target based combat. How can a 3rd gen improve this? Adopt a targeting system similar to the Fallout series. Swing at an enemy's eyes, and you blind them. Break the enemy's arms, and they're unable to use certain skills, etc etc. Give enemies weak points similar to Phantasy Star Universe. These are all adaptations that need to be in the so called "3rd generation" of MMORPG's. They've existed on the single player front for years, and there's no excuse for the laziness and lack of innovation from modern MMO developers.
2) Economies
I'd like to see more player-run, "efficient" economies. Limited resources for limited crafted goods. Territories yielding said resources, which could contribute to factional warfare in a bi-weekly/monthly manner. Boycotts, trade routes, caravans, smugglers, black markets. Complex? Yes. This is a must for some serious advancement in the genre.
3) Races
I've said it in a debate before, but I want new races. I'm sick and tired of Tolkien, and having 5-20 humanoid races which play exactly the same, aside from minor cosmetic differences and skins.
4) The World
I grow weary of "dead" worlds. What I'd REALLY love to see in MMORPG's is actual dev involvement. Have them host events where they raid towns as a giant boss monster. Create some random, unplanned, unexpected festival for the hell of it. Semi-intelligent creatures, that don't wander mindlessly in 5-7 meter circles for hours on end.
That's off the top of my head. That's what I would consider advancement to a new generation of MMORPG's. Find me a dev team who wants to make my game, and I'll show you all pure gaming gold.
This is also why I think so many dislike the game. McQuaid ran his damned mouth about creating this epic gaming experience, and he ended up producing a re-hash of Everquest. There's literally nothing about it that screams "play me" in my opinion, but with all the hype and promises made, along with the mind-numbingly weak "vision", the bar was set high. When you hear about the first title from the "3rd generation", and you see Vanguard, well, you're left with an empty, disappointed feeling, as well as little expectations for the rest of the titles coming out this year.
That, in my opinion, is why this game inspires such venom. It's one thing to fall short of folk's expectations, it's another to crush their hopes for other titles that are in the same category.
Vanguard inspires venom because of SOE's involvement. People will swear up and down about how they have played it and it's uninspired blah blah blah... B.S. it's because tons of people hate SOE for what they did to SWG (and whatever other game they pick) and they can't get over it.
And saying Vanguard is a rehash of EQ is just showing how truly little you know about the game itself. You don't like the game, we get it. Your opinion is worth nothing more than any other account on this site. For a staff writer you sure do have a bug up your rug for this game.
So I don't hate SOE, but I do have tons of complaints about Vanguard. Never played EQ, so can't call Vanguard a rehash. It's definitely first-gen in a lot of ways though.
How do you know it's first gen? You never played EQ.
Have you ever played a MMO on day 1 or even beta? EQ was suddenly the only first-gen MMO?
I played Ultima Online; not day one.
Dark Age of Camelot I beta'd and played day one, Asheron's Call, City of Heroes, so on and so on; your typical beta jumper and first-free month junkie in the second-gen.
But as for the 'ways' Vanguard is first-gen in a lot of aspects. Dark Age of Camelot for example, it launched with better animations; character movement and spell effects than Vanguard. So if Vanguard isn't up to par with the second-gen, I call that particular aspect first-gen.
Should I go further? Back in 1997, Origin figured out that if your character got hit with a sword, he should react through animations accordingly. I was wrong, some aspects of Vanguard aren't even first-gen if one was to get nitpicky.
Yet some games and their communities evoke more venom than others. And I do not think it can be denied that Vanguard has had a lot of trash talking from various Vanbois. "Go back to WoW" and "This game is not for you" and all the stuff about how other games are easy mode. It provokes people in an otherwise already highly charged and adversarial environment. Its dismissive and arrogant and unfounded. Everyone likes to see elisits dragged down, especially other elitists.
1) Combat
I'd like advances in the combat system. Counters, saves, they're just dumbed down versions of what players have done in the past. Now, instead of timing your skills properly based on the mob's movement, you have an "easy button" that tells you what to use and when to use it. I'm tired of timed swings, fixed delays, and non-target based combat. How can a 3rd gen improve this? Adopt a targeting system similar to the Fallout series. Swing at an enemy's eyes, and you blind them. Break the enemy's arms, and they're unable to use certain skills, etc etc. Give enemies weak points similar to Phantasy Star Universe. These are all adaptations that need to be in the so called "3rd generation" of MMORPG's. They've existed on the single player front for years, and there's no excuse for the laziness and lack of innovation from modern MMO developers.
2) Economies
I'd like to see more player-run, "efficient" economies. Limited resources for limited crafted goods. Territories yielding said resources, which could contribute to factional warfare in a bi-weekly/monthly manner. Boycotts, trade routes, caravans, smugglers, black markets. Complex? Yes. This is a must for some serious advancement in the genre.
3) Races
I've said it in a debate before, but I want new races. I'm sick and tired of Tolkien, and having 5-20 humanoid races which play exactly the same, aside from minor cosmetic differences and skins.
4) The World
I grow weary of "dead" worlds. What I'd REALLY love to see in MMORPG's is actual dev involvement. Have them host events where they raid towns as a giant boss monster. Create some random, unplanned, unexpected festival for the hell of it. Semi-intelligent creatures, that don't wander mindlessly in 5-7 meter circles for hours on end.
That's off the top of my head. That's what I would consider advancement to a new generation of MMORPG's. Find me a dev team who wants to make my game, and I'll show you all pure gaming gold.
This is also why I think so many dislike the game. McQuaid ran his damned mouth about creating this epic gaming experience, and he ended up producing a re-hash of Everquest. There's literally nothing about it that screams "play me" in my opinion, but with all the hype and promises made, along with the mind-numbingly weak "vision", the bar was set high. When you hear about the first title from the "3rd generation", and you see Vanguard, well, you're left with an empty, disappointed feeling, as well as little expectations for the rest of the titles coming out this year.
That, in my opinion, is why this game inspires such venom. It's one thing to fall short of folk's expectations, it's another to crush their hopes for other titles that are in the same category.
Vanguard inspires venom because of SOE's involvement. People will swear up and down about how they have played it and it's uninspired blah blah blah... B.S. it's because tons of people hate SOE for what they did to SWG (and whatever other game they pick) and they can't get over it.
And saying Vanguard is a rehash of EQ is just showing how truly little you know about the game itself. You don't like the game, we get it. Your opinion is worth nothing more than any other account on this site. For a staff writer you sure do have a bug up your rug for this game.
So I don't hate SOE, but I do have tons of complaints about Vanguard. Never played EQ, so can't call Vanguard a rehash. It's definitely first-gen in a lot of ways though.
How do you know it's first gen? You never played EQ.
Have you ever played a MMO on day 1 or even beta? EQ was suddenly the only first-gen MMO?
I played Ultima Online; not day one.
Dark Age of Camelot I beta'd and played day one, Asheron's Call, City of Heroes, so on and so on; your typical beta jumper and first-free month junkie in the second-gen.
But as for the 'ways' Vanguard is first-gen in a lot of aspects. Dark Age of Camelot for example, it launched with better animations; character movement and spell effects than Vanguard. So if Vanguard isn't up to par with the second-gen, I call that particular aspect first-gen.
Should I go further? Back in 1997, Origin figured out that if your character got hit with a sword, he should react through animations accordingly. I was wrong, some aspects of Vanguard aren't even first-gen if one was to get nitpicky. Sorry if i used EQ as an example.
The real 1st gen MMOs are UO and EQ (should i put Merridian in there?). All the others are 2nd gen. Including VG.
No 3rd gen MMOs exist and the upcomming (LOTRO, AoC, WAR) ones aren't going to be 3rd gen either.
As for your last point about UO. Sure, but they forgot the fact that you could still hit even when reacting from a sword hit.
eqnext.wikia.com
I LOVE nothing more than being told why I hate a game. It's like...
Vanguard critic: I don't like the game because it's buggy.
Vanguard fan: Hey, the hell with the reasons you've listed as to why you like/dislike a game, not only are you wrong, but I know better.
That's the type of arrogance I've come to expect when I discuss this game.
Some facts about me:
- Yes I played SWG, and for a little while (7 months, tops)
- Yes, I hated the NGE and the CU equally
- Yes, I hated what SOE did to the game, but really, I hate Lucas Arts, and not SOE
- I am NOT an SOE anti-fan, I actually enjoyed a game which many hated: Planetside
- My first MMO was UO, and though I hated it, I still started with it.
It's really awesome to be condescended when I wasn't even flaming the game. Hell, what I did was answer the question of MY expectations for a 3rd gen game. It wasn't really up for debate...that's the criteria I've laid down for the evolution of the genre, period.
I dislike the game because it's over-rated and has the most ravenous fans I've seen since the days of Fallout 2.
I don't care, not one bit, that SOE is involved. Sorry.
Waiting for something fresh to arrive on the MMO scene...
eqnext.wikia.com
Microsoft was smart to unload when they did. I too had high hopes for the game, have played it and am terribly disappointed. yes I went back to WOW until VG gets its act together and/or Tabula Rasa is released.
/shrug that's how the cookie crumbles I guess. MMO's are products/services, I think many people lose sight of that. No way one would buy a defective, unfinished car without demanding their money back from the manufacturer yet they are fine doing it with an MMO. I think its desperation...many people were starving for this type of MMO experience and VG is the closest a game has come to a challenging, drawn out gaming experience in years. Good luck and I truly hope that VG fulfills its highest vision of itself. but as a consumer buying a service, it simply doesnt cut it in the current state.
I think everyone here hit the nails on the head already about why the game inspires so much hate/hating/haters so I wont regurgitate it. I will say that to me VG was going to be "THE GAME to end all games" and am terribly disappointed in what I see as a buggy, unfinished game, that lacks imagination. Thats not hate, just the word of this small consumer and MMO affecionado.
Current Games: WOW, EVE Online
I would pick apart your point 4) the world though, are you prepared to actually pay the fees for a live team large enough to devote events to you run by humans, would you pay a 50k a year sub to pay the wages? Either they have to invent AI to accomplish GM controlled events, or the playerbase has to do it for themselves (NWN persistant worlds built run and administrated by their own fans is the only real example of this).
1) Combat
I'd like advances in the combat system. Counters, saves, they're just dumbed down versions of what players have done in the past. Now, instead of timing your skills properly based on the mob's movement, you have an "easy button" that tells you what to use and when to use it. I'm tired of timed swings, fixed delays, and non-target based combat. How can a 3rd gen improve this? Adopt a targeting system similar to the Fallout series. Swing at an enemy's eyes, and you blind them. Break the enemy's arms, and they're unable to use certain skills, etc etc. Give enemies weak points similar to Phantasy Star Universe. These are all adaptations that need to be in the so called "3rd generation" of MMORPG's. They've existed on the single player front for years, and there's no excuse for the laziness and lack of innovation from modern MMO developers.
2) Economies
I'd like to see more player-run, "efficient" economies. Limited resources for limited crafted goods. Territories yielding said resources, which could contribute to factional warfare in a bi-weekly/monthly manner. Boycotts, trade routes, caravans, smugglers, black markets. Complex? Yes. This is a must for some serious advancement in the genre.
3) Races
I've said it in a debate before, but I want new races. I'm sick and tired of Tolkien, and having 5-20 humanoid races which play exactly the same, aside from minor cosmetic differences and skins.
4) The World
I grow weary of "dead" worlds. What I'd REALLY love to see in MMORPG's is actual dev involvement. Have them host events where they raid towns as a giant boss monster. Create some random, unplanned, unexpected festival for the hell of it. Semi-intelligent creatures, that don't wander mindlessly in 5-7 meter circles for hours on end.
That's off the top of my head. That's what I would consider advancement to a new generation of MMORPG's. Find me a dev team who wants to make my game, and I'll show you all pure gaming gold.
This is also why I think so many dislike the game. McQuaid ran his damned mouth about creating this epic gaming experience, and he ended up producing a re-hash of Everquest. There's literally nothing about it that screams "play me" in my opinion, but with all the hype and promises made, along with the mind-numbingly weak "vision", the bar was set high. When you hear about the first title from the "3rd generation", and you see Vanguard, well, you're left with an empty, disappointed feeling, as well as little expectations for the rest of the titles coming out this year.
That, in my opinion, is why this game inspires such venom. It's one thing to fall short of folk's expectations, it's another to crush their hopes for other titles that are in the same category.
Vanguard inspires venom because of SOE's involvement. People will swear up and down about how they have played it and it's uninspired blah blah blah... B.S. it's because tons of people hate SOE for what they did to SWG (and whatever other game they pick) and they can't get over it.
And saying Vanguard is a rehash of EQ is just showing how truly little you know about the game itself. You don't like the game, we get it. Your opinion is worth nothing more than any other account on this site. For a staff writer you sure do have a bug up your rug for this game.
So I don't hate SOE, but I do have tons of complaints about Vanguard. Never played EQ, so can't call Vanguard a rehash. It's definitely first-gen in a lot of ways though.
How do you know it's first gen? You never played EQ.
Have you ever played a MMO on day 1 or even beta? EQ was suddenly the only first-gen MMO?
I played Ultima Online; not day one.
Dark Age of Camelot I beta'd and played day one, Asheron's Call, City of Heroes, so on and so on; your typical beta jumper and first-free month junkie in the second-gen.
But as for the 'ways' Vanguard is first-gen in a lot of aspects. Dark Age of Camelot for example, it launched with better animations; character movement and spell effects than Vanguard. So if Vanguard isn't up to par with the second-gen, I call that particular aspect first-gen.
Should I go further? Back in 1997, Origin figured out that if your character got hit with a sword, he should react through animations accordingly. I was wrong, some aspects of Vanguard aren't even first-gen if one was to get nitpicky. Sorry if i used EQ as an example.
The real 1st gen MMOs are UO and EQ (should i put Merridian in there?). All the others are 2nd gen. Including VG.
No 3rd gen MMOs exist and the upcomming (LOTRO, AoC, WAR) ones aren't going to be 3rd gen either.
As for your last point about UO. Sure, but they forgot the fact that you could still hit even when reacting from a sword hit. Yes they will.
Just because Vanguard failed to be third-gen, doesn't mean others this year will, as convenient it'd be as always if Vanguard's shortcomings were industry-wide shortcomings; no different than Vanguard's launch being any worse than WoW's years back eh?
People who hate the current MMO market want, they NEED, vanguard and its peers to fail, and possibly WoW to stumble, just so we dont get another 5 years of high-fantasy big-seller MMOs, and a few niche games that, while interesting, fail to attract more than a small crowd of people seeking for something unconventional. They die shortly after anyway, as you cannot please those "I want something new and dynamic every day" people, so why bother?
1) Combat
I'd like advances in the combat system. Counters, saves, they're just dumbed down versions of what players have done in the past. Now, instead of timing your skills properly based on the mob's movement, you have an "easy button" that tells you what to use and when to use it. I'm tired of timed swings, fixed delays, and non-target based combat. How can a 3rd gen improve this? Adopt a targeting system similar to the Fallout series. Swing at an enemy's eyes, and you blind them. Break the enemy's arms, and they're unable to use certain skills, etc etc. Give enemies weak points similar to Phantasy Star Universe. These are all adaptations that need to be in the so called "3rd generation" of MMORPG's. They've existed on the single player front for years, and there's no excuse for the laziness and lack of innovation from modern MMO developers.
2) Economies
I'd like to see more player-run, "efficient" economies. Limited resources for limited crafted goods. Territories yielding said resources, which could contribute to factional warfare in a bi-weekly/monthly manner. Boycotts, trade routes, caravans, smugglers, black markets. Complex? Yes. This is a must for some serious advancement in the genre.
1. I wanted to expand on your thread a bit. Combat in Vg is far from 3rd gen, or even 2nd gen. If you want 2nd or maybe 3rd gen combat, LOTR has made a good stab at it. Some mobs will run behind you and backstab you. Some will run and hide behind trees. Not perfect, but an improvement. Asheron's Call (first release in 1999) has a more advance combat system than VG does.
2. Economy in VG is the same old standard stuff, with a few money sinks to keep people as broke as possible, with such things as item degradation. Not real original. A true 3rd generation MMO would have a REAL economy something like what EVE Online has. One real trading, trading ships, trade caravans, that kind of thing. No other MMO has come close to having a real economy, but EQ2, UO and SWG have come closer than most. And VG is far behind any of those in the economy factor. Of all mmo's that exist, EVE is the only one that really approaches having anything like a 3rd gen economic system.
There are many other things that could have been done, instead of spending thousands of hours on that boring and lame diplomacy system, like Medieval style crafting guilds, where similar crafters cooperate, Like the ability to build things like permanent roads, bridges,and tunnels (toll of course). Like setting up real farms and/or ranches to perhaps raise and sell scarce commodities.
There are many other things that could have been done, but apparently was not even under consideration. Brad's Vision (tm) seems to have overridden any really new ideas.
To be blunt, Bull Feces.
If WOW is garbage, then it is garbage with 8 million subscribers, more than VG could ever hope for. And I don't think WOW is garbage.
Second, the majority of people spitting out venom here (like me) are NOT WOW players. In fact I have never played WOW. I started with Meridian 59, went to Asheron's Call in 1999, to EQ1 in 2001, to DAOC, to EQ2, back to EQ1 for a long time, then to back to EQ2, and a while in Eve online. So don't give me that "WOW fanboi" line of crap.
And what does SOE have to do with Vanguard?
BUT AC1 did it way before EQL did and they did it for free, every month. I would easily pay $20 a month rather than $15 a month to have the chance to have a team of GM's show up as mobs and raid a city and do different things every night on each server. So each server at least one night of the month had a GM event of some sort. An extra $5 a month with 100k subs is $500k a month (6 mil a year) to pay a pretty good staff to do this. Even if they paid them 50k a year, they could have a staff of 100+.
I've never, not once, professed SWG to be a good game. However, I found it fun. The community was old Star Wars fans, and even though the game itself was broken, it incorporated a lot of elements that built a strong, tightly-knit fan-base. This fan-base had loyalty similar to Vanguard's, however, it was not as adamant in it's preachings about it being the best game ever.
That's a difference between SWG and VG to me: fun.
Also, Neverwinter Nights has perhaps the most intelligent system I've seen to date, in regards to player-run content. I hope more games will follow it's lead, allowing more in-depth dev involvement. Heck, if salaries were a factor, I'm willing to bet you could EASILY have a contest where players could substitute for the GM's/devs, and there'd be little conflict.
Again, by my standards, nothing out or coming out has truly advanced the genre.
Waiting for something fresh to arrive on the MMO scene...
Actually no you are wrong.
SOE did NOT fund the development.
Real facts are hard to comeby in the secret world of mmo finance, but the general consensus is that Sigil ran way over budget and way over time, so Microsoft gave them a "release or leave" option. Since the game at that time was still in beta 2, there was no possibility of it being released. So then Sigil/McQuaid had to find a saviour, since they were out of money. SOE stepped in and infused enough cash to at least get it released. And it was NOT SOE that kicked the game out - it was the incompetence and lack of organization at Sigil that caused that. Even SOE would not put up with going yet another 8 months of beta.
Without SOE, it is quite likely the game never would have been released at all.
Got to agree with you on NWN Cymdai. If a MMORPG came out with a system where you could DM and design your own dungeons. I'd be all over it. IF it was polished and not beta.
Anyways...back to the subject at hand. Just thought I'd chime in on that point you made.
Never be afraid of choices. More choices are always good things.
Personally I can care less if Vanguard, Sigil, or SOE ever fail. (Even though it would be hard to not say that SOE failed with SWG) SOE is becoming the Kmart/Walmart/Price Club of the mmo genre and there is room for them without a doubt. If you really look closely most of the venom is directed towards the people that criticize the game, not from the critics.
http://www.speedtest.net/result/7300033012
1) Combat
I'd like advances in the combat system. Counters, saves, they're just dumbed down versions of what players have done in the past. Now, instead of timing your skills properly based on the mob's movement, you have an "easy button" that tells you what to use and when to use it. I'm tired of timed swings, fixed delays, and non-target based combat. How can a 3rd gen improve this? Adopt a targeting system similar to the Fallout series. Swing at an enemy's eyes, and you blind them. Break the enemy's arms, and they're unable to use certain skills, etc etc. Give enemies weak points similar to Phantasy Star Universe. These are all adaptations that need to be in the so called "3rd generation" of MMORPG's. They've existed on the single player front for years, and there's no excuse for the laziness and lack of innovation from modern MMO developers.
2) Economies
I'd like to see more player-run, "efficient" economies. Limited resources for limited crafted goods. Territories yielding said resources, which could contribute to factional warfare in a bi-weekly/monthly manner. Boycotts, trade routes, caravans, smugglers, black markets. Complex? Yes. This is a must for some serious advancement in the genre.
3) Races
I've said it in a debate before, but I want new races. I'm sick and tired of Tolkien, and having 5-20 humanoid races which play exactly the same, aside from minor cosmetic differences and skins.
4) The World
I grow weary of "dead" worlds. What I'd REALLY love to see in MMORPG's is actual dev involvement. Have them host events where they raid towns as a giant boss monster. Create some random, unplanned, unexpected festival for the hell of it. Semi-intelligent creatures, that don't wander mindlessly in 5-7 meter circles for hours on end.
That's off the top of my head. That's what I would consider advancement to a new generation of MMORPG's. Find me a dev team who wants to make my game, and I'll show you all pure gaming gold.
This is also why I think so many dislike the game. McQuaid ran his damned mouth about creating this epic gaming experience, and he ended up producing a re-hash of Everquest. There's literally nothing about it that screams "play me" in my opinion, but with all the hype and promises made, along with the mind-numbingly weak "vision", the bar was set high. When you hear about the first title from the "3rd generation", and you see Vanguard, well, you're left with an empty, disappointed feeling, as well as little expectations for the rest of the titles coming out this year.
That, in my opinion, is why this game inspires such venom. It's one thing to fall short of folk's expectations, it's another to crush their hopes for other titles that are in the same category.
Now this is what loads of people are wanting and expecting out of a 3rd Gen MMO. Well said. Not rehashed EQ with a few minor changes pretending to be a 3rd gen MMO. I especially agree with the combat part; I want full control over how I attack and where I attack it would add so much stratgedy. The combat system in MMOs haven't really evolved out of the boring "auto-attack plus a special combo every now and then" system that encourages sleeping on the keyboard.
Exactly - SOE funded the last 6 months of development, as well as providing the funds to payout Microsoft. Despite Brad lying by saying Sony was in no way involved in the funding of the game, and they were just hired to publish it.
I could care less that its Sony funding the game, I have never played one of their online games, never had a bad experience with their billing or customer support and I dont hate them.
What I do hate is being lied to. So my venom is inspired by the lies of Brad and thats why I wont be playing Vanguard - ever. That doesnt mean other people shouldnt play the game
And on the kicking the game out the door - Well it was release in its current state so Sony could recoup its investment, or write off the $?? Million dollars they spent on it.
Personally I think if games aren't ready to be released when the money runs out - then the game/company should go under. Sorry to be harsh but thats how I feel.
It's because at it's core, it has nothing to do with a video game. If you actually feel betrayed by a video game, perhaps it's time to step back and reevaluate your priorities.
I read a reply early this morning by someone telling one of the people that replied to his post to go die of an overdose.
People have moved past bashing the game to attacking the people playing it.
The only thing missing is someone invoking Godwin's.
Put this into an MMO and your looking at no one having the processor power to play. Can't wait for this game. However, I do think combat needs an overhaul (not just VG). I actually liked SWG's twitch combat and no sticky targeting.
So Basically you want the first people to play the game to control the economy and make it completely impossible for new comers to have a chance?
Actually kind of agree but I hardly think that this counts towards a 3rd gen concept. More of a personal opinion here.
Totally agree.
No. Get off your butt and FIND your own dev team to make your pure gold like McQuaid did. Here's the problem with most of these people whining about what a game needs. They have all these great ideas but no motivation to put their own butts out on the line. They would much rather sit back and just tell other people what is wrong with their product.
As far as some of what else has been in this thread:
1) "VG fanbois" were actually created by you haters. If someone came over to your house and started telling you about how horrible your home is, how long would it take you to throw that person out, swear at him and tell him not to ever come back? I'm willing to bet about 5 seconds. We can take criticism but it needs to be done maturely. You can't just say 'your game sux crap and so do you for playing it'.
2) The VG community is not as bad as people want you to think guys. Most of us are actually very helpful. Every gaming community is going to have their asshats and unfortunately most of them are very vocal about it. Maybe they are trying to compensate for something, who knows.
3) Most people playing VG agree w/ you about their being a lot of bugs. Some are severe like lost items, crashes and lost corpses. However most of us agree that it'll be worth waiting out the bugs. Once again however, when you tell us that game a was flawless and ours is the worst ever, we are going to throw you out of our house because you are NOT being objective.
Anyway that about sums this up.
It's actually more functional then the last 5 released MMO's I've played too.....
When the NDA is lifted, I'll be happy to talk about it
Waiting for something fresh to arrive on the MMO scene...