Howdy, Stranger!
It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!
Quick Links
Brad addresses Nerd Rage
Nshtiel
Member Posts: 26
Page 43 in the FOH forums.
http://www.fohguild.org/forums/mmorpg-general-discussion/27044-why-all-nerd-rage-against-vanguard-43.html
[quote]Well said and a great question and certainly one we think about. I think there are misconceptions out there about the game and our intent. Our heritage making EQ 1 makes it so a lot of people automatically assume the game is only for the hardcore. I posted here and elsewhere (on other boards and our own message boards) for months before release talking about how the game is for casual, core, and hardcore players and our belief they can all co-exist in the same game. Unfortunately, a lot of people didn't read those posts and assume Vanguard is more hard core because EQ 1 was. I think I failed in reaching out to a lot of people and spreading the word that this game is NOT hard core like the original EQ 1. I probably spent more time talking about the game to those already interested in it than reaching out to those who were not. Ah well, hindsight is 20/20.
A lot of people wanted a new game that was like EQ 1 up to the Velious period and I and others described Vanguard thusly. The good part of that is we got those people excited about the game. The bad part was that people who didn't follow the game as closely didn't hear the complete message, that being that the game also has lots of content for casual and core gamers -- it was like when I posted, I was just preaching to the choir. People who didn't follow the message boards and only heard that Vanguard was made by the original EQ guys made assumptions that Vanguard would be just like EQ and require tons of time to play, that you had to raid, that you had to group constantly, etc.
Like I said, that message resonated with a lot of people in a positive way, but it also did harm in that those people who don't want another EQ 1 were turned off when they heard about Vanguard but not all of the details behind the game. There were and are also a lot of 'Vanbois' who spread the word that this game was not for WoW players and that people who like a more casual game like WoW were not welcome in Vanguard. In that sense, the messaging backfired and many people aren't even giving the game a chance.
I think we could have reached out to those people on other boards in a better way and made sure people knew that casual gamers are indeed welcome in Vanguard. I also think that after level 12ish people are feeling that they have to group, and that is something we need to address. We also need better LFG tools so that people can find groups. We were over-worried that the newbie areas would be over crowded and now we face some under population as people level up and spread out over the large world that is Telon. That is why we are working on making the LFG tools better, looking into adding some overland teleportation, etc. Under population is actually worse than over population because it can be difficult to find people to play with and this hurts community building.
We also need to change our messaging in ads, both online and in print, and attempt to dispel the assumption some people are making that Vanguard is only hardcore. In reality we very much understand that the gamespace has grown and evolved. People who had a lot of time on their hands and played a ton of EQ have grown up, got jobs, families, etc. Even those who played EQ a ton of hours and had a blast for years playing that game now are in situations where while they had fun with EQ want a different game that requires less overall time invested and especially less amounts of contiguous time and the ability to play more casually. Like I said, I think we need to make some changes to the game (nothing fundamental, but some tweaks here and there), but the even bigger problem is that many people aren't even trying the game out because they've already made up their minds that Vanguard = EQ 1.
Some of this will be addressed through viral marketing. As those who are playing the game enjoy Vanguard, they will tell their friends that this game is not as hard core and nearly as tedious as EQ 1. This will help, but I also think we need to be more proactive in spreading the word about what Vanguard is really like. Heck, even people who are giving the game a chance have misconceptions. I was grouped around level 10 and we got into a situation where we were in the floating cities above Jalen's Crossing and died a few times and just couldn't get back to our corpses to do a CR. We ending up dying several times. I said forget it, and went to the altar and just summoned my corpse to me (something you could NOT do in EQ 1). I advised the others in my pick-up group to do the same and they didn't know you could do that! They thought you HAD to CR, just like EQ 1. Man, that was an eye-opener. I think there are people who truly believe you either have to CR or that the penalties for summoning your corpse to the altar are so bad that you never want to do it. And it some cases, at higher levels, and depending on what mob you die to, the penalties *are* too severe, and we need to make some changes. But just as importantly, perhaps even more importantly, we need to get the word out that you don't have to CR in the vast majority of cases, and that also in the vast majority of cases summoning your corpse to the altar where you pop up when you die does NOT include a heinous penalty; rather, that's why we put that functionality in there. Having to CR in Vanguard is the exception, not the rule -- only in fighting extremely difficult mobs where you and your party knowingly accept the risk vs. reward of fighting specific boss mobs likely in the depths of dungeons do you take the risk of having to CR (or get your corpse dragged out) assuming you totally wipe and don't have someone who survives on hand to resurrect you. And I think that's just one powerful example of false assumptions that are being made about the game, either by people playing it (who may get frustrated when they actually don't have to) or by people who have heard about the game and figure, again, that it's hardcore and an old school MMOG with updated graphics. Ah! This is frustrating, but we will get the message out.
No, we're not talking about changing the game to be a lot more similar to WoW. We're not trying to make a WoW clone. The game is more challenging, and it does take longer to level up, but not a lot longer really -- we've timed it. And the additional challenge is optional -- you don't have to play Vanguard the way you had to play earlier MMOGs unless you want to. So as long as we can make leveling up less tedious, make sure there are ways to advance even if you only have a little time that day to play, etc. I think we'll be in good shape.
There are a lot of emotions out there. Strong ones. You have people, like I mentioned, that while they enjoyed EQ 1 back in the day, want a game that has the good parts of EQ 1 but not the tedious nature of it, or the necessity to play crazy hours, or to raid constantly. Those people I think, or at least most of them, will enjoy Vanguard if they give it a chance. But first we need to penetrate these assumptions and perceptions.
Then there's the whole WoW vs Vanguard issue where many people think that if they enjoy WoW they won't like Vanguard or vice versa. This is in part again to those pre-conceptions, but also our fan base has contributed to this stereotype. (sorry Vanguard fans, I don't mean to generalize here, but there has been a negative vibe, a polarizing vibe, even with me and others posting that this game is inclusive not exclusive).
Then there's the issue that Vanguard is a different game and won't appeal to everyone. Some people like that, and some people don't. It was always our desire to make a game where casual, core, and hard core players could co-exist and you can certainly solo or play casually in Vanguard and have a great time. But then there are also people who simply don't want to group. We need to make sure as many of those people can and will still have fun in Vanguard. Again, the game isn't designed to appeal to everyone and some casual players won't like Vanguard no matter what. And that's ok -- we didn't set out to make a game that is all things to all people. But I think quite a few people who have inaccurate preconceptions about the game actually will enjoy the game if they give it a chance. In fact, I know quite a few. The challenge is to get them to try it.
Then there are some of the controversial aspects of Vanguard -- a huge world with hopefully meaningful travel, no instancing, etc. When some people hear about these aspects of Vanguard that seem 'retro' they automatically assume the game isn't for them, that it's old school and that we decided to ignore modern MMOGs and were stuck blindly in the past when designing this game. We need to reach out to those people and explain where we embraced modern MMOG ideas and concepts but also why we chose to build on 'older' foundations, not because we're stubbornly set in our ways, but more so because Vanguard needs to be something different, and a combination of new, revolutionary ideas combined with an evolutionary and proven foundation. And the 'vision' can and does change and learn -- as we've mentioned, we are seriously considering some overland teleportation to take some of the tediousness out of travel. We can and will adapt, and we can do so without making a game that is a clone of another game -- the MMOG gamespace is certainly large and mature enough to support games with their own identity and also large enough where people deserve choices. So overall I think a lot of people will end up enjoying the game once they give it a chance.
In a sense the more controversial aspects of Vanguard have been a blessing and a curse. The game is selling very well, but it could do even better if we could get this message out, that more casual people can and are enjoying the game -- that soloing or playing in small groups is a viable and fun way to play the game. Yes, you can get more rewards out of grouping and Vanguard is a game mostly targeted at the core gamer who enjoys grouping. But again, that's not mutually exclusive with casual gamers having fun too.
We also included features that appeal to more casual players and players with different tastes. We have a robust and fun crafting and harvesting system. We have diplomacy which is enjoyable and is done soloing. We put in housing and the ability to own mounts and ships because we wanted to get the UO/SWG player to enjoy the game as well, and not just the EQ 1 player. But again, getting that message out to those who didn't frequent our official boards before release has been a challenge.
We made it clear how Vanguard differs from other more modern MMOGs. I think this has had both positive and negative effects. It attracted many people who wanted a modern MMOG that is still built on the tried and true foundation of older MMOGs and MUDs. But then it also created controversy and assumptions that Vanguard was just another EQ 1 with updated graphics. In reality, while the game does build on the past, it's also different and takes into account that the gamespace has evolved and that many players don't want a total re-hash of the past. So again, this appealed to those who followed the game closely before launch, but at the same time created misconceptions amongst those who didn't follow the game as closely.
Sometimes controversy is good, and sometimes it's bad. Again, I think better messaging and viral marketing will help here. But to answer your question, I think that's why there's been such polarizing opinions out there -- the Vanguard lovers and haters. EQ 1 created so many emotions, both positive and negative. In fact, I don't know if there's been another game where people have become so emotional both while playing and after they'd finished playing. I still run into people and when they find out my involvement with EQ I tense up a little bit, not knowing if they'll get all excited and tell me about all the great times they had, all the people they met and are still friends with, or how they met their spouse in-game, thanking me profusely for producing the game... or if they'll look at me in a not so friendly way and make sure I know how they dropped out of college, or how the game, in their opinion, caused friction between them and their loved ones, etc. So we need to reach out to the 'haters' because I know a lot of them would love Vanguard if they gave it a chance -- Vanguard is truly a game where we learned from the past and we know people have changed. I know people who were burned out years ago with EQ 1 style games but who love Vanguard, so I know this is doable. It's just easier said than done.
Then there's the issue of us releasing a bit early because of us having to release when we did due to financial issues. And then there's the fact that we released so close to the WoW expansion. That didn't help either, at least short term. I am confident though that as people finish up with the expansion, that many WoW gamers will migrate to Vanguard. People want something new in their lives, and that includes MMOGs. WoW is a fantastic game, but Vanguard is designed with additional polish but also additional depth and freedom to experience more from a virtual world.
So while the game continues to sell well and churn is low, I think we could have done even better had we more effectively addressed what you mentioned and what I talked about above. I'm not worried -- I know Vanguard is a great game and getting better every patch. But at the same time, I'm not as happy as I could be about the negativity and controversy surrounding the game, when we launched the game, etc. We will recover and get the message out, of that I am certain. And in a sense, we did know some of this would happen -- again, there are those drawn to Vanguard because of our EQ heritage, but we also knew that there would be those who would be turned off by that same heritage. The answer is like I said to get better messaging out there, to reach out to those people, to have those who did buy the game and who are enjoying it spread the word to the more cautious or cynical MMOG gamers.
I think we have three groups of people we want to target with this game.
1. People who look back at EQ fondly and want a new game that is built on the foundation and heritage we have. Those people are primarily the ones buying the game and playing it like crazy.
2. People who look back at EQ and either never enjoyed it or enjoyed it immensely but whose lives have changed and don't want to play an updated EQ 1. I think a great number of those people can be reached and will end up playing the game and enjoying it. We learned a lot over the years, from our triumphs and mistakes. Challenge doesn't have to equal tedium. Advancement doesn't have to mean tons of contiguous hours played, families and jobs ignored, etc. Some people within this group are simply done with games like Vanguard period, but I think a lot of them aren't and won't be when they find out that Vanguard is different than EQ 1 in the ways that are no longer compatible with their lifestyle. I also think the more UO-esque elements of Vanguard that were not present in EQ 1 will help make the game more appealing to old school MMOG players who were more interested in a broad rather than deep game. There is a lot more to do in Vanguard than there ever was to do in EQ 1 -- a lot more sandbox, broad, etc. activities like building houses, sailing ships, etc. And when we get full city building in, players will be able to run vendors, enjoy an RTS element, and much more. Lastly in this group are the PvPers and I think as we continue to make our PvP servers better and more varied that more PvP players will be attracted to the game.
3. New gamers or gamers for whom WoW was their first MMOG. Reaching out to them is also a challenge. Many still enjoy WoW, which is fine, and especially are enjoying it now that Burning Crusade is out. As I've posted for months, perhaps years, I am confident that some percentage of WoW players will end up looking for a deeper game like Vanguard, where there is a lot more to do and experience. And as I've posted in the past, it doesn't have to be a huge percentage of WoW players for us to reach 500,000+ subscribers in the first year or so. But, of course, launching so close to the WoW expansion hurt us in this area short term. But they will come
Lastly, there's the art style, being more like EQ 2, using more modern technology -- shaders, bump mapping, specularity, etc. Some people when they look at screenshots of Vanguard assume it is a game much more like EQ 2 than WoW. Here again I am confident that our decision to use newer technology will allow us to keep the game current for years to come. But in the short term, people who stayed with EQ 1 or moved to WoW because they didn't like the looks of EQ 2, or are having performance issues, or who assume Vanguard plays just like EQ 2 -- these people need to be reached as well, because Vanguard is its own game and plays differently and is not an EQ 2 clone any more than it is a WoW clone -- it's a different experience and will become even more so as the game continues to evolve. People will be buying better machines, and we will continue to optimize, and as other games (not just MMOGs) come out that use newer technology (FPS games, etc.), people won't assume as much that Vanguard = EQ 2 just because they use similar tech; rather they'll simply see a modern game with an incredibly immersive world and setting.
So, anyway, that's what I think. We have some hurdles to over come, but I'm confident we can and are overcoming them. The word is getting out. The game is controversial. Our heritage in being involved with EQ 1 is controversial -- a blessing and a curse. But as more and more positive reviews of the game come out, as we continue to optimize and fix bugs, as we continue to add polish, and as people who are playing and enjoying the game tell their friends about it, the game will grow and become that much more popular. It's hard to compete in the gamespace now with WoW being such a giant. But then it can also be very advantageous to offer an alternative to the 'mainstream'. Look at DAoC back in the EQ days -- that game was never as popular as EQ, but was still a great game and found a solid niche and did very well. And now they've been bought by EA and have some tremendous opportunities ahead of them. I think the same is true for Vanguard -- the Vanguard lovers will mellow and enjoy the game and spread the word, and the Vanguard haters will relax and the more they hear about the game and that it's not more of the same, or too retro, or too hard core, they'll give the game a chance too.
In the meantime we'll continue to make the game better, fix bugs, make tweaks, add some very cool features. And we'll make sure people know that you don't have to grind unless you want to, that you can play casually, that you have multiple advancement paths and don't have to fight all of the time. We'll make sure people know that you don't have to CR -- that you can summon your corpse at the altar. We'll make sure that skipping CRs isn't as painful as it is. We'll add some teleporters. We'll make sure that while grouping remains the focus, that we make better LFG and even matchmaking functionality. The word about how fun harvesting and crafting is will spread. The newness of diplomacy where you don't have to fight to advance, where you can find out the lore and storyline without having to hack and slash all of the time will get out there -- there's already been some very positive reviews where people are very excited about this third sphere of gameplay. The community will grow. The controversy and love-hate feelings will subside and having more options when it comes to MMOGs will appeal to more and more people. After all, people like choices.
Anyway, those are my thoughts as to 'why they rage', the controversy, and all the emotions surrounding this game. Thanks for listening
*bow*[/quote]
I plan on trying out Vanguard in 6 months or so, but it seems that he acknowledges the perception of Vanguard needs a lot of help to change and get more people to try it.
feel free to spin his comments towards love/hate for the game as you see fit. I personally hope it will turn out ok in the end, if perhaps too little, too late.
http://www.fohguild.org/forums/mmorpg-general-discussion/27044-why-all-nerd-rage-against-vanguard-43.html
[quote]Well said and a great question and certainly one we think about. I think there are misconceptions out there about the game and our intent. Our heritage making EQ 1 makes it so a lot of people automatically assume the game is only for the hardcore. I posted here and elsewhere (on other boards and our own message boards) for months before release talking about how the game is for casual, core, and hardcore players and our belief they can all co-exist in the same game. Unfortunately, a lot of people didn't read those posts and assume Vanguard is more hard core because EQ 1 was. I think I failed in reaching out to a lot of people and spreading the word that this game is NOT hard core like the original EQ 1. I probably spent more time talking about the game to those already interested in it than reaching out to those who were not. Ah well, hindsight is 20/20.
A lot of people wanted a new game that was like EQ 1 up to the Velious period and I and others described Vanguard thusly. The good part of that is we got those people excited about the game. The bad part was that people who didn't follow the game as closely didn't hear the complete message, that being that the game also has lots of content for casual and core gamers -- it was like when I posted, I was just preaching to the choir. People who didn't follow the message boards and only heard that Vanguard was made by the original EQ guys made assumptions that Vanguard would be just like EQ and require tons of time to play, that you had to raid, that you had to group constantly, etc.
Like I said, that message resonated with a lot of people in a positive way, but it also did harm in that those people who don't want another EQ 1 were turned off when they heard about Vanguard but not all of the details behind the game. There were and are also a lot of 'Vanbois' who spread the word that this game was not for WoW players and that people who like a more casual game like WoW were not welcome in Vanguard. In that sense, the messaging backfired and many people aren't even giving the game a chance.
I think we could have reached out to those people on other boards in a better way and made sure people knew that casual gamers are indeed welcome in Vanguard. I also think that after level 12ish people are feeling that they have to group, and that is something we need to address. We also need better LFG tools so that people can find groups. We were over-worried that the newbie areas would be over crowded and now we face some under population as people level up and spread out over the large world that is Telon. That is why we are working on making the LFG tools better, looking into adding some overland teleportation, etc. Under population is actually worse than over population because it can be difficult to find people to play with and this hurts community building.
We also need to change our messaging in ads, both online and in print, and attempt to dispel the assumption some people are making that Vanguard is only hardcore. In reality we very much understand that the gamespace has grown and evolved. People who had a lot of time on their hands and played a ton of EQ have grown up, got jobs, families, etc. Even those who played EQ a ton of hours and had a blast for years playing that game now are in situations where while they had fun with EQ want a different game that requires less overall time invested and especially less amounts of contiguous time and the ability to play more casually. Like I said, I think we need to make some changes to the game (nothing fundamental, but some tweaks here and there), but the even bigger problem is that many people aren't even trying the game out because they've already made up their minds that Vanguard = EQ 1.
Some of this will be addressed through viral marketing. As those who are playing the game enjoy Vanguard, they will tell their friends that this game is not as hard core and nearly as tedious as EQ 1. This will help, but I also think we need to be more proactive in spreading the word about what Vanguard is really like. Heck, even people who are giving the game a chance have misconceptions. I was grouped around level 10 and we got into a situation where we were in the floating cities above Jalen's Crossing and died a few times and just couldn't get back to our corpses to do a CR. We ending up dying several times. I said forget it, and went to the altar and just summoned my corpse to me (something you could NOT do in EQ 1). I advised the others in my pick-up group to do the same and they didn't know you could do that! They thought you HAD to CR, just like EQ 1. Man, that was an eye-opener. I think there are people who truly believe you either have to CR or that the penalties for summoning your corpse to the altar are so bad that you never want to do it. And it some cases, at higher levels, and depending on what mob you die to, the penalties *are* too severe, and we need to make some changes. But just as importantly, perhaps even more importantly, we need to get the word out that you don't have to CR in the vast majority of cases, and that also in the vast majority of cases summoning your corpse to the altar where you pop up when you die does NOT include a heinous penalty; rather, that's why we put that functionality in there. Having to CR in Vanguard is the exception, not the rule -- only in fighting extremely difficult mobs where you and your party knowingly accept the risk vs. reward of fighting specific boss mobs likely in the depths of dungeons do you take the risk of having to CR (or get your corpse dragged out) assuming you totally wipe and don't have someone who survives on hand to resurrect you. And I think that's just one powerful example of false assumptions that are being made about the game, either by people playing it (who may get frustrated when they actually don't have to) or by people who have heard about the game and figure, again, that it's hardcore and an old school MMOG with updated graphics. Ah! This is frustrating, but we will get the message out.
No, we're not talking about changing the game to be a lot more similar to WoW. We're not trying to make a WoW clone. The game is more challenging, and it does take longer to level up, but not a lot longer really -- we've timed it. And the additional challenge is optional -- you don't have to play Vanguard the way you had to play earlier MMOGs unless you want to. So as long as we can make leveling up less tedious, make sure there are ways to advance even if you only have a little time that day to play, etc. I think we'll be in good shape.
There are a lot of emotions out there. Strong ones. You have people, like I mentioned, that while they enjoyed EQ 1 back in the day, want a game that has the good parts of EQ 1 but not the tedious nature of it, or the necessity to play crazy hours, or to raid constantly. Those people I think, or at least most of them, will enjoy Vanguard if they give it a chance. But first we need to penetrate these assumptions and perceptions.
Then there's the whole WoW vs Vanguard issue where many people think that if they enjoy WoW they won't like Vanguard or vice versa. This is in part again to those pre-conceptions, but also our fan base has contributed to this stereotype. (sorry Vanguard fans, I don't mean to generalize here, but there has been a negative vibe, a polarizing vibe, even with me and others posting that this game is inclusive not exclusive).
Then there's the issue that Vanguard is a different game and won't appeal to everyone. Some people like that, and some people don't. It was always our desire to make a game where casual, core, and hard core players could co-exist and you can certainly solo or play casually in Vanguard and have a great time. But then there are also people who simply don't want to group. We need to make sure as many of those people can and will still have fun in Vanguard. Again, the game isn't designed to appeal to everyone and some casual players won't like Vanguard no matter what. And that's ok -- we didn't set out to make a game that is all things to all people. But I think quite a few people who have inaccurate preconceptions about the game actually will enjoy the game if they give it a chance. In fact, I know quite a few. The challenge is to get them to try it.
Then there are some of the controversial aspects of Vanguard -- a huge world with hopefully meaningful travel, no instancing, etc. When some people hear about these aspects of Vanguard that seem 'retro' they automatically assume the game isn't for them, that it's old school and that we decided to ignore modern MMOGs and were stuck blindly in the past when designing this game. We need to reach out to those people and explain where we embraced modern MMOG ideas and concepts but also why we chose to build on 'older' foundations, not because we're stubbornly set in our ways, but more so because Vanguard needs to be something different, and a combination of new, revolutionary ideas combined with an evolutionary and proven foundation. And the 'vision' can and does change and learn -- as we've mentioned, we are seriously considering some overland teleportation to take some of the tediousness out of travel. We can and will adapt, and we can do so without making a game that is a clone of another game -- the MMOG gamespace is certainly large and mature enough to support games with their own identity and also large enough where people deserve choices. So overall I think a lot of people will end up enjoying the game once they give it a chance.
In a sense the more controversial aspects of Vanguard have been a blessing and a curse. The game is selling very well, but it could do even better if we could get this message out, that more casual people can and are enjoying the game -- that soloing or playing in small groups is a viable and fun way to play the game. Yes, you can get more rewards out of grouping and Vanguard is a game mostly targeted at the core gamer who enjoys grouping. But again, that's not mutually exclusive with casual gamers having fun too.
We also included features that appeal to more casual players and players with different tastes. We have a robust and fun crafting and harvesting system. We have diplomacy which is enjoyable and is done soloing. We put in housing and the ability to own mounts and ships because we wanted to get the UO/SWG player to enjoy the game as well, and not just the EQ 1 player. But again, getting that message out to those who didn't frequent our official boards before release has been a challenge.
We made it clear how Vanguard differs from other more modern MMOGs. I think this has had both positive and negative effects. It attracted many people who wanted a modern MMOG that is still built on the tried and true foundation of older MMOGs and MUDs. But then it also created controversy and assumptions that Vanguard was just another EQ 1 with updated graphics. In reality, while the game does build on the past, it's also different and takes into account that the gamespace has evolved and that many players don't want a total re-hash of the past. So again, this appealed to those who followed the game closely before launch, but at the same time created misconceptions amongst those who didn't follow the game as closely.
Sometimes controversy is good, and sometimes it's bad. Again, I think better messaging and viral marketing will help here. But to answer your question, I think that's why there's been such polarizing opinions out there -- the Vanguard lovers and haters. EQ 1 created so many emotions, both positive and negative. In fact, I don't know if there's been another game where people have become so emotional both while playing and after they'd finished playing. I still run into people and when they find out my involvement with EQ I tense up a little bit, not knowing if they'll get all excited and tell me about all the great times they had, all the people they met and are still friends with, or how they met their spouse in-game, thanking me profusely for producing the game... or if they'll look at me in a not so friendly way and make sure I know how they dropped out of college, or how the game, in their opinion, caused friction between them and their loved ones, etc. So we need to reach out to the 'haters' because I know a lot of them would love Vanguard if they gave it a chance -- Vanguard is truly a game where we learned from the past and we know people have changed. I know people who were burned out years ago with EQ 1 style games but who love Vanguard, so I know this is doable. It's just easier said than done.
Then there's the issue of us releasing a bit early because of us having to release when we did due to financial issues. And then there's the fact that we released so close to the WoW expansion. That didn't help either, at least short term. I am confident though that as people finish up with the expansion, that many WoW gamers will migrate to Vanguard. People want something new in their lives, and that includes MMOGs. WoW is a fantastic game, but Vanguard is designed with additional polish but also additional depth and freedom to experience more from a virtual world.
So while the game continues to sell well and churn is low, I think we could have done even better had we more effectively addressed what you mentioned and what I talked about above. I'm not worried -- I know Vanguard is a great game and getting better every patch. But at the same time, I'm not as happy as I could be about the negativity and controversy surrounding the game, when we launched the game, etc. We will recover and get the message out, of that I am certain. And in a sense, we did know some of this would happen -- again, there are those drawn to Vanguard because of our EQ heritage, but we also knew that there would be those who would be turned off by that same heritage. The answer is like I said to get better messaging out there, to reach out to those people, to have those who did buy the game and who are enjoying it spread the word to the more cautious or cynical MMOG gamers.
I think we have three groups of people we want to target with this game.
1. People who look back at EQ fondly and want a new game that is built on the foundation and heritage we have. Those people are primarily the ones buying the game and playing it like crazy.
2. People who look back at EQ and either never enjoyed it or enjoyed it immensely but whose lives have changed and don't want to play an updated EQ 1. I think a great number of those people can be reached and will end up playing the game and enjoying it. We learned a lot over the years, from our triumphs and mistakes. Challenge doesn't have to equal tedium. Advancement doesn't have to mean tons of contiguous hours played, families and jobs ignored, etc. Some people within this group are simply done with games like Vanguard period, but I think a lot of them aren't and won't be when they find out that Vanguard is different than EQ 1 in the ways that are no longer compatible with their lifestyle. I also think the more UO-esque elements of Vanguard that were not present in EQ 1 will help make the game more appealing to old school MMOG players who were more interested in a broad rather than deep game. There is a lot more to do in Vanguard than there ever was to do in EQ 1 -- a lot more sandbox, broad, etc. activities like building houses, sailing ships, etc. And when we get full city building in, players will be able to run vendors, enjoy an RTS element, and much more. Lastly in this group are the PvPers and I think as we continue to make our PvP servers better and more varied that more PvP players will be attracted to the game.
3. New gamers or gamers for whom WoW was their first MMOG. Reaching out to them is also a challenge. Many still enjoy WoW, which is fine, and especially are enjoying it now that Burning Crusade is out. As I've posted for months, perhaps years, I am confident that some percentage of WoW players will end up looking for a deeper game like Vanguard, where there is a lot more to do and experience. And as I've posted in the past, it doesn't have to be a huge percentage of WoW players for us to reach 500,000+ subscribers in the first year or so. But, of course, launching so close to the WoW expansion hurt us in this area short term. But they will come
Lastly, there's the art style, being more like EQ 2, using more modern technology -- shaders, bump mapping, specularity, etc. Some people when they look at screenshots of Vanguard assume it is a game much more like EQ 2 than WoW. Here again I am confident that our decision to use newer technology will allow us to keep the game current for years to come. But in the short term, people who stayed with EQ 1 or moved to WoW because they didn't like the looks of EQ 2, or are having performance issues, or who assume Vanguard plays just like EQ 2 -- these people need to be reached as well, because Vanguard is its own game and plays differently and is not an EQ 2 clone any more than it is a WoW clone -- it's a different experience and will become even more so as the game continues to evolve. People will be buying better machines, and we will continue to optimize, and as other games (not just MMOGs) come out that use newer technology (FPS games, etc.), people won't assume as much that Vanguard = EQ 2 just because they use similar tech; rather they'll simply see a modern game with an incredibly immersive world and setting.
So, anyway, that's what I think. We have some hurdles to over come, but I'm confident we can and are overcoming them. The word is getting out. The game is controversial. Our heritage in being involved with EQ 1 is controversial -- a blessing and a curse. But as more and more positive reviews of the game come out, as we continue to optimize and fix bugs, as we continue to add polish, and as people who are playing and enjoying the game tell their friends about it, the game will grow and become that much more popular. It's hard to compete in the gamespace now with WoW being such a giant. But then it can also be very advantageous to offer an alternative to the 'mainstream'. Look at DAoC back in the EQ days -- that game was never as popular as EQ, but was still a great game and found a solid niche and did very well. And now they've been bought by EA and have some tremendous opportunities ahead of them. I think the same is true for Vanguard -- the Vanguard lovers will mellow and enjoy the game and spread the word, and the Vanguard haters will relax and the more they hear about the game and that it's not more of the same, or too retro, or too hard core, they'll give the game a chance too.
In the meantime we'll continue to make the game better, fix bugs, make tweaks, add some very cool features. And we'll make sure people know that you don't have to grind unless you want to, that you can play casually, that you have multiple advancement paths and don't have to fight all of the time. We'll make sure people know that you don't have to CR -- that you can summon your corpse at the altar. We'll make sure that skipping CRs isn't as painful as it is. We'll add some teleporters. We'll make sure that while grouping remains the focus, that we make better LFG and even matchmaking functionality. The word about how fun harvesting and crafting is will spread. The newness of diplomacy where you don't have to fight to advance, where you can find out the lore and storyline without having to hack and slash all of the time will get out there -- there's already been some very positive reviews where people are very excited about this third sphere of gameplay. The community will grow. The controversy and love-hate feelings will subside and having more options when it comes to MMOGs will appeal to more and more people. After all, people like choices.
Anyway, those are my thoughts as to 'why they rage', the controversy, and all the emotions surrounding this game. Thanks for listening
*bow*[/quote]
I plan on trying out Vanguard in 6 months or so, but it seems that he acknowledges the perception of Vanguard needs a lot of help to change and get more people to try it.
feel free to spin his comments towards love/hate for the game as you see fit. I personally hope it will turn out ok in the end, if perhaps too little, too late.
"The most merciful thing in the world, I think, is the inability of the human mind to correlate all its contents." -H.P. Lovecraft, "The Call of Cthulhu"
Comments
Viral marketing? They intend to install a virus on our computers that distributes marketing material?
When did he write that?
Because in SEVERAL interviews right before the game was released he commented on the fact that Sigil prided on the fact this game isn't for the weak of hearted and will tend to be loved by HardCore gamers.
It's like he did a 180.
And, yes, what does he mean about implementing Viral ads ingame? WTF, Brad. I don't think you get it. Dont get your employees to pose as regular people and then have them post awesome comments on public boards! SWG got caught doing that and it just made things worse for em (Post NGE)
People who have to create conspiracy and hate threads to further a cause lacks in intellectual comprehension of diversity.
Basically, they pretend to be regular gamers that like their game, and they try to put a positive spin on everything about a game.
It's shaky ground. When a community finds out it usually turns for the worst, so good viral marketing consists of being a convincing person that blends in with the rest of the public.
Another example of viral marketing is Halo's ilovebees website.
The one thing that really needs to stop for Vanguard to do well is the Vanbois need to stop attacking and comparing it to WoW, and really emphasize the good unique points of the game. Attacking WoW or other MMO's and saying "Vanguard is better" doesn't give anyone any substance or actual material to judge the game off of.
Honesty works for me too. The more people say, "Vanguard has never crashed on me and runs perfectly smooth" the less I want to play because I know it's a lie, and that I would have to eventually meet and deal with these people in Telon somewhere.
"The most merciful thing in the world, I think, is the inability of the human mind to correlate all its contents." -H.P. Lovecraft, "The Call of Cthulhu"
Thank you for the definition, I really was unfamiliar with it. I went to Webster's Dictionary and looked up "viral" to see if there was another usage I was unfamiliar with, there wasn't. Apparently Webster's is not up on all the new marketing terminology.
He says this and yet in view of update #1, were solo play were more or less removed for many clases I somehow doubt his sincerety.
I actually took another month to check update #1 out, I took a station pass though as I figured if this still blows I can give eq2 another whirl.
My bard was reduced from a viable solo or "casual" character to something that could barely deal with any mob that could potentially give XP and adequate rewards.
As I was mostly geard out in rare crafted the item nerf, ( you know that one that would end up in the item "always being better" ), killed me in one swift blow.
I mailed all my nice gear ( the few parts that still were indeed nice ) to a friend who has decided to push on.
Game over.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Originally posted by Jerek_
I wonder if you honestly even believe what you type, or if you live in a made up world of facts.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Bite me, Turbine.
You may be right here but I hope not. If Brad is able to make good on what he says in this note Vanguard will be one of the most successful games in the history of gaming. If not, Vanguard will go the way or Horizons.
I think this note really defines Brad's "Vision". At least on paper it looks great. Only time will tell if he can pull it off.
It should be interesting to see what affect this has on the game in the next year and how they continue to spin the changes in their favor. It will also be interesting to see how the Vanguard community reacts to Brad trying to convert WoW players over to his game, since the community on these forums as least has made it very clear that WoW players are not welcome in their world.
Also I am not in the least convinced that a game can be made to appeal to all play styles. When they try, they end up being mediocre in all departments.
Ungh... that is just too much to read and I really don't care either.
Ungh... that is just too much to read and I really don't care either.
Then why post in this thread if you don't care? just by merely posting gives the impression you actually do.
--Brad again acknowledges the existence of 'Vanbois', the detrimental cult-center militia of Vanguard that incessantly forge the fallacies of the game into spears they use against the majority that doesn't mistake the game's fallacies as features like they do. In short, the "go back to WoW crowd".
I wish he'd go on an all out offensive and crumble the ground beneath that bunch so they have nothing to stand upon. But since they're standing on things like soloing being miserable, levelling tedious and so on, things that they champion...removing those grounds means fixing the game. Not so easy.
--Besides acknowledging a sect of gamers within Vanguard that wards off some potential buyers, he makes little to NO reference of people playing the game as it is and are displeased with it. He insinuates the only people displeased with the games are the ones who've never given it a chance in the first place and have misconceptions about it.
He does though say that a lot of changes NEED to happen to make the game the way it was intended...but so what? Acknowleding the problem isn't the same as fixing it. What's the point of wanting to spread false word of mouth about the game just because you 'intend' for it to be a certain way?
Back to the original point, there's people playing the game as it is who have feelings about the game he considers 'misconceptions'. That's ridiculous.
--For all his pointing out of the 'Vanbois' and otherwise anti-WoW crowd, he sure does bring WoW up a lot along with some pretty hefty claims that Vanguard is deeper and more challenging...more scarily he seems quite dependent upon Burning Crusades being a flash in the pan.
Oh well, all together he's only speaking about potential, what he 'thinks' and the same ol' "this game is for everyone, but don't understand me wrong, it's not for everyone." And we witnessed what that did for the game's initial success.
At least he's admitting things like quick travel are needed, less tedium, more soloability and shorter levelling times. Yet he addresses them all as if they need to be carefully given out in moderation as if they're a 'bad' thing, how're you going to reach the crowd that has 'misconceptions' about this game when you treat features that they cherish as a mere bone you're throwing? Speak of all that in a GOOD light and champion innovations of these times rather than addressing them as nuisances you're conforming to simply because you have to.
I don't want a total solo experience but he is correct in that it needs to be tweaked to allow solo play after lvl 20 or so. Who knows if this is just spin, he took the time to address things so maybe they see the flaws that are keeping a segment of the population away. I continue to play and if the game gets the correct tweaks and updates maybe it will become the game many have waited for.
I'm enjoying myself but can't help but see where these things he talks about needs to be added and or changed. MMO's evolve, I'm sure when he released it he thought that the system was done right but hindsight is 20/20 and it sounds like some of the annoying things will be addressed. I knew when I bought the game that there would be roadbumps and trust me I've had a couple moments were I was actually cursing at my monitor.
One thing that might help others after each major patch/update do a full file scan, if I don't do this the game always runs buggy and hitches and I have the crash here and there. I forgot to do it after this last update and things just wouldn't run smooth, I exited and ran the full file scan and got my stability back.
I'm glad he took the time to post his feelings/concerns but now comes the important part, acting on those comments. If he follows through with his word then I have nothing but respect, if its simply spin and PR damage control then it will do more damage than good.
Peace
Thank you for the definition, I really was unfamiliar with it. I went to Webster's Dictionary and looked up "viral" to see if there was another usage I was unfamiliar with, there wasn't. Apparently Webster's is not up on all the new marketing terminology.
To be more precisely, viral marketing does not have to do necessarily with people who act as if they are consumers, viral marketing is mainly word-to-word advertisement by users. Stealth marketing is when a employees, producers etc pretend as if they were consumers and rate their product higher, etc.jeez... where to begin...
The fact that he is posting and to such an extent shows the desperation... no matter how many times he says 'sales are great' it is always followed by a a big fat but... 'we could have done better'... etc. Free month quitters must have been enormous...
You can read a lot into what he leaves out of his novella post... the people who played it - tried to like it - and ended up being dissapointed in almost every way... never mind the bugs. I don't blame him for leaving it out - I would have too.
I like the fact that he says WOW is a great game - he is right. I tried to like his game but, for me, it is just to drab, bug filled and mediocre.
I have nothing aginast those who love Van - whatever butters your muffin - plenty to go around. I hope it survives and improves and lasts a long time. I don't imagine I would ever try it again but who knows.
You can take it as despearation or you can just take it as him being honest about the state of the game without any kind of preconceived agenda of desperation. to each his own.
I hope that they remain proactive, I don't think Brad is god I don't think he has all the answers but for him to recognize some key things and then hopefully act on them is key. I was in a group in Thestra doing a Vampire dungeon last night and honestly it was a total blast, the problem? finding that group took an hour of me soloing mobs and see very little gain. When I got in the group I gained half a lvl in around 2 hours which isn't bad. The lfg system needs heavy changes its just to hard to find the people you need and this leads to tons of people with flags up not finding each other.
Peace
for those that are wigged out by the term "viral marketing" its not viral ads being put into ya computer lol. its a terminology in advertisiing to increase awareness in a product what it offers, its features, its benefits, etc. gotta admit thats funny the responses in 1 or 2 of the posts lol. but cant blame ya, but hey, knowing is half the battle lol.
I dont think there is any real agenda, I think he is just being up front and honest about the issues that came up, and questions being asked regarding the game's statte, and what is in the near and immediate future, and how they hope to improve the game to convince people that it is in fact not a Hardcore gamers world, that although it has ties to the Old school MMO method, it combines both retro and modern MMo features. and I think that is good. But also he was hones that this game is not for everyone, and not everyone will be convinced its the game for them, but thats okay, there is nothing wrong with that. but I appreciate the post he gave pointig out the games fualts, and how they hope to fix whatever mistakes and mishaps there have been both on a software level, and as well as the perception this game has receieved.
id say give it time, give it a few months see what happens, get a buddy key, do the trial when it comes out. but i truthfully feel there is no 'agenda" to be 'read" within that post.
i was a bit frustrated with the game during the beta, but I threw down the $50 and the game so far despite its nagging issues is pretty damn stable. but then again I just bought aa high end dual core computer with a 8800 GTS so that helps in the performance area lol. its obvious its going to tkae a bit of hardwork to fix this game, but so far I have grown to like it over the couse of a day since i been playing.
hell i got all the way to lvl 10 solo, got a mount already, a saddle bag, got plate armor for the most part with good stats, and the quests although are like most other MMOs, e.g. kill 10 of these, get this item, deliver this report, there is a story attached, and some are actually interesting reads.
here is me with my lvl 10 orc warrior started playing last night maxxed sliders 1600x1200 High Render quality
3.4ghz Phenom II X4 965, 8GB PC12800 DDR3 GSKILL, EVGA 560GTX 2GB OC, 640GB HD SATA II, BFG 1000WATT PSU. MSI NF980-G65 TRI-SLI MOBO.
Some of this will be addressed through viral marketing. As those who are playing the game enjoy Vanguard, they will tell their friends that this game is not as hard core and nearly as tedious as EQ 1.
unquote.
As for why the apparent 180, my guess is it's the same reason DDO did a 180 on "you have to group -- no soloing" within weeks of launch. Because they're figuring out that they have aimed at too small a core of players who like what they are doing, and they need to broaden things up and allow more varied tastes to enjoy the game or else they go under.
C
I told you so Brad. I can't even count the number of things in his post that he says now but rejected when i said them as a beta tester. God does this make me laugh.
EQ1, EQ2, SWG, SWTOR, GW, GW2 CoH, CoV, FFXI, WoW, CO, War,TSW and a slew of free trials and beta tests
All I want is the truth
Just gimme some truth
John Lennon
Kind of humorous how even Brad is basically saying that the Vanguard fans did more to hurt the game than help it though. Like many of us have been saying. The "Go back to WoW, n00b" sayers are a lot of the reason that many of us don't want to even try Vanguard.
Nice to see him acknowledge that fact. Now if the Vanbois would only get that through there thick skulls...You NEED more people in this game. Brad himself wants WoW people to play.
Now...can't we all just...get along?
Never be afraid of choices. More choices are always good things.
My, Brad does like to talk
Its just more of him telling it as he sees it, like he says, hes in the game playing it.
The one thing I hate is the Vanguard elite snobs, the "go back to wow" crowd, Iv had to stop reading the silky venom site forums coz some of the posters there just cant be playing the same game as me, they say they want the game harder but if thats true why dont they just fight higher lvl mobs? why long posts about how easy they find it all.
VG isnt the best game ever but it could turn out pretty good, it has alot of what I like in a game and even though some people only give out one chance, im prepared to come and go a bit coz in the end I get entertained.