Howdy, Stranger!
It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!
Quick Links
Should Vanguard be free to play??
turbohale
Member Posts: 33
Hi, Im just curious after reading the comments on these boards and also being a Vanguard player that cancelled my account, went back to it then cancelled again, if the majority of this community thinks Vanguard (in its current state) should be free to play like GW or Archlord??
Comments
I hope they raise the subscribtion fee, so undecided people who doesn't really like the game anyway, will give up completely.
So we won't see the million posts on how to make Vanguard more casual friendly and turn it into Eq2.1
Although I am taking applications for volunteers to come and mow my lawn for free this summer.
Any takers?
I mean it's only fair.
I totally agree that they want to milk every nickel they can from us which is why I am surprised they have not released a hard-copy players guide or atlas (even though it would be outdated the second it was printed).
Teak Silverleaf
18 Cleric
Targonor
Doesn't work for you and it doesn't work for SOE and Sigil either.
I agree with the above mentioned that it should not be free as support would stop and the game would cease to progress forward.
EQ -70sk,70clr
DaoC- didnt make it past lvl 10
Archlord-lvl7 booorrrring
WoW- 60war,60priest, 70rogue
well i wouldnt mind if it were free
I totally agree that they want to milk every nickel they can from us which is why I am surprised they have not released a hard-copy players guide or atlas (even though it would be outdated the second it was printed).
Teak Silverleaf
18 Cleric
Targonor
That one's easy, I think. Publishing Guides and Atlas's is the pervue of publishing companies, such as Prima. My guess is that they demand to see the real subscription numbers from SoE on V:SoH. And based on those, have decided that there is not enough interest in V:SoH to justify the risk of a publishing run. Which fundamentally means that they do not see 5000+ people buying the Guide. Which, in and of itself, is pretty telling about the future success of V:SoH, and the current subscription base, and the projected subscription base over the next two years.
Compare that with WoW, which has had two editions of the base Strategy Guide, a Hardcover Atlas, a Dungeon Guide, and the Burning Crusade Guide. Same with DAoC, which has had more guides than I can remember. And don't even ask about EQ1 !
So, bottom line is this. From *every* rational indicator, V:SoH is a failed MMORPG, even though so many wanted it to succeed.
I totally agree that they want to milk every nickel they can from us which is why I am surprised they have not released a hard-copy players guide or atlas (even though it would be outdated the second it was printed).
Teak Silverleaf
18 Cleric
Targonor
That one's easy, I think. Publishing Guides and Atlas's is the pervue of publishing companies, such as Prima. My guess is that they demand to see the real subscription numbers from SoE on V:SoH. And based on those, have decided that there is not enough interest in V:SoH to justify the risk of a publishing run. Which fundamentally means that they do not see 5000+ people buying the Guide. Which, in and of itself, is pretty telling about the future success of V:SoH, and the current subscription base, and the projected subscription base over the next two years.
Compare that with WoW, which has had two editions of the base Strategy Guide, a Hardcover Atlas, a Dungeon Guide, and the Burning Crusade Guide. Same with DAoC, which has had more guides than I can remember. And don't even ask about EQ1 !
So, bottom line is this. From *every* rational indicator, V:SoH is a failed MMORPG, even though so many wanted it to succeed.
Yes yes, we know, "WoW iz teh bezt!".
Wrong, in your opinion it is a failed MMORPG, but in reality an MMORPG has only failed if at the point where the last server is shut down its has failed to recover its costs.
And yes, it should be free, like every other MMO on the market and everything else in the world. Okay, maybe not. Does it really matter if it is free? If you like the MMO you will pay the subscription, its not like $15 a month is a lot! If you dont like it you will find another MMO to play, and spend your $15 there instead.
I totally agree that they want to milk every nickel they can from us which is why I am surprised they have not released a hard-copy players guide or atlas (even though it would be outdated the second it was printed).
Teak Silverleaf
18 Cleric
Targonor
That one's easy, I think. Publishing Guides and Atlas's is the pervue of publishing companies, such as Prima. My guess is that they demand to see the real subscription numbers from SoE on V:SoH. And based on those, have decided that there is not enough interest in V:SoH to justify the risk of a publishing run. Which fundamentally means that they do not see 5000+ people buying the Guide. Which, in and of itself, is pretty telling about the future success of V:SoH, and the current subscription base, and the projected subscription base over the next two years.
Compare that with WoW, which has had two editions of the base Strategy Guide, a Hardcover Atlas, a Dungeon Guide, and the Burning Crusade Guide. Same with DAoC, which has had more guides than I can remember. And don't even ask about EQ1 !
So, bottom line is this. From *every* rational indicator, V:SoH is a failed MMORPG, even though so many wanted it to succeed.
Yes yes, we know, "WoW iz teh bezt!".
Actually, that would more properly be " WoW is the best ! " .
I totally agree that they want to milk every nickel they can from us which is why I am surprised they have not released a hard-copy players guide or atlas (even though it would be outdated the second it was printed).
Teak Silverleaf
18 Cleric
Targonor
That one's easy, I think. Publishing Guides and Atlas's is the pervue of publishing companies, such as Prima. My guess is that they demand to see the real subscription numbers from SoE on V:SoH. And based on those, have decided that there is not enough interest in V:SoH to justify the risk of a publishing run. Which fundamentally means that they do not see 5000+ people buying the Guide. Which, in and of itself, is pretty telling about the future success of V:SoH, and the current subscription base, and the projected subscription base over the next two years.
Compare that with WoW, which has had two editions of the base Strategy Guide, a Hardcover Atlas, a Dungeon Guide, and the Burning Crusade Guide. Same with DAoC, which has had more guides than I can remember. And don't even ask about EQ1 !
So, bottom line is this. From *every* rational indicator, V:SoH is a failed MMORPG, even though so many wanted it to succeed.
Yes yes, we know, "WoW iz teh bezt!".
Actually, that would more properly be " WoW is the best ! " .
That's true...it is the best polished turd in all of gamingI totally agree that they want to milk every nickel they can from us which is why I am surprised they have not released a hard-copy players guide or atlas (even though it would be outdated the second it was printed).
Teak Silverleaf
18 Cleric
Targonor
That one's easy, I think. Publishing Guides and Atlas's is the pervue of publishing companies, such as Prima. My guess is that they demand to see the real subscription numbers from SoE on V:SoH. And based on those, have decided that there is not enough interest in V:SoH to justify the risk of a publishing run. Which fundamentally means that they do not see 5000+ people buying the Guide. Which, in and of itself, is pretty telling about the future success of V:SoH, and the current subscription base, and the projected subscription base over the next two years.
Compare that with WoW, which has had two editions of the base Strategy Guide, a Hardcover Atlas, a Dungeon Guide, and the Burning Crusade Guide. Same with DAoC, which has had more guides than I can remember. And don't even ask about EQ1 !
So, bottom line is this. From *every* rational indicator, V:SoH is a failed MMORPG, even though so many wanted it to succeed.
Yes yes, we know, "WoW iz teh bezt!".
Actually, that would more properly be " WoW is the best ! " .
That's true...it is the best polished turd in all of gamingAnd that would make V:SoH what? The most Unpolished Turd in all of gaming?
Anyway. Last post here. Sorry for the short hijack.
Not free but not a full subscription price either. By the dev's own admission this game was released too soon and we still got charged full price. Everybody says that the game has a lot of potential. The problem is we shouldn't have to pay for potential. We should only pay for the current product not what it has the potential to become. I think for now until the potential is actually met, we should only be charged half price on the subscription fees. When they deliver the other half of the game that Brad so eloquently talked about last week then they can charge full price.
Either way though it's getting to the point where I'm just about done with this game. All the bugs, nerfs and performance problems are finally taking it's toll. I really do like the game but I start asking myself is it worth the frustration and all the aggravation that I'm going through. Every patch seems to make performance worse for me even though my pc meets or exceeds all reccommended specs. So I ask myself, do I really want to play a game with problems that has a potential that may never be fulfilled? Or do I want to play a game that is relatively problem free and is not as frustrating? Maybe there is something to all those vanboi's saying "Go play WoW". Do they know something that I don't know?
As there are a lot of games out there that are more finished, better balanced and have less bugs then Vanguard and are free, I would say yes, Vanguard should be free. I played the game for 3 weeks until frustration with the multitide of bugs and servercrashes made me cancel my account. I would possibly return if it was free. That is assuming they at least fix the major bugs and even then im not sure. In its current state i wouldn't even play it again if they offered me 15 dollars a month to play it.
Nowadays people, and I use that term very loosely, think that any MMO that doesn't have 8 million subs like WoW is a failure. This is just not the case. And to say Vanguard is a failed MMORPG after a month and a half of release is far too short sighted. Give it a year and then let's talk about success or failure.
No, that doesn't make sense. Unless you think it's ok to buy a tv that has say a number of channels that don't work.
Either I don't mind paying for something good, or if it is broken, malfunctioning, or below par I won't buy it.
1) Generally, a MMORPG, upon purchase, gives its buyers a 30 day "free" trial upon purchase.
2) After the 30 day trial is over, the general cost of a MMORPG is $14.99 a month.
3) Generally speaking, most MMORPG's run into a myriad of bugs and problems that render the game "unplayable" as promised on the box - or as promised as advertised. These problems seem to follow every new MMORPG release around for several months.
My solution? Shorten the "free" trial to 7 days. After that, make a "special offer" that the first 6 months of the MMORPG will be only $7.99 a month, and then will increase to the normal $14.99 a month. This will generate MORE revenue for the developers of the games, and allow them the funds to FIX their games. I say this because it will attract more players, increase initial subscribers and give the game a jump start.
Frankly speaking, I don't think Vanguard should go free to play. However, I think more people are quitting the game in higher numbers than new people are coming into it. The game has major problems and needs to be fixed. My fear is that as more and more people leave the game, the funds will not be there for the necessary fixes.
http://aion.24-hrgaming.net
Nowadays people, and I use that term very loosely, think that any MMO that doesn't have 8 million subs like WoW is a failure. This is just not the case. And to say Vanguard is a failed MMORPG after a month and a half of release is far too short sighted. Give it a year and then let's talk about success or failure.
Give it a year? Or, 179.45 to be precise on a monthly sub?Shadowbane didn't get a year. Horizons didn't get a year. Dark & Light didn't get a year. Many others didn't get a year before settling in a niche little games with hardly any worthwhile number of subs.
Many didn't even make it to market, such as Wish and the Microsoft title I can't even remember now.
Why should Brad's bungle get a year? Or at least a year at the customer's expense. Because he's Brad? Vanguard doesn't need 8 million subscribers, but it needs to keep people and attract new people and the people who sing the game's praises are doing it a disservice because you convince some people to try it out it its dysfunctional state and they wind up leaving after a month or two because of it. It should still be in BETA and free to those testers until it's a fully functional MMO.
Nowadays people, and I use that term very loosely, think that any MMO that doesn't have 8 million subs like WoW is a failure. This is just not the case. And to say Vanguard is a failed MMORPG after a month and a half of release is far too short sighted. Give it a year and then let's talk about success or failure.
I knid of disagree with you.MMORPG's rely greatly on word-of-mouth . . . and Vanguard isn't getting much of it. I have tried and tried to get some of my old guildmates to join me on Vanguard. They grumble about some specific things that they have heard about it and ask me if they are true. I won't lie to them . . but I DO say that the devs are always patching the game and that it is getting fixed in increments.
Their response? "I'll wait, then". I don't blame them. But honestly, the longer they wait, the less chance they will come play EVEN IF the issues are fixed.
http://aion.24-hrgaming.net