Vanguard, one year on. Best+Worst case scenario.

Klave

In a years time is Vanguard going to make the 'haters' eat there words, or are the 'Vanbois' going to be very lonely indeed?

IF all the major bugs can be fixed. IF the game can be balanced correctly. IF the content is added to satisfy the needs of the players.IF those in charge can decide on the target audience and give out a clear message.

IF the spheres of the game all work as envisaged, and IF the overall "vision" for the game is satisfied (even approximatively) then the game will be successful (and deservedly so), for its ambition if for nothing else. This game could be huge in a BEST CASE scenario.

OR.............

Vanguard was released SO early the game is playing constant catch-up and can never get ahead of itself to fix bugs from six months ago. New content only adds problems and the bug fixing problems snowball. The lagging/graphics problem is found to be less about peoples configurations but a deeper development side issue. The fight between hard-core and casual gamers tears the game apart as the game pushes towards an easier game to attract the masses.  Under the WORST CASE scenario the game would die a slow painful death.

Will Vanguard  prove you haters wrong in a year or will it be a dead duck?

 

 

Umbrood

If all the ifs were taken care of the game will make a nice profit and live for a long time, on paper at least the game has a lot of promise and most of its problems are indeed technical.

Even though there are many bugs these can be squished, fundamental problems like core engine flaws is another beast alltogether.

I very much doubt it will make it big, if it can sustain 150-200k subs I think Brad and company should be very pleased, more reasonable number would be in the area of 100k though, wich still would make them able to run it with a profit I imagine.

In this business it is very very hard to overcome a bad launch, those in the know are slow to forget and the impulse buyer rarely buys anything old, putting it in the sales bin for 15$ or so migth help and some stores has done it allready.

I also think that regardless the game will be slow to die, if SoE backs out I think Brad will take over on his own and run it with a skeleton crew if need be, I do not think he will let this one go all that easy.

All things aside I do wish them the best, a lot of people put a LOT of work into this, it would be a real shame to let it go to waste.

Daffid011

Every Sony game to date has had that rushed feel to it, with perhaps the exception of EQ when brad and company were in control (really there was no way to know what MMOs should be like back then).   Everything Sony has touched is put to their formula time table of how games should be sold, not how games should be created.  Their products are generally unfinished in several aspects from mechanics to overall design to base concepts of what the game should deliver.  It all leads to the "catch up" retrofitting of their products to pander to the potential customers they think should be playing their game.   Yes, they are always designing for POTENTIAL customers over the current base, because they still think they are some sort of cavalier game maker breaking new ground in the MMO industry.



The base problem is that their online division is controlled by number crunchers instead of people passionate about making games.  If there was a choice to release an expansion with half the content functional to make an extra 5% vs. waiting a month to release a fully operation product, which do you think they will choose?  Based on their past choices with their titles I cannot understand why anyone would think Vanguard will be managed any differently.



Yes Sigil is "in charge", but Sony is involved no matter what anyone says they have some order of control and will not stop until they have full control.  Brad sold Verrant to Sony and there is nothing to stop him from doing again.   In fact it isn't a very bad business plan on his end.  Build up and sell.



Typical SOE fomula launch if you ask me.



Early release

Game breaking bugs

Lackluster game world

Uninspiring game play

Confusion over core mechanics (casual/hard core)

Changes in design philosphy

Tales of what COULD be possible to keep people interested.



This game will end up being yet another at best medicore title that should have been great, all because it must obey the Sony timetable.  History is on the side of the naysayers.  The burden of proof really needs to be shouldered by the appologists/fans of vangaurd.   Why should anyone believe in this game outside of ignoring past actions and just trusting in with blind faith?

djack

Well, I'm going to come back to it about a year from now. This game shows great promise but is chucky. As for performance issue I didn't really have any problems. My problems were bugs, quests now working, my warrior questline was missing an NPC and a GM i talked just /shrugged and asked me to put in a /bug.

I love the Diplomacy and the crafting system was unique and I loved it. This game would allow you to do alot of things without ever having to swing a sword.

I'd like to give it a year and try again. Hopefully they will tweak the codes and make the game run a bit smoother. Like I said I had no real problems with the engine but I'd loss framerates for no apparent reason. Something in the code drains your processing power at random and they need to fix that.

 

Deathstrike2

IF every game that comes out between now and the day that this game is what is should have been, it will most likely be successful. 

IF even one game between now and then is released and becomes a super MMO hit, Vanguard's progress won't matter much.  Most people won't look back and the wheel of time will keep on rolling.

Honestly, even if Vanguard is completely fixed in a year's time (very doubtful), I don't know of any "hater" that will be eating his words.  The so called "hate" is because of the condition of Vanguard at present and for the most part, it is justified.

 

 

gatheris

hey

where's the poll?

since you asked a black or white question it would have been easy

Greek_Matt

Vanguard will never be "huge". It released an ambitious game with high expectations and lots of innovative features. It released to a captive market who was getting bored of their current MMOs (many of them 2, 3, 4 or more years old), and who'd seen nothing but second-rate recent releases and constant delays on those titles still in production. And it failed to live up to the market's expectations (for the vast majority at least) by releasing a bug-riddled, artistically bland perfomance hog, thus blowing its chance to cement a broad, dedicated playerbase in the six month plus head-start it had over the half-dozen other major MMO titles due in '07.

A failure of this magnitude inevitably leaves a bad taste in the mouths of many (who will never return) and adds fuel to the flames of the embittered ex-SWG SOE-haters, two kinds of persistent bad press that Sigil really doesn't need. And while some might have considered (and might still be considering) coming back for another look in six months or a year when the devs have had ample opportunity to sort out the problems, the reality is that by then the MMO market will be awash with new releases and betas to highly-anticipated up-and-comings which will undoubtedly be more polished and visually appealing than Vanguard will be at that time (even ignoring the appeal of the `new and untried' over the `old and disappointing').

The reality is that most of the people who would try picking it up once Sigil is `finished' Vanguard are those for whom the broad spectrum of 2007 releases like LotRO, PotBS, G&H, Tabula Rasa, AoC, WAR and Granado Espada hold little or no appeal. It's my guess that the majority of those people are playing Vanguard already - those for whom visuals hold little or secondary appeal, those who prefer `sandbox' over `theme park' (but still want a toon), and/or those who've waited years for what they hope to be the `true' successor to EQ1.

There will be no magical influx of players into Vanguard. Those who are happy with it will doubtless remain for some time, for its qualities certainly have a replayability about them. For everyone else, the drought is close to breaking and soon there will be plenty of other titles to choose from. You never get a second chance to make a first impression, and Vanguard undeniably blew theirs for most would-be subscribers. It remains to be seen how well the others do, and how well they learn from Sigil/Sony's mistakes.

magpie1412

Good post Klave and one that poses very interesting questions from both sides of the current vanguard fence. This could be a very good discussion if it doesnt attract flames and people are able to see both possible outcomes.



I think that with Scenario A "Vanguard is fixed to an acceptable LIVE level and polished" then its potential will be realised for the massive world that it is and the complexities alone that the game offers to a Variety of players both Hardcore and Casual. Because judging by Brad Mcquiads recent posts for example he seems to be accepting the fact that it simply isnt possible for a big budget production MMORPG such as Vanguard to survive (As in the old days of everquest) on a niche "hardcore" audience anymore, the industry has changed so much and it just isnt the way future MMORPG games that wish to be anywhere in the mainstream competing market can survive.  A certain percentage of that mass of more casual playing gamer is needed.

In this scenario Vanguard could yet prove to rise from a hammering of a release and become the product that im sure in its best interests the developers intended it to be and a popular, despite what people may think about its vision changing. The fact is that vision born almost five years ago at the beginning of its production style has had to take some alteration and change to stay relevent in the expanding and hugely changed market where different standards have been set now.

The two Massive factors riding against it in this category though i feel in my opinion are a A trust issue for the gamers that have cancelled subscriptions by now to vanguard in that a percentage of this customer base will be reluctant to return. And b There is ALOT of What If's riding on this outcome...as im sure people can see from your post.



Scenario B "Vanguard Will only ever see dedicated subscriptions and pass into obscurity" in my opinion if the game continues on its current course then i believe this may well occur as historically MMORPG's that have suffered from a slow/troubled release have very rarely recovered to mainstream acclaim. The Internet community has spoken and whether you love or hate vanguard the massive amounts of reviews and current forum feelings speak for themselves over the last two months. There is no denying this, and it is also hard to believe that any individual with constructive critiscm for vanguard is a hater of the product, as this is simply unrealistic, in the same way that everybody whom currently enjoys vanguard and is having great fun is a Vanboi in the enthrall of Mr Mcquiad, just simply unrealistic. I believe both parties (All games players) can see constructive similarities in each others postings provided critiscms and positives for the game alike can be kept "constructive". If the above realisation can be made then i personally feel we could see some real improvement in communities and forums (I can but hope and dream) ;-).

In terms of prioritizations if i were to be at Sigil now and involved with them from a project management perspective (Real Life Occupation) then i would suggest the following...



A Full Efforts for 1-2 month period to investigate broad claims made in the online community in regards to the Applications performance and to fix accordingly at a client code level where errors and bugs are found. If the ability in house in limited to understand or to contemplate complexities in the hybrid engine code then look into the initial cost of 3rd party inclusions to assist where applicable and measure cost against the MMORPG product having an increase of revenue on the back of the problems being rectified. This would be priority 1. As from what i have witnessed and seen this would certainly close up to 50% of outstanding CSR and Helpdesk related tickets and Technical Forum posts and even see the most immediate return in terms of revenue generation for the product.



B Investment Short term into a cheaply hosted official forum (Aside from Technical). I feel for one this ommision has indeed  proven over the last 2 months this has hurt possible vanguard subscription oppurtunities due to confusion and mis-interpretation of information as well as  not having the ability to have a focused communication channel for subscribers. Initial costs can be weighed against positive reception in the community and development of further communication channels for subscriber        generation.

                                         

C 2 Month Project plan after priority A on point 1. This Secondary phase would involve polish and content verification of existing game elements and subject matter. This would include verification of intended purpose, functionality, minor code fixes, and encounter balancing and adjustment. It could also include addition of scripted content (where applicable) and additional game lore presented in a quest format.

                                          

D 6 Month long term ongoing plan placed into "Miestone" Stages for content addition and System Balancing. This could include the cost of additional art work, unlockable areas, Quest chains and structures, Item addition, Polishing of Housing and economy mechanics, Inclusion of additional Lore and game world plot structures established on a racial basis and continent basis.

                                           

E Long term milestone with a target of 12 to 14 months prior to release, game system expansion pack to open up never seen before mechanics and land and sea content. Arguably the current world is vast and expansive enough in principle that heavy population of polished content would keep the game standing on its positive merit of a truly large coalition of land masses longer than smaller MMORPG games requiring expansion of content via expansion packs sooner in their life cycle.



Of course at the end of the day just my thoughts and "What ifs" in response to the original posters "debate generating" post. ;-) Thanks for reading through my drivel if you have...;-)

On a side note i wish a playable game of highly polished systems,gameplay and content for the whole of the Vanguard community, because to be fair you deserve it with the community storm weathered in the release months, but just be careful because the sad realisation could also be that the potential of this game is simply unobtainable due to poor execution. Best of luck to you.



Mag (Ex Vanguard Player)

talif

To tell you the truth even it all of those stuff that's wrong with this game like one poster said most ppl won't give this game another look even it they fully fixed the gamesorry vanbois. Plus this is a big year for mmo's they picked the wrong year to release an unfinished game. You got LOTRO,Gods and Heros,Warhammer,and AOC just to name a few that are coming out this year.Now i know some of these games are not for everyone  but the thing is they will pull ppl off the other mmo's they are currently playing.Since most ppl playing those other mmo's are looking for something new to try out.

We will see how vanguard's player base looks after april when LOTRO comes out .And just pic more of the same thing when more games are released this year. Well tell you what let's post this again in Nov 3,2007 by then most of the games that ppl where waiting for will be out be then. As for me come on (10-30-07 AOC)

hayes303

I picked the game up a week ago and so far am having a hard time justifying keeping it on my hard drive. I love the concept, love the races/classes, but performance is brutal, the models seem very bad to me, there are bugs on top of the bugs. I guess I'll have to go into the waiting a year crowd, because this is more like beta 3 than a finished release (I played beta and it hasn't gotten much better).

Markaj

I agree with most of the above posters. Very good and articulate points. I think the answer to the one year scenario is a comparative one. As you have pointed out, many blockbusters are on the way, such as AOC, Lotro, POTBS, Gods and Heroes, Huxley, Hero's Journey, Tabula Rasa, etc. And VG's status will highly be dependent on "their release" status!

Now I doubt that they will all be stellar, but from beta leeks most are already in a better shape than Vanguard and one or two will be masterpieces. AOC and POTBS have been delayed more than once, because devs realized that 2007 is a very competitive year and their products should be polished at release. They didn't want to gamble!

Who will stay with VG and how many subs will it have 1 year from now? I strongly believe that most of the rabid fanbois of this game won't have a lasting relationship with it. The romance will not last too long.

1) They paid for a game and so they are trying very hard to like it. It is a fresh experience. Some of them honestly believe that there should be a jewel that they haven't discovered and they will find it in the next level.  Many others are still in the honeymoon period. But it will get old soon, because the partner is a very difficult case and the love affair is too bumpy and uninspiring for loyalty's sake. I think they will let it go when the obviously better will come.  

2) Some other more realistic players have repeatedly said that they are playing this out of boredom, because this is the last big release and they are bored of WOW. So, they already confess that VG for them is a few months stand, not a "happily ever after" thing.   

3) Then there will be new subscribers, those who will fall for the viral marketing thing and will try the game. But I don't think that there will be an influx. Bad release in a year like 2007 will not be ignored or forgotten so quickly.

What will be the shape of the game itself? This is easy and no need for wild guesses. If the game has come so far in 5 years, you can easily figure the mileage it will take in 6 months to 1 year.

I agree with an above poster. I think 100k-ish will it be if they keep fixing it.

 

 

 

 

lancebird

Even when they do get the bugs worked out.. the game will still be plagued with gameplay copied from 10 years ago.  The game won't completely die, but I seriously doubt it will ever grow beyond what is is now.  Also likely that when the next wave of MMOs come out Vanguard will lose the "I played WoW too long" crowd as well.

Lack of innovation + poor quality = a game going nowhere.

whitedelight

WoW was not innovative either and it was horrible at launch and it seems to be doing fine at the moment. I remember not being able to log into WoW for days, and three times being refunded my play time for an entire month.

Kyleran

Best Case Scenario:  Sigil gets everything fixed and all content added that should have been there on day 1.  Then they offer free 14 day trials to everyone (new and returning playrers) coupled with double experience weekends to try and relaunch the game.  Current VG community drops eltiist attitude and welcomes new players with open arms (even if they used to play WOW)

Worst Case Scenario:  SONY pulls the plug, fires most of  the devs and just tosses the game  in the Station scrapheap...

Jackdog

Best case scenario Smedley runs Sigil off and pulls a NGE on the game

Worst case scenario Sigil continues to flounder in the dark until they run out of rent money

sepher

Best Case Scenario: No expansion is released for this year; the game as it is instead undergoes fixes, content completions and as thorough of revamps as possible. No major updates either; simply finish the game, forget having a separate expansion team until that is done.



Worst Case Scenario: Rudimentary problems are neglected while Sigil continues to pretend they have the luxury of releasing an expansion and more of these 'Updates' their first year.. Bugs and performance issues remain systemic...and um, the game takes a permanent place in MMO mediocrity while Warhammer, Conan, Tabula Rasa, Lord of the Rings and other come out the gate.

sololoco

If, if, if.

wjrasmussen

Originally posted by whitedelight

WoW was not innovative either and it was horrible at launch and it seems to be doing fine at the moment. I remember not being able to log into WoW for days, and three times being refunded my play time for an entire month.

Then again we weren't wondering if Wow was going to be a success in a year two months after launch.

Tnice

For the best and worst cases I am assuming that the game is taken over by SOE because that will happen regardless.  From the looks of things Sigil is a small development studio who comes up with great ideas but does not have the corporate critical mass to pull off the implementation of a major MMO.

Best Case
They fix the major issues such as rollbacks, chunking, and most of the performance issues and the game holds a steady subscriber base of 50 - 75k.  People will trickle in from WoW, EQ2, EQ1, and other games who are just sick of them and want more challenge, better graphics, or at least different scenery.
To do this they need to bring in some of the EQ2 Devs and Management to put in the convenience stuff such as an updated UI, chat bubbles, broker window, and other modern functionality.  Plus, SOE ramps up the Customer Service.
Additionally, they need to prevent the game from becoming a WoW or EQ2 by targeting only the hardcore gamers which the game was meant to target originally.  They need to promote the game as a challenge for only the hardcore.  This way they will get the trickle of Gamers from other more casual games.  Vanguard is hardcore and should be marketed as only for hardcore Gamers.  Only very unique, well designed games can please both types of Gamers like WoW.
It will take more than 2 years to fix the game however so the timeframe for this would be 2 years not 1.  This game can not be fixed in only 1 year.
Worst Case
Sigil does not completely give the game to SOE and they continue on the same path they are currently on.  The Vanbois will start to turn against the game at that point.  If the Vanbois can not raid they will turn against the game.  The chunking and performance game is never fixed and it's subscriber base drops to 5 -10k and is banished to the island of misfit toys with Planetside, SWG, and the Matrix Online.
If they try to WoW-erize it and it tries to compete with the massive number of casual-friendly games, they may turn the servers off completely.  They need to understand that they are a circa 1999 game and need keep in that niche.


The unknown here is what the new games launching this year will bring.  I think they have to be worried about AoC, Warhammer, Gods and Heroes, and Tabula Rosa.  Again, if the EQ1 guys go to one of those they may turn the servers off.

whitedelight

Wouldn't it have been easier for the first poster to say

Best Case - It becomes the greatest MMO of all time

Worst Case - They cancel it

sepher

Originally posted by whitedelight


Wouldn't it have been easier for the first poster to say
Best Case - It becomes the greatest MMO of all time
Worst Case - They cancel it

Could sum up the whole board with, "A lot of people think this game sucks", "Some people think this game doesn't suck."



But what's the fun in that?

whitedelight

Just though those were the most appropriate answers lol. He asked what the best was and the worst. It would be the same no matter the game.

On the other hand he could ask what do you think this game will be like a year from now.

xpowderx

Best Case Scenario: Sigil fixes most of the bugs and performance issues currently at plague status in Vanguard. Gives a 14 day trial after the bugs are fixed. Gets rid of SOE altogether and uses there own or independent servers with a higher capability than what SOE has given them.





Worst Case scenario: Sigil gives ownership to SOE who in turn fixes the bugs and performance issues while not doing it in-game. Then sells the reawakening mmorpg by offering a NEW expansion pack which is nothing more than the  fixes the  game should have had to begin with.! Then offers a expansion every 3 months like it does with certain other SOE games!

xAlrythx

Best case: Sigil pick up their game, by the time this happens new mmos will have hit the shelves, the players that actually enjoy it right now might leave for the bigger and better games, some might stay. Either way the games subs WILL drop. Brad runs off to start a new company. Soon as people find out he is in the company the company will fail. Brad goes to the moon.

Worst case: VSoH player base suddenly goes insane and relises how boring their game is, they all sue brad for hypnotising them, somehow they win and Brad sits at home crying for the rest of his life.

whitedelight

If they all sued him and they would, he would not have a home to cry in. Just a slight twist I felt I would add to your story.

Lidane

As others have pointed out, the absolute worst case scenario for Vanguard is entirely  dependent on how the other games that are set to release this year (Huxley, WAR, AoC, LOTRO, G&H, etc.) all shape up at their respective launches.



If even one of those games ends up offering a much more polished, stable, immersive, and vibrant world that draws people in, and if they start seeing massive subs, then Vanguard will suffer for it. VG launched in the direct aftermath of The Burning Crusade, and right before all these other titles see the light of day, so their actual window of opportunity to hook an audience is very narrow.



They're in a very tricky position right now. They had five years of development time, millions of dollars to spend, and two of the most recognizable names in MMO's -- Brad McQuaid and Jeff Butler-- at the helm, so expectations were very high. What they ended up releasing was unfinished, unpolished, and unstable, and all because even by their own admission, they ran out of time and money. They have to really get on the ball and start polishing up the game world and what it has to offer, or they risk getting buried under a deluge of other, newer games.



Best case scenario? All of those other games flounder and fall, and Vanguard manages to pull things together in less than a year.



But with Warhammer, LOTR, Conan, and others on the horizon, they really don't have any time to spare. They need to fix the game, fix the issues, and overhaul the feel of the world in general, or they're going to end up being the victims of either an NGE/CU style "upgrade" in their future, or being relegated to StationPass irrelevance.