Interestingly, I think it is welcome news for some (*many?) that SOE might become more involved in VANGUARD with its resources. However, it is important for Brad to retain his authority and creative direction.
I have resubscribed to Vanguard to explore the changes (improvements) I have heard about. I intend to create an honest, objective post about my experiences for the community. It is important to do this, I think, as people are following Vanguard's progression and neither the Vanguard-lover nor Vanguard-hater are using reason and honesty in their analysis.
Sounds like he is wearing rose-colored glasses. He is basically saying, give it a year and Vanguard will be great and have 500K+ subs.
Pretty much.
That wall of text amounts to Brad staking Vanguard's future on a few things:
1. People getting bored of whatever game they're currently playing and choosing Vanguard over all the other games out there, or any games on the horizon. He's placing all his hopes on people getting bored of WoW and then ignoring other, newer games like LOTR, WAR, Age of Conan, Pirates, etc. in favor of his game, which is highly unlikely.
2. People dropping serious coin on completely new PC's, operating systems, and video cards in order to play his game, because hey, upgrading to bleeding edge tech is inevitable, so you might as well do it by the end of the year so you can play the "re-launch" of Vanguard. What he doesn't seem to understand is two-fold. One, most people aren't going to drop that kind of cash if their system does everything else just fine and plays all of the other games they enjoy without issue. And two, the problems in his game are buried in the code, because even people who have the systems he describes as ideal still have problems playing the game flawlessly.
3. His current players not deciding to up and leave between now and the end of the year, since he's all but admitted to them that the game came out at least a year before it was ready, and that they're paying to play an extended beta until Sigil gets their act together (with SOE's "help" of course) by the end of the year when they reboot the game.
Honestly, the whole thing reads like a guy who is just desperate, and who's got a really rose-colored view of how things are going to go in the next few months, especially if he thinks that people who get bored of their current MMO will choose his game over any of the ones out now, or on the horizon. I wish him luck. He's going to need it.
WHy is everyone bashing SoE regarding the vanguard issue?
Sigil designed Vanguard, not SoE.
Sigil is responsible for the game's failure, not SoE.
People are not quitting because SoE is taking over, people are quitting since the game was in beta, simply because it sucks, and that's Sigil's own doing.
Give SoE a break. Beside failing EQ2 launch and SWG NGE 2 years ago, it's not like they have been making crap games for the past 1( years...
If I can correct you on this, SOE bought Vanguard from Sigil due to Sigil financial issues. SOE pushed for the premature release of Vanguard not Sigil.
Planetside (great game, but due to poor management from SOE the game is all screwed up. Poor maintenance, poor updates, raising the monthly subcription after doing an update.. pathetic, etc)
SWG (Do I need to say anything about this game?)
EQ 2 (Good game, unfortunately the greed of SOE shined on this game 3 expansions and 3 adventure packs, all at cost nothing for free or discounted for player loyalty)
Vanguard (Good game, unfortunately released 3 months before it should)
Matrix Online (LOL this is joke or a game)
Seems to me that there is more than 1 or 2 games in question
Vanguard-haters and Vanguard-lovers not using reason and honesty? how is posting a negative thread about Vanguard not honest or reasonable? or posting a positive thread? If i say Vanguard amounts to that huge pile of triceratops dung we all saw on Jurrasic Park, thats not honest? If i say the game is nigh-unplayable because of the multitude of bugs inherent in the program, that's not reasonable? And the same for folks who see potential in the game and plan to stick it out. I guess healz is the only one of us allowed an opinion about this game
So here's the first topic, starting with the current official statement from SOE: "SOE is in discussions with Sigil regarding the future of Vanguard and Sigil Games in Carlsbad. Talks are going well and first and foremost, our primary concern right now is what's best for Vanguard and its community. We want to ensure that this game and its community have a healthy future. The specifics that we work out over the coming days will all be with that single goal in mind." What does that mean? It means that right now Vanguard is doing decently but not as well as we hoped. If you haven't read my last long post that outlined some of the things that went wrong during development, etc., please do. So the bottom line is that SOE is going to be getting more involved with Sigil and Vanguard - our relationship is going to become even tighter - much tighter. At this point I can't say much more than that. Does this mean an acquisition? I can't say at this point. Does this mean more or less people at Sigil? I can't say at this point. Does this mean management changes at Sigil? I can't say at this point. What it does mean at this point is that both companies agree that we need more of SOE's involvement if Vanguard is going to continue to get the support it needs to both continue to be worked on and improved and debugged and optimized. When people start getting burned out of the Warcraft expansion (pardon the pun), we need to make sure that the game is more polished and will play on lower end machines. As people continue to level up, it means that we need additional higher level content, including raid content. If we are going to change our marketing message effectively to target those who played a lot of EverQuest but who have ‘grown up' such that they have jobs, families, etc. that they cannot and will not play another EverQuest even though they enjoyed they game years ago. We've done studies and it's not atypical of an old EQ player, when they hear about Vanguard, to assume that because many of the people involved in Vanguard's development worked on EQ as well, that Vanguard must simply be an EQ 3. From that point they don't even give Vanguard another look. They don't do any more research on the game. They don't go to the official sites. They don't go to the affiliate sites. Instead they think to themselves, "ah well, were I younger and had my life not changed, I'd give it a shot, but I just don't have the time for another EQ with better graphics right now." And that's it - they don't give Vanguard another thought EQ peaked in late 2001 at almost 500k subscribers. In its lifetime it's sold over 2 million units. Putting EQ in a vacuum and that's a lot of people who played and who aren't playing anymore. And the total number of subscribers didn't start going down until sometime 2002. I'm also pretty sure up until its peak that the average lifespan of a player was nearing 9-12 months. And as I mentioned in my last lengthy post, this group of people who played but don't anymore could arguably be put into two sub-groups - those who look back fondly at those months and even years and those who don't. I have read posts and received emails from people who claim to have played to max level and then quit very angry - the "I just played your game for 2 years and now I hate you" emails. But realistically how big is that group? Even if it was half (boggle) the other group is still pretty big. So ignoring all of the people who have quit or who are growing bored of their current MMOG (WoW, FFXI, DAoC, etc) that need to be reached (and in a very different way, especially the WoW player), both a word of mouth and a formal marketing campaign targeting these people clearly needs to launched. These people need to know that Vanguard does have the ‘EQ feel' in many ways but that it is much more soloable than EQ was, especially the early EQ days. They need to know that you can play for short periods of time and advance. They need to know that the ‘end game' is not all about raiding into the wee hours of the night. Some subset of these people will still feel burnt out of MMOGs period, but I think there's a lot of people who haven't been reached and our and others research supports that. False assumptions are being made by a lot of people. The reality is that Vanguard *is* the game most of these people are looking for - it has the good they remember, but has eliminated a lot of the tedium and necessary long hours that don't fit into their lifestyle anymore. Then there are the people who are growing weary of their current MMOG. Given how much larger the MMOG gamespace has grown since EQ's zenith in 2001 (arguably 7 times as large worldwide, and at least 2-3 time as large in North America alone), we have to take advantage of this. At some point these people are going to want to start a new MMOG (especially after the WoW expansion newness has worn out, which for most of the non-hard-core would be when you really have to start raiding in the expansion). LoTR Online is an x-factor - reviews from beta testers seem to indicate that the game is more casual like WoW, a small game, and that it looks really good but can run on a lower end system much better than Vanguard (just as WoW can). So at least for a time the more casual bored WoW player may migrate to LoTR Online. How sticky (e.g. how long that game will hold onto players) is unknown, but I think it's safe to say that a significant percentage of the more casual bored WoW player will head to LoTR - at least first, given the franchise around it. Conservatively this leaves the more hard core WoW player (which in Vanguard or EQ terms would be considered either a hard core or, more likely, a core gamer). That number, even just taking the North American and European gamer is still potentially a large one and needs to be targeted (given Vanguard's high system specs, the time it will take to localize, and Blizzard's name recognition and pre-existing proven marketing ability in Asia, I wouldn't count that group, although a very significant one, until 2008 or so. Targeting that group is for a future discussion). Lastly, there's the very real issue of Vanguard's system specs, even for the core and hard core gamer in North America and Europe. For a variety of reasons and mistakes on our part that I won't get into right now, Vanguard was released with system spec requirements that were too high for January 2007. Continued optimization will help to a degree, but the game's big hope here is simply Moore's Law and that by the second half of 2007, and certainly by the end of the year, the system spec issue will have been greatly diminished. The big problem that remains is that you still pretty much need a new system as opposed to, say, simply a new graphics card. But eventually, gamers do replace their systems. Given what Vista (especially the Ultimate edition) takes to really run, combined with other games that come out by the end of the year that really push technology, many people will be compelled to buy new systems. Unlike EQ, which was one of the first hardware only games, Vanguard needs not only a fast graphics card, but also a system with pci-express, fast memory, a fast FSB, etc. With EQ, you just needed to buy a Voodoo 1 or Voodoo 2 - the rest of your system is fine. With Vanguard, however, just plugging the fastest AGP card into your 2-3 year old system doesn't cut it. In fact, Vanguard runs pretty well on a 2 GB system with a decent pci-express video card and fast memory in a 2.6 GHz Pentium; conversely, run the game on an older AGP system, the fastest AGP card you can buy, and a 3.2 GHz CPU and you'll have framerate issues. The game is simply not CPU bound, nor just graphics card bound, but rather mostly bound by the data that it needs to constantly move from the CPU to main memory to the graphics card, and then all the way back again. It's all about the various bus speeds and caches - moving data around efficiently is arguably more important than processing that data on the CPU or GPU. The only fix here, again, is time. Vista (especially the Ultimate edition, which is what's being pushed to gamers) wants fast components. Direct X 10 hardware and software will help a lot, especially when there is a DX10 version of Vanguard. A native 64bit client of Vanguard will eventually help a lot too. Bottom line: by the end of 2007, a lot more people should have upgraded, especially if Microsoft succeeds with Vista and native DX 10 games. And if they really push Gaming for Windows like they did, say, the Xbox 360, the end of 2007 and beginning of 2008 should be a very different landscape for PC games in general and Vanguard specifically. Was the Vanguard tech ahead of its time? Yes, and there has been a price to pay for that short term (although many people are able to play with older machines - why? Different configurations, different settings, different thresholds for lower framerates, etc.). But MMOGs ideally never end and if you've architected your engine to both push the limits of existing and near future technology as well as easily employ future technologies, then you have a game that doesn't look dated one, two, even three plus years down the road. And that's what we did with Vanguard - so we feel some pain now, but if we can keep the momentum going, this decision pays off in the long run (big time). In summary, there are arguably a lot of people who by mid to end of this year in the MMOG gamespace for whom Vanguard could potentially be very attractive. What the game needs is a re-launch of sorts, including targeted marketing campaigns, an all-around successful move by gamers to the next generation of hardware, continued good word of mouth ‘viral' marketing by those who are already playing, enjoying, and re-subscribing. And all of this could and should ramp up by the end of the year, all the while the Vanguard team is putting in more content, the live team filling out high level content as well as adding to areas of the game's vast seamless world which are a bit empty. Then a re-launch towards the end of the year plus the first expansion (which is looking like first quarter 200, one that would add RTS style city building, ship to ship combat, jousting, and a second ‘half' of the Kojanese Archipelago that makes ship travel meaningful - and by meaningful I mean not tedious, rewarding exploration, with lots of new areas (both in the existing world and in the extension of the archipelago). And I'm talking about some re-use of existing art, combined with new art that fits into the existing continents, and then finally some all out new stuff - different styles of terrain (islands) and ocean to look at while making your journey to found a new player city while constantly being attacked by exotic sea creatures, leviathans, and other traditional members of fantasy and crypto-zoology. Not to mention pirates with canons, or other players and their ships on the PvP servers. And who knows, could be first expansion or second, but eventually you need to pull from Mesoamerican mythology, encounter empires based on Greco-roman architecture... it goes on and on, it's all planned out, and Vanguard can do all of it given sufficient time. The tools have matured, both in terms of art and design, and the art process orders of magnitude more efficient because of years of Maya scripting, an in-house terrain generator that creates what you want as opposed to spitting out algorithmically generated hills and valleys, and an art team that has this process down pat - for example, they were able to re-create Tursh and Leth Nurae in a fraction of time it took them to create the original, smaller, and much less interesting ‘versions'. "SOE is in discussions with Sigil regarding the future of Vanguard and Sigil Games in Carlsbad. Talks are going well and first and foremost, our primary concern right now is what's best for Vanguard and its community. We want to ensure that this game and its community have a healthy future. The specifics that we work out over the coming days will all be with that single goal in mind." So what does that mean again? Again, I apologize for not being able to go into details and it's the details that need to be worked out. But I think it's safe to say that both Sigil and SOE see the potential of a mind blowing game by the end of the year. What's needed, bottom line, is some time, and how to get that time is what's being worked out. And so I still see a 500k+ game, I was just off by a year for a variety of reasons, some under my control, many not. And I think SOE sees this as well. To pull it off however, requires a funded and supported Sigil and a well marketed Vanguard with these different target audiences identified and solid plan on how to reach them all, and then a solid execution of said plan, hitting them hard, pushing these ‘WoW everywhere' point of purchase materials from the front to the very back.. In the meantime, the Vanguard that was launched in early 2007 continues to move forward, with much of what I've talked about patched in over time, and the rest in the first expansion (or re-launch, or whatever we all agree upon in terms of product and service placement). Bottom line, Vanguard continues to march forward, a solid and fun game today, and an even better one tomorrow. More ‘state of the game' posts by me, a regularly updated ‘In the Works' http://vgplayers.station.sony.com/inTheWorks.vm. And whatever kind of increased partnership between Sigil and SOE is necessary to make this vision a reality. And again, as for what that means exactly, more on that later TM.
Huh...this one seemed kind of short. He must be slipping.
What Brad still fails to realize is that he could give everyone in the United States a new 4000 dollar rig and his game would still not have anyone playing because his designing sucks ass. He is still living in denial and is probably ready to bust a blood vessel at LoTROs success . More than likely he has convinced himself LoTRO was a fluke or will be a flash in the pan and the fact his game is hemorrhaging subs is everyones fault except his
Lets face it, Brad's "Vision" TM is flawed and no longer considered the nirvana of the MMO industry. Its not just the fact that players have matured from their past experiences with EverQuest, its new players saying they don't want to play a second job, they just want to be entertained. Useless timesinks, grind fests and camping are not considered fun by many and as we and industry mature and progress and evolve, it will become even more odious. These games have to change with the times or get left behind in the dust. Moore's law doesn't just apply to hardware technology, it applies every aspect of technology, including gaming paradigms.
With PvE raiding, it has never been a question of being "good enough". I play games to have fun, not to be a simpering toady sitting through hour after hour of mind numbing boredom and fawning over a guild master in the hopes that he will condescend to reward me with shiny bits of loot. But in games where those people get the highest progression, anyone who doesn't do that will just be a moving target for them and I'll be damned if I'm going to pay money for the privilege. - Neanderthal
Originally posted by Sephoroth Dont forget they completely sank the Matrix MMO. SOE has a terrible reputation for a reason man. They have proven to be a greedy, dumb, incompetent, bad servicing group. People who have dealt with them before are the ones hating, we have our very very very very very valid reasons.
Are you insane ? The Matrix Online was a freaking disaster of a game when it first launched. It was pure crap and SOE had nothing to do with it's crappy nature ! Talk about spin.
Games I've played/tried out:WAR, LOTRO, Tabula Rasa, AoC, EQ1, EQ2, WoW, Vangaurd, FFXI, D&DO, Lineage 2, Saga Of Ryzom, EvE Online, DAoC, Guild Wars,Star Wars Galaxies, Hell Gate London, Auto Assault, Grando Espada ( AKA SoTNW ), Archlord, CoV/H, Star Trek Online, APB, Champions Online, FFXIV, Rift Online, GW2.
Originally posted by Samuraisword So Brad lied. He said prior to release that SOE's involvement would only be marketing and publishing. All the people who claimed SOE would not be controlling Vanguard are choking on crow now. This is why Gods and Heroes is also doomed. Stay away from any game SOE is linked to.
Lets get this straight. Vangaurd sucks because of Sigil not because of SOE.
Games I've played/tried out:WAR, LOTRO, Tabula Rasa, AoC, EQ1, EQ2, WoW, Vangaurd, FFXI, D&DO, Lineage 2, Saga Of Ryzom, EvE Online, DAoC, Guild Wars,Star Wars Galaxies, Hell Gate London, Auto Assault, Grando Espada ( AKA SoTNW ), Archlord, CoV/H, Star Trek Online, APB, Champions Online, FFXIV, Rift Online, GW2.
Originally posted by Omega3 WHy is everyone bashing SoE regarding the vanguard issue?
Sigil designed Vanguard, not SoE.
Sigil is responsible for the game's failure, not SoE.
People are not quitting because SoE is taking over, people are quitting since the game was in beta, simply because it sucks, and that's Sigil's own doing.
Give SoE a break. Beside failing EQ2 launch and SWG NGE 2 years ago, it's not like they have been making crap games for the past 1( years...
If I can correct you on this, SOE bought Vanguard from Sigil due to Sigil financial issues. SOE pushed for the premature release of Vanguard not Sigil. Planetside (great game, but due to poor management from SOE the game is all screwed up. Poor maintenance, poor updates, raising the monthly subcription after doing an update.. pathetic, etc) SWG (Do I need to say anything about this game?) EQ 2 (Good game, unfortunately the greed of SOE shined on this game 3 expansions and 3 adventure packs, all at cost nothing for free or discounted for player loyalty) Vanguard (Good game, unfortunately released 3 months before it should) Matrix Online (LOL this is joke or a game) Seems to me that there is more than 1 or 2 games in question
No you are wrong.
1.) Sigil took about 5 years and 30 million dollars to develop this title.
2.) Sigil was orginally signed up with Microsoft.
3.) Microsoft dumped Sigil because they were not meeting their benchmarks and the game was clearly behind in development.
4.) Sigil went shopping for a new publisher after being dumped by Microsoft. They found one called SOE and signed a contract with SOE.
5.) The contracted deal allowed SOE the right to manage the servers and advertise the game in exchange for giving Sigil continued development dollars in order to get the game out the door.
6.) Sigil are currently the owners of Vangaurd.
7.) Sigil still have development control over Vangaurd hence the post of Brad suggesting the eventual selling out of their development control of VG to SOE.
Brad and the gang have yet again run out of steam, money and ability and now they can't fix their broken game. Out of all the publishers Sigil could of gone with they decided to go with SOE because Brad knew that if things went wrong he could sell out to SOE like he did with EQ1.
Please get your facts straight before posting on the internet again.
Games I've played/tried out:WAR, LOTRO, Tabula Rasa, AoC, EQ1, EQ2, WoW, Vangaurd, FFXI, D&DO, Lineage 2, Saga Of Ryzom, EvE Online, DAoC, Guild Wars,Star Wars Galaxies, Hell Gate London, Auto Assault, Grando Espada ( AKA SoTNW ), Archlord, CoV/H, Star Trek Online, APB, Champions Online, FFXIV, Rift Online, GW2.
Relaunch=Actually producing code that makes the game playable on an average system beyong 15 fps.If you have a kickass system a player should be able to crank it up a notch.
If you have a average system then a player should be able to adjust settings to play the game WITHOUT sacrificing graphics completly.
Sigil should have paid attention to EQ2 and implemented this from day 1.Make a game that can run on most systems but if you have a great 1 then the game looks great too.
If they had done this then they wouldnt be losing players and talking to SOE about how to make it better.
His problem was he tried to do waaaay too much, to make a game that appeals to everyone, a game that is an amalgam of all other games, but bigger...
He over-reached, and the game failed. One would think he's learned his lesson, right?
So what does he talk about with the re-launch/expansion? Is he talking about dedicating his team to working out the code to make it playable? Does he speak of making the game FUN?
Hell no. He speaks of again adding unreasonable levels of content left and right. Age of Conan has RTS city building and mounted combat? WEll, we better add that! Pirates has pvp ship battles? WEll, we can't pass that up! LOTR has many subscribers? Well, lets pencil those in for us as well!
Jesus, man. Forget what others are doing. Focus on making YOUR game FUN, and PLAYABLE, and eventually you'll have an audience. But assuming that you'll have an audience because people will flock to you because OTHER games won't live up to their standards is downright foolish.
Lets face it, Brad's "Vision" TM is flawed and no longer considered the nirvana of the MMO industry. Its not just the fact that players have matured from their past experiences with EverQuest, its new players saying they don't want to play a second job, they just want to be entertained. Useless timesinks, grind fests and camping are not considered fun by many and as we and industry mature and progress and evolve, it will become even more odious. These games have to change with the times or get left behind in the dust. Moore's law doesn't just apply to hardware technology, it applies every aspect of technology, including gaming paradigms.
Well put and it's basically the same thing I said on the vanguard forums (when they were still around) and here a few times and was completely flamed to death over it.
EQ (and Brad's Vision TM) came a long at the perfect time to capitalize on peoples need to play a fully 3D MUD (MMO). I just don't think the EQ Vision TM is a viable game system anymore.
I think Brad's out of touch with what MMOers want. Your post is spot on that people don't want a second job, they want to be entertained.
It will probably take significant restructuring for Vanguard to appeal to a broad audience, but I fear the damage has been done. Not to mention the system requirements issues. No "tweaking" will fix the fact that the Unreal engine is a cow and should only be used for FPS games. Though it seems many companies haven't learned that yet but they will.
Anyhow, I'm sure if SOE takes over Vanguard and absorbs Sigil. SOE will effectively milk the game like they've done to their other mediocre games. But perhaps they can throw enough money at the issues to fix them or get close to fixing them until such a day as computer technology has caught up to the system resource hog that is Vanguard.
Regardless, let's hope it plays out well for the current players who enjoy the game. It always sucks having your game of choice be ruined by catastrophic changes or mismanagement.
Dont forget they completely sank the Matrix MMO. SOE has a terrible reputation for a reason man. They have proven to be a greedy, dumb, incompetent, bad servicing group. People who have dealt with them before are the ones hating, we have our very very very very very valid reasons.
To be fair, the Matrix Online failed for a variety of reasons long before SOE ever got involved. And really? The only reason they bought MxO at all was to gain the rights to the DC Comics MMO. They had no interest or intention of ever improving that game. All they wanted was the shiny new IP to build a game around.
WHy is everyone bashing SoE regarding the vanguard issue?
Sigil designed Vanguard, not SoE. Sigil is responsible for the game's failure, not SoE. People are not quitting because SoE is taking over, people are quitting since the game was in beta, simply because it sucks, and that's Sigil's own doing. Give SoE a break. Beside failing EQ2 launch and SWG NGE 2 years ago, it's not like they have been making crap games for the past 1( years...
If I can correct you on this, SOE bought Vanguard from Sigil due to Sigil financial issues. SOE pushed for the premature release of Vanguard not Sigil.
Planetside (great game, but due to poor management from SOE the game is all screwed up. Poor maintenance, poor updates, raising the monthly subcription after doing an update.. pathetic, etc)
SWG (Do I need to say anything about this game?)
EQ 2 (Good game, unfortunately the greed of SOE shined on this game 3 expansions and 3 adventure packs, all at cost nothing for free or discounted for player loyalty)
Vanguard (Good game, unfortunately released 3 months before it should)
Matrix Online (LOL this is joke or a game)
Seems to me that there is more than 1 or 2 games in question
No you are wrong.
1.) Sigil took about 5 years and 30 million dollars to develop this title.
2.) Sigil was orginally signed up with Microsoft.
3.) Microsoft dumped Sigil because they were not meeting their benchmarks and the game was clearly behind in development.
4.) Sigil went shopping for a new publisher after being dumped by Microsoft. They found one called SOE and signed a contract with SOE.
5.) The contracted deal allowed SOE the right to manage the servers and advertise the game in exchange for giving Sigil continued development dollars in order to get the game out the door.
6.) Sigil are currently the owners of Vangaurd.
7.) Sigil still have development control over Vangaurd hence the post of Brad suggesting the eventual selling out of their development control of VG to SOE.
Brad and the gang have yet again run out of steam, money and ability and now they can't fix their broken game. Out of all the publishers Sigil could of gone with they decided to go with SOE because Brad knew that if things went wrong he could sell out to SOE like he did with EQ1.
Please get your facts straight before posting on the internet again.
You should also get your facts straight. You are being too generous and giving SOE a complete pass.
It is a fact that SOE developers worked on Vanguard prior to it being released. Therefore they knew what kind of condition the game was in, and that is was not ready to be launched, yet they marketed it as being complete and released it as ready.
Launching an incomplete and buggy product is a recipe for failure, and either SOE is completely clueless or they acted fraudulently with Sigil.
You should also get your facts straight. You are being too generous and giving SOE a complete pass. It is a fact that SOE developers worked on Vanguard prior to it being released. Therefore they knew what kind of condition the game was in, and that is was not ready to be launched, yet they marketed it as being complete and released it as ready. Launching an incomplete and buggy product is a recipe for failure, and either SOE is completely clueless or they acted fraudulently with Sigil.
SOE's devs came into Vanguard only in the last few months, since Sigil was dumped by Microsoft. (And no matter what anyone says, YES, they were dumped by MS. Microsoft saw the writing on the wall, and jumped ship.) By that point, millions had been spent on Vanguard, and several years of work had been done on it.
Sony's coders and devs might have known what shape the game was in when it launched, but they're not miracle workers. There was no way they were going to completely turn the game around before it launched, since part of the deal that Sigil signed with SOE probably had a set launch date. Didn't Brad say they knew when the game was going to launch months before they announced it to everyone else? I seem to recall that.
Most likely, the deal with SOE rested on launching the game on a set date, no matter what shape it was in, and if the game couldn't attract a certain number of subs by X date, SOE would move to have more control, and eventually take it over completely. I doubt their deal with Sigil gave anyone a free, unlimited ride, especially considering the time and money that Microsoft had already spent on the game, and the shape it was in when Sony got it.
First, to all those who still say "VG is going fine, because my server is full and I always find a group": Brad himself admitted it so there is no point denying it. (Hello to all my SV 'friends'.)
Second, if you REALLY like VG and really want it to succeed (I still wish that), admit and accept a 30-40 million dollar AAA title can NOT live in a niche. Period.
Third and last, a LOT of ppl who said they stopped playing it (me included) clearly said they mainly stopped because it felt cold, boring and sterile, NOT because of difficulty or bugs. Brad, Sigil and the zealots have to get that out of their heads for the sake of this game.
On a personal level I didnt like some things, like the Corpse Runs and the fact the game is quite unforgivable to mistakes. A small mistake in tactics kills you very soon, especially in grouping places like dungeons. In that terms Vanguard IS hardcore compared to WOW or EQ2, because in WOW & EQ2 when you make a mistake you have good chances to run away or turn the tide. In VG if you make ONE mistake in a dungeons, you get a WIPE. FACT. (I may be not the perfect gamer but after 6 years and a dozen MMOs my skills are not THAT bad and still that happens to every player I have met there.) Bugs and performace were issues, BUT: if the game were fun, entertaining and great most would have ignored the bugs, as ppl did in many, many other launched MMOs, like in the first months of SWG, EQ2 or 90% of MMos ever launched. VG is just boring. Its sterile, cold and lacks feeling, everything that makes a story, and world that feels alive with meaning and fun. THAT is the problem of VG.
The entire debate about hardcore VS casual or bugs is a ghost debate that has zero to do with the reasons why ppl stopped playing VG or by "viral anti-marketing" didnt bother to come.
People don't ask questions to get answers - they ask questions to show how smart they are. - Dogbert
This year and early year VG have to contest with Aoc and War, follow by WoW x-pac ( 1 x-pac per year) and soon i think by blizz's new mmo ( http://pc.ign.com/articles/784/784124p1.html ) ................ its very very hard.....
If I can correct you on this, SOE bought Vanguard from Sigil due to Sigil financial issues. SOE pushed for the premature release of Vanguard not Sigil.
SOE agreed to finance Vanguard development for a certain amount of time after Microsoft jumped ship. This time ran out, end of story. Only an idiot would say it was SOEs fault Sigil didnt make effective use of the time and money they were given.
Originally posted by Avathos
Planetside (great game, but due to poor management from SOE the game is all screwed up. Poor maintenance, poor updates, raising the monthly subcription after doing an update.. pathetic, etc)
How much money do you dump into a game no one wants to play? $30 million seems to be Sigils magic number.
Originally posted by Avathos EQ 2 (Good game, unfortunately the greed of SOE shined on this game 3 expansions and 3 adventure packs, all at cost nothing for free or discounted for player loyalty)
EQ2 has released plenty of free content. Of course nothing is truly free, every iota of content in every single game is paid for by someone.
Originally posted by Avathos
SWG (Do I need to say anything about this game?)
Funny how SWG ended up with the same tone and flavor as every other Star Wars product ultimately ends up with. SOE didnt work on any of those projects
Comments
I have resubscribed to Vanguard to explore the changes (improvements) I have heard about. I intend to create an honest, objective post about my experiences for the community. It is important to do this, I think, as people are following Vanguard's progression and neither the Vanguard-lover nor Vanguard-hater are using reason and honesty in their analysis.
Pretty much.
That wall of text amounts to Brad staking Vanguard's future on a few things:
1. People getting bored of whatever game they're currently playing and choosing Vanguard over all the other games out there, or any games on the horizon. He's placing all his hopes on people getting bored of WoW and then ignoring other, newer games like LOTR, WAR, Age of Conan, Pirates, etc. in favor of his game, which is highly unlikely.
2. People dropping serious coin on completely new PC's, operating systems, and video cards in order to play his game, because hey, upgrading to bleeding edge tech is inevitable, so you might as well do it by the end of the year so you can play the "re-launch" of Vanguard. What he doesn't seem to understand is two-fold. One, most people aren't going to drop that kind of cash if their system does everything else just fine and plays all of the other games they enjoy without issue. And two, the problems in his game are buried in the code, because even people who have the systems he describes as ideal still have problems playing the game flawlessly.
3. His current players not deciding to up and leave between now and the end of the year, since he's all but admitted to them that the game came out at least a year before it was ready, and that they're paying to play an extended beta until Sigil gets their act together (with SOE's "help" of course) by the end of the year when they reboot the game.
Honestly, the whole thing reads like a guy who is just desperate, and who's got a really rose-colored view of how things are going to go in the next few months, especially if he thinks that people who get bored of their current MMO will choose his game over any of the ones out now, or on the horizon. I wish him luck. He's going to need it.
Here it comes, the VG - NGE!!!!
If I can correct you on this, SOE bought Vanguard from Sigil due to Sigil financial issues. SOE pushed for the premature release of Vanguard not Sigil.
Planetside (great game, but due to poor management from SOE the game is all screwed up. Poor maintenance, poor updates, raising the monthly subcription after doing an update.. pathetic, etc)
SWG (Do I need to say anything about this game?)
EQ 2 (Good game, unfortunately the greed of SOE shined on this game 3 expansions and 3 adventure packs, all at cost nothing for free or discounted for player loyalty)
Vanguard (Good game, unfortunately released 3 months before it should)
Matrix Online (LOL this is joke or a game)
Seems to me that there is more than 1 or 2 games in question
Huh...this one seemed kind of short. He must be slipping.
In very short words..
PLEASE DONT QUIT... I JUST BOUGHT A NEW MERCEDES
I miss DAoC
So Brad lied.
He said prior to release that SOE's involvement would only be marketing and publishing.
All the people who claimed SOE would not be controlling Vanguard are choking on crow now.
This is why Gods and Heroes is also doomed. Stay away from any game SOE is linked to.
"What it does mean at this point is that both companies agree that we need more of SOE's involvement if Vanguard is going to continue"
OWNED !!!
With PvE raiding, it has never been a question of being "good enough". I play games to have fun, not to be a simpering toady sitting through hour after hour of mind numbing boredom and fawning over a guild master in the hopes that he will condescend to reward me with shiny bits of loot. But in games where those people get the highest progression, anyone who doesn't do that will just be a moving target for them and I'll be damned if I'm going to pay money for the privilege. - Neanderthal
Are you insane ? The Matrix Online was a freaking disaster of a game when it first launched. It was pure crap and SOE had nothing to do with it's crappy nature ! Talk about spin.
Games I've played/tried out:WAR, LOTRO, Tabula Rasa, AoC, EQ1, EQ2, WoW, Vangaurd, FFXI, D&DO, Lineage 2, Saga Of Ryzom, EvE Online, DAoC, Guild Wars,Star Wars Galaxies, Hell Gate London, Auto Assault, Grando Espada ( AKA SoTNW ), Archlord, CoV/H, Star Trek Online, APB, Champions Online, FFXIV, Rift Online, GW2.
Game(s) I Am Currently Playing:
GW2 (+LoL and BF3)
Lets get this straight. Vangaurd sucks because of Sigil not because of SOE.
Games I've played/tried out:WAR, LOTRO, Tabula Rasa, AoC, EQ1, EQ2, WoW, Vangaurd, FFXI, D&DO, Lineage 2, Saga Of Ryzom, EvE Online, DAoC, Guild Wars,Star Wars Galaxies, Hell Gate London, Auto Assault, Grando Espada ( AKA SoTNW ), Archlord, CoV/H, Star Trek Online, APB, Champions Online, FFXIV, Rift Online, GW2.
Game(s) I Am Currently Playing:
GW2 (+LoL and BF3)
Something that Brad needs to realize, and all developers need to keep in mind...
You only get ONE chance to make a good first impression.
"Don't corpse-camp that idea. Its never gonna rez"
Bladezz (The Guild)
No you are wrong.
1.) Sigil took about 5 years and 30 million dollars to develop this title.
2.) Sigil was orginally signed up with Microsoft.
3.) Microsoft dumped Sigil because they were not meeting their benchmarks and the game was clearly behind in development.
4.) Sigil went shopping for a new publisher after being dumped by Microsoft. They found one called SOE and signed a contract with SOE.
5.) The contracted deal allowed SOE the right to manage the servers and advertise the game in exchange for giving Sigil continued development dollars in order to get the game out the door.
6.) Sigil are currently the owners of Vangaurd.
7.) Sigil still have development control over Vangaurd hence the post of Brad suggesting the eventual selling out of their development control of VG to SOE.
Brad and the gang have yet again run out of steam, money and ability and now they can't fix their broken game. Out of all the publishers Sigil could of gone with they decided to go with SOE because Brad knew that if things went wrong he could sell out to SOE like he did with EQ1.
Please get your facts straight before posting on the internet again.
Games I've played/tried out:WAR, LOTRO, Tabula Rasa, AoC, EQ1, EQ2, WoW, Vangaurd, FFXI, D&DO, Lineage 2, Saga Of Ryzom, EvE Online, DAoC, Guild Wars,Star Wars Galaxies, Hell Gate London, Auto Assault, Grando Espada ( AKA SoTNW ), Archlord, CoV/H, Star Trek Online, APB, Champions Online, FFXIV, Rift Online, GW2.
Game(s) I Am Currently Playing:
GW2 (+LoL and BF3)
To all those who said SOE is just a publisher for this game, I told you so.
To all those who said SOE exerts no influence over the game, I told you so.
To all those who said Brad would never sell to SOE, I told you so.
To all those who bought Brad's lies and bs over how the partnership with SOE gave Sigil more control, I told you so.
To all those who said the game was growing, rather than going down the tubes, I told you so.
Omg I could go on and on. What a rough day for fanbois. I picture them with a paper sack over their heads.
EQ1, EQ2, SWG, SWTOR, GW, GW2 CoH, CoV, FFXI, WoW, CO, War,TSW and a slew of free trials and beta tests
If you have a average system then a player should be able to adjust settings to play the game WITHOUT sacrificing graphics completly.
Sigil should have paid attention to EQ2 and implemented this from day 1.Make a game that can run on most systems but if you have a great 1 then the game looks great too.
If they had done this then they wouldnt be losing players and talking to SOE about how to make it better.
What is your physical limit?
This Brad character just doesn't get it.
His problem was he tried to do waaaay too much, to make a game that appeals to everyone, a game that is an amalgam of all other games, but bigger...
He over-reached, and the game failed. One would think he's learned his lesson, right?
So what does he talk about with the re-launch/expansion? Is he talking about dedicating his team to working out the code to make it playable? Does he speak of making the game FUN?
Hell no. He speaks of again adding unreasonable levels of content left and right. Age of Conan has RTS city building and mounted combat? WEll, we better add that! Pirates has pvp ship battles? WEll, we can't pass that up! LOTR has many subscribers? Well, lets pencil those in for us as well!
Jesus, man. Forget what others are doing. Focus on making YOUR game FUN, and PLAYABLE, and eventually you'll have an audience. But assuming that you'll have an audience because people will flock to you because OTHER games won't live up to their standards is downright foolish.
EQ (and Brad's Vision TM) came a long at the perfect time to capitalize on peoples need to play a fully 3D MUD (MMO). I just don't think the EQ Vision TM is a viable game system anymore.
I think Brad's out of touch with what MMOers want. Your post is spot on that people don't want a second job, they want to be entertained.
It will probably take significant restructuring for Vanguard to appeal to a broad audience, but I fear the damage has been done. Not to mention the system requirements issues. No "tweaking" will fix the fact that the Unreal engine is a cow and should only be used for FPS games. Though it seems many companies haven't learned that yet but they will.
Anyhow, I'm sure if SOE takes over Vanguard and absorbs Sigil. SOE will effectively milk the game like they've done to their other mediocre games. But perhaps they can throw enough money at the issues to fix them or get close to fixing them until such a day as computer technology has caught up to the system resource hog that is Vanguard.
Regardless, let's hope it plays out well for the current players who enjoy the game. It always sucks having your game of choice be ruined by catastrophic changes or mismanagement.
To be fair, the Matrix Online failed for a variety of reasons long before SOE ever got involved. And really? The only reason they bought MxO at all was to gain the rights to the DC Comics MMO. They had no interest or intention of ever improving that game. All they wanted was the shiny new IP to build a game around.
If I can correct you on this, SOE bought Vanguard from Sigil due to Sigil financial issues. SOE pushed for the premature release of Vanguard not Sigil.
Planetside (great game, but due to poor management from SOE the game is all screwed up. Poor maintenance, poor updates, raising the monthly subcription after doing an update.. pathetic, etc)
SWG (Do I need to say anything about this game?)
EQ 2 (Good game, unfortunately the greed of SOE shined on this game 3 expansions and 3 adventure packs, all at cost nothing for free or discounted for player loyalty)
Vanguard (Good game, unfortunately released 3 months before it should)
Matrix Online (LOL this is joke or a game)
Seems to me that there is more than 1 or 2 games in question
No you are wrong.
1.) Sigil took about 5 years and 30 million dollars to develop this title.
2.) Sigil was orginally signed up with Microsoft.
3.) Microsoft dumped Sigil because they were not meeting their benchmarks and the game was clearly behind in development.
4.) Sigil went shopping for a new publisher after being dumped by Microsoft. They found one called SOE and signed a contract with SOE.
5.) The contracted deal allowed SOE the right to manage the servers and advertise the game in exchange for giving Sigil continued development dollars in order to get the game out the door.
6.) Sigil are currently the owners of Vangaurd.
7.) Sigil still have development control over Vangaurd hence the post of Brad suggesting the eventual selling out of their development control of VG to SOE.
Brad and the gang have yet again run out of steam, money and ability and now they can't fix their broken game. Out of all the publishers Sigil could of gone with they decided to go with SOE because Brad knew that if things went wrong he could sell out to SOE like he did with EQ1.
Please get your facts straight before posting on the internet again.
You should also get your facts straight. You are being too generous and giving SOE a complete pass.
It is a fact that SOE developers worked on Vanguard prior to it being released. Therefore they knew what kind of condition the game was in, and that is was not ready to be launched, yet they marketed it as being complete and released it as ready.
Launching an incomplete and buggy product is a recipe for failure, and either SOE is completely clueless or they acted fraudulently with Sigil.
SOE's devs came into Vanguard only in the last few months, since Sigil was dumped by Microsoft. (And no matter what anyone says, YES, they were dumped by MS. Microsoft saw the writing on the wall, and jumped ship.) By that point, millions had been spent on Vanguard, and several years of work had been done on it.
Sony's coders and devs might have known what shape the game was in when it launched, but they're not miracle workers. There was no way they were going to completely turn the game around before it launched, since part of the deal that Sigil signed with SOE probably had a set launch date. Didn't Brad say they knew when the game was going to launch months before they announced it to everyone else? I seem to recall that.
Most likely, the deal with SOE rested on launching the game on a set date, no matter what shape it was in, and if the game couldn't attract a certain number of subs by X date, SOE would move to have more control, and eventually take it over completely. I doubt their deal with Sigil gave anyone a free, unlimited ride, especially considering the time and money that Microsoft had already spent on the game, and the shape it was in when Sony got it.
First, to all those who still say "VG is going fine, because my server is full and I always find a group": Brad himself admitted it so there is no point denying it. (Hello to all my SV 'friends'.)
Second, if you REALLY like VG and really want it to succeed (I still wish that), admit and accept a 30-40 million dollar AAA title can NOT live in a niche. Period.
Third and last, a LOT of ppl who said they stopped playing it (me included) clearly said they mainly stopped because it felt cold, boring and sterile, NOT because of difficulty or bugs. Brad, Sigil and the zealots have to get that out of their heads for the sake of this game.
On a personal level I didnt like some things, like the Corpse Runs and the fact the game is quite unforgivable to mistakes. A small mistake in tactics kills you very soon, especially in grouping places like dungeons. In that terms Vanguard IS hardcore compared to WOW or EQ2, because in WOW & EQ2 when you make a mistake you have good chances to run away or turn the tide. In VG if you make ONE mistake in a dungeons, you get a WIPE. FACT. (I may be not the perfect gamer but after 6 years and a dozen MMOs my skills are not THAT bad and still that happens to every player I have met there.) Bugs and performace were issues, BUT: if the game were fun, entertaining and great most would have ignored the bugs, as ppl did in many, many other launched MMOs, like in the first months of SWG, EQ2 or 90% of MMos ever launched. VG is just boring. Its sterile, cold and lacks feeling, everything that makes a story, and world that feels alive with meaning and fun. THAT is the problem of VG.
The entire debate about hardcore VS casual or bugs is a ghost debate that has zero to do with the reasons why ppl stopped playing VG or by "viral anti-marketing" didnt bother to come.
People don't ask questions to get answers - they ask questions to show how smart they are. - Dogbert
RIP Orc Choppa
SOE agreed to finance Vanguard development for a certain amount of time after Microsoft jumped ship. This time ran out, end of story. Only an idiot would say it was SOEs fault Sigil didnt make effective use of the time and money they were given.
How much money do you dump into a game no one wants to play? $30 million seems to be Sigils magic number.
EQ2 has released plenty of free content. Of course nothing is truly free, every iota of content in every single game is paid for by someone.
Funny how SWG ended up with the same tone and flavor as every other Star Wars product ultimately ends up with. SOE didnt work on any of those projects