Howdy, Stranger!
It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!
Quick Links
vanguard a 7.9 HAHAHHAAHHA lies
This discussion has been closed.
It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!
Comments
I know I shouldn't be surprized by now after being in some type of MMO since 1996 but it still amazes me why anyone would want to rush though an MMO. What so you can be first to the top of the hill? Oppee you got there first, you got bored and quit first. All you have shown me is that you are inmature and childish cause that is how childrean like to play things. An MMO is not for children, and just because some may say they are old enough to legally drink does not make them mature.
A MMO is like a fine wine. You must admire it and then savor the flavor by keeping it in your mouth before you swallow it. That is how all MMOs should be played. If you just rush through it you get nothing from it and leave. I feel sorry for your live partner (trying to be PC here) cause you most likely give them a quicky as well and leave the room leaving them wanting more.
MMO deserve you time and attention. I have several characters and the highest is 35. I have been in the mid-30s for 2 to 3 months now and I have no desire to go any faster. I am enjoying the game and it has not disappointed me in content. There is a lot to do. So much so I could not do it all with one character. I get one of the others out and do the content I have not done with one of them.
Each continent has its own quest areas to get special gear. Each continents crafts can make something different. From 3 styles in boats to 3 styles in funiture for you three different types of housing.
Vanguard has the most content I have ever seen in an MMO and I have played most of them including WoW, EQ, AO, etc. This is a great game and I strongly encourage everyone to play it, but don't play it where you go to 50 in 2 days play it where if you so desire you get to 50 in 2 years and guess what you will find when you get there... endgame content.
A MMO is like life. It is something to cherish and enjoy upon in it journey. So why race to the end of it. In life at the end you die.
As for crafting, SWG had crafting people really enjoyed more than anything else. It was the best part of the game for many. Same for horizons to an extent, but that might be due to terrible gameplay overall. I'm sure there are a few I am missing, but those games have very tricky dynamics.
SWG is just a single game though, and I tend not to judge a company off of a single product. EQ2 is a great game today.
The highlighted part is important. If Nvidia isn't giving support to the devs then it's not the games fault. Then again, most people that are familliar with Nvidia and the 8k series cards knows that the drivers aren't very good. A lot of people also had problems playing other games with vista and the 8800. Rainbow six: Vegas was one of them. Nvidia even released a set of drivers wich contained a fix specifically for that game, and several others.
Some people don't care though. It's not the hardware or OS that is the problem, and it doesn't matter to them because the game should be straight regardless of what they got in thier system. They can't imagine that people with simillar systems can have completely varied performance in the same game. Or that the top of the line gfx card could be giving them problems. Let's not talk about sound cards now. God forbid the sound cards drivers aren't compatable. They should be, they shouldn't have to find alternative drivers. We pay money for these things and they should work. Sometimes they just don't. People either forget or ingore the fact that Vista and the 8k series cards aren't just a problem for VG, they were a problem in many games, all across the industry. VG just happend to be the game that gave some here a problem, and that's all that matters to them.
I'm not sure I get the point you were trying to make about crafting. SWG's crafting is a specific class in itself, and you can only be a pure crafter if you make a trader. SWG also uses a very simple crafting system. If I have all the necessary components I simply put them in the right place and click a button. I'm not familliar with Horizons. My personal favorite is EQ2 crafting as it is today. The original system was to much, more akin to VG crafting. The process itself though, is still pretty easy.
VG's crafting was supposed to be complex I though, and in it's own right it is with the number of complications that arise. Like every crafting system I've tried though, it's primary mechanic involves repeating the same thing over and over and over to raise your crafting skill. Repetition is the staple of crafting. At least all the crafting systems I'm familliar with. I don't really know how you can make a system that doesn't involve doing the same thing over and over, and like every system, you either like it or you don't.
Wish Darkfall would release.
I think you were trying to say it's a result of Microsoft parting from the Sigil team, but I don't want to write a reply to the wrong thing.
Waiting for something fresh to arrive on the MMO scene...
Actually, you are incorrect.
The AMD Athlon XP 3000+ only runs at around 2.19ghz under optimum conditions unless you are overclocking it (I know this because I am currently running one on my computer, but a check at Ebay or any other reseller would tell you the same basic stats). The Athlon 64 X2 4200+ has two processors that run at 2.2ghz.
So your average dual core 4200+ and above should run any program designed to operate with an Athlon XP 3000+ regardless of whether that program was designed to take advantage of dual-core processing or not.
Besides the fact that the minimum system requirements did not call for a Athlon XP 3000+:
Quoted from EBGames, Gamestop and the Sony Station Store
"Processor 2.4 GHz Intel processor or 2400+ or higher model AMD processor"
From the above, it should be obvious that the Athlon XP 2400+ does not run at 2.4ghz, but closer to 1.8ghz; even the 3000+ doesn't run at 2.4ghz.
The point that Cymdai originally made still stands; if VSOH had been designed to take advantage of dual-core processing, the result would be that your dual-core processor would have been faster than a comparable single-core processor. The overall result would have been that those individuals with dual-core 4200+ or above would be getting better overall performance from VSOH than those with a single-core Athlon XP 3000+.
The advantages of dual-core processors (besides less heat and lower overall energy consumption) for programs that are designed to take advantage of them are:
The processor is designed to split requests and instructions between the separate cores along a shorter bus path, which results in faster overall processing with lower latency, as each core independently processes system and program requests.
Each core has between 1280 to 2304kb of effective cache assigned to it, rather than one core with a similar amount of cache.
The dual-core processor has its DDR2 memory controller directly on the CPU rather than going through the chipset on the motherboard to address your RAM (at least, on AMD dual-core processors; I think Intel still goes through the motherboard chipset). The result is more bandwidth available for memory addressing and faster throughput with direct addressing.
Reference:
Wikipedia Article Multi-Core Computing (pay particular attention to the advantages/disadvantages section; it speaks directly to the program issue)
AMD Dual Core Page AMD Athlon 64 X2 and Athlon X2 Dual-Core Processors (It gives more information on the bandwidth and bus improvements that were made to take advantage of dual core processing).
Since both AMD and Intel have basically abandoned single-core processors for the time being (many believe they've reached the upper limit of efficiency between power consumption, processor speed and the ability to manage and dissipate heat that you get from single-core processors, but who knows) it would definitely behoove game manufacturers to ensure that they are designing high-end 3D games with dual-core optimization in mind.
I'm not attacking Vanguard here, or Vaedur in particular. I am simply pointing out that Vaedur's information on this point is incorrect.
The simple fact of the matter in the long run was that Sigil should have simply listed the recommended specs as the minimum system requirements. That would have led to much less buyer dissatisfaction from those who just barely exceeded the published minimum they released with or fell between the minimum and recommended.
Yes, the game can be played on an Athlon XP 3000+, but the performance in my experience just was not satisfactory in the long run.
Abbatoir / Abbatoir Cinq
Adnihilo
Beorn Judge's Edge
Somnulus
Perfect Black
----------------------
Asheron's Call / Asheron's Call 2
Everquest / Everquest 2
Anarchy Online
Shadowbane
Dark Age of Camelot
Star Wars Galaxies
Matrix Online
World of Warcraft
Guild Wars
City of Heroes
Okay didn't you know Vanguard was first gonna be a MS/Sigil title??, and knowing what branche you seem to work obviously you know that Vanguard might (no proof for this thats why i uderlined MIGHT!! ) have had more acces to those type of tech things then when they had to part from microsoft (again no fact but knowing MS and seeing what tech capability's they offer its safe to asume (again used a word like "asume" as for me another word that isn't FACT) this rather then thinking about people being penalized
Hope the highlighted words make it somewhat clear Cym
You were not quoting me, but I guess you were referring to my post. Anyhow, you should work on your tolerance skill a little bit and you should not so easily jump to assumptions. In any case, even if you were not referring to my post you are assuming that everyone who plays an MMORPG in a different fashion than you are used to play it is "childish"? I hate to break it to you, but the majority of the people playing an MMORPG with the endgame in mind are not childisch and immature in any way. Think twice please, before you jump to assumptions for no reason, besides bashing people and actually saying nothing productive for the ongoing discussion. I would guess my /played in VG is even below yours, we just have a different approach on the game.
Anyways, this is all besides the point. The point is, that VG was/is unfinished, and I followed the game a very long time, even before release. What you are saying in your post is, that it is the players fault that they run out of content? Oh please, this is not even worth to be commented, because that would be the same as "to grab an "picture" I think I read somwhere in this thread":
If someone would buy an apple with a worm in it, complaining about it and just gets told that its hit fault the worm decied to live inside this apple.
It is just unbelievable how stupid and ignorant some of the fanbois in here are.
What's up with the "get a descent computer for at least 3000$ and it will run fine. I HAVE ONE - YOU POOR S.O.A.B.". Seriously, what is that about? Are you guys braindead? Do you want to show off? It's the internet - We don't believe you anyway.
You SHOULD not need an PC for 3000$ to play ANY game and it is stupid to argue with that, because it makes you look dumb. You are not defending Vanguard with it, what you say is: "those boys at sigil don't know s... about programming, so you need a machine for at least 2000$".
It would be professional to tell the other readers your system specific's, but to name a cash amount. That's sad!
Anyhow, 7.9 must be an error because Vanguard realy sucks. It's a crap piece of software with absolutly no love in it. Don't believe me? Fine! Buy it! I don't care - But you have been warned.
Raven
Agree ^^ ...why do people flamme about a game??....if you dont like it....stop talking about it or posting crap.....
let it go....
Cheers
_____________________________________________________
Currently Playing: GTA4, Urban Terror, Aion,Dreamfall:TLJ,Fahrenheit
I put .. Hmm.. £600 into my machine, downloaded the trial, and it runs like a dream.
Whoever you are and whatever your computer is worth, if you can't get VG to run nowadays;
Go pack up your computer, return it to the store and tell them that you're to stupid to handle silicone based machinery and buy a set of legos.
For those in beta; I was there too, it sucked, it was horrible and it made me cry.
Tried it this week,
it's EQ2, but alot better.
Well worth trying again, it has very much become sweet.
Mind you it's not a 'zomg I R leet epixx' game but a rather casual game, for now.
It's nice, we're building a boat, relaxing and enjoying the scenery.
I recommend making a Kojani Human as first character, just to see what the Tutorials will be all about when they're all done, it's really really nifty.
So; To sum it up:
It's insanely much better than beta now
If you can't make it run with a decen computer you're an idiot
And Kojani Humans rock.
Thank you for reading.
Played so far: 9Dragons, AO, AC, AC2, CoX, DAoC, DF, DnL, DR, DDO, Ent, EvE, EQ, EQ2, FoMK, FFO, Fury, GW, HG:L, HZ, L1, L2, M59, MU, NC1, NC2, PS, PT, R:O, RF:O, RYL, Ryzom, SL, SB, SW:G, TR, TCoS, MX:O, UO, VG, WAR, WoW...
It all sucked.
Actually, you are incorrect.
The AMD Athlon XP 3000+ only runs at around 2.19ghz under optimum conditions unless you are overclocking it (I know this because I am currently running one on my computer, but a check at Ebay or any other reseller would tell you the same basic stats). The Athlon 64 X2 4200+ has two processors that run at 2.2ghz.
So your average dual core 4200+ and above should run any program designed to operate with an Athlon XP 3000+ regardless of whether that program was designed to take advantage of dual-core processing or not.
Besides the fact that the minimum system requirements did not call for a Athlon XP 3000+:
Quoted from EBGames, Gamestop and the Sony Station Store
"Processor 2.4 GHz Intel processor or 2400+ or higher model AMD processor"
From the above, it should be obvious that the Athlon XP 2400+ does not run at 2.4ghz, but closer to 1.8ghz; even the 3000+ doesn't run at 2.4ghz.
The point that Cymdai originally made still stands; if VSOH had been designed to take advantage of dual-core processing, the result would be that your dual-core processor would have been faster than a comparable single-core processor. The overall result would have been that those individuals with dual-core 4200+ or above would be getting better overall performance from VSOH than those with a single-core Athlon XP 3000+.
The advantages of dual-core processors (besides less heat and lower overall energy consumption) for programs that are designed to take advantage of them are:
The processor is designed to split requests and instructions between the separate cores along a shorter bus path, which results in faster overall processing with lower latency, as each core independently processes system and program requests.
Each core has between 1280 to 2304kb of effective cache assigned to it, rather than one core with a similar amount of cache.
The dual-core processor has its DDR2 memory controller directly on the CPU rather than going through the chipset on the motherboard to address your RAM (at least, on AMD dual-core processors; I think Intel still goes through the motherboard chipset). The result is more bandwidth available for memory addressing and faster throughput with direct addressing.
Reference:
Wikipedia Article Multi-Core Computing (pay particular attention to the advantages/disadvantages section; it speaks directly to the program issue)
AMD Dual Core Page AMD Athlon 64 X2 and Athlon X2 Dual-Core Processors (It gives more information on the bandwidth and bus improvements that were made to take advantage of dual core processing).
Since both AMD and Intel have basically abandoned single-core processors for the time being (many believe they've reached the upper limit of efficiency between power consumption, processor speed and the ability to manage and dissipate heat that you get from single-core processors, but who knows) it would definitely behoove game manufacturers to ensure that they are designing high-end 3D games with dual-core optimization in mind.
I'm not attacking Vanguard here, or Vaedur in particular. I am simply pointing out that Vaedur's information on this point is incorrect.
The simple fact of the matter in the long run was that Sigil should have simply listed the recommended specs as the minimum system requirements. That would have led to much less buyer dissatisfaction from those who just barely exceeded the published minimum they released with or fell between the minimum and recommended.
Yes, the game can be played on an Athlon XP 3000+, but the performance in my experience just was not satisfactory in the long run.
I think the point he was trying to make is....
Duel core precessors only work better IF the program it's trying to run is made to optimize those cpu's.
If said program is not optimized for duel cores than its running off just one...the second processor can actualy get in the way and slow you down. In this case a AMD 3500 can out perform an AMD 4200.
I am no expert mind ya....feel free to educate me..but that was how I understood it.
You were not quoting me, but I guess you were referring to my post. Anyhow, you should work on your tolerance skill a little bit and you should not so easily jump to assumptions. In any case, even if you were not referring to my post you are assuming that everyone who plays an MMORPG in a different fashion than you are used to play it is "childish"? I hate to break it to you, but the majority of the people playing an MMORPG with the endgame in mind are not childisch and immature in any way. Think twice please, before you jump to assumptions for no reason, besides bashing people and actually saying nothing productive for the ongoing discussion. I would guess my /played in VG is even below yours, we just have a different approach on the game.
Anyways, this is all besides the point. The point is, that VG was/is unfinished, and I followed the game a very long time, even before release. What you are saying in your post is, that it is the players fault that they run out of content? Oh please, this is not even worth to be commented, because that would be the same as "to grab an "picture" I think I read somwhere in this thread":
If someone would buy an apple with a worm in it, complaining about it and just gets told that its hit fault the worm decied to live inside this apple.
Actualy...I aggree with this guy.
It is childish to rush through a mmorpg. As a father of 3 I can say in all three of my kids ..and their friends...struggle with the concept of enjoying the journey...all they see is the candy at the end. It is deffinetly a maturity thing ..imo.
I think it's much more mature to approach a game with the mindset of experiencing everything the game has to offer...particularly if this person intends to publicaly comment on the game later on.
Maybe childish is not the right word...I'd say..immature ( only in reference to play style..doesn't necessarily apply to other aspects of life )
The second processor doesn't cause any significant slowdown between the two processor types. Basically, the Athlon XP 3000+ and the Athlon 64 X2 4200+ run at between 2.18 and 2.2ghz (without overclocking) in benchmark testing on programs that aren't optimized for dual-core processor support. So if a program recommends a 3000+ processor, the dual-core 4200+ and above should provide the exact same performance.
The dual-core won't run noticeably slower than the single-core CPU if the program isn't optimized for dual-core. It simply won't run much faster, which is what it is designed to do.
You can visit here and see that in benchmarks on games not designed with dual-core support using single core and dual-core AMD processors with comparable frequency ratings (in this case, 2.4ghz) the dual-core processor still provided slightly better performance.
The two examples that Vaedur used were single and dual-core processors running at basically the same frequency. They should (and probably do) provide the same performance in games that are not designed for dual-core support, just like the example above.
In contrast, the point Cymdai was making is that when hyperthreading (multi-threading) dual-core support exists, the dual-core processor may provide almost twice the performance of a similarly rated single core processor and exceeds even higher rated single-core processors.
You can see the comparisons between single and dual-core processors in these benchmark tests below when dual-core support exists.
Cymdai was making the point that lacking dual-core optimization was a pretty big mistake on VSOH's part, considering the fact that nearly every single high-end PC today (and practically in the past two years) utilizes dual-core processors. So not including direct support for dual-core processing, which would have provided much improved performance, would alienate a large part of your audience who would otherwise have very good performance.
When you add a lack of support for SLI, that further decreases the performance that today's high-end PC would provide.
Abbatoir / Abbatoir Cinq
Adnihilo
Beorn Judge's Edge
Somnulus
Perfect Black
----------------------
Asheron's Call / Asheron's Call 2
Everquest / Everquest 2
Anarchy Online
Shadowbane
Dark Age of Camelot
Star Wars Galaxies
Matrix Online
World of Warcraft
Guild Wars
City of Heroes
Can't dual core and SLI/ Xfire support be added?
I recall reading awhile ago that SLI support would be incorporated at some point. I don't know about the dual core optimization though.
Also, it makes sence to me that if you see yourself faced with having to release early and you haven't put in support for things like SLI and dual core, that you would focus resources on getting the client to run on single core. I would assume that there would be other things of more significant importance to focus on, that using what limitted resources you have to impliment, and test support.
I wonder just how many people are using Dual core over single core processors right now. Dual core is like PCI-E and SLI to me. Most people in AGP systems aren't going to have Dual core or have SLI.
I do know that worrying about SLI when you have other things to deal with in order to launch would have been bad. SLI isn't that wide spread and there are still going to be many "average" PC gamers that aren't running 2 gfx cards even though they can.
I guess the point I'm trying to make is,
Not having dual core, or SLI support isn't "hurting" the game. It's not CONTRIBUTING to performance problems. Even if you had it you would still have a larger group of people having performance issues, because the game isn't optimized to run on a single core.
Get it working with one processor and one gfx card and then worry about "enhancing" performance with support of these things later. Using these things as criticism just doesn't seem fair to me. It's like my boy telling me that my PC is junk because it's not liquid cooled.
Wish Darkfall would release.
They should be able to do the optimization and add SLI support. It's just a little strange that it wasn't a consideration since the first dual-core processors started coming out in 2005. Given that they knew their product would have performance issues on lower-end PCs, you would think they would have taken that optimization into consideration as more and more of the newer high-end computers were switching to dual-core.
Well, you can get a Dell Dimension C521 with an Athlon 64 X2 3600+ for $439; and if you go to Tiger Direct, their entire CPU page starts the list with dual-core processors.
Just based on the performance improvements I posted earlier between single and dual core processors, it only makes sense to optimize for dual-core. And as I said earlier, if you already know your game is going to be resource-intensive and you tell your prospective clients that it will be, they're going to try to upgrade if they want to play the game.
Dual-core was the next step up, unless you already had a very robust (3.0ghz or faster) single-core processor to start with. Even then, a mid-range dual-core processor will outperform a single-core processor at a higher frequency if the program in question is optimized for it. I would think that at this point dual-core systems are pretty prevalent.
They use less power, have lower heat management issues and the cost to performance ratio between a lower-end dual-core in comparison to a high-end single core is competitive.
SLI, on the other hand, probably isn't. I agree that the majority of gamers are probably still running a single AGP card. But in the long run, SLI really is more of a luxury feature. A robust CPU, especially for gaming, really isn't.
If VSOH was optimized for dual-core, that portion of its playerbase that may even be using a lower-end dual-core would still be getting greatly improved performance.
Actually, optimizing for dual-core processors has no effect on game performance for single-core processors. The dual-core instruction set is a completely different architecture and it only operates if the user turns it on in the options or if the program detects the presence of a dual-core processor. Otherwise, the program operates normally as though it is dealing with a single-core processor.
So a program optimized to support dual-core processors still functions normally on a single-core processor. The end benefit the developer receives is that those players who have high-end single core processors and those with mid to high end dual-core processors get good performance. That means overall a larger playerbase can enjoy the game.
Your PC isn't liquid cooled? Ewwwwww!
Just kidding.
I agree. You should ensure that your program will work as intended on a single-core processor and a single graphics card.
But if you are starting with the assumption that the single-core processor and the single graphics card would need to be at the higher end of the spectrum, as Sigil did, optimizing for more cost-effective dual-core processors just makes sense.
It is rather a damned if you do, damned if you don't situation if you are already up against a deadline. As the developer, you would have to decide what was more important; additional content and content fixes or performance improvement to be followed by content and content fixes.
But one thing I think can be agreed on is that consideration of the amount and quality of content becomes secondary if the performance of the game itself is bad enough that a large portion of your target audience cannot play the game to enjoy the content to begin with.
Abbatoir / Abbatoir Cinq
Adnihilo
Beorn Judge's Edge
Somnulus
Perfect Black
----------------------
Asheron's Call / Asheron's Call 2
Everquest / Everquest 2
Anarchy Online
Shadowbane
Dark Age of Camelot
Star Wars Galaxies
Matrix Online
World of Warcraft
Guild Wars
City of Heroes
Intresting discussion above
might ad this to it http://au.gamespot.com/news/6168900.html?om_act=convert&om_clk=morenews&tag=morenews;title;1
Game developers adapt to multicore world
As more and more PCs incorporate dual-core processors into their guts, game developers must rethink their design processes.
PC game developers appear to finally be getting the message: the free ride is over.
For years, developers were able to take advantage of faster and faster processors from Intel and Advanced Micro Devices. All they had to do was write their program once, and it would run faster and faster as Intel and AMD cranked up the clock speed.
But overheating forced chip companies to adopt designs with two or more processor cores running at slower speeds, which meant that some applications written to run on a single thread couldn't take advantage of that extra horsepower. This has required an entirely new way of looking at software development, prompting Intel this week to release another batch of software development tools aimed at helping developers make that transition.
Major games take years to develop, meaning that most of the games released around the time that dual-core chips hit the market in 2005 were not built with two lanes in mind. The good news is that developers have found a way around this so far with patches, which alert the game that it has two cores to work with.
The bad news is that releasing patches is only a stopgap solution until game studios sell titles designed with multiple software threads in mind. More and more studios seem to be getting the message, with dozens of major titles in the works for multicore processors. But this is hard work--the abandonment of decades of programming expertise for a new way of exploiting processor power. (i like to ad especialy when time seem to be limited)
"I'd say we're at a 'C-plus' right now," said Randy Stude, director of Intel's game platform office, assigning a grade for the industry's progress toward parallel development. "When the first dual-core chips came out (in 2005), we were at a D-minus."
Intel and AMD have spent significant time and energy urging developers to take advantage of the "low-hanging fruit"--easy ways to make their games more aware of parallel computing. AMD even sponsored a coding competition last year to help drive those points home.
As a result, over the past year, major game studios such as Blizzard Entertainment (World of Warcraft) and Id Software (Quake and Doom) have released patches to make their games multicore-friendly. Didn't know WoW was multi-core, CooL, but ermmmmm why? Quake and Doom are pretty obvious seeing very high quality visuals of the game.
But that's not the same as having designed the game from day one with multiple processors or multicore chips in mind, said Ted Pollak, an analyst at Jon Peddie Research.
"It won't give the same kind of performance, but it's going to help, and it's better than nothing," Pollak said. So basicly even if it can be implemented in Vanguard at this time will not give a magic boost in performance, if when the first code-block was set and Vanguard was build upon it, it would have mattered, atleast i feel its safe to asume these guy's know what they talk about
According to lists supplied by Intel and AMD, just over 25 games are available that were designed with multiple-core processors in mind. One of those games, THQ's Supreme Commander, made its debut in February. Knowing how many games there are this is actualy proof of its still a very young area to work with
"We feel it's a design choice you have to make from the outset," THQ spokesman Ben Collier said.
Unfortunately, it's not always that simple. Massive PC games are multiyear projects, and many companies are reluctant to tinker with code that has been well received by the public. Some developers are working on just a single game, while others are creating game engines that will power several games.
One company thinks that it has a product that can help alleviate the long nights spent coding for multicore chips. "It's a way to continue to use serial programming but achieve a parallel approach to data parallelism," said Ray DePaul, CEO of RapidMind.
Most of the work on the RapidMind development platform has been for IBM's multicore Cell processor, but the company is working on tools to support multicore x86 chips from Intel and AMD as well, DePaul said. Developers use an API (application programming interface) to write their application, and the platform figures out how to distribute the load across multiples cores.
A company called PeakStream has a similar product that can let developers plunge right into the multicore world.
Intel thinks that developers might as well just get used to the parallel world, however. Soon all PCs will have at least dual-core chips, with quad-core desktop chips already available from Intel and coming later this year from AMD.
Console games appear headed in that direction as well, Stude said, given the use of multicore chips in the PlayStation 3 and Xbox 360.
"The learning curve is becoming less and less to get threading work done," Stude said. In other words where not there yet
You were not quoting me, but I guess you were referring to my post. Anyhow, you should work on your tolerance skill a little bit and you should not so easily jump to assumptions. In any case, even if you were not referring to my post you are assuming that everyone who plays an MMORPG in a different fashion than you are used to play it is "childish"? I hate to break it to you, but the majority of the people playing an MMORPG with the endgame in mind are not childisch and immature in any way. Think twice please, before you jump to assumptions for no reason, besides bashing people and actually saying nothing productive for the ongoing discussion. I would guess my /played in VG is even below yours, we just have a different approach on the game.
Anyways, this is all besides the point. The point is, that VG was/is unfinished, and I followed the game a very long time, even before release. What you are saying in your post is, that it is the players fault that they run out of content? Oh please, this is not even worth to be commented, because that would be the same as "to grab an "picture" I think I read somwhere in this thread":
If someone would buy an apple with a worm in it, complaining about it and just gets told that its hit fault the worm decied to live inside this apple.
Actualy...I aggree with this guy.
It is childish to rush through a mmorpg. As a father of 3 I can say in all three of my kids ..and their friends...struggle with the concept of enjoying the journey...all they see is the candy at the end. It is deffinetly a maturity thing ..imo.
I think it's much more mature to approach a game with the mindset of experiencing everything the game has to offer...particularly if this person intends to publicaly comment on the game later on.
Maybe childish is not the right word...I'd say..immature ( only in reference to play style..doesn't necessarily apply to other aspects of life )
First of all, if someone plays to Level 50 over a time frame of 3,5 months, it aint rushing. This is just focussing most of the time on the main character and playing effectively together with friends and guild mates, formulate goals and work towards them. My play schedule differs most likely by no means from those of other people, but when we log on we actively play the game until we log out.
There is no immature play style per se, There are just different approaches on the game. I have seen about 85% to 90% of the adventuring content Vanguard has to offer, set aside crafting and dipplomacy where I can't make a proficient comment on. If this is not enough to "publicly" comment as you call it. well.
As I said, i adore the content Vanguard has to offer between 30 and 40. My rogue owns a complete set of wardship armour from top to bottom. I don't care if you call my play style immature or childish as there are probably as many folks out there who see this totally different, but that people with this play style are not able to publicly comment on a game, because they "rushed" is really not true in any case.
To me it seems, that everyone who says something "slightly" negative about VG in this forum gets attacked just out of a habit. It seems people get overprotective when someone even mentions a negative point. The fact that posters been focussing on my play style, instead of replying on the facts I posted shows me that I had a point.
To make this clear, I am not a hater of this game. I would love to see it flourish, because I have been an EQ1-player since release and VG is for me the true successor of EQ1.
I was just stating pure facts which happened around this game and on the current status, which is alarming concerning subscription numbers. Vanguard is not the "holy cow" and nobody is trying to slaughter it, but a little bit of objectivity needs to be in place. At the end of the day publishers of games just check if there is a possitive financial result, so all this emotional debates are fine for us and get us all worked up, but it won't change the fact that a subscription based game lives and dies through subscription numbers.
Good read and good data, Reklaw.
I would like to reply to on one of your commented additions, however.
I think that's safe to assume as well; however, they didn't say that there was no improvement or "magic boost in performance". They said it wasn't the same as designing the program to address dual-core processors from the ground up; but it would still be an improvement.
If many average gamers are combing a given program's INI files (in this case, VSOH) just to find the lines they can change that give them a minor performance improvement, it's not at all presumptuous to assume that they would be appreciative of any improvement in performance
Even if that improvement was only a one-quarter improvement in overall processing speed and bus throughput while using a dual-core processor rather than nearly double that of competing frequency single-core processors, that would still represent a noticeable step up in performance.
I don't blame development studios for not being quick to jump on the dual-core bandwagon. I'm sure they thought it was some kind of alternative that Intel and AMD were introducing until they could release their next big single core processor.
That doesn't appear to be the reality, however, since the fact is that in less than two years Intel has already developed and released a quad-core processor and AMD should be releasing its quad-core Phenom processor later this year.
I think the point Cymdai was trying to introduce was that considering how labor-intensive VSOH is and the fact that Sigil knew it would be, it's surprising that they didn't try to implement some kind of dual-core processing optimization, particularly as they knew that part of their potential audience would be early adopters of dual-core technology.
It's also natural that dual-core owners would be disappointed in their performance in the game when they know they could be getting better performance.
Abbatoir / Abbatoir Cinq
Adnihilo
Beorn Judge's Edge
Somnulus
Perfect Black
----------------------
Asheron's Call / Asheron's Call 2
Everquest / Everquest 2
Anarchy Online
Shadowbane
Dark Age of Camelot
Star Wars Galaxies
Matrix Online
World of Warcraft
Guild Wars
City of Heroes
I think that's safe to assume as well; however, they didn't say that there was no improvement or "magic boost in performance". They said it wasn't the same as designing the program to address dual-core processors from the ground up; but it would still be an improvement. Yup fully agree it does indeed still matter if implemented at this time or later, bit bad choise of words on my part
with me saying "it would have mattered if build upon", should have been "it would matter "more" 
Lol sorry mate, but i have $3000 worth of machine (Alien) and this game still sucks.
2 level 50s, equiped in 4-5 45+ heroics, caravel ship, 2 floor house, shadowhound... etc...etc... so dont go on to say i havent given it a try.
Tried to love this game, but its poor, very poor.
Pics or it didn't happen as they say. Like many people in WoW for some reasons little trolls ALWAYS have 2-3 max levels on every game they play but unfortunately most of them just fail waaay before thatSo simple pics or you just talking bull.
A friend is not him who provides support during your failures.A friend is the one that cheers you during your successes.
2x 35+ characters.
Quit into my first paid month, I don't enjoy spending 15+ hours doing a quest and then having the devs decide the very next patch day to make it a 6 hour quest - while, at the same time, introducing 2 new quests that take ~15 hours.
I didn't enjoy endlessly searching desperately for a group.
I didn't enjoy soloing as a warrior or cleric.
I didn't enjoy quests that side-stepped gear I got 5 levels ago.
The quest system needs a serious overhaul, bajillion part quests that require groups scream "Bring your own fracking group!"...
Troves of morons in the server who all knew everything and insisted that doing anything other than their way means you're an idiot and you suck. Community was - by far - the worst I've ever seen in any MMO (I'll take 12yr olds in WoW over pompous arrogant @#&; holes thanks).
... There's just so much more. I give this game .01/10 just to acknowledge that it does indeed exist.
A lot of people on this web page review and talk about Vanguard at its terrible release. Today, Vanguard is not the same Vanguard that most of these people talk about. Instead, Vanguard is really an enormous game, many classes and races, tons of content, no linear game progression, several paths of development (adventurer, diplomat, crafter), and much more.
It is otherwise a great game with a really bad release.
-----
WoW and fast food = commercial successes.
I neither play WoW nor eat fast food.
Great article Reklaw.
The dual core issue always seemed like a mute point to me.
The game began dev. before dual cores were wide spread, and before building games for it was really being done. The line about 25 games being dev. with dual core in mind is very telling. Considering the money and time issues that Sigil was having, combined with what the article said about the difficulty of programing for dual core, I can see why VG doesn't support it. I can also see why the PS3 isn't doing so well.
Seems to me the game didn't start with dual core in mind, and by the time it would have been a viable route it was already to late. Nor is it that big an issue because almost all of the games in dev. at that time are also not being built with dual core in mind.
I just don't understand why I see more critisism for this very minor issue, to me at least, and very little about the lack of a viable QA team. It seems to me that with all the complaints about performance that dual core and SLI support not being integrated wasn't the issue. It was the ability to test and optimize before the rushed release that is the direct contributer to performance issues.
You just can't release games without even some sort of proper testing at some level. Something that you can't really do if you don't have money, and the resources you were counting on are no longer available to you. Maybe people forget, or chose to ignore that MS was thier QA resource and when Sigil bought the publishing rights from MS they no longer had a testing facility or QA personell, nor the money to get either.
I do believe that SoE with get the game optimized. I do not think that VG needs dual core. Support will be nice, but for the magority of the average gamer it's not even an issue. They are trying to run games on single core PC's. I do not think that the average gamer has jumped up to a dual core or PCI-E and things like dual core and SLI support just isn't an issue for the average gamer. Something tells me that a good magority of average gamers haven't baught a new gaming PC or upgraded thier current ones processor in the past 2 years. Even then, a year ago dual core would have been much more expensive and purchasing or upgrading to a single core would have been the more feasable and cost effective route to go for the average gamer.
Wish Darkfall would release.
For $15/mo, I would agree Vanguard deserves a low rating. With what is available on the market, Vanguard performs poorly at $15/mo.
Now for $5/mo, I would say Vanguard would rate high. It would provide a number of good features (even with its problems) for such a price-point.
For $10/mo... I think that is if'fy, good arguments can be made for or against at such a price-point.
For Vanguard to be competitive, the price-point should be reduced (besides of the fixing and other improvements).
If or when Vanguard becomes the game that it should have been, then the price-point can be increased.
And that is why...
Conservatives' pessimism is conducive to their happiness in three ways. First, they are rarely surprised -- they are right more often than not about the course of events. Second, when they are wrong they are happy to be so. Third, because pessimistic conservatives put not their faith in princes -- government -- they accept that happiness is a function of fending for oneself. They believe that happiness is an activity -- it is inseparable from the pursuit of happiness.
First of all, if someone plays to Level 50 over a time frame of 3,5 months, it aint rushing. This is just focussing most of the time on the main character and playing effectively together with friends and guild mates, formulate goals and work towards them. My play schedule differs most likely by no means from those of other people, but when we log on we actively play the game until we log out.
There is no immature play style per se, There are just different approaches on the game. I have seen about 85% to 90% of the adventuring content Vanguard has to offer, set aside crafting and dipplomacy where I can't make a proficient comment on. If this is not enough to "publicly" comment as you call it. well.
As I said, i adore the content Vanguard has to offer between 30 and 40. My rogue owns a complete set of wardship armour from top to bottom. I don't care if you call my play style immature or childish as there are probably as many folks out there who see this totally different, but that people with this play style are not able to publicly comment on a game, because they "rushed" is really not true in any case.
To me it seems, that everyone who says something "slightly" negative about VG in this forum gets attacked just out of a habit. It seems people get overprotective when someone even mentions a negative point. The fact that posters been focussing on my play style, instead of replying on the facts I posted shows me that I had a point.
To make this clear, I am not a hater of this game. I would love to see it flourish, because I have been an EQ1-player since release and VG is for me the true successor of EQ1.
I was just stating pure facts which happened around this game and on the current status, which is alarming concerning subscription numbers. Vanguard is not the "holy cow" and nobody is trying to slaughter it, but a little bit of objectivity needs to be in place. At the end of the day publishers of games just check if there is a possitive financial result, so all this emotional debates are fine for us and get us all worked up, but it won't change the fact that a subscription based game lives and dies through subscription numbers.
Ok to set the record straight on my part. I did not quote you because I was making a generalized statement. Yes your post may have inspired the remarks but you are not the only person that has siad anything like this which caused me to comment. That is why I did not quote you becuase I was not directing it at you out right. You fit a mold of player that are the ones I was refering to. So no I was not calling you personally "childish."
In an MMO that is designed to last 5 years max (which is the industry standard for MMOs at this time) yes 3 to 5 months is rushing. You leveled a character to max in 8.33% of the max time of the games expected life span. They all use the 5 year model. EQ, WoW and DAoC did not have end game within the first 6 to 8 month of the game min, because the devs were following the model. Per the model they are not required to have endgame material in the game til 25% of the expected lifetime of an MMO which is 15 months into the game (this is about when EQ got its endgame content btw) due to the fact that most of the people playing the game will at that time be reaching the level cap of the game. Most being the average player that takes their time and enjoys the game in a nice steady pace like I do. Why have endgame content for 10% of the popoulation when 90% of the population is complaining about bug and other issues that happen in the lower level ranges?
To comment that a MMO has no endgame content 3 to 5 months into an MMOs life is not correct and to judge an MMO soully on that is wrong which you did in your first posting. Now you have posted an honest review of the game which shows me that per you the game should be rated higher then 7.9 even though it does not have endgame content.
Note: If a game last longer then 5 years that is extra profit for the company that designed it. That is why you do not see new content for EQ in an large way since it is will beyond the 5 year plan.
A MMO is like life. It is something to cherish and enjoy upon in it journey. So why race to the end of it. In life at the end you die.
Good article. It's definitely an interesting read.
As for WoW being multicore, it makes total sense. They've got 8.5 million subscribers, and I'd wager that quite a few of them have dual core systems. Just because the game itself may not be as graphically intensive as, say, Oblivion, doesn't mean that Blizz can't update their game to take advantage of the dual cores for their users who have them.