Howdy, Stranger!
It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!
Quick Links
Vanguard (?)
troydavid
Member Posts: 150
I keep reading about this game and how amazing it is and a breath of fresh air and the game you've been looking for etc. It seems to have successfully overcome its initial release.
However. It is by SOE. With that being said can a VG fan explain to me in bullets points, what makes this game so good? What makes it different? Why is this the game I've been looking for.
If you have played VG since the release and are still not satisfied, tell me why. I want a comprehensive Vangaurd critique. Hopefully an Honest one.
Thanks in Advance.
T
Comments
- tons of content
- lots of races and classes
- very explorable (hidden places with npc's and quests)
- many dungeons
- nice graphics
- huge variety of monsters and lanscapes
- smooth and fun high fantasy travel system (ride a unicorn, rent a pegasus, teleport around the world ...)
- many free updates (new character models and starter zone soon)
- ....
Kaylin summed it up pretty nicely..
this game is worth it. It is truley an unappreciated gem in the MMO industry and more people should check it out. It has some of the biggest and unique dungeons I have seen in any MMO.
If I write another positive thing about SOE ever I will slowly eat a shovel however:
Vanguard was taken out of sigils hands as a complete mess. SOE have been working their arses off on this game getting it to a playable state.
I have played vanguard myself for the free month and have seen a good few bugs, when I have ever had a problem the CS were responsive quickly. What vanguard does that other mmos dont do is show you a big wide open space and you can go for a wander, you want to get to the castle in the distance sure go for it but it might take you 30 mins to an hour and then you'll see another thing in the distance you might want to visit.
What vanguard is essentially is a sandbox and thats what people are raving about. I am currently looking at playing this or more probably the saga of ryzom when the trials come up. I did not play star wars galaxies however I did play Planetside for two years, I don't know where my sub went on that but development certainly didn't get a cut.
Vanguard is also a pretty game the trees sway in the wind and things are graphically outstanding bar character models which are being buffed up as we speak. For me there are three games I am looking at now, Vanguard, Warhammer and The Saga of Ryzom. Personally I am leaning towards ryzom too many people rate it plus it has decent GvG combat at the end for resources.
Vanguard has the potential to be one of the biggest mmos on the scene but how many of you have seen that word before.
Excuse me while I digest my shovel.
While we are making lists....
I tried Vanguard recently for two weeks....
I have a small "fanbase" that follows me around and complains whenever I copy/paste this answer, but I just had to agan..
I'll give you my best review, despite the probability that I'll get flamed by the fanbois.
IMO, Vanguard is a game that doesn't know what it wants to be; the game seems to me to have an identity crisis not unlike someone at puberty questioning their own sexuality or something.
Vanguard was initially proposed as a game that was sandbox-like, for hardcore players, and which had a stinging death penalty to give players a reason to respect the game world and to better appreciate their own accomplishments. Vanguard was also designed as a large zoneless, multi-cultural game world which would offer vast content and near-endless adventure. Grouping was to be important in Vanguard, as were crafting and diplomacy.
Now, going back in time...
I was in Beta 2, which was a very early beta. I found the game to be quite buggy, which really did not bother me. Animations were jerky, but graphics were on the same plane as Dark Age of Camelot, which was just fine. Character customization was minimal in the hairstyle department. The world seemed vast and the starting areas were like little villages. No problem with any of that, because it was early beta.
I had this sense that there was an absence of geographical identity in any area I rolled a toon in. Wherever I was felt sort of like anywhere else, even though some of the terrain might have been different.
You know how in some MMORPG's, you always know you're in a particular zone and that the zone has its own character, flavor, culture, location, and challenges? For example, in old EQ, the Qeynos Hills felt different than West Karanas, and although you might be lost in the zone, you knew what zone you were in; the zone had its particular feel and community. Well, in Vanguard, like I said, to me anywhere seemed like everywhere else, and anyone in chat could have been 1,000 miles away for all I knew.
Now, this was Beta 2 and this feeling has not disappeared even when I went back a few months ago to check out the game's progress. To me, the world was not alive for me and had no character to it. Incidentally, in Beta 2, I could not force myself to remain logged in more than 5 or 10 minutes at a time; the game so bored me, and the in-game music was so bizarre and forgettable that it was an annoyance; first game I wanted to turn the sound off in.
I recall on the forums that the devs were griping a little at folks for not giving the game enough time or not being logged long enough to level and give valuable beta feedback. I do not know which is right. It may be the beta tester's duty to give a game a chance, but it is also the devs' duty to make a game fun to play. If a game is dull or incomplete, then how can devs' expect more from unpaid beta testers?
Now, I have heard the game had a $30 million budget and that Microsoft dropped sponsorship of the game sometime during the beta; perhaps they were reading the forum boards or realized the game was not up to their expecations. The devs seem to claim otherwise, but who or what do you believe? I'm guessing Microsoft watched the game's development and made their own call.
Of course, Sony picked it up, and there is some history on the web of what went on or might have gone on; so again, you must make your own judgement. Personally, IMO, the devs might not have designed within parameters, not approached the design in a timely and structured fashion, and not stuck with their own basic design principles. You can now see some of WOW in the game, and which was not present in the early betas. Maybe the last ditch effort to save the game at launch was to become WOW-like, since WOW's design was successful. However, the problem with this is it defeats the purpose of having a separate game from WOW; many Vanguard players were old EQ vets who wanted a new EQ in the spirit of the first game.
I left beta, but bought the game at launch, because I still hoped and believed in the devs' "Vision". (Maybe more "hoping" than "believing".) Again, I could not really get into the game, mostly because the world just did not feel right. Other folks will tell you Vanguard was doomed because of bugs or technical issues or lack of higher end content, but for me it was the game world; I just could not fall in love with the world of Telon.
Now, the game is much less buggy, but to me it feels like a melting pot of other games mixed in at the last moment. With only four or so servers after being out for almost two years, I cannot see much of a future for Vanguard.
Yes, there are some that love the game, but for many folks an MMO's community is half the game. If people are not playing, then the game is missing a very important social element.
For me to stick with a MMORPG, the following conditions must be present:
1) I like my in-game character (i.e., class choices, appearance)
2) The gameplay is smooth and intuitive
3) The game world and its music enchants; the world is a beautiful place to escape into
4) The game is supported both by the game company and its players. (Who wants to play in a barren world?)
For me, Vanguard struck out on all counts, especially #3.
Again, all of the above are my opinions and opinions ONLY.
Is this post for real?
Most of what I hear and read is negative and rightfully so. The game had potential but wasn't completed and SOE has taken it into a different direction and WoWified it.
My experience was pretty much same as this, except I never fell through the world geometry. I played just prior to the last update. Not that impressed, even now. Was in the Beta did not like it. Purchased the box about 6mo after release, still did not like it. Re-installed and played for a bit just a short while ago and still do not like it. Just feels flat, empty, static, and so on. At least to me.
If you are talking about my post, yes, I am giving as real and faithful an account of my experiences with the game. I have touched Vanguard at three points in its life: Beta 2, Launch, then again 2 or 3 months ago.
IMO, incompletion is the fault of devs, not sponsors. If the devs are given a lesser budget, then they should sacrifice a little in graphical detail, perhaps. With a $30M budget, it is better to design a good $30M game than to design a half-finished $60M game.
But my feeling is if they had $100M to work with, this game would still be a mess; just poor design and poor execution.
I'm just calling things as I see them. Again, my own opinion.
It is truly a love it or hate it type of game.
I cannot disagree with the points made by its detractors or its praisers in this thread.
But in my opinion this is the only next-gen sandbox MMO out there right now. You can actually build houses and boats that take up server space and are not instanced. You can display trophies, like slain dragon's heads, in your guild hall. You can get a flying mount and actually explore the incredible environment. I always got frustrated flying from Ironforge to Menethil and not being able to access that hidden airfield and those hilltop farms. In VG you control your flying mount and can go anywhere you please. Its not a taxi ride.
The graphics seem to be a matter of taste. I think they are amazing and life-like. Others feel they are drab. The colors don't overhwelm you as they do in a lot of the cartoonish looking MMO's out there, but I think that is a good thing.
Isle of Dawn will be out soon and should come with a free trial. Its definitely worth checking out and it won't take long for you to decide if you love it or hate it.
I will say, the pvp system is weak and most likely always will be. They do offer a FFA server, but I still enjoy games like WoW for some insta-grat pvp'ing. However, VG is truly an immersive world. Its lack of instancing and the realistic feel that a lack of instancing provides is what MMORPG'ing is all about. MMO's are increasingly easy to find, but MMORPG's are not. In a market that is saturated with failed promises and unoriginality, VG is a game that will at least maintain a good cult following, if not a re-emergence after people realize they want to move onto the kind of depth that it offers.. There is another good reason to check it out, the community is great! A question in general will most likely get answered instead of ridiculed.
If you are talking about my post, yes, I am giving as real and faithful an account of my experiences with the game. I have touched Vanguard at three points in its life: Beta 2, Launch, then again 2 or 3 months ago.
IMO, incompletion is the fault of devs, not sponsors. If the devs are given a lesser budget, then they should sacrifice a little in graphical detail, perhaps. With a $30M budget, it is better to design a good $30M game than to design a half-finished $60M game.
But my feeling is if they had $100M to work with, this game would still be a mess; just poor design and poor execution.
I'm just calling things as I see them. Again, my own opinion.
I think he was talking about the original post..
I recently started playing Vanguard, and...I'm absolutely loving it, and it's one of the most immersive MMO's I've ever played...it reminds me of the experience I had when i first played EQ. The world actually feels like a world, with places you really want to go explore. And i even played the beta, and couldn't stomach it then.
The combat is very intuitive, and while I don't think it's ground-breaking, it's surprisingly fun. You get chain moves, and reaction type moves. And you can also move while casting...you move slower, but can still do it.
There's in depth crafting, and diplomacy (which is like a card game) and is very fun as well. The game just feels so dynamic. You also have player housing with actual plots of land in the world that you buy and build your own house, and can craft boats.
I also think that the graphics are absolutely gorgeous and the music is very nice.
Also...about the more recent post...um...i've seen no direction of this game being "WoWified" or whatever you wanna call it. It's really a great game.
as a person that played VG from beta till about 3 months ago, teh game release was a mess and i only stayed because of my guild (been with half since EQ1 and other half EQ2), but now its a whole new game if ur coming into it fresh with no play time on it before u will like it if u enjoyed say EQ/1EQ2.
only thing i say is if u play it roll a char on a server with good pop and wait till the Noob island is released alot of ppl will reroll an alt to play it and some new ppl might show up with a few bad releases atm AoC and maybe WaR (will see how that one goes) u should have a few ppl to play along side.
Good.
Loads of Quests to work through
Some nice dungeons to fight through, solod or duoed alot with a necro friend (i was a ranger)
nice gfx
a nice raid dungeon at end if u get there, though they need to release a new one soon lol
Bad
not many low lvls atm
my pet hate to many mounts !!!!!!! <- doesnt bother most lol
some high end specs if u want to play on high when ur in citys
crafting is mind numbing only got to 42 leatherworking while i played it for about 2 years lol
dip starts out fun but then becomes just another grind
these are just my good and bads and everyone has there own i would think.
wait till Island of Dawn comes out and try it for free, they said they would make it a free try ,im sure i seen somewhere.
-------------------------------------
-=:Sometimes "The Majority" Only Means All The Fools Are On The Same Side.:=-
Vanguard has its pluses and minuses like all games. But what is a plus for one, may be a minus for another, and generally speaking we all bring our own biases and expectations into a game, which tend to color our evaluations.
For example take the graphics. I absolute love the graphics and music in Vanguard. Standing on a cliff at sunset, watching a distant storm move across the horizon, while the trees are swaying in the breeze, and a soft enchanting song is playing in the background, is incredibly immersive. I have zero flickering and get 50-100 fps in most situations on my rig, and imo the graphics are gorgeous. But if you are evaluating the graphics based upon a rig that has to operate at the lowest settings, then you wont be impressed.
As far as bugs go, sure there are some. I occaisionaly get stuck in the geometry, but not very often. Its happened maybe twice in the last month, and I think I have fallen through the world twice during the same period. Is it gamebreaking? Not for me. Its a minor blip on the radar. But if you are a perfectionist and looking for things to gripe about, it might make you see red. There are also some occaisional bugs with the UI and quest interface, which are usually easy to resolve. I have had to call in a CR only once in a total of several months of playing (since release) and the rep showed up within 10 minutes. He was very courteous, resolved my issues, and gave me some nice buffs as a bonus. I was happy.
Crafting is another issue. I personally dont like crafting much--in any game. I tried it out in Vanguard for some 18 levels, and I have a love-hate relation with it. On one hand, I found myself enjoying the heck out of its interactivity. On the other hand, I found myself groaning over the long grind required to gain levels. In the end, the grind got me, and I stopped. But there are many serious crafters who claim that Vanguard has the best crafting system out there. Of course, there are others who absolutely hate it. Its a matter of personal opinion, and everyone has one.
Now lets take combat. I have played EQ, WoW, EQ2, CoH, AoC, Lotro, DDO, etc.--some for years, some for a few months. Vanguard is kinda in the middle as far as combat is concerned. Its not as slow as EQ, but its not as fast as CoH or DDO. The one thing I really like about combat in VG is that its more strategic than most games. You are given a huge number of abilities, such as buffs, debuffs, stuns, attacks, etc., and many of the attacks come with various procs. If you are soloing the fights tend to last longer than in other games, with the exception perhaps of EQ. As a result, you have to mangage your endurance and energy, and attempt to use the right abilities at the right time to prevail. I find this very engaging and enjoyable. I dont really have anything negative to say about the combat....others may disagree.
The real positivies for me about Vanguard concern the game world and its dungeons. The world is arguably the largest open world on the market. Its fricken huge. It has three continents, and each of those is fricken huge, with large islands off shore to boot. The terrain is also varied from one continent to the next, and from one region to the next. Its very realistic however--and you wont find vastly different environments within five minutes of one another, as you do in WoW. I love exploring, and VG is my game of choice because it offers more opportunities to explore than any game Ive ever played.
The dungeons are another big plus for me. Except for the end game raiding dungeon, none of the Vanguard dungeons are instanced, and like the game world itself, some of them are fricken huge. I like the fact that my group can be deep inside a dungeon, on the third level down, and run into another group. Often such meetings result in an exchange of members and friendly chats, as if we were the last citizens on earth. I also like the fact that these dungeons are filled with named bosses that drop nice loot. The quality of that loot was seriously upgraded in Update 4, and more recently much of it became tradable. I like nothing better than to hunt named bosses for treasure, and VG fills the bill.
As far as population goes, the population on my server Seradon is just right--IMO. At popular quest hubs, I have no problem getting groups, and in out of the way places, I can explore and immerse myself in the game world, without ever seeing another soul. I like it that way. As a real-life explorer, hunter, and fisherman, I like going to out of the way natural places, where I seldom if ever encounter another soul. But when you have had enough of solitude, you can always go back to civilization where there are plenty of people to be found. Vangard reflects that situation perfectly. However, the population seems to be steadily increasing, and I expect that the new trial island and character customization revamps will result in an even larger increase.
There are other issues that could be discussed, but you probably get the idea. Is VG perfect? Not by a long shot. Is it worth playing compared to other games out there? You bet your bippie. Ive played virtually all of the AAA games out there, except for FFXI and Lineage 2, and VG is now my game of choice. Others may hate it. But how much of that is due to SOE-Hate or unfulfilled expectations is hard to say. With the new trial island it will be possible for people to check the game out at no cost. The best policity in all cases is to ignore what others say, and form your own opinion based upon direct experience. Thats what I would recommend here.