Brad had an opiate drug addiction during the time he was working on Vanguard, he was not himself during that time and made a lot bad choices which lead to the lackluster MMO Vanguard was.
Have a hard to believing anyone who thinks Brad Mcquaid wasn't mostly responsible for Vanguards failing. Definitely not when they say something like "MAY NOT be perfect."
May not? No, absolutely no. You practically idolize the guy in the end of your post, which makes me think you're not actually thinking clearly, or rationally about the game he's making; not something that inspires any amount of trust in your opinion.
I have a hard time believing anyone who just blindly assumes that Brad was *mostly* responsible for Vanguards failures. There's always multiple parts to every story, and frankly i'm sick of most people just acting like it was 100% it his fault, or even 80% his fault. Do you think he was the one that made the decision to release the game 6 months or more early? Or do you think its more likely that the company that just recently bought out the previous publisher's rights put him in a rock and a hard place, and didn't honor the previou companies commitments? Did Brad have too many aspirations and lacked a firm grasp of the scope of the game? Absolutely. But that doesn't put it all on his shoulders. I can't believe you people will sit here and lambast someone for dreaming big. There are a lot worse things he could have done.
Seriously getting sick of this "Brad McQuaid is the ruiner of all things good" meme.
Such non-sense.
If you are Project Head or head of a company, and hire someone to do additional hiring. With those new hires being awful, yes you are at fault. That is what Managers, Supervisors, Weekly productivity reports, Annual productivity reports, etc are for, your unwillingness or ignorance about such systems does not absolve you from being 100% at fault. That is part of what it means to lead a project/company. If you aren't communicating with those you delegate smaller task to, then you are doomed to fail.
If you are Project Head or head of a company, and hire someone to manage HR related issues, and they screw up. Yes you are at fault. That is what employee feedback, and evaluations are for.
If you lay out a time schedule with completion date, milestones, required man hours, and one department falls behind. Yes you are at fault. That is what project projections, Supervisors/Managers/Department Heads are for. If you are falling behind, and have no idea why as Project Head you are a failure. If you do know and DO NOTHING you are even worse then a failure.
If you hire someone to handle the financial side of your project/company, and they screw up. Yes you are at fault. If you are heading up a project, and know nothing about what is going on with the books. You are a failure. There are plenty of minor and major accounting firms that for varying fees can handle oversight if you believe your finances are irregular or just not adding up.
If you are contracted by a party, and heading up their project. Making a client happy is always a top priority, but the scope or details of the project are being constantly changed by client, and you do nothing about it. Yes you are at fault. As someone leading a project you should know your boundaries. If what your client is constantly changing/requesting is minor then fine. If it is major, you need to ask. If it will cause a major shift in the current planned timetable. If it is something that can be achieved with a shift in resources. If it can be achieved with a shift in personnel. If you can't answer yes to those three. Then as lead your duty is to either get in touch with them personally. Or have your rep talk to their rep, so that you can hammer out some common ground concerning the project. Which you should have done at the start.
In War - Victory. In Peace - Vigilance. In Death - Sacrifice.
Brad had an opiate drug addiction during the time he was working on Vanguard, he was not himself during that time and made a lot bad choices which lead to the lackluster MMO Vanguard was.
I thought Vanguard was pretty kick ass, i really enjoyed it at launch and the year afterwards.
Ya, I don't think anyone who was actually capable of running the game thought it was lackluster if they honestly played it. Most of its downfalls were technical issues and the missing content, bugs, and exploits that were a result of launching early. Yes, those things had a massive negative impact, but the game underneath was great.
Brad had an opiate drug addiction during the time he was working on Vanguard, he was not himself during that time and made a lot bad choices which lead to the lackluster MMO Vanguard was.
I thought Vanguard was pretty kick ass, i really enjoyed it at launch and the year afterwards.
Ya, I don't think anyone who was actually capable of running the game thought it was lackluster if they honestly played it. Most of its downfalls were technical issues and the missing content, bugs, and exploits that were a result of launching early. Yes, those things had a massive negative impact, but the game underneath was great.
Brad had an opiate drug addiction during the time he was working on Vanguard, he was not himself during that time and made a lot bad choices which lead to the lackluster MMO Vanguard was.
I thought Vanguard was pretty kick ass, i really enjoyed it at launch and the year afterwards.
Ya, I don't think anyone who was actually capable of running the game thought it was lackluster if they honestly played it. Most of its downfalls were technical issues and the missing content, bugs, and exploits that were a result of launching early. Yes, those things had a massive negative impact, but the game underneath was great.
Brad had an opiate drug addiction during the time he was working on Vanguard, he was not himself during that time and made a lot bad choices which lead to the lackluster MMO Vanguard was.
I thought Vanguard was pretty kick ass, i really enjoyed it at launch and the year afterwards.
I agree, VG was an awesome game. His drug habits only made his company broke and SoE bailed out the project. If the game released today, I would sub in a min.
I hope that Pantheon becomes a great game that lasts for over a decade. But honestly, I would look to a European company (namely Scandinavian countries) to make the ultimate MMO. The bottom line is in the US, quarterly reports are king. Your job as a CEO is to keep investors happy quarter to quarter. The incentive is against long term outlooks. Games end up like WoW -- based around selling that next expansion as quick as possible with the most recycled content possible. Or even more to the point, the dozen WoW clones that have come since.
In the coordinated economies in Europe, investment isn't as liquid and is more "locked in." So investors favor long term profitability, rather than short term gains. This is more conducive environment for companies to create loyal fan bases that continue to play and spend money on the game. While the US has always seemed to have an edge in investing in new ideas, gaming is no longer a new idea and is becoming more mainstream. So I will expect European companies to overtake the US as time goes on. Just like they have with many other industries.
I hope that Pantheon becomes a great game that lasts for over a decade. But honestly, I would look to a European company (namely Scandinavian countries) to make the ultimate MMO. The bottom line is in the US, quarterly reports are king. Your job as a CEO is to keep investors happy quarter to quarter. The incentive is against long term outlooks. Games end up like WoW -- based around selling that next expansion as quick as possible with the most recycled content possible. Or even more to the point, the dozen WoW clones that have come since.
In the coordinated economies in Europe, investment isn't as liquid and is more "locked in." So investors favor long term profitability, rather than short term gains. This is more conducive environment for companies to create loyal fan bases that continue to play in spend money on the game. While the US has always seemed to have an edge in investing in new ideas, gaming is no longer a new idea and is becoming more mainstream. So I will expect European companies to overtake the US as time goes on. Just like they have with many other industries.
This is all a good point,
In my last job when a new CEO took over we had meetings with him. His philosophy was always
" Lets make money now, we don't know what the future holds "
We would ask what about shutdowns for scheduled maintenance ?......He would say, I don't care run them as fast as you can, don't stop !......We destroyed a lot of machines that way !
Important:
He was only CEO for three years......He knew this all along........He looked good for the three years !
That is one of the advantages of an indie company though. Visionary Realms does have an investor and is looking for others (so we don't know exactly what their agreement is), but I'd imagine they have retained the power to make the game they want to make.
When Sigil began its relationship with Microsoft, one of the good things was the level of creative license the development team had initially. But as time passed and as expense increased, Microsoft seemed to start weighing in (or trying to weigh in) more heavily. At least that was my take away from what I read.
There is always that risk from investors. But what I see different in this case is how carefully VR has tamped down what they are doing and what they are not doing. They have made a lot of key design decisions early on and are implementing those decisions. By contrast, Vanguard for the longest time seemed to be mired in a state of continuous discussion.
I think Pantheon will be a much better game than Vanguard. The people involved with its creation seem to have learned from what has gone before.
EQ1, EQ2, SWG, SWTOR, GW, GW2 CoH, CoV, FFXI, WoW, CO, War,TSW and a slew of free trials and beta tests
That is one of the advantages of an indie company though. Visionary Realms does have an investor and is looking for others (so we don't know exactly what their agreement is), but I'd imagine they have retained the power to make the game they want to make.
But there are many disadvantages to an indie developing an MMORPG.
So much so, that even IF we see Pantheon, I doubt the finished product is going to be what you think it will be.
That is one of the advantages of an indie company though. Visionary Realms does have an investor and is looking for others (so we don't know exactly what their agreement is), but I'd imagine they have retained the power to make the game they want to make.
But there are many disadvantages to an indie developing an MMORPG.
So much so, that even IF we see Pantheon, I doubt the finished product is going to be what you think it will be.
Depends. If you mean that we are expecting AAA quality graphics, systems, and all the fluff common with most mainstream games today? Sure, I could see some being disappointed (maybe, so far they seem to be going a good job don't you think?). If they end up making a game anywhere near EQ in an honest attempt to bring a modern presentation, well sir... they did exactly what I expected.
You see, you have to understand how much some of us hate the games today. For me personally, I wouldn't piss on a mainstream game, much less play it these days. I dislike the way they make them, the people they make them for. I am so far on the opposite side of the fence of those people and their development studios that I might as well be in a completely different world. I despise all that mainstream games today represent, in all forms and all fashions.
So, if Pantheon is even remotely able to provide even clunky working game of the features I desire? Then it is a success. You see, if you saw their first videos of the game, you know... the ones where it looked very clunky, almost EQ like with poor animations, generic settings, etc...? I was excited then as even if the game looked like that and even if it played as shitty as Vanguard on release, it would be a more pleasurable experience than suffering through the completely moronic games of today.
So I don't think there is a worry about Pantheon serving up disappointment to people like me, well... that is unless they start catering to the idiot mainstreams, they do that, and I won't bother. As long as they stay true to their intent, I will play their game (even with some complaints and dislikes about various systems). Heck, I still pop on and play random EQemu servers from time to time, they are a 1000 times more entertaining than the complete crap out there today catering to the drooling masses of sheep.
That is one of the advantages of an indie company though. Visionary Realms does have an investor and is looking for others (so we don't know exactly what their agreement is), but I'd imagine they have retained the power to make the game they want to make.
But there are many disadvantages to an indie developing an MMORPG.
So much so, that even IF we see Pantheon, I doubt the finished product is going to be what you think it will be.
Depends. If you mean that we are expecting AAA quality graphics, systems, and all the fluff common with most mainstream games today? Sure, I could see some being disappointed (maybe, so far they seem to be going a good job don't you think?). If they end up making a game anywhere near EQ in an honest attempt to bring a modern presentation, well sir... they did exactly what I expected.
You see, you have to understand how much some of us hate the games today. For me personally, I wouldn't piss on a mainstream game, much less play it these days. I dislike the way they make them, the people they make them for. I am so far on the opposite side of the fence of those people and their development studios that I might as well be in a completely different world. I despise all that mainstream games today represent, in all forms and all fashions.
So, if Pantheon is even remotely able to provide even clunky working game of the features I desire? Then it is a success. You see, if you saw their first videos of the game, you know... the ones where it looked very clunky, almost EQ like with poor animations, generic settings, etc...? I was excited then as even if the game looked like that and even if it played as shitty as Vanguard on release, it would be a more pleasurable experience than suffering through the completely moronic games of today.
So I don't think there is a worry about Pantheon serving up disappointment to people like me, well... that is unless they start catering to the idiot mainstreams, they do that, and I won't bother. As long as they stay true to their intent, I will play their game (even with some complaints and dislikes about various systems). Heck, I still pop on and play random EQemu servers from time to time, they are a 1000 times more entertaining than the complete crap out there today catering to the drooling masses of sheep.
+1 Sinist,
You worded that well, better than I could. I know I come across much more harsh. I don't mean to but I do !
Everquest was my first MMO and I never had love/hate relationship with it, it was all love since day 1 and I still play EQ from time to time, on the classic P99 servers mostly.
Vanguard was awesome too, amazing class depth comes on top of the long list of things I liked about the game, actually Vanguard was close to perfect for me, it's achilles heel being of technical nature so you could say it was ahead of it's time.
So I guess I'm Brad's fan and since i know he is checking this forum from time to time I'll only say this to him: Brad, PLEASE don't fck this up mate! Please don't release this until is finished enough to pass a reasonable non-frustrating launch. The game being group dependent (which I like) needs enough people playing it in order to form groups in a reasonable time frame even for casual players with no guild. As Vanguard showed, tech issues are a massive turnoff for people let's not do that again. Us, old farts gamers (or as we like to call ourselfs, Old-school gamers) need this game to work and it's both our interest for the game to have a large player base.
Let's do this!... only when it's ready please.
I care about your gaming 'problems' and teenage anxieties, just not today.
Comments
If you are Project Head or head of a company, and hire someone to do additional hiring. With those new hires being awful, yes you are at fault. That is what Managers, Supervisors, Weekly productivity reports, Annual productivity reports, etc are for, your unwillingness or ignorance about such systems does not absolve you from being 100% at fault. That is part of what it means to lead a project/company. If you aren't communicating with those you delegate smaller task to, then you are doomed to fail.
If you are Project Head or head of a company, and hire someone to manage HR related issues, and they screw up. Yes you are at fault. That is what employee feedback, and evaluations are for.
If you lay out a time schedule with completion date, milestones, required man hours, and one department falls behind. Yes you are at fault. That is what project projections, Supervisors/Managers/Department Heads are for. If you are falling behind, and have no idea why as Project Head you are a failure. If you do know and DO NOTHING you are even worse then a failure.
If you hire someone to handle the financial side of your project/company, and they screw up. Yes you are at fault. If you are heading up a project, and know nothing about what is going on with the books. You are a failure. There are plenty of minor and major accounting firms that for varying fees can handle oversight if you believe your finances are irregular or just not adding up.
If you are contracted by a party, and heading up their project. Making a client happy is always a top priority, but the scope or details of the project are being constantly changed by client, and you do nothing about it. Yes you are at fault. As someone leading a project you should know your boundaries. If what your client is constantly changing/requesting is minor then fine. If it is major, you need to ask. If it will cause a major shift in the current planned timetable. If it is something that can be achieved with a shift in resources. If it can be achieved with a shift in personnel. If you can't answer yes to those three. Then as lead your duty is to either get in touch with them personally. Or have your rep talk to their rep, so that you can hammer out some common ground concerning the project. Which you should have done at the start.
In War - Victory.
In Peace - Vigilance.
In Death - Sacrifice.
In the coordinated economies in Europe, investment isn't as liquid and is more "locked in." So investors favor long term profitability, rather than short term gains. This is more conducive environment for companies to create loyal fan bases that continue to play and spend money on the game. While the US has always seemed to have an edge in investing in new ideas, gaming is no longer a new idea and is becoming more mainstream. So I will expect European companies to overtake the US as time goes on. Just like they have with many other industries.
This is all a good point,
In my last job when a new CEO took over we had meetings with him. His philosophy was always
" Lets make money now, we don't know what the future holds "
We would ask what about shutdowns for scheduled maintenance ?......He would say, I don't care run them as fast as you can, don't stop !......We destroyed a lot of machines that way !
Important:
He was only CEO for three years......He knew this all along........He looked good for the three years !
There is always that risk from investors. But what I see different in this case is how carefully VR has tamped down what they are doing and what they are not doing. They have made a lot of key design decisions early on and are implementing those decisions. By contrast, Vanguard for the longest time seemed to be mired in a state of continuous discussion.
I think Pantheon will be a much better game than Vanguard. The people involved with its creation seem to have learned from what has gone before.
EQ1, EQ2, SWG, SWTOR, GW, GW2 CoH, CoV, FFXI, WoW, CO, War,TSW and a slew of free trials and beta tests
So much so, that even IF we see Pantheon, I doubt the finished product is going to be what you think it will be.
You see, you have to understand how much some of us hate the games today. For me personally, I wouldn't piss on a mainstream game, much less play it these days. I dislike the way they make them, the people they make them for. I am so far on the opposite side of the fence of those people and their development studios that I might as well be in a completely different world. I despise all that mainstream games today represent, in all forms and all fashions.
So, if Pantheon is even remotely able to provide even clunky working game of the features I desire? Then it is a success. You see, if you saw their first videos of the game, you know... the ones where it looked very clunky, almost EQ like with poor animations, generic settings, etc...? I was excited then as even if the game looked like that and even if it played as shitty as Vanguard on release, it would be a more pleasurable experience than suffering through the completely moronic games of today.
So I don't think there is a worry about Pantheon serving up disappointment to people like me, well... that is unless they start catering to the idiot mainstreams, they do that, and I won't bother. As long as they stay true to their intent, I will play their game (even with some complaints and dislikes about various systems). Heck, I still pop on and play random EQemu servers from time to time, they are a 1000 times more entertaining than the complete crap out there today catering to the drooling masses of sheep.
+1 Sinist,
You worded that well, better than I could. I know I come across much more harsh. I don't mean to but I do !
Vanguard was awesome too, amazing class depth comes on top of the long list of things I liked about the game, actually Vanguard was close to perfect for me, it's achilles heel being of technical nature so you could say it was ahead of it's time.
So I guess I'm Brad's fan and since i know he is checking this forum from time to time I'll only say this to him:
Brad, PLEASE don't fck this up mate!
Please don't release this until is finished enough to pass a reasonable non-frustrating launch.
The game being group dependent (which I like) needs enough people playing it in order to form groups in a reasonable time frame even for casual players with no guild.
As Vanguard showed, tech issues are a massive turnoff for people let's not do that again.
Us, old farts gamers (or as we like to call ourselfs, Old-school gamers) need this game to work and it's both our interest for the game to have a large player base.
Let's do this!... only when it's ready please.
I care about your gaming 'problems' and teenage anxieties, just not today.