If you canceled VSOH because of SOE...

FikusOfAhazi · May 2006

usually publishers front money to devs to make the game and support it..then pay the devs earned royalties whenever they reach a certain milestone or whatever. Sigil is co-publisher with sony so i assume they share that role with soe. or split that role in two where soe handles marketing blah blah..and sigil makes the calls on what direction it wants the devs(which is sigil too) to go for the future of the game. Thats my understanding of whats been released. Still, im not quite sure on why soe given their bad rep..ya ya..they got skills in the publishing..but, a good game will sell regardless of the publisher. Brad said this was the best way for vanguard to be available to the most people..i can only assume that means console

jimmyman99 · May 2006

Originally posted by FikusOfAhazi

I tend to agree with you about giving sigil the benefit of the doubt. The only reason this is such a problem is because there are so many axiously awaiting fans for this game. It has the potential to be one of the best, but with risk of an all out bomb(which is very unlikely). My only concern is.. if the game ever releases.. Soe has a certain market stadegy..and they've changed or complitely overhauled their games to fit in this stadegy. Then adds vanguard which seems to be in conflict with that stadegy IMO. Marketing also directly effects how many, but also what kind of players you get. Focus all marketing on casual gamers..you end up with alot of casual gamers who can sway the devs from their original idea to more in line with what sony wants. There are still many ways SOE can affect developement without touching the code. I will still give this game a try..it sounds to good to NOT play because of SOE. But, unfortunately, launches are always a delicate time for MMO's, Im afraid this is where SOE will hurt this game the most. People will not care that all launches are a buggy and will just dismiss the game as another SOE mess up rather than see it through.

I share your concerns. One of the biggest concerns of mine is that SOE will NOT influence Vanguard much up untill few months after it is released. And then Brad/John might drop a hammer on us all - "Sigil has been merged/bought/assimilated by SOE". If that happens... I try not to think about that. If SOE begins to influence Vanguard during beta, this will post likely pop up eventually before or shortly after release, so I will most likely save my 60-70 CAD$ becuase I tend to not buy games right after they are released (WoW was an exception becuase I betaed it and I was 100% sure it will not be screwed up after release). But if Brad does sell Sigil to SOE after lets say 4-5 months... I will most definitely feel cheated, lied to, violated and definitely depressed. Dang, im feeling a bit depressed already just thinking about it. The ghost of SWG haunts me to this day. I even bought 2 SWG games to play 2 accounts at the same time!!! OMG I was so stupid *CRY*

About SOE marketing strategy. I think the general misconseption is that SOE has invested into Sigil. Maybe im missing something and maybe the most crucial thing that was overlooked and/or not communicated properly - SOE is NOT investing into or buying Sigil, I think Sigil is simply purchasing SOE services (specifically production). its like High Speed Internet - you do not actually OWN it, but rather rent it. So if you were the developing company and suddenly u switched from Bell Sympatico to Rogers High Speed Cable. Rogers has a bed rep with cell phones, so people would turnaway because of this. But Rogers cable has nothing to do with cell phones. They only provide you with internet. Nothing more, nothing less. Or maybe i see a brillian business move where its not and this all is a first step in SOE's eating yet another potentially "unique" MMORPG? Only time will tell

jimmyman99 · May 2006

Originally posted by Blackmoor
Van to be on Launchpad

Sony also will add "Vanguard: Saga of Heroes" to the LaunchPad lineup this winter, Pearce said

Jimmy while you may not want people to give up on Van because of SOE , the simple fact is that everyone will be dealing with SOE at login , billing, logout , etc. This is just the simple fact , even if by some miracle they don't touch the game itself. People have had bad experiences with SOE CSR, Billing, and just plain SOE trying to screw their customers (Obi Wan//NGE ring a bell?). SOE is your first contact with the game , and your last contact with the game, and possibly contact within the game itself. Thats just a lot more SOE contact than I and a lot of other people care to have with SOE.

Aww, thats bad news indeed. Ive had some problems with the damned launchpad. I was hoping VSOH will have something simple that doesnt actually screw up with no reason at all. Another doubt seed has been planted in the forest of hope

InspGadgt · May 2006

Originally posted by jimmyman99

Originally posted by InspGadgt

Originally posted by jimmyman99

Again I have to state my concerns on this point. Do you really think that SOE would make a deal with anyone where SOE is investing money in marketing, server hardware, network hardware, and the people to run it, and not have a say in the game? That makes no sense LOGICALLY. Granted SOE has made some mistakes with it's games but as a business it is pretty well run. It would be bad business to make such a deal where SOE invests time, money, and their name into a venture that they have no say over. I don't believe SOE would make a business decision like that. It doesn't make sence logically.

I know what you mean. Its a very touchy point for us players. Does Brad trully passionate about his work and will he stay to the end resisting all SOE attempts to influence this game? Or will he gain a critical player mass and then just sell this to the highest bidder (which most likely would be SOE)? The answer is - I dont know. So far he hasnt openly lied about anything, he didnt try to cover up this news (doubt that he could even if he tried). So for now I tend to trust Brad. But yeah, that feeling of "what if he sells out" keeps bugging me every time I think about vanguard.

To our knowledge...Now that I find out he used to work for SOE and is all buddy buddy with many at SOE it makes me wonder if he learned the art of deception there or if he is being 100% truthfull. As you say he probably didn't even try to cover up the news...He couldn't even if he wanted to so the best practice in those situations is to get it out in the open early and hope the fallout cools quickly.

jimmyman99 · May 2006

Originally posted by FikusOfAhazi
usually publishers front money to devs to make the game and support it..then pay the devs earned royalties whenever they reach a certain milestone or whatever. Sigil is co-publisher with sony so i assume they share that role with soe. or split that role in two where soe handles marketing blah blah..and sigil makes the calls on what direction it wants the devs(which is sigil too) to go for the future of the game. Thats my understanding of whats been released. Still, im not quite sure on why soe given their bad rep..ya ya..they got skills in the publishing..but, a good game will sell regardless of the publisher. Brad said this was the best way for vanguard to be available to the most people..i can only assume that means console

IN this case im clueless. I thought publishing was the things company does to promote a product - make CDs/DVDs, set up account creation, registration, make game boxes, send them to stores, stuff like that. But if Sigil could do that without SOE...

I understand what SOE has to gain from this - they make a product that is different from theirs (closest match is EQ2) but is potentially much stronger and make it look like its their product then SOE not only get some PR boost, but also royalties from the investment. I think its cheaper for them to buy or invest into a brand new game then try to reshape EQ2 into something like VSOH.

But what does Sigil gain from this? The only thing that comes to my mind is that Sigil simply switched partners, perhaps lost some money in the process but regained more control over its own game. Bah, I wish I didnt skip all those economics classes in my uni. At least id had a clue on whats going on in the business world.

InspGadgt · May 2006

Originally posted by FikusOfAhazi
usually publishers front money to devs to make the game and support it..then pay the devs earned royalties whenever they reach a certain milestone or whatever. Sigil is co-publisher with sony so i assume they share that role with soe. or split that role in two where soe handles marketing blah blah..and sigil makes the calls on what direction it wants the devs(which is sigil too) to go for the future of the game. Thats my understanding of whats been released. Still, im not quite sure on why soe given their bad rep..ya ya..they got skills in the publishing..but, a good game will sell regardless of the publisher. Brad said this was the best way for vanguard to be available to the most people..i can only assume that means console

I've read through his reasons that this was the best for everyone and I disagree with them. His basic premise that SOE can reach a lot more customers then he could is right but so could many other capable companies. He follows this up by saying he is friends with certain people at SOE making it sound more like this is the real reason he chose SOE.

FikusOfAhazi · May 2006

Originally posted by jimmyman99

Originally posted by FikusOfAhazi

I tend to agree with you about giving sigil the benefit of the doubt. The only reason this is such a problem is because there are so many axiously awaiting fans for this game. It has the potential to be one of the best, but with risk of an all out bomb(which is very unlikely). My only concern is.. if the game ever releases.. Soe has a certain market stadegy..and they've changed or complitely overhauled their games to fit in this stadegy. Then adds vanguard which seems to be in conflict with that stadegy IMO. Marketing also directly effects how many, but also what kind of players you get. Focus all marketing on casual gamers..you end up with alot of casual gamers who can sway the devs from their original idea to more in line with what sony wants. There are still many ways SOE can affect developement without touching the code. I will still give this game a try..it sounds to good to NOT play because of SOE. But, unfortunately, launches are always a delicate time for MMO's, Im afraid this is where SOE will hurt this game the most. People will not care that all launches are a buggy and will just dismiss the game as another SOE mess up rather than see it through.

I share your concerns. One of the biggest concerns of mine is that SOE will NOT influence Vanguard much up untill few months after it is released. And then Brad/John might drop a hammer on us all - "Sigil has been merged/bought/assimilated by SOE". If that happens... I try not to think about that. If SOE begins to influence Vanguard during beta, this will post likely pop up eventually before or shortly after release, so I will most likely save my 60-70 CAD$ becuase I tend to not buy games right after they are released (WoW was an exception becuase I betaed it and I was 100% sure it will not be screwed up after release). But if Brad does sell Sigil to SOE after lets say 4-5 months... I will most definitely feel cheated, lied to, violated and definitely depressed. Dang, im feeling a bit depressed already just thinking about it. The ghost of SWG haunts me to this day. I even bought 2 SWG games to play 2 accounts at the same time!!! OMG I was so stupid *CRY*

About SOE marketing strategy. I think the general misconseption is that SOE has invested into Sigil. Maybe im missing something and maybe the most crucial thing that was overlooked and/or not communicated properly - SOE is NOT investing into or buying Sigil, I think Sigil is simply purchasing SOE services (specifically production). its like High Speed Internet - you do not actually OWN it, but rather rent it. So if you were the developing company and suddenly u switched from Bell Sympatico to Rogers High Speed Cable. Rogers has a bed rep with cell phones, so people would turnaway because of this. But Rogers cable has nothing to do with cell phones. They only provide you with internet. Nothing more, nothing less. Or maybe i see a brillian business move where its not and this all is a first step in SOE's eating yet another potentially "unique" MMORPG? Only time will tell

well..all we can do is trust Brad and Sigil. Maybe they are making the game that this niche has been looking for and will stay true to the vision and the fans that vision has gathered. That happens alot!!

jimmyman99 · May 2006

Originally posted by Benz00

SOE will produce Vanguard for Sigil, meaning SOE will be responcible for CSR,

pro·duce (pr-ds, -dys, pr-)
v. pro·duced, pro·duc·ing, pro·duc·es
v.tr.

1. To bring forth; yield: a plant that produces pink flowers.
2.
a. To create by physical or mental effort: produce a tapestry; produce a poem.
b. To manufacture: factories that produce cars and trucks.
3. To cause to occur or exist; give rise to: chemicals that produce a noxious vapor when mixed.
4. To bring forth; exhibit: reached into a pocket and produced a packet of matches; failed to produce an eyewitness to the crime.
5. To supervise and finance the making and public presentation of: produce a stage play; produce a videotape.
6. Mathematics To extend (an area or volume) or lengthen (a line).
v.intr.

1. To make or yield products or a product: an apple tree that produces well.
2. To manufacture or create economic goods and services.
n. (prds, prds)

1. Something produced; a product.
2. Farm products, especially fresh fruits and vegetables, considered as a group.

SOE is paying for the game. Hence they own part of it.

touche

I think to produce means more like a "loan from a rich uncle who will let me do all the work but will take credit for at the end". Not sure now. All these good points and concerns that people voice makes me feel even more clueless then before.

jimmyman99 · May 2006

Originally posted by FikusOfAhazi
well..all we can do is trust Brad and Sigil. Maybe they are making the game that this niche has been looking for and will stay true to the vision and the fans that vision has gathered. That happens alot!!

I really hope so, becuase im desperate. Almost as desperate as finding a girlfriend....almost... but very close... in fact, who needs a girlfriend anyway?

FikusOfAhazi · May 2006

Originally posted by jimmyman99

Originally posted by FikusOfAhazi
usually publishers front money to devs to make the game and support it..then pay the devs earned royalties whenever they reach a certain milestone or whatever. Sigil is co-publisher with sony so i assume they share that role with soe. or split that role in two where soe handles marketing blah blah..and sigil makes the calls on what direction it wants the devs(which is sigil too) to go for the future of the game. Thats my understanding of whats been released. Still, im not quite sure on why soe given their bad rep..ya ya..they got skills in the publishing..but, a good game will sell regardless of the publisher. Brad said this was the best way for vanguard to be available to the most people..i can only assume that means console

IN this case im clueless. I thought publishing was the things company does to promote a product - make CDs/DVDs, set up account creation, registration, make game boxes, send them to stores, stuff like that. But if Sigil could do that without SOE...

I understand what SOE has to gain from this - they make a product that is different from theirs (closest match is EQ2) but is potentially much stronger and make it look like its their product then SOE not only get some PR boost, but also royalties from the investment. I think its cheaper for them to buy or invest into a brand new game then try to reshape EQ2 into something like VSOH.

But what does Sigil gain from this? The only thing that comes to my mind is that Sigil simply switched partners, perhaps lost some money in the process but regained more control over its own game. Bah, I wish I didnt skip all those economics classes in my uni. At least id had a clue on whats going on in the business world.

copied from vanguard FAQ hope it helps

- 1.9 This is more of a general question about MMOG developers, publishers, etc., and how those relationships work, how profit and contracts work, etc. Could you give us a summary of what might be typical in this industry?

Specifically, what makes more profit, box sales or subscription revenue?

Both really, but the monthly subscriptions in the long run. The initial box sales help pay for the initial development cost, although it typically still takes several months of subscription revenue before the entire development, marketing, etc. costs are paid for.

After that, the revenue comes in the form of the monthly subscriptions and the periodic expansion releases. Every 2 or so expansion releases it's also a good idea to put a 'gold' or 'platinum' version of the main game out that includes the older expansions. This 'freshens' things, and keeps two SKUs (boxes) of your product on the channel/on the shelves simultaneously, which is also good. We've found that a new expansion also renews interest in the game itself and that sales of the original game or the re-packaged game (and therefore overall subscriber numberes) go up as well. I assume this is because existing players are excited about the expansion, the expansions get reviews in magazines, etc., so the word about the game gets out to new players as well.

The costs, however, continue as well. Not only do you have the marketing dollars necessary to put the expansion and refreshed main product out there (both ads as well as channel marketing dollars (end caps, PoP (point of purchase) materials, etc.) but you also have the continued cost of the Live, Expansion, Operations, and CS teams (not to mention the infrastructure costs themselves -- the server farms, the bandwidth costs, etc).

The way a developer/publisher relationship usually works is that the developer is paid advances on the game in order to fund development. The publisher sets up milestones and other metrics to make sure the developer is doing their job (e.g. making the game, preferably on time) and then pays the developer a portion of the agreed upon advances at those milestone dates. This money is then used by the developer to pay salaries, rent, buy computers & software, vast quantities of diet Mountain Dew, etc. Rarely is any money kept around except maybe a small fund for an emergency because a smart developer wants to spend that money on more employees, tools, equipment, etc. so that the game turns out that much better.

The contract the developer usually has with the publisher includes the total advance amount, the milestone schedule, and the royalty percentage.

(The other way, which is more rare, is that the developer raises funds through Venture Capitalist or Angel Investors or the founders themselves were already very affluent and also willing to put their own money on the line).

So when the game comes out, all revenue goes first into paying back the development costs (e.g. nobody is making any money). Once the costs of development are paid, both the publisher and developer make (hopefully) a profit. The developer gets a percentage royalty payment on an agreed to frequency, and the publisher gets the rest. (The Publisher usually gets the majority because they fronted all of or at least the majority of the money and therefore assumed the vast majority of the risk).

The developer can then take that profit (again, assuming the game was successful enough to have paid of its development costs (and MMOGs are VERY expensive, btw) and do any number of things with it. They can pay out royalties to their employees and/or a bonus or some such, or they can put the money away to build up a 'nest egg' hoping to eventually be able to self-fund a game.

Very successful developers (say ID Software, for example) I believe (don't know this for a fact) pay for the majority of the development costs for their games such that they assume the financial risk and therefore receive a much higher royalty. This is atypical, however -- it typically requires a developer that's stayed independent and been around quite a while and has a long history of hit titles behind them.

Developing, launching, and maintaining massivley multiplayer games is more complex, however, since MMOGs are not 'fire and forget' like many conventional video or computer games, the costs keep recurring. Money still has to come into the developer to pay for the Live, Expansion, and CS teams. So, typically, the developer also at some point executes a contract (or amendment to the first contract) to receive advances even after the game is launched. This is, of course, a good thing because no one wants to lay off their talented and experienced staff after the MMOG is launched. Royalty percentages, etc. are also figured out then for both the expansions and the overall success of the game in terms of retention and monthly revenue the game generates. Sometimes royalties are not a set number but can go up (or down, but hopefully not) based on how successful the game is (e.g. if the overall revenue or profit reaches a certain point, the developer's royalty could go up).

The profit margin for an MMOG can be very good relative to other games because of the recurring monthly subscription revenue. If the operation of the game is kept lean and mean but also at the level that the customer is sastisfied and therefore keeps subscribing, the margin can be very high (up to 40%-50%). This is one of the reasons, especially early on in the UO/EQ days that everyone and their dog wanted to make an MMOG (regarless, unfortunately, of whether they truly had the talent and/or passion for this particular genre).

The fact of the matter, however, is that while those profit margins are indeed attractive, it takes a LOT more to make an MMOG than a typical game. It's a lot harder IMHO, takes a talent pool that is not necessarily the same as what it takes to make a single player games, and that talent pool (since there are far less MMOG experienced developers out there) is much harder to find. Then you need good operations people and a good operations infrastructure to launch the game and maintain it after launch (you all know the struggles many companies have gone through with launching theses games). The development cycle is also typically longer (3-5 years) and many people simply aren't willing to devote that kind of time only working on one title. And, as mentioned, the expense is very high (becuase of the infrastructure necessary as well as the longer development cycle), so it's often hard to find a publisher/funder willing to assume that level of risk. Bottom line: there are far easier ways to make money in the computer/video game business -- you really need a developer and publisher committed to the genre.

But, of course, if all goes right and the game is a success, in the end a lot of profit can be generated. Again, most of this typically goes to the publisher. The money that goes to the developer, as mentioned above, can be used for royalties, bonusses, or saved (or some combination of the three).

Typically, if the developer is in it for the long haul (and the mentality of the developer who wants to make an MMOG is typically oriented thusly), they try to keep much of that profit to put into future games and endeavors.

The other scenario that can occur if the game is very successful is that the publisher or someother enterprising entity will buy the developer after the game launches and looks like its going to be a success (or even before, if everything looks very promising). An example of this would be SOE buying Verant not long after EQ came out. And if the developer is employee owned (e.g. the employees have stock options), this can be a way to make good money more short term as opposed to staying independent and amassing royalties. There are, of course, downsides to 'selling out' as well, and it's an interesting (but probably overall good) 'problem' to deal with.

I hope this answered your questions -- the short answer would be to say that box sales drive the initial big hit of revenue (and payback of development costs) but the real profit comes from long term subscription revenue that a successful and popular MMOG hopefully generates (and then, of top of that, successful expansions).

Bama1267 · May 2006

Im done either way....I wont contribute a dime to any game that will send part of it to SOE. If I bought this game it would be putting money directly into SOE's pocket....they can rot in hell.

FikusOfAhazi · May 2006

Originally posted by jimmyman99

Originally posted by FikusOfAhazi
well..all we can do is trust Brad and Sigil. Maybe they are making the game that this niche has been looking for and will stay true to the vision and the fans that vision has gathered. That happens alot!!

I really hope so, becuase im desperate. Almost as desperate as finding a girlfriend....almost... but very close... in fact, who needs a girlfriend anyway?

hehe..ya, its hard to believe so many millions of dollars being wasted on making games that "suck less" or "suck more". At least in sanbox games you can create your own content that sucks.

jimmyman99 · May 2006

Very nice post Fikus. I rememberd I read that FAQ at some point, but that was some time ago when i was aimlessly browsing just another game while trying to forget WoW (I swear its worth then crack becuase crack will eventually kill you but WoW... its forever man!). So that FAQ didnt stick to me. Very informative and shreds light on major aspect of SOE's involvement with Vanguard. Unfortunately, it only confirms that SOE will be reaping a lot of profit from Vanguard's success...and many many people will not purchase VSOH just to show the middle finger to SOE... *in dramatic and hysterical voice* whyyyyy whyyyy did Brad have to go with SOE!!!!

FikusOfAhazi · May 2006

just remember that was posted when MS was publisher.not that it has any baring on what was in the FAQ. also sigil is co-publisher for whatever that is worth.

Shayde · May 2006

Not one thin dime of mine will ever pay Smed's paycheck. $OE boycott forever.

jimmyman99 · May 2006

Originally posted by Shayde
Not one thin dime of mine will ever pay Smed's paycheck. $OE boycott forever.

Im tearing apart here becuase I love the idea behind VSOH and Id love to boycott SOE and even Sony in general. Everything I buy SONY seem to be not working well lately. Heck even the MP3 player I bought requires me to install THEIR software in order to upload music to my player. I cant just USB-plug it to my PC and copy files. It wont work that way. THey want EVERYTHING to go through THEIR software. At least they dont force me to convert to ACPAC format, but I am restricted to MP3. And some streamed radio programs that I download from inet radio get this "copyright" status and SONY program refuses to copy it. I have to re-pack MP3 to get by it. Sony is a communist company.

WuduLarch · May 2006

We are beginning to show those big companies that we, consumers, have the power. That they cannot screw us over without major consequences. U make a promise and lie about it? Fine, no1 will play your game. You do it 5 times? Now1 will play ANY of your games. Just have to remember not to hurt the little guys who develop games separately but rely on bigger guys to put their games on store shelves or to host servers for them.

I think that those of us who refuse to give SOE our money are trying to do what you state. people are speaking with money. They are telling SOE that their practices will not be tolerated. Yes, it is unfortunate that small companies may take some loss, but it is their choice to team up with a company they know has a bad reputation (This could be MS or SOE). If they do not know their potential partners reputation with the very people they are marketing to, then they deserve the loss. If any company is to lazy or is too cozy with another company to research it before hiring/partnering with it then they deserve whatever happens.

P.S. I still haven't decided wether to play or not (Leaning towards not). The game sounds great, but......SOE makes me gag.

P.P.S. The same controversy is still being debated in LotR:OL from when Vivendi sold it to Turbine.

Blackmoor · May 2006

As to game costs ,, it all depends on the sales, 100k box sales is around 5 mil. Bandwidth ( which is the main cost after making the game) and other expenses maybe comes to 350k per 100k subs so thats 1.15 mil a month profit there, and thats being pretty conservative on the profit. Thats going off a full server load of 100k people using 112k bandwidth IE 4 OC48's.

OC48 Price

Parsifal57 · May 2006

Simply put a lot of people don't wish to contribute any money to SOE and that alone is the reason they will be giving the game a wide berth. Its basically a matter of principle and to those that actually follow through on their statements I applaud them. SOE hasn't got the best of reputations which makes me leery of buying Vangaurd out of the door, i instead will wait until at least a month after launch to read reviews and player feedback about the game.

Whilst I couldn't get into either EQ or SWG (Tried them both) DAOC was the game that finaly addicted mme to the Genre, i've managed to miss most of the major exploits performed by SOE. However the reputation that SOE has aquired through a good deal of the gaming population has directly affected my decisions regarding vanguard from preordering to taking a wait and see approach (and that I suspect will be the approach that a lot of gamers take with the game)

So i've not quite cancelled but my purchasing plans have definately been adjusted because of the move.

Morneblade · May 2006

Originally posted by jimmyman99
The whole point of "unique" games like Vanguard, Conan, D&L is to start yet another trend, and then another so that at the end, we have a real diversity - not many games that look the same.

Thing is, Vanguard is nothing more than a EQ clone, in many ways moreso than other EQ clones. In all actuality, it's very uninovative at it's core. Add Hero's Journey to the unique list, subtract Vanguard.

jimmyman99 · May 2006

Originally posted by MornebladeThing is, Vanguard is nothing more than a EQ clone, in many ways moreso than other EQ clones. In all actuality, it's very uninovative at it's core. Add Hero's Journey to the unique list, subtract Vanguard.

The only way to know for sure what you are saying is true, if you are participating in Beta. I wouldnt disregard your comment if you are in beta and breaking NDA, but I would still consider that its too early to judge since this is not a final Beta yet, a lot can be added/changed in the last couple of months.

Heres the list of Key Features from their website ( http://vanguardsoh.com/aboutvanguard.php )

Key Features:

Discover intriguing adventures and fearsome creatures across two
vast continents and an enchanted archipelago which form the ancient
lands of Telon.
Encounter the world as one of 19 classic fantasy races including
dwarves, barbarians, a variety of elves, and exotic human/animal
combinations.
Guide your character along the path of one of 15 exciting
professions including Paladin, Ranger, Sorcerer, Psionicist, Bard, and
Rogue.
Build chains of special attacks and reactions with Openers, Bridges, and powerful Finishing moves.
Actions of your group-mates can open exciting opportunities for you during battle.
Unique spells are distinctively enhanced when you possess special items.
As a diplomat cunning words are your most powerful weapon as you curry favor in centers of power.
Collect essential materials and use skills such as blacksmithing,
alchemy and ship building to create valuable and powerful items.
Travel on horseback, join a caravan, or take your entire group on a sea-based adventure to discover faraway lands.
Make Telon feel like home by furnishing your own house with unique items.

The biggest "unique" feature IMO is Diplomacy. But any one of those features can be different enough from the generic MMORPG game to qualify as "unique". The amount of races avaialble alone is very impressive! That alone would make amazing roleplaying material.

SpiritofGame · May 2006

Hmmm, just a thought here.

So, like, if Funcom's Age of Conan, for whatever reason, suddenly decided to partnership with SOE, that would make AoC suck bad too?

Course, they would never do that, right? Right?

Blackmoor · May 2006

Originally posted by SpiritofGame

Hmmm, just a thought here.
So, like, if Funcom's Age of Conan, for whatever reason, suddenly decided to partnership with SOE, that would make AoC suck bad too?
Course, they would never do that, right? Right?

Hmmm Just a thought here ,, maybe you could actually come up with a new troll line?

C for effort since you are getting lazy and that line is getting dang old coming from you.

Of course you could never come up with a new troll line , right ? Right?

The thread has been going quite well , and aside from one post its been about the reasons people have reservations, hesitations , or flat out won't play because of the SOE association. It's been very well mannered and debated overall. But I guess that just doesn't sit well with a fanbois trolls like yourself.

SpiritofGame · May 2006

Originally posted by Blackmoor

Originally posted by SpiritofGame

Hmmm, just a thought here.
So, like, if Funcom's Age of Conan, for whatever reason, suddenly decided to partnership with SOE, that would make AoC suck bad too?
Course, they would never do that, right? Right?

Hmmm Just a thought here ,, maybe you could actually come up with a new troll line?

C for effort since you are getting lazy and that line is getting dang old coming from you.

Of course you could never come up with a new troll line , right ? Right?

Nice try.

C is for Classic. I used it twice because, frankly, it's a lot more entertaining that anything you could think up.

Nor is it trolling, you see, the comment points up the dichotomy between the pre-SOE Vanguard lovers and the post-SOE Vanguard haters -- especially in regards to them "jumping ship" from Vanguard to the newly-vaunted Age of Conan, and the possibility that Funcom may or may not do something in the future that would suddenly sour the newly formed Fanbois -- and, yes, something like that could actually happen.

So my question stands: "What would you do?"

Wait ... no need to say ... if you are just like the other hyterical SOE-haters you would drop your newly beloved Age of Conan faster than a hot potato -- you know, just like you did to Vanguard.

So, do you catch the meaning now -- or is it too scary to contemplate? Well, is it, punk?

Ravenbow · May 2006

Going back to the OP, I also blew a gasket upon hearing of the SOE involvement, but now after reading up, getting some facts, etc I will give it a try just because I have such high hopes for this game.

/em Quietly jumps off the "I hate SOE" bandwagon

footnote- Still mad about CU/NGE, but willing to give Sigil a try in leau of SOE

Howdy, Stranger!

If you canceled VSOH because of SOE...

Comments

~ Ancient Membership ~

~ Ancient Membership ~

Howdy, Stranger!

Quick Links

If you canceled VSOH because of SOE...

Comments

~ Ancient Membership ~

~ Ancient Membership ~