Originally posted by Elnator [...]The definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over with the same results. EQ1: Pick a class... level up.... raid EQ2: Pick a class... level up.... raid WoW: Pick a class.... level up.... raid Vanguard: Pick a class.... level up.... raid [...]
More to the point (applies to all 4 games): Pick a class...play an elf...use magic...kill kobolds...level up...cast more magic...see a dwarf or 7...level up...win a Sword of Bringabongalong +5...raid.
One thing vanguard does it put all the things that other games have (player housing,decent crafting,pvp,guild cities and diplomacy - all things that havent all been put in one game btu are spread through numerous games) and put them into one, with nice gfx and a massive world.
Goofy, this is indeed what Sigil seems to be trying to do. I was hoping for a huge world where exploration was outright fun, and I didn't just feel like I was riding the same theme park ride as everybody else. I've been testing Vanguard since Beta 4 in December, and I'm still not convinced they pulled it off. I'm time-limited, so I just try a few hours here and there. Some thoughts:
Performance has definitely improved since December, but the server still crashes far too often. It's hard for me to get immersed with crashes about every 20 minutes.
I've yet to make up my mind about how "advanced" the world is, since I don't have a character past level 10. The intro levels are pretty weak and generic, and I agree that they add little or nothing to the genre. I do like the fact that there are so many intro areas, but this comes at the cost of inconsistency and content dilution. Put simply, some newbie areas are much better than others. Games like WoW did a much better job of making the newbie experience fun and accessible across the board.
The claims for diplomacy are interesting, and the card "parleys" are fairly fun as a minigame. I'm just not sure why a card game would be the main way of achieving dynamism in the game world. I was hoping that Vanguard would offer a more dynamic monster environment, and I thought I had read they were trying to achieve that.... Instead it looks like just another "x monster spawns here with a 5% chance of being a boss mob" or whatever. I was hoping for a more AC-style dynamic world, with frequent changes to the content, and possibly even such a system that did not depend on monthly updates.
If the game is really meant to be interesting at higher levels and appeal to "hardcore" gamers, it's hard for me to tell. The pace of leveling is too slow, and I won't get to see most of that content in beta. And I've heard nothing to indicate that such content is especially advanced, except that supposedly group combat can be quite involving. But I have seen no evidence of the combat system being very interesting at low levels, and I was hoping for something more than "EQ2 with a more advanced combat system."
So, there are my random thoughts... I do not hate this game, but Sigil hasn't convinced me that it's worth plunking down $100 for me and my wife on Jan 31. Since we are subscribing to EQ2 at the moment, I guess the Station Pass might make sense if Vanguard improves dramatically. I'm hoping Sigil can pull off some miracles in the next 3 weeks, but my gut tells me to avoid this one until a few months after release, then check back. But by that time, AoC will be out, and I suspect that'll be my next game since I love DAOC-style RvR/PvP.
Wow and Vanguard are both heavily based on the old Everquest game. It really is no surprise they look alike so much.
For once I agree with Gameloading.
The games are going to look alike because they're both based on EQ1
Just like EQ2 shares many similarities with WoW
any EQ clone is going to resemble WoW because, at the end of the day, WoW is an EQ clone.
Vanguard isn't a bad game. Remember it's a game designed specifically to cater to more, for lack of a better term, "hard core" MMORPG players. Not folks looking for quick and easy fun (most, but not all, WoW players). The game is meant to appeal to those who enjoyed the fact that EQ1 took a long time to accomplish things and required you to retrieve your corpse and where entire raid parties regularly wiped out. It's meant to be that way. Thus it has a bit longer starting arc than wow does.
This was pretty much my impression as well. Actually the "Geez, this looks like a WoW clone" never entered my mind as I was playing oddly enough. However, I did think, "Geez this reminds me a little to much of EQ and EQ2" almost immediately. Go figure. Vanguard isn't a bad game, from my experience it's just dull and uninspired. I just felt like I was going through the motions, and therefore there was no sense of fulfillment or enjoyment as I leveled or as I found new places to explore.
-------------- Played: Age of Conan, DDO, Saga of Ryzom, SWG, DaOC, MxO, EQ2, and so on... Wish List: Jumpgate Evolution, Star Wars: TOR, Star Trek
I agree with OP 100%. I think the days of quality MMOs are going to die fast, unless WAR takes the positives in WoW and incorporates them into their next gen mmo.
Great so every game thats coming out in 2007 is going to be borrowing stuff from WoW? Ughh.......
Don't be terrorized! You're more likely to die of a car accident, drowning, fire, or murder! More people die every year from prescription drugs than terrorism LOL!
Comments
Currently Playing: Dungeons and Dragons Online.
Sig image Pending
Still in: A couple Betas
More to the point (applies to all 4 games): Pick a class...play an elf...use magic...kill kobolds...level up...cast more magic...see a dwarf or 7...level up...win a Sword of Bringabongalong +5...raid.
That's what makes them the same.
Dont blame Sigil for the interface. That was a player initiated change as a result of no one in beta liking their original interface.
The games are going to look alike because they're both based on EQ1
Just like EQ2 shares many similarities with WoW
any EQ clone is going to resemble WoW because, at the end of the day, WoW is an EQ clone.
Vanguard isn't a bad game. Remember it's a game designed specifically to cater to more, for lack of a better term, "hard core" MMORPG players. Not folks looking for quick and easy fun (most, but not all, WoW players). The game is meant to appeal to those who enjoyed the fact that EQ1 took a long time to accomplish things and required you to retrieve your corpse and where entire raid parties regularly wiped out. It's meant to be that way. Thus it has a bit longer starting arc than wow does.
This was pretty much my impression as well. Actually the "Geez, this looks like a WoW clone" never entered my mind as I was playing oddly enough. However, I did think, "Geez this reminds me a little to much of EQ and EQ2" almost immediately. Go figure. Vanguard isn't a bad game, from my experience it's just dull and uninspired. I just felt like I was going through the motions, and therefore there was no sense of fulfillment or enjoyment as I leveled or as I found new places to explore.
--------------
Played: Age of Conan, DDO, Saga of Ryzom, SWG, DaOC, MxO, EQ2, and so on...
Wish List: Jumpgate Evolution, Star Wars: TOR, Star Trek
Don't be terrorized! You're more likely to die of a car accident, drowning, fire, or murder! More people die every year from prescription drugs than terrorism LOL!