Howdy, Stranger!
It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!
Quick Links
Extract from Vanguard review
turbohale
Member Posts: 33
To top this off, as of going to press Vanguard veers between unstable and unplayable on many computers, even those that run WOW or EQII smoothly. The graphics are lush, but even on the 'highest performance' setting they can bring competent computers to a jerky, pitiful halt. With bugs galore and a stinking, stuttering engine, it becomes even harder
to be positive about this game.
While taking inspiration from many of its peers, Vanguard fails to understand the keys to success. It's a classic case of quantity over quality, sporting so much repetition and needless grinding that it can hardly be called an adventure. In a world of well-made, fun-packed MMORPGs like Guild Wars and WOW, Vanguard is in no way recommendable to anyone but masochists and those with more time and money than sense. Sadly, Sigil's vision is dead.
The above is an extract from a review by computer and video games.com
Full review can be found here http://www.computerandvideogames.com/article.php?id=157936
Comments
You don't get any more unprofesional then refering to people as masochists if they play a game; also not very respectable. And to compare a system that runs WoW to one that can't run VG?
Wanna know how hard WoW is to run?
My old system was a dell with a 2.1ghz pentium, an ATI 9250 (This is PCI bus, no agp, no pciE, PCI!), and 512mb of ram and it ran WoW with almost all the setting up fine. You can't make a comparison to games that run WoW to ones that run VG it's very misleading and inaccurate.
PC gaming is about upgrading as time goes on and the reviewer should know that and not expect a system that can run WoW to run every other game out. Hell my old system wouldn't run Doom3, doesn't make it a bad game cause it can't play it.
I've seen better reviews, but he at least held some of his integrity while making his point. (Much better than the guy who reviewed a game he never played, but let's not get into that again.)
Though I dislike how harsh and... descriptive he was, he did get his point across. The game was not for him, and he obviously did not enjoy many of the unique features of Vanguard that so many others have decided to play the game just because of (Diplomacy, crafting system, etc.) He doesn't like level curved games anymore. He doesn't like reading lore and getting into the game. He doesn't like getting deeply involved with a community. That with a final beta gameplay state just added fuel to his fire, understandably however.
Oh well, the graphical issue has been discussed time and time again. If you can play WoW and EQ2 smoothly, you probably won't play VG smoothly right off of the bat. This is a fact of life now, as the devs have even stated.
It also appears that many people, including the reviewer, prefer a much more friendly looking fluffy world to play in nowadays. This is one of the reasons that I can't stand LOTRO, or WoW for that matter, since it looks nothing like the movies and reminds me nothing of what my imagination dreamt of when reading the Trilogy and other works over and over.
Getting off track now, so I'll just stop now as my Vanboi is starting to show again.
I don't think they did there research for this review. My friend plays with a 6 year old computer that he spend $315 upgrading. Smooth as a baby's bottom for him, no crashes, no hitches and no problems. Of course, he's playing on high performance, but nevertheless, no problems.
I'm sorry, but any publication which refers to 10's of thousands of gamers as masochists with more time and money then sense is not reputable in my opinion. I like the game, but I won't be playing it a year from now because I don't like it that much and don't forsee it getting enough better to hold my attention in the coming months. But totally unnecessary and bombastic descriptions like "masochists" come from a tiny mind.
i play on a pent4 3.2 ghz, 1 gig ram, 6800 GT.
By no means a bad computer, or a good one. Play the game on balanced A-OK.
cost me about 1k 2 years ago.
Well written professional reviews provide insight based on facts and limit their opinions to their own gameplay experiences and their sense of fun and adventure; or the lack thereof. They don't group all potential gamers in overly generic flattering or unflattering terms. That type of review is subjectively based upon anger, and isn't objective. He doesn't like the game. fine. As a reviewer, he can even recommend against other prople buying it, that's fine too. But catagorizing gamers the way he has is totally unprofessional in my opionion. I'd say the same thing if he had had a positive spin and had said that anyone who liked the game was a "shining example of a great all around human being." Unnecessary tripe in either description which removes objectivity from the review.
How about a little civility Shoal..... and remember, High Performance is the setting with graphics turned down to get better FPS. Whereas High Quality is the setting where the graphics are cranked up at the expense of FPS.
Here are the upgrades.... $320 total at the time of purchase.
2.8ghz processor (he couldn't go any higher because of the mobo contraints)
7800GS AGP (had to do some bios tweaking to get it to work with mobo)
1 more gig of ram.
I checked in with my friend and with these upgrades he gets "I had to UNcheck the "Enable write combining" box under the "advanced" tab under the display menu in the control panel to get the card to work properly. With "balanced" graphics and trees and grass on low density, I get 30-40 fps in open areas.
Good performance on low end systems is VERY doable with a little patience and some adjustments. In fact, until I got my Geforce 8800 GTX dialed in right I was EXTREMELY frustrated because my low end system friend didn't crash or hitch at zones while I was having all sorts of problems. He was laughing all the way to the bank because I paid more for my video card that he did for his entire system upgrade.
The article is spot-on in pointing out the numerous design flaws.
This is by far the most honest review of this game I have ever read.
As for the unplayability not seeing it from my end, only issues I'm haveing is network related and those same issues killed WoW for me when I tried to go back a few months ago. And before some points out that I said WoW was boring I was going back to play cause some guildies convinced me to try it again.
Lol I love how you got called a troll for your honest opinion of this craptastic game. Lol I guess a lot of ppl fee strongely abou the game still, like they have to defend the absolute BS that the game is and represents to this community. I feel ya brother
I think when he called you a troll he was referring to you posting two (negative) paragraphs from a review that's already been linked to multiple times in different posts, along with other reviews. And NO, I'm not saying posting something negative about the game is bad...but when you go about it the way you did, well, that's trolling.
In Internet terminology, a troll is a person who enters an established community such as an online discussion forum and intentionally tries to cause disruption, often in the form of posting messages that are inflammatory, insulting, incorrect, inaccurate, or off-topic, with the intent of provoking a reaction from others.
/bye
I wouldnt wipe my ass with this so-called review...let me sum up:
'The game sucks and all the people playing it are idiots'
Yeah, sign me up for this tools blog...
Vanguard's requirements are not exceedingly high. I run Vanguard on an P4 2.4, Asus P4B with 200Mhz FSB, 1Gb of PC 133 SDRAM, and I spent a grand total of $189 on a ATI X1650XT 512Mb AGP graphics card.
That is FAR from being a high end computer, in fact, it's rather mediocre by today's computer standards and I generally get 15-25 fps except in crowded areas.
I run the game on 1280 x 1024 balanced settings normally. I switch to 1024 x 768 High Performance when grouped or in cities.
I find it difficult to believe that 50% of WoW gamers have computers less powerful than mine.
- How can you talk if you haven't got a brain?
- I don't know, but some people without brains do an awful lot of talking, don't they?
Vanguard's requirements are not exceedingly high. I run Vanguard on an P4 2.4, Asus P4B with 200Mhz FSB, 1Gb of PC 133 SDRAM, and I spent a grand total of $189 on a ATI X1650XT 512Mb AGP graphics card.
That is FAR from being a high end computer, in fact, it's rather mediocre by today's computer standards and I generally get 15-25 fps except in crowded areas.
I run the game on 1280 x 1024 balanced settings normally. I switch to 1024 x 768 High Performance when grouped or in cities.
I find it difficult to believe that 50% of WoW gamers have computers less powerful than mine.
15-25 fps is poor. You need at least 30-40 fps for it not to appear laggy which is a must if you wish to do things like PvP. And you say you get this in non crowded areas? What fps do you get in crowded areas and just how crowded are you talking about? 10 players? 100?
That 50% is a gestimate on my part I'll admit, but I'll stand by it. My PC for instance is less powerful than what you are running and I consider myself a pretty avid gamer. I play nightly and have been playing since the days of Vic-20. (You've probably never heard of it) You see I have a family and have a kid in college and another starting next year. I own several computers, one for me, one for my son, a laptop for my daughter and one for my wife. I own several cars, have 2 grandkids and quite frankly I have bills up to my eyeballs and I can't afford to got out and spend several hundred dollars on a new PC just so I can play a game and yes I believe that there are a lot of players like me.
Look, I realize that performance is the last thing you work on in game design and I'm quite sure that once Sigil has had a chance to fix the bugs they'll be able to optimize some of the code and get the graphics working at a much more acceptable level, but currently the requirements ARE exceedingly high. When your PC can run the game with 30 fps in all area's no matter how crowded it gets, let me know.