I can see where a hardcore Vanguard fan might see the writing on the wall. Let's face it, Sigil is panicking. The second I played the beta I placed my own bets for how long it would take them to make the game more mainstream, and I think it's only just begun. "This is not the hardcore game you're looking for /wavehand"
The admission that they were going to add teleporters are what made me realize it. It's not so much that they're adding them, it's that they even need to add them. 5 years of development and nearly 2 years of beta and they only just realize that the world might be a tad bit too large to accomodate pick-up groups? Wow. That certainly wasn't part of the original plan.
I still puzzles me why people think this game was designed for 'hardcore' players. It seems to me that the game was designed to offer choice... from casual to hardcore depending on one's playing style. Personally, I'm closer to the casual side of the gaming spectrum, but I also enjoy a challenge. I'm not overly happy with some of the ways this game has been made easier, although I'm not looking for it to be too hard either. It's about striking a balance.
For example, I wanted death to be painful so that I would be cautious with my adventures and that I would get that great feel of risk, reward and acheivement again. Initially, I thought Vanguard was taking it too easy on deaths with altars and such. But the more I played, the better I think the balance is. There is no way I could play this game and sink time into CRs like EQ. With the way it's set-up now, I can choose to get some help and go get my corpse, or I can take a big exp hit and summon it if I am in a hurry to play with my son, eat supper or simply go to bed.
On the other hand I really don't like teleporters. I know they are in the game now because the boats aren't working and are supposed to be removed once they're in. The world feels absolutely huge now, and travel is required, but is also a big part of the immersive feel. I really hope that Sigil doesn't keep teleporters, add more teleporters or any additional travel aids. For example, I'm going to pick up a friend in Tawar Galan tonight and escort him back to Leth Nurae. It's gonna take some time, he's only level 12 so there could be some danger on the way.... all in all, it's adventuring!
At least they saw it was an issue and are working on it, no?
To an extent, sure. But the fact that it became an issue at all shows a lack of foresight. Did they honestly think they could build such a massive world, make it difficult and time consuming for people to get around, and NOT end up with people complaining about it? Hell, even EverQuest ended up putting in the Planes of Power not only to provide more raiding for higher end players, but to give all EQ players a more centralized means of travel in the world, which had become huge by that point.
You'd think that anyone who had worked on the original EQ would have remembered that, but somehow, they all got collective amnesia.
The whole edit thing you put there I think is meant for people that don't really play mmorpg’s?? At least in my book mmorpg players don't want easy and don't complain about being busy, why would we, mmorpg are games that don't have to be played within a specific kind of hours to complete, they are made to have fun with people playing them in game, build community's, relations, fun, explore, discover and build, cause that is where Vanguard will stand out and that’s its future in what the community can do in game, but yes this takes time I know, some are just to inpatient, I personally think the whole WOW/Vanguard comparison far from the truth I don't see anything that reminds me of wow other then some people trying to play the game like WOW
Not sure what makes you think that most players don't want easy. Think when I said "at least in my book" which could mean something like "the people I know or am gaming with" but also the people I know that play and enjoy WoW really did not subscribe to it because its easy, they did so because they felt the game is/was fun or maybe other reasons,(maybe for you easy equals fun) sorry I don't know all of wow players base to assume they play it mainly because its easy (bit short minded to even think that) This is not me saying the game isn't easy or that nobody indeed play's wow mainly because its easy, but there is or can be abit more to WOW then just easy m8.
I would say it's more accurate to say that " .... most players who subscribe to a mmorpg like it to be easy.". I base that on the fact that WoW is an easy game (I play it, and it's easy) and WoW's lion's share of the market.
And I also believe WoW and Vanguard (and LOTRO and EQ and EQ2 et al) are more similar than different. Classes, races, levelling, quests (mostly of the kill X of Y variety), levelling zones, quest hubs, etc are all common elements. The games look different (thought still similar), play similarly (especially combat). The only real difference I see in Vanguard is that it takes longer to do the same things. Yes, crafting is more time consuming and diplomacy is a new element, but as for the adventuring parts of the game, all those mmo's are comparable, and such comparisons are inevitable. You see again I was not talking about the basic ingredients of a mmorpg, those things can be seen in almost every mmorpg (pure logic that these things are comparable Doh), I only told that nothing reminds me of WoW in the way I play Vanguard.
At least they saw it was an issue and are working on it, no?
To an extent, sure. But the fact that it became an issue at all shows a lack of foresight. Did they honestly think they could build such a massive world, make it difficult and time consuming for people to get around, and NOT end up with people complaining about it? Hell, even EverQuest ended up putting in the Planes of Power not only to provide more raiding for higher end players, but to give all EQ players a more centralized means of travel in the world, which had become huge by that point.
You'd think that anyone who had worked on the original EQ would have remembered that, but somehow, they all got collective amnesia.
The problem is not that they saw it as an issue, but when they saw it as an issue.
If you are planning for people of different races to play together, one would think you would at least try
to get them together before launch. I suspect that the only people who tested this game were their
target audience. The developers probably played GM like characters that have the ability to move
wherever they want at will and forgot that the everyday user won't be able to do those things.
There used to be a common saying in business - "eat your own dog food" to see how the average
consumer will relate to your product. If you are playing with GM abilities 100 percent of the time,
you are out of touch with reality.
This is just another consequence of rushing the game to market - where no one really got the chance
I think the problem leading to the potential downfall of the game has nothing to do with technical gameplay issues. It's all about the game's quality and consistency.
Sigil needs a vision, and they need to boldly stand behind it. When they think of changing some aspect of gameplay, they need to ask themselves, "Is this in line with our vision?". While all the recent changes to my Paladin are nice, I sometimes feel as though Sigil has no backbone when it comes to making decisions. It's like they're trying to make the game appeal to every crowd.
If the game was just polished more (MUCH better performance would be a start) and was more tightly knit together they could easily double their subscription base. FFXI is a game at least 10x harder than most MMOs (including Vanguard) and they have well over 500,000 subs. SquareEnix has a vision for that game, and it shows.
Sometimes when I play Vanguard, I think, "What is this game even about?" or "What is the theme the devs are trying to convey?" and I still can't find anyone who can answer those two questions. Sigil was too busy worrying about adding features and they forgot to tie them all together.
The first is that Brad & Co. are no longer are in touch with what players consider "fun." They have alienated casual players by the droves, and are now aliienating other types of players with the changes to woo casual players over. It is possible to accomodate both playstyles. WoW has been doing it for years. Casual players love it. Hard core raid guilds like it too. The notion that only one kind of player can enjoy a game is belied by the market and the history of this genre. Both casual players and others play EQ. They both play EQ2. They both played SWG. And so on. These are big worlds and there is no reason why a competent gamemaker can't make them fun for a wide audience. One thing is for sure. Brad claims he was aiming at the "core player' and the subscription numbers show he missed that target by a country mile.
The second problem is implementation. The journey from concept to implementation to testing to polish is just broken down at Sigil. It's bad management. Sure, they have some neat concepts, but neat concepts are a dime a dozen in this industry. Lots of games have had cool ideas and just can't get the job done.
When all the dust settles, what this game will become is not Vanguard, and not EQ, and not WoW, but EQ 2, 2.
EQ1, EQ2, SWG, SWTOR, GW, GW2 CoH, CoV, FFXI, WoW, CO, War,TSW and a slew of free trials and beta tests
There's a reason they are trying to appeal to a wider audience. They aren't retaining enough players by sticking to his vision so he is selling out his fan base to try and get enough subs to keep the projected funded in hopes of getting it to where it should have been when it launched.
Hmmm...a SOE connected game selling out it's current players in a desperate attempt to lure new players? Where have I heard that before?
There are lots of players who rather solo then go thru' the hassle of setting up a group. I got to level 19 with a Druid as well as 14 with a Dread Knight and I grouped with 4 others just once and that was at level 18+. two other times I teamed up with another player for a mission run and because we both happen to be there at the same time doing the same quest.
I'll group but I'd rather run solo any time. Unfortunately, you need to group up at times to complete certain missions.
Brad made a game for himself and no one else in a lame attempt to reclaim his EQ1 glory days.
Its obvious he did no research into what mainstream gamers want, did we want 20min travel times? no, did we want a kiddies card game? no, did we want a non instanced world? no, did we want crappy graphics? no, did we want to see 5km into the distance with the downside of poor performance? no, did we want a punishing death penalty? no, did we want click,click,click,click crafting? no. did we want to have to spend $500 on new hardware to run the game? no. did we want forced grouping? no.
And the numbers,reviews and poor sales support this. Sigil will never get their magic 200k subs unless they make some huge changes which they have already started to do with teleporters and faster exp.
Watching VG:SoH is like watching a car crash, you dont want to look but you just have too.
Its obvious you did not research into what audience Vanguard was claimed to be designed for. From the start, Sigin never intended for a "mainstream" target audience, and for good reason. There are plenty of games out there geared toward this "mainstream" audience you identify with, but for those of us who miss the old days of MMORPG's (and yes, there are quite a few of us), we really have no game to call our own. Kinda like how Taco Bell cleans house by selling tacos when everyone else is doing burgers. Did WE want 20 min travel times? Yes as long as they were interesting. Did WE want a "kiddies card game" as you put it? If by that you mean an alternative mode of play besides straight killing and questing to break the monotony of typical MMORPG play, then yes. Did WE want crappy graphics? No, have you actually played the game? It looks far better than the current "mainstream" leader out there. Did WE want to see 5km in the distance with the downside of poor performance? No, thats why we turn down the far plane clip setting in the options menue. Did WE want a punishing death penalty? Hell yes we did, but we didnt get it; again if you've actually PLAYED the game you should know how easy and unpunishing corpse summoning is. Did WE want click,click,click,click crafting? Thats a laugh. The crafting process in Vanguard is by far the most complex and interesting I've seen in any MMO. I just think it's a shame that making "rare" equipment takes so little effort. Did WE want to spend $500 on hardware to run the game? That depends on your meaning. You can run the game and play it just fine with a mid-end system, I did for my first 2 weeks. If you want to play on the highest settings (an this goes for any recent graphic intense PC game) it's up to you to spring for the hardware. Did WE want forced grouping? Yeah we did, because WE like the feeling of advancing through effort and not having everything handed to us. WE like the feeling of learning who we can trust, and being trusted by others to get a task done. Again, I'm not saying you're wrong for feeling otherwise, but while you or others make the argument "a game should be fun, not work", keep in mind that not every thinks "work" is such an evil word. I take it those who do have never had a job they've enjoyed. Hope that changes for you someday.
The poor subscription turnover, I think, is largely due to the fact that Sigil is making the same mistake that was made with EQ2 when it was first released; trying to please everyone instead of focusing those who were truly looking forward to it from the start. Blizzard knows their audience, and dispite all the WoW-haters out there, they continue to do well because they continue to make exactly what their audience wants. Sigil is letting the Vanguard-haters get to them it seems. Trying to tweak and tweak and tweak to please those who weren't really interested to begin with, and in the process losing more and more of their original fanbase. There's a lot of money to be made in niche markets, particularly when you have little or no competition. So there's no fault in their original strategy. Their folly comes in the form of deviation from that strategy. This is what's proving to be their downfall.
Why is being able to solo a bad thing? There are lots of players who rather solo then go thru' the hassle of setting up a group. I got to level 19 with a Druid as well as 14 with a Dread Knight and I grouped with 4 others just once and that was at level 18+. two other times I teamed up with another player for a mission run and because we both happen to be there at the same time doing the same quest. I'll group but I'd rather run solo any time. Unfortunately, you need to group up at times to complete certain missions.
Why is not being able to solo a bad thing?
What's so wrong with the existance of a game that's heavily group oriented? Every game doesn't have to appeal to the same type of gamer. When grouping becomes less rewarding, or more troublesome than soloing, nobody does it, and those hoping for a nice social experience are left out in the cold. It's easy to put a game down when it doesn't appeal to you, but that doesn't make it wrong for appealing to others, and there are a lot of games that cater well to solo play already.
I'll admit, there are times when I just dont want to be bothered with other people, or when I dont want to commit to a long play session, but as long as there's somthing else that you CAN do solo during those times, like crafting or bullying..er I mean farming lower lvl critters, I'm ok with it.
Speaking of alternative things to do, I've yet to see a good integration of ingame gambling done. Perhaps mounted races. Players could spend time at the track betting on other players who also spend time raising their mounts and racing them against each other. Or a gambling card or dice game. A GOOD one. That players can play against each other...although I suppose that would require others as well. There would need to be a way to prevent money farmers from exploiting it, but if I could think that up off the top of my head, Sigil, Blizzard, SE, NC, and all the other MMO companies would be fighting over who gets to pay me the most for the idea.
There's a reason they are trying to appeal to a wider audience. They aren't retaining enough players by sticking to his vision so he is selling out his fan base to try and get enough subs to keep the projected funded in hopes of getting it to where it should have been when it launched.
I'm sure he is not concerned with alienating the existing (i.e. charter) player base.
His concern is that the changes will result in a net gain of subs. In other words,
as long as the changes give him a net gain in subs, he won't give a rat's behind how many quit out of anger at the game being "dumbed down".
There's a reason they are trying to appeal to a wider audience. They aren't retaining enough players by sticking to his vision so he is selling out his fan base to try and get enough subs to keep the projected funded in hopes of getting it to where it should have been when it launched.
I'm sure he is not concerned with alienating the existing (i.e. charter) player base.
His concern is that the changes will result in a net gain of subs. In other words,
as long as the changes give him a net gain in subs, he won't give a rat's behind how many quit out of anger at the game being "dumbed down".
Which is exactly what SOE thought when they inflicted the NGE on Star Wars: Galaxies. They figured by making SWG more WoW-like they would attract millions of new subscribers and that would counter the loyal subscribers who left. We all know how that turned out...
I have been wondering now for awhile if I should try this game or not. But given my playstyle, Im one of those hardcore solo players who will group on a rainy day. Originally I heard this game would be very group oriented. So amongs some features I do find interesting and appealing to me, this hardcore raider idea kepted me away.
Reading this and some other reviews and people claiming this game is more solo friendly then predicted has finally done it for me. Im going to buy it and give it a try.
I hate SOE, but I did love thier Swg game (pre-CU and even CU) but I loved thier free world concepts. EQ2 was ok but not so much my style. Im hoping this will be something I can really play and enjoy. Player housing, Boats, non-instanced world, player cities to come, attackable player guard towers and all that. It not just kill x and y, theres more to it.
So Im off to get a copy. Im just not sure which server is the PvP free for all.
This post actually did it for me. I have been wondering now for awhile if I should try this game or not. But given my playstyle, Im one of those hardcore solo players who will group on a rainy day. Originally I heard this game would be very group oriented. So amongs some features I do find interesting and appealing to me, this hardcore raider idea kepted me away. Reading this and some other reviews and people claiming this game is more solo friendly then predicted has finally done it for me. Im going to buy it and give it a try. I hate SOE, but I did love thier Swg game (pre-CU and even CU) but I loved thier free world concepts. EQ2 was ok but not so much my style. Im hoping this will be something I can really play and enjoy. Player housing, Boats, non-instanced world, player cities to come, attackable player guard towers and all that. It not just kill x and y, theres more to it. So Im off to get a copy. Im just not sure which server is the PvP free for all.
I suggest waiting a few months before you try it. With the way things have been with Vanguard the game could well be very different 3 months from now than it is now. It's no big secret that it was released earlier than Sigil would've liked it to be, and major changes are taking place on a pretty regular basis right now.
Comments
I still puzzles me why people think this game was designed for 'hardcore' players. It seems to me that the game was designed to offer choice... from casual to hardcore depending on one's playing style. Personally, I'm closer to the casual side of the gaming spectrum, but I also enjoy a challenge. I'm not overly happy with some of the ways this game has been made easier, although I'm not looking for it to be too hard either. It's about striking a balance.
For example, I wanted death to be painful so that I would be cautious with my adventures and that I would get that great feel of risk, reward and acheivement again. Initially, I thought Vanguard was taking it too easy on deaths with altars and such. But the more I played, the better I think the balance is. There is no way I could play this game and sink time into CRs like EQ. With the way it's set-up now, I can choose to get some help and go get my corpse, or I can take a big exp hit and summon it if I am in a hurry to play with my son, eat supper or simply go to bed.
On the other hand I really don't like teleporters. I know they are in the game now because the boats aren't working and are supposed to be removed once they're in. The world feels absolutely huge now, and travel is required, but is also a big part of the immersive feel. I really hope that Sigil doesn't keep teleporters, add more teleporters or any additional travel aids. For example, I'm going to pick up a friend in Tawar Galan tonight and escort him back to Leth Nurae. It's gonna take some time, he's only level 12 so there could be some danger on the way.... all in all, it's adventuring!
To an extent, sure. But the fact that it became an issue at all shows a lack of foresight. Did they honestly think they could build such a massive world, make it difficult and time consuming for people to get around, and NOT end up with people complaining about it? Hell, even EverQuest ended up putting in the Planes of Power not only to provide more raiding for higher end players, but to give all EQ players a more centralized means of travel in the world, which had become huge by that point.
You'd think that anyone who had worked on the original EQ would have remembered that, but somehow, they all got collective amnesia.
I would say it's more accurate to say that " .... most players who subscribe to a mmorpg like it to be easy.". I base that on the fact that WoW is an easy game (I play it, and it's easy) and WoW's lion's share of the market.
And I also believe WoW and Vanguard (and LOTRO and EQ and EQ2 et al) are more similar than different. Classes, races, levelling, quests (mostly of the kill X of Y variety), levelling zones, quest hubs, etc are all common elements. The games look different (thought still similar), play similarly (especially combat). The only real difference I see in Vanguard is that it takes longer to do the same things. Yes, crafting is more time consuming and diplomacy is a new element, but as for the adventuring parts of the game, all those mmo's are comparable, and such comparisons are inevitable. You see again I was not talking about the basic ingredients of a mmorpg, those things can be seen in almost every mmorpg (pure logic that these things are comparable Doh), I only told that nothing reminds me of WoW in the way I play Vanguard.
To an extent, sure. But the fact that it became an issue at all shows a lack of foresight. Did they honestly think they could build such a massive world, make it difficult and time consuming for people to get around, and NOT end up with people complaining about it? Hell, even EverQuest ended up putting in the Planes of Power not only to provide more raiding for higher end players, but to give all EQ players a more centralized means of travel in the world, which had become huge by that point.
You'd think that anyone who had worked on the original EQ would have remembered that, but somehow, they all got collective amnesia.
The problem is not that they saw it as an issue, but when they saw it as an issue.
If you are planning for people of different races to play together, one would think you would at least try
to get them together before launch. I suspect that the only people who tested this game were their
target audience. The developers probably played GM like characters that have the ability to move
wherever they want at will and forgot that the everyday user won't be able to do those things.
There used to be a common saying in business - "eat your own dog food" to see how the average
consumer will relate to your product. If you are playing with GM abilities 100 percent of the time,
you are out of touch with reality.
This is just another consequence of rushing the game to market - where no one really got the chance
to see how the game would play in Peoria.
Not 100% sure but think I remember Brad saying they would start without the teleports but be ready to put them in if they felt it was needed.
I think the problem leading to the potential downfall of the game has nothing to do with technical gameplay issues. It's all about the game's quality and consistency.
Sigil needs a vision, and they need to boldly stand behind it. When they think of changing some aspect of gameplay, they need to ask themselves, "Is this in line with our vision?". While all the recent changes to my Paladin are nice, I sometimes feel as though Sigil has no backbone when it comes to making decisions. It's like they're trying to make the game appeal to every crowd.
If the game was just polished more (MUCH better performance would be a start) and was more tightly knit together they could easily double their subscription base. FFXI is a game at least 10x harder than most MMOs (including Vanguard) and they have well over 500,000 subs. SquareEnix has a vision for that game, and it shows.
Sometimes when I play Vanguard, I think, "What is this game even about?" or "What is the theme the devs are trying to convey?" and I still can't find anyone who can answer those two questions. Sigil was too busy worrying about adding features and they forgot to tie them all together.
This game has two problems, and always has.
The first is that Brad & Co. are no longer are in touch with what players consider "fun." They have alienated casual players by the droves, and are now aliienating other types of players with the changes to woo casual players over. It is possible to accomodate both playstyles. WoW has been doing it for years. Casual players love it. Hard core raid guilds like it too. The notion that only one kind of player can enjoy a game is belied by the market and the history of this genre. Both casual players and others play EQ. They both play EQ2. They both played SWG. And so on. These are big worlds and there is no reason why a competent gamemaker can't make them fun for a wide audience. One thing is for sure. Brad claims he was aiming at the "core player' and the subscription numbers show he missed that target by a country mile.
The second problem is implementation. The journey from concept to implementation to testing to polish is just broken down at Sigil. It's bad management. Sure, they have some neat concepts, but neat concepts are a dime a dozen in this industry. Lots of games have had cool ideas and just can't get the job done.
When all the dust settles, what this game will become is not Vanguard, and not EQ, and not WoW, but EQ 2, 2.
EQ1, EQ2, SWG, SWTOR, GW, GW2 CoH, CoV, FFXI, WoW, CO, War,TSW and a slew of free trials and beta tests
whether you choose to adventure, craft, or diplomat, it needs to have more story as to what
you have in store for the future and why.
This is my first "real mmorpg", played GW for almost 2 years as a human and badly wanted to
be something else, I decided on an Orc, well then I find out that Orcs, Goblins, and Dark Elves
are the races that don't have much material added to the game for them, that would have been
nice to know up front, and not many ppl playing them either.
Now I have been to all the contitents and did some quests on Thestra in Three rivers village,
but I am wondering what is the path of lvling up and adventuring other Orcs are taking???
I know alot of ppl don't like cut-scenes and stuff, but I think a few of these at the right places
would help alot of ppl out, like myself.
I am in the dark on this question, how do you know what your faction is with all cities???
I have spent alot of time riding around to places only to find out when I get there???
thx.....
Why is being able to solo a bad thing?
There are lots of players who rather solo then go thru' the hassle of setting up a group. I got to level 19 with a Druid as well as 14 with a Dread Knight and I grouped with 4 others just once and that was at level 18+. two other times I teamed up with another player for a mission run and because we both happen to be there at the same time doing the same quest.
I'll group but I'd rather run solo any time. Unfortunately, you need to group up at times to complete certain missions.
Its obvious you did not research into what audience Vanguard was claimed to be designed for. From the start, Sigin never intended for a "mainstream" target audience, and for good reason. There are plenty of games out there geared toward this "mainstream" audience you identify with, but for those of us who miss the old days of MMORPG's (and yes, there are quite a few of us), we really have no game to call our own. Kinda like how Taco Bell cleans house by selling tacos when everyone else is doing burgers. Did WE want 20 min travel times? Yes as long as they were interesting. Did WE want a "kiddies card game" as you put it? If by that you mean an alternative mode of play besides straight killing and questing to break the monotony of typical MMORPG play, then yes. Did WE want crappy graphics? No, have you actually played the game? It looks far better than the current "mainstream" leader out there. Did WE want to see 5km in the distance with the downside of poor performance? No, thats why we turn down the far plane clip setting in the options menue. Did WE want a punishing death penalty? Hell yes we did, but we didnt get it; again if you've actually PLAYED the game you should know how easy and unpunishing corpse summoning is. Did WE want click,click,click,click crafting? Thats a laugh. The crafting process in Vanguard is by far the most complex and interesting I've seen in any MMO. I just think it's a shame that making "rare" equipment takes so little effort. Did WE want to spend $500 on hardware to run the game? That depends on your meaning. You can run the game and play it just fine with a mid-end system, I did for my first 2 weeks. If you want to play on the highest settings (an this goes for any recent graphic intense PC game) it's up to you to spring for the hardware. Did WE want forced grouping? Yeah we did, because WE like the feeling of advancing through effort and not having everything handed to us. WE like the feeling of learning who we can trust, and being trusted by others to get a task done. Again, I'm not saying you're wrong for feeling otherwise, but while you or others make the argument "a game should be fun, not work", keep in mind that not every thinks "work" is such an evil word. I take it those who do have never had a job they've enjoyed. Hope that changes for you someday.
The poor subscription turnover, I think, is largely due to the fact that Sigil is making the same mistake that was made with EQ2 when it was first released; trying to please everyone instead of focusing those who were truly looking forward to it from the start. Blizzard knows their audience, and dispite all the WoW-haters out there, they continue to do well because they continue to make exactly what their audience wants. Sigil is letting the Vanguard-haters get to them it seems. Trying to tweak and tweak and tweak to please those who weren't really interested to begin with, and in the process losing more and more of their original fanbase. There's a lot of money to be made in niche markets, particularly when you have little or no competition. So there's no fault in their original strategy. Their folly comes in the form of deviation from that strategy. This is what's proving to be their downfall.
Why is not being able to solo a bad thing?
What's so wrong with the existance of a game that's heavily group oriented? Every game doesn't have to appeal to the same type of gamer. When grouping becomes less rewarding, or more troublesome than soloing, nobody does it, and those hoping for a nice social experience are left out in the cold. It's easy to put a game down when it doesn't appeal to you, but that doesn't make it wrong for appealing to others, and there are a lot of games that cater well to solo play already.
I'll admit, there are times when I just dont want to be bothered with other people, or when I dont want to commit to a long play session, but as long as there's somthing else that you CAN do solo during those times, like crafting or bullying..er I mean farming lower lvl critters, I'm ok with it.
Speaking of alternative things to do, I've yet to see a good integration of ingame gambling done. Perhaps mounted races. Players could spend time at the track betting on other players who also spend time raising their mounts and racing them against each other. Or a gambling card or dice game. A GOOD one. That players can play against each other...although I suppose that would require others as well. There would need to be a way to prevent money farmers from exploiting it, but if I could think that up off the top of my head, Sigil, Blizzard, SE, NC, and all the other MMO companies would be fighting over who gets to pay me the most for the idea.
His concern is that the changes will result in a net gain of subs. In other words,
as long as the changes give him a net gain in subs, he won't give a rat's behind how many quit out of anger at the game being "dumbed down".
His concern is that the changes will result in a net gain of subs. In other words,
as long as the changes give him a net gain in subs, he won't give a rat's behind how many quit out of anger at the game being "dumbed down".
Which is exactly what SOE thought when they inflicted the NGE on Star Wars: Galaxies. They figured by making SWG more WoW-like they would attract millions of new subscribers and that would counter the loyal subscribers who left. We all know how that turned out...
This post actually did it for me.
I have been wondering now for awhile if I should try this game or not. But given my playstyle, Im one of those hardcore solo players who will group on a rainy day. Originally I heard this game would be very group oriented. So amongs some features I do find interesting and appealing to me, this hardcore raider idea kepted me away.
Reading this and some other reviews and people claiming this game is more solo friendly then predicted has finally done it for me. Im going to buy it and give it a try.
I hate SOE, but I did love thier Swg game (pre-CU and even CU) but I loved thier free world concepts. EQ2 was ok but not so much my style. Im hoping this will be something I can really play and enjoy. Player housing, Boats, non-instanced world, player cities to come, attackable player guard towers and all that. It not just kill x and y, theres more to it.
So Im off to get a copy. Im just not sure which server is the PvP free for all.