I believe a core gamer is someone who will stay with a game to advance their character for months to years. A core gamer is someone who has played games their whole life, and will continue to do so. At our core we are gamers, first and foremost.
Very good definition of what a core gamer should be and I whole heartedly agree. However, the OP's validity in pointing out what Brad or Sigil if you will were really looking for.
Which means he's now placing anyone who posts something he disagrees with on his Blocked User list.
I've placed only one person on block due to what I considered to be an offensive signature and the funny part is it never worked I could still see the guys replies and posts. Wonder if they fixed that ?
"Conservatively this leaves the more hard core WoW player (which in Vanguard or EQ terms would be considered either a hard core or, more likely, a core gamer). " There it is. Brad considers a hardcore WoW player to equate to a "core" Vanguard player. Considering that Fires of Heaven, Afterlife, Death and Taxes, etc are among the hardcore in WoW; and considering the numerous intense raid guilds on every WoW server (people who play 6-8 hours a night or more, every night), it is clear that Vanguard was never really targeting people like me (the people he desribed as "core", but really the truly hardcore, as many people have been saying all along!
WoW hardcore = 3-4hours a night a 3-5 nights a week (9-20 hours tops). That is pretty damn casual considering MMO history.
My old guild had plenty of server firsts, naxx, c'thun, etc at that pace. That is a pretty casual friendly if you ask me. Being "hardcore" is WoW is rather leisurely.
Originally posted by healz4u Lidane states, "at the early levels, sure" Vanguard is the most solo-friendly game on the market.
LOL! I never said that at all. Thanks for taking my words out of context.
Many MMO's out there now can be soloed at the early levels. I soloed the newbie trash in VG rather easily, which wasn't that hard, since they didn't aggro, and largely just stood there while I attacked their buddies. Or they respawned as soon as they were looted. I also soloed the early levels in CoH/V, LOTR, WoW, Anarchy Online, DAoC, Asheron's Call, Earth & Beyond, and many other games. Soloing at the newibe levels is no big deal. *shrug*
CoH/V offers more of a challenge at those levels, IMO, especially if you choose the Science origin. Facing down rooms full of Vahzilok at the earliest levels can actually be pretty daunting if you're not careful.
Originally posted by HellsWizard I've been playing Shadowbane since release. I still play it alot. And i can tell you right now, shadowbane is NOT, NOT solo friendly. Once you hit R2 and get kicked off noob island, you BETTER ALREADY HAVE FRIENDS.
PvP notwithstanding, it's a faster leveling curve than other MMOs. There may be a resurgence of people playing now that it's free, but last time I played when it was still pay to play, it was pretty well deserted on the regular servers(Played on Vengeance? Wrath, maybe? Been a long while). Test server was fairly well populated due to the even higher than normal xp and gold.
I've been playing Shadowbane since release. I still play it alot.
And i can tell you right now, shadowbane is NOT, NOT solo friendly. Once you hit R2 and get kicked off noob island, you BETTER ALREADY HAVE FRIENDS.
PvP notwithstanding, it's a faster leveling curve than other MMOs. There may be a resurgence of people playing now that it's free, but last time I played when it was still pay to play, it was pretty well deserted on the regular servers(Played on Vengeance? Wrath, maybe? Been a long while). Test server was fairly well populated due to the even higher than normal xp and gold.
Thats true, you'll never level faster in another game than you will in SB. And yes, quiet alot of people are playing, especially since it went free to play. Mourning and vindication are both very well populated, brailia and wrath are only so so.. Mainly due to brailia having been over run by PacRim players who perfer a real life us versus them, political game structure. the non-PC way of saying it would be, the pacRim players like to fight the north American players, but not each other ? i'll leave it at that. Redemption server has also fallen under the same situation, however Redemption was the first to fall. Infact WolfPack made redemption the official-PacRim server and set bane windows and mine windows of oppritunity to Asiatic-friendly times.
Anyways, ya people play it. my guild averages about 3 banes a week, with 1 sometimes 2 on the weekends.
Yeah, I rolled up a mage assassin on test for S&G's last month, and noticed a whole mess o' Korean language names, where I don't remember seeing any before.
LOL! I never said that at all. Thanks for taking my words out of context.
Many MMO's out there now can be soloed at the early levels. I soloed the newbie trash in VG rather easily, which wasn't that hard, since they didn't aggro, and largely just stood there while I attacked their buddies. Or they respawned as soon as they were looted. I also soloed the early levels in CoH/V, LOTR, WoW, Anarchy Online, DAoC, Asheron's Call,Earth & Beyond, and many other games. Soloing at the newibe levels is no big deal. *shrug*
CoH/V offers more of a challenge at those levels, IMO, especially if you choose the Science origin. Facing down rooms full of Vahzilok at the earliest levels can actually be pretty daunting if you're not careful.
The text in red made me weep a bit. God, how I miss it .
Lidane states, "at the early levels, sure" Vanguard is the most solo-friendly game on the market.
LOL! I never said that at all. Thanks for taking my words out of context.
Many MMO's out there now can be soloed at the early levels. I soloed the newbie trash in VG rather easily, which wasn't that hard, since they didn't aggro, and largely just stood there while I attacked their buddies. Or they respawned as soon as they were looted. I also soloed the early levels in CoH/V, LOTR, WoW, Anarchy Online, DAoC, Asheron's Call, Earth & Beyond, and many other games. Soloing at the newibe levels is no big deal. *shrug*
CoH/V offers more of a challenge at those levels, IMO, especially if you choose the Science origin. Facing down rooms full of Vahzilok at the earliest levels can actually be pretty daunting if you're not careful.
Then what is early levels in vanguard? Yes those yellow colored mobs don't help their friends. But as soon you get to counter redcolored ones they help their friend if their friend are in range , that range seems to be reasonable. These mobs also aggroes on you if you get close
To get to those mobs wich are lvl5 or maybe lvl6+ is that beyond early levels. And isn't it resonable that you have that easy within atleast the first few levels.
Where was you playing and to wich level, honestly?
And I'm sorry, but after spending 3+ years in CoH/V, finding any non-aggro mobs at the lowest levels is silly. From the very beginning in CoH/V, if an enemy sees you, they're going to attack. If they have friends around them, they're all going to attack you at once. If you don't pay attention to your surroundings and you wander into the aggro range of another group while fighting the first one, that second one will also attack.
I like it that way. It's fun, and really lets me test out any power combinations I'm wanting to try. Plus, it forces the player to start thinking of things like strategy and tactics at the lowest levels in the game.
A bunch of mobs standing around blankly while I kill their buddy? That's boring, and there's zero challenge in that. Feh.
Where was you playing and to wich level, honestly?
The Dark Elves, the Raki, the Varanjar, and the Half Elves were the races I played to any level, and I got past the immediate newbie yards in all of them. My highest characters were the Half Elf and the Raki, and they got to around 11 or 12. The others got to around 8 or 9.
Does VG have aggro mobs? Sure. Every game does. But they also had, in my experience, very boring newbie areas that offered nothing in the way of challenge, since the mobs just stood there while you killed them, or popped right back when you looted.
Lidane states, "at the early levels, sure" Vanguard is the most solo-friendly game on the market.
Lidane, I appreciate your making my point in which Vanguard-haters (I do not consider them haters any more but obsessed-haters) continue to view things retrospectively. In other words, in the early levels Vanguard was the most solo-friendly game on the market at its release. However, today, it is not only the most solo-friendly game in the early levels but all-levels; if this were not true, I would not be subscribed to the game. In fact, i would be bashing it.
That is 100% opinion. Facts require proof. So far ive only seen differing opinions.
See you in the dream.. The Fires from heaven, now as cold as ice. A rapid ascension tolls a heavy price.
Lidane states, "at the early levels, sure" Vanguard is the most solo-friendly game on the market.
Lidane, I appreciate your making my point in which Vanguard-haters (I do not consider them haters any more but obsessed-haters) continue to view things retrospectively. In other words, in the early levels Vanguard was the most solo-friendly game on the market at its release. However, today, it is not only the most solo-friendly game in the early levels but all-levels; if this were not true, I would not be subscribed to the game. In fact, i would be bashing it.
That is 100% opinion. Facts require proof. So far ive only seen differing opinions.
As I said, I intend to create an objective, truthful, and unbiased report of Vanguard in its current state.
However, if you need "hard" evidence, you will have to do what I did - resubscribe. It might not be financially feasible for you (or an acceptable option) but the only real way to determine whether or not the game has (or has not) improved and what it is like now. It is simply what I did, and I am astonished by how different the game is from what people (who played months ago) claim it to be. In the interest of full disclosure, a few months ago I would have bashed and condemned Vanguard for its early release and myriad problems. Nevertheless, the fact is that Vanguard is an entirely different game. I think you should be skeptical. I know I was.
Anarchyart, no one with 5753 posts, at least 5000 of which are extolling the virtues of Vanguard, has standing to tell me to get a life lol.
But see that's just it. I might praise and that is one thing, but you waste your time bashing! Either you have no life, or someone is paying you. Which is it?
Originally posted by FikusOfAhaziThat is 100% opinion. Facts require proof. So far ive only seen differing opinions.
As I said, I intend to create an objective, truthful, and unbiased report of Vanguard in its current state.
However, if you need "hard" evidence, you will have to do what I did - resubscribe. It might not be financially feasible for you (or an acceptable option) but the only real way to determine whether or not the game has (or has not) improved and what it is like now. It is simply what I did, and I am astonished by how different the game is from what people (who played months ago) claim it to be. In the interest of full disclosure, a few months ago I would have bashed and condemned Vanguard for its early release and myriad problems. Nevertheless, the fact is that Vanguard is an entirely different game. I think you should be skeptical. I know I was.
Well, they just revamped SWG so you cant solo the entire game..so hell, you may be right. Sorry, cant keep up with all of the revamps over there. As far as paying to play this game..I'll wait and see what happens with SOE and what they plan to do. I would hate to see another community destroyed...hope that doesnt happen here.
See you in the dream.. The Fires from heaven, now as cold as ice. A rapid ascension tolls a heavy price.
Someone wanna do a quick and dirty version of just what great changes have occurred since April 5th? I know Healz won't respond, since I'm on his "blocked list" since I disagreed with him back when he was a VG hater .
I'm aware they upped the XP rate again, and I've heard it's pretty fair nowadays. How does it compare to other current games? Solo? Group? etc.
I remember Discs, and others bitching that they were being nerfed out of existence, and a lot of people complaining that Sigil was overly focused on class balance when there were more pressing issues at hand.
Is rogue stealth still borked in pvp?
Helms?
Is crafting still a nightmare of complication induced frustration?
Is Diplomacy heading in the direction they originally intended, or is it still just a sidebar, useful only for crafting buffs, and lore junkies?
Ahem, getting back to the OP's topic, it's quite possible that Brad doesn't know WTF he really wants. Whatever he says may be simply an effort to articulate what cannot be articulated, frosted over with some marketing buttercream.
I'll leave it at that to see if anything combusts.
Originally posted by Poldano Ahem, getting back to the OP's topic, it's quite possible that Brad doesn't know WTF he really wants. Whatever he says may be simply an effort to articulate what cannot be articulated, frosted over with some marketing buttercream. I'll leave it at that to see if anything combusts.
No, Brad knows very well what he wants. I think it was articulated by him very well in the early days of the design process on the original forums. It's, in part, what drew a lot of us to the game in the first place(nostalgic goonery for the old days of EQ aside).
The disconnect comes partly from his overestimating the size of that audience, particularly in lieu of WoW's runaway success. Which ignorant as it may be, is now used by the money men as the metric for success. Mostly though, it's from their changing gears too many times during the development to change according to WoW, which led to the game releasing in an unfinished state, which really is what screwed them more than anything else. Well, that, and their "future proofing" the graphics engine.
Had WoW not happened, or not been the huge hit that it was, it would have allowed Sigil to continue with their original design, and poor execution aside, they'd have had a pretty successful game on their hands.
Hell, if they'd just stuck to their guns, and not tried to restructure the original design to accommodate WoW, I think they'd have had a much more solid release, and probably would have hit Brads goal of 200k pretty easily.
Ahem, getting back to the OP's topic, it's quite possible that Brad doesn't know WTF he really wants. Whatever he says may be simply an effort to articulate what cannot be articulated, frosted over with some marketing buttercream.
I'll leave it at that to see if anything combusts.
No, Brad knows very well what he wants. I think it was articulated by him very well in the early days of the design process on the original forums. It's, in part, what drew a lot of us to the game in the first place(nostalgic goonery for the old days of EQ aside).
The disconnect comes partly from his overestimating the size of that audience, particularly in lieu of WoW's runaway success. Which ignorant as it may be, is now used by the money men as the metric for success. Mostly though, it's from their changing gears too many times during the development to change according to WoW, which led to the game releasing in an unfinished state, which really is what screwed them more than anything else. Well, that, and their "future proofing" the graphics engine.
Had WoW not happened, or not been the huge hit that it was, it would have allowed Sigil to continue with their original design, and poor execution aside, they'd have had a pretty successful game on their hands.
Hell, if they'd just stuck to their guns, and not tried to restructure the original design to accommodate WoW, I think they'd have had a much more solid release, and probably would have hit Brads goal of 200k pretty easily.
So, I think you're saying that Brad knows and has always known what he really wants, but has not been doing what he really wants. I can live with that interpretation. Presumably, he has not been doing what he really wants because he needs to make money.
I've never played EQ1, or for that matter any fantasy MMO before VG. Having lived through too many lunch hours listening to the tales of EQ raiders, I was quite sure the game was not for me, so I never took it up. Similar things applied to my perception of the other fantasy MMOs. I'm playing VG because it appears to have made some changes to the original EQ model that directly addressed some of the things I didn't like. If it gets much more difficult, I know I won't play because I won't feel that I'm making satisfactory progress. If it gets much easier, I might become bored to death by it. It has lots of room to go sideways without risking my disenchantment.
I have already pointed out the lie in the first post, which is that this game is only for a "core" or a "hardcore" gamer. In fact, Vanguard is the most solo-friendly game I have yet played in 8 years of gaming.
My tendency is to believe someone who posts actual quotes from the Developer and can accurately remember the history of the hype for this game rather than someone making claims like the one above.
Are you saying Vanguard is more solo-friendly than WoW? Try to recall that WoW was derided by the old-school MMORPG community when it was first released for having such a relaxed leveling curve and being so easy to solo?
At least when WoW was released there was no argument about how it played. With Vangurd I am constantly hear conflicting information. One person says the game is X. Another person says the game is Y. And all too often those claims are in absolutes like "This is the greatest game ever created'. As if we're supposed to believe *that*.
Eventually the dust from Vanguard's hideous launch will settle and the tedious posts from Brad M will actually become readable, perhaps then the true nature of this game will finally become apparent.
Originally posted by Poldano So, I think you're saying that Brad knows and has always known what he really wants, but has not been doing what he really wants. I can live with that interpretation. Presumably, he has not been doing what he really wants because he needs to make money.
Yes and no. Two, maybe three, things tripped up McQuaid, and Sigil, as I see it. One was definitely the money, and those holding the purse strings. When they originally went into it, EQ was the current top dog with a peak of 400k odd subs. That would make Brads goal of 200k subs pretty successful. Then WoW happened, and from a financial standpoint, the MMO genre got flipped on it's ear. This forced them to have to make compromises I don't think they'd have made had WoW followed the norm for MMO's up to that point, subwise.
Secondly: Brad, while a great(or at least good) game designer, is a piss poor leader. He never should have made himself CEO of Sigil. He should have found someone trustworthy, so as to avoid Bowman's big snafu, and focused on designing the game, rather than running the company, doing PR, and designing the game, which wound up being designed by committee due to Brad having way to much on his plate.
Thirdly, and this is sort of off in personal theory land: They never should have gone with Microsoft. Between Microsoft's piss poor track record with MMO's(re:Mythica as well as holding the license to print money that would be a decent MMO version of Battletech or Shadowrun /mourn FASA). And if I had to make a wild guess, I would wager that M$ was pushing for a Vista exclusive release, which Sigil(or any dev in their right mind) would be hesitant to outright resistant to do, led to a split from M$, which required Sigil to buy out M$, and probably take a pretty unfavorable deal from the weasels at SOE to bail their ass out.
Comments
Which means?
Which means he's now placing anyone who posts something he disagrees with on his Blocked User list.
I've placed only one person on block due to what I considered to be an offensive signature and the funny part is it never worked I could still see the guys replies and posts. Wonder if they fixed that ?
My old guild had plenty of server firsts, naxx, c'thun, etc at that pace. That is a pretty casual friendly if you ask me. Being "hardcore" is WoW is rather leisurely.
I've been playing Shadowbane since release. I still play it alot.
And i can tell you right now, shadowbane is NOT, NOT solo friendly. Once you hit R2 and get kicked off noob island, you BETTER ALREADY HAVE FRIENDS.
LOL! I never said that at all. Thanks for taking my words out of context.
Many MMO's out there now can be soloed at the early levels. I soloed the newbie trash in VG rather easily, which wasn't that hard, since they didn't aggro, and largely just stood there while I attacked their buddies. Or they respawned as soon as they were looted. I also soloed the early levels in CoH/V, LOTR, WoW, Anarchy Online, DAoC, Asheron's Call, Earth & Beyond, and many other games. Soloing at the newibe levels is no big deal. *shrug*
CoH/V offers more of a challenge at those levels, IMO, especially if you choose the Science origin. Facing down rooms full of Vahzilok at the earliest levels can actually be pretty daunting if you're not careful.
PvP notwithstanding, it's a faster leveling curve than other MMOs. There may be a resurgence of people playing now that it's free, but last time I played when it was still pay to play, it was pretty well deserted on the regular servers(Played on Vengeance? Wrath, maybe? Been a long while). Test server was fairly well populated due to the even higher than normal xp and gold.
PvP notwithstanding, it's a faster leveling curve than other MMOs. There may be a resurgence of people playing now that it's free, but last time I played when it was still pay to play, it was pretty well deserted on the regular servers(Played on Vengeance? Wrath, maybe? Been a long while). Test server was fairly well populated due to the even higher than normal xp and gold.
Thats true, you'll never level faster in another game than you will in SB. And yes, quiet alot of people are playing, especially since it went free to play. Mourning and vindication are both very well populated, brailia and wrath are only so so.. Mainly due to brailia having been over run by PacRim players who perfer a real life us versus them, political game structure. the non-PC way of saying it would be, the pacRim players like to fight the north American players, but not each other ? i'll leave it at that. Redemption server has also fallen under the same situation, however Redemption was the first to fall. Infact WolfPack made redemption the official-PacRim server and set bane windows and mine windows of oppritunity to Asiatic-friendly times.
Anyways, ya people play it. my guild averages about 3 banes a week, with 1 sometimes 2 on the weekends.
Yeah, I rolled up a mage assassin on test for S&G's last month, and noticed a whole mess o' Korean language names, where I don't remember seeing any before.
S'ok, gives me someone/something to focus on.
LOL! I never said that at all. Thanks for taking my words out of context.
Many MMO's out there now can be soloed at the early levels. I soloed the newbie trash in VG rather easily, which wasn't that hard, since they didn't aggro, and largely just stood there while I attacked their buddies. Or they respawned as soon as they were looted. I also soloed the early levels in CoH/V, LOTR, WoW, Anarchy Online, DAoC, Asheron's Call, Earth & Beyond, and many other games. Soloing at the newibe levels is no big deal. *shrug*
CoH/V offers more of a challenge at those levels, IMO, especially if you choose the Science origin. Facing down rooms full of Vahzilok at the earliest levels can actually be pretty daunting if you're not careful.
Then what is early levels in vanguard? Yes those yellow colored mobs don't help their friends. But as soon you get to counter redcolored ones they help their friend if their friend are in range , that range seems to be reasonable. These mobs also aggroes on you if you get close
To get to those mobs wich are lvl5 or maybe lvl6+ is that beyond early levels. And isn't it resonable that you have that easy within atleast the first few levels.
Where was you playing and to wich level, honestly?
I'm so broke. I can't even pay attention.
"You have the right not to be killed"
Early levels, for me = 1-10
And I'm sorry, but after spending 3+ years in CoH/V, finding any non-aggro mobs at the lowest levels is silly. From the very beginning in CoH/V, if an enemy sees you, they're going to attack. If they have friends around them, they're all going to attack you at once. If you don't pay attention to your surroundings and you wander into the aggro range of another group while fighting the first one, that second one will also attack.
I like it that way. It's fun, and really lets me test out any power combinations I'm wanting to try. Plus, it forces the player to start thinking of things like strategy and tactics at the lowest levels in the game.
A bunch of mobs standing around blankly while I kill their buddy? That's boring, and there's zero challenge in that. Feh.
The Dark Elves, the Raki, the Varanjar, and the Half Elves were the races I played to any level, and I got past the immediate newbie yards in all of them. My highest characters were the Half Elf and the Raki, and they got to around 11 or 12. The others got to around 8 or 9.
Does VG have aggro mobs? Sure. Every game does. But they also had, in my experience, very boring newbie areas that offered nothing in the way of challenge, since the mobs just stood there while you killed them, or popped right back when you looted.
That is 100% opinion. Facts require proof. So far ive only seen differing opinions.
See you in the dream..
The Fires from heaven, now as cold as ice. A rapid ascension tolls a heavy price.
That is 100% opinion. Facts require proof. So far ive only seen differing opinions.
As I said, I intend to create an objective, truthful, and unbiased report of Vanguard in its current state.
However, if you need "hard" evidence, you will have to do what I did - resubscribe. It might not be financially feasible for you (or an acceptable option) but the only real way to determine whether or not the game has (or has not) improved and what it is like now. It is simply what I did, and I am astonished by how different the game is from what people (who played months ago) claim it to be. In the interest of full disclosure, a few months ago I would have bashed and condemned Vanguard for its early release and myriad problems. Nevertheless, the fact is that Vanguard is an entirely different game. I think you should be skeptical. I know I was.
But see that's just it. I might praise and that is one thing, but you waste your time bashing! Either you have no life, or someone is paying you. Which is it?
Core player does not have a $ 500 computer.
I dare anyone to prove me wrong.
this would explain the differences in the vision and the reality of the game and it would also explain why this game misses its mark with me.
When I played this game in late beta there was no lore, no back story, no intro to the world. it was hi and welcome to the grind fest.
Brad's vision of acore gamer is seen through beer goggles if he thinks that tedium = hardcore anyway.
Everyone knows. It was my impression as well.
I believe this is why an objective, truthful, and unbiased report on the current state of Vanguard is desperately needed.
As I said, I intend to create an objective, truthful, and unbiased report of Vanguard in its current state.
However, if you need "hard" evidence, you will have to do what I did - resubscribe. It might not be financially feasible for you (or an acceptable option) but the only real way to determine whether or not the game has (or has not) improved and what it is like now. It is simply what I did, and I am astonished by how different the game is from what people (who played months ago) claim it to be. In the interest of full disclosure, a few months ago I would have bashed and condemned Vanguard for its early release and myriad problems. Nevertheless, the fact is that Vanguard is an entirely different game. I think you should be skeptical. I know I was.
Well, they just revamped SWG so you cant solo the entire game..so hell, you may be right. Sorry, cant keep up with all of the revamps over there. As far as paying to play this game..I'll wait and see what happens with SOE and what they plan to do. I would hate to see another community destroyed...hope that doesnt happen here.
See you in the dream..
The Fires from heaven, now as cold as ice. A rapid ascension tolls a heavy price.
Ok, I'll bite.
Someone wanna do a quick and dirty version of just what great changes have occurred since April 5th? I know Healz won't respond, since I'm on his "blocked list" since I disagreed with him back when he was a VG hater
.
I'm aware they upped the XP rate again, and I've heard it's pretty fair nowadays. How does it compare to other current games? Solo? Group? etc.
I remember Discs, and others bitching that they were being nerfed out of existence, and a lot of people complaining that Sigil was overly focused on class balance when there were more pressing issues at hand.
Is rogue stealth still borked in pvp?
Helms?
Is crafting still a nightmare of complication induced frustration?
Is Diplomacy heading in the direction they originally intended, or is it still just a sidebar, useful only for crafting buffs, and lore junkies?
more ?'s as I think of them.
Ahem, getting back to the OP's topic, it's quite possible that Brad doesn't know WTF he really wants. Whatever he says may be simply an effort to articulate what cannot be articulated, frosted over with some marketing buttercream.
I'll leave it at that to see if anything combusts.
No, Brad knows very well what he wants. I think it was articulated by him very well in the early days of the design process on the original forums. It's, in part, what drew a lot of us to the game in the first place(nostalgic goonery for the old days of EQ aside).
The disconnect comes partly from his overestimating the size of that audience, particularly in lieu of WoW's runaway success. Which ignorant as it may be, is now used by the money men as the metric for success. Mostly though, it's from their changing gears too many times during the development to change according to WoW, which led to the game releasing in an unfinished state, which really is what screwed them more than anything else. Well, that, and their "future proofing" the graphics engine.
Had WoW not happened, or not been the huge hit that it was, it would have allowed Sigil to continue with their original design, and poor execution aside, they'd have had a pretty successful game on their hands.
Hell, if they'd just stuck to their guns, and not tried to restructure the original design to accommodate WoW, I think they'd have had a much more solid release, and probably would have hit Brads goal of 200k pretty easily.
No, Brad knows very well what he wants. I think it was articulated by him very well in the early days of the design process on the original forums. It's, in part, what drew a lot of us to the game in the first place(nostalgic goonery for the old days of EQ aside).
The disconnect comes partly from his overestimating the size of that audience, particularly in lieu of WoW's runaway success. Which ignorant as it may be, is now used by the money men as the metric for success. Mostly though, it's from their changing gears too many times during the development to change according to WoW, which led to the game releasing in an unfinished state, which really is what screwed them more than anything else. Well, that, and their "future proofing" the graphics engine.
Had WoW not happened, or not been the huge hit that it was, it would have allowed Sigil to continue with their original design, and poor execution aside, they'd have had a pretty successful game on their hands.
Hell, if they'd just stuck to their guns, and not tried to restructure the original design to accommodate WoW, I think they'd have had a much more solid release, and probably would have hit Brads goal of 200k pretty easily.
So, I think you're saying that Brad knows and has always known what he really wants, but has not been doing what he really wants. I can live with that interpretation. Presumably, he has not been doing what he really wants because he needs to make money.
I've never played EQ1, or for that matter any fantasy MMO before VG. Having lived through too many lunch hours listening to the tales of EQ raiders, I was quite sure the game was not for me, so I never took it up. Similar things applied to my perception of the other fantasy MMOs. I'm playing VG because it appears to have made some changes to the original EQ model that directly addressed some of the things I didn't like. If it gets much more difficult, I know I won't play because I won't feel that I'm making satisfactory progress. If it gets much easier, I might become bored to death by it. It has lots of room to go sideways without risking my disenchantment.
My tendency is to believe someone who posts actual quotes from the Developer and can accurately remember the history of the hype for this game rather than someone making claims like the one above.
Are you saying Vanguard is more solo-friendly than WoW? Try to recall that WoW was derided by the old-school MMORPG community when it was first released for having such a relaxed leveling curve and being so easy to solo?
At least when WoW was released there was no argument about how it played. With Vangurd I am constantly hear conflicting information. One person says the game is X. Another person says the game is Y. And all too often those claims are in absolutes like "This is the greatest game ever created'. As if we're supposed to believe *that*.
Eventually the dust from Vanguard's hideous launch will settle and the tedious posts from Brad M will actually become readable, perhaps then the true nature of this game will finally become apparent.
Yes and no. Two, maybe three, things tripped up McQuaid, and Sigil, as I see it. One was definitely the money, and those holding the purse strings. When they originally went into it, EQ was the current top dog with a peak of 400k odd subs. That would make Brads goal of 200k subs pretty successful. Then WoW happened, and from a financial standpoint, the MMO genre got flipped on it's ear. This forced them to have to make compromises I don't think they'd have made had WoW followed the norm for MMO's up to that point, subwise.
Secondly: Brad, while a great(or at least good) game designer, is a piss poor leader. He never should have made himself CEO of Sigil. He should have found someone trustworthy, so as to avoid Bowman's big snafu, and focused on designing the game, rather than running the company, doing PR, and designing the game, which wound up being designed by committee due to Brad having way to much on his plate.
Thirdly, and this is sort of off in personal theory land: They never should have gone with Microsoft. Between Microsoft's piss poor track record with MMO's(re:Mythica as well as holding the license to print money that would be a decent MMO version of Battletech or Shadowrun /mourn FASA). And if I had to make a wild guess, I would wager that M$ was pushing for a Vista exclusive release, which Sigil(or any dev in their right mind) would be hesitant to outright resistant to do, led to a split from M$, which required Sigil to buy out M$, and probably take a pretty unfavorable deal from the weasels at SOE to bail their ass out.