Wow you wouldn't believe the storm that the "rested xp" implementation is raising at the Vanguard forums. Seems all the "hardcore" players are threating to leave the game if it's changed in anyway as to attract more subscribes. What a freaking joke. LOL ! They would rather have Vanguard shutdown so no one could play it then to see changes made to increase subscriber numbers so that it can turn a profit. Talk about a bunch of whinny and selfish players.
Ignoring the attempted flame-bait... what is rested experience?
Same as EQ2 vitality. WoW has something similar.
You start out with 100% rested xp. Whenever you do something that gives you xp an amount will be substracted from your resting xp until its 0. Once at zero you gain half of the xp. Better to rest then and do something else.
Its the old glas half full, half empty disscusion. Some say double xp (as long as you have rested xp bonus) is the evil. In EQ2 it works perfect and does slow down people.
The only chances to save Vanguard is to fix the fucking performances issues which keep "core" players away (It s not the game itself).
For the most part, I have to agree with this. Putting XP back on my machine helped a lot but as soon as things get busy. *pop* I'm back to 10FPS. Why would I play Vanguard when I can run EQ2 on close to full settings if they then make Vanguard like EQ2? There is no logic in that.
Although I do think this probably the new MMORPG crowed have with getting to the high levels is just plain stupid and missing most of the point of A MMORPG.
I thought Brad McQuaid was the worst enemy of Vanguard. Now that he's out of the picture, hopefully SOE can whip this game into shape and make it playable.
I thought Brad McQuaid was the worst enemy of Vanguard. Now that he's out of the picture, hopefully SOE can whip this game into shape and make it playable.
Maybe , i dont know. maybe he is just a victim too.
I never cared for vanguard. Been on the old forums for a while and i can tell you that this was the place with the most completely crazy people on this planet. So i left and didnt care for vanguard anymore. Two weeks or so before launch i stumbled over a text from McQuaid on the net. Its was very different to what completely nuts fans told about the game. Up today i have no reason to not belief what Mcquaid sayed back then in this text. All in game is as he described it...
Anyone seen the move "The fan" or remembers the crowd of girls who wanted to comit suicide when take that split up ?
Wow you wouldn't believe the storm that the "rested xp" implementation is raising at the Vanguard forums. Seems all the "hardcore" players are threating to leave the game if it's changed in anyway as to attract more subscribes. What a freaking joke. LOL ! They would rather have Vanguard shutdown so no one could play it then to see changes made to increase subscriber numbers so that it can turn a profit. Talk about a bunch of whinny and selfish players.
Ignoring the attempted flame-bait... what is rested experience?
Rested experience is when they increase the experience rate for people who are not able to play
as often as their friends so that they have an easier time catching up. When the players are not
logged on, they are given rested experience. When you do log back on, the amount of experience
you gain from kills is doubled until the rested experience is exhausted, at which time you revert to
normal experience. Depending on implementation, there may or may not be a cap on the amount
of rested experience one may accumulate (for example one level worth of experience).
If they want more people to sub, why are they not answering my emails to support? I want back in the game but my email account is gone and I can't remember my password. Contacted support several times and no reply. Makes me mad....I want back in and can't get there.
I know there is a phone number for customer support, my best help has come from that, not email. But I'm at work and don't have it. I was never on hold more that 10 minutes... pretty responsive.
Wow you wouldn't believe the storm that the "rested xp" implementation is raising at the Vanguard forums. Seems all the "hardcore" players are threating to leave the game if it's changed in anyway as to attract more subscribes. What a freaking joke. LOL ! They would rather have Vanguard shutdown so no one could play it then to see changes made to increase subscriber numbers so that it can turn a profit. Talk about a bunch of whinny and selfish players.
Ignoring the attempted flame-bait... what is rested experience?
Rested experience is when they increase the experience rate for people who are not able to play
as often as their friends so that they have an easier time catching up. When the players are not
logged on, they are given rested experience. When you do log back on, the amount of experience
you gain from kills is doubled until the rested experience is exhausted, at which time you revert to
normal experience. Depending on implementation, there may or may not be a cap on the amount
of rested experience one may accumulate (for example one level worth of experience).
Thanks, gotcha. I played EQ2 and now I remember how it worked. It will be interesting to see how it's applied to diplomacy. I think the adventuring sphere is very easy to level in, but diplomacy can be a very tough haul outside of quests and writs.
I can see the more hardcore players not wanting 'rested' exp, and trying to cater to more than one master rarely works well in an MMORPG game. You cannot create a game that appeals to everyone.....
True but don't expect to have your servers on for very long if you only go for niche audience of players. Vangaurd is a perfect is example of what happens when you only cater to minority of players.
Now that extremist minority is going to try to block any attempt to increase subscription numbers to get VG out of the red and into the black financially speaking. Some people forget that money is the motivating and key factor for all MMO ventures to succeed.
Exactly. And this is also why Ferrarris, VW Bugs, '67 Mustangs, and every other car that fits a 'niche' audience should either be discontinued or destroyed: Honda Civics for everyone. McDonald has truly paved the way to success by its appeal to the masses, doesn't the 4 Seasons resteraunt know that it is doomed to financial failure?
The above logic is so entirely flawed, it is laughable. There are many ways to make money in business. Some choose to go for mass appeal, i.e. Wal-Mart. Others, also successful and lucrative (i.e. J Crew), choose to make money off the niche that the mass market is losing. This is a basic concept of business 101. So, if this is the paper you are turning in, I'm afraid, you get an 'F'.
Vanguard could easily succeed by drawing a segment of the mmo audience that isn't being served by the Wal-Mart mmo's. With the over saturation in the current market, and the impending release of further mmo's, Vanguard's best chance of success is creating a game that stands apart from every other, and that means perfecting the systems already in place, adding cohesion to the lore, performance enhancement, original challenging content and never ever copying something that will drive it further into an oversaturated mass appeal audience.
In addition, it is common knowledge that Vanguard failed because of performance issues and game-breaking bugs - the people who think that Vanguard failed mainly due to its gameplay and target audience are the minorty. The MAJORITY of people just want them to fix performance, eradicate bugs and add more content. So, by your very own logic, if they follow your advice, they will be catering to a 'niche' minority.
But mind you, this is only a well thought out reasoned 'guess' at what the future holds. If you have a lock on seeing the future, I suggest you use it in more lucrative ways than applying it to computer game forums.
So explain to me how Vangaurd will make money if it continues to appeal to a very few hardcore group players???
First, Vanguard, isn't solely designed to cater to 'a very few hardcore group of players'. There is a ton of content for solo work in this game and can be played in a casual way. The current review of Vanguard in fact states that this gamewould be good for casual play but NOT for hardcore play. So clinging to your misinterpretation of the games design is the first thing to get out of the way. You keep trying to boil this down to 'casual' vs. 'hardcore', and this isn't actually the issue. You can be a casual gamer and still not like WoW's style of gameplay. I know its hard for your to wrap your mind around, but it is true. I never said that Vanguard needs to cater to 'hardcore' players, that was you. I said they needed to appeal to a different type of gamer than the ones who already have an oversaturated market. Again, this is basic business 101. Don't try to tap into a oversaturated market when there is an untapped market sitting at your feet.
Second, your assumption is that every single person who is in Vanguard's target demographic is actually playing the game. This isn't true at all. Vanguard's falling subscription rates have to do with the performance issues and bugs, not with the gameplay. Therefore, there are a number of people in Vanguard's target audience who stopped because of bugs and performance, not because they wanted a game that appealed to a mass audience. Are you really suggesting that there are only 40k total people who don't want something other than a game that appeals to the lowest common demoninator? This is idiotic. Again it goes back to basic business 101; Wal-Mart will appeal to most people. There will always, always, always be a percentage of the population that will never support Wal-Mart. In a capitalist society, the smart business targets that demographic and makes money off them. This is so basic to U.S. business history and capitalist philosophy that you calling it 'idiotic' is just funny.
So unless the few remaining group of hardcore players are willing to shell out a few hundred dollars a month for this game I don't see how your illogical way of think adds up to "dollars and sense".
Again, just because you assume something to be true, doesn't make it true. I simply stated that Vanguard had a better chance of succeeding if they fixed the game and drew in the untapped market that is tired of mass appeal games, which they weren't able to draw initially because the game was unfinished. You are talking about throwing the baby out with the bathwater. Now, if the game were optimized and polished and still didn't have a profitable player base, that would be the time to look at ways of appealing to a wider audience. But until the game is fixed, we simply don't know if it is necessary.
If anything is flawed it's your weak attempt to vainly grasp at straws in order to justify the continued failure of Vangaurd and somehow assert the idea that catering to hardcore players was a success for Vanguard and Sigil.
I am not sure how explaining basic business philosophy is a weak attempt to vainly grasp at straws. If you tried to make me feel like I don't know what I'm talking about, you failed. I have an MBA, working on my PhD currently, I am focusing my studies on the Tech industry, what exactly are your credentials?
Oh and last I checked Ferrari wasn't hemorrhaging money left and right like Sigl and Vanguard but there cars cost an arma and a leg. VW Bugs were mass produced and sold enough models to turn a profit and were eventually brought back in newly updated and polished streamlined model. Which was also mass produced and made money. 1967 Mustangs were extremely successful but the model and were mass produced at one point but are no longer produced by Ford hence the 67 before it as in 1967.
So hold on, is your argument that Vanguard was not mass produced or is it that it targets a 'niche' audience. Because those are two different things. Believe it or not Einstein, something can be mass produced IN ORDER to appeal to a niche audience and then make money, for example, all those niche cars....so your attempt to prove me wrong, proved my point, appealing to a nich audience as all those cars do, can make money.
Or are you really trying to say that there are just as many Ferrarri, Mustang and VW Bug owners as there are Honda Civic owners, simply because all of them were mass produced?
If anyone with a shred of intelligence were to think through your statements and compare it to the complete and utter failure of Vangaurd they would realize how out of touch you are with reality.
This is such an immature way of trying to make me feel bad. You said Vanguard failed because it doesn't appeal to a mass audience, I say it failed because it has game-breaking bugs and performance issues.....the weight of public opinion is on my side, are you sure I am the one who is out of touch?
All those cars and car companies made tons of cash which you cannot say is the same for Vangaurd or Sigil. Your post only shows that you have idea about what the hell you are talking about period.
When did I ever say Vanguard made tons of money? I said it failed. I just think it failed for different reasons than you. And I think it has a better chance of succeeding by appealing to a nich audience rather than trying to steal from an oversaturated market of mass appeal mmo's. It cannot appeal to the niche audience however, until the game works. Get some reading comprehension because you are exposing yourself as the one who doesn't have an idea about what the hell you are talking about period.
Thankfully SOE realizes and understands what needs to be done in order to keep this game afloat and gain new subscriptions for it. The only sad part is that it will be to little to late because of all the new MMO's which will be launching soon.
So wait.....you just said exactly what I was saying. You are now saying that SOE will fail because they are going to make a mass appeal game out of Vanguard and put it into an oversaturated market. Which is exactly why I said they should target an mmo player that isn't satisfied with a mass appeal game.
You need to pick a side and stay there, because you are directly stating that SOE SHOULD make the game mass appeal so that it can fail anyway due to the oversaturated market........and you are saying that I am the one without business sense? You would knowingly destroy Vanguard instead of thinking of alternative business models to ensure longevity.
SOE is going to have a very hard up hill battle in order to gain enough subscribers to maintain this title in a sea of newly released MMO's.
Exactly, which is why they shouldn't target the same audience that all those games appeal too......for disagreeing with me, you sure do prove my point.
SOE is going to have a very hard up hill battle in order to gain enough subscribers to maintain this title in a sea of newly released MMO's. Really ? What sea of newly released MMO's ? All games i see in the queue are maybe good games, but have a very specialized gameplay. WAR is a PvP game and is targeting RvR. I dont say this game wont be a good one, but i have problems to see the true mmo content. AoC is again PvP targeting GvG. Basically its EvE in Hyperborea, its about gaining space and raws to build defence or siege equipment. Again most probably a good game, but i cant see the true mmo content.
Exactly, which is why they shouldn't target the same audience that all those games appeal too......for disagreeing with me, you sure do prove my point.
That Fire of Heaven guild that wants everyone to think they are "uber" (I even think they are on "ubernetworks," I cannot make this stuff up) is a strange target audience.
One, they are a minority.
Two, they piss people off.
Three, see Two.
Four, they are never happy with any game; it is always too "carebear" or something.
Five, they hurt communities in-game and out-of-game.
Six, no one likes "uber" guilds; they do not even like each other, often.
----- WoW and fast food = commercial successes. I neither play WoW nor eat fast food.
That Fire of Heaven guild that wants everyone to think they are "uber" (I even think they are on "ubernetworks," I cannot make this stuff up) is a strange target audience.
One, they are a minority.
Two, they piss people off.
Three, see Two.
Four, they are never happy with any game; it is always too "carebear" or something.
Five, they hurt communities in-game and out-of-game.
Six, no one likes "uber" guilds; they do not even like each other, often.
If you want a "hardcore" game, go play EVE. Vanguard had potential, but we all know what happened next. From here on SOE will be only abut trying to turn a lame duck into a viable product, and they will do whatever they feel they need to do in order to achieve that. You only need to look at the NGE to know that where SOE are concerned, all bets are off - permanently. I hope that they do make Vanguard more fun, better combat animations, mounted combat, no more of that stupid "crash-to-desktop-die-and-lose-hours-of-xp" gameplay. Personally I hope that crafting is not made easier, they should learn from EVE - you do not have to make all parts of the game equally accessible and "easy". But I expect they will eventually go EQII on crafting (i.e. keep making it easier and less valuable than raid items).
Ah well, we shall see. Unless WAR comes out before they are done changing things, because then no-one will be looking anyway.
Comments
Same as EQ2 vitality. WoW has something similar.Ignoring the attempted flame-bait... what is rested experience?
You start out with 100% rested xp. Whenever you do something that gives you xp an amount will be substracted from your resting xp until its 0. Once at zero you gain half of the xp. Better to rest then and do something else.
Its the old glas half full, half empty disscusion. Some say double xp (as long as you have rested xp bonus) is the evil. In EQ2 it works perfect and does slow down people.
For the most part, I have to agree with this. Putting XP back on my machine helped a lot but as soon as things get busy. *pop* I'm back to 10FPS. Why would I play Vanguard when I can run EQ2 on close to full settings if they then make Vanguard like EQ2? There is no logic in that.
Although I do think this probably the new MMORPG crowed have with getting to the high levels is just plain stupid and missing most of the point of A MMORPG.
I thought Brad McQuaid was the worst enemy of Vanguard. Now that he's out of the picture, hopefully SOE can whip this game into shape and make it playable.
If they want more people to sub, why are they not answering my emails to support?
I want back in the game but my email account is gone and I can't remember my password. Contacted support several times and no reply.
Makes me mad....I want back in and can't get there.
I never cared for vanguard. Been on the old forums for a while and i can tell you that this was the place with the most completely crazy people on this planet. So i left and didnt care for vanguard anymore. Two weeks or so before launch i stumbled over a text from McQuaid on the net. Its was very different to what completely nuts fans told about the game. Up today i have no reason to not belief what Mcquaid sayed back then in this text. All in game is as he described it...
Anyone seen the move "The fan" or remembers the crowd of girls who wanted to comit suicide when take that split up ?
Ignoring the attempted flame-bait... what is rested experience?
Rested experience is when they increase the experience rate for people who are not able to play
as often as their friends so that they have an easier time catching up. When the players are not
logged on, they are given rested experience. When you do log back on, the amount of experience
you gain from kills is doubled until the rested experience is exhausted, at which time you revert to
normal experience. Depending on implementation, there may or may not be a cap on the amount
of rested experience one may accumulate (for example one level worth of experience).
Ignoring the attempted flame-bait... what is rested experience?
Rested experience is when they increase the experience rate for people who are not able to play
as often as their friends so that they have an easier time catching up. When the players are not
logged on, they are given rested experience. When you do log back on, the amount of experience
you gain from kills is doubled until the rested experience is exhausted, at which time you revert to
normal experience. Depending on implementation, there may or may not be a cap on the amount
of rested experience one may accumulate (for example one level worth of experience).
Thanks, gotcha. I played EQ2 and now I remember how it worked. It will be interesting to see how it's applied to diplomacy. I think the adventuring sphere is very easy to level in, but diplomacy can be a very tough haul outside of quests and writs.
True but don't expect to have your servers on for very long if you only go for niche audience of players. Vangaurd is a perfect is example of what happens when you only cater to minority of players.
Now that extremist minority is going to try to block any attempt to increase subscription numbers to get VG out of the red and into the black financially speaking. Some people forget that money is the motivating and key factor for all MMO ventures to succeed.
Exactly. And this is also why Ferrarris, VW Bugs, '67 Mustangs, and every other car that fits a 'niche' audience should either be discontinued or destroyed: Honda Civics for everyone. McDonald has truly paved the way to success by its appeal to the masses, doesn't the 4 Seasons resteraunt know that it is doomed to financial failure?
The above logic is so entirely flawed, it is laughable. There are many ways to make money in business. Some choose to go for mass appeal, i.e. Wal-Mart. Others, also successful and lucrative (i.e. J Crew), choose to make money off the niche that the mass market is losing. This is a basic concept of business 101. So, if this is the paper you are turning in, I'm afraid, you get an 'F'.
Vanguard could easily succeed by drawing a segment of the mmo audience that isn't being served by the Wal-Mart mmo's. With the over saturation in the current market, and the impending release of further mmo's, Vanguard's best chance of success is creating a game that stands apart from every other, and that means perfecting the systems already in place, adding cohesion to the lore, performance enhancement, original challenging content and never ever copying something that will drive it further into an oversaturated mass appeal audience.
In addition, it is common knowledge that Vanguard failed because of performance issues and game-breaking bugs - the people who think that Vanguard failed mainly due to its gameplay and target audience are the minorty. The MAJORITY of people just want them to fix performance, eradicate bugs and add more content. So, by your very own logic, if they follow your advice, they will be catering to a 'niche' minority.
But mind you, this is only a well thought out reasoned 'guess' at what the future holds. If you have a lock on seeing the future, I suggest you use it in more lucrative ways than applying it to computer game forums.
So explain to me how Vangaurd will make money if it continues to appeal to a very few hardcore group players???
First, Vanguard, isn't solely designed to cater to 'a very few hardcore group of players'. There is a ton of content for solo work in this game and can be played in a casual way. The current review of Vanguard in fact states that this game would be good for casual play but NOT for hardcore play. So clinging to your misinterpretation of the games design is the first thing to get out of the way. You keep trying to boil this down to 'casual' vs. 'hardcore', and this isn't actually the issue. You can be a casual gamer and still not like WoW's style of gameplay. I know its hard for your to wrap your mind around, but it is true. I never said that Vanguard needs to cater to 'hardcore' players, that was you. I said they needed to appeal to a different type of gamer than the ones who already have an oversaturated market. Again, this is basic business 101. Don't try to tap into a oversaturated market when there is an untapped market sitting at your feet.
Second, your assumption is that every single person who is in Vanguard's target demographic is actually playing the game. This isn't true at all. Vanguard's falling subscription rates have to do with the performance issues and bugs, not with the gameplay. Therefore, there are a number of people in Vanguard's target audience who stopped because of bugs and performance, not because they wanted a game that appealed to a mass audience. Are you really suggesting that there are only 40k total people who don't want something other than a game that appeals to the lowest common demoninator? This is idiotic. Again it goes back to basic business 101; Wal-Mart will appeal to most people. There will always, always, always be a percentage of the population that will never support Wal-Mart. In a capitalist society, the smart business targets that demographic and makes money off them. This is so basic to U.S. business history and capitalist philosophy that you calling it 'idiotic' is just funny.
So unless the few remaining group of hardcore players are willing to shell out a few hundred dollars a month for this game I don't see how your illogical way of think adds up to "dollars and sense".
Again, just because you assume something to be true, doesn't make it true. I simply stated that Vanguard had a better chance of succeeding if they fixed the game and drew in the untapped market that is tired of mass appeal games, which they weren't able to draw initially because the game was unfinished. You are talking about throwing the baby out with the bathwater. Now, if the game were optimized and polished and still didn't have a profitable player base, that would be the time to look at ways of appealing to a wider audience. But until the game is fixed, we simply don't know if it is necessary.
If anything is flawed it's your weak attempt to vainly grasp at straws in order to justify the continued failure of Vangaurd and somehow assert the idea that catering to hardcore players was a success for Vanguard and Sigil.
I am not sure how explaining basic business philosophy is a weak attempt to vainly grasp at straws. If you tried to make me feel like I don't know what I'm talking about, you failed. I have an MBA, working on my PhD currently, I am focusing my studies on the Tech industry, what exactly are your credentials?
Oh and last I checked Ferrari wasn't hemorrhaging money left and right like Sigl and Vanguard but there cars cost an arma and a leg. VW Bugs were mass produced and sold enough models to turn a profit and were eventually brought back in newly updated and polished streamlined model. Which was also mass produced and made money. 1967 Mustangs were extremely successful but the model and were mass produced at one point but are no longer produced by Ford hence the 67 before it as in 1967.
So hold on, is your argument that Vanguard was not mass produced or is it that it targets a 'niche' audience. Because those are two different things. Believe it or not Einstein, something can be mass produced IN ORDER to appeal to a niche audience and then make money, for example, all those niche cars....so your attempt to prove me wrong, proved my point, appealing to a nich audience as all those cars do, can make money.
Or are you really trying to say that there are just as many Ferrarri, Mustang and VW Bug owners as there are Honda Civic owners, simply because all of them were mass produced?
If anyone with a shred of intelligence were to think through your statements and compare it to the complete and utter failure of Vangaurd they would realize how out of touch you are with reality.
This is such an immature way of trying to make me feel bad. You said Vanguard failed because it doesn't appeal to a mass audience, I say it failed because it has game-breaking bugs and performance issues.....the weight of public opinion is on my side, are you sure I am the one who is out of touch?
All those cars and car companies made tons of cash which you cannot say is the same for Vangaurd or Sigil. Your post only shows that you have idea about what the hell you are talking about period.
When did I ever say Vanguard made tons of money? I said it failed. I just think it failed for different reasons than you. And I think it has a better chance of succeeding by appealing to a nich audience rather than trying to steal from an oversaturated market of mass appeal mmo's. It cannot appeal to the niche audience however, until the game works. Get some reading comprehension because you are exposing yourself as the one who doesn't have an idea about what the hell you are talking about period.
Thankfully SOE realizes and understands what needs to be done in order to keep this game afloat and gain new subscriptions for it. The only sad part is that it will be to little to late because of all the new MMO's which will be launching soon.
So wait.....you just said exactly what I was saying. You are now saying that SOE will fail because they are going to make a mass appeal game out of Vanguard and put it into an oversaturated market. Which is exactly why I said they should target an mmo player that isn't satisfied with a mass appeal game.
You need to pick a side and stay there, because you are directly stating that SOE SHOULD make the game mass appeal so that it can fail anyway due to the oversaturated market........and you are saying that I am the one without business sense? You would knowingly destroy Vanguard instead of thinking of alternative business models to ensure longevity.
SOE is going to have a very hard up hill battle in order to gain enough subscribers to maintain this title in a sea of newly released MMO's.
Exactly, which is why they shouldn't target the same audience that all those games appeal too......for disagreeing with me, you sure do prove my point.
Well, I think everyone is right.
That Fire of Heaven guild that wants everyone to think they are "uber" (I even think they are on "ubernetworks," I cannot make this stuff up) is a strange target audience.
One, they are a minority.
Two, they piss people off.
Three, see Two.
Four, they are never happy with any game; it is always too "carebear" or something.
Five, they hurt communities in-game and out-of-game.
Six, no one likes "uber" guilds; they do not even like each other, often.
-----
WoW and fast food = commercial successes.
I neither play WoW nor eat fast food.
If you want a "hardcore" game, go play EVE. Vanguard had potential, but we all know what happened next. From here on SOE will be only abut trying to turn a lame duck into a viable product, and they will do whatever they feel they need to do in order to achieve that. You only need to look at the NGE to know that where SOE are concerned, all bets are off - permanently. I hope that they do make Vanguard more fun, better combat animations, mounted combat, no more of that stupid "crash-to-desktop-die-and-lose-hours-of-xp" gameplay. Personally I hope that crafting is not made easier, they should learn from EVE - you do not have to make all parts of the game equally accessible and "easy". But I expect they will eventually go EQII on crafting (i.e. keep making it easier and less valuable than raid items).
Ah well, we shall see. Unless WAR comes out before they are done changing things, because then no-one will be looking anyway.