Do you even read what you're posting? How I should "behave in the world", are you serious? Move forward? Just because you and your followers (both of them) are calling for the game to die, because you and your followers (both of them) don't like it, doesn't mean I would have to move forward.
Which I have no intention of doing by the way- I'll continue playing and I'll continue to like it, and many others with me. You're the one who's a fool if you think you can force your opinion on anyone but yourself. You're also a troll. Enjoy your lunch.
To be honest i am not really concerned about Vanguard as it is already out. And i have never owned or played it.
I am speaking in general, hence the words like World and Moving forward.
I am just saying that we, you and me, and any other person that plays these games, need to think about not buying games that are low in quality so that we send a clear message to Producers, can you get that around your thick head?!?
I am just saying that we, you and me, and any other person that plays these games, need to think about not buying games that are low in quality so that we send a clear message to Producers, can you get that around your thick head?!? PS: what do you mean i am a troll?
So you basically think that producers and developers will release unfinished games because Vanguard did that? And the only chance to tell them not to do that is to convince those 30.000 subs vanguard has to cancel their subscribtion?
A few people should stop posting here. You make a grown up laugh to hard.
Elikal if this isnt your game it cant be helped. But thats no reason to let it die. There are many more people in game who have problems with the cons and the aggro and the "when to run". Thats not a reason to let a game die. I dont have any problem with it, its easy for me and easy for a lot of others.
Let's get this straight-- at this point, there are only three things that will kill Vanguard outright:
1. SOE deciding the game is no longer profitable for them and pulling the plug.
2. Some sort of major patch and/or update that drives a majority of the remaining playerbase away. It would have to be something really drastic, since the folks playing have shown their loyalty to VG by sticking with it despite all of the problems the game has had so far.
3. A new MMO somewhere down the line that offers a similar experience to Vanguard but with a more polished, stable client, and a more compelling world.
That's pretty much it. All the threads in the world calling for the game's demise don't mean squat if SOE still sees what they consider enough income from subscriptions to keep it afloat and if there are still people willing to pay to play despite any and all flaws and issues that remain.
It's funny, I hadn't thought about Vanguard for Months, then I read this thread and decided to try it for a laugh. I'm quite enjoying it to be honest. Some starting areas are much much more fun than others, which makes your 'first impression' a bit of a gamble I suppose.
Originally posted by Elikal It must happen. Only if we let it die, the lesson is learned. I had my entries and breaks, but now, after server merge, I came back a third time. VG has it qualities, no doubt. But all in all its cumbersome, difficult, deadly and dull. I still spent about 60% of my time SEEKING things instead of having fun, I still die waaay too fast and often compared to medium difficulty games like EQ2 ( NO I DONT PLAY WOW!) and still its difficult to find a group (not because of lack of players, but those who are in only group with friends) asf. Really, VG has qualities, but altogether its so unbelievable cumbersome, EACH damn time I feel, hey lets resub and see how VG has evolved after some time I feel intolerable levels for frustration. When I was stuck in some damn curtain of doom today (aka bug) and died because of the uber fast repop I just decided this was my thrid and last try. VG deserves to die. Its a lesson devs must learn, the painful way, as I learned in this thrice damned excuse for a game. >< You may write athousand times I am stupid, whatever. I think I am as good or as bad as most players, and years of MMO experience have shown ME, what I am capable of, which is all I need to know. The unwelcoming nature of the game is just too much.
Personally I think VG is a great game and getting better with each update. Bugs wise, none of them stop me playing the game (and I see very few bugs these days) and CTD are a thing of the past for me after I patch Vista, so it wasn't even VGs fault.
Letting it die will only teach game designers the lesson that if its not like WoW, it wont sell and people will hate it.
Now playing: VG (after a long break from MMORPGS) Played for more than a month: Darkfall online, Vanguard SOH, Everquest, Horizons, WoW, SWG, Everquest II, Eve
To be honest i am not really concerned about Vanguard as it is already out. And i have never owned or played it. I am speaking in general, hence the words like World and Moving forward. I am just saying that we, you and me, and any other person that plays these games, need to think about not buying games that are low in quality so that we send a clear message to Producers, can you get that around your thick head?!? PS: what do you mean i am a troll?
Becouse you dislike the game means poeple have to stop playing? What if poeple enjoy playing it? Who are you to judge whatever an game clasifies as "low in quality" unless you actualy did worked at the QA department of the game. I have not played the game since open beta. I did not run good on my PC and the quality was not to good at the time, but really that is like a long time ago. So long that even I can not judge whatever this game is low in quality.
Actualy show me the proof it is low in quality. Define low in quality and after you did do so show me the proof?
Definition "low quality" Game launched with ONE QA person on staff at Sigil 200,000 people buy it; all but 30,000 quit $30+ million invested and for the most part lost Sigil bankrupts Sigil fires employees in the parking lot SOE demotes Brad
Nah thats bullshit. People don't want quality products. If something is not popular it doesnt mean it can't have high quality. Average person is not able to recognize high quality vs low. He has his priorities and if something appeals to him he grabs it. Average person prefers britney spears over einsturzende neubauten and will rather see shawshank redemption or american pie than let's say Stalker from Tarkowski.Actually I believe quality is the exact opposite of popularity. Yes that's what I think about 100 IQ person.
Doesn't a product appealing to someone effectively make it a quality product, to that person even if to nobody else. A comparison of quality vs popularity is really apples vs oranges. I do believe that everyone "wants" a quality product, even though "quality" is a relative term. That fact has thoroughly been established here, as some people think VG is a quality product and others do not. There seems to be no debate about popularity however, which is the only relevant statistic in Heltern's post.
My question is, what direction is SOE taking VG as it relates to quality in my mind. VG is in a ditch, and i do not see SOE pulling it back onto the road. In my opinion VG is a quality product, however unpopular it may be or become. My concern is that it seems to be sliding further into the ditch. The game as it stands seem to ride the fence somewhere between trying to gain new subs and satisfy the screams for end-game content, all-the-while completely ignoring some pretty major issues that have been present since release and prior.
People like to state "rushed to early release" as a defense, but that's history. That may have been forgivable for a few months, but how long do you think that dog's gonna hunt?
You might think that quality is the exact opposite of popularity, and you definitely have the right to your opinion, but would you still say that if VG had 2 million subs? I don't blame people for defending VG, it has plenty of features worth defending. I hope that one day I can return and feel that SOE made the changes that I thought were important ones. But, all the changes they've made so far have been lip service and neither impressive nor vital.
i think it is different for each person. the changes made dont seem to be the same for each player. i mean for me the most important things have been fixed. i couldnt play the game for 6 months because of performance issues. now i dont! so to me SOE have done wonders. i feel that the direction they are taking will be much healthier for new players as the performance issues are what puts most people of.
funny thing is my FPS doesnt seem to have got better but the game does seem to run much smoother for me with less glitching and no CTD's so hopefully for myself at least SOE will continue to work in this direction. but for people with absolutely no performance issues i can see why they want a different dircetion
but hopefully if they get on top of performance then content etc will come next.
Vanguard did promise so much and for the most part, is starting to deliver what it promised. Unfortunately, the lifeblood of an MMO, it's playerbase, started to leave in droves because it failed to deliver in an acceptable time for most. Empty starting zones, LFG for a long time and no community conversation can destroy an MMO as quickly as bad graphics and quests. VG certainly has an awful lot going for it and is a very playable, immersive MMO. The community dwindled so fast though, it's hard to see it becoming as popular as it should have been within the next year.
Server merges came and that went someway to resolve the issue, so what you are left with now is a group of Vanguard fans playing the game making they enjoy. There is a much tighter sense of community now as well as those that are still playing are not after an easy mmo, they don't want it handed to them on a plate - they are a close knit bunch, creating a community with their not-so-populated-as-you'd-like server base.
I played VG from late beta and stopped playing just before server merges happened. I did log back on after the merge and have to say, it is busier, it does have the community it needed and SOE are doing good things to the game content, responsiveness and playability.
Problem is, I've already emotionally detached myself from it. Once bitten, forever smitten. But that's just me.
"The death penalty is not a type of capital punishment. A death penalty is losing half your xp, whereas capital punishment is what you get when you enter a pvp area after one week playing. Totally different." - J.K. 2001
"In the context of software engineering, software quality measures how well software is designed (quality of design), and how well the software conforms to that design (quality of conformance)[1], although there are several different definitions."
Vanguard is Software, the above definition of software from Wikipedia.
All who are playing Vanguard do you think it has quality, givne the above definiton.
Each bug you find indicates that it has not conformed to the design, so go figure it out!
Vanguard did promise so much and for the most part, is starting to deliver what it promised. Unfortunately, the lifeblood of an MMO, it's playerbase, started to leave in droves because it failed to deliver in an acceptable time for most. Empty starting zones, LFG for a long time and no community conversation can destroy an MMO as quickly as bad graphics and quests. VG certainly has an awful lot going for it and is a very playable, immersive MMO. The community dwindled so fast though, it's hard to see it becoming as popular as it should have been within the next year. Server merges came and that went someway to resolve the issue, so what you are left with now is a group of Vanguard fans playing the game making they enjoy. There is a much tighter sense of community now as well as those that are still playing are not after an easy mmo, they don't want it handed to them on a plate - they are a close knit bunch, creating a community with their not-so-populated-as-you'd-like server base. I played VG from late beta and stopped playing just before server merges happened. I did log back on after the merge and have to say, it is busier, it does have the community it needed and SOE are doing good things to the game content, responsiveness and playability. Problem is, I've already emotionally detached myself from it. Once bitten, forever smitten. But that's just me.
Agree with you that the lifeblood of a MMO is the player base.
Now that Vanguard has been taken over by SOE, whom have good finances, why don't they make a consious decision and scarp the monthly fee for a year, whislt they get rid of the bugs, this will may get the player base up, and then when the game is fit for purpose, re-introduce the monthly fee.
This will will also help SOE's current bad rep and show that they do really care about their player base!
i think it is different for each person. the changes made dont seem to be the same for each player. i mean for me the most important things have been fixed. i couldnt play the game for 6 months because of performance issues. now i dont! so to me SOE have done wonders. i feel that the direction they are taking will be much healthier for new players as the performance issues are what puts most people of. funny thing is my FPS doesnt seem to have got better but the game does seem to run much smoother for me with less glitching and no CTD's so hopefully for myself at least SOE will continue to work in this direction. but for people with absolutely no performance issues i can see why they want a different dircetion but hopefully if they get on top of performance then content etc will come next.
I'm glad that UD2 landed in your wheelhouse Shukes, but performance isn't the major issue I'm referring to, even though it seems debatable it's any better than when SOE took over. SOE will HAVE TO create stability for lower end rigs to generate an influx of players. I don't doubt that you'll see a spike in the pop when APW goes live. I'm sure there will be more than a few 50s come back to check out the raid scene. Ultimately, however, this will probably be the downfall of the game.
VG has an older, more mature, player base than most MMOs only because of the early development and the Sigil vision. The VG community, in my experiences, were more patient and helpful to newcomers (long as they didn't mention WoW) than any game in the past 5 years. These are exactly the people that will be driven out by the "new community" that SOE is apparently shaping VG for. How many people do you think will pack their bags when instancing is introduced? No instancing, you say? We'll see about that when the stability is so bad that 50s start bailing because they can't put 30 players on the same mob (not to mention if another guild wants to contest the spawn).
What kind of community will crop up then? One similar to the "kiddies" that play WoW? Diversity is in serious jeopardy here. WoW for all it's faults has generated revenue, and that's the only language that companies like SOE speak. They will destroy the original vision of VG, just you wait and see.
"In the context of software engineering, software quality measures how well software is designed (quality of design), and how well the software conforms to that design (quality of conformance)[1], although there are several different definitions."
Vanguard is Software, the above definition of software from Wikipedia. All who are playing Vanguard do you think it has quality, givne the above definiton. Each bug you find indicates that it has not conformed to the design, so go figure it out!
In the context of people having fun, quality measures if people are having fun or not. And many people are.I've taken the liberty of browsing through your little Wikipedia-article, and it's fan-tas-tic. If you're reviewing MS Office XP.
What you need to get through your *insert bannable offensive language* skull is that there are a lot of people playing Vanguard, and they are liking it. End of discussion.
Now playing: City of Heroes/Villains, Age of Conan
To be honest friend i am a game player! that's why i post on this site i enjoy games. Not really bothered about technicalitys with words.
i am a simple type of guy. play a game if i like it then to me it's good. if i dont then to me it's not god! Who cares about all the other crap. Bet you dont eat Mc Donslads either because technicaly that's not quality food?
the people that play the game and stay are simply players that enjoy the game. That's why we dont care how you explain why VG is crap, it just dont matter.
Just realised i posted after a page of others haha! my reply was meant for the guy talking about the definition of a qualitiy game, which was the most useless piece of crap i have ever read. ok i have read worse but come on that was rubbish at it's best.
I see what your saying Dailybuzz but i think you are looking at it a little critical and expecting the worst that's all. i mean i have not seen instancing mentioned once yet so in my eyes it's not gonna happen. we can all speculate that it will but that's all it is, speculation. though i do see your reasoning and am interested in how they will get past that problem if they can.
As for the game catering mostly for kiddie players i think also again speculation. as the current player base seems much more a mature audience than most games ive played.
i think we can all agree the next 6 months is critical for VG and soe's reputation.
"In the context of software engineering, software quality measures how well software is designed (quality of design), and how well the software conforms to that design (quality of conformance)[1], although there are several different definitions."
Vanguard is Software, the above definition of software from Wikipedia. All who are playing Vanguard do you think it has quality, givne the above definiton. Each bug you find indicates that it has not conformed to the design, so go figure it out!
In the context of people having fun, quality measures if people are having fun or not. And many people are.I've taken the liberty of browsing through your little Wikipedia-article, and it's fan-tas-tic. If you're reviewing MS Office XP.
What you need to get through your *insert bannable offensive language* skull is that there are a lot of people playing Vanguard, and they are liking it. End of discussion.
Well you my friend are an example of an ignorant individual.
How can you say quality measures if people are having fun or not, lol,some people have fun poking their eye with a needle!
Whether it is Win XP or VS it don't matter, the quality of the software is low, hence people left in droves.
Now as said above, you may well enjoy it, but the general population will not.
"In the context of software engineering, software quality measures how well software is designed (quality of design), and how well the software conforms to that design (quality of conformance)[1], although there are several different definitions."
Vanguard is Software, the above definition of software from Wikipedia. All who are playing Vanguard do you think it has quality, givne the above definiton. Each bug you find indicates that it has not conformed to the design, so go figure it out!
In the context of people having fun, quality measures if people are having fun or not. And many people are.I've taken the liberty of browsing through your little Wikipedia-article, and it's fan-tas-tic. If you're reviewing MS Office XP.
What you need to get through your *insert bannable offensive language* skull is that there are a lot of people playing Vanguard, and they are liking it. End of discussion.
Well you my friend are an example of an ignorant individual.
How can you say quality measures if people are having fun or not, lol,some people have fun poking their eye with a needle!
Whether it is Win XP or VS it don't matter, the quality of the software is low, hence people left in droves.
Now as said above, you may well enjoy it, but the general population will not.
Actually poking someone else's eye with a needle is a fun for most of the people. You still evaluate what is quality and what isnt just by its popularity. You wanna tell me britney spears makes a quality music because she's popular?
His point is that people left the game because they didnt enjoy it! people are staying because they enjoy it. mothing to do with the definition of quality. you can't say he is ignorant because he recognises why people play games. anyone can try to make themselves clever by stating technical points etc, but VG is a game simple as that. if people enjoy it they will play it. why not let them? no one is saying that us players are not in the minority! were just saying "so?"
"In the context of software engineering, software quality measures how well software is designed (quality of design), and how well the software conforms to that design (quality of conformance)[1], although there are several different definitions."
Vanguard is Software, the above definition of software from Wikipedia. All who are playing Vanguard do you think it has quality, givne the above definiton. Each bug you find indicates that it has not conformed to the design, so go figure it out!
In the context of people having fun, quality measures if people are having fun or not. And many people are.I've taken the liberty of browsing through your little Wikipedia-article, and it's fan-tas-tic. If you're reviewing MS Office XP.
What you need to get through your *insert bannable offensive language* skull is that there are a lot of people playing Vanguard, and they are liking it. End of discussion.
Well you my friend are an example of an ignorant individual.
How can you say quality measures if people are having fun or not, lol,some people have fun poking their eye with a needle!
Whether it is Win XP or VS it don't matter, the quality of the software is low, hence people left in droves.
Now as said above, you may well enjoy it, but the general population will not.
Actually poking someone else's eye with a needle is a fun for most of the people. You still evaluate what is quality and what isnt just by its popularity. You wanna tell me britney spears makes a quality music because she's popular?
Are you confused?
You say that you evaluate what has quality by its popularity and then condradicte yourself with the Britney spears example ?!?!
His point is that people left the game because they didnt enjoy it! people are staying because they enjoy it. mothing to do with the definition of quality. you can't say he is ignorant because he recognises why people play games. anyone can try to make themselves clever by stating technical points etc, but VG is a game simple as that. if people enjoy it they will play it. why not let them? no one is saying that us players are not in the minority! were just saying "so?"
Agree with your point, people can still enjoy it if it is low quality, but what you can't say is because people enjoy it, it therefore has quality.
The whole quality thing came about when i said that the software was low in quality. Then someone responded saying that it is has quality because people enjoy it. Which i am afraid is incorrect.
Further more i never said he should or anyone should stop playing it, if that how you get your kicks then fine, all i have ever said is that the only way we can stop such low quality games coming to the market is stop buying them.
"In the context of software engineering, software quality measures how well software is designed (quality of design), and how well the software conforms to that design (quality of conformance)[1], although there are several different definitions."
Vanguard is Software, the above definition of software from Wikipedia. All who are playing Vanguard do you think it has quality, givne the above definiton. Each bug you find indicates that it has not conformed to the design, so go figure it out!
In the context of people having fun, quality measures if people are having fun or not. And many people are.I've taken the liberty of browsing through your little Wikipedia-article, and it's fan-tas-tic. If you're reviewing MS Office XP.
What you need to get through your *insert bannable offensive language* skull is that there are a lot of people playing Vanguard, and they are liking it. End of discussion.
Well you my friend are an example of an ignorant individual.
How can you say quality measures if people are having fun or not, lol,some people have fun poking their eye with a needle!
Whether it is Win XP or VS it don't matter, the quality of the software is low, hence people left in droves.
Now as said above, you may well enjoy it, but the general population will not.
Actually poking someone else's eye with a needle is a fun for most of the people. You still evaluate what is quality and what isnt just by its popularity. You wanna tell me britney spears makes a quality music because she's popular?
Are you confused?
You say that you evaluate what has quality by its popularity and then condradicte yourself with the Britney spears example ?!?!
Is it that hard to understand? You are saying that quality of Vanguard is low, therefore people have left it. I guess you consider Vanguard as a low quality game is because out of 200k people only 30k remained. So im asking you if you consider quality just by its popularity? You can re-read my previous also and if you still don't understand it i give up.
Comments
Do you even read what you're posting? How I should "behave in the world", are you serious? Move forward? Just because you and your followers (both of them) are calling for the game to die, because you and your followers (both of them) don't like it, doesn't mean I would have to move forward.
Which I have no intention of doing by the way- I'll continue playing and I'll continue to like it, and many others with me. You're the one who's a fool if you think you can force your opinion on anyone but yourself. You're also a troll. Enjoy your lunch.
To be honest i am not really concerned about Vanguard as it is already out. And i have never owned or played it.
I am speaking in general, hence the words like World and Moving forward.
I am just saying that we, you and me, and any other person that plays these games, need to think about not buying games that are low in quality so that we send a clear message to Producers, can you get that around your thick head?!?
PS: what do you mean i am a troll?
So you basically think that producers and developers will release unfinished games because Vanguard did that? And the only chance to tell them not to do that is to convince those 30.000 subs vanguard has to cancel their subscribtion?
REALITY CHECK
A few people should stop posting here. You make a grown up laugh to hard.
Elikal if this isnt your game it cant be helped. But thats no reason to let it die. There are many more people in game who have problems with the cons and the aggro and the "when to run". Thats not a reason to let a game die. I dont have any problem with it, its easy for me and easy for a lot of others.
Let's get this straight-- at this point, there are only three things that will kill Vanguard outright:
1. SOE deciding the game is no longer profitable for them and pulling the plug.
2. Some sort of major patch and/or update that drives a majority of the remaining playerbase away. It would have to be something really drastic, since the folks playing have shown their loyalty to VG by sticking with it despite all of the problems the game has had so far.
3. A new MMO somewhere down the line that offers a similar experience to Vanguard but with a more polished, stable client, and a more compelling world.
That's pretty much it. All the threads in the world calling for the game's demise don't mean squat if SOE still sees what they consider enough income from subscriptions to keep it afloat and if there are still people willing to pay to play despite any and all flaws and issues that remain.
It's funny, I hadn't thought about Vanguard for Months, then I read this thread and decided to try it for a laugh. I'm quite enjoying it to be honest. Some starting areas are much much more fun than others, which makes your 'first impression' a bit of a gamble I suppose.
Personally I think VG is a great game and getting better with each update. Bugs wise, none of them stop me playing the game (and I see very few bugs these days) and CTD are a thing of the past for me after I patch Vista, so it wasn't even VGs fault.
Letting it die will only teach game designers the lesson that if its not like WoW, it wont sell and people will hate it.
Now playing: VG (after a long break from MMORPGS)
Played for more than a month: Darkfall online, Vanguard SOH, Everquest, Horizons, WoW, SWG, Everquest II, Eve
Becouse you dislike the game means poeple have to stop playing? What if poeple enjoy playing it? Who are you to judge whatever an game clasifies as "low in quality" unless you actualy did worked at the QA department of the game. I have not played the game since open beta. I did not run good on my PC and the quality was not to good at the time, but really that is like a long time ago. So long that even I can not judge whatever this game is low in quality.
Actualy show me the proof it is low in quality. Define low in quality and after you did do so show me the proof?
Definition "low quality"
Game launched with ONE QA person on staff at Sigil
200,000 people buy it; all but 30,000 quit
$30+ million invested and for the most part lost
Sigil bankrupts
Sigil fires employees in the parking lot
SOE demotes Brad
and in the meantime just play........ err ok ye just wait.
REALITY CHECK
Doesn't a product appealing to someone effectively make it a quality product, to that person even if to nobody else. A comparison of quality vs popularity is really apples vs oranges. I do believe that everyone "wants" a quality product, even though "quality" is a relative term. That fact has thoroughly been established here, as some people think VG is a quality product and others do not. There seems to be no debate about popularity however, which is the only relevant statistic in Heltern's post.
My question is, what direction is SOE taking VG as it relates to quality in my mind. VG is in a ditch, and i do not see SOE pulling it back onto the road. In my opinion VG is a quality product, however unpopular it may be or become. My concern is that it seems to be sliding further into the ditch. The game as it stands seem to ride the fence somewhere between trying to gain new subs and satisfy the screams for end-game content, all-the-while completely ignoring some pretty major issues that have been present since release and prior.
People like to state "rushed to early release" as a defense, but that's history. That may have been forgivable for a few months, but how long do you think that dog's gonna hunt?
You might think that quality is the exact opposite of popularity, and you definitely have the right to your opinion, but would you still say that if VG had 2 million subs? I don't blame people for defending VG, it has plenty of features worth defending. I hope that one day I can return and feel that SOE made the changes that I thought were important ones. But, all the changes they've made so far have been lip service and neither impressive nor vital.
i think it is different for each person. the changes made dont seem to be the same for each player. i mean for me the most important things have been fixed. i couldnt play the game for 6 months because of performance issues. now i dont! so to me SOE have done wonders. i feel that the direction they are taking will be much healthier for new players as the performance issues are what puts most people of.
funny thing is my FPS doesnt seem to have got better but the game does seem to run much smoother for me with less glitching and no CTD's so hopefully for myself at least SOE will continue to work in this direction. but for people with absolutely no performance issues i can see why they want a different dircetion
but hopefully if they get on top of performance then content etc will come next.
Vanguard did promise so much and for the most part, is starting to deliver what it promised. Unfortunately, the lifeblood of an MMO, it's playerbase, started to leave in droves because it failed to deliver in an acceptable time for most. Empty starting zones, LFG for a long time and no community conversation can destroy an MMO as quickly as bad graphics and quests. VG certainly has an awful lot going for it and is a very playable, immersive MMO. The community dwindled so fast though, it's hard to see it becoming as popular as it should have been within the next year.
Server merges came and that went someway to resolve the issue, so what you are left with now is a group of Vanguard fans playing the game making they enjoy. There is a much tighter sense of community now as well as those that are still playing are not after an easy mmo, they don't want it handed to them on a plate - they are a close knit bunch, creating a community with their not-so-populated-as-you'd-like server base.
I played VG from late beta and stopped playing just before server merges happened. I did log back on after the merge and have to say, it is busier, it does have the community it needed and SOE are doing good things to the game content, responsiveness and playability.
Problem is, I've already emotionally detached myself from it. Once bitten, forever smitten. But that's just me.
"The death penalty is not a type of capital punishment. A death penalty is losing half your xp, whereas capital punishment is what you get when you enter a pvp area after one week playing. Totally different." - J.K. 2001
"In the context of software engineering, software quality measures how well software is designed (quality of design), and how well the software conforms to that design (quality of conformance)[1], although there are several different definitions."
Vanguard is Software, the above definition of software from Wikipedia.
All who are playing Vanguard do you think it has quality, givne the above definiton.
Each bug you find indicates that it has not conformed to the design, so go figure it out!
Now that Vanguard has been taken over by SOE, whom have good finances, why don't they make a consious decision and scarp the monthly fee for a year, whislt they get rid of the bugs, this will may get the player base up, and then when the game is fit for purpose, re-introduce the monthly fee.
This will will also help SOE's current bad rep and show that they do really care about their player base!
VG has an older, more mature, player base than most MMOs only because of the early development and the Sigil vision. The VG community, in my experiences, were more patient and helpful to newcomers (long as they didn't mention WoW) than any game in the past 5 years. These are exactly the people that will be driven out by the "new community" that SOE is apparently shaping VG for. How many people do you think will pack their bags when instancing is introduced? No instancing, you say? We'll see about that when the stability is so bad that 50s start bailing because they can't put 30 players on the same mob (not to mention if another guild wants to contest the spawn).
What kind of community will crop up then? One similar to the "kiddies" that play WoW? Diversity is in serious jeopardy here. WoW for all it's faults has generated revenue, and that's the only language that companies like SOE speak. They will destroy the original vision of VG, just you wait and see.
In the context of people having fun, quality measures if people are having fun or not. And many people are.I've taken the liberty of browsing through your little Wikipedia-article, and it's fan-tas-tic. If you're reviewing MS Office XP.
What you need to get through your *insert bannable offensive language* skull is that there are a lot of people playing Vanguard, and they are liking it. End of discussion.
Now playing: City of Heroes/Villains, Age of Conan
Played: Eve, Hg:L, Vanguard, WoW, FFXI, Planetside, Neocron, Battlezone, EQII, AO, CoX, AA, DDO
I win at Vanguard.
To be honest friend i am a game player! that's why i post on this site i enjoy games. Not really bothered about technicalitys with words.
i am a simple type of guy. play a game if i like it then to me it's good. if i dont then to me it's not god! Who cares about all the other crap. Bet you dont eat Mc Donslads either because technicaly that's not quality food?
the people that play the game and stay are simply players that enjoy the game. That's why we dont care how you explain why VG is crap, it just dont matter.
Just realised i posted after a page of others haha! my reply was meant for the guy talking about the definition of a qualitiy game, which was the most useless piece of crap i have ever read. ok i have read worse but come on that was rubbish at it's best.
I see what your saying Dailybuzz but i think you are looking at it a little critical and expecting the worst that's all. i mean i have not seen instancing mentioned once yet so in my eyes it's not gonna happen. we can all speculate that it will but that's all it is, speculation. though i do see your reasoning and am interested in how they will get past that problem if they can.
As for the game catering mostly for kiddie players i think also again speculation. as the current player base seems much more a mature audience than most games ive played.
i think we can all agree the next 6 months is critical for VG and soe's reputation.
In the context of people having fun, quality measures if people are having fun or not. And many people are.I've taken the liberty of browsing through your little Wikipedia-article, and it's fan-tas-tic. If you're reviewing MS Office XP.
What you need to get through your *insert bannable offensive language* skull is that there are a lot of people playing Vanguard, and they are liking it. End of discussion.
Well you my friend are an example of an ignorant individual.How can you say quality measures if people are having fun or not, lol,some people have fun poking their eye with a needle!
Whether it is Win XP or VS it don't matter, the quality of the software is low, hence people left in droves.
Now as said above, you may well enjoy it, but the general population will not.
In the context of people having fun, quality measures if people are having fun or not. And many people are.I've taken the liberty of browsing through your little Wikipedia-article, and it's fan-tas-tic. If you're reviewing MS Office XP.
What you need to get through your *insert bannable offensive language* skull is that there are a lot of people playing Vanguard, and they are liking it. End of discussion.
Well you my friend are an example of an ignorant individual.How can you say quality measures if people are having fun or not, lol,some people have fun poking their eye with a needle!
Whether it is Win XP or VS it don't matter, the quality of the software is low, hence people left in droves.
Now as said above, you may well enjoy it, but the general population will not.
Actually poking someone else's eye with a needle is a fun for most of the people. You still evaluate what is quality and what isnt just by its popularity. You wanna tell me britney spears makes a quality music because she's popular?
REALITY CHECK
His point is that people left the game because they didnt enjoy it! people are staying because they enjoy it. mothing to do with the definition of quality. you can't say he is ignorant because he recognises why people play games. anyone can try to make themselves clever by stating technical points etc, but VG is a game simple as that. if people enjoy it they will play it. why not let them? no one is saying that us players are not in the minority! were just saying "so?"
In the context of people having fun, quality measures if people are having fun or not. And many people are.I've taken the liberty of browsing through your little Wikipedia-article, and it's fan-tas-tic. If you're reviewing MS Office XP.
What you need to get through your *insert bannable offensive language* skull is that there are a lot of people playing Vanguard, and they are liking it. End of discussion.
Well you my friend are an example of an ignorant individual.How can you say quality measures if people are having fun or not, lol,some people have fun poking their eye with a needle!
Whether it is Win XP or VS it don't matter, the quality of the software is low, hence people left in droves.
Now as said above, you may well enjoy it, but the general population will not.
Are you confused?Actually poking someone else's eye with a needle is a fun for most of the people. You still evaluate what is quality and what isnt just by its popularity. You wanna tell me britney spears makes a quality music because she's popular?
You say that you evaluate what has quality by its popularity and then condradicte yourself with the Britney spears example ?!?!
Agree with your point, people can still enjoy it if it is low quality, but what you can't say is because people enjoy it, it therefore has quality.
The whole quality thing came about when i said that the software was low in quality. Then someone responded saying that it is has quality because people enjoy it. Which i am afraid is incorrect.
Further more i never said he should or anyone should stop playing it, if that how you get your kicks then fine, all i have ever said is that the only way we can stop such low quality games coming to the market is stop buying them.
In the context of people having fun, quality measures if people are having fun or not. And many people are.I've taken the liberty of browsing through your little Wikipedia-article, and it's fan-tas-tic. If you're reviewing MS Office XP.
What you need to get through your *insert bannable offensive language* skull is that there are a lot of people playing Vanguard, and they are liking it. End of discussion.
Well you my friend are an example of an ignorant individual.How can you say quality measures if people are having fun or not, lol,some people have fun poking their eye with a needle!
Whether it is Win XP or VS it don't matter, the quality of the software is low, hence people left in droves.
Now as said above, you may well enjoy it, but the general population will not.
Are you confused?Actually poking someone else's eye with a needle is a fun for most of the people. You still evaluate what is quality and what isnt just by its popularity. You wanna tell me britney spears makes a quality music because she's popular?
You say that you evaluate what has quality by its popularity and then condradicte yourself with the Britney spears example ?!?!
Is it that hard to understand? You are saying that quality of Vanguard is low, therefore people have left it. I guess you consider Vanguard as a low quality game is because out of 200k people only 30k remained. So im asking you if you consider quality just by its popularity? You can re-read my previous also and if you still don't understand it i give up.
REALITY CHECK