Howdy, Stranger!
It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!
Quick Links
What if Sony relaunced Vanguard?
pencilrick
Member Posts: 1,550
What if Sony pumped some more cash into this game, hired back many of the Sigil Dev's with Jeff and Brad at the helm, then had Smed, Brad and Jeff show up for a big press conference at some gamers convention, maybe with William Shatner present for an advertisting/celebrity boost.
Do you think it would work? Would Vanguard be successful? (Or would people just start associating Vanguard with William Shatner? "What's your game, Dog?)
Comments
Marketing isn't what made Vanguard a failure. It was poor performance.
Yes i agree! now if they get the game say...20% more optimized add an expansion then go and market the game with the expansion included then maybe that would draw more people in faster. At the min the population is growing at a steady pace but because it was so low it needs a big bump to keep present subs going
I think bringing Brad back as the creative designer providing the vision and his drive to what the game should be would be a good thing. With Brad no longer around VG seems to be drifting without any real vision. For all Brads faults he is a good vision guy who does know what he wants the game to be.
That said I think that a relaunch would be premature till they really fixed the game performance and added content and polish. Maybe in 6 months to a year if they ramp back up and really drive...
---
Ethion
Come on shuke "add an expansion"what to an already unfinished game?Dont you think it maybe wiser to try and get the game in a finished state and sort the bugs and add missing content before they start to pump out expansion`s
i will be suprised if you ever see an expansion but if you did it wouldnt be for a long time and by then there will be no point in a re-release at that point,They need the game in a finished state this year and a re-release also for this game to see 2009.
If someone had came up to me in 1980 when I was on my Atari 2600 and said we will be playing games with thousands of people at the same time.I guess my response would have been,"but I only have 2 joysticks"
http://www.mmorpg.com/discussion2.cfm/thread/235780/page/8
If they will relaunch it one more time, we need to hope it doesn't land on our planet anymore.
It is to late for V:SoH
It can limp along for years in the Sony All Access bin of failed games.
But, it will never be the AAA product it could have been if it had been finished before being foisted out onto the world.
MMROPG players (in the main) simply will no longer put up with, or pay for, junk being sold to us so we can pay for testing and completion costs.
Sure, some fan-boyz will always stick with a game they have committed to. Until they as well silently vanish from the stage (you know who you are). Very vocal about how "V:SoH Sucks Less Than The Rest". But, it does suck. Still.
So, no. This game was done for when they launched unfinished. And, it can never come back.
Time to move on.
If you want any succes for the game the best option is to emphasize on diplomancy part.
This is the one thing that is treully original in the game and gives you a marketing angle to sell it to a whole bunch of mmorpg players that a bored with the kill&craft only games
Sorry friend i think i came across wrong there!
I was meaning that it would be a good way to rerelease the game that's all. but yes your right priority is to get the game running as it should first. Then look at how to relaunch it. I agree there would be no point in a rerelease as it is in this state. The game really needs for the average player to load up and play with minimal hitching etc before any real push on content.
( you know who you are )
you must be referring to me
because yes i love the game. And i am no publisher or producer or dev so unfortunately i dont have the insight that you do and i just see that it's getting beter. To me that seems like moving forward but i may be wrong 
Oh ye and when you say "us at mmorg wont put up with it any longer" please dont label all of us mmorg's the same if you dont mind. Me i prefer to play the best of whats here and not just complain that there is nothing that compares to my standards. You do realise that we here at mmorg have a really bad reputation for this exact thing dont you? in anycase lets try to repair it rather than drag ourselves down further.
Play what game you prefer guys/gals and dont let anyone tell you what you should like/dislike or you may also join the mmorg bandwagon and come down with us.
Your opinion, my opinion it was based on hardcore rule set. Sure, it could be said it was watered down but it was still hardcore by comparison. Problem with making it more playable is, the game was based on hardcore bs so you can't sell the same old "stuff" in a different box. I think they should just make the bloody game insane hardcore, hell put permadeath in it. Why not, it's not going to compete with the newer games coming out so target a small nicht market.
Your opinion, my opinion it was based on hardcore rule set. Sure, it could be said it was watered down but it was still hardcore by comparison. Problem with making it more playable is, the game was based on hardcore bs so you can't sell the same old "stuff" in a different box. I think they should just make the bloody game insane hardcore, hell put permadeath in it. Why not, it's not going to compete with the newer games coming out so target a small nicht market.
Put in musicinstruments like in lord of the rings lol ?
Or you can just remove fighting totally and make it a chat game.
The technology is fundamentally broken in Vanguard. Plus, it is very boring. A relaunch will do little but suck more money from SOE that they will not recover. Just be glad SOE does not pull the plug on this vegetable.
And it IS to late for V:SoH
I am just wondering what game SOE will mess up next, since it seems they are getting very good at it.
Bringing Brad back would actually drive people away, just like putting the SOE title on the box did. Brad burned up all his credibility when he kept hyping the game. Regardless of what he could really do if given another chance, people would not flock back if he is getting involved again.
It might sooth some of the current playerbase who seem worried about the new SOE producers letter and what direction the game looks to be heading, but no Brad won't help as far as marketing goes.
Sony could dump as much cash into marketing as they wan't and parade and endless cast of celebrities around and the result wouldn't be worth the effort and I think Sony knows it.
The only way this game rebounds is
1) gets the game to a functional state for a large base of players. By that I mean 30 people can't have 30 different experiences. The game simply needs to run somewhat smooth when first loaded and patched. No tweaking INI files or hacking registries or running to support forums for help.
2) The game needs an expansion at least by end of this year. There isn't enough content to keep people occupied for 2 years. The temptation to try newer shiny games once you get to the stage of seeing everything VG has to offer.
3) The game needs to win back old players. Word of mouth is the only thing that might turn this game around, but even then it will be an uphill battle.
All that said, I just don't see VG getting anywhere close to the resources it will need. Best case scenario in my opinion is the game gets infrequent updates the likes of SWG. I honestly think all this talk about relaunch and the like is pure dreaming as I think SOE gave up trying to compete in the fantasy market a while ago.
If they relaunched the game, with a press release, and prior three-month advertising (to get folks excited about it), then yes I would resub to check it out. I would want to play on a new server; not one that is full of high level folks.
Luckily, i don't need you to like me to enjoy video games. -nariusseldon.
In F2P I think it's more a case of the game's trying to play the player's. -laserit
ROFLMAO! Classic, classic. Bring back Brad. ROFLMAO! You are too funny.
Mate they have not long merged servers as they were so empty,They wont be openning any new 1s for new players that is for sure,You should maybe check it out now as I think you would be suprised at the numbers on line,Wither you enjoy it or not is your own opinion.
If someone had came up to me in 1980 when I was on my Atari 2600 and said we will be playing games with thousands of people at the same time.I guess my response would have been,"but I only have 2 joysticks"
http://www.mmorpg.com/discussion2.cfm/thread/235780/page/8
Your opinion, my opinion it was based on hardcore rule set. Sure, it could be said it was watered down but it was still hardcore by comparison. Problem with making it more playable is, the game was based on hardcore bs so you can't sell the same old "stuff" in a different box. I think they should just make the bloody game insane hardcore, hell put permadeath in it. Why not, it's not going to compete with the newer games coming out so target a small nicht market.
It's not just my opinion. It's the general consensus that the game performed poorly. Fundamentally it failed, so whether or not it was hardcore becomes incidental. Had they released a game at launch that was not so buggy and performed smoothly, then we could test your assumptions.
Your opinion, my opinion it was based on hardcore rule set. Sure, it could be said it was watered down but it was still hardcore by comparison. Problem with making it more playable is, the game was based on hardcore bs so you can't sell the same old "stuff" in a different box. I think they should just make the bloody game insane hardcore, hell put permadeath in it. Why not, it's not going to compete with the newer games coming out so target a small nicht market.
It's not just my opinion. It's the general consensus that the game performed poorly. Fundamentally it failed, so whether or not it was hardcore becomes incidental. Had they released a game at launch that was not so buggy and performed smoothly, then we could test your assumptions.
I'm not sure if you are into research as I am but I'd love to see the consensus data. How was it carried out? what method did they use? I certainly hope you are not just referring to the general consensus with your friends.
I think he's referring to the fact that almost 200k people bought the box at launch, but most of them left within the first few months, largely because of performance issues. The game went from 13 servers to 4 within six months, was sold to SOE with Sigil imploding, and has gone through two massive rounds of layoffs bringing a team of 100 down to less than 30.
That kind of stuff doesn't happen if your game's performance is up to par. And it doesn't take massive amounts of research to see that. All it takes is a simple glance at the year that Vanguard has had.
I think he's referring to the fact that almost 200k people bought the box at launch, but most of them left within the first few months, largely because of performance issues. The game went from 13 servers to 4 within six months, was sold to SOE with Sigil imploding, and has gone through two massive rounds of layoffs bringing a team of 100 down to less than 30.
That kind of stuff doesn't happen if your game's performance is up to par. And it doesn't take massive amounts of research to see that. All it takes is a simple glance at the year that Vanguard has had.
Yea, you still need research to say it's a censensus, for the love of all that is evil, look it up. Well, one thing you'll not see with or without real data is... a hardcore game with a huge budge. Old eq style games are dead.
I think he's referring to the fact that almost 200k people bought the box at launch, but most of them left within the first few months, largely because of performance issues. The game went from 13 servers to 4 within six months, was sold to SOE with Sigil imploding, and has gone through two massive rounds of layoffs bringing a team of 100 down to less than 30.
That kind of stuff doesn't happen if your game's performance is up to par. And it doesn't take massive amounts of research to see that. All it takes is a simple glance at the year that Vanguard has had.
Yea, you still need research to say it's a censensus, for the love of all that is evil, look it up. Well, one thing you'll see with or without real data is... a hardcore game with a huge budge. Old eq style games are dead.
Uh...I think a pretty good argument for consensus can be made when most of the people who buy your game leave within the first couple of months and don't come back. Also, only Sony has the real numbers and they never tell. The best us mere mortals can do is just look in from the outside and take the best guesses we can.
And Vanguard might have been hardcore in beta, but it certainly wasn't when it launched. By then, it was aimed at the "core" player according to Brad, though I don't think he ever really defined what that meant.
In order for Vanguard to relaunch, it has to be taken off the market. It then needs to undergo vast improvements to warrant being taken down and relaunched in the first place. If they did this, it would be like releasing an upgraded Vanguard. On paper, this would make it seem that Vanguard will do better, and they would. However, since Vanguard would be competing with new releases such as AoC and WAR, I doubt the relaunch would ever break the atmosphere.
MMORPG's w/ Max level characters: DAoC, SWG, & WoW
Currently Playing: WAR
Preferred Playstyle: Roleplay/adventurous, in a sandbox game.