What a shame , SOEs step child is a failure. I was tempted to switch from WoW to Vanguard but I was have Soe much fun playing the BC that I rolled my primary avatar to a new account Soe my kids could play my original. Muahahahaha , SOE loves that Jestor .
I am done with SoE titles. TERRIBLE customer service, inferior product. With all the new titles out this and next year, no need to continue to support $OE.
i have played wow for 2 years since launch then eq2 for 2 months but i have never played a more exciting gane or indead one with so much potential {wow is so predictable} sigil have great things in store for this game LONG LIVE VANGUARD!!
3) The sudden success of World of Warcraft dramatically changes the common held idea of what an MMO was supposed to be.
4) Microsoft, as any buisness, wants to offer a product that will compete in the market. After the market changed drastically with the release of World of Warcraft, it became less attractive to produce a game that didn't conform to the new market's standard.
5) All of these added factors changed Microsoft's approach to Vanguard, and Brad being the stubborn idealist that he is, would not comprimise.
Am I missing anything?
----------------------------
You are missing a lot.
Wow did not in any revolutionize the design of an MMO. They made a full blown copy of EQ, which was already a success, knowing that people would come from EQ because of this.
You are right in, that the market has changed, or rather expanded. China has been opened up and Wow has had a great success based on the other stuff that Blizzard has done (the warcraft series). Blizzard has been lucky with many of the things they have put out, but they did not invent anything new. They are just good businessmen, something this genre lacks.
I also believe Vanguard is a far better made game than Wow. But it isnt new or inventive or revolutionary. It is just better graphics and more classes.
I don't post much on forums one because I sux at gram so I don't want the gramer police after me :P Anyho.
1st off I have played Vanguard as well as SWG from the Beta stage. And yes there will never be another game like SWG for some time. I find my self thinking why are those of you whom have played vangruad think there is not going to be problems? Come on from the 1st days of WoW/SWG/EVE ect there are gliches, IT IS GAME SOFTWARE WRITIN BY PEOPLE lol. Wining about such a thing to me is a waste of time. I know that there was going to be problems. But the biggest problem is not the game but those computers you play them on. I have seen SOOOO I got this and I got that and the game sux running on it well look here. P4 3.4 HT 2g ram Nvidia 7600 512mg thats is about the run of the mill computer most poeple are playing on and thats mine. I get 25 to 30 FPS outside town and around 12 to 15 FPS in town. So thing to look at when talking bad about a game because it is not running like you want it to..... Is it the game or your stuff and or your conection? Do you have things set up for game or and off the shelf computer thinking because it is the newest stuff on the land it will run the game great. Again I will say I play vanguard and enjoy it alot I think the game is well made and will only get better as time goes on. It is not a solo game for you gold miners but a group game so YES you have to have a friend to work with and share :P. In close let me say this. If you are haveing problems with a game fix it or help fix it don't just sit back and wining like a sissy get involed in your game and help other enjoy it as much as other because in the end we are just here to have FUN !!
Its SOEs way to make money!! The game is flawed so SOE camn offer the fixes as a expansion for only 39.99US$ They have done this to many of there games. EQ is the worst right now. A expansion every 3 months for the past 3 years ..
Its SOEs way to make money!! The game is flawed so SOE camn offer the fixes as a expansion for only 39.99US$ They have done this to many of there games. EQ is the worst right now. A expansion every 3 months for the past 3 years ..
Keep telling this to yourself and maybe one day you might actualy start to believe this type of nonsens people say about SOE.
SWG is probably never going to be the game that it was, but after the recent publishes I'd say it works better than it ever has. That's not saying it is better in terms of what you can do - it's a different game. But the new developers have made the game feel like a well designed game rather than the mismatched bunch of game features that it was. I'd rather be playing SWG now than any other game. There's still no other game that compares to it.
Actually I agree with you....we were all stung by the NGE and that crap...but now its a new game...
Its SOEs way to make money!! The game is flawed so SOE camn offer the fixes as a expansion for only 39.99US$ They have done this to many of there games. EQ is the worst right now. A expansion every 3 months for the past 3 years ..
This just proves how totally clueless you are.
EQ has been out 8 years. There have been 13 expansions.
Going by your post of "every 3 months" they should be on expansion #25 next.
But I don't know why I bother posting - most of the rabid SOE haters are so irrational that no amount of facts will penetrate anyway.
3) The sudden success of World of Warcraft dramatically changes the common held idea of what an MMO was supposed to be. 4) Microsoft, as any buisness, wants to offer a product that will compete in the market. After the market changed drastically with the release of World of Warcraft, it became less attractive to produce a game that didn't conform to the new market's standard. 5) All of these added factors changed Microsoft's approach to Vanguard, and Brad being the stubborn idealist that he is, would not comprimise. Am I missing anything?
---------------------------- You are missing a lot. Wow did not in any revolutionize the design of an MMO. They made a full blown copy of EQ, which was already a success, knowing that people would come from EQ because of this. You are right in, that the market has changed, or rather expanded. China has been opened up and Wow has had a great success based on the other stuff that Blizzard has done (the warcraft series). Blizzard has been lucky with many of the things they have put out, but they did not invent anything new. They are just good businessmen, something this genre lacks.
I also believe Vanguard is a far better made game than Wow. But it isnt new or inventive or revolutionary. It is just better graphics and more classes.
WoW changed to Quest based leveling instead of murder based leveling, it also fully introduced instancing, reduced death penalties, reduced class abilities (less learning), etc etc etc. While the gameplay of WoW is very much a clone of EQ, it is striped down of any challange or tedium that many consider "hardcore". Quick easy fun. WoW changed the philosphy of making MMOs from challenging and exploration to following the preset path. Really WoW holds a players hand from level 1 to level 60. EQ didn't even explain what spells did let alone how to play a class.
My GUESS is SOE saw a win win proposition. The game survives and they have a piece of the actiion..the game fails which they suspected it would, and they pick up the property cheap.
It sounds great, so great in fact, I pitty those who canceled - Some deluded SWG fanboi who pities me. I don't like it when you say things. - A Vanguard fan who does too. 09f911029d74e35bd84156c5635688c0
Sorry to jump on the bandwagon, but I too am quite disapointed with SOE ever since they made such huge changes to SWG and EQ2. I played both games in beta til after launch and felt they were actually more fun in beta. SOE is great at watering down games in an attempt to appeal to the more casual crowds. They end up making games with little to no replayability value which leads to shorter subscription periods.
The latest news about SOE taking over is going to hurt Brad more than anything since most people who know his past won't support him and his ideas after two sellouts. Fool me once shame on you...fool me twice...well you know the deal.
Let's look at a timeline instead of just quoting Brad. Time 1: Sigil pitches the game to Microsoft and they like the Vision (tm). They like it so much they are willing to invest many millions of dollars and fund its development over the course of many years. Time 2: Brad and Co. work on the game for years, all the while touting the freedom MS affords them to make the game the way Sigil wants, and the harmonious relationship they enjoy. Time 3: Game goes into closed Beta. Time 4: Suddenly, out of the blue, Sigil needs a new financial backer and a new publisher because of alleged differences with MS about how the game should be made, and an alleged need for more control. Think about this. What really changed? It's obvious. The beta. MS saw something in the beta that caused them to realize that this was going to be a turd. Why else would they walk away from a return on their investment as the game is approaching launch in the next six months or so? MS saw the feedback and said "fix this crap" and Brad said no and had to buy them out instead. So the question each of you has to answer is, do you think MS are fools? Do you think they are unable to see the problems? Do you think they just hate money and walked away from something that was clearly going to be a huge success? Do you think they would have had those reservations if, as Brad likes to imply, the beta testers like the game and are raving about how great it is? You know better.
No MS aren't fools, if they were they would be bankrupt by now. :P I was a beta tester, enuff said. There was alot of consternation when SOE stepped into the picture after MS .."dropped the ball" or however you want to phrase that. At the time, some were glad that "ebil" MS was gone..others were practically hysterical that SOE had stepped up to the plate and were going to "take over".
I see those predictions coming true with the latest "Brad" statements...unfortunately I was one of the blind and refused to believe that SOE would be anything more than co-publisher and server/technical side of things.
Ah well....live and learn. I guess Developpers do talk out of their left ears...and tell the gaming populace what they want to hear...and not the facts.
Suffice it to say with this latest development, I am extremely disappointed. Vanguard is cancelled on my machine.....and will remain so if SOE takes ownership.
Let's look at a timeline instead of just quoting Brad. Time 1: Sigil pitches the game to Microsoft and they like the Vision (tm). They like it so much they are willing to invest many millions of dollars and fund its development over the course of many years. Time 2: Brad and Co. work on the game for years, all the while touting the freedom MS affords them to make the game the way Sigil wants, and the harmonious relationship they enjoy. Time 3: Game goes into closed Beta. Time 4: Suddenly, out of the blue, Sigil needs a new financial backer and a new publisher because of alleged differences with MS about how the game should be made, and an alleged need for more control. Think about this. What really changed? It's obvious. The beta. MS saw something in the beta that caused them to realize that this was going to be a turd. Why else would they walk away from a return on their investment as the game is approaching launch in the next six months or so? MS saw the feedback and said "fix this crap" and Brad said no and had to buy them out instead. So the question each of you has to answer is, do you think MS are fools? Do you think they are unable to see the problems? Do you think they just hate money and walked away from something that was clearly going to be a huge success? Do you think they would have had those reservations if, as Brad likes to imply, the beta testers like the game and are raving about how great it is? You know better.
First off, you made a mistake in number 4. They didn't need a new financial backer. They bought all the rights from MS without any help from SOE. But they did need someone with lots of experience to publish the game for them. Since Brad had friends at SOE, that was the natural choice.
Second, let's take a look at MS's experience with MMOs. Now, there may be more, but I only know of three MS MMOs. The first was AC. It was a decent game, but always overshadowed by EQ and UO. People always say EQ did so well because it was the only game on the market, but that wasn't true. UO and AC still existed, but UO wasn't 3d, and AC is often either dismissed or forgotten. Second was AC2. It is on the extremely short list of MMOs that have actually had to be shut down. Third was Mythica, but MS got cold feet on that one and killed it (possibly because of Vanguard). So it isn't like MS has some spectatular track record when it comes to MMOs. My guess is they wanted the game out faster, and possibly that they wanted it on the X-Box some time in the near future. I don't think they tried to directly alter the game, but by saying they wanted it out sooner rather than letting the beta run it's full course, that means content would have to be cut to make the deadline and the game would be released in a condition that many other games are being released now days, in a payed beta state.
Look in your gaming files for Vanguard.....there is a gaming console file. Put there by whom? Well it was there in beta.......so I assume thats what MS was wanting. The other thing that made it a fail for alot of folks is the high end requirements to even play the game. I can play it on a relatively new machine (year old as of this month) but there are still many fixes needed..including memory leaks, hitching...zone lines, character animations etc etc.
Other rumour was that ....MS wanted Vanguard out by last July 1st or September 2006. (two rumours about that one) I think we all realize that Vanguard was in no shape to be released that early on...as evidenced by the recent launch and people still complaining that VG needs another 6 months to a year development.
No I wouldn't say MS has any kind of "good" record with gaming...basically I don't consider them a gaming company, they make OS that you don't dare buy for at least two years after release, due to compatibility issues with every other application out there. hehehe
I have no idea what happened behind the scenes, and I am sure the death of their art director also didn't help things either. Just a whole run of really bad luck, and possibly some bad decisions being made.
Now as it stands...it looks as if SOE will assimulate Vanguard...from what I saw, and that makes me sad. I had alot of hope that ..that wouldn't happen.
Fact: Whatever $OE touches turns into poo poo. CHECK Fact: John Smedley is a cancerous pollip upon the anus of humanity. CHECK Fact: $OE are obssesed with turning one of their games into "WoW part 2". CHECK Fact: $OE are offering an online service for the PS3 for the exact same price as the station pass. Although they refuse to answer which games will be available on this service. I THINK PEOPLE STOPPED BUYING THESE DIDN'T THEY? Fact: Every MMO purchased by $OE to date with the exception of EQ (owned by Smedley himself), has gone down the pan. CHECK Fact: $OE has perhaps the worst customer support in the MMO industry. CHECK Fact: $OE is the most hated MMO company in the industry (as you can see by these stickies). WON THE MMOWTF AWARDS 7 MONTHS LATER SO CHECK Fact: John Smedley is perfectly happy with producing a sub-standard product with unfinished expansion packs and having the subscriber pay through subscriptions to "complete" it. CAN ANYONE SAY VANGUARD? Fact: $OE employees (including Smedley) spend more time playing WoW than their own titles (if they play their own titles at all!). I THINK HE CHANGED HIS TACK TO "WE ALL PLAY COUNTER STRIKE" NOW Fact: If you play this game with $OE as the publisher, you will be lied to and treated like scum until you get so browned off you cancel. GIMME A "V" GIMME A "A" GIMME A "N" GIMME ..... NEVER MIND, CHECK Fact: $medley sees you as cattle, and will begin sheering you from day one. OK YOU SHEER SHEEP BUT SMED WOULD TRY TO SHEER ANYTHING HE COULD, THINK HE EVEN GOT HOLD OF BRITNEY SPEARS DIDN'T HE? Fact: If the game doesn't attract WoW numbers within 6 months Devs will be cut back and Vanguard will be running on a skeleton crew. STILL GOT A FEW MONTHS TO GO ON THIS ONE Fact: $OE now controls the purse strings, therefore they control the game no matter what is said. CHECK Fact: $medley is evil incarnate. MY OPINION BUT UNTIL PROVEN WRONG CHECK
Just checking out my own post one year later.
"Of all tyrannies, a tyranny sincerely exercised for the good of its victims may be the most oppressive. It would be better to live under robber barons than under omnipotent moral busybodies. The robber baron's cruelty may sometimes sleep, his cupidity may at some point be satiated; but those who torment us for our own good will torment us without end for they do so with the approval of their own conscience"
It sounds great, so great in fact, I pitty those who canceled - Some deluded SWG fanboi who pities me. I don't like it when you say things. - A Vanguard fan who does too. 09f911029d74e35bd84156c5635688c0
I have to apologize ahead of time for my incredible lack of restraint here (since I essentially don't have a horse in this race at all). It appears in light of the Ex-Sigil interview and other news that SOE was not the culprit here, and in fact might not have been the culprit in many of the fiascos which have surrounded it over the years. For that I just wanted to say, with the utmost sincerity,
I'm sorry SOE.
Yes. It appears I, like many, have been casting blame on SOE for years which was largely not theirs to bear, and for that I must now extent my deepest, humblest apology. I only wish that Smed's beancounters would have cast the blame a little more clearly, and a little more quickly, when it was first due.
We have no loyalty to them. Our loyalty is to the work, to the product, to the game itself. If it turns out Brad's a wackjob, tell us so. We can take it, we won't all flock in droves to his raving side (well... some of us will, but I think those of us have learned their lessons now).
I'm sorry for judging you for Luclin et seq., I'm sorry for cursing your peons for EQ2's post-launch woes. If I had any experience with NGE, I might be sorry for that too, but alas, I do not. I regret only that for so long the vast efficiency of your cold, corporate machine was shackled by the chains of the lunatic visions of men like McQuaid, and I pray for a day soon dawning when SOE's work stands alone, and can be judged itself wholly apart from the parasitic influence of quacks and has-beens.
I pray also that as Vanguard calmly retires into the solemn vault of unquiet dreams, you breathe life into a new thing with wisdom unfettered by the allegiance of the damned to McQuaid and his kin, that the new and silent projects which whisper grotesque prophecies in the cool halls of your facilities will shine with a promise which is none but yours. And mostly I pray that your investments, calculated and shrewd, bring vast amounts of fat cash dollars into your wet, hungry pockets, and that the shadow of your menace looms long and bleak over the faces of those who clasped lies to their bosoms only for the lust from their itching ears.
Well...if the ex-Sigil employee's interview/information is accurate, some things seem pretty clear:
1) The management at Sigil was messing up Vanguard long before SOE got involved. They deserve the blame for the bad product.
2) One of the management persons responsible came from SOE, and appears to be staying with the game, despite being partly responsible for the failure. Not SOE"s fault, but not positive looking, IMO.
and....
3) Although SOE isn't responsible for the mess the game was, they do appear responsible for pushing the release of a messy, unfinished game, for their own profit.
(as evidenced by: f13.net: Who set the release date?
Ex-Sigil: The release date was set as a result of SOE not wanting to fund the project any deeper without SOME revenue coming in...)
And #3 is why SOE won't get any of my money.....no, they didn't make a bad product...but, you don't get to sell me unfinished products for personal profit, I don't care who you are or what you make.
That's assuming, of course, that the f13 interview is accurate.
Comments
What a shame , SOEs step child is a failure. I was tempted to switch from WoW to Vanguard but I was have Soe much fun playing the BC that I rolled my primary avatar to a new account Soe my kids could play my original. Muahahahaha , SOE loves that Jestor .
Rodo at Dragon - Con 07 - you going?
Unaware of the Jestor?
http://about.me/JestorRodo/
Friends enjoy his classic Vblog - https://www.facebook.com/GoodOldReliableNathan
And sorry, SOE didn't screw up SWG with that patch. It sucked from the very beginning. The grind made vanguard look like a walk n the park.
what the hell are you on about??
i have played wow for 2 years since launch then eq2 for 2 months but i have never played a more exciting gane or indead one with so much potential {wow is so predictable} sigil have great things in store for this game LONG LIVE VANGUARD!!
3) The sudden success of World of Warcraft dramatically changes the common held idea of what an MMO was supposed to be.
4) Microsoft, as any buisness, wants to offer a product that will compete in the market. After the market changed drastically with the release of World of Warcraft, it became less attractive to produce a game that didn't conform to the new market's standard.
5) All of these added factors changed Microsoft's approach to Vanguard, and Brad being the stubborn idealist that he is, would not comprimise.
Am I missing anything?
----------------------------
You are missing a lot.
Wow did not in any revolutionize the design of an MMO. They made a full blown copy of EQ, which was already a success, knowing that people would come from EQ because of this.
You are right in, that the market has changed, or rather expanded. China has been opened up and Wow has had a great success based on the other stuff that Blizzard has done (the warcraft series). Blizzard has been lucky with many of the things they have put out, but they did not invent anything new. They are just good businessmen, something this genre lacks.
I also believe Vanguard is a far better made game than Wow. But it isnt new or inventive or revolutionary. It is just better graphics and more classes.
I don't post much on forums one because I sux at gram so I don't want the gramer police after me :P Anyho.
1st off I have played Vanguard as well as SWG from the Beta stage. And yes there will never be another game like SWG for some time. I find my self thinking why are those of you whom have played vangruad think there is not going to be problems? Come on from the 1st days of WoW/SWG/EVE ect there are gliches, IT IS GAME SOFTWARE WRITIN BY PEOPLE lol. Wining about such a thing to me is a waste of time. I know that there was going to be problems. But the biggest problem is not the game but those computers you play them on. I have seen SOOOO I got this and I got that and the game sux running on it well look here. P4 3.4 HT 2g ram Nvidia 7600 512mg thats is about the run of the mill computer most poeple are playing on and thats mine. I get 25 to 30 FPS outside town and around 12 to 15 FPS in town. So thing to look at when talking bad about a game because it is not running like you want it to..... Is it the game or your stuff and or your conection? Do you have things set up for game or and off the shelf computer thinking because it is the newest stuff on the land it will run the game great. Again I will say I play vanguard and enjoy it alot I think the game is well made and will only get better as time goes on. It is not a solo game for you gold miners but a group game so YES you have to have a friend to work with and share :P. In close let me say this. If you are haveing problems with a game fix it or help fix it don't just sit back and wining like a sissy get involed in your game and help other enjoy it as much as other because in the end we are just here to have FUN !!
that bullshit
EQ2 great game
This just proves how totally clueless you are.
EQ has been out 8 years. There have been 13 expansions.
Going by your post of "every 3 months" they should be on expansion #25 next.
But I don't know why I bother posting - most of the rabid SOE haters are so irrational that no amount of facts will penetrate anyway.
Shayde - SWG (dead)
Proud member of the Cabal.
It sounds great, so great in fact, I pitty those who canceled
I don't like it when you say things. - A Vanguard fan who does too.
09f911029d74e35bd84156c5635688c0
Sorry to jump on the bandwagon, but I too am quite disapointed with SOE ever since they made such huge changes to SWG and EQ2. I played both games in beta til after launch and felt they were actually more fun in beta. SOE is great at watering down games in an attempt to appeal to the more casual crowds. They end up making games with little to no replayability value which leads to shorter subscription periods.
The latest news about SOE taking over is going to hurt Brad more than anything since most people who know his past won't support him and his ideas after two sellouts. Fool me once shame on you...fool me twice...well you know the deal.
FOR ME TO POOP IN!
No MS aren't fools, if they were they would be bankrupt by now. :P I was a beta tester, enuff said. There was alot of consternation when SOE stepped into the picture after MS .."dropped the ball" or however you want to phrase that. At the time, some were glad that "ebil" MS was gone..others were practically hysterical that SOE had stepped up to the plate and were going to "take over".
I see those predictions coming true with the latest "Brad" statements...unfortunately I was one of the blind and refused to believe that SOE would be anything more than co-publisher and server/technical side of things.
Ah well....live and learn. I guess Developpers do talk out of their left ears...and tell the gaming populace what they want to hear...and not the facts.
Suffice it to say with this latest development, I am extremely disappointed. Vanguard is cancelled on my machine.....and will remain so if SOE takes ownership.
Very sad turn of events.
Cendharia
Second, let's take a look at MS's experience with MMOs. Now, there may be more, but I only know of three MS MMOs. The first was AC. It was a decent game, but always overshadowed by EQ and UO. People always say EQ did so well because it was the only game on the market, but that wasn't true. UO and AC still existed, but UO wasn't 3d, and AC is often either dismissed or forgotten. Second was AC2. It is on the extremely short list of MMOs that have actually had to be shut down. Third was Mythica, but MS got cold feet on that one and killed it (possibly because of Vanguard). So it isn't like MS has some spectatular track record when it comes to MMOs. My guess is they wanted the game out faster, and possibly that they wanted it on the X-Box some time in the near future. I don't think they tried to directly alter the game, but by saying they wanted it out sooner rather than letting the beta run it's full course, that means content would have to be cut to make the deadline and the game would be released in a condition that many other games are being released now days, in a payed beta state.
Look in your gaming files for Vanguard.....there is a gaming console file. Put there by whom? Well it was there in beta.......so I assume thats what MS was wanting. The other thing that made it a fail for alot of folks is the high end requirements to even play the game. I can play it on a relatively new machine (year old as of this month) but there are still many fixes needed..including memory leaks, hitching...zone lines, character animations etc etc.
Other rumour was that ....MS wanted Vanguard out by last July 1st or September 2006. (two rumours about that one) I think we all realize that Vanguard was in no shape to be released that early on...as evidenced by the recent launch and people still complaining that VG needs another 6 months to a year development.
No I wouldn't say MS has any kind of "good" record with gaming...basically I don't consider them a gaming company, they make OS that you don't dare buy for at least two years after release, due to compatibility issues with every other application out there. hehehe
I have no idea what happened behind the scenes, and I am sure the death of their art director also didn't help things either. Just a whole run of really bad luck, and possibly some bad decisions being made.
Now as it stands...it looks as if SOE will assimulate Vanguard...from what I saw, and that makes me sad. I had alot of hope that ..that wouldn't happen.
Cendharia
Just checking out my own post one year later.
"Of all tyrannies, a tyranny sincerely exercised for the good of its victims may be the most oppressive. It would be better to live under robber barons than under omnipotent moral busybodies. The robber baron's cruelty may sometimes sleep, his cupidity may at some point be satiated; but those who torment us for our own good will torment us without end for they do so with the approval of their own conscience"
CS Lewis
Shayde - SWG (dead)
Proud member of the Cabal.
It sounds great, so great in fact, I pitty those who canceled
I don't like it when you say things. - A Vanguard fan who does too.
09f911029d74e35bd84156c5635688c0
For those of you that think that SOE is the one that screwed up VG, you might want to read this...
http://www.f13.net/index.php?itemid=561#more
I'm sorry SOE.
Yes. It appears I, like many, have been casting blame on SOE for years which was largely not theirs to bear, and for that I must now extent my deepest, humblest apology. I only wish that Smed's beancounters would have cast the blame a little more clearly, and a little more quickly, when it was first due.
We have no loyalty to them. Our loyalty is to the work, to the product, to the game itself. If it turns out Brad's a wackjob, tell us so. We can take it, we won't all flock in droves to his raving side (well... some of us will, but I think those of us have learned their lessons now).
I'm sorry for judging you for Luclin et seq., I'm sorry for cursing your peons for EQ2's post-launch woes. If I had any experience with NGE, I might be sorry for that too, but alas, I do not. I regret only that for so long the vast efficiency of your cold, corporate machine was shackled by the chains of the lunatic visions of men like McQuaid, and I pray for a day soon dawning when SOE's work stands alone, and can be judged itself wholly apart from the parasitic influence of quacks and has-beens.
I pray also that as Vanguard calmly retires into the solemn vault of unquiet dreams, you breathe life into a new thing with wisdom unfettered by the allegiance of the damned to McQuaid and his kin, that the new and silent projects which whisper grotesque prophecies in the cool halls of your facilities will shine with a promise which is none but yours. And mostly I pray that your investments, calculated and shrewd, bring vast amounts of fat cash dollars into your wet, hungry pockets, and that the shadow of your menace looms long and bleak over the faces of those who clasped lies to their bosoms only for the lust from their itching ears.
In short, Doom.
Peace and safety.
Well...if the ex-Sigil employee's interview/information is accurate, some things seem pretty clear:
1) The management at Sigil was messing up Vanguard long before SOE got involved. They deserve the blame for the bad product.
2) One of the management persons responsible came from SOE, and appears to be staying with the game, despite being partly responsible for the failure. Not SOE"s fault, but not positive looking, IMO.
and....
3) Although SOE isn't responsible for the mess the game was, they do appear responsible for pushing the release of a messy, unfinished game, for their own profit.
(as evidenced by: f13.net: Who set the release date?
Ex-Sigil: The release date was set as a result of SOE not wanting to fund the project any deeper without SOME revenue coming in...)
And #3 is why SOE won't get any of my money.....no, they didn't make a bad product...but, you don't get to sell me unfinished products for personal profit, I don't care who you are or what you make.
That's assuming, of course, that the f13 interview is accurate.