Howdy, Stranger!
It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!
Quick Links
Last immersive MMO was Vanguard
Arclan
Member UncommonPosts: 1,550
The last non-instanced MMO made was Vanguard. I think this is testimony to how long it takes to create a non-instanced, sandbox game. I wish two things had gone differently:
1. Microsoft should have kept investing in the project; because still today there are no MMOs to compete with a well-made and distributed Vanguard.
2. Sigil should not have given into the WoW mentality of linear gameplay. Because quest are the ONLY way to make fast xp in Vanguard; everyone does the quests; hence linear.
When I look at PoBS and AoC, I see an utterly un-immersive world where you click on portals and are magically ported into rooms that look nothing like the area you just left. Worlds where inivisible walls and facade are standard. Games that cause one to bore in a matter of weeks. It isn't the gameplay; it's the utter lack of immersion.
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
Comments
The reason why Microsoft did not see Vanguard's potential is because SIGIL was poorly managed.
SIGIL needed a management team. The "creative" team was the management team: bad idea.
I do agree that Sigil had terrible management problems; at least rumors as such. Brad was missing-in-action most of the time.
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
Umm did you play the game?
1) Vanguard is instanced. There are instances all over, and you tended to freeze for several mins while Chunk.. urr excuse me ZONING (zones of course being nothing but large INSTANCES)
2) Didn't seem very sandboxy to me just another poorly done time sink grindage lvl / gear game, but i admit that is just my own perception YMMV
3) Microsoft stopped throwing good money away after bad because Brad was scamming them. SOE picked up the tab and continued (and still does today) to fund this failed effort. At some point you gotta cut your loses Microsoft is the big name it is today because like it or hate they know when to do so.
On the whole Vanguard is still around, and i'm happy because it gives players like you a place to play. All to their own!
/agree. I love VG, and will for years to come
I liked Vanguard for a couple of months; but it got boring fast. I'll tell ya one thing - playing a ranger has been a heck of a lot more fun in AoC than Vanguard. The combat and animations are far superior.
Vanguard was basically travel travel travel grind grind and repeat.
Winter, I'm not sure what you are smoking... please lookup "instances" in the MMO dictionary so you can take part in the conversation...
Praxus, you may love AoC right now; because it was JUST released. I felt the same way about POBS...for about a month. But if you love it after that, then I might just buy AoC.
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
I'm really curious, havent played, and problably wont play, just want to know. Thanks.
_________________
Senhores da Guerra
Yes the bosses are roaming around, usually near their "lair" or stomping grounds. You just pick them off if you see them. BTW, my post is not meant to suggest that Vanguard is a great game; I personally stopped playing it over a year ago. But, it is the last MMO to come out that wasn't instanced; and had the potential to be great if Microsoft had the patience to complete it.
I personally think Vanguard development is going in the wrong direction. Of course, you might love the game; i have no idea
Regarding waiting for spawns, I'm not sure now. When I was playing it, the world was so large and spread out that no one was competing for spawns. Well, maybe just a little in the starting towns, but it was very minor.
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
Vanguard was hardly immersive... people complain about how zoned games break immersion and all that... What about lagging for every little object that has to load, or crossing zone chunks... Vanguard does have zones... they're just invisible... they might as well have added load screens for the invisible zone crossings, they take about as long to load as AoC's.
Stuff just popping into existence isn't really immersive either. Sigil/SOE tried though, so they get an E for effort.
Wait, what about Darkfall?
Oh wait HAHAHAHAHAHAHA!
(no I'm not a fanboi, just had to throw that out there before someone else did) XD
Chunking only takes like 2-5 seconds actually.
"Negaholics are people who become addicted to negativity and self-doubt, they find fault in most things and never seem to be satisfied."
^MMORPG.com
For the most part, I don't fault them since so many people were burned or felt slighted by the release (it was bad) and most of those people will never give it another chance.
The only ones that frustrate me are the ones that are adamant on spewing negativity based on their experience over a year ago. Alot has changed, performance is (literally) 100% better (if not more) and the game is getting better with each update/patch.
Back on topic, for me, Vanguard is the only immersive game left out there. I've had my fill of linear games that force questing in order to progress (LOTRO), are full of loading screens and instances (GW, AoC, LOTRO), and that are so PVP-centric (WoW, AOC) that the community often reminds me of FPS crowds (not all of them are bad, but the majority are rough). I enjoy Vanguard because I have the opportunity to play how I want (quest or no, adventuring, crafting, diplomacy spheres all separate entities, player housing, flying mounts [world wide],), and because I can LITERALLY go anywhere I want. If I want to spend the energy to get to that tree that is barely visible on top of a mountain in the distance, I can. And when I get there, I can look back and see the terrain I've traveled..and backtrack if I want, without encountering a single loading screen or instance/invisible wall.
Bah, I'm rambling along again.
Point is, most people will never give the game another chance. It's sad, because I believe it's come so far and is truly an amazing game (in my opinion). In the end though, I do hope each and every person here finds the game that fits the bill and works for them. After all, if you're not having fun, then there's no point in playing.
For the most part, I don't fault them since so many people were burned or felt slighted by the release (it was bad) and most of those people will never give it another chance.
The only ones that frustrate me are the ones that are adamant on spewing negativity based on their experience over a year ago. Alot has changed, performance is (literally) 100% better (if not more) and the game is getting better with each update/patch.
Back on topic, for me, Vanguard is the only immersive game left out there. I've had my fill of linear games that force questing in order to progress (LOTRO), are full of loading screens and instances (GW, AoC, LOTRO), and that are so PVP-centric (WoW, AOC) that the community often reminds me of FPS crowds (not all of them are bad, but the majority are rough). I enjoy Vanguard because I have the opportunity to play how I want (quest or no, adventuring, crafting, diplomacy spheres all separate entities, player housing, flying mounts [world wide],), and because I can LITERALLY go anywhere I want. If I want to spend the energy to get to that tree that is barely visible on top of a mountain in the distance, I can. And when I get there, I can look back and see the terrain I've traveled..and backtrack if I want, without encountering a single loading screen or instance/invisible wall.
Bah, I'm rambling along again.
Point is, most people will never give the game another chance. It's sad, because I believe it's come so far and is truly an amazing game (in my opinion). In the end though, I do hope each and every person here finds the game that fits the bill and works for them. After all, if you're not having fun, then there's no point in playing.
Sounds cool, but once again it's run by SOE and fantasy swords and spells game, nothing new there.
Oh indeed. I agree with you in that regard Tillamook. I'm just as ready as the next person for something different (space, futuristic, whatever), but if they're going to release full of instances, zone loading screens, and linear forced gameplay, I'll stick with my mace and shield
Zones and instances are not the same thing. The terminology is not interchangeable.
Maybe I should give Vanguard another month of my time& money...just to see what I can see
"It'll be dark soon."
"Aye...that it will."
So does most of AoCs zones. Least on my comp.
At first glance, Vanguard truly has come a long way. But I think it will always be a smaller game, unfortunately, however the closest thing to a sandbox in a modern MMO.
I loved the game but the bugs were just terrible :-S. I do agree thought that it is one of the last immersive MMOs to come out recently, it reminded me of everquest 1, except with a bunch of problems...
Ok, AoC has made me have to throw this out there since the terms are misused so often.
Zone: A particular area in the game world.
Instance: A copy of a zone.
An instanced game has multiple copies of zones running at once.
Loading screens do NOT equal instancing, they equal zoning.
You may continue trolling, however, I ask you use proper terminology.
Thank you.
Vanguard being a sandbox game ? I fail to see the sandbox. Vanguard is a faithful implementation of the classic static MMO concept. There is nothing the player can really change about the world itself, except for having one single house per account in one of the predefined housing areas, which is IMHO not enough to qualify Vanguard for being a sandbox.
SOE keeps funding Vanguard, but on a much smaller basis. I am quite sure they are funding Vanguard on the basis of the current player base, as the dev team is obviously rather small and the updates lack enough content updates to make highlevel players keep playing. OTOH the content updates that make it into the game seem to be high quality, at least, such as the Ancient Port Warehouse dungeon aka APW. Quite unlike some really annoying stuff ingame right now, like the super boring grindfests Wardship, Xenn Gear, or Swamp Armor, which are all older designs. And the dev team is doing a really good work in respect to making the game more stable, more enjoyable, etc.
Umm did you play the game?
1) Vanguard is instanced. There are instances all over, and you tended to freeze for several mins while Chunk.. urr excuse me ZONING (zones of course being nothing but large INSTANCES)
2) Didn't seem very sandboxy to me just another poorly done time sink grindage lvl / gear game, but i admit that is just my own perception YMMV
3) Microsoft stopped throwing good money away after bad because Brad was scamming them. SOE picked up the tab and continued (and still does today) to fund this failed effort. At some point you gotta cut your loses Microsoft is the big name it is today because like it or hate they know when to do so.
On the whole Vanguard is still around, and i'm happy because it gives players like you a place to play. All to their own!
VG has many flaws, but it has almost ZERO instances!
I agree on some level, the vast world and the many classes and races really were good, but too many things borked.
People don't ask questions to get answers - they ask questions to show how smart they are. - Dogbert
Someone please defined "Sandbox" and tell me which games you thing are as such. My understanding was that old EQ (sans the current instancing) and current Vanguard were sandbox games.
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
I agree with you. I liked vanguard but When I was playing it it was so full of glitches bugs and errors that was more a pain in the ass to play than it was worth. So I quit. I won't be coming back to it simply because I give a game 1 chance to make an impression on me, if the company lets me down Why Should I help the company out or give them a 2nd shot, They want my money I don't care for their product that much.
Anyways yes most mmorpgs that came out in 2007 are crap. A bunch of crappy Korean Grind fest cash shop trash games, and a few decent but linear and lobby based games. Like Hellgate London and Yes PoTBS. With its micro party only fights.
Instancing itself is not bad per se, it all depends on how the instancing is used. Personally i would like to see a game to do both, some instances but not everything.
The main game world should NOT be instanced like AoC is (which is the major thing I don't like about the game).
Starter zones can be instanced to alleviate that initial launch rush. Some dungeons can be instanced so groups can run it without interference. If i were to design a game I wouldn't do every dungeon instanced and i would have plenty of dungeons and bosses non-instanced so there would be both options.
Overall instancing should be limited, the fun is to play in the world with everyone else. Everyone is their own instance is boring and makes the game feel deserted.