In order for Vanguard to be played right. The game was designed to have full servers to take advantage of group play.
This never happened.....EVER ! Sure vets had their closed off to the public guilds, leaving others without the effect of the full potential.
This is SOE's fault for not advertising the game to get players playing AT THE SAME TIME.
As mentioned by others it was a business decision likely based on their belief most of the market was looking for the next WOW so the only customers they would be marketing Vanguard to were players of their current EQ1/2 titles.
Made more sense to only invest enough money to ensure a return on their initial investment.
Just trying to live long enough to play a new, released MMORPG, playing New Worlds atm
Fools find no pleasure in understanding but delight in airing their own opinions. Pvbs 18:2, NIV
Don't just play games, inhabit virtual worlds™
"This is the most intelligent, well qualified and articulate response to a post I have ever seen on these forums. It's a shame most people here won't have the attention span to read past the second line." - Anon
...until I realize all the same problems are there that caused me to stop playing the first time.
Nostalgia glasses are a very powerful tool, indeed.
If a person genuinely is enjoying themself while playing a game - whether you personally like it or not - it has nothing to do with 'nostalgia'.
I get the same crap when I talk about missing FFXI as it used to be... "Oh it wasn't that good.. it's just nostalgia goggles". Bullshit. Nostalgia is not what kept me playing it for almost 8 years. I continued playing it for that long because I enjoyed it.
To put it another way.. Think of whatever game you're playing and really enjoying currently, perhaps have been for a long time now, years maybe. You log in, and you spend the time and you play when ever you can because you genuinely enjoy the experience. Now, imagine some joe-schmo on the internet who doesn't know you from Adam coming along somewhere down the road and telling you "Oh, you're just wearing nostalgia glasses", because they didn't enjoy the game as you do. Would be pretty asinine, right? Well that's effectively what you are doing to the OP in your post.
The same can very likely be said of the OP - they miss Vanguard because they genuinely enjoyed their time playing it, despite its problems. Who are you, or anyone else, to try and invalidate their experiences or memories as just "nostalgia"?
Stop trying to dismiss others' points-of-view just because they don't resemble your own. It's rude and presumptuous.
And, in the name of thoroughness... just in case someone was thinking "Oh, I know... I'll use the "not many other options!" argument! That'll shut them down!" - also wrong. There were a number of other options at the time, up to, including and long after WoW's release. There's also always the choice to simply not play any of them.
As for people wanting to shut down the OP's wish/request/suggestion because they didn't personally like the game... Why? You can simply choose to not play it. Why does it matter if a game exists that you don't like, but others do? Does it affect your enjoyment of what you like to play? No, it doesn't. Will it happen? Likely not, but what's the harm in someone making the suggestion? Absolutely nothing. You don't have to agree. You don't even have to read the post. This mentality of "I don't/didn't like the game, so it shouldn't exist and people shouldn't talk about it" is one of the most obnoxious, intolerant and close-minded I've seen in gaming forums.
...until I realize all the same problems are there that caused me to stop playing the first time.
Nostalgia glasses are a very powerful tool, indeed.
If a person genuinely is enjoying themself while playing a game - whether you personally like it or not - it has nothing to do with 'nostalgia'.
I get the same crap when I talk about missing FFXI as it used to be... "Oh it wasn't that good.. it's just nostalgia goggles". Bullshit. Nostalgia is not what kept me playing it for almost 8 years. I continued playing it for that long because I enjoyed it.
To put it another way.. Think of whatever game you're playing and really enjoying currently, perhaps have been for a long time now, years maybe. You log in, and you spend the time and you play when ever you can because you genuinely enjoy the experience. Now, imagine some joe-schmo on the internet who doesn't know you from Adam coming along somewhere down the road and telling you "Oh, you're just wearing nostalgia glasses", because they didn't enjoy the game as you do. Would be pretty asinine, right? Well that's effectively what you are doing to the OP in your post.
The same can very likely be said of the OP - they miss Vanguard because they genuinely enjoyed their time playing it, despite its problems. Who are you, or anyone else, to try and invalidate their experiences or memories as just "nostalgia"?
Stop trying to dismiss others' points-of-view just because they don't resemble your own. It's rude and presumptuous.
And, in the name of thoroughness... just in case someone was thinking "Oh, I know... I'll use the "not many other options!" argument! That'll shut them down!" - also wrong. There were a number of other options at the time, up to, including and long after WoW's release. There's also always the choice to simply not play any of them.
As for people wanting to shut down the OP's wish/request/suggestion because they didn't personally like the game... Why? You can simply choose to not play it. Why does it matter if a game exists that you don't like, but others do? Does it affect your enjoyment of what you like to play? No, it doesn't. Will it happen? Likely not, but what's the harm in someone making the suggestion? Absolutely nothing. You don't have to agree. You don't even have to read the post. This mentality of "I don't/didn't like the game, so it shouldn't exist and people shouldn't talk about it" is one of the most obnoxious, intolerant and close-minded I've seen in gaming forums.
Leave the "social justice warrior" bullshit at home, buddy.
It has EVERYTHING to do with nostalgia.
Just about every "rebooted" game suffers from it.
The game re-releases. People flock to it in droves calling it the best game EVAR! Two months pass and then the complaints start, most of them the same complaints they had previously.
Nothing to do. Old problems still exist. Where are the updates? No one to group with.
Culminating in the usual battle cry...
"This game is DEAD!"
Luckily we have an experiment ongoing. It's called Secret World Legends. I'll be back in a couple of months with the usual "I told you so."
In the meantime I'll let you enjoy the little fantasy world that you live in.
...until I realize all the same problems are there that caused me to stop playing the first time.
Nostalgia glasses are a very powerful tool, indeed.
If a person genuinely is enjoying themself while playing a game - whether you personally like it or not - it has nothing to do with 'nostalgia'.
I get the same crap when I talk about missing FFXI as it used to be... "Oh it wasn't that good.. it's just nostalgia goggles". Bullshit. Nostalgia is not what kept me playing it for almost 8 years. I continued playing it for that long because I enjoyed it.
To put it another way.. Think of whatever game you're playing and really enjoying currently, perhaps have been for a long time now, years maybe. You log in, and you spend the time and you play when ever you can because you genuinely enjoy the experience. Now, imagine some joe-schmo on the internet who doesn't know you from Adam coming along somewhere down the road and telling you "Oh, you're just wearing nostalgia glasses", because they didn't enjoy the game as you do. Would be pretty asinine, right? Well that's effectively what you are doing to the OP in your post.
The same can very likely be said of the OP - they miss Vanguard because they genuinely enjoyed their time playing it, despite its problems. Who are you, or anyone else, to try and invalidate their experiences or memories as just "nostalgia"?
Stop trying to dismiss others' points-of-view just because they don't resemble your own. It's rude and presumptuous.
And, in the name of thoroughness... just in case someone was thinking "Oh, I know... I'll use the "not many other options!" argument! That'll shut them down!" - also wrong. There were a number of other options at the time, up to, including and long after WoW's release. There's also always the choice to simply not play any of them.
As for people wanting to shut down the OP's wish/request/suggestion because they didn't personally like the game... Why? You can simply choose to not play it. Why does it matter if a game exists that you don't like, but others do? Does it affect your enjoyment of what you like to play? No, it doesn't. Will it happen? Likely not, but what's the harm in someone making the suggestion? Absolutely nothing. You don't have to agree. You don't even have to read the post. This mentality of "I don't/didn't like the game, so it shouldn't exist and people shouldn't talk about it" is one of the most obnoxious, intolerant and close-minded I've seen in gaming forums.
Leave the "social justice warrior" bullshit at home, buddy.
It has EVERYTHING to do with nostalgia.
Just about every "rebooted" game suffers from it.
The game re-releases. People flock to it in droves calling it the best game EVAR! Two months pass and then the complaints start, most of them the same complaints they had previously.
Nothing to do. Old problems still exist. Where are the updates? No one to group with.
Culminating in the usual battle cry...
"This game is DEAD!"
Luckily we have an experiment ongoing. It's called Secret World Legends. I'll be back in a couple of months with the usual "I told you so."
In the meantime I'll let you enjoy the little fantasy world that you live in.
Sorry. I have been playing MMORPGs exclusively on emulators for the past six months. It's not nostalgia I just enjoy playing the older games. The same way if I picked up Super Mario 3 and played it, not because of nostalgia but because it's a good game I enjoy playing.
It would be just as pretentious and patronizing to say the only reason people liked Super Mario 3 was nostalgia.
...until I realize all the same problems are there that caused me to stop playing the first time.
Nostalgia glasses are a very powerful tool, indeed.
If a person genuinely is enjoying themself while playing a game - whether you personally like it or not - it has nothing to do with 'nostalgia'.
I get the same crap when I talk about missing FFXI as it used to be... "Oh it wasn't that good.. it's just nostalgia goggles". Bullshit. Nostalgia is not what kept me playing it for almost 8 years. I continued playing it for that long because I enjoyed it.
To put it another way.. Think of whatever game you're playing and really enjoying currently, perhaps have been for a long time now, years maybe. You log in, and you spend the time and you play when ever you can because you genuinely enjoy the experience. Now, imagine some joe-schmo on the internet who doesn't know you from Adam coming along somewhere down the road and telling you "Oh, you're just wearing nostalgia glasses", because they didn't enjoy the game as you do. Would be pretty asinine, right? Well that's effectively what you are doing to the OP in your post.
The same can very likely be said of the OP - they miss Vanguard because they genuinely enjoyed their time playing it, despite its problems. Who are you, or anyone else, to try and invalidate their experiences or memories as just "nostalgia"?
Stop trying to dismiss others' points-of-view just because they don't resemble your own. It's rude and presumptuous.
And, in the name of thoroughness... just in case someone was thinking "Oh, I know... I'll use the "not many other options!" argument! That'll shut them down!" - also wrong. There were a number of other options at the time, up to, including and long after WoW's release. There's also always the choice to simply not play any of them.
As for people wanting to shut down the OP's wish/request/suggestion because they didn't personally like the game... Why? You can simply choose to not play it. Why does it matter if a game exists that you don't like, but others do? Does it affect your enjoyment of what you like to play? No, it doesn't. Will it happen? Likely not, but what's the harm in someone making the suggestion? Absolutely nothing. You don't have to agree. You don't even have to read the post. This mentality of "I don't/didn't like the game, so it shouldn't exist and people shouldn't talk about it" is one of the most obnoxious, intolerant and close-minded I've seen in gaming forums.
Leave the "social justice warrior" bullshit at home, buddy.
It has EVERYTHING to do with nostalgia.
Just about every "rebooted" game suffers from it.
The game re-releases. People flock to it in droves calling it the best game EVAR! Two months pass and then the complaints start, most of them the same complaints they had previously.
Nothing to do. Old problems still exist. Where are the updates? No one to group with.
Culminating in the usual battle cry...
"This game is DEAD!"
Luckily we have an experiment ongoing. It's called Secret World Legends. I'll be back in a couple of months with the usual "I told you so."
In the meantime I'll let you enjoy the little fantasy world that you live in.
Sorry. I have been playing MMORPGs exclusively on emulators for the past six months. It's not nostalgia I just enjoy playing the older games. The same way if I picked up Super Mario 3 and played it, not because of nostalgia but because it's a good game I enjoy playing.
It would be just as pretentious and patronizing to say the only reason people liked Super Mario 3 was nostalgia.
Just trying to live long enough to play a new, released MMORPG, playing New Worlds atm
Fools find no pleasure in understanding but delight in airing their own opinions. Pvbs 18:2, NIV
Don't just play games, inhabit virtual worlds™
"This is the most intelligent, well qualified and articulate response to a post I have ever seen on these forums. It's a shame most people here won't have the attention span to read past the second line." - Anon
- First, More in detail. The game was meant for full servers.
SOE created the Trial Island. In SOE's defense they did a great job. They understood Vanguards deep group mechanics and used the starter island to make players understand it.
At level 3 you had a simple cave quest that was impossible to finish without a group of at least 2 players, then again at level 5 and 6. Then again for level 10 where you had to fly to a cliff edge and fight in a building. Because it was a Trial area, it was always packed solid even at the games weakest times of low population.
This Trial area was fun by everyones standards because of the coordination needed. I don't think this could be disputed at all.
HOWEVER, Directly after the Trial Area players were dropped into the real world. This is where the game went south ONLY BECAUSE OF LOW POPULATION. Veskal's Exchange was the central meeting area for everyone in the game, this was also a low level zone (10-20). Players couldn't leave this hub alone without heavy danger without a group....This area was meant to be played just like the starter area. A group.
My point is the game was made to be way more fun than players realize but it needed a FULL population.
-Second, By this time it was SOE's responsibility to advertise for the re-launch, but they dropped the ball !!
Everyone seems to blame the bad launch totally... Yesssss, your right, mmo's NEVER recover, they only get one chance !
BUT Vanguard re-release could have been a reprieve. It was a brilliant game that only had a half assed chance to prove something amazing despite it's demise.....Again SOE dropped the ball. SOE had an excellent developer team that was unrelated to its piss poor management.
- First, More in detail. The game was meant for full servers.
SOE created the Trial Island. In SOE's defense they did a great job. They understood Vanguards deep group mechanics and used the starter island to make players understand it.
At level 3 you had a simple cave quest that was impossible to finish without a group of at least 2 players, then again at level 5 and 6. Then again for level 10 where you had to fly to a cliff edge and fight in a building. Because it was a Trial area, it was always packed solid even at the games weakest times of low population.
This Trial area was fun by everyones standards because of the coordination needed. I don't think this could be disputed at all.
HOWEVER, Directly after the Trial Area players were dropped into the real world. This is where the game went south ONLY BECAUSE OF LOW POPULATION. Veskal's Exchange was the central meeting area for everyone in the game, this was also a low level zone (10-20). Players couldn't leave this hub alone without heavy danger without a group....This area was meant to be played just like the starter area. A group.
My point is the game was made to be way more fun than players realize but it needed a FULL population.
-Second, By this time it was SOE's responsibility to advertise for the re-launch, but they dropped the ball !!
Everyone seems to blame the bad launch totally... Yesssss, your right, mmo's NEVER recover, they only get one chance !
BUT Vanguard re-release could have been a reprieve. It was a brilliant game that only had a half assed chance to prove something amazing despite it's demise.....Again SOE dropped the ball. SOE had an excellent developer team that was unrelated to its piss poor management.
I don't think you are interpreting the data incorrectly. You stated the starter island had considerable grouping mandatory content.
Once players left the starter island they went to a zone which it was dangerous to try and leave without a group.
Unless Vanguard had solid group finding mechanics perhaps the reason few stuck around at this point was the "forced grouping" mechanic?
Just trying to live long enough to play a new, released MMORPG, playing New Worlds atm
Fools find no pleasure in understanding but delight in airing their own opinions. Pvbs 18:2, NIV
Don't just play games, inhabit virtual worlds™
"This is the most intelligent, well qualified and articulate response to a post I have ever seen on these forums. It's a shame most people here won't have the attention span to read past the second line." - Anon
SOE created the Trial Island. In SOE's defense they did a great job. They understood Vanguards deep group mechanics and used the starter island to make players understand it.
At level 3 you had a simple cave quest that was impossible to finish without a group of at least 2 players, then again at level 5 and 6. Then again for level 10 where you had to fly to a cliff edge and fight in a building. Because it was a Trial area, it was always packed solid even at the games weakest times of low population.
Back then I finished the whole trial island solo on several classes, just for fun. Yeah, including the cliff cave.
Facts > Assumptions.
I also played a lot solo in the open world.
I don't think the lack of solo-ability was a major problem in that game.
SOloing trial Isle was pretty easy after you did it once , And yes you could Solo in Vanguard to max lvl , some classes easier than others of course , But all the best content and gear were behind the group game ...
Thst not altogether true either as SOE did release new Content in several updates , including oddly enough the massive Dungeon Pantheon , Fishing skill , A New Starter Isle expeience , The HUnters Quest line (which was massive etc .. i could go on
Yeah the whole SOE wanted to let Vanguard die because it was a direct competition to EQ/EQ2 was just rubbish. It sounded like something conjured up by die hard fans who couldn't admit Brad McQuaid messed up.
Fact: SOE was the only reason, ONLY reason, Vanguard even launched.
Fact: SOE did invest both money and manpower resources to give Vanguard the extra 6 months of development. Sigil had completely run out of money, the game wasn't ready to be launched, SOE gave them 6 extra months of time, money, and resources to launch the game.
Fact: SOE was the only reason Vanguard even stayed running for as long as it did, despite Sigil/Brad McQuaid going bankrupt shortly after launch.
If anybody wants to place blame, it has to be on Brad McQuaid. He was head of Sigil, and if you can't finish a game after given $30mil and 5 years of development, plus 6 extra months of money/resources, then you simply messed up. There's no other way to spin it. And this is coming from a hardcore Vanguard supporter who beta tested the game, worked as IGN newsie at the time to help spread news about Vanguard, and I played the game thoroughly for a year and half after launch.
Brad McQuaid let me down, he was to blame for everything that happened. This is why I'm wary about Pantheon since he's heading the project. But I will say he doesn't seem to be as ambitious this time around so maybe he has learned and will deliver a finished product. We'll see.
Valid points, but Vanguard would never have existed without Brad McQuaid. So yes credit SOE for providing support when Microsoft pulled the plug; but that's about it. All credit for Vanguard, as a game, should go to Brad McQuaid, and the team he assembled. He bit off more than he could chew, obviously.
Vanguard's incredible advances in UI had the side effect of making it unnecessary to talk to other players. This killed community. Further, Vanguard was transformed into a WoW experience prior to launch, which also killed community.
Also interesting to hear Veskal's Exchange was a hub. I spent some time there but hadn't realized it was a hub. Cool.
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
Made more sense to only invest enough money to ensure a return on their initial investment.
"True friends stab you in the front." | Oscar Wilde
"I need to finish" - Christian Wolff: The Accountant
Just trying to live long enough to play a new, released MMORPG, playing New Worlds atm
Fools find no pleasure in understanding but delight in airing their own opinions. Pvbs 18:2, NIV
Don't just play games, inhabit virtual worlds™
"This is the most intelligent, well qualified and articulate response to a post I have ever seen on these forums. It's a shame most people here won't have the attention span to read past the second line." - Anon
I get the same crap when I talk about missing FFXI as it used to be... "Oh it wasn't that good.. it's just nostalgia goggles". Bullshit. Nostalgia is not what kept me playing it for almost 8 years. I continued playing it for that long because I enjoyed it.
To put it another way.. Think of whatever game you're playing and really enjoying currently, perhaps have been for a long time now, years maybe. You log in, and you spend the time and you play when ever you can because you genuinely enjoy the experience. Now, imagine some joe-schmo on the internet who doesn't know you from Adam coming along somewhere down the road and telling you "Oh, you're just wearing nostalgia glasses", because they didn't enjoy the game as you do. Would be pretty asinine, right? Well that's effectively what you are doing to the OP in your post.
The same can very likely be said of the OP - they miss Vanguard because they genuinely enjoyed their time playing it, despite its problems. Who are you, or anyone else, to try and invalidate their experiences or memories as just "nostalgia"?
Stop trying to dismiss others' points-of-view just because they don't resemble your own. It's rude and presumptuous.
And, in the name of thoroughness... just in case someone was thinking "Oh, I know... I'll use the "not many other options!" argument! That'll shut them down!" - also wrong. There were a number of other options at the time, up to, including and long after WoW's release. There's also always the choice to simply not play any of them.
As for people wanting to shut down the OP's wish/request/suggestion because they didn't personally like the game... Why? You can simply choose to not play it. Why does it matter if a game exists that you don't like, but others do? Does it affect your enjoyment of what you like to play? No, it doesn't. Will it happen? Likely not, but what's the harm in someone making the suggestion? Absolutely nothing. You don't have to agree. You don't even have to read the post. This mentality of "I don't/didn't like the game, so it shouldn't exist and people shouldn't talk about it" is one of the most obnoxious, intolerant and close-minded I've seen in gaming forums.
It has EVERYTHING to do with nostalgia.
Just about every "rebooted" game suffers from it.
The game re-releases. People flock to it in droves calling it the best game EVAR! Two months pass and then the complaints start, most of them the same complaints they had previously.
Nothing to do.
Old problems still exist.
Where are the updates?
No one to group with.
Culminating in the usual battle cry...
"This game is DEAD!"
Luckily we have an experiment ongoing. It's called Secret World Legends. I'll be back in a couple of months with the usual "I told you so."
In the meantime I'll let you enjoy the little fantasy world that you live in.
~~ postlarval ~~
It would be just as pretentious and patronizing to say the only reason people liked Super Mario 3 was nostalgia.
https://elysium-project.org/status
http://www.magicbane.com/
https://www.project1999.com/
"classification of games into MMOs is not by rational reasoning" - nariusseldon
Love Minecraft. And check out my Youtube channel OhCanadaGamer
Try a MUD today at http://www.mudconnect.com/DAOC freeshard definitely provided the classic experience I was looking for but I think I'm ready for something new.
Still looking around.
"True friends stab you in the front." | Oscar Wilde
"I need to finish" - Christian Wolff: The Accountant
Just trying to live long enough to play a new, released MMORPG, playing New Worlds atm
Fools find no pleasure in understanding but delight in airing their own opinions. Pvbs 18:2, NIV
Don't just play games, inhabit virtual worlds™
"This is the most intelligent, well qualified and articulate response to a post I have ever seen on these forums. It's a shame most people here won't have the attention span to read past the second line." - Anon
- First, More in detail. The game was meant for full servers.
SOE created the Trial Island. In SOE's defense they did a great job. They understood Vanguards deep group mechanics and used the starter island to make players understand it.
At level 3 you had a simple cave quest that was impossible to finish without a group of at least 2 players, then again at level 5 and 6. Then again for level 10 where you had to fly to a cliff edge and fight in a building. Because it was a Trial area, it was always packed solid even at the games weakest times of low population.
This Trial area was fun by everyones standards because of the coordination needed. I don't think this could be disputed at all.
HOWEVER, Directly after the Trial Area players were dropped into the real world. This is where the game went south ONLY BECAUSE OF LOW POPULATION. Veskal's Exchange was the central meeting area for everyone in the game, this was also a low level zone (10-20). Players couldn't leave this hub alone without heavy danger without a group....This area was meant to be played just like the starter area. A group.
My point is the game was made to be way more fun than players realize but it needed a FULL population.
-Second, By this time it was SOE's responsibility to advertise for the re-launch, but they dropped the ball !!
Everyone seems to blame the bad launch totally... Yesssss, your right, mmo's NEVER recover, they only get one chance !
BUT Vanguard re-release could have been a reprieve. It was a brilliant game that only had a half assed chance to prove something amazing despite it's demise.....Again SOE dropped the ball. SOE had an excellent developer team that was unrelated to its piss poor management.
Once players left the starter island they went to a zone which it was dangerous to try and leave without a group.
Unless Vanguard had solid group finding mechanics perhaps the reason few stuck around at this point was the "forced grouping" mechanic?
Seems the more likely explanation.
"True friends stab you in the front." | Oscar Wilde
"I need to finish" - Christian Wolff: The Accountant
Just trying to live long enough to play a new, released MMORPG, playing New Worlds atm
Fools find no pleasure in understanding but delight in airing their own opinions. Pvbs 18:2, NIV
Don't just play games, inhabit virtual worlds™
"This is the most intelligent, well qualified and articulate response to a post I have ever seen on these forums. It's a shame most people here won't have the attention span to read past the second line." - Anon
~~ postlarval ~~
Vanguard's incredible advances in UI had the side effect of making it unnecessary to talk to other players. This killed community. Further, Vanguard was transformed into a WoW experience prior to launch, which also killed community.
Also interesting to hear Veskal's Exchange was a hub. I spent some time there but hadn't realized it was a hub. Cool.
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