Title: Vanguard Beta Post by: Shavnir on December 20, 2006, 10:57:24 PM So apparently I got a beta invite to Vanguard. Anyone want it?
Title: Re: Vanguard Beta Post by: Falconeer on December 21, 2006, 01:53:23 AM me me me oh please I will do anything for it. I'll be your .. mm...
Title: Re: Vanguard Beta Post by: Shavnir on December 21, 2006, 02:09:34 AM Alright pm me your e-mail addy and I'll let you dive on the grenade.
Title: Re: Vanguard Beta Post by: Margalis on December 21, 2006, 02:14:24 AM Does the invite come with $100?
Title: Re: Vanguard Beta Post by: Teleku on December 21, 2006, 04:41:35 AM Hes going to need to offer a little more than $100 bucks to get me to take that beta invite off his hands for him.
Title: Re: Vanguard Beta Post by: Shavnir on December 21, 2006, 05:36:03 AM Like I said, I let him dive on the grenade. I don't even remember signing up for it.
Title: Re: Vanguard Beta Post by: Falconeer on December 21, 2006, 05:41:47 AM I know you played lots of stuff worst than Vanguard in your life.
Actually, I know you payed to play lots of stuff worst than Vanguard. So drop that attitude. The amount of forum kudos you can gain by bashing Vanguard is capped at 20. After that, you have to buy new skills or just levelgrind a little more (with autoattack). EDIT: Thanks a lot, Shavnir :D Title: Re: Vanguard Beta Post by: Signe on December 21, 2006, 06:44:20 AM Be prepared for a two week download.
Title: Re: Vanguard Beta Post by: Shavnir on December 21, 2006, 06:50:24 AM I know you played lots of stuff worst than Vanguard in your life. Actually, I know you payed to play lots of stuff worst than Vanguard. So drop that attitude. The amount of forum kudos you can gain by bashing Vanguard is capped at 20. After that, you have to buy new skills or just levelgrind a little more (with autoattack). EDIT: Thanks a lot, Shavnir :D Ha, schild knows the depth of my true mmo-shame. :-P Title: Re: Vanguard Beta Post by: Endie on December 21, 2006, 06:54:03 AM Ha, schild knows the depth of my true mmo-shame. :-P Soulgainer? Title: Re: Vanguard Beta Post by: Nonentity on December 21, 2006, 07:04:34 AM Be prepared for a two week download. Rumor has it, the install folder is decently into the double-digit numbers. In gigabytes. Title: Re: Vanguard Beta Post by: schild on December 21, 2006, 07:07:39 AM 22GB. Too bad it looks like 19...
...98. Title: Re: Vanguard Beta Post by: Nonentity on December 21, 2006, 07:15:06 AM 22GB. Too bad it looks like 19... ...98. This is all part of McQuaid's plot to have everyone who wants to play this running a supercomputer. Then they'll harness the power of the Ren Faire through their supercomputers, and through some rift in time and space, the popular music becomes bardic harmonies. Title: Re: Vanguard Beta Post by: Strazos on December 21, 2006, 07:24:35 AM Not sure if the catasses will be able to do it. They've been sacrificing their lives to play EQ, then WoW, for years....they may not have the cash from shit jobs to upgrade.
Title: Re: Vanguard Beta Post by: Nonentity on December 21, 2006, 07:36:43 AM Not sure if the catasses will be able to do it. They've been sacrificing their lives to play EQ, then WoW, for years....they may not have the cash from shit jobs to upgrade. If only there were some way to sell in-game assets for money! My friend ended up selling one of AC Darktide characters for 2 or 3 grand. He then promptly used that to buy a new computer. Title: Re: Vanguard Beta Post by: Yegolev on December 21, 2006, 08:06:40 AM I have seen the screenshots. What sort of rig are you really going to need to run that? Worst case you will need to jam another hard disk in your chassis. My machine is something like four years old and I have 650GB of disk space strung up in there. I bet I could run it.
Title: Re: Vanguard Beta Post by: Nonentity on December 21, 2006, 08:12:37 AM :nda: - but don't hold your breath, Yeg. It's beastly.
Title: Re: Vanguard Beta Post by: Falconeer on December 21, 2006, 08:38:19 AM Be prepared for a two week download. Nah, I am sure the download thing has been greatly improved recently. :nda: Title: Re: Vanguard Beta Post by: d4rkj3di on December 21, 2006, 10:28:53 AM Be prepared for a two week download. Nah, I am sure the download thing has been greatly improved recently. :nda: :nda: No, it hasn't. I know a guy who's best friend is on day 3 of just trying to get the files. Title: Re: Vanguard Beta Post by: geldonyetich on December 21, 2006, 10:38:57 AM Sounds like somebody needs to invest in a better client distribution archetexture. Or are we breaking the NDA already?
A 1998 gig client wouldn't be a problem to the catass. It's not like they need to have more than one game installed. Title: Re: Vanguard Beta Post by: Yegolev on December 21, 2006, 10:39:28 AM There should be a :nda: with downturned eyebrows.
Title: Re: Vanguard Beta Post by: Nonentity on December 21, 2006, 10:45:17 AM Man, when the :nda: is up for this game, I'm gonna have fun. Yessir.
Title: Re: Vanguard Beta Post by: Yegolev on December 21, 2006, 10:48:49 AM Man, when the :nda: is up for this game, I'm gonna have fun. Yessir. Now that is a very telling comment. Title: Re: Vanguard Beta Post by: Nonentity on December 21, 2006, 10:52:15 AM Man, when the :nda: is up for this game, I'm gonna have fun. Yessir. Now that is a very telling comment. Hey, I'm just sayin'. Once you turn on the steam-pumps and air-conditioned vents to run the overclocked bio-nano-tech supercomputer, there are things worth talking about. Title: Re: Vanguard Beta Post by: Venkman on December 21, 2006, 12:20:39 PM Sheesh guys, we all got the invites. The only folks affected by NDA-breaking disclosure are folks not reading this thread anyway.
Title: Re: Vanguard Beta Post by: Yegolev on December 21, 2006, 12:38:13 PM I didn't get an invite.
Title: Re: Vanguard Beta Post by: Falconeer on December 21, 2006, 01:49:52 PM Be prepared for a two week download. Nah, I am sure the download thing has been greatly improved recently. :nda: :nda: No, it hasn't. I know a guy who's best friend is on day 3 of just trying to get the files. :nda: well I said what I said based on the fact that I overheard a conversation today between the friend of a guy I know and the janitor, and he was saying that his cousin's girlfriend received the invite on the morning and about 9 hours later it was done. And she doesn't even live in America. Of course the girl wasn't allowed to share the news about her participating in the beta with her boyfriend, but he was spying her with a security cam because when she called sick and barred herself in her room with the computer, he was sure she was cheating on him over the internet. Hope this is not a NDA violation though, apparently that poor girl was pretty excited about the game. Title: Re: Vanguard Beta Post by: geldonyetich on December 21, 2006, 01:51:21 PM We will find her and ban her! ;)
I'm not in the beta either, sorry it was a bit ambiguous. I said "we" meaning "those on the thread" and not "we" meaning "those in the beta". One of these days I might actually sign up for the Vanguard forums. Title: Re: Vanguard Beta Post by: WayAbvPar on December 21, 2006, 02:04:49 PM If it is information from someone in or invited to the beta that is not public knowledge, then it is probably an NDA violation. Err on the side of caution please.
Title: Re: Vanguard Beta Post by: Riley on December 21, 2006, 03:02:11 PM Despite the vastly overwhelming negativity surrounding this game, I'd still like to see it for myself if anyone has a beta to give away :)
Title: Re: Vanguard Beta Post by: sam, an eggplant on December 21, 2006, 03:22:07 PM PM WITH YOUR EMAIL ADDRESS.....
... Just kidding. I'm no typhoid mary, spreading the Vision(tm) around right before christmas just ain't right. Title: Re: Vanguard Beta Post by: geldonyetich on December 21, 2006, 03:22:32 PM Technically, the very transference of your beta account was an NDA violation. Not sure why we tolerated it, but the deed is done.
Title: Re: Vanguard Beta Post by: Venkman on December 21, 2006, 05:26:24 PM You want to get technical? People talking about this shit at all is violating the NDA. I don't care how many friggin :nda: :nda: :nda: you use.
New rule: you can only talk about the NDA if you abide by it. Otherwise you're just e-peening and we all know it. Title: Re: Vanguard Beta Post by: Gutboy Barrelhouse on December 21, 2006, 06:08:45 PM Curious is it NDA legal to talk/message to another BETA tester if you know they are a BETA tester? I am not referring to this game but really any BETA really. I assume that most NDA's have more or less the same language.
Title: Re: Vanguard Beta Post by: geldonyetich on December 21, 2006, 06:24:51 PM Depends on the NDA. I've seen some go so far as to say "Sure, you can discuss the game, but nothing negative" and others that say "You are agreeding not to so much as tell anyone you're in the beta, even if they too are in the beta." Gotta read those things to tell the difference.
As for me, I'm not sworn under an NDA because I'm not in the beta. Therein lies the inherant risk of telling me things I shouldn't know. :wink: Title: Re: Vanguard Beta Post by: Tannhauser on December 21, 2006, 09:13:45 PM If a company lets you beta test (i.e. play for free) you should damn well obey an NDA, I don't care if it's Hello Kitty Murder Isles. :hello_kitty:
It's just proper. Title: Re: Vanguard Beta Post by: tazelbain on December 21, 2006, 09:19:17 PM Ya, all you beta whores should shut the hell up.
Title: Re: Vanguard Beta Post by: Cheddar on December 21, 2006, 09:27:19 PM Why did you waste the invite on the village idiot?
Title: Re: Vanguard Beta Post by: damijin on December 21, 2006, 09:38:47 PM SO ANYWAY
I was totally psyched for Vanguard. My guild was going to move there, and we changed all the graphics on our forums to totally sweet Vanguard: SoH stuff. But after all this talk, I think my 200 member superguild and I are going to play Archlord instead (or maybe Maple Story, not sure). Title: Re: Vanguard Beta Post by: Strazos on December 21, 2006, 10:52:19 PM Talk about picking your poison...
Title: Re: Vanguard Beta Post by: schild on December 22, 2006, 01:51:26 AM Vanguard, Archlord or Maplestory?
Am I the one hallucinating? Title: Re: Vanguard Beta Post by: Endie on December 22, 2006, 02:09:15 AM I kinda inserted my own green. Presumed innocent, and all that...
Title: Re: Vanguard Beta Post by: Simond on December 22, 2006, 06:22:30 AM The amusing thing about the Vanguard NDA is that one of the sites with the most :nda:-breaks (FoH MMOG Discussion) also has frequent visits from Brad.
Title: Re: Vanguard Beta Post by: Strazos on December 22, 2006, 06:53:26 AM That's because they are a moist, warm receptacle for his cock.
Title: Re: Vanguard Beta Post by: SnakeCharmer on December 22, 2006, 06:57:08 AM Vanguard, Archlord or Maplestory? Am I the one hallucinating? Maybe not hallucinating, but obviously missing the sarcasm. I hope. Title: Re: Vanguard Beta Post by: Megrim on December 22, 2006, 06:58:06 AM That's because they are a moist, warm receptacle for his cock. Santa can bring me nothing this Christmas that will wash away the pain. Title: Re: Vanguard Beta Post by: Signe on December 22, 2006, 07:00:26 AM I've seen him post on other boards, too... MMORPG.com for one. He sometimes breaks his own NDA. I think he just likes to see himself post. Anyway, the NDA for this game has definitely proved ineffective. They should just give it up. It didn't hurt WoW any to not bother.
Title: Re: Vanguard Beta Post by: Venkman on December 22, 2006, 08:25:59 AM Because WoW had nothing to make excuses for.
Quote from: SnakeCharmer Maybe not hallucinating, but obviously missing the sarcasm. I hope. In the spirit of the holidays, I will add to my list for Santa a sanitarium for damijin.Title: Re: Vanguard Beta Post by: sam, an eggplant on December 22, 2006, 08:57:22 AM Brad is a terrifically motivated self-promoter during beta, responding immediately to all questions, participating in multiple interviews, posting to various messageboards, sending out screenshots and whatnot, etc. He was on alt.games.everquest every day. Once the game is released, if it's a success, he'll immediately disappear and hire abashi. Of course that won't happen, it won't succeed, because it isn't 1999.
Title: Re: Vanguard Beta Post by: Chenghiz on December 22, 2006, 09:56:33 AM The install size is hardly a secret. It's listed right on the system requirements:
Quote 20 Gigabytes Hard Drive Space Title: Re: Vanguard Beta Post by: Nonentity on December 22, 2006, 10:11:52 AM They're at the point where they have Pre-Order boxes on the freakin' shelves of stores. I have two of them that I'm giving to friends (I'm a bad person, I know).
It's getting towards the home stretch. They need to just drop the NDA already. Anyone who wants to know something about the game already knows about the game. Leaked newsletters, leaked screenshots, the FoH boards, etc. Title: Re: Vanguard Beta Post by: Falconeer on December 22, 2006, 10:41:56 AM Why did you waste the invite on the village idiot? That would be me? Take it back before I'll teleport and confine you on Siege Perilous (with Sinij) and haunt your dreams with graphs for the rest of your life. Title: Re: Vanguard Beta Post by: Cheddar on December 22, 2006, 11:45:21 AM Why did you waste the invite on the village idiot? That would be me? Take it back before I'll teleport and confine you on Siege Perilous (with Sinij) and haunt your dreams with graphs for the rest of your life. Well played sir, I concede this round! I gave you a compliment in the other thread, though, so we are even. lolz intardnet. Title: Re: Vanguard Beta Post by: stray on December 22, 2006, 11:48:34 AM To be fair, Falconeer seems to be fanboi for Test Drive too. Which is a good thing.
I just don't understand the rabid appeal for Vanguard though. It looks like crap, and plays like a gajillion games he's probably played before. Even taking his liking for diku into account, it should only appeal to him on a "normal" level at best. Or am I missing something about it? Title: Re: Vanguard Beta Post by: geldonyetich on December 22, 2006, 11:59:57 AM I was actually up and in a good position to make the first reply on this thread, but passed up the opportunity. Considering my recent stubbornness has convinced everybody I'm hyu-incarnate, you can count your blessions Falconeer ended up with the invite.
Title: Re: Vanguard Beta Post by: HaemishM on December 22, 2006, 12:13:54 PM No, we'd much rather you get the AIDS.
Title: Re: Vanguard Beta Post by: geldonyetich on December 22, 2006, 12:19:50 PM I'd take an invite. Apparently Brad McQuaid deserves me.
Title: Re: Vanguard Beta Post by: Cheddar on December 22, 2006, 12:47:09 PM I'd take an invite. Apparently Brad McQuaid deserves me. For AIDS? Heh. Look on the brightside; WUN did a 180' turn and is now a Title: Re: Vanguard Beta Post by: Falconeer on December 22, 2006, 01:13:39 PM To be fair, Falconeer seems to be fanboi for Test Drive too. Which is a good thing. I just don't understand the rabid appeal for Vanguard though. It looks like crap, and plays like a gajillion games he's probably played before. Even taking his liking for diku into account, it should only appeal to him on a "normal" level at best. Or am I missing something about it? Why am I so rabidly interested in Vanguard? So simple. Can you say Uberdiku ? I played Dikus and EverQuest bastard sons in a form or another for the last 8 years, now I wanna see the end of the story, I wanna see the biggest one of them all. It's "The return of the Creators", it's "Diku's back where it started from", it's "XXL EverQuest". It's like in those crappy hollywood movies, darn! Good or bad, Vanguard will be a milestone and it'll have a place in online videogaming history, even as a failure, as the legitimate child of the EQ. And I just wanna see it. (note that I never said "play") And for the records, no I am not a VG fanboi yet. I posted on the other Vanguard topic here on f13 lots of Brad's comedic posts from other places in the 'net, just to make fun of him. Definitely not the kind of fanboi attitude he likes. (Test Drive on the other hand, rocks! Too bad they pulled off parts trading, that made MCO huge). Title: Re: Vanguard Beta Post by: Nebu on December 22, 2006, 01:16:16 PM I'm hoping to get into this beta for some sick reason. I'm not sure if it's to relive my EQ nostalgia or because I enjoy pain.
Title: Re: Vanguard Beta Post by: geldonyetich on December 22, 2006, 01:19:53 PM Quote Dear geldonyetich, Thank you, Vanguard Forums. I look forward to my "stay" at your "community".Thanks for registering at Vanguard Forums! We are glad you have chosen to be a part of our community and we hope you enjoy your stay. All the best, Vanguard Forums Title: Re: Vanguard Beta Post by: Cheddar on December 22, 2006, 01:28:35 PM Is there enough interest around here for me to try and weasel some beta invites for F13 people?
Title: Re: Vanguard Beta Post by: Nebu on December 22, 2006, 01:41:56 PM Is there enough interest around here for me to try and weasel some beta invites for F13 people? I never realized that you had that kind of power. I continue to underestimate you! Title: Re: Vanguard Beta Post by: damijin on December 22, 2006, 01:51:08 PM Behold, the power of...
eh, nevermind, I just ragged on someone for making a terrible food related pun in the Raph thread the other day~ Title: Re: Vanguard Beta Post by: Signe on December 22, 2006, 01:55:43 PM I would have thought that this is exactly the sort of game that people around here wouldn't be interested in.
Title: Re: Vanguard Beta Post by: Nonentity on December 22, 2006, 01:58:31 PM By all accounts, it's not a terrible looking game.
As far as specific instances, I can't say ( :nda: ), but I digress. Title: Re: Vanguard Beta Post by: Merusk on December 22, 2006, 02:36:21 PM Is there enough interest around here for me to try and weasel some beta invites for F13 people? I never realized that you had that kind of power. I continue to underestimate you! Never underestimate the poooooower of the crazy man. Title: Re: Vanguard Beta Post by: Swede on December 22, 2006, 03:11:04 PM I would have thought that this is exactly the sort of game that people around here wouldn't be interested in. take it from someone who can't say anything - you'r absolutely ri...:nda: Title: Re: Vanguard Beta Post by: Simond on December 22, 2006, 05:42:02 PM Why am I so rabidly interested in Vanguard? www.worldofwarcraft.comSo simple. Can you say Uberdiku ? I played Dikus and EverQuest bastard sons in a form or another for the last 8 years, now I wanna see the end of the story, I wanna see the biggest one of them all.[/size] :rimshot: Title: Re: Vanguard Beta Post by: Yegolev on December 22, 2006, 06:00:03 PM That's because they are a moist, warm receptacle for his cock. Thread's over, Straz wins. Title: Re: Vanguard Beta Post by: Tale on December 22, 2006, 06:42:54 PM The amusing thing about the Vanguard NDA is that one of the sites with the most :nda:-breaks (FoH MMOG Discussion) also has frequent visits from Brad. To the point that he started the thread (http://www.fohguild.org/forums/mmorpg-general-discussion/25222-lots-new-vanguard-info-released-plus-videos-screenshots.html) they're using to break the NDA. Title: Re: Vanguard Beta Post by: Tale on December 22, 2006, 06:49:46 PM Curious is it NDA legal to talk/message to another BETA tester if you know they are a BETA tester? I am not referring to this game but really any BETA really. I assume that most NDA's have more or less the same language. As I understand it, the Vanguard NDA prohibits any discussion of Vanguard beta outside the beta forums and the game itself. PMs, non-Sigil private boards for beta testers, etc, are all against the NDA, and they apparently enforce it. NDAs for game betas could theoretically be acted on like NDAs for any physical product. For example, you sign an NDA to test a company's revolutionary power tool design for carpenters. If you are found to have leaked details of the product to rival manufacturers, the company wil try to nail your ass to the wall for millions of dollars in lost income. It just so happens that many game beta testers don't really get the concept and tend not to read the words, but these NDAs could be similarly enforced. Non-disclosure agreement: you legally agreed not to say anything. I'm told guilds have been removed from beta if Sigil has discovered they have private Vanguard beta discussion forums between their members. I recall one of the public Vanguard beta newsletters asked people to report any such private guild forums to Sigil. Which increases the outrageousness of Brad's participation in the FoH forum. I'm not a lawyer, but I can't see a court taking the Vanguard NDA seriously when the CEO publicly turns a blind eye to constant NDA breaches on FoH and contributes to threads where others are breaking his NDA. Title: Re: Vanguard Beta Post by: geldonyetich on December 22, 2006, 06:53:20 PM NDA breakages are apparently starting to get out of hand (http://www.vanguardsoh.com/forums/showthread.php?t=94646) for the game. It's beginning to sound like if I spend time watching the Vanguard boards I can find out everything I need to know about this game by reading the messages before they're moderated.
Que, "If you can't enforce it, lift the restriction" argument. Title: Re: Vanguard Beta Post by: Falconeer on December 22, 2006, 07:00:18 PM Why am I so rabidly interested in Vanguard? www.worldofwarcraft.comSo simple. Can you say Uberdiku ? I played Dikus and EverQuest bastard sons in a form or another for the last 8 years, now I wanna see the end of the story, I wanna see the biggest one of them all.[/size] :rimshot: Please. WoW is a watered down EQ. How can it be an uberdiku? Cause Raph said so? Or maybe you meant an uberpopular diku. Definitely not an uberdiku. Title: Re: Vanguard Beta Post by: WindupAtheist on December 22, 2006, 08:39:46 PM Whether you like it or not, WoW is the final evolution of the diku. The biggest, the most successful, with the most people willing to say it's fun. VG, even if it wasn't the clusterfuck we all know it's going to be, would never garner enough users to be anything but an grindy irrelevant little subspecies.
Title: Re: Vanguard Beta Post by: Rasix on December 22, 2006, 08:41:21 PM Is there enough interest around here for me to try and weasel some beta invites for F13 people? I never realized that you had that kind of power. I continue to underestimate you! Never underestimate the poooooower of the crazy man. Put your faith in Cheddar, because I don't think the staff will lift a finger for this game. Title: Re: Vanguard Beta Post by: schild on December 22, 2006, 09:24:07 PM what?
Title: Re: Vanguard Beta Post by: Rasix on December 22, 2006, 10:23:58 PM what? Are you going to be submitting a list to the Vanguard CM? :-D Title: Re: Vanguard Beta Post by: schild on December 22, 2006, 10:57:55 PM What?
Title: Re: Vanguard Beta Post by: Falconeer on December 23, 2006, 04:04:34 AM Whether you like it or not, WoW is the final evolution of the diku. The biggest, the most successful, with the most people willing to say it's fun. VG, even if it wasn't the clusterfuck we all know it's going to be, would never garner enough users to be anything but an grindy irrelevant little subspecies. Aside from popularity, I think you are wrong, unless you consider WoW "the final evolution" and "the biggest" just because of its huge subscriber base. We'll talk again as soon as NDA will be lifted. Title: Re: Vanguard Beta Post by: Venkman on December 23, 2006, 06:02:16 AM It all comes down to how you measure diku: by game mechanic alone or by game mechanic and popularity.
Title: Re: Vanguard Beta Post by: Falconeer on December 23, 2006, 06:25:51 AM In this case, I was thinking about game mechanics, game world vastity and amount of content.
But beware, I am not talking about Vanguard being the biggest, not until I try it. It just "promises" to be and it could. We'll see. As I stated elsewhere I am not a VG fanboi yet, just an interested watcher. I am just saying that WoW, based on the three elements I mentioned above, is FAR from being an uberdiku. More like a slight enhancement of EQ, and not in all the three parts, given the 8 years of EQ expansions. Again, I am NOT talking about overall quality of WoW, because I think it's a masterpiece from a certain point of view and it's by far the smoothest diku ever possible. Just not the ultimate one, cause it adds too little, graphics and accessibility aside, to the EQ formula. Especially mechanics-wise and world-wise. And it's not true I don't like WoW. I liked it and loved it for 2 weeks. It just grew old very very fast, for the above mentioned reasons. I still think it's great and understand why so many mmorpg-novices love it like most of us loved EQ back in the days. I am just a little more confused about veterans enjoying it SO MUCH. Title: Re: Vanguard Beta Post by: Venkman on December 23, 2006, 07:07:19 AM Personally, size to me matters much less than content relevancy and density. AC1 was an enormous world, half empty. All of EQ1 zones strung together would take six solid hours to run across, most of it irrelevant (West Karana anyone?). World size, like "seamless world", just aren't selling points to folks who've played enough of these games. And that's VGs core audience.
Otherwise, I hear ya on WoW. I love it on and off. I do think you undersell its integrated PvP as a separate and useful method of advancement that has no analog in EQ. But otherwise agree WoW is EQ1++ with a low barrier enough to attract millions where EQ (nor VG) ever would. Title: Re: Vanguard Beta Post by: Falconeer on December 23, 2006, 07:12:38 AM World size, like "seamless world", just aren't selling points to folks who've played enough of these games. And that's VGs core audience. I admit that, and I admit that world size and exploration capabilities are selling points to me. Actually that's 50% of why I love Test Drive Unlilmited. Still, I like to think that most of VG selling points are yet covered by :nda: , so we'll see. Title: Re: Vanguard Beta Post by: Nija on December 23, 2006, 08:45:31 AM I love sifting through these brown-nosing red name "NDAs should be respected!" threads.
Pathetic. The game blows FYI. Title: Re: Vanguard Beta Post by: Tale on December 23, 2006, 09:41:09 AM Your respect is irrelevant to an NDA. It just sets the conditions under which you can be wtfpwned for a breach. If you choose to breach, that's your gamble. If you choose to breach on someone else's forums, you are forcing them to join your gamble. They might not want to.
Title: Re: Vanguard Beta Post by: Rhonstet on December 23, 2006, 12:54:37 PM I love sifting through these brown-nosing red name "NDAs should be respected!" threads. Pathetic. The game blows FYI. If a game sucks, and you break the NDA, you can probably be sued once the game sucks. That would probably make for a fascinating court case about total abdication of personal and professional responsibility from all involved. If a game is awesome, and you break the NDA, then you're just generating good press and promoting exclusion. If a game is so-so, and you break the NDA, its free advertising for the niche for something that would be flash-in-the-pan anyways. Sounds like win-win-win to me. Why the fuck do they even call it a 'beta' anymore... Title: Re: Vanguard Beta Post by: Endie on December 23, 2006, 03:02:17 PM ...But otherwise agree WoW is EQ1++ with a low barrier enough to attract millions where EQ (nor VG) ever would. To be pedantic, it is the pre-increment operator : ++EQ1. :-P Title: Re: Vanguard Beta Post by: Venkman on December 23, 2006, 07:16:26 PM I was going by the DAoC creature level qualifier.
And I have no idea what a pre-increment operator is :) Title: Re: Vanguard Beta Post by: Cheddar on December 23, 2006, 11:10:29 PM Wow. I am beginning to think it is best not to touch this one!
Title: Re: Vanguard Beta Post by: Endie on December 24, 2006, 01:33:29 AM I was going by the DAoC creature level qualifier. And I have no idea what a pre-increment operator is :) Sorry, I thought you were making a C++ joke. I debated long and hard before writing the next geeky bit, but hey, knowledge is A Good. Basically, if you assign the value of ++EQ1 to a variable, it is made equal to EQ1 plus one (and EQ1 is also incremented by one). If you assign the value of EQ1++ then your variable, then it is made equal to EQ1, then EQ1 is incremented by one. So saying WoW is equal to EQ1++ (the way I thought you were using it) is kinda like saying it is the same as EQ1, but EQ1 is then made better. Titter. See what I did there? Lord, I know I will regret this post. Title: Re: Vanguard Beta Post by: Simond on December 24, 2006, 02:08:42 AM Sounds like win-win-win to me. Why the fuck do they even call it a 'beta' anymore... You can always taken the cynic's route and ask "If this game is going to be so great, why does it need an NDA until just before launch?"Title: Re: Vanguard Beta Post by: Calantus on December 24, 2006, 02:44:10 AM Wouldn't EQ2 be EQ++? In which case I disagree entirely that WoW is the same as EQ2. :hello_kitty:
Title: Re: Vanguard Beta Post by: Venkman on December 24, 2006, 07:54:53 AM Sorry, I thought you were making a C++ joke. I debated long and hard before writing the next geeky bit, but hey, knowledge is A Good. Basically, if you assign the value of ++EQ1 to a variable, it is made equal to EQ1 plus one (and EQ1 is also incremented by one). If you assign the value of EQ1++ then your variable, then it is made equal to EQ1, then EQ1 is incremented by one. So saying WoW is equal to EQ1++ (the way I thought you were using it) is kinda like saying it is the same as EQ1, but EQ1 is then made better. That actually makes sense. The only thing I know about C is to use ! before something to say it's not-something. Like WoW =! SWG, right?And if I drive this to the fourth page, you'll be safe. Nobody uses those page buttons anymore :) Title: Re: Vanguard Beta Post by: Shavnir on December 24, 2006, 02:12:16 PM Actually its != not =!.
Title: Re: Vanguard Beta Post by: geldonyetich on December 24, 2006, 03:01:59 PM IMLTHO, FFXI is EQ++. EQ2 is a considerably more casual friendly game. Vanguard may have been plotting to be an EQ++, but from what I understand they've changed direction a bit, much to the chagrin of their more hardcore fans.
Title: Re: Vanguard Beta Post by: schild on December 24, 2006, 03:38:06 PM FoH is a really fucking terrible forum. While I can see the appeal of NeoGAF, I can't see the appeal of that shit. I need to think of something clever to word/replace/censor the FoH acronym.
Title: Re: Vanguard Beta Post by: Lantyssa on December 24, 2006, 04:07:01 PM Full of Herpes?
Title: Re: Vanguard Beta Post by: geldonyetich on December 24, 2006, 04:25:02 PM That's a waste of a perfectly good letter F in an unassigned acronym.
Title: Re: Vanguard Beta Post by: Margalis on December 24, 2006, 08:43:35 PM Yes, Geldon is right that FFXI is really EQ1++. It was created to be a better EQ. That was pretty much as far as the ambition went.
EQ2 is halfway between EQ and WOW and is moving towards WOW. FFXI has never moved an inch. As far as WOW being the ultimate Diku...only for now. There is always a next thing coming eventually. Title: Re: Vanguard Beta Post by: damijin on December 24, 2006, 09:04:05 PM Quote a really fucking terrible forum is a really fucking terrible forum Title: Re: Vanguard Beta Post by: Fabricated on December 25, 2006, 01:12:33 PM FoH is a really fucking terrible forum. While I can see the appeal of NeoGAF, I can't see the appeal of that shit. I need to think of something clever to word/replace/censor the FoH acronym. Well, when you have a pocketdev from WoW you tend to get a hojillion people just reading the forum as guests to see what's up.Title: Re: Vanguard Beta Post by: Cheddar on December 25, 2006, 09:13:31 PM FoH = quaint.
Title: Re: Vanguard Beta Post by: Xilren's Twin on December 26, 2006, 06:17:33 AM FoH is a really fucking terrible forum. While I can see the appeal of NeoGAF, I can't see the appeal of that shit. I need to think of something clever to word/replace/censor the FoH acronym. "Fanboi's Overblown Hyperbole"? "Flaming Other Hypocrites"? "Fancy Otaku Hermaphrodites"? It's like Acrophobia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Acrophobia_(game)) for evil. Xilren Title: Re: Vanguard Beta Post by: WayAbvPar on December 26, 2006, 07:52:30 AM Is there enough interest around here for me to try and weasel some beta invites for F13 people? I never realized that you had that kind of power. I continue to underestimate you! Never underestimate the poooooower of the crazy man. Put your faith in Cheddar, because I don't think the staff will lift a finger for this game. I don't know...every time I think about Vanguard, I lift one finger on each of my hands. Title: Re: Vanguard Beta Post by: Nonentity on December 26, 2006, 07:58:26 AM I find the WoW/VG threads on the FoH forums the most uninteresting of them, actually.
I like watching the aged diku disciples tear apart games and mechanics in other threads, while the other half of the populace builds them back up. It's like interweb tennis. Title: Re: Vanguard Beta Post by: sam, an eggplant on December 26, 2006, 04:18:48 PM FoH forums aren't really the uberguild chatspot of choice these days, the cool kids all hang out at the elitistjerks guild forums now. That's what I'm told anyway, I haven't played WoW since 8/05 but I occasionally check in on forums and such.
Title: Re: Vanguard Beta Post by: Falconeer on December 26, 2006, 04:25:38 PM IGN/Fileplanet is about to start a half-open (subscribers only) betatest. (http://www.fileplanet.com/promotions/vanguardbeta/prepromo.aspx)
Given the enormity, the client is already available for download. What strikes me is the size: 6.6 gigabytes. WTF? What happened to the remaining 10 gigs? Wonder what got cut out of it... Title: Re: Vanguard Beta Post by: geldonyetich on December 26, 2006, 04:27:18 PM Checking "I Agree to share this information with Sigil Games Online and Sony Online Entertainment for future marketing opportunities relating to Vanguard: Saga of Heroes." required. Oh well, more work for Mailwasher.
Title: Re: Vanguard Beta Post by: sam, an eggplant on December 26, 2006, 04:30:02 PM High-res textures, maybe?
Title: Re: Vanguard Beta Post by: Strazos on December 26, 2006, 06:04:47 PM I have friends who are really looking forward to this thing. One guy even did a full reserve on a copy tonight. I don't know what to do, and I need help. I don't want to see them poisoned by another fucking Diku piece of shit.
Title: Re: Vanguard Beta Post by: stray on December 26, 2006, 06:10:57 PM High-res textures, maybe? Maybe. DDO's normal download version doesn't include high res textures. If you want them, it's optional -- but it definitely doesn't amount to a 20 gig difference. Or even a 5 gig difference. Then again, it's a dungeon centric world. I'd still be surprised though if that makes that big of a difference. Title: Re: Vanguard Beta Post by: Venkman on December 26, 2006, 07:03:08 PM I can't imagine it's the whole world. Maybe there's a level cap, and therefore restricted access from X amount of the game. That plus all associated high res textures, objects, sounds, whatever optimization they've achieved and whatever other content is specific to those places could maybe equal another 16gb in size. Maybe?
Title: Re: Vanguard Beta Post by: Yegolev on December 26, 2006, 07:28:01 PM I have friends who are really looking forward to this thing. One guy even did a full reserve on a copy tonight. I don't know what to do, and I need help. I don't want to see them poisoned by another fucking Diku piece of shit. Some people have bad taste in women, some in MOGs. These people are not the ones that learn lessons easily. Title: Re: Vanguard Beta Post by: Falconeer on December 27, 2006, 03:58:36 AM A stripped down final beta phase (Are we still a couple of month from release? Gamestop/EBGames says 1 month), with only a portion of the world, or with a level cap or even worst low res texture it's not even worth the definition of "free trial". King Clusterfuck incoming? I'll be damned...
Title: Re: Vanguard Beta Post by: Merusk on December 27, 2006, 04:46:16 AM A stripped down final beta phase (Are we still a couple of month from release? Gamestop/EBGames says 1 month), with only a portion of the world, or with a level cap or even worst low res texture it's not even worth the definition of "free trial". King Clusterfuck incoming? I'll be damned... That was my thought. They know that nobody will hit the upper-levels on these trial accounts, so why include the zones, textures, .mp3s and all other files related to them? Save yourself some bandwith (a LOT of bandwith if you're going from 22->6gb) and pass around a reduced file-size. As to a release date, there hasn't been anything official. The EB/GS date is pulled from someone's ass, per their usual M.O. for any announced-but-no-street-date game. Title: Re: Vanguard Beta Post by: Simond on December 27, 2006, 05:23:49 AM I don't know what to do, and I need help. Point and laugh.Edit: Get the popcorn ready (http://www.vanguardsoh.com/forums/showpost.php?p=1797524&postcount=44) Title: Re: Vanguard Beta Post by: sam, an eggplant on December 27, 2006, 04:35:57 PM Looking forward to it. I'd like to think of myself as the kind of open minded enlightened dude who'd be happy to see Vanguard succeed, because great games are good for everybody, but, well, I'm not. I'm bitter over EQ and addicted to my schadenfreude. I get a little tingle in my nipples every time someone badtalks Vanguard. I am a small, small, man.
Title: Re: Vanguard Beta Post by: Signe on December 27, 2006, 06:49:06 PM The next bit of beta is open and you can get it from Fileplanet (http://www.fileplanet.com/promotions/vanguardbeta/prepromo.aspx).
Title: Re: Vanguard Beta Post by: geldonyetich on December 27, 2006, 06:59:01 PM It's not actually open yet, Fileplanet just offers the capacity to download it ahead of time to their subscribers. At a 6.6 Gb download, that might not be a bad idea.
Too bad they wipe my hitpoints every time I let my Fileplanet subscription lapse. Otherwise, I could afford some free softporn (http://hitpoints.fileplanet.com/showproduct.aspx?Productid=249). Title: Re: Vanguard Beta Post by: Simond on December 29, 2006, 11:02:22 AM Another interview (http://vanguard.tentonhammer.com/index.php?module=ContentExpress&func=display&ceid=464), this one all-but-spelling out the beta & launch dates:
Quote [Ten Ton Hammer]: Many of us have seen the rumor recently leaked on the official Vanguard forums which suggests that open beta is expected to begin January 4, 2007. Of course, “expected” doesn’t mean for certain, but can you say with certainty that open beta will begin some time in early January? [Nick Parkinson]: Beta 5, or “open” beta, will be starting in early January. [TTH]: Some Vanguard fans consider moving into open beta so soon after beginning beta 4 (which started in mid-December) as rushing things. We know that much of the content on Kojan was just added and has had limited testing. What prompted this move to open beta so soon after the beginning of beta 4? Does Sigil simply feel the game is ready for open beta, or are there other motivating factors? [NP]: It’s just the right time for beta 5 to start. I think our unusually long prior phases probably threw some folks off and they (understandably) assumed the final two phases would be equally long. Fortunately, we’re at the point where they don’t need to be now and we feel the month or so that beta 4 will have lasted when we move on to beta 5 will be sufficient. [TTH]: An open beta in early January would likely put Vanguard on target to launch shortly after Blizzard’s first World of Warcraft expansion, The Burning Crusade, which will launch January 16. Is it Sigil’s intent to go head to head with the WoW expansion? [NP]: There are a lot of gamers out there. We think that as long as the games are good, both titles can do just fine. Don't forget, the :nda: goes away with beta 5. :mob: Title: Re: Vanguard Beta Post by: Strazos on December 29, 2006, 11:19:12 AM I'm not in the beta, so I am not held down by NDA. But I know someone in the beta, and have seen the character creator, as well as some gameplay. All I can say is...
WTF are these people thinking? I'm not sure who is more delusional - the devs who think the same old shit is going to meet with success, who the players who've already played this style of garbage before, and are STILL hyped about this turd. Just gonna ramble off some stuff: - Player models are ugly. Yes, you have a lot of sliders to play with. I didn't see a "fucking ugly graphic" slider to raise or lower. - Regurgitated gameplay. Instead of starting on rats and bats, at least in one area you start out on slime. Still plays like auto-attack + ability bullshit. How novel. Also, looks like they just put the abilities from EQ classes in a hat and shuffled them up, then drew them and assigned them a class. Necromancer is back, and is yet again a pet class. Blood Mage is the class with the drains and dots. And bards yet again sing different things to give AE effects. Oh, but now instead of twisting by hand, you "build a song," which is really just automating the singing of different songs from EQ. It's not cute, Sigil. It's a sign of bad things to come when new players automatically assume or ask if certain classes, like Shaman, are going to have good slows. Or that bards have travel songs. And they wear heavier armor. Way to be different. Morons. - Oooo, you get a horse early in the game for travel. And you can put barding on it, and it kind of levels up. Big deal - how does it affect gameplay? "Awesome, you get a horse (or songs) for fast travel early in the game!" Yeah, too bad travel is going to Suck Fucking Ass in this game, due to both an almost complete lack of magical travel, and the sheer size of the world. +30-40% move rate is nice, until you realize that the world is 300%+ larger than EQ or something. - OOO, the texture for that wall in the solo dungeon looks nice. The clouds are dynamic and shit. Cool stuff, I wonder how they had time to design that kind of extra stuff... I'm going to laugh all the way to the fucking bank when this thing flops with everyone except for people with a poopsock permanently stitched to their anus. Title: Re: Vanguard Beta Post by: Merusk on December 29, 2006, 12:04:44 PM How does one empty a permanently attached poopsock? Doesn't it defeat the purpose? Wouldn't a cork achieve the same end and be less painful?
The horse thing does sound pretty nifty, however. It's not a gameplay-enhancing element, but a worldly element. The same is true of the housing and 'inn' features they've been crowing about. Their idea seems to have become "Combine EQ combat AND SWG/ UO world features" somewhere along the line. They're promising to be the first MMO since UO to provide boats, afterall. That said, the catass time to get to the fun/ neato parts still kill the game in the womb. Title: Re: Vanguard Beta Post by: Morat20 on December 29, 2006, 12:30:39 PM Oh good. Boats. That's a triple-A game there. Think of all the fun that could be had with boats.
Umm..... No, seriously, boats? I can understand housing. Crafting. Even this weird diplomacy thing. But what's the big deal with the fucking boats, other than "It's like a horse, but made of wood and travels on water"? It's nice, but I think I'd prefer to forego boats in favor of having the suck removed. Title: Re: Vanguard Beta Post by: Venkman on December 29, 2006, 12:49:25 PM If a Horse is a worldy element, then so are SoW boots and Selos.
Nah. Horses are to get the job, as defined by the game mechanic, done faster. Now, if these were pack horses where you could put stuff you couldn't carry on your person, or war horses you could armor up and have fight for you, then we're talking about some unique thinking. Yes those have appeared in games before. No they haven't been experienced by the vast majority of gamers. Boats on the other hand, those are cool. At least in theory. If they do it right, it's a new way of playing the same game. And you know? That's sometimes just fine for this genre, in a WoW flying mount, or SWG: JTL sorta way. Title: Re: Vanguard Beta Post by: Merusk on December 29, 2006, 12:56:03 PM Oh good. Boats. That's a triple-A game there. Think of all the fun that could be had with boats. Umm..... No, seriously, boats? I can understand housing. Crafting. Even this weird diplomacy thing. But what's the big deal with the fucking boats, other than "It's like a horse, but made of wood and travels on water"? It's nice, but I think I'd prefer to forego boats in favor of having the suck removed. Every time I read someone bringing up UO to reminisce about, this will go through my head and I will giggle madly. Thanks If a Horse is a worldy element, then so are SoW boots and Selos. Nah. Horses are to get the job, as defined by the game mechanic, done faster. Straight sow/ selos is more game-y than worldly, simply because it's more artificial. You also don't have to include anything beyond the speed increase and MAYBE some pretty flashing lights. Horses imply a lot more thought that "hey we need some way to decrease travel time," and add another layer of realism to things, in addition to making you a bit more attached to your character. Quote Now, if these were pack horses where you could put stuff you couldn't carry on your person, or war horses you could armor up and have fight for you, then we're talking about some unique thinking. Yes those have appeared in games before. No they haven't been experienced by the vast majority of gamers. There was, at one time, a rumor about horse-mounted fighting but I think it was scrapped. They DO have caravans, which I suppose implies pack-horses. I wonder if you can have a burro that stands around while you hack a_snake_0239 to death. Probably not, ah well. Quote Boats on the other hand, those are cool. At least in theory. If they do it right, it's a new way of playing the same game. And you know? That's sometimes just fine for this genre, in a WoW flying mount, or SWG: JTL sorta way. Yep. Nifty toys are always fun. Like houses. I may favor gamey environments, but I like me some nifty toys to play with from time to time, too. They don't even have to enhance my grinding efficiency. :-D Title: Re: Vanguard Beta Post by: stray on December 29, 2006, 12:56:28 PM No, seriously, boats? Boats in a Vanguard world....Yeah, probably not cool. Boats in a UO 2.0 world, where I can rape and pillage innocent spice traders. Yeah, that's cool. [EDIT] This post was for Merusk. Title: Re: Vanguard Beta Post by: Morat20 on December 29, 2006, 01:02:12 PM Don't get me wrong -- I'm all for options. River and ocean travel on my own boat? Great. Sign me up. Sounds fun. However, this needs to be in the context of an actual fun game.
If the game's for shit, boats are a stupid thing to be wasting time on, unless they are somehow integral to the gameplay, which is more my complaint. Vanguard has -- as best I can tell -- a lot of problems, and it's launch seems destined to be a replay of SWG. Boats are really not an important issue right now. I suspect there are few damn people out there who are going to say "This game isn't all that great, and it's buggy, and it runs like shit -- but fuck, it's got boats. Sign me up!". Boats are not the new Jedi. They're boats. They don't even have the slightly guilty allure of player housing. Title: Re: Vanguard Beta Post by: stray on December 29, 2006, 01:13:10 PM As much as I'd like to rag on Vanguard, I don't think this will be anywhere near the clusterfuck that SWG was. For one, it's a diku. From Brad McQuaid of all people. There's not much to screw up there. There aren't as many expectations from a fantasy setting like this as there was with SWG either.
Title: Re: Vanguard Beta Post by: Morat20 on December 29, 2006, 02:01:22 PM As much as I'd like to rag on Vanguard, I don't think this will be anywhere near the clusterfuck that SWG was. For one, it's a diku. From Brad McQuaid of all people. There's not much to screw up there. There aren't as many expectations from a fantasy setting like this as there was with SWG either. To my mind? It'll be worse. Expectations at least get you eyeballs. All that new "WoW" market is going to take a fucking look at that, see a chugging graphics engine that's throwing (and they will NOT fucking upgrade to a new PC just to run Vanguard), see gameplay that's not as "grindy" as the hard-core masochists want, but that's a fuck more grindy than the casuals like, and see a game released several months too early and with all the flaws to show for it. The casuals will go back to WoW, because it's polished, runs on their PC's and is fun. The MMORPG vets will release it's EQ2 meets SWG with an extra helping of dick-grinder, and decide they're too old for that shit and go back to whatever game they were getting bored with. The Brad vanbois will buy 30 boxes a piece, bitching about how Brad sold out the hardcore vision in which the game ships with a giant spiked dildo to shove up your ass while playing and made it too much like "WoW" in an attempt to attract 10 year olds while simultaneously praising the 5 FPS they get in the middle of nowhere as a brilliant cockblock designed to make sure ONLY people running 6k rigs who are ALSO hardcore old-style gamers will play -- thus keeping out the WoWbois. In short, Vanguard seems designed to appeal to the intersection of the following groups: 1) People with top-of-the-line machines. 2) People who like shoving their dick in a grinder. 3) People who want EQ1, only with more suffering. 4) People who hate people who like WoW. 5) People who are willing to play it for the game it MIGHT be, two years down the road, once The Vision is complete. So yeah, SWG meets EQ meets Lineage meets PC snobs. I think "clusterfuck". And yes -- I'm aware that Vanguard isn't quite the grind-fest it originally appeared to be. I just think the hard-core Vanbois really WANT a dick-grinder, and that everyone else (vets and newbie "WoW is my first MMORPG!") isn't going to tolerate the "Same old shit". I think Vanguard is going to demonstrate that one thing Blizzard has really done to the market is make people intolerante of shitty releases. Title: Re: Vanguard Beta Post by: Venkman on December 29, 2006, 03:35:09 PM VG does not have the expectations SWG had, simply because VG is just a game IP appealing to just MMORPG players. SWG cast a net based on the license that covers, well, just about everyone.
VG may or not tank publicly and royally. But it'll do so base solely on its relevance as a game. Quote from: Merusk Straight sow/ selos is more game-y than worldly, simply because it's more artificial. You also don't have to include anything beyond the speed increase and MAYBE some pretty flashing lights. Horses imply a lot more thought that "hey we need some way to decrease travel time," and add another layer of realism to things, in addition to making you a bit more attached to your character. Unless the Horse actually performs like a horse, like, it needs to be fed, groomed and so on, then it's simply replacing the gleamies of Selos with a 3D object. Particularly if everyone can have one quickly. That's my only beef. I like spells (I actually loved the EQ1 Bard song twisting. I've never seen the like, except maybe SB Shadow Mage). I like horses. I just want them to mean something more than just a spell rendered differently. Otherwise, it's a waste.And careful with that "realism" thing. VG has spells too :) Title: Re: Vanguard Beta Post by: stray on December 29, 2006, 03:45:18 PM What exactly is bard song twisting (never played EQ heh...except a short trial)? The only bards I've like so far are Shadowbane Bards....Were they anything like that?
Title: Re: Vanguard Beta Post by: Nonentity on December 29, 2006, 03:48:27 PM What exactly is bard song twisting (never played EQ heh...except a short trial)? The only bards I've like so far are Shadowbane Bards....Were they anything like that? When you cast a song as a Bard in EQ, it would lag for a second, and then everyone in your party would get an extremely short duration buff, think 15-20 seconds. As soon as that buff hits, you would stop playing that song and start casting another one (casting songs? heh), until that one hit, and then start casting a third one. If you were fast, you could keep a couple songs 'twisted' together at once like that. Title: Re: Vanguard Beta Post by: stray on December 29, 2006, 03:55:35 PM Same as SB then. Think they had 30 sec timers though. You could pretty much run all of them -- especially with a macro. ;)
My SB bard shunned group support though. That was my solo pk'er. Awesome kiter with bows. Super speed, +haste, +damage, + regen, etc.. Title: Re: Vanguard Beta Post by: CaptainNapkin on December 29, 2006, 04:06:21 PM I have to just lol at some of the performance comments, I just don't get it, for this and other games also. Obviously there's layers of sarcasm and exaggeration laced in those comments, but I'm not sure I could actually spend 6 grand on a box (without a monitor, which you don't need to upgrade until they die). Hell, if you want to play high end console games you have shell out 400 or 600 bucks, and this is PC land where we don't get off that easy. But seriously, where does it come from? My PCs here are no where near uber by today's standards and everything's running perfectly :nda: All the other comments (many of which seem based on "my buddy's girlfriend's brother's sister who's in beta said" type of stuff) aside, if you don't expect to shell out a 1000-1500 beans every 2 or 3 years to upgrade your PC, then methinks PC gaming shouldn't be your hobby of choice. Then, by all means, stick with WoW that will run at 100fps on your 64meg card... it also happens to be a really fun game for a good amount of time.
Title: Re: Vanguard Beta Post by: Venkman on December 29, 2006, 05:05:17 PM Same as SB then. Think they had 30 sec timers though. You could pretty much run all of them -- especially with a macro. ;) Yes. I didn't think twisting was in ANY other game until I played the SB Shadow Mage. I was able to "twist" quite a number of buffs in SB. In EQ1, the usual cap was 2 for the lazy, 3 for the involved, 4 if you did nothing but twist songs, and on rare occasion, 5 if you were using some songs with much longer durations. I usually hovered in the 3 to 4 range depending on if I was also meleeing (in the 20s-30s range). There was also a school of thought that said having 5 buffs where only 3 were up at any given time was better all around than just having those 3, but I didn't really side with those.My SB bard shunned group support though. That was my solo pk'er. Awesome kiter with bows. Super speed, +haste, +damage, + regen, etc.. Song twisting was apparently an accident, not intended by design. It's a shame though. I really wish other games integrated something like it. It really allowed players to define themselves as more than the sum of their gear and time-in. But at least the genre has integrated other ways of self uniqueness over time. Title: Re: Vanguard Beta Post by: Kageru on December 29, 2006, 05:38:26 PM Same as SB then. Think they had 30 sec timers though. You could pretty much run all of them -- especially with a macro. ;) That's a major part of the difference, the serious bards did not macro their songs. This is partly because they had quite a few songs but mostly because EQ's macro capability was pretty basic / restricted. So you had a person spending potentially hours at a time keeping a simple rhythm on their keyboard. Visiting the bard class forums, and watching all the discussions on RSI prevention, made you realise how insane it all was. During the game it also meant that bards were mostly silent in chat, or had the very distinctive "ok12" as parts of their beat got into their short chat responses. I tried it for a while, but it was too much work... though the things a good bard could do were insane / unbalanced. From my memory the mechanics are that a time period was 6 seconds, bard songs were three seconds to cast and most songs would last for 6 seconds then fade over the next 12, which gave you the chance to trigger two more songs while the first was fading. As for Vanguard, meh. Though I do look forward to the NDA dropping so it can be dissected in the search for any originality. Title: Re: Vanguard Beta Post by: stray on December 29, 2006, 06:08:27 PM The SB bard songs were instacast, if I recall...Which adds another layer of convenience compared to EQ, I guess.
Really great class, only topped by SB Mage Assassins. I've been wanting to see those two pop up in another game somewhere for awhile now. Title: Re: Vanguard Beta Post by: Threash on December 29, 2006, 06:35:03 PM This thread should now be about SB bards, best class evah. Running in at full speed and smacking the shit out of someone with my blade master bard and then being able to run off before most of his group even knew what hit him was so much fun.
Title: Re: Vanguard Beta Post by: stray on December 29, 2006, 07:02:27 PM I had a great bard name: Elvis the Pelvis. Irekei with the big chop sideburns 8-)
Title: Re: Vanguard Beta Post by: Strazos on December 29, 2006, 07:07:26 PM I had a monk in EQ once named Showa Stoppah.
Unfortunately, I did not play her enough to actually put the Stoppah surname on. Title: Re: Vanguard Beta Post by: Falconeer on December 30, 2006, 07:57:16 AM praising the 5 FPS they get in the middle of nowhere as a brilliant cockblock designed to make sure ONLY people running 6k rigs Vanguard scores higher than 5fps on anything better than a 1980s Casio pocket calculator. I am sure there are lots of 2007 releases that will really run at 5fps on your computer but I don't see you bitching about every single one of them. Finally, assuming you actually managed to see the game, you are talking about a beta client that's not even in its final stage. There's nothing much I can do for you than quote myself from post #6 of this very topic: Quote Drop that attitude. The amount of forum kudos you can gain by bashing Vanguard is capped at 20. After that, you have to buy new skills or just levelgrind a little more (with autoattack). Title: Re: Vanguard Beta Post by: Modern Angel on December 30, 2006, 08:10:56 AM The mole! Oh you are a wily one, waiting 365 posts in before the reveal. My hat's off to you, rapscallion!
Title: Re: Vanguard Beta Post by: Falconeer on December 30, 2006, 08:59:53 AM Kids these days...
Title: Re: Vanguard Beta Post by: Venkman on December 30, 2006, 09:46:14 AM This has come up before, most recently in the Tabula Rasa thread. The point isn't the 5fps. It's that it's 5fps for an MMOG. You want to cast as wide a net possible there or risk losing people (http://everquest2.station.sony.com) to those games that do (http://www.worldofwarcraft.com). Yes, some folks will upgrade their rigs for an MMOG. No, it's not nearly the same percentage of players as it is in FPS games. It's a question of motivation: what matters in an MMOG is fairly different than an FPS.
Title: Re: Vanguard Beta Post by: Signe on December 30, 2006, 10:14:31 AM Just the thought of Vanguard makes me feel all emo inside.
(http://www.threadless.com/product/370/minizoom.jpg) :cry: Title: Re: Vanguard Beta Post by: geldonyetich on December 30, 2006, 11:25:22 AM Actually, I don't think low FPS hurt MMORPG much, because they've lag-friendly gameplay that basically require you click once on a target, turn on your autoattack, and ride the hotbar from there. There some more actiony MMORPGs, like City of Heroes, that have a hard time with low FPS. However, diku-like ones run pretty playable at low FPS. Case in point: EQ2.
Title: Re: Vanguard Beta Post by: Morat20 on December 30, 2006, 11:27:16 AM This has come up before, most recently in the Tabula Rasa thread. The point isn't the 5fps. It's that it's 5fps for an MMOG. You want to cast as wide a net possible there or risk losing people (http://everquest2.station.sony.com) to those games that do (http://www.worldofwarcraft.com). Yes, some folks will upgrade their rigs for an MMOG. No, it's not nearly the same percentage of players as it is in FPS games. It's a question of motivation: what matters in an MMOG is fairly different than an FPS. There's also the fact that really low FPS makes many games look like shit. Who wants a brand new game that looks like shit? Hardcore players will upgrade their PCs. Most people will say "This looks like shit" and go play something else.And it's really not the FPS that's the problem in Vanguard. It's that weird hitching feel as it loads up the world around you as you move. Almost stuttering at times. For people used to playing WoW, that's going to look awful. Title: Re: Vanguard Beta Post by: LC on December 30, 2006, 01:29:32 PM praising the 5 FPS they get in the middle of nowhere as a brilliant cockblock designed to make sure ONLY people running 6k rigs Vanguard scores higher than 5fps on anything better than a 1980s Casio pocket calculator. I am sure there are lots of 2007 releases that will really run at 5fps on your computer but I don't see you bitching about every single one of them. Finally, assuming you actually managed to see the game, you are talking about a beta client that's not even in its final stage. There's nothing much I can do for you than quote myself from post #6 of this very topic: Quote Drop that attitude. The amount of forum kudos you can gain by bashing Vanguard is capped at 20. After that, you have to buy new skills or just levelgrind a little more (with autoattack). I have also seen Vansuck first hand. (I have not signed an NDA. I never even signed up for Vansuck beta.) The game runs like shit on anything but the minimum settings. When you set it to the minimum settings it looks just like asherons call 1 (before the graphics update) and still runs at <24 fps. I laughed as my friend was killed by a snake that was at least 100 yards behind him. Title: Re: Vanguard Beta Post by: Tale on December 30, 2006, 04:16:22 PM Question: where is Brad McQuaid? He's been totally silent for weeks on the Vanguard public boards at least. That's out of character for Aradune.
Edit: here's his dev tracker in the VG forums: http://www.vanguardsoh.com/forums/search.php?searchid=4763625 Title: Re: Vanguard Beta Post by: Signe on December 30, 2006, 05:37:04 PM Someone said somewhere and I'm sure it wasn't the Vanguard forum because I haven't actually read a post there in ages... that he was gone from before Xmas until after New Years. I don't remember the posted dates, but I read it just before Xmas. Somewhere. Unless I've accidentally made this up. Again. :|
Title: Re: Vanguard Beta Post by: Tale on December 30, 2006, 07:27:52 PM That seems weird because the December newsletter (http://www.vanguardsoh.com/Newsletters/Dec2006/main/december.html) says "We are cancelling Christmas" and they're about to go to open beta. Then again, if I was him I'd probably want a month off before dealing with all that.
Title: Re: Vanguard Beta Post by: Signe on December 30, 2006, 08:06:55 PM Okay, so maybe I made it up. It wasn't on purpose. Seriously. I'm not Fox. I read that somewhere about someone though.
Title: Re: Vanguard Beta Post by: Tale on December 30, 2006, 09:48:40 PM You are a fox, Signe. You are.
Title: Re: Vanguard Beta Post by: Mi_Tes on December 31, 2006, 09:29:29 AM While looking for the Collector's Edition of the new WOW, I saw a release date for Vanguard of 1/29. That was a hell of a lot sooner than I expected!
Below is the last topic from Aradune in the Vanguard Forums. For anyone who missed the funny, I just had to share that Brad's beta is bigger and longer. Guess we will see very soon if those qualities make Brad's Vanguard any better. My guess is Vanguard will initially sell up to 225K boxes and after 3 months have less than 125K subs, falling some, and then holding under 100K subs. http://www.vanguardsoh.com/forums/showthread.php?postid=1720812#post1720812 (http://www.vanguardsoh.com/forums/showthread.php?postid=1720812#post1720812) 09-25-06, 04:45 PM #85 Aradune Mithara Sigil Games Online Join Date: 2003 Jul Re: Download Size of Beta -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Quote: Originally Posted by Zaryn Hey Brad, any chance of getting tee-shirts for your employees that say "Our beta is bigger than yours" And longer __________________ Brad McQuaid CEO, Sigil Games Online, Inc. Exec. Producer, Vanguard: Saga of Heroes. and 12-06-06, 03:06 PM #92 Aradune Mithara Sigil Games Online Join Date: 2003 Jul Re: Download Size of Beta -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- We're getting it down to about 18 gigs for launch by optmizing woohoo __________________ Brad McQuaid CEO, Sigil Games Online, Inc. Exec. Producer, Vanguard: Saga of Heroes. Title: Re: Vanguard Beta Post by: Simond on December 31, 2006, 01:30:29 PM Question: where is Brad McQuaid? He's been totally silent for weeks on the Vanguard public boards at least. That's out of character for Aradune. No, no, no - Brad is chatty as long as the game's still in beta. Once it goes live (or, apparently, is about to start open beta) he vanishes and is replaced by people like Abashi.Edit: here's his dev tracker in the VG forums: http://www.vanguardsoh.com/forums/search.php?searchid=4763625 Title: Re: Vanguard Beta Post by: Miasma on December 31, 2006, 03:18:11 PM They keep saying that there will be no official forums once it launches too.
Title: Re: Vanguard Beta Post by: Simond on December 31, 2006, 06:04:17 PM That'll last until SOE buys Sigil out. ;)
Title: Re: Vanguard Beta Post by: SpaceDrake on December 31, 2006, 11:39:28 PM Below is the last topic from Aradune in the Vanguard Forums. For anyone who missed the funny, I just had to share that Brad's beta is bigger and longer. Guess we will see very soon if those qualities make Brad's Vanguard any better. My guess is Vanguard will initially sell up to 225K boxes and after 3 months have less than 125K subs, falling some, and then holding under 100K subs. That's pretty generous. "The buzz" I've heard in various places would indicate that it might sell in six-digits initially, but I'd be goddamn stunned if it didn't pull an Auto Assault and tank into the four-digits in terms of long-term subs. There's just nothing being offered here that can't be found elsewhere. Title: Re: Vanguard Beta Post by: Strazos on January 01, 2007, 02:21:05 AM But but but, what about the card game of Diplomacy!?
Title: Re: Vanguard Beta Post by: Simond on January 01, 2007, 03:42:33 AM That's pretty generous. "The buzz" I've heard in various places would indicate that it might sell in six-digits initially, but I'd be goddamn stunned if it didn't pull an Auto Assault and tank into the four-digits in terms of long-term subs. There's just nothing being offered here that can't be found elsewhere. ...even on SOE's own All-Access pass, to boot.I suppose that Smed figured it'd be better for EQ/EQ2 players to fork over for an AAP to try out Vanguard rather than unsub. Quite canny, really. Title: Re: Vanguard Beta Post by: Gutboy Barrelhouse on January 01, 2007, 05:54:46 AM Already getting some guildies that have been absent coming back to SWG after the "wow, cool a new game this must rock" wore off and the real game was revealed for what it is. Kinda sad when a BETA does not hold their interest at least till launch when the would have spent money.
Title: Re: Vanguard Beta Post by: Mi_Tes on January 01, 2007, 07:40:31 AM Below is the last topic from Aradune in the Vanguard Forums. For anyone who missed the funny, I just had to share that Brad's beta is bigger and longer. Guess we will see very soon if those qualities make Brad's Vanguard any better. My guess is Vanguard will initially sell up to 225K boxes and after 3 months have less than 125K subs, falling some, and then holding under 100K subs. That's pretty generous. "The buzz" I've heard in various places would indicate that it might sell in six-digits initially, but I'd be goddamn stunned if it didn't pull an Auto Assault and tank into the four-digits in terms of long-term subs. There's just nothing being offered here that can't be found elsewhere. The generosity came from the Vanguard boards, seeing that many EQ players will buy it just because it is a "Brad McQuaid" game and the fact that there hasn't been many new MMO's out lately. I think many will be unsubbing very quickly because they will have a difficult time installing and running this game on their systems, many will realize that it wasn't the game that it was made out to be, and I agree with you, almost everything Vanguard can be found elsewhere with more fun. If it was anything but a fantasy game (built to bring out the catass), I would agree that it would be in the 4 digit numbers, but given who it is build for, I don't see any less than 50K-100K subs for as long as it takes to max out at least one character. Given how much time and money this game has taken to make, this game will never be able to keep over 200-250K subs it needs to make money anyway, so I guess the bets are on for how much money this game will loose. The next few months should be fun to watch. :evil: Title: Re: Vanguard Beta Post by: HRose on January 01, 2007, 07:52:57 AM My bet is 60k after three/four month.
The interesting part is that EQ2 will be a much better game. And that SOE is just trading its own subscribers between games without getting any new ones. Title: Re: Vanguard Beta Post by: SpaceDrake on January 01, 2007, 11:36:03 AM My bet is 60k after three/four month. The interesting part is that EQ2 will be a much better game. And that SOE is just trading its own subscribers between games without getting any new ones. Are they, though? I had forgotten about the All-Access Pass. Still, given the state of the client, this won't be a financial success. Title: Re: Vanguard Beta Post by: Falconeer on January 01, 2007, 05:33:26 PM But but but, what about the card game of Diplomacy!? :nda: , darn... can't wait to stop speculate and actually start talking about the game... Title: Re: Vanguard Beta Post by: HRose on January 01, 2007, 05:56:37 PM Are they, though? I had forgotten about the All-Access Pass. How are things different?Still, given the state of the client, this won't be a financial success. I think that all-access pass still gives money depending whether the player logs in the game or not. Even if they can "falsify" the sub numbers by counting those subscribed to all those titles what matters is the money that goes to Sigil. If you play EQ2, Vanguard and maybe even SWG or EQ then surely much less money goes to Sigil. The other important point is that EQ2 and Vanguard aren't going to be so different experiences that you are going to have an interest to play both. It's already very hard to find a player that maintains a sub to both WoW and EQ2. In this case the games are even more similar. So why playing both? How many powerplayers are there that two or more mmorpgs aren't enough? The two games just aren't different enough to justify playing both. And I'm still convinced that EQ2 is a much better game and if you have to choose, you'll choose that one. About the client, yeah. A while ago I wrote that all the design issues and principles behind Vanguard and that were criticized may not even be a relevant reason why the game will do poorly. I would be much more worried about the technology they have and production values. I mean, Vanguard was supposed to have the very best technology, graphic and and art direction. While today it can hardly compete even with EQ2, that also had to deal with a terrible client, not so great art direction, poor animations and so on. Those problems have the priority over Brad's arguable game design choices. EQ2's devs still today are fighting against all the bad decisions at the basis of EQ2, Vanguard looks like starting even more behind from EQ2 at release. The point is: when Vanguard will perform way below the expectations (assuming it will), SOE and Sigil will continue to support it more strongly than ever (as SOE did on EQ2 under Hartsman's direction), or it will just be pushed forward with just the vitality support, as it happened with Matrix Online, while Sigil will be disbanded and then absorbed once again by SOE? Title: Re: Vanguard Beta Post by: Falconeer on January 01, 2007, 06:02:22 PM I foresee lots and lots of people dropping EQ2 for Vanguard. We'll talk again in a year (hopefully earlier...).
EDIT: I am not foreseeing a bright future for Vanguard. Actually, the opposite it's true (much like everyone else). But I doubt it will be able to score under any expectation, given that expectations are the lowest I ever heard for any "major" mmorpg. Title: Re: Vanguard Beta Post by: Sairon on January 01, 2007, 06:17:25 PM I think A LOT of people will try the preview trial ( open beta in MMO terms ), and very few of those actually buying the game. I think the playerbase for these kind of dikus wants a little more of an upgrade before leaving their "work" behind in for example EQ2. It could very well crash and burn faster than AA.
Title: Re: Vanguard Beta Post by: HRose on January 01, 2007, 06:21:49 PM EDIT: I am not foreseeing a bright future for Vanguard. Actually, the opposite it's true (much like everyone else). But I doubt it will be able to score under any expectation, given that expectations are the lowest I ever heard for any "major" mmorpg. Of course these days everyone expect 1M easy.But Brad still said he expect 300-400k at least. That is close to twice what EQ2 got (I'm not sure nowadays). And you really believe EQ2's players will consider Vanguard a better game? Title: Re: Vanguard Beta Post by: Falconeer on January 01, 2007, 07:42:07 PM I know Eq2 players are seriously burned out. And I am talking of long term players, not the new ones that are just appreciating the game as it is now. If you played EQ2 for 2 years, you don't give a dildo about how much it has improved. Quite the opposite is true: lots of the oldest players left a long ago and if you can meet them occasionally these days it's because everyone likes to pay a visit when a new patch or expansion is released. One of the things you can't almost find at all in EQ2 is enthusiasm: sure it has its lovers (I am one of them, after all), but it's a game that comes with a moan included in the subscription. Even its biggest fans secretly hide the big delusion (?) of what it could have been, but it's not. And lots of those who are still playing it make no mystery of the fact that, given you don't like/want to play WoW, there's nothing else worth playing in the fantasy diku market (Actually, I can't recall any other professional fantasy diku released since WoW/EQ2, and I mean 2 years... 25 months! Can you?).
So: a) lots of the former hardcore eq2 players already left the ship - although they are still paying the subscription (a.k.a. the Nostalgia pass... so no one can say you dropped the old EQ1 account.. or you let your SWG house decay) to casually login from time to time and say hello to the guild/family.. this give the false idea that EQ2 has more players than what's actually true. b) lots of the former, and the latter, eq2 players are deluded EQ players who couldn't find a home for their original eq needings. More than half of my guild kept talking about moving to Vanguards since early 2005, and no they didn't stopped when the game supposedly got better with time. So they will switch to Vanguard. And it's not important at all if Vanguard will deliver the experience they are looking for, the proof of this being EQ2 itself: they stick to it for two years despite hating it. EQ2 was NOTHING of what they were waiting for, but still it was the *closest* thing, so they played it anyway for two years (on and off, of course... as very very few people played it without taking breaks and pauses... and we are back to the "enthusiasm" part). c) as I said, they are burned out and hungry for something new, but not that new. While LoTRO will try to scratch off from WoW a handful of players, Vanguard is going for the EQ2 audience in the same identical way EQ2 went for the EQ1 one. The entire argument that Vanguard could stomp EQ2's feet was raised back in the days when EQ2 was announced and EQ1 was still going strong. Apparently, it's their strategy, they believe in it. Only difference here is Vanguard could merge the two EQs, and I am pretty sure this is what Smed is hoping for, especially after the EQ2 commercial fiasco. I think the main and only reason why SOE "bought" Vanguard and Brad back is because they failed to make a true Everquest sequel (lore aside), they failed the EQ audience and now they want those customers back (for starters). Well, I could go on a lot, but to answer your question: roughly 50% of the actual EQ2 players will stick to it as it is exactly the kind of game they want to play. The majority of them being the "newest" players or well-established Guilds that love to have the edge and the "serverfirsts" more than actually enjoying the game. Another 50% will move to Vanguard, cause it is exactly what they wanted to play in the first place and patiently waited to be released while mindlessly playing EQ2 to kill boredom in the meantime. On expectations: Brad says 300k - 400k but I think he *hopes* to get 400k players, different story from *expecting* it (I don't care what he says, he's got no nerves o' steel and I am sure he has nightmares about hooded-axe-wielding-killer-subscription-figures all the time). Reading f13 at a glance would make any casual lurker think Vanguard will score as bad as Dark and Light or Horizons, being probably less fun than those two joined together. Those I call public expectations, and based on those I think should Vanguard reach 300k subs, it should be considered a success. Anyway, I doubt it will be able to go under any realistic expectation. Disclaimer: the above considerations are just based on a personal view of the EQ2 state of the game. I am not even taking into account Vanguard's quality, as it still counts as uncharted lands to me. Title: Re: Vanguard Beta Post by: geldonyetich on January 01, 2007, 09:26:59 PM I'd like to throw in here that many of the same reasons EQ2 players may be burnt from the game applies to all games. WoW, a game I've doomcast incorrectly (I say, lest everybody forget and forgive me) is no more immune to this effect than EQ2.
Of course, all this really establishes is that there's flow of players between existing MMORPGs and new ones. Did we honestly believe this was not the case? Title: Re: Vanguard Beta Post by: Simond on January 02, 2007, 02:06:10 AM I think Falconeer has some good points, but I can think of an excellent counterpoint: Old (ex-)EQers go on about enjoying camping mobs, racing to named and so on but when that's actually put to the test, I suspect quite a few of the 'ZOMG I quit EQ2. Vanguard FTW' players will skulk back to EQ2.
After all, it's one thing to be nostalgic about camping the FBSS in Guk...it's quite another to give up your nice instanced house (which you've just got decorated just the way you want it) and your top-end gear and your level whatever character just to start again from scratch where you'll need to camp for hours on end for the chance to get the good loot/housing plot/etc - and that's if you can even get on The List. Or get into The Uberguild of whichever server. (Case in point: The Pregression servers in EQ). If you cannot, well...that high level character back in EQ2 starts to look a lot more appealing again. I predict server merges in Vanguard within six months of launch. Title: Re: Vanguard Beta Post by: Sairon on January 02, 2007, 03:31:02 AM I haven't played this game first hand, however I frequently talk to a friend who's an old school EQ player. The guy has been on the L2 train twice, tried most and even liked a few other Korean games. He's certainly not the hard to please type and should catter pretty nicely to the audience Vanguard is trying to capture. He couldn't stand Vanguard for more than a couple of days and haven't looked back yet. Sure it's only a single person so not exactly of statistical significance though, but Vanguard seems to be targeting a very small market of players and it doesn't even seem like they're getting the majority of those customers.
EDIT: typo Title: Re: Vanguard Beta Post by: Venkman on January 02, 2007, 07:25:04 AM While I don't think it would drive them to 500k users, I do think we shouldn't forget the Xbox 360 angle. Yea yea, "no plans" and whatnot. But afaik they are using some of the XNA tools, as that wasn't of the casualties when they moved from hat hasn't changed even with them moving from co-publishing with Microsoft to with SOE instead. Could be wrong.
Otherwise, everything's already been said. Title: Re: Vanguard Beta Post by: Tale on January 02, 2007, 07:58:43 AM Falconeer. Now is the time to stop talking (unless at some point you change your mind about Vanguard).
Title: Re: Vanguard Beta Post by: shiznitz on January 02, 2007, 11:28:10 AM I am an anecdotal counter to Falconeer's thesis. I have played EQ2 since launch and I am a stickier customer now than I was then. I am also an All Access Pass guy so I can jump into Planetside. If Vanguard is part of the AAP I will install it, but I don't expect to do much beyond that. There are a few people in my EQ2 guild who have been level 70 for almost 6 months that will give Vanguard a shot, but not all of them.
So, I will count as a Vanguard sub, probably. As far as Sigil getting paid, no responsible accountant would allow All Access monies to go to Sigil unless the customer actually logs in. Since AAP is a monthly sub, I imagine the activity test would be applied monthly. Title: Re: Vanguard Beta Post by: Venkman on January 02, 2007, 11:38:55 AM I have no idea how AAP actually works. But I imagine a percentage of the total take goes to each game based on log ins, which would be standard for an aggregator like that. As shiznitz says, no responbile accountant would allow otherwise. But in general it's win-win for both sides, which is why it works.
Title: Re: Vanguard Beta Post by: Falconeer on January 02, 2007, 11:39:24 AM Falconeer. Now is the time to stop talking (unless at some point you change your mind about Vanguard). Uh? "Go bashing Vanguard before we all murder you"? I have no mind to change, other than the idea that the expectations are exaggeratedly low. Title: Re: Vanguard Beta Post by: Nebu on January 02, 2007, 11:41:02 AM I have no mind to change, other than the idea that the expectations are exaggeratedly low. Is that possible? Expectations for Horzons, Matrix Online, and Auto Assault weren't nearly low enough and this is a pretty jaded crowd. Title: Re: Vanguard Beta Post by: Falconeer on January 02, 2007, 11:47:14 AM That is why I am so impatient about the NDA to drop and the game to launch, Nebu. Vanguard is my Race #8 of the day... I can't wait to see it to the finish line and start cashing or talking about it...
Title: Re: Vanguard Beta Post by: Trouble on January 02, 2007, 12:28:21 PM Perhaps we need a MMO success betting forum?
Title: Re: Vanguard Beta Post by: Signe on January 02, 2007, 12:36:10 PM Perhaps we need a MMO success betting forum? Or an MMO dead pool. Title: Re: Vanguard Beta Post by: Yegolev on January 02, 2007, 12:37:19 PM Both fine ideas that I support but do not volunteer to do any work on.
Title: Re: Vanguard Beta Post by: Falconeer on January 02, 2007, 12:41:14 PM I proposed some MMO success betting here long ago, but it would be considered RMT, and I am not sure about the f13 official position about it.
Anyway, I'd predict a fourth, fifth place for Vanguard where everyone else expects it to barely cross the finish line. That sounds too much for me. Title: Re: Vanguard Beta Post by: Venkman on January 02, 2007, 01:04:20 PM Who says it need be about money? Call it a microeconomy of debit chits that can be used to gear up sigs and titles or avatars. But I'm with Yeg. Nice idea. Someone else go design and code it :)
Falconeer: I don't disagree with your theories of who will be playing VG and why from the current SOE set. However, I do think you overestimate how many people there are in that equation. Unless a significant chunk of WoW or FFXI players hit up VG, they are going to be hard pressed to hit even the numbers quoted here. That's because outside of EQ2, there isn't anything in the SOE lineup that is an immediate transition starting point. SWG? PS? MxO? Heck, even EQ1. Those folks have had 5 years worth of slightly/greatly-enhanced experiences to jump to and still haven't. That includes the very game specifically designed for them. But it's all academic until Christmas 2007. Fun to hypothesize though ;) Title: Re: Vanguard Beta Post by: Falconeer on January 02, 2007, 02:14:00 PM Just 2 months ago, in this topic (http://forums.f13.net/index.php?topic=8501.0) a prediction/betting game came up. It got average to low popularity, and confusion ruled so some predicted about December 2007 while some other about December 2008.
I'd recap the whole thing here for your loins pleasure, and maybe we could start it for true. I'd say both categories should apply at this point, meaning December 2007 AND December 2008. No need to say spot on predictions on Dec 2008 are worth way more kudos than those of 2007. Bets for December 2007: Stray - Warhammer: 400k - Age of Conan: 200k - Lord of the Rings Online: 200k - Vanguard: 30k - Gods n' Heroes: 50k Andar - Vanguard: 50k - Lord of the Rings Online: 20k - Warhammer: 150k - Age of Conan: 80k - World of Warcraft: 8 millions Falconeer - Warhammer: 500k - Lord of the Rings Online: 200k - Age of Conan: 250k - Vanguard: 400k - World of Warcraft 5 millions Endie - Warhammer: 180k - Lord of the Rings Online: 300k - Age of Conan: 120k - Vanguard: 90k - World of Warcraft: 4.1 millions Comstar - Vanguard: 50K - Lord of the Rings Online: 50K - PoTBS: 20K - Warhammer: 120K - Age of Conan: 70K - World of Warcraft: 9million Bets for December 2008: Arthur Parker - Warhammer: 1 million - Age of Conan: 90k - Vanguard: 60k Waylander - Warhammer: 400k DataGod - Vanguard: 68k - Lord of the Rings Online: 108k - PoTBS: 154k - Warhammer: 1,8 millions - World of Warcraft: 4,1 millions Cheddar - Age of Conan: 35k - Lord of the Rings Online: 40k - Vanguard: 60k - Warhammer: 45k - World of Warcraft: 9 million Stray - Warhammer: 150k - Age of Conan: 150k - Lord of the Rings Online: 40k - Vanguard: 60k - World of Warcraft: 9 millions - Gods n' Heroes: 250k Tazelbain - Warhammer: 300k WindUpAtheist - Vanguard: 150k - Lord of the Rings Online: 90k - PoTBS: 40k - Warhammer: 300k - Age of Conan: 150k - World of Warcraft: 9 millions Falconeer - Warhammer: 1 million - Lord of the Rings Online: 150k - Vanguard: 300k - Age of Conan: 200k - World of Warcraft: 4 millions I'd say our little in house game could use this whole month of January to gather more bets and allow some fixing for the earlier gamblers. Title: Re: Vanguard Beta Post by: HaemishM on January 02, 2007, 02:14:34 PM Perhaps we need a MMO success betting forum? Or an MMO dead pool. MMO's don't die, they just get sold to other companies. Title: Re: Vanguard Beta Post by: damijin on January 02, 2007, 02:25:20 PM Perhaps we need a MMO success betting forum? Or an MMO dead pool. MMO's don't die, they just get sold to other companies. Exception to the rule, of course, being anything that has ever loaded up with the phrase, "Challenge Everything" Title: Re: Vanguard Beta Post by: Venkman on January 02, 2007, 02:31:01 PM (The list) I'd say our little in house game could use this whole month of January to gather more bets and allow some fixing for the earlier gamblers. I'll add my own: December 2007: - Vanguard: 300k - Lord of the Rings Online: 400k - PoTBS: 100k - Warhammer: 1mil - World of Warcraft: 8 mil (because they'll likely do rolling release of BC worldwide like they did their launch. This self-promotes) December 2008: - Vanguard: 200k (slow decline but leveling off, likely lost some to AoC) - Lord of the Rings Online: 200k (decline for folks back to WoW) - PoTBS: 100k (steady for lack of competition of the like) - Warhammer: 1.5mil (if they really unique themselves up from WoW) - World of Warcraft: 7 mil (for hype from the assumed next expansion pack) Title: Re: Vanguard Beta Post by: damijin on January 02, 2007, 02:51:02 PM I wanna be trendy, and also I have balloons attached to my ceiling to rain down on me whenever I call something correctly, so in anticipation: here's my list.
December 2007: - Vanguard: 100k (I feel like I'm over-estimating this one, but I'm giving it the benefit of the doubt. maybe there are that many people looking for some alternative to WoW and EQ2) - Lord of the Rings Online: 80k - PoTBS: ~30k - Warhammer: 450k - World of Warcraft: Oodles. December 2008: - Vanguard: 80k (down a bit, due to the plethora of new games in 07, but it keeps it's loyal crowd.) - Lord of the Rings Online: 50k (down due to not being anything special) - PoTBS: 70k (gaining steam due to developer devotion and a rabid community that conquers sites like MMORPG.com, like EVE's.) - Warhammer: 650k (Just because.) - World of Warcraft: A little less than oodles, on account of being old as fuck. There simply aren't enough players to explain the kind of numbers some people put in this thread. The niche games will become more plentiful, and they'll all be shooting for around the 100k mark. More and more games will maintain that 100k range, and WoW will slowly decline at a rate very relative to WARs success, but with some irregularity on account of the billions of small games coming out. edit: sigh, I posted just as a thread for it was made :roll: Title: Re: Vanguard Beta Post by: Cheddar on January 02, 2007, 03:11:16 PM Just 2 months ago, in this topic (http://forums.f13.net/index.php?topic=8501.0) a prediction/betting game came up. It got average to low popularity, and confusion ruled so some predicted about December 2007 while some other about December 2008. I'd recap the whole thing here for your loins pleasure, and maybe we could start it for true. I'd say both categories should apply at this point, meaning December 2007 AND December 2008. No need to say spot on predictions on Dec 2008 are worth way more kudos than those of 2007. <words> I'd say our little in house game could use this whole month of January to gather more bets and allow some fixing for the earlier gamblers. Good idea. Start a new thread so you can track who predicts what on the first page. I would like to update my LOTRO estimates; it will definitely get 150k+. Title: Re: Vanguard Beta Post by: Chenghiz on January 02, 2007, 04:12:21 PM MMO's don't die, they just get sold to other companies. Didn't Earth & Beyond just up and die? Title: Re: Vanguard Beta Post by: WayAbvPar on January 02, 2007, 04:14:18 PM I think a benevolent nurse smothered it with a pillow.
Title: Re: Vanguard Beta Post by: Falconeer on January 02, 2007, 04:16:30 PM MMO's don't die, they just get sold to other companies. Didn't Earth & Beyond just up and die? Motor City Online was murdered young too, the slayer being EA once again... Title: Re: Vanguard Beta Post by: Grimwell on January 02, 2007, 09:43:03 PM Asheron's Call 2 is also dead and gone...
Title: Re: Vanguard Beta Post by: WindupAtheist on January 03, 2007, 01:48:53 AM AC2 wasn't really killed so much as it just died of it's horrible horrible flaws. It wasn't murdered, it was just born with flippers and gills and didn't live long enough to make it out of the hospital.
Title: Re: Vanguard Beta Post by: HaemishM on January 03, 2007, 11:42:16 AM Asheron's Call 2 became the graphic engine for DDO and LOTRO. :evil:
Earth & Beyond died a righteous death as it should. But really, both it and MCO were suicides, owed to being developed by EA or one of its studios. Title: Re: Vanguard Beta Post by: LC on January 03, 2007, 01:32:46 PM Asheron's Call 2 became the graphic engine for DDO and LOTRO. :evil: Earth & Beyond died a righteous death as it should. But really, both it and MCO were suicides, owed to being developed by EA or one of its studios. It was the most expensive engine demo I have ever purchased. Title: Re: Vanguard Beta Post by: Nebu on January 03, 2007, 01:36:03 PM I actually enjoyed AC2 for a couple of weeks... at least until I realized how many broken classes there were.
Title: Re: Vanguard Beta Post by: Strazos on January 03, 2007, 01:44:39 PM I liked the diving animations.
Title: Re: Vanguard Beta Post by: AlteredOne on January 04, 2007, 10:23:13 AM Back to the actual topic of Vanguard beta... Rumors are that the NDA should be lifted within a few days, and open beta will begin. See below for the official word. Can't wait to see what you folks have to say post-NDA, assuming many of you are in the beta.
http://www.ausguard.com/community/viewtopic.php?t=345&postdays=0&postorder=asc&start=0 From Glip: "Hey all, I hate to be the bearer of bad news but I think some wires may have gotten crossed somewhere. As per my post on the official forums, we have not confirmed any date for Beta 5 yet, publicly, privately, or anywhere. "Early" January is all we can say for sure. Obviously, that means soon, but we don't have an exact date yet. Thanks, Nick Parkinson Community Manager Sigil Games Online " Title: Re: Vanguard Beta Post by: d4rkj3di on January 04, 2007, 11:03:44 AM Get your popcorn ready, NDA drops tomorrow.
Title: Re: Vanguard Beta Post by: Falconeer on January 04, 2007, 11:07:02 AM Tomorrow?
So I'll start my write-up and ready my fireproof suit right now. Title: Re: Vanguard Beta Post by: Nonentity on January 04, 2007, 11:23:17 AM Tomorrow? So I'll start my write-up and ready my fireproof suit right now. Oh boy! I'll have all sorts of fun stuff to write tomorrow. Title: Re: Vanguard Beta Post by: Furiously on January 04, 2007, 12:32:28 PM I liked the diving animations. Hmmm - it's funnier when I say it. Title: Re: Vanguard Beta Post by: Endie on January 04, 2007, 01:27:59 PM Tomorrow? So I'll start my write-up and ready my fireproof suit right now. I'm genuinely interested, particularly in how much they have backed off from The Vision in favour of The Money. Title: Re: Vanguard Beta Post by: Nebu on January 04, 2007, 01:34:56 PM I'm genuinely interested, particularly in how much they have backed off from The Vision in favour of The Money. That's sig-worthy. I almost snorted my diet coke. Title: Re: Vanguard Beta Post by: Shapechanger on January 04, 2007, 01:40:58 PM I can't wait to read some of these reviews! :heart: :-D :heart:
Title: Re: Vanguard Beta Post by: d4rkj3di on January 04, 2007, 01:53:36 PM I've been cautioned to remain mature. So I'm not sure if I'll be able to mention a possible Furry population rivaled only by Second Life and WoW Druids.
Title: Re: Vanguard Beta Post by: Simond on January 04, 2007, 02:33:40 PM Look who just reappeared.... (http://www.vanguardsoh.com/forums/showthread.php?t=99030)
NB: Vanguard boards are dying on their arse right now, so don't expect the link to work the first few times. So...quotes! Quote from: Brad McFuckingQuaid Hi guys, Wanted to apologize for not being on the boards for a while. With the holidays and now with us entering the final stretch, things have been hectic. Also, there has been a huge influx of posts on both the beta and general boards -- we upgraded our message and web server system significantly and the boards are still slow do the increased traffic. A problem, but a good problem to have in one sense I will monitor this thread and try to answer any questions you have, but I simply don't have the time right now to jump all over the message boards. Please keep your questions concise and try not to ask the same question if someone else has. thanks all, *** I can't announce the launch date yet, but the dates that are floating around are pretty close. Yes, I know we could use more time. Any MMORPG could But at some point you have to launch. Keep in mind that we will be keeping a solid Live Team on board and keep working on the game post-launch. And this team is seperate from the expansion team, and the expansion team will be helping the live team at *least* 2 months after launch. *** Originally Posted by foxninja "Could you explain why it was recently announced none of the animal races will have tails? Many people had been under the impression they were coming eventually, and the animal races feel incomplete without them. It's like a Dwarf without a beard or an Elf with round ears." I'd like to see tails, but they will be post-launch. *** Originally Posted by Jessup "When can we expect to see the rest of the closed chunks opened up for testing?" Inquisitor still slated for post-release patch or will we get a glimpse of them before Beta ends? Inquistor is still post launch. The remaining chunks will open first with up to level 35 on Thestra hopefully some time next week and then the 35+ chunks slowly but surely after that, with as many ready as we can by launch, and then us continuing to work our butts off after launch. *** Originally Posted by Huntir "The game looks extraordinary! The world is massive and breathtaking, great job with that aspect. The game play however is subpar and the armor is boring, especially on casters. The lore/background is visually there and some of the early quest give minimal history, but overall the game is lacking here to. 3 Questions I heard we lost the "Vision" somewhere in Vegas? Has anyone found it? If so, do we get a reward?, like maybe the game you sold us on a while back? Will we get more then the 3-4 hair, face, color selctions from the slider bars we have atm on the creation page before launch? Will we still get Beserkers after launch?or are they now set for an expansion class? Huntir" The vision is safe here in Carlsbad We will have more character customization in by launch and you'll see them appear in Beta 5. Berserkers are still post-launch, like the Inquisitor. *** Originally Posted by ebric View Post "Why live corpse runs? As much as I do not like WoW for feeling like the bunnyhill all the way to lvl 50, ghost corpse runs IMO would open up a much larger market to VG. I just do not see any way someone that is a fan of WoW would jump to a game with live corpse runs. I do not understand why you would want to go live so close to the WoW expantion also. Again I think that will hurt popularity in the long run." We've gone through a lot of corpse run variations and are pretty happy with what we have now. The game *is* supposed to be a more challenging one. As for launching, yes it may be fairly close to the WoW expansion, but that's not something we can control. SOE has given us financing that has gotten us a lot further than our previous publisher, but at some point you have to launch a game. If we could have a couple more months of development, sure, that would be great. If we could have another year, we could do a lot more too. But again, the game has to launch at some point and we know when that is. I'm pretty proud of how much funding, marketing, etc. we've received to-date. We have over 100 people workiing on this game. That said, we're not Blizzard either (yet). So the polish, time, and budet they had isn't what we've had, although we probably come in second. The game is also different -- Vanguard is more about freedom, attracting people who want a more challenging long term home, providing a game for old school EQ players and also WoW players looking for either/both something new and/or something more free and immersive. That means Vanguard is going to offer features and an evironment that is different and better IMHO than WoW, but also be a very different game than WoW, where we are focussed on different things and have different priorities. *** FakeEdit: Sod the rest of that thread, NDA is dropped. (http://www.vanguardsoh.com/forums/showthread.php?t=99130) :mob: time. Title: Re: Vanguard Beta Post by: Falconeer on January 04, 2007, 02:37:51 PM Post launch tails?
I snorted all my life into my diet coke. Title: Re: Vanguard Beta Post by: Falconeer on January 04, 2007, 02:40:57 PM I waited so long for the NDA to lift that I don't even know where to start. I am lost..!
Anyway, reading Simond's quoted.. this looks possibly like the MOST INCOMPLETE LAUNCH of the history of MMOs. Quote Inquisitor still slated for post-release patch or will we get a glimpse of them before Beta ends? Inquistor is still post launch. The remaining chunks will open first with up to level 35 on Thestra hopefully some time next week and then the 35+ chunks slowly but surely after that, with as many ready as we can by launch, and then us continuing to work our butts off after launch. Berserkers are still post-launch, like the Inquisitor. Crap, can't believe what I read. Sounds like a joke, can't be true... Title: Re: Vanguard Beta Post by: Raging Turtle on January 04, 2007, 02:45:51 PM Launching at almost the same time as WoW: BC?
Insane. NDA is down, someone dish the dirt. Title: Re: Vanguard Beta Post by: Falconeer on January 04, 2007, 02:51:45 PM No seriously, I am still speechless...
I like the game (flamesuit ON!), but is FAR from finished. To the pont that NO you can't release it, Brad! What's missing? Guess it? POLISH! I'd say this is a suicide if it wasn't Brad himself to say they were out of money and forced to launch (so no suicide, 'cause they were dying anyway). Well, about the game? It's good. It's a great Diku, and has a lot of interesting features, including some new stuff. And no it doesn't run so bad as you may have heard. And the graphics are better than you can imagine by the screenshots. Sadly, it's VERY unpolished. Whoever buy this at launch is DEFINITELY paying for a beta. Title: Re: Vanguard Beta Post by: Arthur_Parker on January 04, 2007, 02:54:08 PM Somebody who cares about this game, please start a new thread mentioning the nda has gone in the title. I got into the beta a few days ago and my client is still patching, I want to see just how bad it is.
Title: Re: Vanguard Beta Post by: Nebu on January 04, 2007, 02:54:12 PM Sadly, it's VERY unpolished. This sounds like little more than a generic rant. Unpolished how? What's wrong? What is desperate for change? Tell me something with some substance beyond it's pretty and a nice diku experience... that sounds like a Horizons statement. Title: Re: Vanguard Beta Post by: Falconeer on January 04, 2007, 02:54:56 PM Ok, on with the new topic...
Title: Re: Vanguard Beta Post by: Signe on January 04, 2007, 04:52:32 PM Tomorrow? So I'll start my write-up and ready my fireproof suit right now. I'm genuinely interested, particularly in how much they have backed off from The Vision in favour of The Money. LOTS. Title: Re: Vanguard Beta Post by: Venkman on January 04, 2007, 05:02:44 PM Quote Inquistor is still post launch. The remaining chunks will open first with up to level 35 on Thestra hopefully some time next week and then the 35+ chunks slowly but surely after that, with as many ready as we can by launch, and then us continuing to work our butts off after launch. You've made the classic blunder! It's like fighting a land war in Asia! You never bet a Sicilian when death is on the line! You never patch in 1/3 of your content three weeks before launch!(I'm sure the expectation is that there'll be {some amount of time} before people even see the 35+ stuff anyway, so therefore they'll have enough time to patch it in before people get there en masse. I'm as sure as that as I am of {some amount of time} being incorrect by a factor of two). Title: Re: Vanguard Beta Post by: Kenrick on January 04, 2007, 05:21:36 PM Hmmm how can I put my opinion into words...
Graphically, I think it has potential to be an okay looking game, but right now everything about it is very unpolished. Here's my big gripe with this game so far, though. Look, I think I have a decent rig. I can run games like WoW and HL2 in high resolutions with the graphics settings on high quality. But, in Vanguard, even on "high performance" mode, my framerate leaves much to be desired. And of course, setting it on high performance or ultra high performance makes the world and models look like shit anyway. (Think EQ2, maybe even worse). The gameplay itself seems like it could really be enjoyable, but I think I speak for most people when I say I'm not going to even consider buying a game that doesn't run well on my PC. That's one reason I still enjoy playing WoW... smooth 60.0 FPS in all environments. In summary: So far, slightly more enjoyable than LoTRO, and far less enjoyable than EQ2. Title: Re: Vanguard Beta Post by: LK on January 07, 2007, 04:11:58 PM Keep in mind that we will be keeping a solid Live Team on board and keep working on the game post-launch. And this team is seperate from the expansion team, and the expansion team will be helping the live team at *least* 2 months after launch.
Well I'm glad they are already planning to get an expansion out. Maybe they should finish the damn game first though. Title: Re: Vanguard Beta Post by: Lantyssa on January 08, 2007, 12:57:39 PM Putting the cart before the horse is fairly typical of the MMO mentality.
|