f13.net forums - Vanguard: Round 1

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
July 18, 2025, 10:21:57 AM

we're back, baby

This shit is fucking hilarious. The XP rate is lower, the XP rate is higher. Lists of shit published weekly, ten miles long and full of basic features and game mechanics they're still fucking with despite having been in development for 5 years prior. All of it minutiae, since none of it will make people sign up for a gameplay experience they've already decided they don't want.

"Oh shit, people aren't biting! Quick, let's dick with enchantment!"

I don't have anywhere near the MMO experience of you guys around here, but it's definitely more fun to read about MMO's than to actually play them. And it's free.

Brad posts alot of words on why people love/hate VG
________________________________________________________________________________________________________

Quote:
Originally Posted by Lyrical
Title says it all. There has been so much vitriol against Vanguard. It is like when some products get launched with a ton of hype, but the opposite. I have never seen an MMO launched with so much negative-hype. Lately many people on these boards have stated that they hate VG because they want it to bring them back to the glory days. I am not sure if that comparison will ever make sense. Eq1 was my first game, and while I have fond memories of being in a virtual world for the first time, I have since then played just about every MMO launched, and have become a jaded gamer. The n00b sense of wonder is never going to come back, so why look for it? Its like the song by Sade called "It's Never as Good as the First Time." But it seems like many want it to be like that Madonna song called "Touched for the Very First Time." That's not going to happen again.

This game is nowhere near as bad as many people on this board are saying. To me, it has a very Velious like feel to it. Alot of the old mechanics in Eq1 (like kiting but with more risk) are back in VG. The gameplay seems a bit more free than we are getting in other MMO's (like Eq2). The classes are fresh, and we are either seeing new classes or new takes on classes.

The only two things I don't like about this game are TLC and performance. TLC is self-explanatory. As far as performance goes, it was so bad in beta that I deleted my VG off of my hard drive. With a medium level comp (3200 Athlon, ATI 9950 graphics card and 1 gig ram) I was only getting a pathetic 5 fps. However, since launch, I decided to give VG a second try. I added a gig of ram and put an NVIDIA 7800 GS OC, and am getting 25 to 30 fps with the graphics reso on the highest setting and the display set to balanced (and this is while fighting in the city). My new rig is hardly state of the art, but is running VG fine. I played for four hours last night with no probs until midnight where the server started glitching. Assuming they fix this, I think VG will be fine.

I started playing VG with very low expectations for it, other than I could add it to my Station Access and play it with Eq2 (and I planned on adding the DC MMO and other upcoming MMOs for a flat fee). The posters on this board lowered my expectations on the game with their rants on how VG sucked. I am finding this game to be much better than they said, and am wondering how many others of you think that VG has been better than the poor word of mouth it received throughout beta.
_______________________________________________________________________________________________________
Well said and a great question and certainly one we think about. I think there are misconceptions out there about the game and our intent. Our heritage making EQ 1 makes it so a lot of people automatically assume the game is only for the hardcore. I posted here and elsewhere (on other boards and our own message boards) for months before release talking about how the game is for casual, core, and hardcore players and our belief they can all co-exist in the same game. Unfortunately, a lot of people didn't read those posts and assume Vanguard is more hard core because EQ 1 was. I think I failed in reaching out to a lot of people and spreading the word that this game is NOT hard core like the original EQ 1. I probably spent more time talking about the game to those already interested in it than reaching out to those who were not. Ah well, hindsight is 20/20.

A lot of people wanted a new game that was like EQ 1 up to the Velious period and I and others described Vanguard thusly. The good part of that is we got those people excited about the game. The bad part was that people who didn't follow the game as closely didn't hear the complete message, that being that the game also has lots of content for casual and core gamers -- it was like when I posted, I was just preaching to the choir. People who didn't follow the message boards and only heard that Vanguard was made by the original EQ guys made assumptions that Vanguard would be just like EQ and require tons of time to play, that you had to raid, that you had to group constantly, etc.

Like I said, that message resonated with a lot of people in a positive way, but it also did harm in that those people who don't want another EQ 1 were turned off when they heard about Vanguard but not all of the details behind the game. There were and are also a lot of 'Vanbois' who spread the word that this game was not for WoW players and that people who like a more casual game like WoW were not welcome in Vanguard. In that sense, the messaging backfired and many people aren't even giving the game a chance.

I think we could have reached out to those people on other boards in a better way and made sure people knew that casual gamers are indeed welcome in Vanguard. I also think that after level 12ish people are feeling that they have to group, and that is something we need to address. We also need better LFG tools so that people can find groups. We were over-worried that the newbie areas would be over crowded and now we face some under population as people level up and spread out over the large world that is Telon. That is why we are working on making the LFG tools better, looking into adding some overland teleportation, etc. Under population is actually worse than over population because it can be difficult to find people to play with and this hurts community building.

We also need to change our messaging in ads, both online and in print, and attempt to dispel the assumption some people are making that Vanguard is only hardcore. In reality we very much understand that the gamespace has grown and evolved. People who had a lot of time on their hands and played a ton of EQ have grown up, got jobs, families, etc. Even those who played EQ a ton of hours and had a blast for years playing that game now are in situations where while they had fun with EQ want a different game that requires less overall time invested and especially less amounts of contiguous time and the ability to play more casually. Like I said, I think we need to make some changes to the game (nothing fundamental, but some tweaks here and there), but the even bigger problem is that many people aren't even trying the game out because they've already made up their minds that Vanguard = EQ 1.

Some of this will be addressed through viral marketing. As those who are playing the game enjoy Vanguard, they will tell their friends that this game is not as hard core and nearly as tedious as EQ 1. This will help, but I also think we need to be more proactive in spreading the word about what Vanguard is really like. Heck, even people who are giving the game a chance have misconceptions. I was grouped around level 10 and we got into a situation where we were in the floating cities above Jalen's Crossing and died a few times and just couldn't get back to our corpses to do a CR. We ending up dying several times. I said forget it, and went to the altar and just summoned my corpse to me (something you could NOT do in EQ 1). I advised the others in my pick-up group to do the same and they didn't know you could do that! They thought you HAD to CR, just like EQ 1. Man, that was an eye-opener. I think there are people who truly believe you either have to CR or that the penalties for summoning your corpse to the altar are so bad that you never want to do it. And it some cases, at higher levels, and depending on what mob you die to, the penalties *are* too severe, and we need to make some changes. But just as importantly, perhaps even more importantly, we need to get the word out that you don't have to CR in the vast majority of cases, and that also in the vast majority of cases summoning your corpse to the altar where you pop up when you die does NOT include a heinous penalty; rather, that's why we put that functionality in there. Having to CR in Vanguard is the exception, not the rule -- only in fighting extremely difficult mobs where you and your party knowingly accept the risk vs. reward of fighting specific boss mobs likely in the depths of dungeons do you take the risk of having to CR (or get your corpse dragged out) assuming you totally wipe and don't have someone who survives on hand to resurrect you. And I think that's just one powerful example of false assumptions that are being made about the game, either by people playing it (who may get frustrated when they actually don't have to) or by people who have heard about the game and figure, again, that it's hardcore and an old school MMOG with updated graphics. Ah! This is frustrating, but we will get the message out.

No, we're not talking about changing the game to be a lot more similar to WoW. We're not trying to make a WoW clone. The game is more challenging, and it does take longer to level up, but not a lot longer really -- we've timed it. And the additional challenge is optional -- you don't have to play Vanguard the way you had to play earlier MMOGs unless you want to. So as long as we can make leveling up less tedious, make sure there are ways to advance even if you only have a little time that day to play, etc. I think we'll be in good shape.

There are a lot of emotions out there. Strong ones. You have people, like I mentioned, that while they enjoyed EQ 1 back in the day, want a game that has the good parts of EQ 1 but not the tedious nature of it, or the necessity to play crazy hours, or to raid constantly. Those people I think, or at least most of them, will enjoy Vanguard if they give it a chance. But first we need to penetrate these assumptions and perceptions.

Then there's the whole WoW vs Vanguard issue where many people think that if they enjoy WoW they won't like Vanguard or vice versa. This is in part again to those pre-conceptions, but also our fan base has contributed to this stereotype. (sorry Vanguard fans, I don't mean to generalize here, but there has been a negative vibe, a polarizing vibe, even with me and others posting that this game is inclusive not exclusive).

Then there's the issue that Vanguard is a different game and won't appeal to everyone. Some people like that, and some people don't. It was always our desire to make a game where casual, core, and hard core players could co-exist and you can certainly solo or play casually in Vanguard and have a great time. But then there are also people who simply don't want to group. We need to make sure as many of those people can and will still have fun in Vanguard. Again, the game isn't designed to appeal to everyone and some casual players won't like Vanguard no matter what. And that's ok -- we didn't set out to make a game that is all things to all people. But I think quite a few people who have inaccurate preconceptions about the game actually will enjoy the game if they give it a chance. In fact, I know quite a few. The challenge is to get them to try it.

Then there are some of the controversial aspects of Vanguard -- a huge world with hopefully meaningful travel, no instancing, etc. When some people hear about these aspects of Vanguard that seem 'retro' they automatically assume the game isn't for them, that it's old school and that we decided to ignore modern MMOGs and were stuck blindly in the past when designing this game. We need to reach out to those people and explain where we embraced modern MMOG ideas and concepts but also why we chose to build on 'older' foundations, not because we're stubbornly set in our ways, but more so because Vanguard needs to be something different, and a combination of new, revolutionary ideas combined with an evolutionary and proven foundation. And the 'vision' can and does change and learn -- as we've mentioned, we are seriously considering some overland teleportation to take some of the tediousness out of travel. We can and will adapt, and we can do so without making a game that is a clone of another game -- the MMOG gamespace is certainly large and mature enough to support games with their own identity and also large enough where people deserve choices. So overall I think a lot of people will end up enjoying the game once they give it a chance.

In a sense the more controversial aspects of Vanguard have been a blessing and a curse. The game is selling very well, but it could do even better if we could get this message out, that more casual people can and are enjoying the game -- that soloing or playing in small groups is a viable and fun way to play the game. Yes, you can get more rewards out of grouping and Vanguard is a game mostly targeted at the core gamer who enjoys grouping. But again, that's not mutually exclusive with casual gamers having fun too.

We also included features that appeal to more casual players and players with different tastes. We have a robust and fun crafting and harvesting system. We have diplomacy which is enjoyable and is done soloing. We put in housing and the ability to own mounts and ships because we wanted to get the UO/SWG player to enjoy the game as well, and not just the EQ 1 player. But again, getting that message out to those who didn't frequent our official boards before release has been a challenge.

We made it clear how Vanguard differs from other more modern MMOGs. I think this has had both positive and negative effects. It attracted many people who wanted a modern MMOG that is still built on the tried and true foundation of older MMOGs and MUDs. But then it also created controversy and assumptions that Vanguard was just another EQ 1 with updated graphics. In reality, while the game does build on the past, it's also different and takes into account that the gamespace has evolved and that many players don't want a total re-hash of the past. So again, this appealed to those who followed the game closely before launch, but at the same time created misconceptions amongst those who didn't follow the game as closely.

Sometimes controversy is good, and sometimes it's bad. Again, I think better messaging and viral marketing will help here. But to answer your question, I think that's why there's been such polarizing opinions out there -- the Vanguard lovers and haters. EQ 1 created so many emotions, both positive and negative. In fact, I don't know if there's been another game where people have become so emotional both while playing and after they'd finished playing. I still run into people and when they find out my involvement with EQ I tense up a little bit, not knowing if they'll get all excited and tell me about all the great times they had, all the people they met and are still friends with, or how they met their spouse in-game, thanking me profusely for producing the game... or if they'll look at me in a not so friendly way and make sure I know how they dropped out of college, or how the game, in their opinion, caused friction between them and their loved ones, etc. So we need to reach out to the 'haters' because I know a lot of them would love Vanguard if they gave it a chance -- Vanguard is truly a game where we learned from the past and we know people have changed. I know people who were burned out years ago with EQ 1 style games but who love Vanguard, so I know this is doable. It's just easier said than done.

Then there's the issue of us releasing a bit early because of us having to release when we did due to financial issues. And then there's the fact that we released so close to the WoW expansion. That didn't help either, at least short term. I am confident though that as people finish up with the expansion, that many WoW gamers will migrate to Vanguard. People want something new in their lives, and that includes MMOGs. WoW is a fantastic game, but Vanguard is designed with additional polish but also additional depth and freedom to experience more from a virtual world.

So while the game continues to sell well and churn is low, I think we could have done even better had we more effectively addressed what you mentioned and what I talked about above. I'm not worried -- I know Vanguard is a great game and getting better every patch. But at the same time, I'm not as happy as I could be about the negativity and controversy surrounding the game, when we launched the game, etc. We will recover and get the message out, of that I am certain. And in a sense, we did know some of this would happen -- again, there are those drawn to Vanguard because of our EQ heritage, but we also knew that there would be those who would be turned off by that same heritage. The answer is like I said to get better messaging out there, to reach out to those people, to have those who did buy the game and who are enjoying it spread the word to the more cautious or cynical MMOG gamers.

I think we have three groups of people we want to target with this game.

1. People who look back at EQ fondly and want a new game that is built on the foundation and heritage we have. Those people are primarily the ones buying the game and playing it like crazy.

2. People who look back at EQ and either never enjoyed it or enjoyed it immensely but whose lives have changed and don't want to play an updated EQ 1. I think a great number of those people can be reached and will end up playing the game and enjoying it. We learned a lot over the years, from our triumphs and mistakes. Challenge doesn't have to equal tedium. Advancement doesn't have to mean tons of contiguous hours played, families and jobs ignored, etc. Some people within this group are simply done with games like Vanguard period, but I think a lot of them aren't and won't be when they find out that Vanguard is different than EQ 1 in the ways that are no longer compatible with their lifestyle. I also think the more UO-esque elements of Vanguard that were not present in EQ 1 will help make the game more appealing to old school MMOG players who were more interested in a broad rather than deep game. There is a lot more to do in Vanguard than there ever was to do in EQ 1 -- a lot more sandbox, broad, etc. activities like building houses, sailing ships, etc. And when we get full city building in, players will be able to run vendors, enjoy an RTS element, and much more. Lastly in this group are the PvPers and I think as we continue to make our PvP servers better and more varied that more PvP players will be attracted to the game.

3. New gamers or gamers for whom WoW was their first MMOG. Reaching out to them is also a challenge. Many still enjoy WoW, which is fine, and especially are enjoying it now that Burning Crusade is out. As I've posted for months, perhaps years, I am confident that some percentage of WoW players will end up looking for a deeper game like Vanguard, where there is a lot more to do and experience. And as I've posted in the past, it doesn't have to be a huge percentage of WoW players for us to reach 500,000+ subscribers in the first year or so. But, of course, launching so close to the WoW expansion hurt us in this area short term. But they will come

Lastly, there's the art style, being more like EQ 2, using more modern technology -- shaders, bump mapping, specularity, etc. Some people when they look at screenshots of Vanguard assume it is a game much more like EQ 2 than WoW. Here again I am confident that our decision to use newer technology will allow us to keep the game current for years to come. But in the short term, people who stayed with EQ 1 or moved to WoW because they didn't like the looks of EQ 2, or are having performance issues, or who assume Vanguard plays just like EQ 2 -- these people need to be reached as well, because Vanguard is its own game and plays differently and is not an EQ 2 clone any more than it is a WoW clone -- it's a different experience and will become even more so as the game continues to evolve. People will be buying better machines, and we will continue to optimize, and as other games (not just MMOGs) come out that use newer technology (FPS games, etc.), people won't assume as much that Vanguard = EQ 2 just because they use similar tech; rather they'll simply see a modern game with an incredibly immersive world and setting.

So, anyway, that's what I think. We have some hurdles to over come, but I'm confident we can and are overcoming them. The word is getting out. The game is controversial. Our heritage in being involved with EQ 1 is controversial -- a blessing and a curse. But as more and more positive reviews of the game come out, as we continue to optimize and fix bugs, as we continue to add polish, and as people who are playing and enjoying the game tell their friends about it, the game will grow and become that much more popular. It's hard to compete in the gamespace now with WoW being such a giant. But then it can also be very advantageous to offer an alternative to the 'mainstream'. Look at DAoC back in the EQ days -- that game was never as popular as EQ, but was still a great game and found a solid niche and did very well. And now they've been bought by EA and have some tremendous opportunities ahead of them. I think the same is true for Vanguard -- the Vanguard lovers will mellow and enjoy the game and spread the word, and the Vanguard haters will relax and the more they hear about the game and that it's not more of the same, or too retro, or too hard core, they'll give the game a chance too.

In the meantime we'll continue to make the game better, fix bugs, make tweaks, add some very cool features. And we'll make sure people know that you don't have to grind unless you want to, that you can play casually, that you have multiple advancement paths and don't have to fight all of the time. We'll make sure people know that you don't have to CR -- that you can summon your corpse at the altar. We'll make sure that skipping CRs isn't as painful as it is. We'll add some teleporters. We'll make sure that while grouping remains the focus, that we make better LFG and even matchmaking functionality. The word about how fun harvesting and crafting is will spread. The newness of diplomacy where you don't have to fight to advance, where you can find out the lore and storyline without having to hack and slash all of the time will get out there -- there's already been some very positive reviews where people are very excited about this third sphere of gameplay. The community will grow. The controversy and love-hate feelings will subside and having more options when it comes to MMOGs will appeal to more and more people. After all, people like choices.

Anyway, those are my thoughts as to 'why they rage', the controversy, and all the emotions surrounding this game. Thanks for listening

*bow*
reply to this post Find all posts by Aradune Mithara.

The guy doesn't understand why people don't like his game.

That says it all right there.

Heh, he still thinks he can reach 500K in one year.

Nothing in Brad's comments explain why they just nerfed the living shit out of every melee class, why soloing is more exp efficient than grouping in a game that supposedly encourages grouping, and why Sigil has felt the need to offer back-to-back double exp weekends (which actually reward the hardcore over the casuals since, at least in my world, the casuals are less likely to have marathon weekend sessions like I used to do in EQ1 5 years ago.)

Well, it is good to know it is all just a PR problem and not the fact that they released a broken and unfinished game that had changed design direction several times... rolleyes

Here's my take on Vanguard after having played 5 toons to the 12-20 level mark. These are the first things that come immediately to mind:

1) Combat is dull. There is nothing exciting about combat that makes the player feel a) immersed in the game world nor b) like a hero. For a game titled "Saga of Heros" there is nothing heroic about it. WoW has it. CoH/CoV has it. Vanguard, no.

2) The classes have very little that's "new" about them with the minor exception that the healing classes are now some of the more effective soloers. They did shuffle a few of the standard diku abilities among the classes, but I've never had a "Wow this is a cool ability" moment. It's more like: Oh... this is like the EQ power <insert power here>.

3) Grouping with random people isn't worth the effort. XP is less efficient and having them kill you sets you back enough that it's often not worth the frustration. For a game that claims to promote groups and encourage social interaction, you sure get penalized for attempting to meet people.

4) The quests are numerous but uninteresting. Kill X of Y, Deliver Z to A, Talk to B. Been there, done that. After level 15 the reward for questing is typically not worth hte effort. Dungeon crawling for loot is more effective.

5) I am my gear. Will this ever change? If I have shitty gear, I can not overcome it by playing more skillfully.

6) Crafting/Diplomacy are interesting. Matter of fact, you could eliminate the combat aspects of the game altogether and this may be a nice graphical upgrade for ATitD if enough crafting content were added. This is the most positive thing I can say about the game.

7) The world is big, but I began to wonder why. Lots to see and explore, but no real rhyme or reason as to the expansiveness. There was no economic reason for the expanse and all areas contained essentially the same content. The mobs/quests/npcs just looked different.

8 ) You're penalized from the start for making a group of diverse classes/races with friends. When I played with 2 other RL friends, we couldn't simply play what we wanted to because it meant that at least one of us would be travelling 45 or so minutes just to meet up with the others. That is if they didn't die trying.

So many more... but I have to go lecture. I'll try to add more when I can.

Quote from: Nyght on March 09, 2007, 08:06:43 AM

Well, it is good to know it is all just a PR problem and not the fact that they released a broken and unfinished game that had changed design direction several times... rolleyes

The part that gets me is that he states several times that they DIDN'T change directions. That it was ALWAYS meant to be a 'casual friendly' MMO. He could have silenced those 'vanbois' on day one, but didn't, because that WAS the direction.

It is to fucking laugh.

Quote from: Merusk on March 09, 2007, 08:17:25 AM

Quote from: Nyght on March 09, 2007, 08:06:43 AM

Well, it is good to know it is all just a PR problem and not the fact that they released a broken and unfinished game that had changed design direction several times... rolleyes

IGNORANCE IS STRENGTH
WE HAVE ALWAYS BEEN AT WAR WITH EASTASIA
VANGUARD WAS ALWAYS INTENDED TO BE CASUAL-FRIENDLY
BIG BROTHER LOVES YOU

On 'meaningful travel' ...

I have to live on the continent of Thestra, since my guild mates are located there and its is a trail of tears trying to group in Vanguard without an established social base. Now, I love the crafting. Every 10 levels, I have to go train. I have to train in Qalia, one of two other continents. I cannot train in Thestra because I haven't done a series of quests that are required to do so, and I've not done these quests because I would have to faction grind to even be allowed to talk to the NPC that gives out the quest.

So last night, I ding level 21 blacksmith. I tell my friends that I will not play with them tonight since I have to embark on a journey to train my smithing. I leave the enclave of Veskal's Exchange and head to the port city of New Targonor. This takes approximately 30 minutes.

From Thestra, I teleport into Khal, since boats are a huge waste of time in a game that seems to be dedicated to wasting mine.

In Khal, I ride to Lomshir, the site of my last trainer. I assume that even if he doesn't train me, he will have some indication as to where my new trainer is. After another 20 minutes, I arrive in Lomshir, and the trainer has nothing to say. So I figure I should go back to my starting main large city, Hathor Zhi. This takes an additional 20 minutes. The trainer there doesn't talk to me, and gives no indication as to where my new trainer is. I'm an hour into this song and dance, so I join the crafting global channel and ask. Turns out I have to go to Ahgram, a 35 minute 'gallop' to train.

I get there, find the new trainer, and behold, he has a quest icon above his head! Huzzah! I talk to him, and he says that my quest is to...go back to Lomshir and get some materials to do my level 21 quest. Then come back.

I quit for the night after spending one hour and 30 minutes gaining absolutely nothing. Please note, that even if I had been informed apriori as to where I'd have to go train, for a guild based on Thestra, a Qalian player would have to spend a minimum of an hour and a half just traveling -to get the danged quest-.

And this quest isn't a necessity. It doesn't advance your character one jot, it simply blocks your way to advance further. If you don't do the quest, you aren't allowed to grind to futher levels.

Quote from: Merusk on March 09, 2007, 08:17:25 AM

Quote from: Nyght on March 09, 2007, 08:06:43 AM

Well, it is good to know it is all just a PR problem and not the fact that they released a broken and unfinished game that had changed design direction several times... rolleyes

I could only get about a quarter of the way through that post. The first 5 paragraphs or so contradict EVERYTHING HE EVER SAID ABOUT THE GAME before the beta got into full swing. He was the one continually telling people it was a challenging game, it wasn't going to be like WoW, it was very much about grouping and raiding and hardcore play. He made up the "CORE" player designation when he started to realize all that was turning people away.

His own words are to blame for the lack of interest. The word of mouth about how shitty, buggy and grindy it is have just added fuel to that already crackling fire.

Two things from McQuaid's spiel:
1) For the love of Pete, someone hire him an editor.
2) VG is underperforming and Brad's under pressure - hence him throwing the vanbois under the bus and pleading for WoW players to try his game.

Next up: Teleports, rest xp & DAoC-style horse rides.

He mentioned overland teleports as coming up in that spiel.

more spiel, the important parts of which have been largely referenced:

Quote

2x exp weekends

Quite frankly, no BSing around, it's a preemptive attempt at giving players who have less time to play a boost and to give people something to look forward to and to keep subscribing. We want to do things that encourage people to keep subscribing. That said, I think it can be taken too far and it also allows people who already play a lot to advance that much more quickly. It definitely could be taken too far which is something we're aware of.

We continue to grow quite nicely in terms of subs and registered players. That said, we want to have special events like this and while churn and conversion is fine, we'd rather offer events like this ahead of time and not in reaction to a problem. That said, we don't want to over do it either, so I wouldn't consider double exp periods to happen that frequently. It's a cool thing to do occasionally, but can also easily be over done, and we're aware of that.

Double exp on the weekends rewards hardcore. They are the ones that can put in 15-20 hours from Friday night to Sunday night.

Quote

Update 1

Some issues just don't materialize until you go live. Remember, the game has only been out a little over a month. Some nerfs and tweaks are going to be necessary and happen with every MMOG both during beta and for a period of time following launch. That said, we've planned a lot better, given our experience making MMOGs in the past. I'm not going to say we're going to stop making tweaks in the future, or changes that some may consider a nerf -- after all, the long term health of the game is more important than the desires or wants of the individual. Making a more balanced game and our responsibilities as stewards of this evolving, virtual world and service mandates that we balance and tweak. That said, I think it's safe to say that these changes will happen less and less frequently as things settle down and reach more of an equilibrium.

But to be completely honest, in the future, whether it be a Live update or part of a major expansion, if we add significant content of mechanics to the game, undoubtedly we'll have to follow up with some tweaks again -- and some may be considered positive, and others unfortunately negative. These are just the facts of maintaining a service and a healthy MMOG for months and years. We don't like to nerf -- in fact we hate it. We certainly don't like upsetting people and will do our damndest to avoid them if at all possible. Heck, we play this game too, and many of us a LOT. But again, we have to look at the big picture and long term health of the game. While we love the fact that the game is out and we're in a live environment, and while we have a lot of cool plans for new features, classes, mechanics, areas to explore, updated areas, etc., which makes us excited and will continue to evolve Vanguard into an even more incredible game (like I've said, as cool as Vanguard is now (and yes, I realize there are issues and bugs), the Vanguard of 2008 is going to smoke the Vanguard of 2007, and the Vanguard of 2009 smoke 2008. We have a LOT of cool stuff planned (city building, mounted combat, ship to ship combat, better AI and more interesting dungeon layouts and population, eventually user generated content and a more dynamic world, and so much more). But as these things get added, either by the live team or as part of a major expansion, while we'll do our best to test things on test servers, etc. they will be going live and problems will be exposed. And those problems will have to be addressed.

Sorry to go so long on this, but I really want to be up front and clear about this. Again, we hate nerfing or upsetting anyone, but from the very beginning, in the very first FAQ we put up about the game years ago, we made a commitment that the long term and overall health of the game means that overall players will enjoy a better game and a better service. Some people may be affected adversely, or perceive they are, but overall and over time our commitment to maintaining a great game and a great service will pay off.

The alternative would be to let issues stay untouched and cause problems... say a class or classes are unbalanced so people over time feel compelled to play the more powerful classes even though they would have preferred to play another class. Or we leave an exploit in so players feel compelled to advance more quickly in certain areas of the world or by doing certain things, leaving the rest of the world and the opportunities to advance neglected. Or we don't add to the game in fear that we may make mistakes and have to address them, upsetting some people. We can't do that. Arguably the greatest thing about MMOGs is that they continue to advance and evolve -- they're never truly done. What an exciting upside -- to participate in a game that offers more and more the months and even years that you play it. Making the game both deeper and broader is what we've planned for Vanguard for so long. But then we're not perfect either, and we will make mistakes -- hopefully less because of the experience we have making these games -- but then we're pretty ambitious as well, as so we'll likely make brand new mistakes. For that I'll apologize up front, but when we do make mistakes or when something goes live and doesn't work exactly like we'd planned, or what wasn't apparent on dev servers, or on test servers, we will then have to fix the problems in a live environment. Some fixes, hopefully most, will make the majority of players happy. But some will be perceived as negative

What you do have is our commitment to be available and to explain our decisions and to listen to all of you. Hopefully this will minimize 'nerfs' and when they do occur you'll at least know why -- you may agree or disagree -- but we will both explain and listen, because we owe you guys that and because from the beginning Sigil has always stood for being up front and not hiding things -- stealth nerfs and the like.

Thanks for listening and for your understanding and patience as we continue to build upon the foundation that is Vanguard and take it places not only have we planned and dreamed about for years now, but also places we haven't even thought of yet

Teleportation Systems

We're looking into adding some teleportation. We don't want to over do it and we want travel to still be meaningful, but as the game has become live, it has become apparent that some overland teleporation is necessary like you said for community building and keeping groups together and being able to travel long distances more quickly so you can get together with friends. Horses and other vehicles will remain important, but it is becoming clear that at times teleportation is appropriate. We'll then get the best of both worlds -- you'll be able to more quickly traverse long distances, but at the same time exploration will remain key and we keep the ability to add new content to the existing world.

To my knowledge, nothing is set in stone yet and there are still meetings figuring out the details. My preference is that they are not class based, but rather fixed locations (that we can move if necessary) that allow for teleportation. But again, that's just my preference. This is and always has been a team effort. The issue of teleportation should be determined fairly quickly and devs who play the game far more than me will weigh in as well and I'm sure we'll come up with some good solutions that, as I mentioned, help community building, help people find groups more easily, but still maintain a large world with meaningful travel. I don't think they are mutually exclusive and if you look up some of my old posts from very early beta, the fact that we might need some overland teleportation was always a plan B -- we just needed to get the game out so we could have a better and more clear idea of what is necessary so we don't go too far (nor not far enough). With any changes or additions like this you want to make sure the pendulum doesn't swing from one side to the other by over compensating for a problem.

This is a complete cave, but for the best. They built a huge world for no reason other than they could. It doesn't help the game.

Quote

Ref: Zoning & Chunking

For many computers there is minimal to no chunking time. And this will become more and more true as people upgrade and as we fix bugs associated with chunking. Like I said, my systems with x1950s have virtually no chunking issues -- no falling through the world, and crossing over a chunk border is almost instantaneous. And that 90% will approach 100% over the next year as we continue to optimize, fix bugs, and better hardware becomes both available and cheaper. Having to artificial chokeways, as you put it, makes more a more immersive virtual world. Add to that all the advantages I listed in my long post and this forward thinking architecture will pay off more and more and the upsides eventually so out weigh any downsides that it will cease to be an issue. Planning and architecting for the future, which I think is essential when making an MMOG that should continue to look good, be flexible, be upgradeable, etc. for years to come I feel strongly is the way to go, despite the short term issues some players have (although again I do apologize they do sometimes occur to people, and depending on their set up, the fact that they happen more often to some than to others -- by no means am I being flippant or dismissive of the problems some people experience; rather, like with many aspects of designing an MMOG that is to last years and planning for the future and the technology that will become more and more available and accessible/affordable, this does mean that short term there will be some issues, and more issues for some people -- again, I think for most people the advantages already far outweigh the disadvantages and this will become more and more true as the months go by).

The chunking works. I do like this part.

Quote

Benefits of Chunking over Instancing

The entire world is seamless in the sense that it's one huge contiguous world. It's divided into grids that are 2km x 2km. There's really no other way to do it. EQoA on the PS/2 was similar except that the hardware on the PS/2 allowed for constant reading of the DVD as a separate process (something the PC still cannot do, sigh). So there was less of a 'chunking' issue with EQoA because of the PS/2's hardware. But the world was the same way, divided into a grid.

1. Immersion -- the whole world is really there. You're not limited in where you go unless we specifically need to block something for gameplay reasons -- but we don't need to block off part of the world for technical reasons.

2. View Distance -- even though you are in a 2k x 2k chunk, the programmers did major surgery to the Unreal engine and the chunks all around you are loaded up. So you can see 4-6km. This creates fantastic view distances which again helps with the immersion -- you really feel like you're part of a world.

3. Future View Distance -- Because the engine has been architected for the future, one of things we'll be able to do is when there is a 64bit client, you'll be able to load even more chunks into memory and see even farther. This will help a great deal when flying mounts become more and more key to higher level gameplay.

4. Advanced level of detail and portal technology. Because of the view distances, how level of detail (where there are several models of, say, a house, each less detailed, such that the farther away an art asset is, the lower detail model is displayed so your computer isn't crunching polygons that you can't even see). One of the things that needs to be done is, like WoW, LODs as well as any object that is coming into view needs to fade in and not pop in -- this is something that will be done when time permits. In any case we knew from the beginning that we wanted a world where you could not only see far, but where you could fly up above a major city and still have a framerate. This required, as I mentioned, a complete and extremely advanced portal and LOD system. This is why you can fly anywhere (unless blocked by framerate) and have been able to do so since before beta. Contrast this to WoW, where you can only fly in the new expansion areas.

5. Lots of room to expand the existing world. While expansions will be made (and are also easy to add -- we just create more chunks and attach them logically to existing chunks) and new islands and continents will pop up, the other advantage of a seamless world is that every square foot is there. It has always been very important to us that we keep the 'old world' updated and fresh even as expansions are added. This was a goal early on, as we messed up and allowed expansions in EQ 1 to make the old world obsolete. Not only didn't we update the content in the old world, we made it such that there was little to no reason to visit the old world because the items and such that you could obtain in expansions rendered the old world obsolete as well. Our commitment with Vanguard is to have a Live Team that keeps the old world up to date and interesting. And having a seamless world makes that easier in the sense that the Live Team won't only be updating and revising content in existing areas of the old world, but there is plenty of room to add complete new areas to the existing old world. When we laid out the world early on we made the choice to make things big. At the same time, we were aware of the dangers of a huge world becoming boring (ala SWG) because it's virtually impossible to fill every bit of the world with something interesting (a point of interest, a dungeon, a city, a village, etc.). So what we did is lay out the world with cities, dungeons, and POIs and then created corridors of content connecting them (often roads or other logical pathways for players to traverse). If you leave these corridors of content, there's still stuff to see, wandering NPCs, etc. But the detail isn't there. I've seen criticisms of this, but the alternative again is to go zone based and just have nothing there as opposed to land with less focused and custom content. In any case, the Live Team will be able to slowly but surely add POIs, dungeons, camps, and other interesting areas to those parts of the world that are more plain without having to deal with a zone based world and figure out what is going to connect to what. So they'll add more custom content and then create new corridors of content connecting the new or updated area to what is already there.

The world is too big, even with this in mind. Why the two small continents? There is plenty of land mass in Thestra alone for all races AND 2 years of added plug in content.

Quote

6. In the future (probably some time away) we do have the ability to add a z coordinate to chunks. Right now you can fly very high up into the sky, and you can also create an underground dungeon that goes deep into the ground. But if necessary, and I think it will eventually happen, we could add chunks under the world, creating an 'Underdark', and then we could also add chunks above the world, creating cities in the sky, or flying into these chunks could lead to alternate planes. I think of the MUD I used to play and they had the Norse Tree Yggdrasil that you could climb to reach places like Jotunheim. Something analogous could be done. Pretty cool, IMHO.

7. Because it's a seamless world, we need to be able to load up any art asset *anywhere*. By art asset I mean anything: an NPC, a PC, a building, a part of a dungeon, a statue, etc, etc. With a zone based world, take EQ 1, there was a global file that always loaded in (for example, for PCs since they could pop up anywhere). But there was also files with art assets unique to that zone. It would include buildings, NPCs, etc. In fact, if we wanted to use an NPC in more than one zone, we would either add it to both zone files or if it was used a lot, we'd put it in the global file. But the global file had to be kept small (especially back in those days when servers and PCs had much less memory, slower hard drives, etc). In fact, when loading a zone in EQ 1 (at least when I was there) you loaded *everything* into memory. When you zoned, you deleted all of the zone specific data and loaded in the specific data for the new zone (hence the 'loading please wait'). With Vanguard the architecture and the fact that PCs and servers have become that much more powerful, anything can be loaded anywhere. We don't have to worry about a local and global file. This has many advantages. One is that we can assign an item to refer to any art asset. That means if you were in southern Qalia in the depths of a dungeon and killed a rare NPC or just found an object laying around, as long as an item in the database referenced it, you could pick it up, put it in your inventory, take it all the way to the other side of the world (say an island for housing, or northern Thestra) and place it in your house. So that cool statue of a djinn from the City of Brass could be placed in your house on the other side of the world as a trophy. Pretty cool. And that's just the beginning. When player housing turns into player cities, players will be able to decorate their villages or cities with objects from anywhere in the world.

The seamless architecture of the Vanguard engine and the way Telon is put together I think is already very cool and has many advantages other MMOGs don't have and simply cannot do. And then in the future, we can take advantage of this architecture all the more and do some really crazy things. Just for example, our portal technology will allow us to create non-Euclidean dungeons that cannot be mapped, creating quite an adventure and some time to get used to the area and not get lost. Really, the possibilities are tremendous. The engine was really architected with hooks into it that will allow us to do some really crazy things in the future for years to come.

So, yes, there is some downside and some pauses when you chunk. Again, this will become less and less of an issue as PCs become more powerful, as things move to 64bit, as our NPC AI improves, etc. So the downsides will become less and less of an issue and the advantages more and more apparent than they already are. I already strongly believe what we have now is worth it, and that again will become more and more apparent over time. So many aspects of Vanguard were planned from the beginning thinking about the shape and layout of the world for literally years to come. I really think the future is very bright. It's really so much more than long views and being able to go to just about anywhere you can see, being able to fly far above the world, etc. If you are going from point a to point b it doesn't take *that* long, but at the same time with every square foot being there, adding to the existing world is sooo much easier.

Priorities & Expansions

Like I've already posted, financial realities were such that we needed to release when we did. We did our best to get as much time as possible and we feel bad that the game could have used a few more months in beta. But what is done is done.

As we've always said, there will be a Live and Expansion team, with the Live team committed to updating, adding to, and refreshing the existing world. They will also be adding classes, new areas, new mobs, updating the AI, continue to optimize, etc. The first expansion is some time away and will add new land masses and include some major new features. The smaller stuff, while certainly important, will be added over time with patches.

Right now much of our focus is on bug fixing, balancing, etc. But that's not everybody. For example, while the design team is tweaking things, they are also adding new content, working on classes, etc. It's a balancing game -- how much effort do you put into bug fixes, tweaks, etc. vs. how many assets do you allocate to adding cool new things to the game. Right now, this soon after launch, there are more resources allocated to fixing things than how things will be a couple of months from now. But as you can see with our first major update we patched in, by no means are we only fixing things. We're doing our best to balance our resources and I think, overall, we're doing a decent job at it. Eventually more and more resources will be allocated to new mechanics, features, classes, NPCs, new areas in the existing world, etc. It will be a slow transition where as issues and bugs are addressed, more resources will be transitioned into new stuff and not just addressing bugs and other problematic issues. But it will happen.

'nuff said for now.

Without even touching on the content, it felt like a grind trying to read it.

Quote from: Lantyssa on March 09, 2007, 02:01:22 PM

Without even touching on the content, it felt like a grind trying to read it.

Lol. My thoughts exactly. I was interested for about 10 lines then I thought "Fuck this, even reading your posts/notes is a grind!". How lazy I've become...

Quote from: Lantyssa on March 09, 2007, 02:01:22 PM

Without even touching on the content, it felt like a grind trying to read it.

Well, that's because you haven't grinded up enough Reading skills to get Bullet Points. Since I've been doing Reading about 12 hours a day since VG launched, let me go ahead and give you what a High-Level reader gets:

1) Um, casuals think it's too much of a grind. But if we double the XP rate, the catasses leave. So we just do double XP like, every weekend.
2) We're doing some cool stuff later on down the line, so stop bitching about how lame our nerfs are and keep paying. And don't bring up why these features weren't in at launch. I am not going to discuss why we're nerfing low-power classes.
3) People are bitching about travel about spending an hour trying to meet up with their friends, so we're considering allowing some teleporting you lazy fucks.
4) My computer doesn't have a problem at chunk lines. Pony up for a real machine, fucker. I have a big fucking empty world and YOU BETTER LIKE IT.
5) Reasons chunking is cool: You can see large swathes of empty world, instead of tiny patches of empty world.
6) Reasons big giant empty world is cool: Because we have all this space where we can, at some point, add cool stuff. We won't discuss that, in fact, it would take about 10 years of expansions to fill up one continent and we have three...
7) Not content with three continents of vast, empty space, we have plans to create content in the vast empty sky above it, and below it. Aren't we fucking awesome? That giant empty tract of land that takes 45 minutes to cover on foot could have a giant empty cave system below it! Or a giant, empty city floating high above it!
8) Seriously, it might suck now, but our engine can do all this cool shit we plan on doing just as soon as we finish painfully nerfing every class in the game to unplayability, then offering 10x XP so people can advance at a snail's pace. And it's casual-friendly!
9) Seriously, about the hitching -- get a real machine, fucker.
10) We're already working on an expansion!
11) Jesus, please play the game, okay? It's totally cool in my head.

The only innovation i've seen in vanguard is the double targets (offensive, defensive). I like that mechanic because it can do things like "attack to generate a heal" which would be demonstrated by the disciple (if it was not hopelessly broken) and bloodmage. It also allows support characters to be more involved in melee.

Other than that it's a rather clunky, empty and unfinished game with little to recommend it. I love the opening picture, half colored and half still in pencil, which seems a homage to the fact that the game is incomplete.

The worst thing about the game is that the space is too large for the population to support. If you want a grouping game then you need multiple points at which people congregate in close proximity to level appropriate content. In vanguard content is just smeared all over these huge, but largely uninteresting, continents. Of course they can't really support that model either, given none of the content is instanced. I did a "scout the headquarters" quest yesterday just by walking past the other adventurers who were slaughtering everything that moved, how exciting.

Oh, they also need to stop doing game balancing with a virtual mallet. Multiple gentle re-adjustments will not piss your playerbase off in the way they have been managing. That and instituting a rest system if that's what they want. As observed double xp is a boon mainly to the hardcore. And considering the game is dying from the bottom up that's not a good idea.

Trying to be all things to all people...if you liked EQ you'll like this, if you hated EQ you'll like this, if you like WOW you'll like this...lol.

I'm a big fan of a huge world as long as there is some damn point to it.

Edit: I don't think they thought past "damn, this huge world will be awesome!!" 10 years ago something that *seemed* cool might have been enough, now the novelty has warn off. Nobody is a wide-eyed newb anymore.

The chunking/zoning problem does not go away with a fast computer. I have a GTX8800, 2GB ram, Athlon x2 6000+ and a 100mbps connection. I still freeze at the chunkline for a minimum of 2-3s(balanced settings even, hah!).

I would argue that it is their server tech that sucks balls. I play in Europe on a Euro server and the ping is all over the place if you watch it for a while. Normally for me the ping is around 200-300ms and its not uncommon with spikes in the seconds.
Even if the Euro servers are physically located in the US(not sure where they are actually), that is still too much since I can easily get below 150ms on an east coast server and below 200 on a west coast server.

Quote from: Secundo on March 12, 2007, 06:27:28 AM

Try defragging your hard drive.

Yes defragging after a major Vanguard patch is absolutely essential. That's around 20 gigs and the patcher just completely trashes it. I remember during the beta I would run the defrag analyzer and half of my hard drive was red. Loading times were drastically cut afterwards, the file scan when Vanguard starts up was also much faster.

Can they shrink the land at this point if they wanted to? I mean, they released with 3? continents, can two continents just up and disappear, while everyone suddenly finds himself teleported, architecture and all, to the one remaining continent?

I ran into an old friend last night -- old EQ1 junkie. He was THE target market for Vanguard. He bitched about it for about thirty minutes. Said he'd heard all about how it was innovative, how the guys behind it were the guys that brought him EQ, how it was going to be awesome, etc, etc.

His review? "It's like playing a shittier version of EQ1 with EQ2's graphics. The only thing new is diplomacy, which it's for me. And the grind is for shit already."

This is a guy who happens to be in the middle of a year off work, and has plenty of time to play.

Something cool about Vanguard: our guild has its first ship built by our guild carpenter (this guy is a grinding machine.)

"Gave the first ship to Adrift, who for the past 25 levels helped outfit me with his weapons and other gear, and at dawn, the October Star sailed out of Konarthi Point on it's first voyage."

My guild is about 8 hardcore players and 8 that haven't logged in for some time. I am in the latter. There are two MMOG newbs in the hardcore group.

Now that's pretty cool. Do the ships fit into anything besides transport or possibly fishing? Like, could your guild build a fleet and have a naval war with another guild? The most recent EQ1 expansion features naval battles (bought the expansion but haven't checked that part out yet). Just wondering if Vanguard is going the same route early on. I'm getting curious about this game. How long do you think before they have a trial download? Or if they do, where are they hiding it?

Everything cool about ships will be patched in later. Right now, they are expensive travel tools. That type is available from our guild artificer (not carpenter) for 17g for a "from scratch" build. It will take him about 2 hours of crafting monotony if he has all the raw materials ready.

2 hours to make one fucking ship?

Surely that's a fucking typo. It surely cannot take 2 hours. Seriously, you're pulling my fucking leg.

WHAT THE FUCK IS WRONG WITH PEOPLE?

At level 25 (when you get the ability to make 5 boards at a time) it takes our artificer 1 hour to just get all the boards done. That includes the refining process from the raw material. The additional work is probably closer to 30 minutes when I pressed him.

Oh, I forgot one thing -- my EQ1 junkie of a friend did have one positive thing to say about Vanguard. He apparently got turned into a Vampire, and thought that was cool. He also indicated he had no interest in curing his Vampire-like nature.

Quote from: Morat20 on March 12, 2007, 01:35:08 PM

Got turned into a vampire? As in like happens in Oblivion and dynamically "caught" vampirism in play? Interesting. And the ship looks cool. How much control does it have I wonder?

Quote from: Riggswolfe on March 12, 2007, 02:01:56 PM

Quote from: Morat20 on March 12, 2007, 01:35:08 PM

Got turned into a vampire? As in like happens in Oblivion and dynamically "caught" vampirism in play? Interesting. And the ship looks cool. How much control does it have I wonder?

So he said. There's a longish-quest chain to cure it, but he has no interest in it. Likes it -- pluses and minuses. I think he's doing his usual Evil Dark Elf thing. I think I would have noticed if he'd started talking about another game, but there was a lot of cross-talk.

Quote from: HaemishM on March 12, 2007, 12:17:09 PM

2 hours to make one fucking ship?

Surely that's a fucking typo. It surely cannot take 2 hours. Seriously, you're pulling my fucking leg.

WHAT THE FUCK IS WRONG WITH PEOPLE?

Honestly, I don't have an issue with that. yeah, it sucks for the guy making one by himself, but hey.... You go chop down a few trees, and then I'll start a timer and see how long it takes you to turn felled trees into a ship.

Heck, swap you with someone who knows how to make ships like that, who has done it before. I'd be impressed if he can knock it out in less than 40 hours, even if we give him time curing the wood for free.

The important part to me, is that the majority of the work is parallellisable. In that, if you had two carpenters, you can cut the 'making boards' time from an hour to 30 mins. Probably a fair part of the last 30 mins is the same way, you just need to move all the parts to one guy for the final combine.

Think of it like the crafting version of a solo instance run. He spends an hour killing crap mobs, and faces a few more difficult enemies near the end, and if everything works out, instead of a magic helmet, he gets a boat.

--
Alkiera

Quote from: HaemishM on March 12, 2007, 12:17:09 PM

2 hours to make one fucking ship?

Surely that's a fucking typo. It surely cannot take 2 hours. Seriously, you're pulling my fucking leg.

WHAT THE FUCK IS WRONG WITH PEOPLE?

Not that I disagree, but how long does it take to scrape up the 90 gold you'd need in WoW to get a level 40 mount?
Assuming of course that you don't cheat, don't buy your gold from RMT, and don't have a high level toon twinking you.

It's not a perfect analogy, of course. But, on my first WoW toon, I recall spending several hours grinding away from level 37-40, selling everything I could find, including Iron and Mithril bars, to make it to 90G before I hit 40. And even then I was broke for the next two levels b/c I hadn't left myself anything to pay for training.

You do it in WoW to alleviate the pain (tedium, call it what you will) of moving around the world at the default run speed. I dunno what (if any) content is opened up by making boats in Vanguard. Or if boats in Vanguard serve the same purpose that the free ones do in WoW, i.e. intercontinental travel.