Can I currently prove it's a failure? No. Will anyone every be able to prove it? Probably not, unless SOE/Sigil release subscriber numbers that aren't inflated with the All-Access Pass which I doubt will happen. That being said, I say it's a failure for multiple reasons. One reasons is that I doubt Vanguard will break 200,000 subs. In this day and age, with the budget, credentials and publisher that Vanguard had, anything less than 300,000 subs is a failure. When other games with budgets a fraction of the size of Vanguard and no-name developers/publishers heading them have user bases that are close to Vanguard's, something obviously isn't right.
My second reason for calling Vanguard a failure is based on how much potential it squandered away. Two years ago, even after the birth of WoW, Vanguard was one of the most talked about upcoming MMOs for a variety of reasons. If you would've polled the MMO community at that time you would have probably seen a load of positive sentiment for the game. Now, only a month after release, Vanguard is being pretty much universally panned by critics and gamers alike. Not many are saying it's a bad game, it's just an amazingly mediocre game.
Now you can argue all you like that those don't necessarily make a game a failure, and maybe you're right. I'm sure their are 100,000 people out there who love the game and think it's the greatest thing since Everquest, but that could be said about a lot of games that are generally accepted as failures. I'd bet that if you really had a completely honest chat with McQuaid and Butler, they'd say the game didn't match their expectations either. So, is Vanguard a failure? In a common-sense view, it probably is.
HA! Both the mob models disappearing and the inventory problems have been around for literally 9 months. These two issues were probably one of the most reported bugs in beta. If that's not a perfect example of the game, I don't know what is.
It's kind of sad to me, and a few others I know because this didn't have to happen. Sigil spent a LOT of money on Vanguard, not WoW money, but more than pretty much any other MMO out at the moment besides EQ2. Not only that, but they had lot's of time too, something like 5 years of development time. Unfortunately, they pissed it all away. They just made mistake after mistake that eventually lead to the current state. I was part of the most active guild in beta for a long time and most of us left about 4 months prior to launch even after putting in months of playtime on characters we knew would be deleted. It just became obvious to us, people who had big plans, tons of time and resources invested and really wanted to enjoy the game, that it was just going downhill fast. I really feel sorry for some of the developers and other Sigil employees that we got to know. Most of them joined Sigil because they expected greatness from McQuaid, he was one of the creators of Everquest after all, but instead they got screwed just like everyone else, but more so. It became pretty plain that even the devs were losing hope and enthusiasm for the project, and when that happens the game is doomed.
As for Vanguard settings bad precedent, I agree, but not for the same reasons. Like someone else mentioned, MMO's releasing before they finished is nothing new and if anything Vanguard lack of success is going to further show new developers that to release an unfinished MMO these days is essentially suicide. Where I think the bad precedent comes from is that Vanguard was originally being built as the last crack at a "hardcore" MMO. Now that Vanguard is essentially a failure investors will be far less likely to put their money on another "hardcore" style MMO which is really a shame since the style of the game was not why it's failing. I don't know if we'll ever see a mainstream Everquest style MMO again, but I'm sure we're going to see a long line of WoW clones hoping to ride the coattails. Whether you like one style of game or another it's always nice to have more choices.
Finally, another important thing to gather from the Vanguard release is that it will most likely be Brad McQuaid's last. He used up every ounce of fanboyism and nostalgia that he gained from Everquest and totally wasted it. He made a lot of big claims and hard-nosed statements concerning Vanguard and didn't deliver on any of them. He's truly eating his words right now as he's basically become a MMO pariah. And frankly, after seeing what he did (and didn't do) with such a promising "Vision" of Vanguard, I say good riddance.
She kinda seems bitchy to me, especially when her answers are gender related. Then I see she's majoring in "Women's Studies." Future Femmenazi if you ask me.
I love these comments calling people masochists for wanting more challenging gameplay. What about the olympic athletes? Are they masochists for dedicating their lives to a sport, often times taking up far more time/money than any MMO, and for some sports (curling anyone?) which have less worldwide appeal than online gaming does? I'm not trying to equate playing an MMO to an Olympic event, but come on, this lame argument holds no water.
Believe it or not, some people actually do enjoy playing difficult, time consuming games. If you aren't one of them, fine, but don't bash the game for choosing a market or the players for doing what they enjoy. You should be glad that Vanguard is advertising itself for what it is, a game that is aimed at those who enjoyed the old experience of EQ or whose who aren't happy with today's current crop of easy MMORPG's. Most other developers don't even give the courtesy of talking truely about their game. Instead they try and make it seem like it will fit all players of all types, which is virtually impossible. In the end, they make lots of money from people who dropped $50 on a game that they find out really doesn't fit their play style.
Personally, I'm looking forward to playing this game. I''m just glad to see that truthful advertising is cutting the "fat" players now instead of having to put up with them when the game goes live.
A bit ironic that a userbase that strongly supports anti-censorship and internet control has so many people "offended" by this topic.
If there's ever a topic involving orgasms again, make sure it contains Microsoft basing and Linux advertisments. I'm sure it will go over much better.
I'd like to see some quality MMO and single-player RPG's come out for some popular Fantasy series/titles. A new Wheel of Time or Malazan Book of the Fallen MMO or RPG would be awesome.
As for original ideas, I'm still waiting for a MMORTS. Rome: Total War Online, anyone?
This isn't as bad as when an underage girl gets into a club or bar with a fake ID and gets picked up by some 21+ guy then screws him. She either regrets it or her parents find out, and the guy is a child molester, even if he asked for ID. There's been several cases like that in the past, I feel sorry for the dude. Stupid bullshit paradigms in the US.
Slashdot Mirror
Can I currently prove it's a failure? No. Will anyone every be able to prove it? Probably not, unless SOE/Sigil release subscriber numbers that aren't inflated with the All-Access Pass which I doubt will happen. That being said, I say it's a failure for multiple reasons. One reasons is that I doubt Vanguard will break 200,000 subs. In this day and age, with the budget, credentials and publisher that Vanguard had, anything less than 300,000 subs is a failure. When other games with budgets a fraction of the size of Vanguard and no-name developers/publishers heading them have user bases that are close to Vanguard's, something obviously isn't right.
My second reason for calling Vanguard a failure is based on how much potential it squandered away. Two years ago, even after the birth of WoW, Vanguard was one of the most talked about upcoming MMOs for a variety of reasons. If you would've polled the MMO community at that time you would have probably seen a load of positive sentiment for the game. Now, only a month after release, Vanguard is being pretty much universally panned by critics and gamers alike. Not many are saying it's a bad game, it's just an amazingly mediocre game.
Now you can argue all you like that those don't necessarily make a game a failure, and maybe you're right. I'm sure their are 100,000 people out there who love the game and think it's the greatest thing since Everquest, but that could be said about a lot of games that are generally accepted as failures. I'd bet that if you really had a completely honest chat with McQuaid and Butler, they'd say the game didn't match their expectations either. So, is Vanguard a failure? In a common-sense view, it probably is.
HA! Both the mob models disappearing and the inventory problems have been around for literally 9 months. These two issues were probably one of the most reported bugs in beta. If that's not a perfect example of the game, I don't know what is.
It's kind of sad to me, and a few others I know because this didn't have to happen. Sigil spent a LOT of money on Vanguard, not WoW money, but more than pretty much any other MMO out at the moment besides EQ2. Not only that, but they had lot's of time too, something like 5 years of development time. Unfortunately, they pissed it all away. They just made mistake after mistake that eventually lead to the current state. I was part of the most active guild in beta for a long time and most of us left about 4 months prior to launch even after putting in months of playtime on characters we knew would be deleted. It just became obvious to us, people who had big plans, tons of time and resources invested and really wanted to enjoy the game, that it was just going downhill fast. I really feel sorry for some of the developers and other Sigil employees that we got to know. Most of them joined Sigil because they expected greatness from McQuaid, he was one of the creators of Everquest after all, but instead they got screwed just like everyone else, but more so. It became pretty plain that even the devs were losing hope and enthusiasm for the project, and when that happens the game is doomed. As for Vanguard settings bad precedent, I agree, but not for the same reasons. Like someone else mentioned, MMO's releasing before they finished is nothing new and if anything Vanguard lack of success is going to further show new developers that to release an unfinished MMO these days is essentially suicide. Where I think the bad precedent comes from is that Vanguard was originally being built as the last crack at a "hardcore" MMO. Now that Vanguard is essentially a failure investors will be far less likely to put their money on another "hardcore" style MMO which is really a shame since the style of the game was not why it's failing. I don't know if we'll ever see a mainstream Everquest style MMO again, but I'm sure we're going to see a long line of WoW clones hoping to ride the coattails. Whether you like one style of game or another it's always nice to have more choices. Finally, another important thing to gather from the Vanguard release is that it will most likely be Brad McQuaid's last. He used up every ounce of fanboyism and nostalgia that he gained from Everquest and totally wasted it. He made a lot of big claims and hard-nosed statements concerning Vanguard and didn't deliver on any of them. He's truly eating his words right now as he's basically become a MMO pariah. And frankly, after seeing what he did (and didn't do) with such a promising "Vision" of Vanguard, I say good riddance.
She kinda seems bitchy to me, especially when her answers are gender related. Then I see she's majoring in "Women's Studies." Future Femmenazi if you ask me.
I love these comments calling people masochists for wanting more challenging gameplay. What about the olympic athletes? Are they masochists for dedicating their lives to a sport, often times taking up far more time/money than any MMO, and for some sports (curling anyone?) which have less worldwide appeal than online gaming does? I'm not trying to equate playing an MMO to an Olympic event, but come on, this lame argument holds no water. Believe it or not, some people actually do enjoy playing difficult, time consuming games. If you aren't one of them, fine, but don't bash the game for choosing a market or the players for doing what they enjoy. You should be glad that Vanguard is advertising itself for what it is, a game that is aimed at those who enjoyed the old experience of EQ or whose who aren't happy with today's current crop of easy MMORPG's. Most other developers don't even give the courtesy of talking truely about their game. Instead they try and make it seem like it will fit all players of all types, which is virtually impossible. In the end, they make lots of money from people who dropped $50 on a game that they find out really doesn't fit their play style. Personally, I'm looking forward to playing this game. I''m just glad to see that truthful advertising is cutting the "fat" players now instead of having to put up with them when the game goes live.
A bit ironic that a userbase that strongly supports anti-censorship and internet control has so many people "offended" by this topic. If there's ever a topic involving orgasms again, make sure it contains Microsoft basing and Linux advertisments. I'm sure it will go over much better.
Or if you have some balls you can play paintball. How did they leave that one out?
I'd like to see some quality MMO and single-player RPG's come out for some popular Fantasy series/titles. A new Wheel of Time or Malazan Book of the Fallen MMO or RPG would be awesome. As for original ideas, I'm still waiting for a MMORTS. Rome: Total War Online, anyone?
This isn't as bad as when an underage girl gets into a club or bar with a fake ID and gets picked up by some 21+ guy then screws him. She either regrets it or her parents find out, and the guy is a child molester, even if he asked for ID. There's been several cases like that in the past, I feel sorry for the dude. Stupid bullshit paradigms in the US.