Those who are following the development of Vanguard:Saga Of Heroes know that in fact there is a great deal of refinement, particularly in the combat mechanics and archetype interelationships, compared to EQ1.
One can only suspect that SirBruce's commentary regards things such as instancing which have become popular in the post EQ1 world of MMORPG.
Not all things innovative pan out in the long run (see New Coke). Many things in life represent a classic design, and with those things you don't innovate, you refine. Innovation remains for those who did not invent the classic, but against which they are inevitably and eternally judged.
While I will not fault SirBruce for his estimate, or his prediction, I will submit that he's missing the point. And the boat.
Re:McQuaid Part of the Problem, Not Part of the Cu
on
The MMOGs of Tomorrow
·
· Score: 1
I'm not convinced that attacking personalities provides any useful insight into a game.
It is difficult, in my mind, to make a persuasive case that a game with the length and breadth of loyalty EQ1 enjoyed was built on anything less than a solid foundation.
Instant travel, conveniences such as 'binding', rapid advancement, etc. that constitute so much of the modern crop of MMORPG illustrate a fundamental misunderstanding of the human spirit.
True accomplishment is a feeling one gets only from prevailing over the challenging. Yes, there will always be those who prefer 'God Mode', cheat codes, and very simple and convenient games.
But there is a large and neglected demographic seeking the sort of challenge that no longer exists in the trivial MMORPG offerings post EQ1.
I have every confidence that Vanguard will find great success therefore, and may very well lure away many from the current crop who seek a meatier dish for their gaming appetite.
Slashdot Mirror
Those who are following the development of Vanguard:Saga Of Heroes know that in fact there is a great deal of refinement, particularly in the combat mechanics and archetype interelationships, compared to EQ1. One can only suspect that SirBruce's commentary regards things such as instancing which have become popular in the post EQ1 world of MMORPG. Not all things innovative pan out in the long run (see New Coke). Many things in life represent a classic design, and with those things you don't innovate, you refine. Innovation remains for those who did not invent the classic, but against which they are inevitably and eternally judged. While I will not fault SirBruce for his estimate, or his prediction, I will submit that he's missing the point. And the boat.
I'm not convinced that attacking personalities provides any useful insight into a game. It is difficult, in my mind, to make a persuasive case that a game with the length and breadth of loyalty EQ1 enjoyed was built on anything less than a solid foundation. Instant travel, conveniences such as 'binding', rapid advancement, etc. that constitute so much of the modern crop of MMORPG illustrate a fundamental misunderstanding of the human spirit. True accomplishment is a feeling one gets only from prevailing over the challenging. Yes, there will always be those who prefer 'God Mode', cheat codes, and very simple and convenient games. But there is a large and neglected demographic seeking the sort of challenge that no longer exists in the trivial MMORPG offerings post EQ1. I have every confidence that Vanguard will find great success therefore, and may very well lure away many from the current crop who seek a meatier dish for their gaming appetite.