Vanguard: Saga of Heroes

Originally posted by sigamon

Originally posted by SlydeRule

Originally posted by Chainspell

wat i dont get is the people that keeps bashing age of conan always promotes vanguard in their posts.

i didnt get age of conan because everyone says it sucks. but from wat i can tell vanguard is the same thing.

Vanguard really has very little in common with AoC.

Vanguard is a huge, seamless world (no zones, no instances).  If you can see a distant mountain, you can reach the top of it (may need a flying mount though).  AoC is heavily instanced.

Vanguard is primarily a PvE game at this time.  PvP will get attention once PvE is balanced.  AoC is primarily PvP.

The Vanguard community, on the whole, is more mature,  Many have been playing MMOs since Ultima Online or Everquest.  The AoC community is, well, let's just say they tend to be younger.

Many people left Vanguard to try AoC - especially those on the PvP server, but most of them have returned and brought other AoC refugees with them.

AoC may be a great game someday, but its launch was worse than Vanguards, and the improved Vanguard is now benefiting from this.

 

 

 

ARE YOU FREAKIN KIDDING ME!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!?  AoC's launch was worse then Vanguards?! what planet were you on when VG launched.  not only did the game get rated worst game of 2007 but also half the stuff in game was broken or bugged all to hell.  i dont even want to get into how bad VG's launch was.  AoC's launch was nice, i could play the game w/o crashing to desktop every 5 seconds.  The zones transfer over quickly, unlike VG where at launch it took me at least 3 to 4 minutes to chunk over.

I tried VG again a few days ago, i wasnt impressed. its all still the same the only thing i noticed was that it ran smoother and i played a day without crashing once.  VG is fun yeah but Aoc and VG are on two different levels.  And in my opinion AoC stomps VG

Lol.....If you say AOC stoms VG I dont think you have been playing MMO's for long.....I want my 70 bucks back .

Tried it again. Was still not impressed.

The game did run smoother and alot of the bugs were fixed. The game itself still lacks in depth, appeal, and population.

For those stating that the subscription numbers are increasing. Every free month for those, like myself, that have re-activated the account and tried it again, counts towards that.  The real numbers will come at the end of the month (July) when the offer runs out.  Unfortunately, after researching the games over all subscriptions, given the free accounts, the population is still not growing hugely enough. The game is still not generating money to pay the developers with (it's no wonder why Sony cut the developement team in half, given Sigil hoped that they would foot the bill for their dissappointing game, sorry folks, but no one works for free) The release of Warhammer in August will only diminish the 100,000 player base that Vanguard has now (with the free subscription offer) leaving Sony with even a bigger bill to pay.

The game is lacking "ummph", for lack of a better word.  It had the grand idea's and big dreams, but the execution was sub par, and still is overall.

Kudos for fixing the bugs Sony, but F for making the game any more interesting, in which it's not. It's a nostraligic home for EQ players, and sadly nothing more than that.

AoC also lacks, but not in game interest or content. In that, it's worlds ahead of VG, but the bugs, crashes, ect in it made you want to pull your hair out. Fortunately, AoC is releasing a huge patch to fix all that in the following weeks, which may cause those that left AoC to "return" or "try out" Vanguard to return back to them. Only time will tell. 

For the poster that wrote that AoC got the worst MMO game award in 2007, you're incorrect. The game did not release to this year, thus, couldn't have won the award in 2007. VG incidently did win that award in 2007, and 2008. It will be a toss up between who will win it in 2009, VG or AoC.

Summary: Vanguard is still a huge disappoint.  Fix the storyline, fix the combat structure, fix the death penalities, add some real pvp, and then maybe, Vanguard will be a likable game.

Originally posted by Leather2

Summary: Vanguard is still a huge disappoint.  Fix the storyline, fix the combat structure, fix the death penalities, add some real pvp, and then maybe, Vanguard will be a likable game.

Agreed.  Death penalties need to be made more harsh in VG.

Umm... the death penalty gets pretty harsh at higher levels.  At it's worst you can lose a good 30%-50% of a level in a few hours if you end up getting into tough areas and are unable to retreive corpses.  I think the death penalty curve is about right all the way through the levels.

As for the story line.... wow... if you don't think Vanguard has a good storyline you are somehow missing the lore when adventuring, crafting or parleying.  The big storyline is very interesting and the mini-story lines are weaved in exceptionally well.  Paying attention to the lore can be very helpful later on in the game :)  Listen to your diplomats and what they are able to learn.

Combat System... what do feel is lacking and what classes have you tried out?  Sure it's complex, but when a group or a raid is working together it is really a lot of fun.

lol, every board i go to, "i am returning to <<<insert your favorite mmo here>>>> because i quit conan. conan was pretty bad, hahah gaute you loser, all talk, i mean lisp.

Originally posted by boojiboy

Umm... the death penalty gets pretty harsh at higher levels.  At it's worst you can lose a good 30%-50% of a level in a few hours if you end up getting into tough areas and are unable to retreive corpses.  I think the death penalty curve is about right all the way through the levels.

As for the story line.... wow... if you don't think Vanguard has a good storyline you are somehow missing the lore when adventuring, crafting or parleying.  The big storyline is very interesting and the mini-story lines are weaved in exceptionally well.  Paying attention to the lore can be very helpful later on in the game :)  Listen to your diplomats and what they are able to learn.

Combat System... what do feel is lacking and what classes have you tried out?  Sure it's complex, but when a group or a raid is working together it is really a lot of fun.

Death Penalty: I agree that the death penalty can be harsh at higher levels, but only on the very rare occasions when you can't get to your tombstone (or get a rezz) and you have to summon it to an alter.  Even then you will only lose less than 4%. Example: at 98% into level 50 I died and had to summon my tombstone.  I lost 3% and I'm now at 95% into level 50.  With almost every death, even at level 50, you can recover your tombstone and regain the lost experience in a very short time.

Lore: Almost all of the game lore is limited to Diplomacy NPCs.  Hopefully, that will be expanded to other NPCs someday, as it is a very interesting story line.

Combat System:  Some classes do look better than others, but I play a healer in 1st person view so I don't see much of the action anyway.

Originally posted by eugam

SOE seems to do something different. They change the structure of the company. Why have a full dev team for each game ? Once some development is stadarized a single department of artists and animators is able to craete graphical content for all games. They lizenced the U3 engine for The Agency and it is possible that there will be some synergy with the U2.5 engine from Vanguard. The whole progress is slow at the beginning,but very rewarding in the future.

Perhaps SOE is still looking at updated the Vanguard engine to use U3.0 engine like it was originally supposed to.

Originally posted by gurugeorge

Originally posted by Hegav

How the fuck did this turn into a AoC vs Vanguard when it was about a player asking for a guild.. I mean wtf guys

 

Because it seems that because of the hype a lot of players got into AoC thinking it would be the game of their dreams - i.e. EQ with a gritty, realistic game world.  When they were disappointed the obvious alternative is the REAL EQ2 - i.e. Vanguard.  Which had a shitty launch but is now playing very well, although still fairly unpolished, the gameplay is starting to shine.

OTOH, as a poster said above, if you were wise to the hype, then you would have expected nothing more from AoC than a good, solid combat-based MMO (like City of Heroes).  I also find the graphics and quests in AoC to be so good that the game amounts to being quite immersive for me.  But I never expected a truly open-ended game like EQ or Vanguard from AoC.

At the end of the day, some people who have been disappointed with AoC are "discovering" Vanguard and because they got new comps to play AoC with, are finding Vanguard very good looking, and it has always had basically great gameplay and a huge, open world to adventure in, and really is the true spiritual successor to EQ in the modern MMO world.

Personally I love both games, they're my favourite MMOs at the moment.  I hope Vanguard sorts out its animation/sync problems soon though, it really does look terribly amateurish sometimes, despite the high quality of the graphics in other ways.

The only real EQ2 I know is ...EQ2. And Vanguard is ...Vanguard. Did I clear your confusion?

I tried VG again a few days ago, i wasnt impressed.

Was in the beta. (AOC) Aoc 's launch has been a success because fc polished 20st levels (tortage) 

Aoc is heavily instanced, mass pvp is not ready (not even 1 month after the release) etc. this game needs 1 year of work and patches. (and content)

Call it Tortage of Conan if you want. Stopped after the end of OB. You're not impressed about what ?  Vg works fine, it has a lot of content. Aoc works bad, no content. 100% hype.

I don't want to bash AOC, there's nothing to bash. I don't care about AOC. I won't pay 50€ + 15€ a month for a tortage online.

I m 40 years old, i'm not a kid, i'm not impressed by marketing.

---------------------------------------------

Next.