"Con:

Diplomacy & crafting are a chore"

Originally posted by remyburke

Crafting, Diplomacy and exploration were my favorite parts of this game. I disagree.

 

I agree with remyburke.. I disagree with this awful review.

I still fail to see why the devs of most of the games that lack of population are reluctant to put AI on their side, saying put god damn hierlings!! DDO has proven to be probably one of the most succesful games on history despite the hate, still collects on the top 5 mmos to the date, and this is purely due the synergy between players, but not alone that, it allows the players to play their heart content at their own peace by placing healers, tanks and casters at their dispossal.

Even using the horrid AI that hierlings have DDO has made what others not, the viability of playing on your own or play in group as you please, if this system were to be introduced on Vanguard i assure you the experience would be amazing, the main problem of vanguard is the huge world, is so inmense that you barely see any npc, and aside of Qualia main city you feel totally alone.

Seriously, having another server handling the Hierlings is not expencive if you think there are 2 servers now and one of them is dead, merge them and optimize your resources, and let the devs work on a hierling system that would revive this game.

Incredibly silly article. This must be the worst "review" given by this website so far. 

The positives aren't true, and the negatives are just ridiculous. Crafting and diplomacy is a chore? [mod edit]. Why don't you quit reviewing games that require more than a dozen of active brain cells and get back to your usual click-and-wait crafting so common in almost every themepark out there?

Originally posted by xDayx

Originally posted by Dakirn

I'm sorry reviewer, you missed the entire point of Diplomacy and Crafting completely... and of Vanguard.

I tried to read this article but it doesn't make sense.  The reviewer seems like an instant gratification player and that is not what Vanguard is.. it's a game from a previous era when you had to work at things.

This review is just.. well. Yeah.

 Yeah thats the impression I got. He obviously started playing mmo's in the post-wow-era.

 

I have played Vanguard at release for a while and also came back after a year or so to check if performance had improved.  I loved the crafting and diplomacy. It is one of the few MMO's where I think crafting is very well done (SWG and Ryzom are two others).

But despite loving that system, I also thought its progression was a horrible grind. The only reason I put up with it was because it was an alternative progress for my character and the writs didn't need resources that you had to gather yourself (I really don't like nodehunting anymore).

Apart from that I also think that the F2P restrictions are just not competitive enough in the current market.

Still, if I weren't enjoying different games atm, I would revisit Vanguard. I loved the huge explorable world and I am quite curious about the changes.

This review is... confusing.

You gave the aesthetics 6/10, with the only negative note to be seen that the music was nonexistent in some places and "buggy with combat effects" - the latter of which I've never experienced since about three months after launch.  How exactly does that take four points off of a score?

Gameplay - you call combat lacking excitement and unimpressive, but you don't elaborate on why you feel that way.  Personally I find the combat to be quite fun, particularly in groups where you can coordinate properly to use weaknesses and increase damage on the whole.  You call diplomacy a bore, skipping over the entire concept, and your only praise is crafting... yet you (somehow?) give this category a 7 out of 10.  That doesn't even make sense, given what you wrote.

Innovation - you marked this down, seemingly, because features are complex.  That doesn't detract from innovation.  A low innovation score would mean that the game is a boring rehash of everything else out there.

[mod edit]

I see the fanboy crowd wasted no time breaking out the torches and pitchforks.

Honestly, the reviewer has a different viewpoint than you do, that is all there is to it. It doesn't matter when he started playing MMORPGs, whether hes a fan of themeparks or sandboxes, etc...

The review does not make your own opinions any less valid, and the reviewers opinion is not any more valid than your own. They are equally valid and nobody is wrong or right.

It's a difference of opinions and nothing more, if you can't accept that then the internet might not be the place for you.

The vangaurd comunity always goes after anybody who has negative thigns to say about their game. However I think the writer actually give Vanguard a good score 6.5?? I was like that is 2 points too high. So a lot ofwhat I read can be just chucked out as they are flaming and trolling.

Diplomacy was strange when I was in beta, and I admit you either loved it or you really hated it, I hated it and ignored it.   Crafting on the other hand was down right great, it was the one thing that kept me in game for 3 months at launch wile the rest of the folks were leaving.

I got to say I tried free to play, but the game still has massive amounts of lag, It had some great ideas, but it is old and tired, and will only appeal to a certain type of player.   The ones who want instant gratification might as well go back to wow or something, as there is nothing instant about vanguard, and that is where I think they made a misjudgement of the type of player they were shoot at with free to play.

Me I deinstalled vangaurd last week end to make room for something more interesting.

Sorry but what was said rings true for many new players trying the game out for the first time.

Originally posted by mymmo
you can play the game without payinga dime, and still there is some nagging about the f2p model...sigh

Agreed, people are just never satisfied

Originally posted by eddieg50

Originally posted by mymmo
you can play the game without payinga dime, and still there is some nagging about the f2p model...sigh

Agreed, people are just never satisfied

That's not it. There are a number of MMO's that use the Ftp model, so you judge an mmo that claims to be ftp by its competition.

In other words, value for your time.  Vanguard isn't free to play, since it cost you time. Therefor you want to spend your time wisely and get the most bang for your buck.

SOE can suck my stump after bailing on it's EU customers. That said they have easily one of the crappiest F2P "models" in existence that essentially leave you in a "sub or gtfo" situation mostly.

I liked VG a lot when I tried it, it does have its downsides though & these can grate after a while but if you can overlook them there is a uniquely old-school charm to this title, a pity it wasn't purchased by a studio willing to fully polish & flesh it out earlier in its life-cycle as this could have been one of the big guns.

Game engine was lacking 5 years ago even more than now.

Now people have much more powerful PC's on average + engine was patched a bit.

Can you imagine how BAD it was?  It was like half of people had like 5-15 fps which was kinda unplayabel and drove people away.

Originally posted by eddieg50

Originally posted by mymmo
you can play the game without payinga dime, and still there is some nagging about the f2p model...sigh

Agreed, people are just never satisfied

Yeah, the rest of us must be crazy for criticizing SoE's shitbucket of an excuse for a F2P model.

I agree with the reviewer, except the part about crafting.  Even then, crafting is sort of a horrendous grind in that it's not really fun, but it is useful.  Kind of like EQ2's crafting, only I think VG crafting is a bit better.

The scenery looks nice, but date, and the character models are atrocious.

And before anyone knee-jerks about post WoW blah blah blah.  I started with Lineage, which was a great game.  Just because VG has old school grind doesn't make it old school good, just grindy and boring.