Originally posted by Ironman2000

I also wanted to say, its not just poor advertising and bad word of mouth online hurting the popularity of this game.  I recently went into two of our local EBgames and asked for store clerks opinions on Vanguard and it was pretty much blasted.  They tried to steer me towards EQ II, World of Warcraft or if I was willing to wait, WarHammer Online.  I did the same thing with the local Best Buy and got the same results.  So at least in my area, people are being told its not a good game by the store clerks.  I will say, that one of the clerks in one of the EBgames and the guy in Best Buy both said they hadn't played it, but they heard from a lot of people that did play it, that it sucked.  Again, bad word of mouth, but this time in the real world instead of the virtual world.  This goes to show you, bad word of mouth goes a LONG LONG LONG way.

EB games and Gamestop ( same company now ) both are cheese.  I should know..I used to manage a Gamestop store. They are 95% console oriented. A vast majority of the employees there don't know squat about cpu games and even less about mmorpg's.

My wife went in and asked for the latest Guild Wars game and they had no idea which one it was. I'm sure experiences will vary as alot of that depends on Area Managers doing their job to hire the right managers...but still. That should have been a no brainer for someone who gets paid to know games.

Originally posted by Thamoris

 

Originally posted by bill14787

I must say, as a VG player since the public beta and pre-order early access at launch I can partially understand why this game gets so much anti-hype, hate and general bad press. But really, the amount of people who have played the game up to say level 10, or never even played it at all yet still hate it and so vocally warn people off amazes me.

The idiots a few pages earlier who claim to have multiple level 50 "maxed out" characters made me laugh. Anyone with half a brain understood what they were buying when VG launched, if you didn't then it's your own fault for rushing through a minimal amount of content to "win". No MMO should start at the level cap, they all start at one. An MMO that doesn't work like that is a failure, putting continued pressure on the developers to keep the bleeding edge of the population happy with new raid content and "uber lewtz". Where this idea that raiding and end-game content is the be all and end all of MMO gaming came from, is beyond me. This game has more content than I've seen in most MMOs, if you don't RUSH your way through the game you're in for a treat. If you're willing to look for it, you will find it.

Performance is a difficult issue. But personally I can say I really don't think it's that bad as most people will say. The CTD issues have pretty much completely disappeared since launch, and performance is much better (for me at least). The next few patches are bringing in new cache optimisations, PC model optimisations and texture memory fixes, all of which promise further improvement. Really when you look at the size of this game, and the detail in the majority of the world it's no wonder that your Dell "Xtreme" rig suffers so badly.

Most people who have perfomance issues are the type of user who has a pre-built rig that's full of spyware, random applications and just general crap that will slow pretty much anything down, especially a memory intensive game like VG. I run a fairly average mainstream rig and run VG at acceptable rates (usually 20-35FPS) on balanced to high quality settings (I tweak most things myself).  My specs below if anyone cares.

AMD64 X2 (DualCore) 3800+ @ 2.5Ghz
2Gb Corsair "Value" DDR RAM (my major bottleneck)
Plantronics USP DSP Headset (love it)
2x ATI x1600XT 256Mb DDR3 (crossfire is useless)

The problem I have with this review is it gives an unfair and unappealing view of this game. The review doesn't even mention grouping, they managed to get to 30 without playing through any of the major dungeons? That's a real shame. They don't really mention how much fun the combat is either, the reaction system makes each class very much a different experience with a lot of really fun features like chain moves, combos, finishing moves, counterspells... I could go on.

Really this game is for the MMO player who looks after their PC (and thus can expect to run VG just fine) and enjoys grouping, exploring and a slower pace of gameplay than most other games. I'll try and summerise why I think Vanguard is worth playing:

• Exploration : Horses, unicorns, shadowhounds, boats, flying mounts... No invisible walls or instancing, an epic world to get lost in.
• Engaging Combat : Yes it's not Conan, it's not realtime swordplay but it is one of the most engaging traditional MMO combat systems, with unique and well thought out classes.
• True Dungeon Crawling : Play though Temple of Dailuk, Ruins of Trengal Keep, Vol Tuniel or any of the othe major dungeons in the game and you'll understand what VG brings to the table. These places are big enough for several groups to be working through the questlines and content without it getting annoying (well, not too often anyway, the first weeks on Gelenia were a bit mad)
• Loads of Gear : Loot is plentiful, varied and fun to collect/hunt for. There are loads of armor quest-lines and dropped sets to collect.
• Atmosphere : Played DAoC in to the early hours? Loved the atmosphere created by the epic landscapes and music? Vanguard has this, no other MMO really has the same feeling of size and expanse as VG does today.

I forgot to mention diplomacy and crafting, while they may not be for everyone they both have a very loyal following of players, especially diplomacy, so there must be something there that appeals to people (I hear the lore is actually quite in-depth and interesting, I haven't "dipped" much myself).

There really are too many reasons for me to try and list and I've realised that's it's probably pointless to do so since the flaming is about to start. Yes I am a noob, a faggot, a masochistic vanboi. Whatever you want to hurl at me. To those of you reading these pages in the interest of seeing what Vanguard might be like ; wait for the trial or just give it a go for the free month, make up your own mind instead of following the moronic crowd! FLAME ON!!!

Calren Eldelmar - Paladin of Daedalus - Gelenia

Well written !

 

This is your average Vanguard player. Even if you don't agree with what he says know that people like this are the majority of the players in the game ( from my experience )

Thank you for taking the time to post such a well written and thought out post. Perhaps you should go on staff here and write reviews. Your simple post was better written and more accurate that Laura's review.\

You sir...suck less than the rest !

I agree this is a much more thought out and complete review, much better then the staffer did.

Well to address the performance of the game, I have a AMD 3200 with 2gb of memory and a nvidia 6600gt.  Obviously a pretty middle of the road system.   I have run, EQ2, Wow, Lotro, Eve, tried a host of the asian grindfests, all run at high graphics settings with no problems at all.  My gaming system has very little in the startup beyond basic virus protection.

Yet, trying to run this game at even low graphics settings makes me feel like I am walking underwater half the time.  I just resuscribed in May because a friend told me it was much better.   Yes it was better that I remember at release, but still unplayable. 

So it still is a big issue.  I hope the upcoming changes address it, I might look at the game again, but probably not. 

Oh for the record, AC beat Vanguard to the punch when it comes to big worlds and they actually had a lot more content at release. 

 I feel like I'm in a Twilight Zone episode, where I woke up and people forgot what crap Vanguard was, and it was an actual debate topic.

Good review right one the money. end of story, let's wait for some new game to suck okay ?

His post was far more disconcerting than yours.  Don't apologize... anyone who can't form a complete sentence even with abbreviated words (UR?) isn't in a position to criticize anyone.

I haven't, and probably won't try Vanguard for a long time. I had many friends leave the game we were playing to give VG a try, based on the promises - promises that for the most part were not ready at launch and still aren't, as this review mentions.

Poo-poo on unfinished game releases.

There is one thing that I dislike greatly and have heard in more than one place:

 "For example, VG rethought the Cleric class: instead of being an exercise in heal-and-sit-and-stand-and-heal, the VG Cleric is a powerful meleer, and is expected to help in combat."

No, no they did not. They might be the first to put the idea into practic in an MMO (not necessarily true either), but they didn't 'rethink' it. Let's go back to the late 1970's and dust off our old D&D books, shall we? Heck, let's go with an example I was alive for - 2nd Edition AD&D or even the 3.x D&D of more recent days - where your cleric has always been a mace wielder who can wear heavier armor and back up a fighter in melee!

  Yar.

I am excited about about the upcoming patch and Update 2.  We already know that it is going to provide a rested experience feature, so that you can obtain rested experience if you are not able to play everyday. 

To be sure:

Yes.  All classes can solo to max level.  The world provides an array of solo, small group content.

Edit on June 29th: it is a small group oriented game, so duos, trios, and quads work best. (But with a Necro, Druid, Shaman, or a Pscionist you could probably reach max level without ever having to group).

Yes.  The upcoming server mergers will help with population for grouping and growing guilds.  (the game was released unfinished, so many quit until the game is finished.  The game was buggy, laggy at release so many also quit.  The game still started with way too many servers because the world is so enormous!)

No.  It is not a forced-raiding game. 

No.  It is not a forced-grouping game.

Yes. The world is that massive.  Exploration is always fun and interesting!

I wanted to give some screenshots, as the review did not have very many:

A nice view: i181.photobucket.com/albums/x167/truenorthbg/View.jpg

Group in Thelessan:  i181.photobucket.com/albums/x167/truenorthbg/Hell.jpg

Named in a Dungeon: i181.photobucket.com/albums/x167/truenorthbg/fullpartyv.%20named.jpg

Frog attack!:  i181.photobucket.com/albums/x167/truenorthbg/frogattack.jpg

Bug attack!: i181.photobucket.com/albums/x167/truenorthbg/Bugattack.jpg

The infamous:  i181.photobucket.com/albums/x167/truenorthbg/InfamousGaku.jpg

Originally posted by Thamoris

This review was obviously written with a strong anti-Vanguard bias. I don't say this because I am some kind of Vanbois or anything. I really think the review person went out of her way to point out negatives while downplaying the positive aspects of the game. It was NOT a BALANCED review.

 

Nothing like proving yourself wrong by rabidly defending a game.

Truly I would like to see these 30 page reviews people keep telling us about. I read many gaming magazines. Rarely do I see more than 2 pages devoted to a single review, and most of those pages are pictures. I read many gaming websites. Rarely do I see long reviews, unless they are innundated with pictures. Most of the information could be contained on 1 or 2 pages.

Please, tell me where you read these amazing, novel length reviews you people are always talking about. I would like to see them for myself.

Yes the performance of the game is really bad, as one person said the Lag is not bad if you are away from crowds but in town it is a nightmare, unless this game is optimized properly it is unplayable.  Because of the lag it is just too annoying to play for long or short periods of time.  It is to bad because the game has some decent gameplay to it.

Alright, i been reading a lot about this game.  I am looking for a good mmorpg, to keep me busy till either AOC comes out or War comes out.  I tried Lotro..... i could not stay with it.  This game looks good, seems like fun,  but I 'm so baffled by all the negative things i read about it, and then people protecting it.  Seems this is a good game, that just got caught up in politics of  the creators. And it needs to be updated some.  Something that seems it will be fixed over time.  My question is, it worth going out buying the game and spending $15 a month on it for next 3-6 months, or will i play it for a month and drop it just like Lotro?? LoL

These threads stop being fun when it starts to feel hostile.  People should chill a little and remember that we're talking about a game.  No ones life is on the line here.

I think that some are being a little to hard on Taera.  Her play style sounds very much like my own.  I think that it would speak to the typical MMOer.  Kind of casual, but not entirely.  I personally play often, but I play casually.  I don't really dive head long and invest a portion of myself to the game.  The things I look for when I'm playing an MMO, Taera poiinted out nicely.  I'll try a little crafting, but regardless of it's gameplay, I'm not really going to get into it.  I adventure, and that's what I'll spend 99% of my time playing the game doing.  It's the most important part of the game.  It that isn't going to keep people playing, then it doesn't really matter how good the crafting or diplomacy is.

If you're a casual type gamer, and you don't play MMO's to craft, then the crafting may not please you.  Most people that don't craft, don't care, and most people, I think, don't craft.

I got the impression from the review that Taera tried crafting, but didn't really get into it; in fact she said crafting really isn't her thing..  She is also very right.  Crafting and diplomacy are very subjective.  I personally, have no idea what crafters find fun.  Every crafting system feels the same to me.  I stand in one spot clicking buttons while I watch some progress bar.  Woohoo.  Fun.

Diplomacy is just a card game.  You may like it, you may not.  There really isn't much that I could see that needs to be said about it.  Everyone knows how it works by now.  Every review I've read about diplomacy has felt like an overview of how it works.  We don't really need another one of those do we?  How many people are going to log into VG JUST to be a diplomat?  Really now, if the gameplay isn't fun for them, are they going to continue playing just for the card game?  If you can't get past the gameplay, then does it really matter?

Harvesting.  I'm a harvester.  It's my thing for some reason.  But if the adventuring isn't fun then I'm not going to run around and click nodes.  I can do that in any MMO for the most part.  So why not do it in one that has good gameplay.  I see absolutely no reason for a review about harvesting.  Everyone already has an opinion on what it's like to harvest.  It's no dif. in VG.

It is fair however, for us to expect to see some brief overview of all of the features in the game, but as a typical MMOer it's not really important. 

Normally I would want to know about PvP.  It's PvP, then adventuring, then harvesting.  But PvP is very subjective.  It's like crafting.  It can be mentioned, but I don't think it can really be reviewed.  You're either hardcore, casual, or no PvP at all.  I don't think you can really write a review of VG PvP that isn't slanted towards one of them player types.

It's unfortunate that VG has no purpose for PvP at the moment.  I dont' even care about balanced PvP.  As long as I can kill other players I'm happy.  If I can't kill another player in game then it doesn't matter how fun the adventuring is, and if the game only has senceless killing of other players then PvP isn't fun.  Money drops are nice, but not enough; I mean this in every sence it could be applied.

I would have liked to see some XP gain from killing other players.  I don't care that it encourages people to kill each other; in fact, that's exactly why I want.  I would rather be killed by another player because I have worth then to be killed for nothing.  The only game that has plenty of PvP (for me), rewards killing other players (and penalty for being killed), fun adventuring, and usefull harvesting is EQ2.   

If VG gives more reason to kill other players, and more players to kill, then I'll be more active.  As is, I'll just peak in every now and then for fun.

Originally posted by Agent_X7

 

Originally posted by Thamoris

This review was obviously written with a strong anti-Vanguard bias. I don't say this because I am some kind of Vanbois or anything. I really think the review person went out of her way to point out negatives while downplaying the positive aspects of the game. It was NOT a BALANCED review.

 

 

Nothing like proving yourself wrong by rabidly defending a game.

Truly I would like to see these 30 page reviews people keep telling us about. I read many gaming magazines. Rarely do I see more than 2 pages devoted to a single review, and most of those pages are pictures. I read many gaming websites. Rarely do I see long reviews, unless they are innundated with pictures. Most of the information could be contained on 1 or 2 pages.

Please, tell me where you read these amazing, novel length reviews you people are always talking about. I would like to see them for myself.

Where did " 30 pages " come from? Did I say I wanted a 30 page review? I think not.

After a 6 month wait...something more than a 300 word review that talked about ..roughly 20% of game would have been nice though.

At least a review that would touch on ALL aspects of the game.

AND...why are my posts being deleted ??

I am not flaming anyone...using foul or vulgar words ...staying on topic. What gives?

You can find a couple of reviews I did here in the forums that were better thought and more complete than this " official " review.

Originally posted by Thamoris

You can find a couple of reviews I did here in the forums that were better thought and more complete than this " official " review.

That are way more biased than the MMORPG.com one, the other way around.

First of all, the review on the game was accurate and pinpoints the main problems VG has. The score is to the point as well, might be a little generous however.

Thamoris, as a matter of fact you should be happy the review was not longer, because there would have been much more cons waiting of being mentioned than pros.

I have to state it again, as I did in another thread. The countless fixes they have done to the game short after launch should not go as a pro, because it does not speak for the developer. It just tells us that a sloppy coded unfinished game has been released, so why should this go as a plus for the game? This is just beyond all logical thinking. This comes from a guy, who reported about 80 bugs after the game was released, because I care about the worlds I play in. I am aware of the fact that a game never stops evolving, however the high amount of issues the game has is not acceptable to be a "paid service of entertainment", because that's what those games are in the end. Just that we love a game, can't leave us totally uncritical and blind for the flaws. This game did not see any significant QA, probably because the QA department was heavily understaffed.

I know a whole lot about what a good QA means, as I earn my money with it, and VG did not witness proper QA, period.

I can tell you why this is the case, because until now every single bit of content update the devs brought in was actually intended to be in the release version.  Don't you feel fooled that you play a game and after a while the whole game changes, massive additions to class skill trees are made? New quest lines are implemented and old are revamped/redesigned heavily? You don't notice that everything above level 40 is a simple faction grind with little bits of lore tossed in between, where you have to solve a simple riddle or two? Faction grinds are there to give the dev team time to implement stuff, they are nothing more and nothing less. The formula is to keep the player base busy with something. And sorry, if the item I can get through one simple kill has equal or almost equal quality to the one I get through countless hours of faction grinding then there is something very wrong. This all adds to my point that it is/was not well thought through. And no, I am not a loot focussed player, I play to get things done, but the risk/reward-ratio is one of the most important things for a MMORPG, because it stands and falls with it.

Take the whole swamp area with it's three factions as an example. This is actually the only place where the faction grind makes sense to me, because it is imbedded into the game. Places like the Temple of Tehatamani (spelling?, sorry) or Rahz Inkur have just an artificially created faction race to extent the time needed to finish this places. On the other hand let's mention a positive example of how it can be done: The Wardship of the Sleeping Moon. Yes, yes faction involved as well, but it is naturally imbedded into the quest line so you never feel like you are grinding. I discovered all this as a member of a fix playing group, night by night going through this massive armor quest line, and it was a whole lot of fun. But wait, this is lvl 30-40 content. This is where the game shines.

Good review. I like the game, but I am not doing anything in it until they merge the servers. Went back to Eq2, and with Kunark coming out, might stay there. Depending if it brings back those old EQ1 Kunark memories.

But Vanguard is a good game, just incomplete.

Originally posted by Sharlochar

First of all, the review on the game was accurate and pinpoints the main problems VG has. The score is to the point as well, might be a little generous however.

Thamoris, as a matter of fact you should be happy the review was not longer, because there would have been much more cons waiting of being mentioned than pros.

I have to state it again, as I did in another thread. The countless fixes they have done to the game short after launch should not go as a pro, because it does not speak for the developer. It just tells us that a sloppy coded unfinished game has been released, so why should this go as a plus for the game? This is just beyond all logical thinking. This comes from a guy, who reported about 80 bugs after the game was released, because I care about the worlds I play in. I am aware of the fact that a game never stops evolving, however the high amount of issues the game has is not acceptable to be a "paid service of entertainment", because that's what those games are in the end. Just that we love a game, can't leave us totally uncritical and blind for the flaws. This game did not see any significant QA, probably because the QA department was heavily understaffed.

I know a whole lot about what a good QA means, as I earn my money with it, and VG did not witness proper QA, period.

I can tell you why this is the case, because until now every single bit of content update the devs brought in was actually intended to be in the release version.  Don't you feel fooled that you play a game and after a while the whole game changes, massive additions to class skill trees are made? New quest lines are implemented and old are revamped/redesigned heavily? You don't notice that everything above level 40 is a simple faction grind with little bits of lore tossed in between, where you have to solve a simple riddle or two? Faction grinds are there to give the dev team time to implement stuff, they are nothing more and nothing less. The formula is to keep the player base busy with something. And sorry, if the item I can get through one simple kill has equal or almost equal quality to the one I get through countless hours of faction grinding then there is something very wrong. This all adds to my point that it is/was not well thought through. And no, I am not a loot focussed player, I play to get things done, but the risk/reward-ratio is one of the most important things for a MMORPG, because it stands and falls with it.

Take the whole swamp area with it's three factions as an example. This is actually the only place where the faction grind makes sense to me, because it is imbedded into the game. Places like the Temple of Tehatamani (spelling?, sorry) or Rahz Inkur have just an artificially created faction race to extent the time needed to finish this places. On the other hand let's mention a positive example of how it can be done: The Wardship of the Sleeping Moon. Yes, yes faction involved as well, but it is naturally imbedded into the quest line so you never feel like you are grinding. I discovered all this as a member of a fix playing group, night by night going through this massive armor quest line, and it was a whole lot of fun. But wait, this is lvl 30-40 content. This is where the game shines.

 

 

 

But then, VG doesn't have class trees.  If you mean to say that massive changes to each class, then you are only partially right.  Since release my druid has seen very little change.  There was a patch that upped his damage some, but nothing I would call a nerf.  WoW on the other hand has been altering the classes for the past 2 years.  Every update seems to change something in some classes, and not by a little.  My mage took a hit on damage, had the way they used mana altered.  My hunter, well he's not the same toon I started playing 2 years ago; not even close.  Every class is like that in WoW.  How do you justify a complaint against a NEW game that has to balance, just like EVERY game that comes out, when games that are several years old continue to do the exact same thing. 

2) New quest lines are added?  I pay 15 dollars a month to play an MMO, I DEMAND new content.  Why would I pay to play the same game for months on end, not getting anything more then I could get from a free to play single player game.  New quest lines isn't a bad thing; especially if those quests were supposed to be there.  MMO's change old quest lines as well.  Sometimes a quest line may not be fun, or the quest reward may not be suited to the quest.  Not sure how you argue this one either.  Almost every MMO goes through this.

3)  Faction grinding?  Yeah, so like the number one MMO out right now is one giant faction grind  Faction grinding exists in MANY MMO's; not just VG.  WoW had a lot of senceless faction grinding as well.  Why would you grind rep with the wildhammer dwarves (think that's there name)?   At one point grinding AD rep was pointless; then they added the rewards for it.  In fact, I think WoW beats every game on the market with the number of factions you grind rep for.  I just don't get the complaining about faction grinding in VG, as if it's the only game that has you doing it. 

A review is nothing more then a single persons opinion of the game.  Is that opinion worth more or less then anyone elses?  I think not; so why all the hate over a silly review.

Man, the reviewer really bent over backwards ( and forwards, and sideways ) to try and Not make it sound TOO negative.  What kills it for me is the stability issues - people falling off ships due to lag is an ancient EQ1 bug ! 

I refuse to play any mmog that has server-side lag issues  (latency, freezing, popping, warping, synch issues, etc.). 

There is Absolutely NO Excuse these days for lag -  fast latency-free client server game code is no longer a mystery, it's been solved for many years yet some companies still refuse to implement appropriate solutions.

It seems like Vanguard may the last of the standard " Traditional Gameplay " mmogs ala EQ and AC.

Originally posted by Thamoris

 

Originally posted by Ginaz

 

Originally posted by Stradden

MMORPG.com Community Manager, Laura Genender, takes a look at the world of Telon in her review of Vanguard: Saga of Heroes.

Explaining Vanguard inevitably leads to explaining Vanguard's community. So, let's just start with it: yes, the game and the forums/fansites that support it are plagued with 'Fanbois' vs 'Haters' - the most heated faction warfare I have ever witnessed. Here, though, the rule of 'vocal minority' is in effect, and if you stay off of the forums and out of general chat, the majority of players are quiet and friendly (if you're not on a PvP server!).

According to unconfirmed sources like MMOGData.com, the Vanguard community is shrinking: what at launch had featured around 200k subscribers was down below 50k by May of '07. The PvP and Roleplay server populations are still rather steady, but the "normal servers" are practically ghost towns. When I created a character to explore one of those servers, I ran into another newbie who boldly stated "you're the 3rd person I've seen so far!"

Read the whole review here.

This review really doesn't mean much since they've had 6 months to patch and fix it.  Is it this website's policy to only review games after the devs have had a chance to fix their mistakes?  Is that fair to the people that were looking for a review here when VG was released?  Does mmorpg.com have this kind of review policy for other games or was VG treated differently?  Whats the reason you people waited so long to write a review?

 

The most fair way to review and comment on a game is to review it when its released and then write an update of sorts a few months later.  I wonder what VG's rating would have been when it was released?

 

actualy...the review is worse than that

Review person seemed to have been reviewing more on the way the game WAS rather than the what the game is NOW.

Review and opinions on performance were based on what they were a couple months ago while the opinions on quests and such seemed current. The remarks on the low player populations are current as well though effort could have been made to explain some of this due  to the massive size of the world which exaggerates the issue greatly.

The review is not so much inaccurate as she does not  tell the whole story or paint the full picture. It's called...lying by ommision. Since many on these boards consider a mmorpg review to be at least semi - professional....that is not acceptable. Particularly when one considers the high profile nature of the game...be it good or bad.  Review should have been ALOT more detailed and ALOT more effort should have been made to tell the WHOLE story.

It just seems too convienent if ya ask me.

Convienent and generalized and late reviews like that just scream ...hidden agenda!

I think I made it fairly clear in the review what performance problems DID happen, and what are STILL happening - i.e. doors still lag me, and I still fall off my boat from lag.  Black screens of death? Not so much anymore, but it was part of the game's launch history.

As for population - I TOTALLY agree that a big part of it is world size - when you have dozens of starting cities, even 50 new players leaves the newbie areas barren and lonely.  This is, though, a flaw of the game - I think that merging the servers will help a lot on this.  If I handed you a cup full of sand, and a sandbox with one cup of sand in it, you'd probably call the cup full and the sandbox empty, despite the same quantities.  I don't think this is an omission really.

Originally posted by Tnice

Strange review and late.  Not only that but bizarre that it is recommended to the "casual" Gamer.  That is bizarre beyond words.  If VG is anything, it is not casual friendly.

I don't know what to tell ya - I'm a fairly hardcore gamer, and the only way I really enjoyed VG was 10 hours a week at my absolute peak.  Again, though, I was a very solo friendly class.

Originally posted by ivan50265

Vanguard will be one of those games we will all watch to see if they can get it together.  I give it another six months and it should be in good shape I just wonder if it will be too late. SOE really needs to start looking at the quality of their products on release this is getting old from them.

Originally posted by truenorthbg

I agree with the review.

 

The author was fair and accurate.  The game is fun but does have some problems.  I am confident that SOE will address those issues.  Moreover, the author is right about the serious lack of end-game content.  All we know is that SOE is developing some raid content. 

Yeah just like SOE fixed SWG.