I agree, I like the EQ buffs better than any other game buffs, because they actually were that....buffs! They made you feel stronger, as well as made the classes that gave them more important.

I also wish Vanguard would have "magic" in the game. I played a Bard for awhile and I didn't feel like a bard at all. No instruments stringing, no songs playing, no music in the background, no sound effects, no special graphics, no magical flare, no feeling that I'm actually a bard....nothing. All I got was a fighter with a sword that gave himself invisible, sound-less, graphic-less buffs.

That's why I didn't buy Vanguard after my pre-release subscription ended. There is no magical flare to the game. When I play a Bard, I don't feel like a Bard. When I play a Bard, I feel like a ranger without a pet, a rogue without stealth, and a monk without martial arts.

It's not just you shae, a lot of people can tell the difference between 30 FPS and 60 FPS. I definitely can.

My system cost me $2000, which is high-end. The fact of the matter is....... unless there is a major leap in graphics quality, there is no reason that a system that can run oblivion SMOOTHLY on max settings can't run Vanguard on lowest settings with a greater framerate.

WoW has great graphics in that the graphics are efficient enough to immerse yourself in the world. This is all you need in terms of graphics. They should have made Vanguard where you could change the settings to run like WoW does in terms of playability, while at the same time make it where you can have the high-end stunning graphics which Vanguard fails to deliver. The fact that when I change the trees from beautiful to "flat paper" and there's only a 3 fps difference.....well....that's crappy coding.

Kopema said it perfectly. It could make sense for someone to upgrade his system when there is a leap in game graphics technology. But buying new hardware to compensate for lousy coding is just plain stupid.

Some of you have really good posts and points.

If it wasn't for my personal opinion of crappy character models, the game would be ABSOLUTELY beautiful. The environment is GREAT. I don't mind the lack of sense some of the world has (like a huge rock not sinking like it would IRL or something) and even then that's not the problem (The non-human character models are very nice. Raki is so wonderful, and goblins are cool too! It's just the humans that bug me, but that's easily worked around.)

What drove me off wasn't the performance, as I had good frames on average (I believe I achieved 35 fps with near-max settings, whih was great for me, although I wish I could have gotten 60 because I CAN notice the difference).

I tried really really hard to like the game, but the two things that drove me off were....

1) The game is unfinished. I played a bard, and 90% of my spells/abilities had no animation, spell graphics, or sound effects. The animations were unfinished, sound effects and spell graphics weren't even in the game yet, etc. When I used my Bard's "Shout" instant damage spell, there was no sound, no graphics, nothing. Just numbers that appeared (which you couldnt turn off.....)

2) The grind. I began to feel the grind at level 8. I did quests and even grouped, and the XP was extremely slow.

I will, however, take a look at it in a few months to see how it's been polished and if the game is finished.

You prove a good point. They need to make MMORPG's to where you get most things when you jump right in, but it DOES change and you "achieve" things.

I don't know how that would work, but it's true. You should be able to just jump in instantly like a console game. Also though, there should be more to it than that. Hmm, I don't know though.

The human eye can see the difference between 30fps and 60fps. Just because you read an article on the internet saying different doesn't mean it's true. I can tell the difference, and so can thousands of others.

I also know the system specs of thousands of others. It's something called 3dMark. It's also called "Not everyone buys a $2000 computer this year." Since I know the fact is that thousands of people have computers, and thousands play MMO's, and thousands play Vaguard, and thanks to things like 3d-Mark which tells me my computer vs. the average computer, as well as me being able to do 2 + 2 = 4....well you see, I can SAFELY know thousands of other's system specs are under mine, as well as the CONSTANT forums where people go to great lengths to increase their FPS from 10 to 15 using "tweaks."

If you MUST know, I got anywhere between 1 FPS and 70 FPS. The fact is though, those are more rare than the average number. Sometimes my average was 20, sometimes 30, sometimes 40. I don't have to say exact numbers just to be free from your judgemet.

You're misinformed, perhaps you should reevaluate where you get your knowledge and assumptions from.

That's not true. I, as well as thousands of others, can tell the difference between 30fps and 60fps. I can't be wrong because I CAN tell the difference. So I guess if you're right, I must be some kind of robot.

Thanks, I did find  a better game. Hope you have fun too!

Quality of Graphics do NOT justify the required High-End system.

I ran Vanguard on max settings getting 20-50 fps, and with some stuff toned down I got a constant 35 fps. That's fine because I have a high-end system. Not everyone can spend $2000 on a computer though. Especially just to play this unfinished game (which should still be in beta for 3 more months.)

The graphics are NOT that impressive. The character models are cartoony, the game is full of bugs/glitches,  and the lack of organic detail is disappointing. The graphics are good, excluding the character models. If I wanted to play a cartoon character model, I'd play WoW. Games such as Oblivion, LoTR Online, and other games have beautiful graphics that are better than Vanguard's. Far better. Whether in terms of the world itself or the actual graphical textures, they are far greater than Vanguard's graphics. They also require less resources to play.

The fact is that Vanguard requires a ridiculous amount of computer power to even play. Worse, it requires even more ridiculous amount to play with good fps. Even worse, you can't, even with lowest settings and a high-end computer, get above 50fps.
The fact is that Vanguard's graphics do not constitute nor justify the required high-end system to efficiently play it. WoW, Oblivion, LOTR, those are all games whose graphics are great. Great enough to be satisfied by good graphics and an immersive world. Vanguard on the other hand is worse than those games in terms of graphics and thus immersion, yet it requires MORE resources to play? Also, the options are ridiculous. Running at max settings I got an average of 30-40 fps. Running on minimum settings, where the trees are paper crayola drawings, I only got 35-40fps average. A big boost of 5fps in return for a huge loss in quality. Pathetic.

Vanguard is a poorly made game. I used to play in the Phase 1 of a popular MMO's beta, and there's barely any bugs, a finished and greatly polished game. Vanguard, in Phase 4 beta, and even after release, isn't polished at all, has tons of bugs, and it's just pathetic compared to other MMO's who are already more bug-free and polished in phase 1 than Vanguard is AFTER RELEASE. I do not understand how they expect you to bring your friends to Vanguard when they can't even play the game because they don't want to spend $2000 just to play an unfinished, unpolished, bug-filled, poorly designed game.

I am not here to only troll, I'm also here to tell other about this game. Mainly about what angers me the most: A company that FORCES the players to upgrade their machine just to play when the graphics are NOT worth upgrading for. This game has and is going to lose thousands of players solely because it decided to limit its playerbase on those who can afford a high-end system. Don't get me wrong, my system is fine and runs Vanguard smoothly. But my friends, family, and thousands of others can't even play it for different reasons. If you can't get a game to run on the average system with 30fps, you've failed in the MMO market. MMO is about getting a lot of people, not getting those who are rich and spoiled enough to buy a $2000 machine.

Sorry, but Vanguard's character models (at least the humans) are way too cartoony.

I don't understand how you can say WoW graphics are cartoony while Vanguard's is better. They are both cartoony.

Just look at the Thestran Male. The eyes stand out way too much,the face is all-around cartoonish, the hair is ALWAYS (even in darkness) shining, as if they are all from the movie GREASE. Just add the leather jackets to Vanguard's cartoon hair and you have

Grease: Saga of Heroes.

The character models suck.... the animations are even worse....stiff.......so stiff............

Not every game has the "auto attack" right now.

City of Villains/Heroes doesn't.
Neither does Dungeons and Dragons Online.
Neither does Neocron.

Not to mention Ultima Online, although I guess that's "1st generation."

Conan isn't the first to try out a new combat system, although it IS a step towards a better direction. Neocron, CoX, DDO, all have excellent combat systems compared to the "Press Q and wait" combat system of most MMO's today.

The result? The games are actually really really fun! You're right, the combat system IS the most important thing about a game.

All three of those games (CoX, DDO, Neocron) are very fun in terms of combat. They have major flaws (Lack of content and lack of random traps/dungeons for DDO, lack of population for Neocron, and lack of anything-but-Grind for CoX)

But actually, despite their horrible flaws (which almost all MMO's seem to have...AND NEVER FIX!!!!) they are among my favorite MMO's. I don't play Neocron, but I might if it had more people. I don't play DDO, but I might if the community didn't rush every dungeon and know where all the traps are. I do play CoX though, as well as Vanguard.

I completely agree that the combat system is the most important. My own opinion (of my favorite MMO's) shows it, and I didn't even realize it when I was first writing this post! Ultima Online is my favorite MMO, and it's up there too! Wow!!!

I was browsing through the threads and saw this about DnL's failure:

"Farlan blaming it all on the fans"

.....you gotta be kidding me? Is this true? What's the story behind it? Any links or is this just an exageration?

I just can hardly believe my eyes that someone has said the makers of the crappy game blame the FANS to flee responsibility. How arrogant can you be?