Trending Games | ArcheAge | World of Warcraft | Destiny | Guild Wars 2

  Network:  FPSguru RTSguru
Login:  Password:   Remember?  
Show Quick Gamelist Jump to Random Game
Members:2,860,266 Users Online:0
Games:742  Posts:6,246,360
Sony Online Entertainment
MMORPG | Genre:Fantasy | Status:Cancelled  (est.rel 01/30/07)  | Pub:Sony Online Entertainment
PVP:Yes | Distribution:Download,Retail | Retail Price:Free | Pay Type:Hybrid | Monthly Fee:$14.99
System Req: PC | ESRB:TOut of date info? Let us know!

Vanguard: Saga of Heroes Forum » General Discussion » Vanguard does not need updates/patches/expansions !

4 Pages « 1 2 3 4 » Search
62 posts found
  Loke666

Elite Member

Joined: 10/29/07
Posts: 16716

6/01/11 4:39:34 PM#41

MMOs don't need expansions but they do need updating, and that pretty often.

Paying the same monthly fees for VG as you do for EQ2 or Wow is not fair because of that, SOE have very small costs but still charge full price.

If they lowered the fees to 5 bucks or so fine, but for 15 bucks I demand at least 4 acceptable updates every year, and I don't think that is too much to ask for, almost every single MMO out there actually give you that.

SOE need to either make the game F2P ASAP or rework and relaunch the game. And they really need to update it.

  klokwurk

Novice Member

Joined: 4/30/06
Posts: 35

6/01/11 5:41:59 PM#42

Oddly enough the actual game launch shows a more recent update of April 2010 version 2680 than they show on the official website. It REALLY seems like SOE is just hoping this game dies.

As for updating I have mixed feelings about how necessary it is to enjoying a game. If the game has sufficient content then adding new content is unnecessary. Take WoW where new content usually just meant that earlier content was now pointless. Often the content added is stuff I wouldn't end up doing anything with either, like raiding or pvp content. A game with the content that Vanguard has could entertain a player (assuming they enjoy the game and the world) for a couple years. But updating as in fixing problems, add new items, holidays stuff, events and things like that are always important towards the feeling that the game is thriving.

However it IS a hard pill to swallow that you pay the same for this game as you do for a game where you know things will get fixed and there is the promise of new stuff to keep you interested for even longer. Why players accept paying a monthly fee is because of the promise of development and that the developers will attempt to keep us engaged and enjoying the game for years to come and the notion that what is a little buggy or annoying now will probably eventually be fixed or changed. For me I am back to Vanguard for now and probably for the long haul. It's a little grating to pay a full subscription price, but then I enjoy it much more than I ever enjoyed other games which were getting plenty of updates.

  delete5230

Elite Member

Joined: 8/15/07
Posts: 2550

 
OP  6/01/11 7:21:20 PM#43

Vanguard has 5x more content than 90% of all other mmo's. I can't stress enough how bad I hate SOE, you would think they would only charge like $5 just to keep the servers running.

BUT it's still a great game ( I consider it the best, but that's an opinion ).  Better than any other crap that's out there.

  boojiboy

Apprentice Member

Joined: 10/28/06
Posts: 1544

6/02/11 9:45:06 AM#44
Originally posted by page

Vanguard has 5x more content than 90% of all other mmo's. I can't stress enough how bad I hate SOE, you would think they would only charge like $5 just to keep the servers running.

BUT it's still a great game ( I consider it the best, but that's an opinion ).  Better than any other crap that's out there.

 This is very true.  You could jump into Vanguard with a guild and have a couple years of content ahead of you.  Vanguard probably has more like 10x the content of a MMO such as Rift.  So if SoE wants veteran players back, yes, they'd have to offer something new... like finishing Stirhaad as the next APW-style raid zone.  But  for a new player there is more content than you can imagine.

  User Deleted
6/02/11 11:49:22 AM#45

EQ2 is the sameway (Mind numbing, crazy amounts of content that craps all over every other MMO), and they actually pay attention to it.

 

Both are pretty viable for a guild or team of bros to move in on and stay busy for a long, long time.

 

But in the end, you're still giving $oE money - and that's bad.

  delete5230

Elite Member

Joined: 8/15/07
Posts: 2550

 
OP  6/03/11 5:06:01 AM#46
Originally posted by Razeron

EQ2 is the sameway (Mind numbing, crazy amounts of content that craps all over every other MMO), and they actually pay attention to it.

 

Both are pretty viable for a guild or team of bros to move in on and stay busy for a long, long time.

 

But in the end, you're still giving $oE money - and that's bad.

 I have to agree Razeron,

EQ2 is the same way ( mind numbing crazy amounts of content ).  I guess I was a little hard in my original post saying how bad EQ2 is. I guess I was trying to stress that Vanguard's bugs are not as bad as the Haters make it out to be and I was using EQ2 as a comparison.

In reading your post I realize that there are VERY FEW MMO'S THAT ARE REALLY A WAY OF LIFE.   A HEAL TY WAY OF LIFE ?... Not really ! ..... but that is how MMOS ARE TO BE DESIGNED.

 

Here is a list of MMO's that a full games, that can be considered a way of life.  Feel free to add a game if I'm missing something, and I'll refrain from giving my opinion on game play as that is personal preference :

 

**Full way of life ( what an mmo should be )

WoW,  EQ2, Vanguard, EVE, LOTRO, EQ1, D&D Online, FF 11, Guild Wars 1,Star Wars Galaxies, maybe City of Heroes, DAOC, Lineage, UO.

 

**MMO's that fall short on a way of life ( Not talking about quality )

Warhammer, FF14, Aion, AOC, Champions Online, DC Universe, Rift. And all other mmo's on the list.

 

If your like me, you see over 100 mmo's on the list here at mmorpg.com.  CLOSE TO ALL OF THEM  are toys that are half made and are considered one month novelties. The list is really short or real mmo's.  We are in bad times, I almost feel sorry for developers with cost, time constraints, competition and marketing.......But facts are facts. MMO's are really few and far between.

Everyone is waiting for Guild Wars 2 and SWTOR and praying for a full game rich in content FROM THE START.

Until then we have 9 or so Real MMO's.

I find Vanguard is by far the best, since Blizzard destroyed WoW, but thats my opinion.

 

 

 

  Loke666

Elite Member

Joined: 10/29/07
Posts: 16716

6/03/11 5:22:35 AM#47
Originally posted by page

Vanguard has 5x more content than 90% of all other mmo's. I can't stress enough how bad I hate SOE, you would think they would only charge like $5 just to keep the servers running.

BUT it's still a great game ( I consider it the best, but that's an opinion ).  Better than any other crap that's out there.

The things is still: If I play EQ2 I get even more content and steady updates for exactly the same sum.

SOE needs to lower the price for VG if they don't intend to update it, anything else is highway robbery.

I can agree that a game can get to a point where it is fun for years without updates, fine. But I can't agree that it should cost the same as a game that cost many time the running cost because you actually have people working to improve it.

  tazarconan

Advanced Member

Joined: 1/03/07
Posts: 1022

6/03/11 5:33:32 AM#48

All things Op mentioned maybe right . Some maybe not. All those  though concern classes and pve .

What about pvp? Op forgot to mention. Is there rated bg or rated arenas ranking ladder system?

Can a guild build its settelement and defend it against threats from other guilds/ enemy races?

Hows world pvp working nowdays in Vg?

  User Deleted
6/05/11 9:56:32 PM#49

It would be interesting to see what a $9.99 monthly charge would do for Vanguard.

Never happen, though.

  Daffid011

Old School

Joined: 1/03/04
Posts: 7652

6/06/11 9:53:23 AM#50

I'm not sure the subscription fee is what keeps the game from hitting its possible potential.  Right now vanguard is free for 45 days to basically anyone who has ever had an SOE account. 

 

What the game really needs is some sort of relaunch with a solid commitment from SOE that it will get some development.  Having a game that could easily shut down any moment and not surprise anyone isn't a very strong sales point for a game.  Contrary to this entire thread I don't think many players want to invest time in a game that they believe doesn't have a future. 

That has been the biggest problem of vanguard for most of its life.  It could be so much more though. 

  Getalife

Novice Member

Joined: 1/06/05
Posts: 832

6/06/11 10:02:58 AM#51
Originally posted by Daffid011

I'm not sure the subscription fee is what keeps the game from hitting its possible potential.  Right now vanguard is free for 45 days to basically anyone who has ever had an SOE account. 

 

What the game really needs is some sort of relaunch with a solid commitment from SOE that it will get some development.  Having a game that could easily shut down any moment and not surprise anyone isn't a very strong sales point for a game.  Contrary to this entire thread I don't think many players want to invest time in a game that they believe doesn't have a future. 

That has been the biggest problem of vanguard for most of its life.  It could be so much more though. 

You are right it is not about the money. i use station pass and i have access to all SOE games and yet i never log in to Vanguard. When i have such well supported games like EQ2 and SWG why would i bother playing Vanguard which has zero content patches or updates? if i know that this game has some future i will surely spend my time playing it, otherwise no thank you.

  Vonatar

Hard Core Member

Joined: 7/18/10
Posts: 582

6/06/11 10:10:21 AM#52

Problem is Vanguard is an oxymoron for SOE - a game they wished never existed because it competes with their "flagship" EQ2 but they own it anyway as a result of a kind of accident. From a business perspective I can't understand why they bought it, other than as a way to protect EQ2 from the competition and to get Brad back in-house, perhaps so he could consult on other games too.

SOE clearly never had any interest in investing in Vanguard. All they did was keep it alive and make it playable with a few extra bits and pieces. I guess they did the minimum required to break even on their purchase, but it seems hard to say they ever tried to make it into something great.

Yes it's a great game but I have difficulty playing it for 2 reasons. 1) I hate paying away a monthly sub for pretty much nothing. I agree with others that the price should be $5 a month or something to pay to keep the server running. 2) The wasted potential makes me sad and I hate to spend time in the game and constantly realise what it could have been.

To me the greatest crime against Vanguard was not the business ineptitude of its creator, or the dismal launch, but that no one nurtured it afterwards. If SOE had invested, polished and perfected we could have had a great MMO on our hands today.

  Misaligned

Novice Member

Joined: 6/05/11
Posts: 45

6/06/11 1:11:53 PM#53

I think there are a lot of astute observations in this thread and I can understand where most people are coming from. I am giving Vanguard a 2nd chance and am joining the crusade to try and breathe new life into this game. I understand some of you have no faith in SOE and are content to believe the game is "dead." Those of you who feel that way are certainly entitled to your opinion, but I don't understand the sentiment of trying to impede this crusade or discourage people from getting involved again.

I hadn't really considered the Station Access thing much. I guess a lot of people probably use that and when looking at the choice of games available it's easy to understand why you choose a game that is currently getting development and support. I think the issue for Vanguard then is less about subscriptions and more about how many people are logging-in and playing. When you have less than 1000 (just guessing here based on population numbers I've seen) people actively playing it's going to be hard to justify paying developers to spend their time on it when other games with much healthy populations are demanding their attention.

All Vanguard needs is more people logging-in and playing. You're paying for access to a virtual world where you can play with other people. Whether that's worth $15 to you or not is a personal decision. I spend that on lunch somedays so for me it's an easy decision.

There are a growing number of us, some old and some new, who want to see Vanguard more populated and receive developer attention again. We recognize that currently SOE doesn't have much interest in the game. We are accepting the responsibility as a community to get the word out and do what we can to grow the community ourselves. If our crusade fails, so be it, but we're going to try. We believe Vanguard is a better game than anything else out there and is worth the effort. If you can't be persuaded to join us or have no interest for whatever reason that is fine but please don't impede our efforts for the sake of being spiteful. 

Vanguard is a truly great game and given some population growth and even minimal developer support it will only get better.

  Ardwulf

Novice Member

Joined: 10/27/10
Posts: 284

6/07/11 3:21:13 AM#54
Originally posted by Getalife

You are right it is not about the money. i use station pass and i have access to all SOE games and yet i never log in to Vanguard. When i have such well supported games like EQ2 and SWG why would i bother playing Vanguard which has zero content patches or updates? if i know that this game has some future i will surely spend my time playing it, otherwise no thank you.

Vanguard has the future that we, the players, carve out for it.  It's a game that is still newbie-friendly, ahs players all across the level range instad of all stacked at the level cap, and enough content that even players who have been playing since launch have years worth of stuff to do yet.  SOE's lack of focus on it is regrettable and short-sighted on their part, but ultimately any MMO is about the experience that players have in in.

We as a community need to get away from the WoW cycle that everything in an MMO must be spoonfed to us by developers.  We need to take charge.

  Getalife

Novice Member

Joined: 1/06/05
Posts: 832

6/07/11 8:45:36 AM#55
Originally posted by Ardwulf
Originally posted by Getalife

You are right it is not about the money. i use station pass and i have access to all SOE games and yet i never log in to Vanguard. When i have such well supported games like EQ2 and SWG why would i bother playing Vanguard which has zero content patches or updates? if i know that this game has some future i will surely spend my time playing it, otherwise no thank you.

Vanguard has the future that we, the players, carve out for it.  It's a game that is still newbie-friendly, ahs players all across the level range instad of all stacked at the level cap, and enough content that even players who have been playing since launch have years worth of stuff to do yet.  SOE's lack of focus on it is regrettable and short-sighted on their part, but ultimately any MMO is about the experience that players have in in.

We as a community need to get away from the WoW cycle that everything in an MMO must be spoonfed to us by developers.  We need to take charge.

Simply no. The future of Vanguard is in hand of SOE and no matter what players do a MMO can not thrive or grow without new content addition, support of devs and healthy community. What you are saying might be nice to read but has zero practical value.

  Ardwulf

Novice Member

Joined: 10/27/10
Posts: 284

6/07/11 11:06:07 AM#56
Originally posted by Getalife

Simply no. The future of Vanguard is in hand of SOE and no matter what players do a MMO can not thrive or grow without new content addition, support of devs and healthy community. What you are saying might be nice to read but has zero practical value.

What you're saying is absolutely the conventional wisdom, and I don't doubt that it's true for a majority of players.  But it's also true that we have been conditioned to think that because that's the way things have always been.  The question I am ultimately asking is: what happens when the developer gets out of the way?

Community is influenced by a game's design (for two examples at opposite ends of the community quality spectrum, look at Age of Conan and LotRO,) but isn't strengthened by new content streams.  A case can be made that the strrength of a community is in fact eroded by an ongoing nerf/buff cycle and high-handed interference by developers, or by diminishing of player accomlishment by making things easier.  I decline to name any particular title in which that's happened, but I'm sure you can think of one or several.

Imagine SWG without the CU and NGE.  Imagine vanilla WoW or EQ in the days of Kunark, in 2011.  Such things might not be mainstream hits, but there are absolutely folks who would go for that kind of environment. This was amply demonstrated when EQ launched a server under a pseudo-classic ruleset and people fell all over each other to get on it.  What two MMOs this year saw multi-hour queues to log in?  Rift and EverQuest.  There is a market for old school.

I'm sure you're right that the progression-focused majority feel exactly as you've expressed. But there's also players here and there who'll feel liberated by a lack of developer interference and gear grind, or who value a tight community where everybody knows everybody and reputation matters, or rich non-combat systems and progression paths, or a lore-heavy classic fantasy world ideal for immersion.  Those are people that Vanguard can appeal to.  And I suspect that, niche or not, there's enough of them to change Vanguard's trajectory, if they can be mobilized.

It would be fair to argue that the only reason this is possible for Vanguard is becuase the bar is set so low.  But that actually enhances my point.  If the game is viable now (and it is) it will be twice as viable with twice as many players, and the lower that viability number is today the easier it'll be to amplfy.

You could also dismiss all this as meaningless and empty rhetoric. And you'd have again made a point, because the Vanguard Forever movement is built on rhetoric. But you'd also be admitting that you are not the person I am talking to.  I don't need or expect to convince everybody.  But you know what?  I've already convinced some people.  It's moving.  Can't you feel it?

  Getalife

Novice Member

Joined: 1/06/05
Posts: 832

6/07/11 11:18:20 AM#57
Originally posted by Ardwulf
Originally posted by Getalife

Simply no. The future of Vanguard is in hand of SOE and no matter what players do a MMO can not thrive or grow without new content addition, support of devs and healthy community. What you are saying might be nice to read but has zero practical value.

What you're saying is absolutely the conventional wisdom, and I don't doubt that it's true for a majority of players.  But it's also true that we have been conditioned to think that because that's the way things have always been.  The question I am ultimately asking is: what happens when the developer gets out of the way?

Community is influenced by a game's design (for two examples at opposite ends of the community quality spectrum, look at Age of Conan and LotRO,) but isn't strengthened by new content streams.  A case can be made that the strrength of a community is in fact eroded by an ongoing nerf/buff cycle and high-handed interference by developers, or by diminishing of player accomlishment by making things easier.  I decline to name any particular title in which that's happened, but I'm sure you can think of one or several.

Imagine SWG without the CU and NGE.  Imagine vanilla WoW or EQ in the days of Kunark, in 2011.  Such things might not be mainstream hits, but there are absolutely folks who would go for that kind of environment. This was amply demonstrated when EQ launched a server under a pseudo-classic ruleset and people fell all over each other to get on it.  What two MMOs this year saw multi-hour queues to log in?  Rift and EverQuest.  There is a market for old school.

I'm sure you're right that the progression-focused majority feel exactly as you've expressed. But there's also players here and there who'll feel liberated by a lack of developer interference and gear grind, or who value a tight community where everybody knows everybody and reputation matters, or rich non-combat systems and progression paths, or a lore-heavy classic fantasy world ideal for immersion.  Those are people that Vanguard can appeal to.  And I suspect that, niche or not, there's enough of them to change Vanguard's trajectory, if they can be mobilized.

It would be fair to argue that the only reason this is possible for Vanguard is becuase the bar is set so low.  But that actually enhances my point.  If the game is viable now (and it is) it will be twice as viable with twice as many players, and the lower that viability number is today the easier it'll be to amplfy.

You could also dismiss all this as meaningless and empty rhetoric. And you'd have again made a point, because the Vanguard Forever movement is built on rhetoric. But you'd also be admitting that you are not the person I am talking to.  I don't need or expect to convince everybody.  But you know what?  I've already convinced some people.  It's moving.  Can't you feel it?

Nope sorry i don't feel it. To give it a benefit of doubt i spent one last week playing Vanguard and yes the same old feeling creeps up where i feel i am playing a single player game not a MMO.

Only because devs would support their game doesn't mean it will become gear grind or that is the only thing players would begin to focuse upon. However, those things are of later concern. the first and foremost important thing that keeps players away is lack of support and development. it might not matter for a single player game but it is not true for MMORPG. Players have different expectation from this genre and if a MMO is not supported or does not recieve continuous updates and content it just becomes stagnant.

  Daffid011

Old School

Joined: 1/03/04
Posts: 7652

6/07/11 11:29:29 AM#58

This isn't the first time there has been some player driven effort to change vanguard and there have actually been some big ones.

I do wish the game all the best, but it isn't going to rebound as things are going now.  There is just something missing, even for those willing to overlook the issues.  At this point any revival requires a developer supporting the game, even if only to give the impression that things can get corrected and players willing to join in large enough numbers to populate the world.

SOE has already shown that they are not willing to support the game any longer.  Even when the game had 4 servers filled with players they were already sunsetting the support team. 

 

Maybe if the players trying to revive the game have a more comprehensive plan than forming a guild and making the occassional groups something might come of it, but I don't see how it will be any different than past attempts.

 

Sorry if I sound like a little black rain cloud, but I think that is the reality of it.  I will be reloading the game in the near future just so I can enjoy it again in case it closes down soon.  Maybe I'm wrong and players do find a way to revive the population and I can enjoy it a little longer. 

 

  Misaligned

Novice Member

Joined: 6/05/11
Posts: 45

6/07/11 12:14:45 PM#59
Originally posted by Daffid011

This isn't the first time there has been some player driven effort to change vanguard and there have actually been some big ones.

I do wish the game all the best, but it isn't going to rebound as things are going now.  There is just something missing, even for those willing to overlook the issues.  At this point any revival requires a developer supporting the game, even if only to give the impression that things can get corrected and players willing to join in large enough numbers to populate the world.

SOE has already shown that they are not willing to support the game any longer.  Even when the game had 4 servers filled with players they were already sunsetting the support team. 

 

Maybe if the players trying to revive the game have a more comprehensive plan than forming a guild and making the occassional groups something might come of it, but I don't see how it will be any different than past attempts.

 

Sorry if I sound like a little black rain cloud, but I think that is the reality of it.  I will be reloading the game in the near future just so I can enjoy it again in case it closes down soon.  Maybe I'm wrong and players do find a way to revive the population and I can enjoy it a little longer. 

 

You do sound like a little black rain cloud. This sort of defeatist attitude only serves to perpetuate the status quo. You may be right, you may be able to post again in a few months or a year or whenever and say "told you so," but this sort of rhetoric will not help the game or the community.

I'm not trying to rip on you, I totally understand the sentiment. SOE as a company just boggles my mind. They routinely make horrible decisions that only hurt their business and dishearten their fans. I could post pages of why I dislike them as  a company.

I am making a very conscious decision to look beyond all my frustration with them as a company because in the quagmire of lackluster MMOs that currently exist and the bastardized versions of games that we once loved I believe Vanguard stands out. I believe it's worth the effort. Most importantly I just really enjoy the time I'm spending there, and believe many others would too if they could look past the issues. I feel these issues pale in comparison the issues with most of our current alternatives.

Again I can totally relate to those of you who don't want to get on board or who are fed up with SOE. I get it. Some of us are making the choice to try to do something positive with a game we feel is worth our time and effort. As a gamer and someone passionate about MMORPGs I would look back with regret for not trying. It's the best thing I can do short of walking into the SOE offices and Hulk-raging MRRAAAAGGGGHHHH which admittedly is a tempting alternative.

  viletoto

Novice Member

Joined: 9/30/04
Posts: 23

6/07/11 12:47:40 PM#60

I just started playing last night, so i don't have an opinion on content (hoping the stories of years of content for a new player are true).  personally i have been mmo hopping lately since there is really nothing good out right now and am looking for a game to keep me interested until GW2 or secret world comes out.  So far this game seems cool and having no zones is a big plus.  I am still working on tweaking the setting so it will run smooth on my computer but overall i am pretty impressed with the graphics and gameplay.  The last game i played was everquest 2 and just began to realize that the combat sytem was really bland in that game (hoping vanguards is better).  as far as population.....obviously it's low, I am on the island, I did a /who and got about 22 players in levels ranging from 1-10 (ish) when I logged off last night around 11:30pm pst.  I actually saw 2-3 other players in the starting zone when I was playing (like i said though, this is just the very beginning, i am only level 5 right now)...I am gonna give this game my full attention for the next 14 days and if it grabs me I will likely sub.

4 Pages « 1 2 3 4 » Search