SoE to publish Vanguard

[Digits]

Quite obviously this was all a ruse by Brad, making the game poor quality in beta just so he could obtain the rights to publish it. Now that he has them, he will remove the placeholder game and put in the real Vanguard. Prepare to be amazed, ladies and gentle folk.

[Khorum]

I'm curious.. how long was this in the works, and why drag this out 5 days before E3? Why announce this so close to E3? That just kinda compounds the problem doesn't it?

Was Microsoft making a statement (indirectly?) with their E3 Vanguard presentation? Was the Vanguard display in E3 relegated to a smaller footprint with a tiny kiosk in the back room or something? This was supposed to be the MMORPG E3 with like 40 titles strutting their stuff right?

[Hateyou]

My favorite quote from that thread so far. It's wild how out of touch with reality some people are.

Ummmm no!!! Microsoft doesnt just back out of a game that can do as well or better than WoW. So something is up or something big happened for a company to give up on this title.

[Skars]

Originally Posted by Hateyou

My favorite quote from that thread so far. It's wild how out of touch with reality some people are.

Psht you could have done much better than that, some of the people posting in that thread are clinically insane.

[Antarius]

Originally Posted by Utnayan

And on the flip side, a publisher like Microsoft doesn't dump a game this late in development unless there are some solid reasons.

MS: We need you to release the game in Summer to beat the wow expansion.
Brad: Can't be done, game isn't finished, Best I can do is November.
MS: Ok, well start cutting alot of shit, get the game out in 2 months. August at the latest.
Brad: I'm not going to do that
MS: Ok, then we aren't going to publish the game any longer. Pay us back all the cash we have invested in you.
Brad: Ok well I'll have to sell 8 of my 29 ferraris

[Iannis]

Pshaw. The only thing that can compete with WoW's numbers are the idea for an MMO i've tried to sell to Microsoft.

I call it MySpace Online. You gain experience points for friending people, and raids consist of joining MySpace groups and arguing over whether or not Ashlee Simpson is more talented than Jessica Simpson.

[Hateyou]

Originally Posted by Skars

Psht you could have done much better than that, some of the people posting in that thread are clinically insane.

That's why I said so far I'm only on page 2.


Personally I don't know what to think about it. Looks like they just lost a shitload of potential customers. I guess All Access pass people will make up for it? Whatever, I find it humorous either way, just because of the rampant vanboi's taking it up the ass at the moment.

[Shogon]

SoE hate is overdone. EQ's problems didn't just stem from SoE. Trying to summarize the problems up in a paragraph or two or even three would be stupid.

This SoE/Sigil arrangement won't have any effect on me playing Vanguard or not. If the game is good... I'll play. If it's bad... I won't. And since I wasn't picked for beta (I'm guessing cause my comp was crappier than it is now)... I'll just have to wait for release.

I haven't touched an MMO since I quit EQ about 2 or 3 years ago (shit has it been that long?) but I will almost definitely try Vanguard for a period of no less than 2 months.

[Skars]

^^^ No shit, why is this so hard for people to understand. People get so wrapped up in liking/hating a game that they just become blind to reason. I don't know why it's so hard for people to just say "if it's good I'll play, if it sucks I won't. Not rocket science.


Hahaha

Benbanglong says:

Dazzler, the SOE fanbois are laughing at you on the FOH website . Yes, there are SOE fanbois

:13 PM #39
GrobbeeTrull
Won a medal!

Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Springfield, Ohio
Posts: 667
Send a message via AIM to GrobbeeTrull

Dazzler's fagging up that thread too. Haven't seen him post here in forever, didn't he get laughed out of here? Ah, good times!

I love this move just for the comedy gold im getting out of it.

[Smed]

Originally Posted by Utnayan

This, in my opinion, means a couple things:

First, the negative.

1> Microsoft likely saw where this game was headed and didn't want to take any more risks. 4 years of funding and pulling the plug this late in the game means they did not have any confidence in this title. Microsoft, as a publisher, is very good. And having something like this happen puts a big dent into the credibility of Sigil, and the game as far as I am concerned.

2> I wonder about the likelihood of an Xbox 360 version with this news. Which may have something to do with reason 1 as well.

3> The last time this happened, as Verant Interactive, sooner or later SOE took full control and the abortion called Luclin popped out.

Second, the positive.

1> It will add tremendous value to a sinking all access pass. Matrix Online, Star Wars Galaxies, and Planetside are dead weight. With the addition of Vanguard, the value of the all access pass may hold it's own weight - depending on how the game actually turns out.

2> Maybe between Sigil, SoE, and their lawyers, someone will be able to figure out how to design a dwarf where it's legs are not longer than it's torso.

3> If true, and Sigil retains full development and timelines, it will be nice to see if they can come out with a game that isn't finished on 6 months worth of subscription revenue. And if it isn't, there aren't any excuses this time around.

There is only one almost for sure thing anyone can take from this though this late in the game's development and years of funding. A publisher pulling out this late means they have lost confidence in the ability of the developer, and Microsoft doesn't pull out easily. So something is pretty fucked up at the moment.

I'll step up on this one Ut. On the business side I can assure you Microsoft had (and still has) confidence in Vanguard. I've spoken to them myself, and that certainly isn't the issue. I've been in this business a long time and I've seen (and I've been a part of) plenty of games that move elsewhere at the last second. I would only point out that Microsoft is about to get locked into a severely protracted battle with my compadres that make the PlayStation 3... and even though they are Microsoft, they have budgets. If the right deal comes along and they can get a return on a smart investment... well everything has a price.. that's the way I'd put it. I happen to respect the MS guys a lot. I play a lot of their games (most notably the Age series) and I know they are committed to making great games.

The same applies to us getting into the deal to co-publish it. I have to say I'm incredibly impressed with Vanguard. The game is awesome, and I think from our perspective it's going to be something we're very proud to be associated with. As to your other points, you have made them before and only time and hard work will prove you'll be happy with the quality of Vanguard and the other stuff we're releasing (can't wait for people to see our PS3 title at E3... I was just playing it and it's damn awesome!).



Smed

[Darph]

Im all for it.

Countless games have been destroyed by demanding publishers. If Vanguard needs room to breath, then that's a ballsy move by Brad and he deserves applaud.

Congrats to Smed and Brad.

[Skars]

Brad said on VG forums in relation to having complete control:

We did. Then we didn't. So we found an opportunity to become publisher not developer to make sure we keep control.

More evidence that MS was putting pressure on them to force gameplay changes or release early etc.

[Fender]

My only question is how/why Microsoft was deemed to be "not good" at distribution and marketing. The Age of Empires series isn't exactly known as a flop. Also, it's effing Microsoft. If they can't get boxes out and market them who can?

I guess I'll subscribe to the whole "Brad was being leaned on and didn't like it" theory at this point.

[Shogon]

Originally Posted by Smed

I'll step up on this one Ut. On the business side I can assure you Microsoft had (and still has) confidence in Vanguard. I've spoken to them myself, and that certainly isn't the issue. I've been in this business a long time and I've seen (and I've been a part of) plenty of games that move elsewhere at the last second. I would only point out that Microsoft is about to get locked into a severely protracted battle with my compadres that make the PlayStation 3... and even though they are Microsoft, they have budgets. If the right deal comes along and they can get a return on a smart investment... well everything has a price.. that's the way I'd put it. I happen to respect the MS guys a lot. I play a lot of their games (most notably the Age series) and I know they are committed to making great games.

The same applies to us getting into the deal to co-publish it. I have to say I'm incredibly impressed with Vanguard. The game is awesome, and I think from our perspective it's going to be something we're very proud to be associated with. As to your other points, you have made them before and only time and hard work will prove you'll be happy with the quality of Vanguard and the other stuff we're releasing (can't wait for people to see our PS3 title at E3... I was just playing it and it's damn awesome!).



Smed

Get me in beta, thanks.

[Ravensign]

nm