More Exclusives for FoH

[Cad]

I wish there were some topics that Utnayan posted in which weren't about Vanguard that he actually cared about - so we could go shit all over them and give him an idea of what he's doing. Not that I care about Vanguard, but I'd like to be able to read about the damn game.

[Ravvenn]

Ut - chill out on the personal attacks. The rest of you, chill out on attacking him. That is like the pot sticking the kettle in the pooper.

I'm sure Brad is a big boy and can take a punch by now, he has probably taken note of those defending him and appreciates it, in advance I wish each of you luck on Beta slots! Ut clearly doesn't care what anyone thinks about him.

Regardless, you're all getting on my nerves today - stop being a bunch of girls.

You can actually say something or ask questions without verbally lashing out in a fit of rage every single post (I know, it's crazy!). You can also not become a part of the problem and respond with the "And here comes a post by [Insert Name here] in 3...2....".

See my post about reporting for today. I shall squeeeesh the fingers of the next person who pushes that button. Ferealz!

[Dildo Faggins]

Originally Posted by Papillon

There is a new Vanguard video at the German website Onlinewelten from the Games Convention.

http://mmog.onlinewelten.com/index.p...=54#contentbox

Says low resolution, so I clicked proded the site a few times and found
High rez
Wow is all I can say. It was kind 'thats nice' for the opening, but then you see the harbor with the ships and all I can say is hot damn am I impressed. The ships are absolutely fucking beautiful, and anyone who says otherwise is a fool, and the city/harbor is pretty damn hot looking too. THere's obviously stuff to do, wakes would add a lot, shadows(i use blob shadows anyways, so they dont need be fancy ones to make me happy), and there should be some fog to water in some areas. I spent a few months in monaco, and the water was almost as clear as that. I could easily see VERY deep into the water. It was beautiful.

Also, animation don't seem so bad to me, I cant see why its worth of lots of complaining, though the animation parts were admittably kinda short.

Also, I like the variety of customization, but it's hard to say if I'll completely like it until I mess with it. What I do like is that as they randomized stuff, none of the chars looked like the flesh eating zombies that Oblivion char creation spawned. I mean, the only thing the char creation in that game allowed me to do was decide just exactly how horrible I wanted my char to be.

Who do I have to kill to get into beta .

[Neric]

Some of you guys will never get it. "The ships are beautiful"...so what? How many times did you visit Freeport just to watch the ships? Ships don't fucking matter. They are a form of travel. Who the hell cares if they look "beautiful" or just "normal"? After a while you won't care about it anyways.

That's the reason why all of this discussion about graphics is missing the point. Stuff looks nice for the first week or so, but from then on only the GAMEPLAY counts. As far as gameplay goes, Vanguard is about 99.9% identical to DAoC PvE. Extremely primitive and absolutely straight forward. There is no room for sophisticated moves.

[Kaxmax]

Originally Posted by Neric

As far as gameplay goes, Vanguard is about 99.9% identical to DAoC PvE. Extremely primitive and absolutely straight forward. There is no room for sophisticated moves.

Unless DAoC has changed drastically since the last time I played it (ToA/NF), I'm not really sure how you can say this. There's very, very little similarity.

And just so it's said, I liked quite a bit of DAoC's PVE, even if the encounters prior to ToA were bland. I thought their positionals, reactionals, and shield skills were pretty innovative at the time. It's the only game I've played where a tank can actually feel like a tank in PVP.

[Dildo Faggins]

Originally Posted by Neric

Some of you guys will never get it. "The ships are beautiful"...so what? How many times did you visit Freeport just to watch the ships? Ships don't fucking matter. They are a form of travel. Who the hell cares if they look "beautiful" or just "normal"? After a while you won't care about it anyways.

That's the reason why all of this discussion about graphics is missing the point. Stuff looks nice for the first week or so, but from then on only the GAMEPLAY counts. As far as gameplay goes, Vanguard is about 99.9% identical to DAoC PvE. Extremely primitive and absolutely straight forward. There is no room for sophisticated moves.

You are absolutely right, you cant judge gameplay without playing the game, and gameplay wont be decided until the full game is out, so it's hard to say, but comparing it daoc's pve is not a bad thing in my book. Daoc was a ton of fun, the only big fault was there was a lack of things to do until the end.

As for using ships. I hope there's reason to use them often. I'm a big pvp bastard, and I love killing people for fun, and especially like the idea that I could force people to walk the plank so they have to swim back to shore. Lol timesink that.

A ship full of Ninja's from qalia get's boarded by a ship from thestra full of pirates. Begin the ultimate battle. Why hasn't anybody thought of this shit? If I were making vanguard I would be all over creating that vid.

[Aradune Mithara]

Originally Posted by Kaxmax

Unless DAoC has changed drastically since the last time I played it (ToA/NF), I'm not really sure how you can say this. There's very, very little similarity.

And just so it's said, I liked quite a bit of DAoC's PVE, even if the encounters prior to ToA were bland. I thought their positionals, reactionals, and shield skills were pretty innovative at the time. It's the only game I've played where a tank can actually feel like a tank in PVP.

Thanks -- these people are not in Beta 3 and are going off of a few negative reactions that got out during beta 2. With hundreds and hundreds more people in beta 3, where are all of the NDA breakers? Could it be that the game is getting better and more polished?

In any case, it's true that graphics don't show gameplay. Videos like the one that just came out of Germany's show, show gameplay from a third person's standpoint, but ultimately until the true skeptics play the game, they will say what they say.

I will agree DaOC had some great gameplay, as did other MMOGs of that era, and that we are building our fundation of gameplay on what has worked in the past. But comparisons more detailed than that are simply not accurate.

Just as Vanguard looks a bit like EQ 2 because we both chose to use newer tech and less stylized art than, say, WoW, doesn't make the engines the same or even close to the same tech level, especially if you know what you are looking for. The same hold true of combat -- sure, Vanguard feels like an MMOG, but it's also its own game too.

[Utnayan]

I never said the anim tech would be done in beta 2. Technology like that continues to evolve. We did put better animation tech and animation data into beta 2, and we're improving it in beta 3, and it will likely continue to improve up to launch and beyond. In fact, the entire game from a content, playability, polish, technology, and feature standpoint will continue to evolve, expand, and get better and better throughout beta and then for years after launch.

Sounds good. I just wanted to gauge where this was at. If it was now at a stand still from beta 2, or what was happening. Hopefully you can see the confusion when I see new tech unveiled in beta 3 when I knew new tech was unveiled in beta 2. Thanks for the clear up. What I hope happens next is you find some animators that really know what they are doing so they can use that tech to full advantages. I know how hard it is to find good animators in this business.

I know this is your hot button -- that MMOGs are never released 'finished'. To me, they need to be released with the feature sets they were advertised to have and if anything changes pre-release, the developer needs to be up front about it (as we have been). They need to be released with enough content and features to entertain people up until the majority of them are ready for a major expansion. They need to continue to have content added and balance and data and systems tweaked both before and after launch such that these games are living evolving entities, constantly improving and expanding, and also so that unexpected events can be responded to if necessary to safeguard the long term health of the game.

That's perfect - as long as you are always upfront and honest about it. But that also means turning a new leaf on community management. If something is not in the game later on down the road, and players are wondering if they should spend time on that or move on, that you have communication open to let those players know so they don't waste time chasing something that doesn't exist. And if a high end zone isn't complete, or a key quest is broken, just come out and say it so players know. This is all I have ever asked. But I am also going to ask that you do not listen to Rich Vogel anymore. You should not deflect concerns by players and guide them to something else - because all it will do is create more frustration. It is a piss poor way of doing things, and his way should never be taken into consideration ever again.

To me, what is most hated by you, and it seems to go way back to our working on EQ 1, is that we don't ever release anything that is completely done, in a box forever, fire and forget. The irony is that what seems to upset you the most if what excites me most of about this genre -- it's like a great book series -- it's like a real virtual world -- the game is never done! It's not a product, it's a service.

Completely understood here as well. I know that MMORPG's are always a work in progress. What gets me though is when zones are supposed to be in a game, players question what is going on, and those questions fall on deaf ears. Don't let that happen and I have no problem. I also know at some point you have to release a game. As long as everyone knows upfront what will and what won't make it, I am fine with it. I would suggest an entire web page link that would detail what will make it and what won't. Just a simple "Things that are not going to make our launch: But may be added in the near or far future" and list those features.

I know you think Diplomacy, for example, should have been planned perfectly from the beginning and not revised several times during beta. I now you don't agree with a long beta where we interact with players and make all sorts of changes to the game, some small, and some even big -- you'd rather we test all of this in-house somehow and then have a short beta with no NDA that is really more of a preview. It bothers you that we post 'work in progress' that clearly has flaws in it. You don't have faith that we have time to complete our goals and are convinced that we either won't ship or will ship with so much less than we've promised that there won't really be much of a game there at all.

Right now the only thing that is leading me to believe that, other than NDA breakers, is the lack of information this close to release. Which is why I have always recommended you lift the NDA. If it's a work in progress, you stand to gain much more from being open about it. I understand the need to keep things from competing product, but right now you have divulged most everything that you hope to have in the game anyway short of some key revamps. Little things that would help in my opinion would be this example: If someone asks what is up with diplomacy? I would say, "Guys, we are completely redoing diplomacy - it wasn't fun as it stood. I'll have more information for you after we take a hard look at what we can do to make this system fun" instead of, "We'll give you more info later - for now, secret sauce". Hopefully you understand what I am saying there.

I know you still won't believe this. I do sincerely hope, no matter how angry you seem, that you enjoy Vanguard after its launched. You may not, because it is so clearly designed to not only be a great game at launch but also to evolve so much further post-launch that you may feel we should have stayed in production another 2 or 3 years. I really don't know. But at least I am here letting you know our production methodology and being up front about it.

This is what I have always asked for. I hope you know, contrary to my anti fan base here, that I do not hate you. I do not hate Sigil. I do not hate SOE. We have known each other via the e-waves for a long time now, ever since I did one of your first interviews since leaving SOE for Guru3d.com.

What I want to see are changes to the genre so it can evolve passed a play now patch later concept where all too often the live patching process is a scapegoat for publishers to launch a game before it's ready. And I would love nothing more than to love playing your game. That's why I care so much in the first place.

You'll see Diplomacy evolve from a new approach to factions and non-combat character advancement into an entire system involving player run towns and an RTS element to appeal to more strategy oriented players. You'll see the biggest and best dungeons that are level 50 (e.g. end game) material at launch looked dwarfed and almost pathetic when you eventually explore vast under worlds and cities floating in the sky (our 2km by 2km 'chunks' our seamless world is created out of have Z coordinates too -- and while we won't use them at launch, the code and data is there so we can certainly use them in the future) -- imagine flying 8 km up into the air to explore a city in the clouds!

Perfect. This is the information I am wanting to hear about.

All of this is possible and, yes, planned for post launch (along with a lot of things I can't reveal because a. we don't need to see it in other games and b. we keep back information we're either not positive about or c. we hold back some exciting information for exclusive coverage in the major magazines and on the major gaming sites).

Perfect. And if the NDA is in place at this point to grab exclusives in press releases via major and minor affiliates, that's fine. Again, no problems at all when you have an NDA for those reasons as long as the funding you receive will benefit the game before it launches. I only have a problem with an NDA if I am under the impression that it holds back the negative information only, while no one cares about positive NDA breakers. I know you can see my point of view here and admit that was happening. But that is why I dislike NDA's when used for that purpose - because it holds back other crucial information that the public should know about as well.

Yes, Vanguard will be ready when we launch in this Winter. No, it won't be perfect. Yes, it will be missing some things we hoped would be in it, but we will make sure to continue to be up front with everyone about these items. Also, however, it will include things that I didn't think would make it in by launch, as well as systems and technology and features that are *better* than what I would have thought.

Again, this is all I ever needed to hear. And please take a hard look at my suggestion above, and time it out right when you have a content lock. I am guessing you should know about a month ahead of time.

All of this seems to either bother you or you just think I'm full of it. Again, I don't know why you are so angry and skeptical -- we made our fair share of mistakes with EQ, and I'm sorry if they hurt you at some point, but I can assure you we never meant to hurt anybody and our decisions, even our tough ones, whether wrong or right looking back now with 20/20 hindsight, were always made out of love for the game. So I can understand being upset, not liking us, not agreeing with our production methodology. I can understand skepticism -- that worries me the least, because the proof is in the pudding, and we'll see who was right about Vanguard soon enough. But I wish there wasn't this anger. We're just gamers like you and we love MMOGs like you and we're doing our best. Some people will criticize me for feeding the trolls and even responding to you, and I don't most of the time, but man, whatever it was, a single event or a series of events... whatever it was, while I know for a fact there was no malice on our part (and I know -- I was on watch -- I was calling the shots) -- I apologize anyway.

To put it out there, here is what bugged me the most. And if you respond to nothing but this, I would be happy.

1> Watching players love your game (EQ) and see them get lied to. Ester the Tester saying that Cloth Caps dropping on Warders was working as intended. Who told her to say that? If she was directed to by someone else, why was that done? Why not just tell everyone that the loot table was not finished for that zone yet? I, others, and everyone else would have just been happy at that point in the game that they were not being lied too. Yes this is old hat and I am over it. But it concerns me as to why it was done in the first place.

2> The same as above when it came to Plane of Mischief. Yes, I know this happened a long time ago. But things like this burn in a person's mind when they see some of the same people behind the product. For 3 months players kept trying to figure out quests that didn't exist and no one tried to stop them and say hey, guys, you know what? Please work on something else and have fun in other zones - this area is not complete yet and we apologize for it, but we don't want you wasting time there.

This goes beyond just normal bugs out of thousands of quests that would be impossible to keep track of. This goes into cutting into months of people's playtimes exploring something that was not physically able to be completed. And when you drive that into players, you drive a sense of rigidness into them while they play your game. Is this quest finished? Am I wasting my time on nothing? I cannot tell you how many times people were more relieved to get a reward than be excited for it because it was just so bugged.

My question in all of this is why did this happen? (The lies) Why was it allowed to happen? And why did it persist? What changes will you make to make sure this type of behavior doesn't happen again in Vanguard? What types of discipline action may you have set up for bad apples? This also goes to seeing employees at SOE making items for themselves or using their status as an employee as levwerage to gain over other normal players. One name comes to mind here specifically. We both know who that is. So I will not say it here, but I have said his name before. What will happen in these instances?

If you never lie, try to cover up anything, and just be flat out honest - and that goes for pre and post launch, I have no beefs with your company, your employees, you, or Vanguard. That is someone I will gladly give my $50 bucks to and try their game.

Edit: Sorry. Wrong thread.

[thuvia]

Originally Posted by Aradune Mithara

Thanks -- these people are not in Beta 3 and are going off of a few negative reactions that got out during beta 2. With hundreds and hundreds more people in beta 3, where are all of the NDA breakers? Could it be that the game is getting better and more polished?

that's a great question. beta 3 has been going for what, 3 weeks? i haven't read a single negative leak, and i'm fairly sure it's because there's not much for reasonable people who are PLAYING to complain about.

keep up the good work.

[Xhar]

Originally Posted by thuvia

that's a great question. beta 3 has been going for what, 3 weeks? i haven't read a single negative leak, and i'm fairly sure it's because there's not much for reasonable people who are PLAYING to complain about.

keep up the good work.

Or maybe some people do tend to want to honor their word on the NDA regardless of what they think of the game? And maybe they really don't want to risk a chance at losing their spot in beta, hoping the game might shape up to something they'd like more? Hell, who doesn't like a free game?

Originally Posted by Aradune Mithara

Thanks -- these people are not in Beta 3 and are going off of a few negative reactions that got out during beta 2. With hundreds and hundreds more people in beta 3, where are all of the NDA breakers? Could it be that the game is getting better and more polished?

Don't taunt the trolls, they just might bite.

[thuvia]

Originally Posted by Xhar

Or maybe some people do tend to want to honor their word on the NDA regardless of what they think of the game? And maybe they really don't want to risk a chance at losing their spot in beta, hoping the game might shape up to something they'd like more? Hell, who doesn't like a free game?

so what makes this batch of beta testers any different than the last? the random beta invite process has managed to pick more honorable testers? not likely. more likely that the game IS shaping up to be something they like.

[Sithro]

Same here. From the people I've talked to beta 3 is good.

[Neric]

Originally Posted by Aradune Mithara

Thanks -- these people are not in Beta 3 and are going off of a few negative reactions that got out during beta 2. With hundreds and hundreds more people in beta 3, where are all of the NDA breakers? Could it be that the game is getting better and more polished?

It could have something to do with the fact that many people from beta 2 deinstalled the game half way through it.

In any case, it's true that graphics don't show gameplay.

Since you got that, why do you keep posting thread after thread with new screenshots? You put too much emphasis on graphics. This game is a graphical hydrocephalus that doesn't even look that impressing. You are using too many standard textures, that's why it all looks the same wherever you go. There is too much rock_01 and tree_02 all over the place.

I will agree DaOC had some great gameplay, as did other MMOGs of that era, and that we are building our fundation of gameplay on what has worked in the past.

We all know by now that DAoC caused nightmares for you. Why, I can't tell. The game was crap from day one, but still you thought that they improved on your concepts, so you wanted to copy as many of those "improvements" as possible. One could make an argument for DAoC PvP, but that doesn't apply to your type of games. Instead of keeping EQ unique, you tried to make EQ a better DAoC and that's ridiculous. Same thing with Vanguard. You got so impressed by those trivial solutions in DAoC that you shaped Vanguard gameplay in a very similar way. Absolutely pathetic, especially because nobody played DAoC for the PvE, they all played it for PvP and PvP only. Last but not least, if you really want to use concepts that worked in the past, why did you ignore those from EQ other than corpse runs and why did you use some from SWG like overland population? It's pretty obvious which game was successful and which game was not. DAoC stands out as mentioned before, because it's success doesn't have much to do with it's PvE concepts.

You know, the problem with all of these 3rd, 4th or 5th generation games is that they feel like sequels to a great movie. It's somewhat the same and polished nicely, but it can never capture the original athmosphere. There are simply too many fixed factors to prevent it from being unique and not enough good new ideas that were overlooked when the original was designed. It's like the 15th James Bond movie where you know exactly that the bad guy will die in the end and the evil fortress will be blown up. The only difference in those movies are a few new computer generated special effects and that everything is a bit bigger than before.

Maybe I should give you credit for a accepting job where it is basically impossible to be successful and create something unique.

[Laerazi]

It could have something to do with the fact that many people from beta 2 deinstalled the game half way through it.

Many people didn't like the game in it's Beta 2 stage; who cares? It's still in Beta, and as long as it's improving (and apparently Beta 3 is much better), then what does it matter.

We all know by now that DAoC caused nightmares for you. Why, I can't tell. The game was crap from day one, but still you thought that they improved on your concepts, so you wanted to copy as many of those "improvements" as possible. One could make an argument for DAoC PvP, but that doesn't apply to your type of games. Instead of keeping EQ unique, you tried to make EQ a better DAoC and that's ridiculous. Same thing with Vanguard. You got so impressed by those trivial solutions in DAoC that you shaped Vanguard gameplay in a very similar way. Absolutely pathetic, especially because nobody played DAoC for the PvE, they all played it for PvP and PvP only. Last but not least, if you really want to use concepts that worked in the past, why did you ignore those from EQ other than corpse runs and why did you use some from SWG like overland population? It's pretty obvious which game was successful and which game was not. DAoC stands out as mentioned before, because it's success doesn't have much to do with it's PvE concepts.

Wow, good job at assuming what other people think. I'm sure you know exactly what Brad thinks, is doing now, and is going to do in the future. You've proven yourself pretty ignorant in the past, so this isn't really a suprising post, on your part.

[Papillon]

Originally Posted by Neric

It could have something to do with the fact that many people from beta 2 deinstalled the game half way through it.

It's realy sad to see so many people just taking a beta as a free game, that should be finished already, and not even try to help in a beta test. Even worse are the people that break NDAs then to tell everybody how bad they think this game will be.

Since you got that, why do you keep posting thread after thread with new screenshots? You put too much emphasis on graphics.

While I'm ok with the Screenshots -- better than nothing -- it would be nice to have at least some kind of story connected with them. While SWG didn't make many things right, what I liked were the "Hunting Stories" prerelease. Series of screenshots connected with a story actually telling what is going on on them. How about a series of screenshots following a goup of players through a quest from start to end?

There is too much rock_01 and tree_02 all over the place.

While Vanguard obviously isn't WoW I still agree here to some extend. I would add that what I've seen so far looks too flat or like sinus wave generated hills everywhere -- even the mountains. Too much just like a simple height map with trees from a salt shaker. No intersections. That's why it mostly looks like generated by a randomizer and not hand crafted.

[Pointless stuff about DAoC]

Is it an improvement that you switched from comparing Vanguard to SWG all the time, to comparing it to DAoC now? Lets see what will come with Beta 4 and 5.