Why all the nerd rage against Vanguard?

[DJk_zero]

So Brad, your solution to Vanguard running like shit is to spend $2500 US on an entirely new system? Are you going to put that on the box as a sticker?

"Unless you run at stone-age resolutions, be prepared to buy a new $2500 rig so as to actually have the game look good and still somewhat run like shit" ?

Seriously, Ive stayed out of most of the VG threads as there are more then enough people to point out how utterly wrong your attitude is to the MMOG playerbase and the industry in general, but holy hell do you need to seriously wake up to reality.

As much as I like to see competition in any industry, you and the people like you that share similar gaming mindsets need to be put out of business.

[Twobit Whore]

I think it would be great to have a RL economist on staff -- it's just a matter of budget. MMOG economies mirror RL economies in many ways, although not all, and having that insight would be very nice.

The only way that they mirror each other is that they are driven by supply and demand. I think trying to enforce a rl economy model in a video game is not the best course of action, but that is just my opinion.

Apparently the supply of world drops (cheap labor) is driving the prices down while the resources for crafted goods (over qualified labor) is driving those prices up. So yeah, bascially what you have is a market that fosters illegal immigrant workers while your university educated people are unemployed.

[Gaereth]

The assumption that most people, even gamers, will dump 2k on a machine or even close to that is a bad assumption. Enthusiasts will do so...but most of your normal, run of the mill gamers are looking at your suggestion of a 2k machine like you have just grown a third eye.

Most folks will be running right around 1k in the comfortable range for purchasing a machine which...let me take off my shoes....is 1k under what your recommending as a 'cheap' machine that will run VG decently.

-sigh- Accessability is king. 2k cuts out a very large percentage of the subs you were looking for...especially when you say that would just play the game decently. That just tells a lot of folks that in a year or two when they finally upgrade, they might want to dig VG out of cheapo bin and give it a go because until then it won't play decently.

[Lyenae]

Originally Posted by Aradune Mithara

Yeah, you probably don't need such a powerful power supply -- I just tend to get powerful ones so I don't ever run into power problems. And yes you can probably get the ram cheaper elsewhere and no you don't need such a pimp case

Still though, you don't have a monitor, mouse, or keyboard in your setup either (all 3 are required to play VG afaik.) So your $2600 dollar estimate would be pumped up to more like ~$3k? I dunno about you, but saying you don't need a $5k system and spitting out a ~$3k estimate isn't really making the problem any smaller.

As someone who custom builds a new PC every 2 years, I understand that PC's need to be upgraded to run the best games. But how can you expect PC's packages to fly off the shelves at ~$3k to play VG... when PC gaming outside of MMO's has sucked the last 2 years? Hell, even fully loaded next gen high-def consoles can't move at $600.

I just don't see the bang for the buck. There just isn't enough entertainment value in VG alone to justify $1500, $2000, or $2500 in overhead. Virtually no 1 PC title does (even if it ran at 60fps steady with no dips and full shadows), and the sum of 2006 PC titles don't.

Only 3 PC games ranked 90% of higher on Game Rankings - Video Game Reviews, Release Dates, Cheat Codes for the last 12 months. One of them is multiplatform (Oblivion). One is Burning Crusade (go figure). The last is Company of Heroes. Great. 1 title is worth your time if you aren't into MMO's.

[Darus Grey]

The only way that they mirror each other is that they are driven by supply and demand. I think trying to enforce a rl economy model in a video game is not the best course of action, but that is just my opinion.

Apparently the supply of world drops (cheap labor) is driving the prices down while the resources for crafted goods (over qualified labor) is driving those prices up. So yeah, bascially what you have is a market that fosters illegal immigrant workers while your university educated people are unemployed.

I agree, they don't have enough in common that a RL degree in the field would be of much relevance, I was just curious if MMO companies actually have a position for an "Expert" in MMO economies who actually considers how balance changes effect it longterm.

Got my answer(which I'm appreciative of as a note, even though the answer certainly discourages me ;0).

[Twobit Whore]

Another factor that drove people to upgrade more rapidly in the past than now is common features that have essentially peaked or are bottlenecking elsewhere. A $500 dell can surf the net, play MP3s, videos, do streaming video and webcam action etc. People don't need to upgrade to gain these because they are going to work about as well as they do on a 3k system. The most one would need to do is get a bigger storage system, but streaming audio/video isn't going to get better until ISPs do.

[Zuuljin]

Jeez, how did I know it would be Lyenae complaining about framerate. This guy isnt happy unless its running 60+ fps at all times.

And please, do you buy an entirely new monitor, keyboard and mouse every 2 years?! I dont think so.

My computer runs vanguard just flippin fine, and it cost me about $1500. C2duo, 7900gt, 2gigs ram and all that other stuff (minus monitor/keyboard/mouse) and this was like a year ago. I'm sure you could build this same rig for $1000-$1300 right now. Is it perfect? No. But its not as bad as you all make it out too be.

IMO what killed vangard more than anything was launching at the same damn time as BC. Who's brilliant fucking idea was that?

[Lyenae]

Originally Posted by Zuuljin

J
And please, do you buy an entirely new monitor, keyboard and mouse every 2 years?! I dont think so.

Keyboard + mouse every year actually. They are wear/tear devices that are good bang/buck when replacing them since you use them 100% of the time.

Monitors will begin to get upgraded more often now. You can't just buy a 19" CRT an sit on it for 10 years. Flat panel technology is evolving fast and it'll be at least a year or 2 till stability is reached. The Dell 2405fpw I paid $1k or so for 2 years ago is a piece of junk now (shitty black levels, ghosting, etc.) and should be replaced the next time I upgrade.

I was going to upgrade my computer this upcoming Xmas but unless Crytek or Ut2007 scores as a 90% or higher games, the nvidia/intel/amd 300% profit margin cartel can kiss my fucking ass.

But its not as bad as you all make it out too be.

What's your FPS when raiding?

[Aradune Mithara]

Originally Posted by Gaereth

One of the things that bothers me about this whole VG release and its issues is that the main issues, the things Brad talks about as mistakes and things that will be changing, are things anyone with an ounce of sense was saying 6-8months ago.

All of those folks got brushed off, told it was beta, told we couldn't see the whole picture, etc, etc, etc, or told to go back to WOW because perhaps this game isn't for you. It bothers me because most of those things were brought up repeatedly everywhere. On the VG forums, in the beta forums and on damn near anywhere people could post about the game.

Its a bit like telling your kid to not put their hand on the stove because its hot. You know it will be bad if they do, you know what the outcome will be if they touch it, but you watch them continue to eye the burner with some sort of maniacal intensity that doesn't allow them to look away. Then...they touch it and look at you with shock because...well...it was hot.

Duh.

1. 6 months isn't enough lead time to make major fundamental changes to the architecture of the game (even had we wanted to). In a 4.5 year project, you simply can't do something like that and make you ship date even if, like I said, you wanted to.

2. I still think, especially longer term, the decisions we made, for the most part, were the correct ones. What we will be able to do with this game, both feature-wise and in terms of using technology not just for eye-candy but also to enhance gameplay (say, use physics cards) I am confident will have been the right call in the long run, and MMOGs are all about lasting months and years. I don't regret EQ 1 being hardware only, although it was one of the first to do so and people had to run out and buy voodoo cards.

3. Once SLI and Crossfire are implemented, better use of multi-core, and eventually dx 10, more unreal 3.0 tech, 64bit clients, etc. are all a reality, performance issues will start to really go away.

4. And again, while I and many others enjoy the game now, keep in mind we planned 5+ years in advance in terms of documentation, expansion ideas, features, using new tech, etc. So while I think there is plenty to do right now, and the game is a blast for many people, including myself, things like city building with an RTS element, mounted combat, ship combat, user generated content, our expansion/theme plans, and quite a few other plans we already have put together (and that would include areas where we fell short, like getting some sort of fellowship system in, making caravans work right, a better LFG system, more optimization, environment shadows, and much more) -- all of that, all of where we want Vanguard to evolve into, will eventually manifest itself, appeal to more people, be accessible to more people, etc. That's why while this isn't a WoW, I don't think it's a niche game either.

Our sales and our paying subscribers match and even exceed EQ 1's in many ways at this point (1.5 months after launch). Yes, I know it's a different world, and there are a lot more MMOG players now, but still the numbers are encouraging. The people who are enjoying Vanguard are sticking around, re-subscribing, and playing a LOT. In fact, we see players playing more often and at different times (there's not just one peak play period like there was in EQ 1) than we have in other games.

Like I've posted before, I think word of mouth is really going to help us. Marketing that let's people know this isn't a hard core game, you don't *have* to CR, etc. will also help. Hardware becoming faster and cheaper will help. The fact that our tools are so much more mature now means we can turn out new areas much faster, revamp areas faster, and populate faster.

No, I'm not in denial -- I read these posts here and elsewhere and see the issues. And I know the team is hard at work on these issues and doing the best that they can. But please understand that I come from making EQ 1, 2 expansion packs, and almost a third before I left SOE. I see where that game got better, less buggy, how we were able to do things in expansions we were never able to do with the initial world, etc. So my perspective is a longer term one. One usually doesn't create an MMOG with the goal of selling a ton of units the first month. Heck, with EQ 1 we had such major problems with login server stability and bandwidth availability in San Diego, that if I recall correctly we gave a month free to our players for putting up with that rough launch. Vanguard thankfully launched a lot more smoothly and while we've made new mistakes, we've avoided many of the old ones because much of the team has gone through this before.

So I don't want to come across as 'hey, it will get better in the future -- look over there! -- just wait!'. No, I'm very proud of the game right now. Rather, I just am conditioned and used to looking at the big picture and both the short and long term, and from that overall perspective, the today and the tomorrow, I remain very bullish

[rinthea]

Originally Posted by Aradune Mithara

I think it would be great to have a RL economist on staff -- it's just a matter of budget. MMOG economies mirror RL economies in many ways, although not all, and having that insight would be very nice.

Theres a lot more value he'd provide than looking over a games economy. He would have paid for his salary greater than 10 times over in VG. Before having anything to do with in game mechanics.

[Aradune Mithara]

Originally Posted by DJk_zero

So Brad, your solution to Vanguard running like shit is to spend $2500 US on an entirely new system? Are you going to put that on the box as a sticker?

"Unless you run at stone-age resolutions, be prepared to buy a new $2500 rig so as to actually have the game look good and still somewhat run like shit" ?

Seriously, Ive stayed out of most of the VG threads as there are more then enough people to point out how utterly wrong your attitude is to the MMOG playerbase and the industry in general, but holy hell do you need to seriously wake up to reality.

As much as I like to see competition in any industry, you and the people like you that share similar gaming mindsets need to be put out of business.

I have to respectfully disagree. It used to be that to buy a top of the line computer you were looking at 3-4k. It's dropped considerably, and I'm only talking about a top of the line computer if you want to run at high resolutions and at high graphical settings. Many, many Vanguard players run the game and have a blast with much lower end machines. They may get a slower framerate, or the graphics may not be as compelling, but it's still the same game, and the same gameplay.

But yes, every few years people do upgrade their PCs, especially gamers, because they want to play the latest games that use the latest tech. No, the average person doesn't upgrade or buy a new system as frequently, but then Vanguard is a more of a gamer's game and also a game designed to last a long time -- we're in this for the long haul. And as more and more compelling games come out that use or take advantage of higher tech, there will be more and more of a reason for gamers to justify upgrading. Lots of people upgraded for EQ 1, for Doom 3, etc. The precedent is there.

[Zuuljin]

Originally Posted by Lyenae

Keyboard + mouse every year actually. They are wear/tear devices that are good bang/buck when replacing them since you use them 100% of the time.

Monitors will begin to get upgraded more often now. You can't just buy a 19" CRT an sit on it for 10 years. Flat panel technology is evolving fast and it'll be at least a year or 2 till stability is reached. The Dell 2405fpw I paid $1k or so for 2 years ago is a piece of junk now (shitty black levels, ghosting, etc.) and should be replaced the next time I upgrade.

I was going to upgrade my computer this upcoming Xmas but unless Crytek or Ut2007 scores as a 90% or higher games, the nvidia/intel/amd 300% profit margin cartel can kiss my fucking ass.

What's your FPS when raiding?

Well I dont know how you wear and tear a keyboard/mouse every year. I'v had my keyboard for 6+ years, and just recently replaced my mouse cause I dropped the old one in the toilet. =P My CRT monitor is going on 4 years old now, which will probably be replaced soon, but no problems yet. Not everyone has to buy the newest of the new and replace it every year due to first round bugs and implimentation. I will agree with you though on the video card price gouging going on.

As for my FPS in a raid, I dont know, since I dont raid. But just by judging having around 15-20 people on my screen I get anywhere between 15-25 fps, which is ok in my book, seeing as it accounts to about <1% of my total playtime.

[Jedite]

Originally Posted by Aradune Mithara

I have to respectfully disagree. It used to be that to buy a top of the line computer you were looking at 3-4k. It's dropped considerably, and I'm only talking about a top of the line computer if you want to run at high resolutions and at high graphical settings. Many, many Vanguard players run the game and have a blast with much lower end machines. They may get a slower framerate, or the graphics may not be as compelling, but it's still the same game, and the same gameplay.

But yes, every few years people do upgrade their PCs, especially gamers, because they want to play the latest games that use the latest tech. No, the average person doesn't upgrade or buy a new system as frequently, but then Vanguard is a more of a gamer's game and also a game designed to last a long time -- we're in this for the long haul. And as more and more compelling games come out that use or take advantage of higher tech, there will be more and more of a reason for gamers to justify upgrading. Lots of people upgraded for EQ 1, for Doom 3, etc. The precedent is there.

Just to jump in here a bit and give a little info on the comp I built.

Core 2 Duo E6600
BFG 8800GTX
Corsair XMS 800 2gigs
WD Raptor 74 gig
Corsair 680watt Power Supply
XFI X-treme Sound Card
MSI P965 Mobo

All in all it was about 1800 dollars.

I already had an external DVD-RW, and good Power backup, aswell as an extra Windows License and 4 hds on my old box.

Run the game on Highest Quality, 50fps everywhere, and 25-35FPS in towns or high pop area at 1680x1054. Still get some hicups when too many ppl around but thats to be expected. Crossing a chunk takes about a second or so. There are some zones however that really can put a beating on my system. Particularly if i remember correctly it was that Freaking Aviak area on that island in the northeast edge Qalia. That area pretty much pwnz me when im there, and in a full group im chugging along at 20-28fps some times in the high teens.

Small edit, I have tweaked the crap out of Windows XP to get as much out of it as I can..

I am considering doing some OverClocking since the Core2duos particularly this one can get pretty good OC.

[Joelage_mcduffbot]

My system is old, i admit it, but honestly i expect to be able to turn off all effects, drop the res to Doom standard and play at a reasonable framerate like i was able to do in EQ1/SWG.
Wow allowed me to play at 1152X864 with reasonable framerates, with Vanguard i was in high teens max at 1024X768 max performace.
I'm running an Athlon XP3200+, 1 gig ram, geforce 6600gt overclocked.
Not a total shitbag, but obviously fairly old.

It's really disappointing because it (amongst other things) turned me off vanguard and gave me an extra reason to cancel my sub and regret the $60 i pumped into the game.
There's potential obviously, but i hope i will never be able to justify spending $2k+ on a rig primarilly for a single game. I'd rather go snowboarding for 2 weeks.

The way i see it, if so many people are complaining (and even those with amazing systems seem to have low FPS for what i'm seeing on the screenshots) then something is wrong, just as it was in EQ1.

[kcxiv]

Originally Posted by Joelage_mcduffbot

My system is old, i admit it, but honestly i expect to be able to turn off all effects, drop the res to Doom standard and play at a reasonable framerate like i was able to do in EQ1/SWG.
Wow allowed me to play at 1152X864 with reasonable framerates, with Vanguard i was in high teens max at 1024X768 max performace.
I'm running an Athlon XP3200+, 1 gig ram, geforce 6600gt overclocked.
Not a total shitbag, but obviously fairly old.

It's really disappointing because it (amongst other things) turned me off vanguard and gave me an extra reason to cancel my sub and regret the $60 i pumped into the game.
There's potential obviously, but i hope i will never be able to justify spending $2k+ on a rig primarilly for a single game. I'd rather go snowboarding for 2 weeks.

The way i see it, if so many people are complaining (and even those with amazing systems seem to have low FPS for what i'm seeing on the screenshots) then something is wrong, just as it was in EQ1.

all you have to do is upgrade to another gig of ram and a new Video card and you would spend what 400 total IF That and be able to run the game well. I paid 140 bucks for a ati1600 512, and i can run the game ok. My problem right now is i need more ram.