Vanguard

[Kynaeus]

Has anyone tried this new MMO yet? The crafting and conversations look unique to say nothing else of the game.

[SpiritWarrior]

Well, I was watching it until I heard the SOE got their paws on it. And, since Sony are like the Atari of the MMO-world, I don't expect good things from it now. Still, I know very little about it at the moment and would welcome any reviews on the game from people here on IW. I am always looking for new MMO's to try and if it is indeed good, I would certainly give it a shot.

[Marty4]

I've heard that it's awful, but I've never actually played nor watched the game being played myself.

[ 02-10-2007, 12:22 PM: Message edited by: Marty4 ]

[SpiritWarrior]

I looked it up a bit yesterday and at first impression it seems to be a bad WoW-clone. Mounts, flying mounts, faction wars etc. It looks ugly too, kinda like EQ2. I was rooting for this one but hadn't seen any of the final stuff until now and amn't too impressed.

[Huwge]

I was in Beta. It was very laggy etc and slow FPS even on my Alienware. I read that those issues are now improved.

I was hoping for an EQ experience but sadly thats not what I got. Levelling was fast...similar to EQ2 or WoW. Quests were nothing special. I didnt see anything revolutionary to be honest. you can build your own house etc but so what (in my opinion) It was billed as a natural successor to EQ but in my opinion falls short.

I'm still waiting for a new MMORPG to capture my magical time in EQ. I only left EQ because of the dying population when I could play.

Please dont bother flaming any of my comments about Vanguard....its just my opinion

[Ziroc]

Yeah, if only the in-game world looked as nice as the artists painting on the boxes of Vanguard and Everquest I and II... heh....

[SpiritWarrior]

Aye. Same goes for those horrible Elminster books by Greenwood. The amazing cover art roped me in.

I was never big on EQ. I didn't fancy marrying a Lizard or rodent-like thing. But Vanguard was indeed touted as the *real* sequel to EQ, and I remember people saying it would "crush" WoW. All that stopped when Sony got their hands on it, lol.

It generated its own good press before they were attached to it, and when they got wind of this they thought "OMG maybe it will be what EQ2 should have been". Unfortunately it doesn't look like it is. And talk about ugly art crossed with demanding technology.

[Kynaeus]

Ugly art orly?
http://www.gameogre.com/reviewdirect...f%20Heroes.jpg
Looks pretty decent to me.

And if you're not going to play a game only because it looks bad, that's kind of sad. The graphics and art can always be changed without too much trouble. The classes and everything else still looks pretty cool, imo.

[SpiritWarrior]

Hardly valid arguments at all. You were looking for opinions. Yet now you don't like those opinions.

I won't even humour your statemanet about art and graphics being changed without "too much trouble". Nor will I entertain the notion that graphics have zero bearing on a game and that it's "kinda said" to dislike a game based on how it looks. Since games are first and foremost, visual interaction. If that was the case we'd all still be playing our Atari 2600's. Or play an old MUD all day.

The screenshot you posted is one of the better ones and for the technology and requirements that it needs, it still just looks OKAY. I was going by the gallery videos on the website of in-game flight etc. Ugly landscape, ugly models. If the develepors put those videos up to show off the amazing artwork you say the game has, then they made a bad choice in what they showed. And this is on the gallery section of the main site. Tell it to them, not me.

[Bithron]

I actually have a friend who only plays games if they look good and have good FPS! I actually think Vanguard could be a good game, liked the crafting ideas!