Man I have no clue what you"re talking about. It is possible to compare them point by point, even if noone cares. What I look for in an MMO is how much content and variety it has first and foremost, I don"t care about the IP.Rayne said:
Why all the nerd rage against Vanguard
- Thread starter Shonuff
- Start date
-
Guest, it's time once again for the massively important and exciting FoH Asshat Tournament!
Go here and give us your nominations!Who's been the biggest Asshat in the last year? Give us your worst ones!
I"m a huge LOTR nerd... but I am really hoping they improve the gameplay. The game couldn"t hold my interest when I tried it in beta, and there was some odd about the character movements.
Anyways, I, on top of being a LOTR nerd, love a good dungeon crawl. It"s the thing that I really enjoy the most out of Vanguard, so I really, really hope they add in some nice dungeons to LoTRO.
Anyways, I, on top of being a LOTR nerd, love a good dungeon crawl. It"s the thing that I really enjoy the most out of Vanguard, so I really, really hope they add in some nice dungeons to LoTRO.
- 791
- 966
Considering that my main is a druid, if they do give us ports I will resub for another month without hesitation The travel tedium is one of the reasons I don"t play anymore.
Dungeon crawling is the only thing that VG has going for it. Of course, at my level everyone is soloing Southwatch missives leaving the dungeons empty, so yeah.
Dungeon crawling is the only thing that VG has going for it. Of course, at my level everyone is soloing Southwatch missives leaving the dungeons empty, so yeah.
No, it isn"t. Because you claiming that Vanguard has a higher quality and quantity of content doesn"t mean dick to those who can barely even run the game, are subjected to countless bugs and glitches, are having a hard time finding people to group with easily, or were looking for all this content over the last couple of weeks. YOUR experiences simply aren"t the same as what many others are experiencing.Nairbog said:
You have to be able to "play" the game to see the content. You have to be able to have "fun" with the content you find. Fuck man, people are saying they"d rather be working than playing this game:
And this one was just beyond belief:
You gotta be fuckin" kiddin" me.
You simply can"t compare a game that the "average" gamer doesn"t enjoy, to one that they do. Whether you do it point for point, by sub rate, or graphically. Because when average gamers would rather play some piece of shit, third rate Korean game over your multi-million dollar production, you fucked up. Big time.
You cant please everyone. /shrugsRayne said:
The game is fun for some, sucks for others. So is there a fucking point to all of your drivel other than that?
No IP, 150K sold in 2 months? Not bad... Not good, but not bad...
And you dont speak for most, you speak for your weak ass self, nothing more.
And you dont speak for most, you speak for your weak ass self, nothing more.
I always speak for myself. At least i"m not making lame ass excuses. Weak or not.Mkopec1 said:
Rayne what are you on? All I"m trying to say is that it is possible to compare them. You have some sort of mental block and you think that to compare them implies that I"m trying to say Vanguard is better or more successful because of the content. You are honestly not making sense, at all. Here, since you claim it"s impossible to compare them let me do it quickly for you right now, to prove you wrong. It"s a simple concept:
New Targonor, compared to LoTRO"s cities, is bigger, seamless, and I would argue, more impressive because of its sheer size.
Vanguard"s dungeons, until I am proven wrong but I have yet to see statements indicating otherwise, are larger, have more variety, and are less linear than LoTRO"s dungeons. (this is only speaking from past experience with Turbine games...)
Vanguard"s world is larger, and has more variety of environments than LoTRO online.
Look, I just made three comparisons, and the world didn"t implode.
New Targonor, compared to LoTRO"s cities, is bigger, seamless, and I would argue, more impressive because of its sheer size.
Vanguard"s dungeons, until I am proven wrong but I have yet to see statements indicating otherwise, are larger, have more variety, and are less linear than LoTRO"s dungeons. (this is only speaking from past experience with Turbine games...)
Vanguard"s world is larger, and has more variety of environments than LoTRO online.
Look, I just made three comparisons, and the world didn"t implode.
And that is where you lose me and probably a lot of other people. Size doesn"t mean jackshit on its own.Nairbog said:
Your entire argument is based on "bigger is better". Texas is a huge state, but you know what, 90% of it is empty dustcovered land with a spattering of cattle here and there.. hmm, sounds familiar.
New Targonor has plenty of variety and content. There"s nothing boring about it. From the library to the throne room, it"s got detail. I will concede that it is likely a bit less detailed than LoTRO"s cities. (and it might not be, atleast the vast majority of buildings are enterable with unique NPC"s, if LoTRO"s towns are anything like AC2"s, there"s only a few buildings you can enter and you have to zone in.). For me, however, New Targonor"s size and epic nature more than makes up for it. Unfortunately, it is still somewhat unfinished because VG released so, so early. (and I was vocal at the time about it being an incredibly bad idea) I am sure that once all the diplomatic content is added to VG the cities will be much more alive and dynamic than anything seen in LoTRO. Yeah yeah I know, the ultimate vanboi response right there. "Just wait, it"s gonna be great guys!" Fortunately, for myself and many others, the game is fun enough that I am willing to wait.
A launch ofwhatmagnitude? Are you seriously saying that VG"s launch is impressive due the tens of players clamoring to get in?Morderick said:
Yes, VGs graphics ARE awesome. Especially since a majority of the gamers have to play them on minimum settings due to ridiculous hardware requirements. Oh, wait...
It"s all about polish. WoW has it in spades. VG... doesn"t.
And on the topic of reviewers, most of them don"t just play for 30 minutes from level 1. They can be given the game for weeks, with preloaded characters or tools that let them experience things from multiple angles. Just watch the G4 review and tell me all they do is kill bats at level 1. No, they don"t even do that at all.. in fact I was surprised they didn"t make a joke about it.
This thread is epic, again $30m spent delivers quality entertainment.
I"d pay $15 to sub to V threads, but not to play the game
I"d pay $15 to sub to V threads, but not to play the game
New Targ is pretty cool, theres no doubt about that. However, apart from being a (high level?) diplomat, theres no reason to go there and its just a PIA to run and navigate through. Theres never any people there and because of this it feels dull. Ironforge was a better place, in gameplay (meeting point) and art. WTF happened to Orgrimar btw? For those who"ve played the WoW expansion, what are those cities like? As good as Ironforge?
You guys know that reviewers of books in the major newspapers get sent "summaries" by the publishers and dont actually read the books? I"d imagine things wouldnt be much different gaming..
Org is still alive and well on my server. Always a few dozen people in the bank/AH/flight tower area. People offering goods and services, spamming for signatures on guild charters.rinthea said:
Shattrath is the main city of Outlands, and it"s not that big, but it"s populated and has all the hussle and bustle you would expect a hub to have.
But for what it"s worth, I"ve been tooling around on a couple alts to see the newb zones of both races, etc.. and I was very surprised to see the lower level outposts and towns to be so populated. Can always find 8-10 people in Tarren Mill or Southshore hanging out, duelling, tradeskilling or turning in quests. I guess that is one benefit of a speedier level curve, it isn"t so prohibitve to roll up a new character and try something new.
Yes. But you"re comparing content from a game thats largely unplayable for a huge portion of the gamespace, to a game that is. What i"m telling you, is that within those parameters, it doesn"t matter how much content Vanguard has, what its scope is, or how much variety it has, because only a select few see it the way you do. Vanguard is handicapped in those respects, therefore no real comparisons can be made.Nairbog said:
It doesn"t matter if Vanguard"s world is huge. Because a majority of the gamespace isn"t tripping over themselves to play it. The scope is immaterial, because a many are finding it a completely pointless game that lacks any meaningful direction. The variety is an utter waste of development time because its largely unplayable on hardware the "average" gamer is currently using, but EVERYTHING else is.
The bottom line is, the "average" gamer will find more bang for thier buck with LoTRo. And Vanguard simply cannot compare regardless of how literally you try to compare it. Perhaps in the next year or two. But certainly not at this point.