Sad part is these are things we all warned you about on this forum. Had you not been stubborn and actually gave us credence things might be different. Glad you are "listening", remains to be seen if it will matter at this point. Afterall too many other competing games are coming down the pike, which won"t cost a bundle on a new machine to play.Aradune Mithara said:
Why all the nerd rage against Vanguard
- Thread starter Shonuff
- Start date
Not only that, but they had 2+ years of EQ2 to look at while they were making these decisions and even admissions that it was a mistake to do so, as it cost them more initially than even a really solid game now can make up for.Maxxius said:
Well that P4 processor is ur main problem. Anything starting with P4 is a total and complete piece of junk, sorry to say but it is. Apart from that a few questions.. Onboard Sound? Latest Nvidia Drivers? Did you use Driver Cleaner to remove previous Nividia Drivers?chackle said:
but really, seriously spend a few bucks and get atleast a new Motherboard/CPU you desperatly need it. That P4 is dragging your system HUGE, besides its a Power hungry/Overheating mofo.
Erronius
Macho Ma'am
- 16,478
- 42,405
I suppose that would be encouraging if VG was in the same ballpark as EQ, from a ROI standpoint. I"ve been under the impression that VG has been many, many times more expensive than EQ, and as such your quote seems somewhat misleading. Is meeting EQ"s sales and subscriptions, and inSOMEways exceeding them, going to mean anything when so much more was invested in VG as compared to EQ?Aradune Mithara said:
I hope your right but I predict you"re wrong on this. I"ve heard nothing good via word of mouth, none of my friends have, no guildies from other games, nada, nothing. At best I"ve heard "It"s a ____ clone, if you like it you"ll like VG" or "It still has problems, maybe it will be ready in X months". At worst, I"ve heard some pretty damning indictments that although biased still cast a pall onto the "word of mouth" that is going around for VG.Aradune Mithara said:
It is actually interesting to me that some of the biggest supporters for VG, outside of dedicated VG forums, have been in the VG threads here. Bad thing is (for you), that those opinions are mixed in with a nearly equal number of people that give VG bad reviews.
I have been seeing a good deal of VG adverts in PC Gamer though. The March issue had the foldout front cover spot; I was thinking to myself "Oh, well, looks like Sigil is taking the gloves off" until I saw the centerfold double-foldout in the center for WOW. Heh. Still, I"d personally set some heads to rolling for the adverts myself. The phrase "Set yourself free" needs to be canned, that has to be one of the most atrocious sounding one-liners I"ve heard (its right up there with the "time to slay the dragon" one). Some of the VG ads actually make me cringe somewhat. The ads seem passive, bland, even dead...maybe there is some attempt at a Tolkienesque backdrop, but imo it isn"t working. That and, though I hate to say it, not enough scantily clad ladies. As sad as the indictment is of gamers in general, T&A=$$$.
Just don"t lose sight of the near term by being optimistic and expecting the long term to pull things out. It might, it might not. IMHO you would be better served being worried about the short term a bit more and banging heads together (Which you may be doing and keeping it out of the public eye, I dunno).Aradune Mithara said:
Daelos
Guarding the guardians
- 219
- 58
I don"t remember EQ1 as having "reasonable framerates" at all. I remember staring into walls to be able to cast my spells.Joelage_mcduffbot said:
Anyway - used to play on an Athlon 2400, 1GB RAM, 5400 RPM harddrives, Nvidia 7600 GS and had ~15-20 FPS in group settings (and my girlfriend is still using that PC and playing happily). (performance settings, some sliders bumped up, 1280x1024)
My new PC (E6600, 2GB RAM, 7950GT) cost me ~?600 and is playing the game at a steady 35+ FPS everywhere but cities with most graphics options turned on/all the way up (not shadows) at 1600x1200.
Yes - the game needs hardware, but it"s worth it.
The cost of the game is a sunk cost, the question is now whether improvements and support can be sustained on the subscription revenues. At this point guys, I"d just stop the references to beta, awkward launch timing etc etc.
I think the first objective is for the game to sustain the 150k mark. 300k is out of question before an expansion. And that expansion needs to be kickass. 500k ? Don"t see it happen ever, unless VG is recompiled with WoW graphics engine and runs on shitty comps. Then 1m is possible (and I am not kidding either). It"s really that simple. It"s not about teleporters or xp rate or any of that garbage, it"s whether it runs on shitty comps. Bottom line.
I think the first objective is for the game to sustain the 150k mark. 300k is out of question before an expansion. And that expansion needs to be kickass. 500k ? Don"t see it happen ever, unless VG is recompiled with WoW graphics engine and runs on shitty comps. Then 1m is possible (and I am not kidding either). It"s really that simple. It"s not about teleporters or xp rate or any of that garbage, it"s whether it runs on shitty comps. Bottom line.
Had they decided to write the game from scratch using OpenGL instead of DirectX there would be NO hardware scaleability issues. Things would run decently on more-than-adequate hardware.
The reason it crawls on non-NASA hardware isn"t because the graphics are phenomenal, the world is bigger, or they are using technology from the future. It is because of a poor, design decision to use EZ mode technology and a drop-in game engine solution and add models to it. Sounds like someone was in a hurry.
Solution: Rewrite the game from scratch, use OpenGL, write or modify an existing OpenGL engine like Q3A/ET/etc. if you do not want to make your own. Wala! No zoning needed, textures loading is sane (why should you load *everything* even stuff you don"t see) and its a better, more scaleable game.
Of course this costs a lot more because you write a lot of your own custom toolkits which require your coders to have more than a 1-year degree from an "online game design college."
"but the trees sway"
The reason it crawls on non-NASA hardware isn"t because the graphics are phenomenal, the world is bigger, or they are using technology from the future. It is because of a poor, design decision to use EZ mode technology and a drop-in game engine solution and add models to it. Sounds like someone was in a hurry.
Solution: Rewrite the game from scratch, use OpenGL, write or modify an existing OpenGL engine like Q3A/ET/etc. if you do not want to make your own. Wala! No zoning needed, textures loading is sane (why should you load *everything* even stuff you don"t see) and its a better, more scaleable game.
Of course this costs a lot more because you write a lot of your own custom toolkits which require your coders to have more than a 1-year degree from an "online game design college."
"but the trees sway"
Sounds like they are just going to let "time" solve the technology problem. However, time will be causing a subscriber problem.
The technology problem wouldn"t be that bad if you could just throw a new video card at it.
The technology problem wouldn"t be that bad if you could just throw a new video card at it.
Yeah done all the software stuff i can (clean/new etc), audigy4 soundcard. Would love to upgrade the mobo/cpu but my card is agp...so that means a new video card...and my ram would need an upgrade for the new mobo and for all of that new stuff I"d need a new PSU...so basically it"s a brand new system in full, probably a $1.5k-$2k spend (aussie dollars) all to play a $60 game. Can you imagine me explaining that to my missus?Jedite said:
Is VG good enough to make you want to upgrade? Are people playing the game asking themselves "Man this game is good but it would be the fucking win if I got some new hardware?"
1- Dude, you have a 3 year old PC (2003-2004?) and you complain that a 2007 game runs poorly on it? Was that sarcasm?The Bog said:
2- I can run this at medium on a p4 2.8, 1GB, 7800GS AGP and I get none of the crap you mention. You review games and can"t make your PC run like it"s supposed to?
3- Have you even played the game? Compairing this to EQ2 must be sarcasm. The feel of the world and the graphics in EQ2 aren"t there at all.
4- Comparing this to other games "you can run fine" is pretty dumb. When Doom 3 came out, many systems couldn"t run it but they "could run other games that came out just fine". Unless you"re a grandmother surfing the net, after 3+ years, it"s time to upgrade your shit, duh.
This is what i was talking about; i know my system is a complete piece of shite, but i don"t expect to run any recent game above resolutions i used 4 years ago. Problem is, i got better framerates in Leisure Suit Larry on my 486 SX 66.chackle said:
Is there a way to turn spell effects off completely? I"m surprised it"s not an option in the menu. I don"t really need all that pretty flying around when I"m running at single digit frames.
Why the fuck would any sane person shell out 2 grand+ to experience a mediocre, horrendously incomplete game on barely acceptable settings? Especially considering the alternatives in the (saturated) MMO market.
And you"re off your rocker if you think you could convince half a million people to essentially buy a 2 thousand dollar video game.
And you"re off your rocker if you think you could convince half a million people to essentially buy a 2 thousand dollar video game.
Saving as JPG drops the quality too much, it should be saving JPG at 100-90% quality when you take a SS. People posting screens from VG without changing to PNG in the .ini file are creating ugly looking shots that don"t do the game justice.
When you compare VG, side by side, to current offerings I think you are going to have a tough time justifying the entire "upgrade to play" concept. You can talk all day long about whats "under the hood", but the actual end result (animations, the "plastic look", some of the models, etc) just isn"t stellar; it just doesn"t justify running out and dropping 2.5k on a top-of-the-line PC.Aradune Mithara said:
Daelos
Guarding the guardians
- 219
- 58
I spent ?600.Samflam said:
I am having a blast - it"s the most fun I"ve had in any MMOG since I got hooked on EQ1 many years ago. The sceneries and atmosphere in the game is fantastic - I am frequently running around and having to stop because - gosh, it"s just beautiful! The content is plentiful, and I"ve not had any problems finding level appropriate fun quests or mobs to kill. The lore is interesting, and delivered in a novel and fun vehicle (diplomacy).
My class (sorcerer) plays really well - like the paper cannon I like my DPS casters to be. Plenty of big numbers and tactics involved in making sure I don"t die in the process. Class interaction is just starting to open up for me - I had a conversation with a blood mage yesterday about some of his spells, and how they will help sorcerers spamming Chaos Volley barrages... every class combination plays out differently, which I find particularly exciting.
I hardly ever encounter bugs or anything that strikes me as incomplete. Yesterday I was doing diplomacy and during the conversation the NPC"s name was replaced with "npcname" in one location. That"s the last bug I can remember seeing for days... weeks even. I can"t remember the last time I encountered a bug that was not just cosmetic.
I am getting perfectly acceptable FPS. (As said before, a steady 35+ FPS when adventuring).
EQ2? Played it - enjoyed it, but it wasn"t my thing. Played two characters to level 50+, and although I had fun in bursts there was something missing.
WoW? Tried it (would say played it, but I quit before level 40), but I just couldn"t get past the Game-iness of if. I felt strongly from the beginning that I was playing a group of pixels that was placed on rails through some "quests" that were only really just masking mob-kill-grinding. I never had the urge to explore.
Eve Online? Great game. If I was 18 and didn"t have work, children and a family to support and could dedicate the hours that are needed to learn the vast numbers of scissor-rock-paper combinations of ships and weaponry I"d still be playing (as it is I left it at 3 mill sp or so).
(I am not hardcore. Most nights I play for 60-90 minutes, some nights and weekends for 3 hours at a time. This still allows me to make meaningful progression in Vanguard every time I log on. )
Saturated? I can think of 5 MMOG game concepts in 5 minutes that I"d play and subscribe to.
if you literally need to spend $2000 to get VG to run decently, that means your current gaming box is such a peice of shit that i hardly doubt you could run WoW or EQ2 without some performance issues. And forget running any of the other single person games coming out that are performance oriented. Also, just how long do you think you"ll be able to not upgrade a PC like that to keep up with current games?Samflam said:
Yes i think Sigil needs to continue to address performance issues, should be a top priority, but let"s not exaggerate the problem.
Box : 30? (No Name) Power : 50? (Fortron Green) HDD : 50? (Hitachi 160GB)
MB : 50? (Asrock AM2) CPU : 80? (X2-3800) RAM : 130? (2GB Corsair Value Select)
GPU : 160? (X1950Pro 256MB)
TOTAL = 550? will run 1600x1200 (22 Wide) in "Medium" at 30-40FPS
You could even get Sub500? deals with some luck.
MB : 50? (Asrock AM2) CPU : 80? (X2-3800) RAM : 130? (2GB Corsair Value Select)
GPU : 160? (X1950Pro 256MB)
TOTAL = 550? will run 1600x1200 (22 Wide) in "Medium" at 30-40FPS
You could even get Sub500? deals with some luck.