So much for Vanguard

On Mon, 08 May 2006 09:26:33 -0400, KDragon <nospam.TakeThisOut@nospam.org> wrote:

>Well, I "was" looking forward to Vanguard, but now that SOE has "arranged" to
>take it over, no way... I'll never play a SOE run game again, ever.


So I'm thinking most of you are not really thinking this through and
are just on the "I hate SOE" kool-aid.

It's still the same people that brought us EQ, in it's original and
brilliant form.

It's still the same people who wanted to do their own thing and make a
game that they would be proud of, even if it meant slipping ship dates
until they felt it was ready.

It's still the same people who want to make video games, not worry
about marketing and packaging and distribution and everything else
that goes along with selling the game.

If you thought Vanguard was going to be the cat's meow before, why
think differently now just because the distributor is changing? And
mind you, read carefully because that IS all that's different.

~F
 >> Stay informed about: So much for Vanguard 

"Faeandar" <mr_castalot.RemoveThis@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:knbv52ldtth7rut0usbla06dg1l5rffsk1@4ax.com...
> On Mon, 08 May 2006 09:26:33 -0400, KDragon <nospam.RemoveThis@nospam.org> wrote:
>
> >Well, I "was" looking forward to Vanguard, but now that SOE has
"arranged" to
> >take it over, no way... I'll never play a SOE run game again, ever.
>
>
> So I'm thinking most of you are not really thinking this through and
> are just on the "I hate SOE" kool-aid.
>
> It's still the same people that brought us EQ, in it's original and
> brilliant form.
>
> It's still the same people who wanted to do their own thing and make a
> game that they would be proud of, even if it meant slipping ship dates
> until they felt it was ready.
>
> It's still the same people who want to make video games, not worry
> about marketing and packaging and distribution and everything else
> that goes along with selling the game.
>
> If you thought Vanguard was going to be the cat's meow before, why
> think differently now just because the distributor is changing? And
> mind you, read carefully because that IS all that's different.
>
> ~F

I am still ticked off about the spyware on sony cd's and am wondering what
other malware they will use.
I am currently in the "I ain't buying anything with a Sony tag" camp
 >> Stay informed about: So much for Vanguard 

"Don Sly" <tdNOslySPAM.RemoveThis@PLEASEsasktel.net> wrote in message
news:125vd9kc3vjai46@corp.supernews.com...
>
> "Faeandar" <mr_castalot.RemoveThis@yahoo.com> wrote in message
> news:knbv52ldtth7rut0usbla06dg1l5rffsk1@4ax.com...
>> On Mon, 08 May 2006 09:26:33 -0400, KDragon <nospam.RemoveThis@nospam.org> wrote:
>>
>
> I am still ticked off about the spyware on sony cd's and am wondering what
> other malware they will use.
> I am currently in the "I ain't buying anything with a Sony tag" camp
>

Is so called spyware is only to stop hackers all MMO's use it. The program
is going out and making sure you are honest and not using banned bots. And
glad to see Sony take over Vanguard since much higher quality will come out
not.
 >> Stay informed about: So much for Vanguard 

This message is not archived
 >> Stay informed about: So much for Vanguard 

On Tue, 09 May 2006 09:38:11 -0500, mary.TakeThisOut@perfect.com (Mary Poppins)
wrote:

>mr_castalot@yahoo.com (Faeandar) wrote in
><i6pv521qtl498j4qqk4o52c8dgebjs12fl.TakeThisOut@4ax.com>:
>
>>Maybe Sigil goes bigger than Lineage and they buy Sony.
>
>You're not rational. SOE will always be bigger than Sigil. SOE is Sigil's
>publisher. Do you even have a clue as to what that means? These will be
>SOE servers and boxes. It's clear you have zero clue as to how things
>work.

It may not be likely but it is rational. Companies leap-frog other
companies all the time. It could happen was all I was pointing out.
Just like Sony could buy out Sigil, more likely I admit but either one
is possible.

The servers will be hosted by SOE, but the game is still Sigil's, at
least for now.

~F
 >> Stay informed about: So much for Vanguard 

"KDragon" <nospam DeleteThis @nospam.org> wrote in message
news:YFH7g.7296$M31.49148@news20.bellglobal.com...
> Well, I "was" looking forward to Vanguard, but now that SOE has "arranged"
> to take it over, no way... I'll never play a SOE run game again, ever.

I guess they need someone big to run the game servers. Surely they could
have found someone else tho. Sony's bad name in both online games and CD
marketing is likely to spell their demise.

I for one wont be touching it now.

RIP Vanguard.
 >> Stay informed about: So much for Vanguard 

On Tue, 09 May 2006 17:42:19 +0100, Tony <tony@[127.0.0.1]> wrote:

>Why don't people just let it get published, take a look at the reviews
>and possibly the demo and then decide.

Why don't you give all your money and belongings to a tv
evanglist(sp)? Because its know they (mostly*) are frauds and won't be
using your money to 'help the needy' unless said needy is blonde
36-24-36 and is called Candie.

The people who say they aren't going to play Vanguard now that Soe is
in the picture most likely have had bad experiences with Sony in the
past and don't want to fund that kind of service any further.
 >> Stay informed about: So much for Vanguard 

I want nothing to do with anything SoE gets it's talons into. No way
I support a company that changes how a class is played 10 months after
release(Warlocks in EQ2)...or lie to their customers and say a world
wide quest to unlock a race is in game...only to find out later the
quest wasn't there and people wasted hours and hours and hours trying
to find/solve it. To hell with that company. It's no wonder WoW is
crushing them.

Silt
 >> Stay informed about: So much for Vanguard 

On Wed, 10 May 2006 12:03:50 -0400, KDragon <nospam RemoveThis @nospam.org> wrote:

>He's equating SOE to TV evangelists. Promises, promises, send money, promises,
>promises... Never deliver on promises.

Yeah thats what I meant... really I did!

/em sends KDragon 5000pp
 >> Stay informed about: So much for Vanguard 

"Tony" <tony@[127.0.0.1]> wrote in message
news:4460c66c$0$650$bed64819@news.gradwell.net...
>> I for one wont be touching it now.
>> RIP Vanguard.
>
> I love these posts. These and the 'omg it's Brad I'm playing it whatever
> it looks like' posts are two extremes of the same string.
>
> Why don't people just let it get published, take a look at the reviews and
> possibly the demo and then decide.
>

You mean like the people who didnt learn their lesson from EQ1 and spent
their cash on EQ2 to later get shafted
 >> Stay informed about: So much for Vanguard 

LOL been playing EQ2 for 15 months and when is the so called shafted going
to start.
It is better than WoW, Guildwars, City of Villian, SWG, and D&D online just
to name
a few. If anything EQ2 has got better over the past 6 months and tons of
people coming
back. We found the grass was not greener on the other side.

"> You mean like the people who didnt learn their lesson from EQ1 and spent
> their cash on EQ2 to later get shafted
 >> Stay informed about: So much for Vanguard 

This message is not archived
 >> Stay informed about: So much for Vanguard 

On Tue, 09 May 2006 00:51:47 GMT, Faeandar <mr_castalot.TakeThisOut@yahoo.com>
wrote:

>Maybe. Maybe Sigil goes bigger than Lineage and they buy Sony. The
>rationale for Sony purposely blowing the distro is flawed. They are
>hurting for revenue. Vanguard is the most anticipated game in
>history, to date. Sigil is very unlikely to go under since it's a
>small dev house. More likely Sony eats it hard if Vanguard flops,
>much harder than Sigil.

When EQ originally came out, it had very little competition. Now it
seems like everyone and his cousin is releasing an MMO. So far, WoW
is the only game that's been a megahit successor to EQ. It's
certainly not impossible that Vanguard will be that next megahit, but
the odds are pretty slim.

As far as "Vanguard is the most anticipated game in history", would
you mind giving a reference for that?
 >> Stay informed about: So much for Vanguard