[MUD-Dev2] [OFF-TOPIC] A rant against Vanguard reviews and rants

[Sean Howard]

"Mike Rozak" <Mike at mxac.com.au> wrote:

> The fundamental flaws in vanguard are:
>
> 1) Been there, done that. I've played many-many DikuMMORPGs and CRPGs
> where you run around killing monsters and making armor.

I think at this point, that's what mass market MMORPGs are. It's a genre,
and you can't hold a genre you don't like against a game.

> 2) Been there, done that, with better specific implimentations, such as
> WoW.

Interesting. What specifically in WoW?

> In movie terms, the design error is like producing a movie with
> excellent special effects, but lousy acting.

Hey! I like Star Wars! :)


> 1) It's a valley! Where are my sweeping vistas that are USPs for
> vanguard?

Start a different character. The middle eastern guys start on top of a
mountain overlooking a port city by the sea.


> 3) This valley has elves standing around... that's all they do.
> ... did I mention: they just stand around. They look real (except that
> they don't move), and it's very obvious that they're vending machines.

This is the problem with every MMORPG I've ever played. Some MMORPGs try
to give the illusion of moving around, but then you'd just complain that
they just walked in circles all day and night. I think you are too busy
holding Vanguard against Vanguard that you never really bother
experiencing the real flaws.

> 4) I talk to a shopkeeper for a quest, and he (or she?) spew some
> standard pre-recorded nonesense about "Are you lost?" or "If you only
> knew the power I had" that has nothing to do with the quest.

Again, you are holding the genre against a genre game. But, I will say
that the diplomacy quests change that quite a bit.

> 5) Of course, my quests are to kill foozles, but not in any new and
> unique way.

What class did you play? It matters. Plus, I should also point out that
you are a level 1 character in a newbie area. Your options aren't exactly
overflowing. I just can't shake the feeling that you don't like the genre.

> 7) For my second character, I do a short diplomacy training tutorial. The
> game mechanics seem interesting, but it's not really integrated into the
> NPC interaction. Instead, the game is abstracted into a card game, and
> described as a card game... Why didn't they abstract combat into a card
> game too?

I really think you should stick witht he diplomacy stuff. The card game
remains simple, but the lore/interactions become more complex and
interesting. As much as you seem to rag on Vanguard for being traditional,
when it actually does something new and interesting, you don't seem too
willing to try it out.

> And while hobbit holes with round doors are expected, they're a little
> bit cliche, as well as the elven "city" being in giant tree from the
> first character.

Man, you know what I hate? Elves! And swords! Why can't they make games
with, I don't know, space ships and laser guns? Again, you are critiquing
a genre, not Vanguard.

> Even my short stay in the hobbit village uncovered sillyness: One NPC
> wanted some will-o-whisps killed for their fairy dust. Another one
> wanted them killed because they were scaring his cow (which was wanding
> nonchalently among the wisps). I got annoyed when WoW made me kill blue
> harpies, then green ones, then red ones. I got really annoyed killing
> the exact same monster in the exact same killing fields.

Those two activities don't seem exclusive. Perhaps you could've done them
simultaneously to double your reward for the same activity?

> 1) Everyone who plays vanguard has killed more than enough foozles in
> their life, and cast more than enough fireballs.

That's not a complaint levied against Vanguard. More against the fact that
Vanguard is a fantasy EQ-styled MMORPG. I've been playing online games
going back to when I was in 7th grade (I'm almost 30 now), and I'm still
not tired the same cliches when they are done right.

If you wanted to argue that Vanguard could've done them better, that's a
discussion I'd like to hear. Vanguard is a prototypical MMORPG in many
ways and a discussion about it would be a discussion about the cliches and
design patterns of online RPGs going WAY back. Think of how productive
such a discussion would be, even if it was the ten millionth time someone
had it! But that doesn't seem to be the discussion you want to have. You
just want to blame Vanguard for being Vanguard, and that doesn't sit well
with me.

> 2) Within the first 30 minutes, I should have seen an awe-inspiring
> vista.

Man, fixated much? Try other character types. It doesn't make sense for a
fox to start on a mountain, or a hobbit to start in the clouds, does it?

> 3) Within the first 30 minutes, I should have been given an inflatable
> raft and started enjoying Vanguard's USP ships.

Maybe not, but you will get a mount at level 10.

> 4) Within the first 30 minutes, I should have had a ride on a flying
> beasty,

I don't know. Flying mounts were a huge selling point of WoW's expansion,
but if you start from level 1, you still won't be seeing them for a while.
Flying mounts and ships are but two of a great many selling points, the
rest of which you can experience within the first 30 minutes. Gotta have
something to look forward to.

> 5) If Vanguard had spent only half the money on the combat sub-game
> (...) and put the other half of the money into dipomacy, they'd actually
> have a unique and interesting feature.

Play diplomacy past the tutorial. I might not defend all of Vanguard.
There are things I don't like about it (crafting sucks). But the diplomacy
really is a great new feature, and if you spent some time to learn about
stuff like civic diplomacy or some of the plans they have for the future,
I think you'll see that it is far deeper and more impressive than it seems
after five minutes with it.


> 6) NPCs should be signficiantly improved, as per Oblivion.

Not reasonable in an online game. There is, perhaps, a really lengthy and
interesting discussion as to why, but I'll just say that what you are
asking for is ultimately unimportant and not worth the effort. Remember,
you aren't alone. There are thousands of other players online with you.
NPCs need only be predictable and reliable, not realistic.

-- 
Sean Howard