[MUD-Dev2] [NEWS] Sigil / Vanguard fallout ... the ex-employee interview

[Michael Zenke]

On 5/18/07, Mike Sellers <mike at onlinealchemy.com> wrote:
>
> I'm not surprised Vanguard hasn't done better given how squarely it sits
> in
> the long dark shadow of WoW, but I'm sorry to see the team flame out like
> this.  What I'm still trying to figure out is why Sony bought the game,
> especially when they have EQ2, which would seem to be a cannibalistic
> competitor.


In conversations I've had with various folks at SOE, the answer to the
question of 'Why purchase Vanguard' seems to be 'because we can'. They paid
pennies on the dollar to the original investors, and walked away with a
multi-million dollar MMOG for a fraction of the price. SOE never fronted
that initial cost, so all they care about is making back their investment in
the publishing deal. I believe they may have already done that. With
Vanguard firmly under their umbrella those subscription fees will be enough
to fund the dev team they're assigning to plug the holes in this particular
leaky barge, with enough money left over for SOE's bank accounts to grow
larger. EQ2 is only growing in popularity at the moment, and Kunark is going
to net them more players this fall. With Vanguard in flux as regards actual
purpose and design, SOE can refocus the game as 'hardcore', and give players
a choice of two newish fantasy MMOGs: the easy way (EQ2) or the hard way
(Vanguard).

The original investors write the whole thing off, SOE profits, Microsoft
avoided a potential PR explosion (essentially the last delayed impact of the
Ed Fries days), and Vanguard players can rest assured that someone with the
cash to do it is now working on their game. The only people who really lose
are McQuaid and any folks that didn't get picked up for the move to SOE.

Now, this is just the why here. Whether or not they SHOULD have done this is
a completely different story.

- Michael Zenke