Vanguard: Saga of Heroes

I say Vanguard: Saga of Heroes should be without monthly fee. In that way a lot more people will buy the game and play it. Like Guild Wars.

Originally posted by robby5403

I say Vanguard: Saga of Heroes should be without monthly fee. In that way a lot more people will buy the game and play it. Like Guild Wars.

Let me correct this poll for you my friend........

I say Vanguard: Saga of Heroes should be without monthly fee because I really like it, but my mom says I can't use her credit card - I can't play!! If should be free like Guild Wars.

........I play games with fees myself but this doesn't worth paying. The game is still unfinished and had one of the worsest MMo scores of the last years........

---

Originally posted by robby5403 I say Vanguard: Saga of Heroes should be without monthly fee. In that way a lot more people will buy the game and play it. Like Guild Wars.

---

---

.......I play games with fees myself but this doesn't worth paying. The game is still unfinished and had one of the worsest MMo scores of the last years........

---

I don't understand how one can go on about how a game isn't any good while suggesting ways to get more people to buy the game. Why buy it if it isn't any good?

That aside, I think that Vanguard is one of the best mmorpgs out there, and I think that there are a lot of people playing it who would agree that it is more than worth the money.

The biggest problem facing Vanguard was its poor launch. I don't play it right now, because I'm broke, but I wouldn't want it to be free so I could play either. They need to advertise aggressively, and find a way to market a relaunch that makes the game feel new.

---

Originally posted by robby5403
........I play games with fees myself but this doesn't worth paying. The game is still unfinished and had one of the worsest MMo scores of the last years........

---

then sony would probably spend less money in its development. but how can you compare guildwars to vanguard. guild wars is more like aoc with all the instances and embodied avantars.

Lol the only money put into VG by SoE is FROM the SUBS, take the subs away and the devs get moved away from the game and it dies.

Vanguard really should be free-to-play, but only if the revenue earned was microtransactions based instead of ad-based.

Vanguard I think would be perfect for something like purchaseable codes that open up content in-game; like new Diplomacy cards, new tools for and ways to clear complications in Crafting, housing items, and  even Adventuring items would fly.

Since Vanguard's primarily a PvE game with the small exception of it's alternative ruleset, what does it matter if there's a real money market fo less than best items and skills?

Particular style of free-to-play aside, at the moment Vanguard's stuck in a catch-22 of needing more subscribers to afford more developers and content, and needing more developers and content to attract more subscribers.

Vanguard is stuck in its state, the subscribers of the market have already decided to pass it up. It's two years old now; even MMOs that've been on their 2nd and 3rd expansion and have put out much larger free content updates than Vanguard begin to peak in what their subscriber count will ever be.
 
So going free-to-play wouldn't be a terrible idea if the revenue potential was really there. I imagine it would be lookin' at past examples. Didn't Archlord release to the same five-digit subscriber acclaim, but went free-to-play and ended up wih 500k some players in a relatively short amount of time?

Hopefully it's something they'll consider. I imagine it's their next plan after Isle of Dawn since there'll be nothing else for 'em to attempt. That and SOE's already cited wanting to bring it's subscription revenue earned from all it's games down to a single-digit percentile, so I doubt they'd be adverse to it.

Originally posted by sepher

 

Hopefully it's something they'll consider. I imagine it's their next plan after Isle of Dawn since there'll be nothing else for 'em to attempt. That and SOE's already cited wanting to bring it's subscription revenue earned from all it's games down to a single-digit percentile, so I doubt they'd be adverse to it.

I really much wan tto see where they said they wanted to bring down their subscription based revenue down to (whatever procentialy) by plainly lowering the subscriptions procentile.

I would want to remember it was to be done by expanding on the other model.