NEWS FLASH: New Publisher for VSoH - Page 3

Taronn Anvilmarr · 05-09-2006, 06:08 PM

lol

i just gotta say i havent had such a good laugh as ive had reading all the posts on this subject.

some people are just so funny when they are not trying to be.

Arctic_Slicer · 05-10-2006, 05:15 AM

Honestly I don't know why the doomsdayers are so upset by this. Reading the official statement makes it abundantly clear that this deal was made to the benefit of Sigil games and theirs games. More importantly this allows "Vanguard: Saga of Heroes" to benefit from a longer beta without the worry having the publisher for it to release prematurely. This means many of those "may not make it by release features" will now have time to make it in.

Also even more exciting is the fact that we have an official release period beyond the vague "sometime in 2006" we used to get. According to the official press release about the partnership with Sony on Sigil Games official site. The game is to be released this winter. If we go by Gregorian calendar dates this means sometime between December 21, 2006 and March 21 2007. Given the fact that having more time in beta is one of causes behind this deal having a release date set in Q1 of 2007 now seems like a likely possibility. Who knows maybe Brad is going to try for another historic March 16th date like that of the original "EverQuest".

Honestly I think the news about allakhazam selling out to IGE is far more disturbing than this could ever be.

Pirotess · 05-10-2006, 02:06 PM

Its really a shame about Allakhazams. Even if nothing changes about their site, the stigma of being owned by IGEs parent company is going to hurt them some.

Aredhel · 05-10-2006, 02:49 PM

yeah. I have yet to hear people complain about gmail having IGE and other such sites on their sidebar...

And, as much as I love Penny Arcade, the newest strip did/does really bother me.

Pirotess · 05-10-2006, 03:08 PM

Rofl. Thats a pretty funny strip. You have to be able to laugh at things eventually.

Jaeth · 05-10-2006, 06:04 PM

I guess I'll have to check into this. My initial reaction was "uh-oh, not good", but having read the whole press release it's more like "well, smart move".

Greymain · 05-10-2006, 06:44 PM

I would be far happier if I knew who Sigils new backers are. Vanguard we are told is a $10 million plus budget game. Sigil has a large development team who need paying and it aint coming out of Brads piggy bank.

SOE is not a charity they will want cash for their services and hardware. The critical factor is just how long can Sigil afford to wait for return on their investment?

I really do want Vanguard to succeed. I really do want a proper Beta leading to a solid game. I am not certain that the announcement of the buy back is really good news.

Arctic_Slicer · 05-10-2006, 10:27 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Greymain

I would be far happier if I knew who Sigils new backers are. Vanguard we are told is a $10 million plus budget game. Sigil has a large development team who need paying and it aint coming out of Brads piggy bank.

SOE is not a charity they will want cash for their services and hardware. The critical factor is just how long can Sigil afford to wait for return on their investment?

I really do want Vanguard to succeed. I really do want a proper Beta leading to a solid game. I am not certain that the announcement of the buy back is really good news.

It actually wouldn't surprise me if some of it wasn't out of Brad's own bank account. Brad has said mulitple times that he is very well blessed and could retire at any time without working another day in his life. However he loves making video games so he continues to do so even though he doesn't have to. As such it wouldn't be too farfetched for him to put up some of his own money for this.

Anyway it is very unlikely that Sigil will disclose too much information about their backers at this point if ever simply because most such aggrements are ususally confidential. Other than the fact that Brad said the money wasn't coming from Sony there is little real information about the subject.

RiKohran · 05-11-2006, 04:53 AM

man that stinks SOE hates gamers Van Guard was looking so good up untill now oh well thats more money i can spend on rpg books SOE can ruin that for me

SOE i fling poo in your direction

Arctic_Slicer · 05-11-2006, 08:14 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by RiKohran

man that stinks SOE hates gamers Van Guard was looking so good up untill now oh well thats more money i can spend on rpg books SOE can ruin that for me

SOE i fling poo in your direction

Can you really say that Microsoft is any better when it comes to their customers? How about EA games or Vivendi Universal? Honestly of all of the choices available I think Sony is best company out there. Plus considering the fact that the President of sigil and excutive producer of "Vanguard: Saga of Heroes" was behing SoE's most popular game along with the games first 3 expansions. He is also a good friend of SoE's president. Why wouldn't he choose to have SoE publish his game?

You illinformed hate is only going to cause to miss out on some great video games and I find that really sad. Sure there are plenty of people who think that "EverQuest" was better in the pre-pop era that Brad and Jeff were responsible for but there are many people who still play the game many of which who think the game is better now than it ever was. It's all about perspective. Sure SoE has made many mistakes but honestly I think SoE gets blamed for alot of things simply because they are in the hot seat. Really though most of the real problem with SoE are in relationship to the "Star Wars: Galaxies" game but most of those descisions were likely forced upon Sony by the people at Lucas Arts so it really isn't fair stick SoE with all of the blame there.

There is an article I think you should read on the "Magic: The Gathering" website that talks about the "golden age" theory. People get attached to the way the game is when they first learn to play. Quite Frankly people are afraid of change. Anyway his article I linked below is very good on the subject.

http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=mtgcom/daily/mc6

Quote:

Originally Posted by Matt Covotta

The theory is that Magic is a personal and precious thing to those who play it,
and the strong feelings they have for this amazing game can warp their objectivity.