Was Microsoft's vision for Vanguard Vista exclusive? [Update 1]
by Conrad Quilty-Harper 
{ May 16th 2006 at 1:30PM }
Sigil Games, developers of the upcoming MMORPG Vanguard: Saga of Heroes, shocked quite a few people by announcing that they were buying the publishing rights from Microsoft so that they could co-publish the title with Sony Online Entertainment. We've already provided some speculation about what the "varying visions and direction for the title's development" between Microsoft and Sigil were, but a tipster (who asked to remain unnamed) from E3 provides another possible reason for the split. Our tipster claims to have spoken to several developers working at Sigil and at another development company that has Microsoft as a publisher -- we'd say the meat of the tip is on the same level of credibility as someone saying that the Government is tapping your phone (yes, I made a political joke -- the first comment to judge my political affiliation wins my apathy!).
According to our tipster, Microsoft intended to make Vanguard a Vista-exclusive title and Sigil didn't like it. The fact that XP users wouldn't have been able to play the game (limiting the user base quite drastically) and Windows Vista's notoriously slippery release date being the obvious disadvantages of such a move on the part of Sigil. If true, the motivation for Microsoft would have been that the title would be the first MMO to take advantage of Live Anywhere, Microsoft's online games platform which blends Xbox 360, PC and mobile phone devices: more Vista sales = profit!
It's credible that Microsoft wanted to use Vanguard as the first MMO to work with Live Anywhere but that Sigil didn't want its game to be Microsoft's guinea pig and therefore bought the publishing rights. With Vista around the corner, Microsoft wants to provide as much incentive for gamers to upgrade and by making big name games playable exclusively on Vista it can gain that incentive. At the very least we get a kick out of discussing the vague PR explanations of the reasons behind leaving a game's publisher during the beta stage. It's impossible for us to believe that simple, meaningless "varying visions" caused this massive, late in the game move.
Update 1: Brad McQuaid (Sigil CEO, creator of MMORPG Everquest) responds by saying "false rumor", but Joystiq commentator Jack Slater cleverly rebukes: "personally I would just deny everything if I was him, as there is no legal obligation for me to tell the truth on the forums but there is likely a legal obligation to keep the reason for leaving Microsoft undisclosed." Meanwhile, Ctrl+Alt+Del daydreams about how the meeting between McQuiad, Microsoft and Sony went. Funny stuff.
Reader Comments (Page 1 of 1)
Joe Smith @ May 16th 2006 1:35PM
Seems more likely that the game was huge and slow and didn't look likely to be finished in this decade -- and that it wouldn't be competetive with WOW when it was done. From what I saw of the game at E3, I would believe this more than the Vista story.
Disclosed @ May 16th 2006 1:38PM
ALl you have to do is look to see at SOE's recent MMO's (Star Wars Galaxies) to see how crap they are. If you ask me SOny only wanted these publishing rights so they can show off to microsoft.
Jewzilla @ May 16th 2006 1:38PM
Dame su apathy, seor.
David @ May 16th 2006 2:06PM
Way to be cynical Joe Smith, despite what you may think not every MMO has to be neck and neck with WoW, and this game is almost definitely the opposite of WoW anyway. Plenty of people even consider World of Warcraft to be a cookie cutter 'entry' mmo and hardcore players move on to other games over time, and to an extent it's true. Vanguard appears to be for those hardcore players (hi, corpse runs?) and I believe will fill a nice niche market quite nicely when it's completed.
Christopher7xii @ May 16th 2006 2:53PM
I figured it was Vista exlusivity(now a word) the day they made the announced. I just thought it was obvious to everyone else.
As for not being WoW, thank god. Warcraft was fun for maybe 4 months. Everyone I know has quit it. Maybe they'll go back for the expansion if they add a drastic change of pace... that's doubtful though. There's no depth, challenge, or replay factor for WoW. You get 60 (two months tops), then you get your top end armor (another two months tops) and it's finished. You can cap out your two tradeskills fairly quickly in WoW, so then your only means of fun is twinking (which is fairly limited with level restrictions), and playing through with an alt of the other faction... since if you play through with the same faction you're going to do all the same quests and see all the exact same zones over again. The fact that you can solo all the way to 60 with relative comfort and speed with every class also diminishes it's fun factor. There is no need (aside from epic gear) to ever communicate or build relationships with other players in game... Oh yeah, and the auction house. Eitherway, kind of ruins the point of an MMO. No sense of fellow player...
Hopefully Vanguard fixes this, but according to CAD's Absath, it's just EQ2 by design. I hope that's a moments glance perspective though...
Patel @ May 16th 2006 3:46PM
"yes, I made a political joke -- the first comment to judge my political affiliation wins my apathy!)."
Oh let me guess
A 20 something male liberal democrat who has never work a 9 to 5 day in his life?
I win your apathy! Now that doesn't sound like you are 'paying your fair share'
Seriously another liberal in the press slaming the gov't on a GAME ARTICLE that has nothing to do with it. Yeah, and the media is not biased
sepll cehck @ May 16th 2006 4:18PM
Patel:
Due to the tone of the joke I would assume that he is a disenfranchised Republican wondering when small government will return...
Kendal @ May 16th 2006 5:38PM
#1, Why must every MMO be compared to WoW? I played the game for a good 6 months before I quit. The game gets boring, repetative, and has no sense of fellowship (as #5 pointed out).
WoW is a good entry level game to the genre, but it's not enough to keep you coming back for more. The only reason why it is so successfull IS because it's a entry level game and can be played by your average joe (Kind of the same strategy that Nintendo is going for with the Nintendo Wii).
Please, stop comparing every MMORPG to WoW, cause not every MMORPG is the same as it. That is a good thing if you ask me.
Always,
Kendal
Lonin @ May 16th 2006 7:14PM
"False rumor. So also is the one where they wanted us to make it Xbox 360."
-Aradune Mithara (Brad McQuaid)
http://www.silkyvenom.com/forums/showthread.php?t=3794
Labyrrinth @ May 16th 2006 7:39PM
Not sure who your source is, but according to Brad McQuaid, your source was misinformed
Here's a link where I blurbed your editorial. Brad's response is a couple of posts down
http://www.silkyvenom.com/forums/showthread.php?t=3794
Paul @ May 16th 2006 7:59PM
The game looks too crappy for Microsoft to publish anyways! It will die fast if it comes out for the PS3! MMO's are a waste of time. Unless you have no life.
Lonin @ May 16th 2006 8:51PM
- Ya, because we all know microsoft has never published a crappy game...
- It's not coming out for the PS3, as stated by the CEO of the company.
- Something like 20 million people worldwide have no lives apparently.
kmowine @ May 17th 2006 2:28AM
If Microsoft is trying to get a MMO to be Vista exclusive what hope do we have for Halo2 on the PC for us XP users?
Sarah @ May 17th 2006 3:05AM
Just because you play MMO's doesn't mean you don't have a life.... escapism is for people with busy lives too.
And I agree with Kmowine, I like XP so where does this leave us with future PC games? Grudgingly installing a new operating system because ours has just become obsolete I guess.
Markus Jury @ May 17th 2006 5:51AM
To #11: Then please explain why over 10 million people play MMO's?
As for Vanguard, it looks pretty good, but again, according to some sources it's just another EQ2. As for everything being compared to WoW, it's true that not everything should be compared to the game, but it actually isn't that bad, even later in the game, with maybe not a ton, but quite a bit of replayable content available. (BG's, expansion...)
Eric4x4 @ May 17th 2006 7:28AM
#14, you mean like Battlefield 2 for XP? I was a happy Win2k user until about two months ago. I grudgingly upgraded to XP so that I could get the "Download Only" Special Forces(initially) Euro Forces, and most likely Armoured Fury expansions. The downloader ONLY worked with XP. Grrrrreaaaaat...
Matt @ May 17th 2006 7:50AM
I find it hilarious that people like Patel think they have the cognizant ability to hypothesize a political affiliation yet have no problem with the "Big Brother" factor. By the way I am a 20 something democrat working on a PhD (science field) and I've never worked 9-5 day, more like 7am-7pm.
Sorry guys don't have a feel about Microsoft:)
Jack Slater @ May 17th 2006 12:11PM
To 16:
*Rant on*
The funny thing about PhD's is the average IQ of a doctor is only 115 because they are the only people stupid enough to continue going to school but intelligent enough to be able to. That, and you're willingness to work 12 hour days just reeks of misinformation and uneducated opinions.
*Rant off*
Actual Content in regards to the topic:
Do any of you really think that the CEO of a company would ever admit what the real reason is if they are keeping it under lock and key?
Personally I would just deny everything if I was him, as there is no legal obligation for me to tell the truth on the forums but there is likely a legal obligation to keep the reason for leaving microsoft undisclosed.
_GriM_
Mathematician
Ma7rix @ May 17th 2006 2:15PM
Not to get too off the topic, but I just wanted to point out a few things.
WoW and EQ# are fairly popular MMOs, therefore it is not out of the norm to hear these names crop up in a MMO comparison. Believe me, many people hear "WoW this...EQ that...WoW does this better, etc" almost as often as they will hear Chuck Norris jokes. You just have to grin and bear it.
Secondly, IIRC, WoW was made for the average gamer. Not the hardcore people. Hence why individuals who are considered "hardcore" tend to get bored quickly with such a game.
Thirdly, in reference to Vanguard: say no evil, speak no evil, hear no evil. I just hope it will be a refreshing MMORPG.
Fourthly, you can make friends in WoW if you want, Chris. Sure, you can level to 60 all by yourself, but you are correct. Where is the fun in that? There are 5-man instances . It is not an efficient way to level, but it's more fun than grinding.
I won't even touch upon your political joke, Mr. Quilty-Harper.
Cheers!
Vertigo @ May 17th 2006 2:37PM
Talk about reaching. This has got to be the stupidest rumor to date.
How dumb do you take worldwide gamers anyway? Vanguard is obviously not done and MS was getting irritated. When the contract came up for renewal, MS said good-bye. Sigil was probably more like good-riddance, too. They knew they had SOE to fall back on.
Is this really any big revelation? Any moron could figure out that a contract was drawn, it had a due date and if it wasn't met, we'll cya later. Does anyone really believe Sigil didn't prepare for the day when MS would put the pressure on if Vanguard wasn't delivered?
Further proof is in the fact that game isn't near done. MS sensed a stall. They opted not to renew and probably because technologies are moving too fast not to be publishing NOW. The more Vanguard waits to be done, the more it's going to have problems competing with what's in the lineup. So packaging it together with an All Access subscription would make better sense because it's not going to be done enough to compete on it's own.
This makes a hell of a lot more sense then some stupid Vista theory.
Conrad Quilty-Harper @ May 17th 2006 3:09PM
Vertigo, Sigil bought the rights from Microsoft. It's not as if Microsoft just dumped Sigil because they couldn't deliver.
Talgrath @ May 17th 2006 10:06PM
Sounds about right to me. Microsoft is trying to force Vista down the throats of gamers; Sigil just didn't want to take the fall if/when Vista tanks. I mean, when was the last time you heard of a developer BUYING BACK the rights to a game in order to go to a different publisher? I don't think I've heard that one in some time, and it's a pretty sure sign that something more then "varying visions" is the problem.
Robs @ May 18th 2006 1:13AM
I have a feeling that there are many major reasons why the move was made to buyt he rights. The whole vista thing is a no brainer, sony also is no stupid and will take advantage of VG as a title under their belt that will not be viewed as a let down. As far as comparing it to wow... PERSONALLY I think its a joke. Wow is just fancy UI and mods, consistant artwork to the warcraft realms. If you played a real MMORPG and could click an "arcade" mode... wow would be it. I played wow for 2 years, and was in beta. It provided me fun yes... as well as large time sinks, mass drama from the blizzard fan boy clubs, and the craving for VG to be released.
All in all Sigil would probably be happy if we all jsut beleived it was mostly them wanting to do whats best, and provide the best for us as prospect buyers :)
X_in_the_corner @ May 18th 2006 3:09AM
It is a sad day when indeed we have to be forced to progress on in life. I mean can you remember DOS ??? Oh the day when "we will never need more than 640KB memory". I can understand how some feel about wanting to stay on Win2k, hell i stayed on Win98 for a long time before going to Win2k and then WinXP. You need to face facts though ... who in their right minds is going to develop for yestersdays technology? The moment you try to keep that technology in mind you stunt the growth of the future technologies. And then you have hardware vendors as well to consider. Just be glad that Microsoft hasnt fully gone DRM in conjunction with Intel (yes another old rumor) that is the fear of the next Microsoft release ... Big Brother (Bill Gates) will be watching then.
So lets try this theory, Microsoft tells Sigil to either come join them in moving forward and Sigil says "Gamers wont join in the march" (which is true, and the reason Linux is constantly gaining fans) so in order to make the game release Sigil just resorted to their "Back up plan". So you could basically see the quote of "Varying Visions" as partly true.
Matt @ May 18th 2006 8:27AM
It's funny and sad that people like Jack use derogatory comments about others to make up for their own inferiority complex. Also my IQ is tested at circa 145 (plus or minus 5 depending on test) and the 12 hour days are so that I can finish grad school and get a job making twice as much as you.
Servius @ May 18th 2006 9:37AM
Yeah Jack, somone who's getting their PHD and working 12 hour days for it is stupid and misinformed, yet Patel thinks somone whos never worked a 9-5 job in their life is also stupid and misinformed? How about you guys make up your mind. For some reason conservatives in this nation are fighting a war aganist education and educated people. Somone who is getting thier PHD and working 12 hour days should be seen as the model of the American Dream. Not as a sap.
Kiasyn @ May 19th 2006 3:10AM
X_in_the_corner: Doesn't mean it can't be backwards-compatiable.
RPGPorkster @ May 19th 2006 7:08AM
If MS gets rid of DRM being at the heart of Vista, more people would want to goto it, else the hobbyists wont touch it. Most people will just stick with XP, or goto Apple or Linux with visualisation to run Windows games.
The only temptation will be DirectX10 and maybe WinFS if it's later put in.
Leareth @ May 21st 2006 2:13PM
Political talk really has no place in this conversation unless it is about the ESRB and the current discussions on making regulations on games more strict.
As far as the Vista rumor goes, it actually does make sense. While I won't say that is the actual reason, I could definately see Microsoft using such a highly anticipated release as fuel to push one of their other products. It isn't like Mircrosoft is known for their kindness and serving the public. But one way or the other it isn't going to happen, so who cares?
Sigil is releasing a 64 bit client and a 32 bit client so those of you who do want Vista can get it and others who don't can still play.
The only thing I don't want to see, is console gamers having the ability to play with PC gamers at the same time. If you want to offer them the ability to play the game fine, but give them their own server with their own 'dumbed' down UI.