First off, swg went down the drain because of SOE. LucasArts had the final say in yay or nay, but were as far as I know never the main game designers, at least the point where everything really went down the drain was were SOE took the reins over more than before.
Lucas Arts has a nasty reputation for dictating to game developers working on Star Wars properties. Basically, if the game play doesnt have an action/adventure feel to it they will insist on the developer changing it even if it doesnt fit with the style of game. If the developer refuses they threaten to pull the license altogether and leave the developer hanging with a produce they can never release.
This is why Biowear refused to do a KOTOR sequel. You can even see a lot of this in the original KOTOR. The racing mini games, the real time action that forced you to constantly hit pause to get a more suitable game play. Etc.
As I said elsewhere SOE didnt take the reigns from Verant. Verant started off as a Sony development studio and was always owned by Sony. Sony simply reabsorbed them and changed their name to SOE, it was the same company with the same developers and the same people running it.
SoE is responsible for the mess with SWG, just as it was with its own EQ2. SoE has HORRIBLE customer service, and I can guarantee that they will manage to screw the pooch with Vanguard too. I think before I bash SoE. I think about all the issues I have had with them in the past as a former customer. I will never purchase another SoE product again, and I will continue to recommend against it whenever I have the chance. I played EQ2 from the first week of December 2004 until January 2006. My issues: - game released early - unfinished - to compete with WoW - major adjustments to mob difficulty at least 3 different times - class rebalancing with every update, usually screwing something up - horrible server stability - zones crashed OFTEN for almost the entire time I was with EQ2 - combat system completely reworked halfway through my experience with EQ2, lots of unhappy players - crafting system completely pooched - horrible customer support, rarely a GM available when needed - memory leak... game poorly coded for memory management, a 4 hour gaming session requires at least 2 reboots with an avarage PC rig (average for the time I played, and based on the observation of both myself and my guildies) - glitches, bugs, exploits galore... in-game economy ruined I could go on and on. I have never experienced the level of issues with any other MMO that I have played. SoE really does suck... it's not so much "bashing" as it is discussing real issues with a company that sees $$$ not players.
Are we talking about the same game here? (sounds like the Vanguard forum to me...)
I have played EQ2 since before release, and I only ever saw 2 of those issues, and both have long since (like over 18 months) been fixed.
And if you actually did play until Jan 2006, why are you listing things that were fixed almost a year before you quit?
Your wrong lomiller. Verant was funded by SOE but worked pretty much independent. And, although EQ was a pretty good game it still had horrible customer service. When SOE took over things just got worse from there.
My disdain for SOE goes back to Everquest when they removed Verant from development and began bringing out expansions such as Scars of Velious and Luclin.
Did you know that the Scars of Velious was the beginning of the faction grind? Between the dwarves, the dragons and the giants, it was a nightmare to get the quest armor.
Now that is the perfect example of what the OP was talking about.
Verant was not "removed" from development. Verant, in fact, was a fully owned subsidiary company of SOE that was merged into SOE - as all games were at that time.
And btw I don't recall having that much trouble getting the armor, even though it was like.. 5+ years ago.
If you are going to bash SOE, at least use something a little bit more recent than 2001.
When you aquire a company, you are basically removing that company's existence. Verant was aquired by SOE, and was combined with the rest of the development studios also brought in under this whole change. So in essence, yes. Verant was removed from the development of Everquest.
"Verant was formed as a development venture inside Sony (and its interactive/online production arm, Sony Interactive Studios), and was spun off as its own design team shortly after the release of EverQuest. The team still always kept itself closely aligned with the operating entity that became Sony Online Entertainment, and was acquired by the company in June of 2000. The developer became fully absorbed into SOE as its core internal design studio and now no longer operates under its original name."
This is basically how Blizzard functions right now under Vivendi Universal. But because Blizzard is a much larger development Studio than Verant ever was, people still see Blizzard as it's own entity. If Vivendi was to bring Sierra, Blizzard, Radical Entertainment, Massive Entertainment, Swordfish Studios and High Moon Studios under a single entity called Vivendi Games, it would be much akin to what SOE did to it's development studios. Those individual studios that run probably quite independently in terms of actual development of games would cease to exist. And do you think a change like that would leave the development teams perfectly intact and functioning how they were previously? I'd bet that Verant was shuffled around some when it was brought in. Yes, some of the same people stayed on, but the likelyhood they still had the same levels of control over the game is slim. This is alluded to by BMQ leaving SOE in October 2001 with a large part of the Everquest development team. Do you see what I am getting at here?
As for the 2001 thing. All I said was that is when my disdain started for SOE. I didn't say it was the only reason. I played SWG for 6 months. 1 pre-CU and 5 after. I had also followed SWG during the beta. That was when I very quickly realized it wasn't going to be what the original "Vision" was. I also played Planetside. This one had huge potential. It could have brought an all new aspect to First Person Shooters by bringing a persistent world to that genre and become a crossover between the MMO and the FPS. How's it doing now? How is MxO doing? I will gladly bring up what SOE has done to more recent games. EQ2 released in a sorry state. First impressions are lasting ones. The same with Vanguard. SOE is the one to provide customer support. They are the ones that are managing the server farms and hardware. To say they are innocent of the poor release of Vanguard is very innacurate. SOE controls the billing. Can you cancel your Vanguard account right now?
Your wrong lomiller. Verant was funded by SOE but worked pretty much independent. And, although EQ was a pretty good game it still had horrible customer service. When SOE took over things just got worse from there.
I’m not wrong. Look it up. Verant started out it’s existence as a studio within Sony Interactive which is where most of the development of Everquest took place. This is why the first city ever built for Everquest is actually “Sony EQ” spelled backwards.
In 1999 Sony Interactive was restructured to focus on the upcoming release of the PS2, and this is when Verant was spun out into a separate company, but it still had the same basic management structure and Sony still had financial control. When Sony reabsorbed them the management struture remained intact and varant was basiclay renamed SOE.
Your wrong lomiller. Verant was funded by SOE but worked pretty much independent. And, although EQ was a pretty good game it still had horrible customer service. When SOE took over things just got worse from there.
I’m not wrong. Look it up. Verant started out it’s existence as a studio within Sony Interactive which is where most of the development of Everquest took place. This is why the first city ever built for Everquest is actually “Sony EQ” spelled backwards.
In 1999 Sony Interactive was restructured to focus on the upcoming release of the PS2, and this is when Verant was spun out into a separate company, but it still had the same basic management structure and Sony still had financial control. When Sony reabsorbed them the management struture remained intact and varant was basiclay renamed SOE.
Towards the end of 1998, 989 Studios shifted its strategy to making PlayStationconsole games only. The company's computer game/online development branch spun off, initially calling itself RedEye Interactive and then soon after Verant Interactive.
EverQuest was Verant Interactive's breakthrough success and the franchise continues its popularity with Sony Online Entertainment.
EverQuest launched with modest expectations from Sony on March 16, 1999 under its Verant Interactive brand and quickly became successful. Numbers continued rising at a steady rate until mid-2001 when growth slowed. As of 2004, Sony reported subscription numbers close to 450,000.
When you aquire a company, you are basically removing that company's existence. Verant was aquired by SOE, and was combined with the rest of the development studios also brought in under this whole change. So in essence, yes. Verant was removed from the development of Everquest.
Taken from IGN: games.ign.com/objects/026/026857.html "Verant was formed as a development venture inside Sony (and its interactive/online production arm, Sony Interactive Studios), and was spun off as its own design team shortly after the release of EverQuest. The team still always kept itself closely aligned with the operating entity that became Sony Online Entertainment, and was acquired by the company in June of 2000. The developer became fully absorbed into SOE as its core internal design studio and now no longer operates under its original name."
Blizzard is not a separate company in any way and hasnt been for a very long time, they are kept separate for branding purposed more then anything else. They do not report financials or issue stock and exist completely within the Vivendi corporate structure the way SOE does now at Sony.
VU games is a full and complete operating unit within Vivendi, and Blizzard falls underneath that. As far as SOE goes the Sony equivalent of VUGames is Sony Pictures, which is the top level division that SOE falls under.
Back when they were still called Verant they were an independent company with their own financial reporting, management structure etc, even though Sony still owned most of the company.
As I said before when Sony reabsorbed Verant they kept the management structure pretty much intact. For example Smed was president of Verant, Brad was VP and both retained these positions within SOE. There really wasnt anything in SOE that didnt come from Verant.
Much like an old fashion dumb mob i am amazed how in last 2 years we started to get people here who lack the simple ability to reason thru things. One of this is the SoE bashing. Firstly,we had the SWG changes which is a joint venture of LA/SoE yet 99% of the post are directed against SoE .Where is LA in all this?I even seen some of this bashers kissing LA butt simply because they own star wars licence and the star wars geeks know that they are only source of a new SW mmorpg for them. Then you have the vanguard issue.So many saying oh SoE ruined vanguard.Hello,SoE runs the CSR,billing,servers and publish it.The development of this game is purely sigil work.What do you want SoE to do?Print more nice looking boxes?Will that make the game better? Give them more time?Have they not done it already after M$ wanted a summer 2006 release?Vanguard had ample development time.SoE bought them some more months but i am sure like any company they don't plan to give a blank cheque to any game . Servers?What do you want them to do?The game engine is nowhere optimized .Not much you can do with servers when this happens.
Well I don't care about LA. Because they don't do half the stuff SOE does.
SOE are part of the EQ serie, SWG and now even Vanguard (servers). They are a much bigger face. LA doesn't have another MMORPG right now and the face people always saw when something happened in SWG were SOE's faces. So there we have it.
I HATE SOE. Simply put. And I will always do. Will not play any of the games they touch in the future.
$OE lies list http://www.rlmmo.com/viewtopic.php?t=424&start=0 " And I don't want to hear anything about "I don't believe in vampires" because *I* don't believe in vampires, but I believe in my own two eyes, and what *I* saw is ******* vampires! "
I think all three of us are saying roughly the same thing at this point. To me however the real key is to track management.
Who was in charge of the Everquest project at Sony Interactive? John Smedly, with Brad McQuaid as lead developer.
Who was the top guy at Verant? John Smedly, with Brad McQuaid as his number 2.
Who was in charge of SOE after Sony reabsorbed Verant? You guessed it John Smedly with Brad McQuaid as his number two.
All SOE management was in fact Verant management all SOE product development was in fact Verant product development. Beyond what came from Verant there was nothing in SOE, it was an empty shell. So saying “SOE bought Verant” isn’t really accurate, rather, Sony bought Verant and renamed it SOE.
As someone who was in the Vanguard beta before they joined up with SOE I can assure you SOE did not ruin it. It already had major faults long before SOE came in to the picture. People have this belief that games change significantly at later stages of beta but that is seldom the case in my experience. The gameplay was basically the same before and after. This game is just not that good.
Yeah I've been reading MMORPG for a while now and enjoyed the mix of emotional daydream posts, idealist posts and sometimes a well written well thought out post identifying feelings the poster has about a topic or game that I find myself sharing. But amid the gems there's alot of random crap, and threads where people just join the hate bandwagon. X game is broken, queue the long line of frustrated gamers willing to share their hate stories and bash X game into infamy.
It's safe to say allot of people come to forums to vent, and just like at work if you're always venting people tend to not want to hang out with you because you're such a negative guy you bring them down. That's kind of what I feel is going on here. You see so many people venting, without reason and targeting whoever is big for their frustrations, problems, or conflicting design philosophy in X game. And it compounds. Anger breeds more anger and ultimately you've got allot of posts with people bashing, ranting, venting, gnashing and gnawing at X company.
It seems no one can do right, at least not for too long before someone nay-says them and predicts their doom. Often it's due to hearsay, misinformation or speculation. It's just easier to generalize and lash out without thinking about the details, was Joe mad because Joe’s boss didn't give him the raise? Joe hates his boss and thinks his boss is an idiot, can't manage, can't run the business. Vents, hates, and lashes out. But later learns that Joes boss had to cut back on raises or else he'd have to fire people, and joe would be on that list of people fired.
Sure that's a cheery analogy but it holds true here as well. We lash out at companies choices without knowing the facts and build up the furor of frustrated posters trying to mob the company and slander it's reputation. But hey that's humanity. Even blizzard, lionized for delivering a stable and fun game a few years ago is now being tar and feathered by people as publishing a "dumb" game for "simpletons" where you need an IQ of 4 to play. Never mind that those same people probably played the game for well over a year and enjoyed it for some time.
We're all hypocrites and reactionary rebel rousers. I don't see that changing any time soon. But I am glad every now and then amid the barking and naying of the wild animals on this site there are some people who pause and question the generalizations.
Yeah I've been reading MMORPG for a while now and enjoyed the mix of emotional daydream posts, idealist posts and sometimes a well written well thought out post identifying feelings the poster has about a topic or game that I find myself sharing. But amid the gems there's alot of random crap, and threads where people just join the hate bandwagon. X game is broken, queue the long line of frustrated gamers willing to share their hate stories and bash X game into infamy. It's safe to say allot of people come to forums to vent, and just like at work if you're always venting people tend to not want to hang out with you because you're such a negative guy you bring them down. That's kind of what I feel is going on here. You see so many people venting, without reason and targeting whoever is big for their frustrations, problems, or conflicting design philosophy in X game. And it compounds. Anger breeds more anger and ultimately you've got allot of posts with people bashing, ranting, venting, gnashing and gnawing at X company. It seems no one can do right, at least not for too long before someone nay-says them and predicts their doom. Often it's due to hearsay, misinformation or speculation. It's just easier to generalize and lash out without thinking about the details, was Joe mad because Joe’s boss didn't give him the raise? Joe hates his boss and thinks his boss is an idiot, can't manage, can't run the business. Vents, hates, and lashes out. But later learns that Joes boss had to cut back on raises or else he'd have to fire people, and joe would be on that list of people fired. Sure that's a cheery analogy but it holds true here as well. We lash out at companies choices without knowing the facts and build up the furor of frustrated posters trying to mob the company and slander it's reputation. But hey that's humanity. Even blizzard, lionized for delivering a stable and fun game a few years ago is now being tar and feathered by people as publishing a "dumb" game for "simpletons" where you need an IQ of 4 to play. Never mind that those same people probably played the game for well over a year and enjoyed it for some time. We're all hypocrites and reactionary rebel rousers. I don't see that changing any time soon. But I am glad every now and then amid the barking and naying of the wild animals on this site there are some people who pause and question the generalizations. -Arioc Murkwood
most enlightened, educated post ever /two thumbs up
If Vanguard really is this gem that every fan boy is talking about then why would a successful business savvy corporation like Microsoft let it go? They must have known it from the start that it MIGHT look awesome on paper but will really stink when it's out.
Yeah I've been reading MMORPG for a while now and enjoyed the mix of emotional daydream posts, idealist posts and sometimes a well written well thought out post identifying feelings the poster has about a topic or game that I find myself sharing. But amid the gems there's alot of random crap, and threads where people just join the hate bandwagon. X game is broken, queue the long line of frustrated gamers willing to share their hate stories and bash X game into infamy. It's safe to say allot of people come to forums to vent, and just like at work if you're always venting people tend to not want to hang out with you because you're such a negative guy you bring them down. That's kind of what I feel is going on here. You see so many people venting, without reason and targeting whoever is big for their frustrations, problems, or conflicting design philosophy in X game. And it compounds. Anger breeds more anger and ultimately you've got allot of posts with people bashing, ranting, venting, gnashing and gnawing at X company. It seems no one can do right, at least not for too long before someone nay-says them and predicts their doom. Often it's due to hearsay, misinformation or speculation. It's just easier to generalize and lash out without thinking about the details, was Joe mad because Joe’s boss didn't give him the raise? Joe hates his boss and thinks his boss is an idiot, can't manage, can't run the business. Vents, hates, and lashes out. But later learns that Joes boss had to cut back on raises or else he'd have to fire people, and joe would be on that list of people fired. Sure that's a cheery analogy but it holds true here as well. We lash out at companies choices without knowing the facts and build up the furor of frustrated posters trying to mob the company and slander it's reputation. But hey that's humanity. Even blizzard, lionized for delivering a stable and fun game a few years ago is now being tar and feathered by people as publishing a "dumb" game for "simpletons" where you need an IQ of 4 to play. Never mind that those same people probably played the game for well over a year and enjoyed it for some time. We're all hypocrites and reactionary rebel rousers. I don't see that changing any time soon. But I am glad every now and then amid the barking and naying of the wild animals on this site there are some people who pause and question the generalizations. -Arioc Murkwood
I entered the MMO scene in 2000. My first game was EQ. Please, don't post your pathetic fanboi opinions expecting not to be labeled as such. SOE has destroyed any game it has touched. EQ, EQ2, SWG, and Vanguard are all mediocre games.
EQ used to be really fun until the original devs left it in SOE hands. EQ2 never surpassed EQ in terms of subscriptions or greatness, and has declined in numbers since launch. Same goes with SWG and now Vanguard doesn't even stand a chance. Companies are suppose to become better. SOE has become worse. Their customer service is about as bad as McDonald's, and they have about the same quality product.
Hate on Blizzard all you want, but they have a quality product, decent customer service, and a game that actually gets more subscribers than it loses. That is how a successful business is run.
so does that make you any more of an expert than someone who disagrees with you? i am one of them. soe's games are not horrible...but not the best either, but they have made some great games. as well as made a huge error or 2 :P
Simply put, I will never, ever by an SOE product again. I made that decision based on personal experiences with the company. In the end, no one will ever really know WHY someone makes a decision they make...whether it's independent, or mob mentality, whether it's logical or emotional. Sometimes, you just have to take the other person's word for it. And yes, I have avoided V:SoH completely because of their connection to SOE. No, they don't run it, but they are involved in billing, which is just as important...so I won't touch that game. (and, considering the multiple billing complaints I've seen, I have no regrets)
Why I won't play an SOE game again:
1) The promotion/releasing of an expansion, with specific descriptions re: systems that were, at the same time, being eliminated. Developer knowledge of the disparity, but NO communication to the players, until after transactions had been completed. I actually talked with some lawyer friends about whether that could be called "fraud".
2) Almost no instances of actual "help" from GM's in their games. Again, that's just personal experience, so others may vary. (compared to City of Heroes, in which I had excellent customer support experiences)
3) Witnessing bugs reported in beta that get shipped, without explaination, and despite tester protest.
4) At least two games that haven't been "finished" for about 1 year post release. I will not pay to test/clean/polish your games anymore.
5) Extremely poor communication through official forums with their communities. On many occassions, rude, self-grandizing, or simply non-informative posts. And, in some extreme cases, very heavy handed moderation.
Now, does that mean others shouldn't play SOE games? No, of course not. But, I will always inform others of why I, personally, refuse to play their games. I would feel terrible if someone I knew, because I didn't tell them, ended up having the same experiences with SOE that I have. If I tell them why I don't play, and they do anyway, and have a grand time....good for them. But I'm not going there again.
There still seem to be people willing to make excuses for SOE's past actions. They are the ones that don't think. When Smedley ridicules the players who were alienated by the SWG changes, and SOE again and again keeps changing fundamental design aspects of every game they are involved with after gamers have bought a product and invested time in a product based on it's original design, that should be clear indication to anyone with any sense to stay away from their products.
Please this is a totally false statement
EQ2 ,EQ1 and planetside all underwent some changes like ALL mmorpg(if u doubt that there a single mmorpg without a change name one popular mmorpg and i tell you changes).
However,none of those went thru any fundamental changes or even radical ones and this are the only true SoE products.The changes in EQ2 which i suppose had the msot changes actually was to make the game better which most agree such as remove group debt and increase soloing ability.Certainly not fundamental way the game is been play!
Others are SWG a joint venture,vanguard which is sigil development and MxO which was bought over as part of a deal.
People saying SOE ruined Vanguard are really out there. If it wasn't for SOE bailing Sigil's sorry broke butts out, there'd be no Vanguard. SOE saved Vanguard from the scrap heap. SOE has become a fall guy company for all the players to blame when their MMO fails. Take Gods and Heroes as an example. If it does well, SOE will get no credit. If it flops, they'll get the blame. Mark my words...
how true.Even if G&H is a success people will find something to moan or say "hey SoE has no development of this game"
If its crappy then SoE will magically become the alpha and omega of development of G&H just like magically vanguard is developed by SoE in some misinformed ppl eyes
SoE is responsible for the mess with SWG, just as it was with its own EQ2. SoE has HORRIBLE customer service, and I can guarantee that they will manage to screw the pooch with Vanguard too. I think before I bash SoE. I think about all the issues I have had with them in the past as a former customer. I will never purchase another SoE product again, and I will continue to recommend against it whenever I have the chance. I played EQ2 from the first week of December 2004 until January 2006. My issues: - game released early - unfinished - to compete with WoW - major adjustments to mob difficulty at least 3 different times - class rebalancing with every update, usually screwing something up - horrible server stability - zones crashed OFTEN for almost the entire time I was with EQ2 - combat system completely reworked halfway through my experience with EQ2, lots of unhappy players - crafting system completely pooched - horrible customer support, rarely a GM available when needed - memory leak... game poorly coded for memory management, a 4 hour gaming session requires at least 2 reboots with an avarage PC rig (average for the time I played, and based on the observation of both myself and my guildies) - glitches, bugs, exploits galore... in-game economy ruined I could go on and on. I have never experienced the level of issues with any other MMO that I have played. SoE really does suck... it's not so much "bashing" as it is discussing real issues with a company that sees $$$ not players.
Everyone always talks about the horrible EQ2 release. For the most part they are really making stuff up. EQ2 had an extremely smooth release. There were not a lot of crashes, I didn't crash once, some did but not a lot. There were not a lot of bugs. At release there was some balancing but not a lot. There was a memory leak. The economy was not ruined, it was actually quite good. Overall EQ2 had one of the best releases.
So what was the problem?
While the game ran smooth and well, they misjudged the market. The product they had was not attracting the numbers that they wanted. So they changed the game, redid class balancing, mellee, and crafting to try and cater to a wider audience. They paniced when they didn't bring in the numbers. Again not because the release was bad, or the product was sub par, but because not enough people found their product entertaining enough compared to what was out in another month.
Myself. I tried it 3 times and got bored within a month 3 times.
Venge Sunsoar
Just because you don't like it doesn't mean it is bad.
Comments
WELL AND THEY MESSED UP THE BILLING!! The only thing they had to do was servers and billing.
And you have thousands of pissed of customers who needed to phone up their banks to cancel their subscription.
SoE SUCKS! and Vanguard is a PoS and the players are beta testers.
Sums it up!
Lucas Arts has a nasty reputation for dictating to game developers working on Star Wars properties. Basically, if the game play doesnt have an action/adventure feel to it they will insist on the developer changing it even if it doesnt fit with the style of game. If the developer refuses they threaten to pull the license altogether and leave the developer hanging with a produce they can never release.
This is why Biowear refused to do a KOTOR sequel. You can even see a lot of this in the original KOTOR. The racing mini games, the real time action that forced you to constantly hit pause to get a more suitable game play. Etc.
As I said elsewhere SOE didnt take the reigns from Verant. Verant started off as a Sony development studio and was always owned by Sony. Sony simply reabsorbed them and changed their name to SOE, it was the same company with the same developers and the same people running it.
Are we talking about the same game here? (sounds like the Vanguard forum to me...)
I have played EQ2 since before release, and I only ever saw 2 of those issues, and both have long since (like over 18 months) been fixed.
And if you actually did play until Jan 2006, why are you listing things that were fixed almost a year before you quit?
Now that is the perfect example of what the OP was talking about.
Verant was not "removed" from development. Verant, in fact, was a fully owned subsidiary company of SOE that was merged into SOE - as all games were at that time.
And btw I don't recall having that much trouble getting the armor, even though it was like.. 5+ years ago.
If you are going to bash SOE, at least use something a little bit more recent than 2001.
"SOE acquired Verant in June 2000 and eventually promoted Brad McQuaid to be its Chief Creative Officer link. EverQuest: The Ruins of Kunark (March 2000) was the first in a long list of expansions for its hit MMORPG. In October 2001, McQuaid resigned and went on to found Sigil Games Online, drawing many of the original developers of EverQuest from SOE to develop their Vanguard: Saga of Heroes MMORPG, released January 2007."
When you aquire a company, you are basically removing that company's existence. Verant was aquired by SOE, and was combined with the rest of the development studios also brought in under this whole change. So in essence, yes. Verant was removed from the development of Everquest.
Taken from IGN: games.ign.com/objects/026/026857.html
"Verant was formed as a development venture inside Sony (and its interactive/online production arm, Sony Interactive Studios), and was spun off as its own design team shortly after the release of EverQuest. The team still always kept itself closely aligned with the operating entity that became Sony Online Entertainment, and was acquired by the company in June of 2000. The developer became fully absorbed into SOE as its core internal design studio and now no longer operates under its original name."
This is basically how Blizzard functions right now under Vivendi Universal. But because Blizzard is a much larger development Studio than Verant ever was, people still see Blizzard as it's own entity. If Vivendi was to bring Sierra, Blizzard, Radical Entertainment, Massive Entertainment, Swordfish Studios and High Moon Studios under a single entity called Vivendi Games, it would be much akin to what SOE did to it's development studios. Those individual studios that run probably quite independently in terms of actual development of games would cease to exist. And do you think a change like that would leave the development teams perfectly intact and functioning how they were previously? I'd bet that Verant was shuffled around some when it was brought in. Yes, some of the same people stayed on, but the likelyhood they still had the same levels of control over the game is slim. This is alluded to by BMQ leaving SOE in October 2001 with a large part of the Everquest development team. Do you see what I am getting at here?
As for the 2001 thing. All I said was that is when my disdain started for SOE. I didn't say it was the only reason. I played SWG for 6 months. 1 pre-CU and 5 after. I had also followed SWG during the beta. That was when I very quickly realized it wasn't going to be what the original "Vision" was. I also played Planetside. This one had huge potential. It could have brought an all new aspect to First Person Shooters by bringing a persistent world to that genre and become a crossover between the MMO and the FPS. How's it doing now? How is MxO doing? I will gladly bring up what SOE has done to more recent games. EQ2 released in a sorry state. First impressions are lasting ones. The same with Vanguard. SOE is the one to provide customer support. They are the ones that are managing the server farms and hardware. To say they are innocent of the poor release of Vanguard is very innacurate. SOE controls the billing. Can you cancel your Vanguard account right now?
- - - -
Support Independent Game Developers
Towards the end of 1998, 989 Studios shifted its strategy to making PlayStation console games only. The company's computer game/online development branch spun off, initially calling itself RedEye Interactive and then soon after Verant Interactive.
EverQuest was Verant Interactive's breakthrough success and the franchise continues its popularity with Sony Online Entertainment.
EverQuest launched with modest expectations from Sony on March 16, 1999 under its Verant Interactive brand and quickly became successful. Numbers continued rising at a steady rate until mid-2001 when growth slowed. As of 2004, Sony reported subscription numbers close to 450,000.
In April 2000, Verant hired former Ultima Online developers Raph Koster and Rich Vogel forming its office in Austin, Texas to develop Star Wars Galaxies for LucasArts. SOE acquired Verant in June 2000 and eventually promoted Brad McQuaid to be its Chief Creative Officer link. EverQuest: The Ruins of Kunark (March 2000) was the first in a long list of expansions for its hit MMORPG. In October 2001, McQuaid resigned and went on to found Sigil Games Online, drawing many of the original developers of EverQuest from SOE to develop their Vanguard: Saga of Heroes MMORPG, released January 2007.
Blizzard is not a separate company in any way and hasnt been for a very long time, they are kept separate for branding purposed more then anything else. They do not report financials or issue stock and exist completely within the Vivendi corporate structure the way SOE does now at Sony.
VU games is a full and complete operating unit within Vivendi, and Blizzard falls underneath that. As far as SOE goes the Sony equivalent of VUGames is Sony Pictures, which is the top level division that SOE falls under.
Back when they were still called Verant they were an independent company with their own financial reporting, management structure etc, even though Sony still owned most of the company.
As I said before when Sony reabsorbed Verant they kept the management structure pretty much intact. For example Smed was president of Verant, Brad was VP and both retained these positions within SOE. There really wasnt anything in SOE that didnt come from Verant.
SOE are part of the EQ serie, SWG and now even Vanguard (servers). They are a much bigger face. LA doesn't have another MMORPG right now and the face people always saw when something happened in SWG were SOE's faces. So there we have it.
I HATE SOE. Simply put. And I will always do. Will not play any of the games they touch in the future.
$OE lies list
http://www.rlmmo.com/viewtopic.php?t=424&start=0
"
And I don't want to hear anything about "I don't believe in vampires" because *I* don't believe in vampires, but I believe in my own two eyes, and what *I* saw is ******* vampires! "
Yeah I've been reading MMORPG for a while now and enjoyed the mix of emotional daydream posts, idealist posts and sometimes a well written well thought out post identifying feelings the poster has about a topic or game that I find myself sharing. But amid the gems there's alot of random crap, and threads where people just join the hate bandwagon. X game is broken, queue the long line of frustrated gamers willing to share their hate stories and bash X game into infamy.
It's safe to say allot of people come to forums to vent, and just like at work if you're always venting people tend to not want to hang out with you because you're such a negative guy you bring them down. That's kind of what I feel is going on here. You see so many people venting, without reason and targeting whoever is big for their frustrations, problems, or conflicting design philosophy in X game. And it compounds. Anger breeds more anger and ultimately you've got allot of posts with people bashing, ranting, venting, gnashing and gnawing at X company.
It seems no one can do right, at least not for too long before someone nay-says them and predicts their doom. Often it's due to hearsay, misinformation or speculation. It's just easier to generalize and lash out without thinking about the details, was Joe mad because Joe’s boss didn't give him the raise? Joe hates his boss and thinks his boss is an idiot, can't manage, can't run the business. Vents, hates, and lashes out. But later learns that Joes boss had to cut back on raises or else he'd have to fire people, and joe would be on that list of people fired.
Sure that's a cheery analogy but it holds true here as well. We lash out at companies choices without knowing the facts and build up the furor of frustrated posters trying to mob the company and slander it's reputation. But hey that's humanity. Even blizzard, lionized for delivering a stable and fun game a few years ago is now being tar and feathered by people as publishing a "dumb" game for "simpletons" where you need an IQ of 4 to play. Never mind that those same people probably played the game for well over a year and enjoyed it for some time.
We're all hypocrites and reactionary rebel rousers. I don't see that changing any time soon. But I am glad every now and then amid the barking and naying of the wild animals on this site there are some people who pause and question the generalizations.
-Arioc Murkwood
Arioc Murkwood
Environment Artist
Sad but true.
EQ used to be really fun until the original devs left it in SOE hands. EQ2 never surpassed EQ in terms of subscriptions or greatness, and has declined in numbers since launch. Same goes with SWG and now Vanguard doesn't even stand a chance. Companies are suppose to become better. SOE has become worse. Their customer service is about as bad as McDonald's, and they have about the same quality product.
Hate on Blizzard all you want, but they have a quality product, decent customer service, and a game that actually gets more subscribers than it loses. That is how a successful business is run.
Simply put, I will never, ever by an SOE product again. I made that decision based on personal experiences with the company. In the end, no one will ever really know WHY someone makes a decision they make...whether it's independent, or mob mentality, whether it's logical or emotional. Sometimes, you just have to take the other person's word for it. And yes, I have avoided V:SoH completely because of their connection to SOE. No, they don't run it, but they are involved in billing, which is just as important...so I won't touch that game. (and, considering the multiple billing complaints I've seen, I have no regrets)
Why I won't play an SOE game again:
1) The promotion/releasing of an expansion, with specific descriptions re: systems that were, at the same time, being eliminated. Developer knowledge of the disparity, but NO communication to the players, until after transactions had been completed. I actually talked with some lawyer friends about whether that could be called "fraud".
2) Almost no instances of actual "help" from GM's in their games. Again, that's just personal experience, so others may vary. (compared to City of Heroes, in which I had excellent customer support experiences)
3) Witnessing bugs reported in beta that get shipped, without explaination, and despite tester protest.
4) At least two games that haven't been "finished" for about 1 year post release. I will not pay to test/clean/polish your games anymore.
5) Extremely poor communication through official forums with their communities. On many occassions, rude, self-grandizing, or simply non-informative posts. And, in some extreme cases, very heavy handed moderation.
Now, does that mean others shouldn't play SOE games? No, of course not. But, I will always inform others of why I, personally, refuse to play their games. I would feel terrible if someone I knew, because I didn't tell them, ended up having the same experiences with SOE that I have. If I tell them why I don't play, and they do anyway, and have a grand time....good for them. But I'm not going there again.
Please this is a totally false statement
EQ2 ,EQ1 and planetside all underwent some changes like ALL mmorpg(if u doubt that there a single mmorpg without a change name one popular mmorpg and i tell you changes).
However,none of those went thru any fundamental changes or even radical ones and this are the only true SoE products.The changes in EQ2 which i suppose had the msot changes actually was to make the game better which most agree such as remove group debt and increase soloing ability.Certainly not fundamental way the game is been play!
Others are SWG a joint venture,vanguard which is sigil development and MxO which was bought over as part of a deal.
Get the facts straight please.
how true.Even if G&H is a success people will find something to moan or say "hey SoE has no development of this game"
If its crappy then SoE will magically become the alpha and omega of development of G&H just like magically vanguard is developed by SoE in some misinformed ppl eyes
Everyone always talks about the horrible EQ2 release. For the most part they are really making stuff up. EQ2 had an extremely smooth release. There were not a lot of crashes, I didn't crash once, some did but not a lot. There were not a lot of bugs. At release there was some balancing but not a lot. There was a memory leak. The economy was not ruined, it was actually quite good. Overall EQ2 had one of the best releases.
So what was the problem?
While the game ran smooth and well, they misjudged the market. The product they had was not attracting the numbers that they wanted. So they changed the game, redid class balancing, mellee, and crafting to try and cater to a wider audience. They paniced when they didn't bring in the numbers. Again not because the release was bad, or the product was sub par, but because not enough people found their product entertaining enough compared to what was out in another month.
Myself. I tried it 3 times and got bored within a month 3 times.
Venge Sunsoar