Please provide an example of 1 mmorpg that does not have people posting about having trouble with either buying the game, patching the game, loading into the game, or playing the game.
Ah. My favourite response. "Everyone else does it so it's OK!"
Look, nothing is ever perfect, but that is NOT the point here.
Poor distribution and marketing, errors in both these and big problems with the launcher / patcher as a start.
Retail had distribution problems yes, but I dont blame SOE for that. When I called the 5 EB's in my area, 3 had the pre-order boxes, 2 of which were sold out, 1 still had 4 left (so I got one), and the remaining 2 EB's had never even heard of PotBS. So how can 3 stores clearly know what I am talking about and 2 not have a clue? SOE's fault or EB's fault? Debatable.
The fact is the game was distributed online, and anyone could pre-order through either Sony directly (which quite a few people in our guild did without any problems) or from other sites like direct2drive.
And big problems with launcher/patcher? The fact that everyone in our guild who pre-ordered is playing without having had ANY problems patching and getting into the game proves that your "big problems" are "isolated and rare cases". I sure as heck had no problems as it took me less than 2 minutes to patch from open beta to retail and start playing.
SOE does not have even one success to show for when partnering with anyone.
Their partnership with LucasArts has led to nothing less than the industry's most infamous catastrophe, Star Wars Galaxies and the CU/NGE, and losing 90% of a 250K sub base within a year
Sigil collapsed within a couple months of Vanguard's release
Perpetual collapsed into bankruptcy, and Gods and Heroes was canceled just weeks before release. It's now being sued by it's creditors for fraud.
I'm not saying that POTBS or Flying Labs are as poorly run as Sigil and PE, but history suggests that SOE is inept and tends to choose partners that are just as inept as they are.
Originally posted by Gyrus Originally posted by Taram
When you post about stuff that's been covered... and covered and covered and covered and covered in dozens of other posts? Yeah I include you in it. ...So your criterior for being a hateboy is posting on a subject that has been posted on before? It hasn't all been discussed before actually - and if you think this is bad - wait until the 22nd when the game switches to retail and players have to enter a NEW key to keep playing - and there is no 'grace period'. Originally posted by Taram
.... I don't even own the game (don't feel it's worth purchasing tbqfh) but even I am sick of people dragging a dead horse around, propping it up and beating it again and again as if somehow that's going to make a difference.The discussion has been had, ad nauseum. Here, on the official PotBS forums and many other places. Let the horse rest in peace already.
The issue is not me - or any of the other posters here posting on this subject... it's you. You're bored.
You're bored with this forum. So why do you come here? You're not obliged to read posts here if they bore you you know?
I'm bored? If I were bored with this forum I wouldn't check it. I happen to feel the game isn't ready for release. Doesn't mean I didn't like the game. Go re-read my review. I enjoyed it, I just don't feel it's worth paying a monthly fee for right now.
Explain to me how that is 'bored'? If I were bored I'd move on, just like I moved on from SWG and any number of other games in my past. What I AM is sick to death of people bashing the game just because SOE is handling billing and distribution. The OP didn't say "SOE is failing at it's job" he said "SOE has it's mits on this game, now it's over". That has ABSOLUTELY NO BASIS in truth or fact. I don't mind discussion of issues, I actually enjoy reading them. But this has gone beyond the realm of discussion and has turned into outright flaming every single time it's brought up.
Discussing SOE's failures on it's role in the game is fine. Stating that the game is 'over' or 'will fail' or 'is done' just because SOE happens to be handling the billing/distribution? That's silly.
"A ship-of-war is the best ambassador." - Oliver Cromwell
I'm bored? If I were bored with this forum I wouldn't check it. ...
So you check it...then you find posts on subjects you have read before over and over... then you get upset with the posters because you have discussed that subject before... and that makes THEM "hateboys"?
Originally posted by Taram
... What I AM is sick to death of people bashing the game just because SOE is handling billing and distribution. ...
Woah there. You called me a "hateboy". I was very clear (I thought) that I was not bashing the game itself - nor was I bashing SOE for past wrongs in other games.
Yet YOU called me a hateboy? Would you care to read back and tell me why?
Originally posted by Taram
...The OP didn't say "SOE is failing at it's job" he said "SOE has it's mits on this game, now it's over". That has ABSOLUTELY NO BASIS in truth or fact. I don't mind discussion of issues, I actually enjoy reading them. But this has gone beyond the realm of discussion and has turned into outright flaming every single time it's brought up. Discussing SOE's failures on it's role in the game is fine. Stating that the game is 'over' or 'will fail' or 'is done' just because SOE happens to be handling the billing/distribution? That's silly.
I agree that the OP's choice of thread title was not brilliant. He was perhaps not the clearest on the issue he had either - but if you had an issue with the OP or his comments what posted your hateboy comment in relation to me?
Perhaps we could get a MOD or ADMIN to change the thread title? Would that make a difference?
Originally posted by Gyrus So, now your counter arguement is "I didn't have any issues therefor no issues exist!"? FWIW - I didn't have a problem either. But that is not the point. Having read the Devlog - do you think 'that company' has lived up to its end of the bargin? Based on the fact Digital Download seems to be the way to go - would FLS have been better to partner with another company? Remember, the whole reason they contracted 'that company' was to get boxes on retail shelves in North America and Europe. If they had elected to go purely Digital Download they could have partnered with other companies, don't you think?
First of all, since neither I, nor you, nor anyone I know has had any problems getting into the game, I fail to see how SOE has done anything wrong with the launcher or patcher. Yes there will always be people out there who do have issues, but SOE is neither special nor unique in this respect.
As for pre-order boxes, since we dont have any numbers available to us on how many ended up in the retail channel, any arguments on the subject are pure speculation. If I hadnt waited a month to get my pre-order box, the very first EB I would have called wouldnt have been already sold out (or not likely to anyhow) and I wouldnt have had to make a few more phone calls to find a store that had it. The fact that I did find a store with it shows that SOE did something right, and once again, any stores that didnt get it can be attributed to other factors, like EB not distributing properly or shortages etc. Whatever, it makes no difference once again since the game was available for online pre-order and download for all those who couldnt get a box copy.
Would FLS have been better off to partner with someone else? Seeing how SOE was basically the only company to meet FLS'es terms (FLS controls game, servers, IP etc), no, SOE was probably their best choice.
Originally posted by Taram I'm bored? If I were bored with this forum I wouldn't check it. ...
So you check it...then you find posts on subjects you have read before over and over... then you get upset with the posters because you have discussed that subject before... and that makes THEM "hateboys"?
Way to twist reality No, I check it, and find that most of the new posts are topics that have already been posted dozens, if not thousands of times before and in all cases are based upon false statements, or at least mostly false statements. And are couched in such a way as to be flamebait or unconstructive.
Originally posted by Gyrus
Originally posted by Taram ... What I AM is sick to death of people bashing the game just because SOE is handling billing and distribution. ...
Woah there. You called me a "hateboy". I was very clear (I thought) that I was not bashing the game itself - nor was I bashing SOE for past wrongs in other games.
Yet YOU called me a hateboy? Would you care to read back and tell me why?
Where did I call *you* a hateboy? I clearly stated what I think construes someone posting as a 'hateboy' if your post falls into that type of post then, yeah, you are posting in a hateful manner. IE: unconstructive and using false 'facts' to back up your arguements.
Originally posted by Gyrus
Originally posted by Taram ...The OP didn't say "SOE is failing at it's job" he said "SOE has it's mits on this game, now it's over". That has ABSOLUTELY NO BASIS in truth or fact. I don't mind discussion of issues, I actually enjoy reading them. But this has gone beyond the realm of discussion and has turned into outright flaming every single time it's brought up.
Discussing SOE's failures on it's role in the game is fine. Stating that the game is 'over' or 'will fail' or 'is done' just because SOE happens to be handling the billing/distribution? That's silly.
I agree that the OP's choice of thread title was not brilliant. He was perhaps not the clearest on the issue he had either - but if you had an issue with the OP or his comments what posted your hateboy comment in relation to me?
Perhaps we could get a MOD or ADMIN to change the thread title? Would that make a difference?
Again: I never said you were a 'hateboy' or that you were posting in a hateful manner. I clearly stated what I construe as a 'hater' post and why. I think I was pretty clear on it and don't really see a need to clarify it... again. YOU chose to assume I was speaking of you. Not the other way around. Even after I clearly stated that the OP's title, and post, were out of line.
"A ship-of-war is the best ambassador." - Oliver Cromwell
Again: I never said you were a 'hateboy' or that you were posting in a hateful manner. I clearly stated what I construe as a 'hater' post and why. I think I was pretty clear on it and don't really see a need to clarify it... again. YOU chose to assume I was speaking of you. Not the other way around. Even after I clearly stated that the OP's title, and post, were out of line.
Yeah you did:
And I didn't chose - I wasn't sure so I asked:
Originally posted by Taram
Originally posted by Gyrus
Originally posted by Taram
...Frankly I'm sick of the constant hateboy posts ...
I re-read the entire thread to see if you were including me with the "hateboy" comment?
Are you?
....
When you post about stuff that's been covered... and covered and covered and covered and covered in dozens of other posts? Yeah I include you in it. ...
As for pre-order boxes, since we dont have any numbers available to us on how many ended up in the retail channel, any arguments on the subject are pure speculation. ...
Fair Point. Although would you agree that it is an established fact that PotBS was NOT availible in retail outlets in the U.K., France, Holland and Belgium?
(That info was availible on the Flying Lab forums)
Originally posted by Annekynn ...Would FLS have been better off to partner with someone else? Seeing how SOE was basically the only company to meet FLS'es terms (FLS controls game, servers, IP etc), no, SOE was probably their best choice.
But that's the whole point isn't it?
"SOE was basically the only company to meet FLS'es terms"
Here’s exactly what SOE brings to this that we want:
1) Strong distribution: We want Pirates of the Burning Sea to be in every retail store that carries games. SOE has that down cold.
But then read on:
We had two other paths to launching this fall: going it alone and working with another independent outfit we’ve been spending time with. Both of these were good options in general (especially the partnership approach, as we really like those guys). But for either of those approaches to work for a fall launch, everything would have to go right the first time and we’d still need some luck. By working with SOE we know it’ll just happen.
So SOE was NOT the only horse in the race.
Now I remember the run up to this and FLS'es vision very definately hinged around having "retail boxes so that everyone who wants a copy can get it" {That may not be an exact quote - but it's pretty close}
I also remember a number of people on the FLS site tried to encourage FLS to forget retail stores and simply go digital download - but FLS was adamant about the retail component.
Remember the whole "Parrot and Sword(s) for RETAIL PRE_ORDER CUSTOMERS ONLY" thing?
So what made SOE the winner in this race?
Was it the promise that they could get retail boxes "in every retail store that carries games"? A process that SOE has "down cold"? The fact that SOE "knows the entire process inside and out, someone who can just start turning the crank and making it happen"?
Something that they subsequently FAILED to deliver on?
I wonder if SOE had said to FLS "Look, we can try to do this retail thing you want... but we don't think you will have much success... and as for Europe? No chance. Sorry." would they still have won the contract?
Had SOE said "We give the game to companies like Amazon - but they have their own policy on this type of thing so we have no real control there..." would FLS have gone with a different option or company?
FLS invested a lot in the retail plan. After all, the Pre-Boarding box would have cost just as much to produce and distribute as a finished game (Case, CD and insert). So it stands to reason this was a cornerstone in their plan. Yet the 'partner' they chose, who clearly told them they could make this work, failed to deliver.
It seemed pretty clear to me lately (reading between the lines of Dev posts on the PotBS beta forums) that FLS wishes they had done just about everything differently in regards to distribution, including NOT going with Sony.
There's been almost no advertising, very spotty retail distribution, and a whole lot of technical and communication confusion in the whole distribution/registration process. Looking at FLS's boards since launch, I can see that FLS staff have been forced to run around overseeing all these retailers and distributors, trying to unclusterfuck a whole lot of channels.
And let's not forget that they *still* have no Australian distributor. That strikes me as very odd, 'cause it's an English-speaking market with a huuuuuuge sailing hobby. Seems like a natural first target to me.
Whoever was in charge of distribution mucked it up pretty royally, imo.
Edit: All that said, the game is #4 for PC titles on Amazon and #1 on gamestop.com, so it's not a *total* disaster.
Again: I never said you were a 'hateboy' or that you were posting in a hateful manner. I clearly stated what I construe as a 'hater' post and why. I think I was pretty clear on it and don't really see a need to clarify it... again. YOU chose to assume I was speaking of you. Not the other way around. Even after I clearly stated that the OP's title, and post, were out of line.
Yeah you did: And I didn't chose - I wasn't sure so I asked:
Originally posted by Taram
Originally posted by Gyrus
Originally posted by Taram ...Frankly I'm sick of the constant hateboy posts ...
I re-read the entire thread to see if you were including me with the "hateboy" comment?
Are you? ....
When you post about stuff that's been covered... and covered and covered and covered and covered in dozens of other posts? Yeah I include you in it. ...
Posts #40, #41 and #42 of this thread. Again, how?
That "you" was intended for anyone who fit my definition. I did not necessarily mean YOU in particular. Go back and read the thread. Do your posts fit? If they do, then you have your answer, if you don't then let it go
I suppose, in hindsight, I should have used the word 'someone' and 'them' instead of 'you' but it's way too late to go back and edit it now.
"A ship-of-war is the best ambassador." - Oliver Cromwell
Originally posted by Jokerkaaos ...There's been almost no advertising, very spotty retail distribution, and a whole lot of technical and communication confusion in the whole distribution/registration process. Looking at FLS's boards since launch, I can see that FLS staff have been forced to run around overseeing all these retailers and distributors, trying to unclusterfuck a whole lot of channels....
Yes. And this is exactly what some of us are saying.
FLS contracted SOE to do this work so that they would not have to.
If FLS is having to do this then it begs the question - why not simply drop SOE?
Of course, now that the launch has begun, how hard would it be to seperate themselves from SOE at this stage? Is it possible at all?
Originally posted by Jokerkaaos
... And let's not forget that they *still* have no Australian distributor. That strikes me as very odd, 'cause it's an English-speaking market with a huuuuuuge sailing hobby. Seems like a natural first target to me. ...
Actually, this is nothing to do with SOE.
The decision to use a different distributer for Oceania was entirely FLS'es decision.
Apparently FLS is planning something very special for Australia / New Zealand that will make us WANT to play on local servers in preference to NA/Euro servers?
Personally, I don't see what that can be considering many Aussies & Kiwis already play in Guilds and with 'friends' from NA/Europe in other MMOs - but, will wait and see.
Originally posted by Jokerkaaos
Edit: All that said, the game is #4 for PC titles on Amazon and #1 on gamestop.com, so it's not a *total* disaster.
Some people think it's "good" to eat bugs too, but since a majority of people do NOT, that makes them willing to eat less desirable food, regardless of what they think "desirable" means. It's a personality facet that allows you to like a game that most of the world will not like. That still DOES make it a bad game, just a bad game that you like.
LOTRO had almost no bugs, COX had few bugs, GW has few bugs, D&D online is actually fairly bug free... most of those games have seen some success. MXO had tons of bugs, Vanguard HAS tons of bugs... both of those games are floundering or dead. So yes, I understand that bugs make this game bad, but here we are saying a game WITH bugs is good, so I had to say it.
Paying for "growing pains" is not something we, as a consumer, should pay for. If madden 0x came out and only 2 teams were on it, and passing didn't work, no one would buy the game until it was completely fixed!! Why are we mmo players such in a hurry to be the first to try out an unpolished, buggy game? I don't think this is a PotBS issue, but more of a genre-wide issue. The classice "buy now, then complain" issue could resolve it's self if we just didn't buy now.
You are going to pay for beta... plain and simple. When the game gets it's core systems in line, and re-evaluates some of it's concepts, and the price drops to 29.99 or less due to it's lack of success, then maybe I'll pick it up as a side project. Fact is, it's just not enough "game" for the ammount of money they are attempting to get out of people willing to buy any mmo.
So while you seem very passionate about this subject, itemized come-backs (like my example here) (on purpose) just re-itterate what you said before with the same point of view. So while I do not doubt that you may think you like this game, and you may play it for years, I'm just letting you know that there are people that have a very objective, and different view of this game (and gaming in general).
Have a look at FLS's own forums - there are players who can't. Why?
They cannot purchase the game because they cannot find it at any retail location?
Their 'Keys' were not provided?
Their 'keys' are wrong?
They are having trouble with the downloads?
They are having trouble with the launcher?
They are having trouble with the patcher?
They cannot even log into the FLS forums? Why?
Please provide an example of 1 mmorpg that does not have people posting about having trouble with either buying the game, patching the game, loading into the game, or playing the game.
There is a big differance between people having troubles and a system broken by design.
- PotBS pre order box shipments - broken by design
- PotBS pre order key - broken by design
- PotBS distribution/advertising - arguably broken by design, at least poor
- PotBS live key - broken by design
- PotBS launching and patching is not broken by design but it is fairly widespread to be flaky and slow as hell.
Most all of the things SoE handles for PotBS are easily done poorly and many are done downright incompetently. It seems to me if you have to argue, true or false, that other things suck as much you are reaching. It is IRRELEVANT whether or not this company or that company do things badly, the conversation is about what SoE does badly and in terms of PotBS that list is about as long as the list of what they do.
Yes there were alternatives to SOE, but look at it from a marketing point of view, compare these two scenarios:
1) SONY is publishing our game!
2) No one wanted us so were publishing ourselves. Our first game from a small independent company.
3) No one wanted us so we teamed up with another small independent company and hope they remotely have a clue what they are doing.
What would make the game better? What would sell more copies? Who would translate the game to the other languages? Billing? Launcher? Patches? Bandwidth? Honestly I doubt the alternatives were as good as what SOE has to offer.
It seemed pretty clear to me lately (reading between the lines of Dev posts on the PotBS beta forums) that FLS wishes they had done just about everything differently in regards to distribution, including NOT going with Sony.
Hindsight is 20 20. If they went with someone else and the game got half the attention it did because of the lack of controversy, think FLS would have been wishing they had went with SOE?
IF no other company was willing to pick the title up, then I could see SOE as a possible choice compared to utter submission, but it definately should be a warning sign to all who are watching this game, that the devs chose to or were forced to get with a company that was not their first choice, or chose properly.
Either way, there are no positives to this arrangement, only a compromise... and I feel a lot is compromised.
Either way, there are no positives to this arrangement...
- For the players that have a Station Pass, there is no extra charge to play the game
- For FLS, they got a publisher with incredible distribution/advertising ability and deep pockets.
Originally posted by Annekynn
Hindsight is 20 20. If they went with someone else and the game got half the attention it did because of the lack of controversy, think FLS would have been wishing they had went with SOE?
Good point
-- Whammy - a 64x64 miniRPG - RPG Quiz - can you get all 25 right? - FPS Quiz - how well do you know your shooters?
I have posted on here after my beta experiences, and they were less than kind, I would say. Many people argued that this game will rock and that the issues I had with the game (refer to the "sucko" post) were just me being picky. However, now that SOE is onboard, it means that everyone who was involved with the original concept (which I thought was great) will be jumping ship, and it will be put into an infinite "hold" pattern like mxo... no free trials... they just hope it will die out. Too bad, because I have been following this game for so long. Now it's in SOE's 99 cent bin along with vanguard.
According to their own figures (FLS, not SOE), they have over 7000 people already playing in the pre-launch start of the game. That's 7000 people that liked the game so much, they signed up to play pre-launch!
Why can't you people get this through your thick skulls? SOE aren't making the game, FLS are! This game isn't Vanguard. FLS haven't let go all their staff, and SOE haven't bought the game. If that happens in the future, fair enough, it happens. But POTBS is quite simply, NOT AT THAT STAGE YET!
Damn...
Honestly, you know what happens when you assume right?
Yes there were alternatives to SOE, but look at it from a marketing point of view, compare these two scenarios: 1) SONY is publishing our game!
Definately a plus/minus here. Earns you press for good and bad reasons. (But there is no such thing as bad press - is there?)
Oddly though, the "SOE" is not obvious on the box. The badge is the "Platform Publishing" name - so not immediately obvious that it is SONY?
Originally posted by Annekynn 2) No one wanted us so were publishing ourselves. Our first game from a small independent company.
This is NOT FLS'es first title. It is their first MMO if that is what you mean?
But if they had chosen to gone the purely Digital Download route I don't think too many people would have seen it as a negative?
Dev posts at FLS Forums suggest they have a lot of admiration for EvE (CCP) and so they probably looked closely at that model.
In addition, FLS has about 70 staff (Dev post, old FLS forum), so they are not the smallest MMO Dev company.
Originally posted by Annekynn 3) No one wanted us so we teamed up with another small independent company and hope they remotely have a clue what they are doing. What would make the game better? What would sell more copies? Who would translate the game to the other languages? Billing? Launcher? Patches? Bandwidth? Honestly I doubt the alternatives were as good as what SOE has to offer.
They don't actaully say who the other company was?
"Independent" does not have to mean inexperianced or incompetent.
Did you consider the fact it could have been CCP(EvE) or Playnet(WWIIoL)?
Teaming up with either of these companies would benefit both parties.
Or how about someone like Paradox Interactive (That would be their first MMO)?
They would certainly be able to handle the language content very well, and have a rapidly growing stable of third party games (OK - most are buggy as hell - but that's not the point! :-P)
It really does depend on who the other party was (which we will probably never know) but SOE is certainly not the be-all and end-all.
If you want to pick one thing - look at all the threads about AMAZON.COM
It seems AMAZON don't have the correct information here or are very confused about what is going on?
It is the distributers job to make sure companies like Amazon get the info they need to retail a product correctly. But have a look at what the FLS Devs are saying: "WE are in contact with Amazon..." (And no, have a proper read, the "we" is clearly not just referring to their SOE partners.)
So, FLS is having to oversee the distribution - a job they contracted out so that they would not have to do it.
It's obvious that lots of folks here don't like Sony. That's their right.
However, it doesn't seem fair to try to torpedo a new game title because of percieved Sony influence, real, implied or illusory. Ultimately it will be the players who decide whether the game sinks or swims (no pun intended) and not those who will refuse to play the game because they think Sony got their dirty little hands on it. I am not defending Sony because god knows they/ve proven themselves to be royal screwups on more than one occasion. However, rather than bitch and complain about it protest with your wallet and don't buy the game.
Comments
Ah. My favourite response. "Everyone else does it so it's OK!"
Look, nothing is ever perfect, but that is NOT the point here.
Have a read of this - http://www.burningsea.com/page/news/article&article_id=10349
Then do a search on this forum and the FLS forums and see if you think 'that company' has lived up to their side of the bargin?
In this case I think 'that company' has done a very poor job.
Poor distribution and marketing, errors in both these and big problems with the launcher / patcher as a start.
This is not just my opinion - do a search.
Nothing says irony like spelling ideot wrong.
Retail had distribution problems yes, but I dont blame SOE for that. When I called the 5 EB's in my area, 3 had the pre-order boxes, 2 of which were sold out, 1 still had 4 left (so I got one), and the remaining 2 EB's had never even heard of PotBS. So how can 3 stores clearly know what I am talking about and 2 not have a clue? SOE's fault or EB's fault? Debatable.
The fact is the game was distributed online, and anyone could pre-order through either Sony directly (which quite a few people in our guild did without any problems) or from other sites like direct2drive.
And big problems with launcher/patcher? The fact that everyone in our guild who pre-ordered is playing without having had ANY problems patching and getting into the game proves that your "big problems" are "isolated and rare cases". I sure as heck had no problems as it took me less than 2 minutes to patch from open beta to retail and start playing.
So, now your counter arguement is "I didn't have any issues therefor no issues exist!"?
FWIW - I didn't have a problem either. But that is not the point.
Having read the Devlog - do you think 'that company' has lived up to its end of the bargin?
Based on the fact Digital Download seems to be the way to go - would FLS have been better to partner with another company?
Remember, the whole reason they contracted 'that company' was to get boxes on retail shelves in North America and Europe.
If they had elected to go purely Digital Download they could have partnered with other companies, don't you think?
Nothing says irony like spelling ideot wrong.
SOE does not have even one success to show for when partnering with anyone.
Their partnership with LucasArts has led to nothing less than the industry's most infamous catastrophe, Star Wars Galaxies and the CU/NGE, and losing 90% of a 250K sub base within a year
Sigil collapsed within a couple months of Vanguard's release
Perpetual collapsed into bankruptcy, and Gods and Heroes was canceled just weeks before release. It's now being sued by it's creditors for fraud.
I'm not saying that POTBS or Flying Labs are as poorly run as Sigil and PE, but history suggests that SOE is inept and tends to choose partners that are just as inept as they are.
You're bored.
You're bored with this forum. So why do you come here? You're not obliged to read posts here if they bore you you know?
I'm bored? If I were bored with this forum I wouldn't check it. I happen to feel the game isn't ready for release. Doesn't mean I didn't like the game. Go re-read my review. I enjoyed it, I just don't feel it's worth paying a monthly fee for right now.
Explain to me how that is 'bored'? If I were bored I'd move on, just like I moved on from SWG and any number of other games in my past. What I AM is sick to death of people bashing the game just because SOE is handling billing and distribution. The OP didn't say "SOE is failing at it's job" he said "SOE has it's mits on this game, now it's over". That has ABSOLUTELY NO BASIS in truth or fact. I don't mind discussion of issues, I actually enjoy reading them. But this has gone beyond the realm of discussion and has turned into outright flaming every single time it's brought up.
Discussing SOE's failures on it's role in the game is fine. Stating that the game is 'over' or 'will fail' or 'is done' just because SOE happens to be handling the billing/distribution? That's silly.
"A ship-of-war is the best ambassador." - Oliver Cromwell
So you check it...then you find posts on subjects you have read before over and over... then you get upset with the posters because you have discussed that subject before... and that makes THEM "hateboys"?
Woah there. You called me a "hateboy". I was very clear (I thought) that I was not bashing the game itself - nor was I bashing SOE for past wrongs in other games.
Yet YOU called me a hateboy? Would you care to read back and tell me why?
I agree that the OP's choice of thread title was not brilliant. He was perhaps not the clearest on the issue he had either - but if you had an issue with the OP or his comments what posted your hateboy comment in relation to me?
Perhaps we could get a MOD or ADMIN to change the thread title? Would that make a difference?
Nothing says irony like spelling ideot wrong.
These Smitty posts are replicating like Tribbles...someone call the crew of the Enterprise, STAT!
That Guild Wars 2 login screen knocked up my wife. Must be the second coming!
First of all, since neither I, nor you, nor anyone I know has had any problems getting into the game, I fail to see how SOE has done anything wrong with the launcher or patcher. Yes there will always be people out there who do have issues, but SOE is neither special nor unique in this respect.
As for pre-order boxes, since we dont have any numbers available to us on how many ended up in the retail channel, any arguments on the subject are pure speculation. If I hadnt waited a month to get my pre-order box, the very first EB I would have called wouldnt have been already sold out (or not likely to anyhow) and I wouldnt have had to make a few more phone calls to find a store that had it. The fact that I did find a store with it shows that SOE did something right, and once again, any stores that didnt get it can be attributed to other factors, like EB not distributing properly or shortages etc. Whatever, it makes no difference once again since the game was available for online pre-order and download for all those who couldnt get a box copy.
Would FLS have been better off to partner with someone else? Seeing how SOE was basically the only company to meet FLS'es terms (FLS controls game, servers, IP etc), no, SOE was probably their best choice.
Way to twist reality
No, I check it, and find that most of the new posts are topics that have already been posted dozens, if not thousands of times before and in all cases are based upon false statements, or at least mostly false statements. And are couched in such a way as to be flamebait or unconstructive.
Where did I call *you* a hateboy? I clearly stated what I think construes someone posting as a 'hateboy' if your post falls into that type of post then, yeah, you are posting in a hateful manner. IE: unconstructive and using false 'facts' to back up your arguements.
Again: I never said you were a 'hateboy' or that you were posting in a hateful manner. I clearly stated what I construe as a 'hater' post and why. I think I was pretty clear on it and don't really see a need to clarify it... again. YOU chose to assume I was speaking of you. Not the other way around. Even after I clearly stated that the OP's title, and post, were out of line.
"A ship-of-war is the best ambassador." - Oliver Cromwell
Yeah you did:
And I didn't chose - I wasn't sure so I asked:
I re-read the entire thread to see if you were including me with the "hateboy" comment?
Are you?
....
When you post about stuff that's been covered... and covered and covered and covered and covered in dozens of other posts? Yeah I include you in it. ...
Posts #40, #41 and #42 of this thread.
Again, how?
Nothing says irony like spelling ideot wrong.
Fair Point. Although would you agree that it is an established fact that PotBS was NOT availible in retail outlets in the U.K., France, Holland and Belgium?
(That info was availible on the Flying Lab forums)
But that's the whole point isn't it?
"SOE was basically the only company to meet FLS'es terms"
Look back at the Devlog here http://www.burningsea.com/page/news/article&article_id=10349
Here’s exactly what SOE brings to this that we want:
1) Strong distribution: We want Pirates of the Burning Sea to be in every retail store that carries games. SOE has that down cold.
But then read on:
We had two other paths to launching this fall: going it alone and working with another independent outfit we’ve been spending time with. Both of these were good options in general (especially the partnership approach, as we really like those guys). But for either of those approaches to work for a fall launch, everything would have to go right the first time and we’d still need some luck. By working with SOE we know it’ll just happen.
So SOE was NOT the only horse in the race.
Now I remember the run up to this and FLS'es vision very definately hinged around having "retail boxes so that everyone who wants a copy can get it" {That may not be an exact quote - but it's pretty close}
I also remember a number of people on the FLS site tried to encourage FLS to forget retail stores and simply go digital download - but FLS was adamant about the retail component.
Remember the whole "Parrot and Sword(s) for RETAIL PRE_ORDER CUSTOMERS ONLY" thing?
So what made SOE the winner in this race?
Was it the promise that they could get retail boxes "in every retail store that carries games"? A process that SOE has "down cold"? The fact that SOE "knows the entire process inside and out, someone who can just start turning the crank and making it happen"?
Something that they subsequently FAILED to deliver on?
I wonder if SOE had said to FLS "Look, we can try to do this retail thing you want... but we don't think you will have much success... and as for Europe? No chance. Sorry." would they still have won the contract?
Had SOE said "We give the game to companies like Amazon - but they have their own policy on this type of thing so we have no real control there..." would FLS have gone with a different option or company?
FLS invested a lot in the retail plan. After all, the Pre-Boarding box would have cost just as much to produce and distribute as a finished game (Case, CD and insert). So it stands to reason this was a cornerstone in their plan. Yet the 'partner' they chose, who clearly told them they could make this work, failed to deliver.
Nothing says irony like spelling ideot wrong.
It seemed pretty clear to me lately (reading between the lines of Dev posts on the PotBS beta forums) that FLS wishes they had done just about everything differently in regards to distribution, including NOT going with Sony.
There's been almost no advertising, very spotty retail distribution, and a whole lot of technical and communication confusion in the whole distribution/registration process. Looking at FLS's boards since launch, I can see that FLS staff have been forced to run around overseeing all these retailers and distributors, trying to unclusterfuck a whole lot of channels.
And let's not forget that they *still* have no Australian distributor. That strikes me as very odd, 'cause it's an English-speaking market with a huuuuuuge sailing hobby. Seems like a natural first target to me.
Whoever was in charge of distribution mucked it up pretty royally, imo.
Edit: All that said, the game is #4 for PC titles on Amazon and #1 on gamestop.com, so it's not a *total* disaster.
That "you" was intended for anyone who fit my definition. I did not necessarily mean YOU in particular. Go back and read the thread. Do your posts fit?
If they do, then you have your answer, if you don't then let it go 
I suppose, in hindsight, I should have used the word 'someone' and 'them' instead of 'you' but it's way too late to go back and edit it now.
"A ship-of-war is the best ambassador." - Oliver Cromwell
Yes. And this is exactly what some of us are saying.
FLS contracted SOE to do this work so that they would not have to.
If FLS is having to do this then it begs the question - why not simply drop SOE?
Of course, now that the launch has begun, how hard would it be to seperate themselves from SOE at this stage? Is it possible at all?
Actually, this is nothing to do with SOE.
The decision to use a different distributer for Oceania was entirely FLS'es decision.
See this thread:http://mmorpg.com/discussion2.cfm/thread/162260
Apparently FLS is planning something very special for Australia / New Zealand that will make us WANT to play on local servers in preference to NA/Euro servers?
Personally, I don't see what that can be considering many Aussies & Kiwis already play in Guilds and with 'friends' from NA/Europe in other MMOs - but, will wait and see.
Really? That is good news!
Nothing says irony like spelling ideot wrong.
Some people think it's "good" to eat bugs too, but since a majority of people do NOT, that makes them willing to eat less desirable food, regardless of what they think "desirable" means. It's a personality facet that allows you to like a game that most of the world will not like. That still DOES make it a bad game, just a bad game that you like.
LOTRO had almost no bugs, COX had few bugs, GW has few bugs, D&D online is actually fairly bug free... most of those games have seen some success. MXO had tons of bugs, Vanguard HAS tons of bugs... both of those games are floundering or dead. So yes, I understand that bugs make this game bad, but here we are saying a game WITH bugs is good, so I had to say it.
Paying for "growing pains" is not something we, as a consumer, should pay for. If madden 0x came out and only 2 teams were on it, and passing didn't work, no one would buy the game until it was completely fixed!! Why are we mmo players such in a hurry to be the first to try out an unpolished, buggy game? I don't think this is a PotBS issue, but more of a genre-wide issue. The classice "buy now, then complain" issue could resolve it's self if we just didn't buy now.
You are going to pay for beta... plain and simple. When the game gets it's core systems in line, and re-evaluates some of it's concepts, and the price drops to 29.99 or less due to it's lack of success, then maybe I'll pick it up as a side project. Fact is, it's just not enough "game" for the ammount of money they are attempting to get out of people willing to buy any mmo.
So while you seem very passionate about this subject, itemized come-backs (like my example here) (on purpose) just re-itterate what you said before with the same point of view. So while I do not doubt that you may think you like this game, and you may play it for years, I'm just letting you know that there are people that have a very objective, and different view of this game (and gaming in general).
Elite poster by 82
Hey smitty?
As the OP - any chance you can get the thread title changed?
My suggestions are:
SOE: The Gatekeeper to PotBS!
or
SOE has the keys to FLS'es Booty Chest!
Nothing says irony like spelling ideot wrong.
Please provide an example of 1 mmorpg that does not have people posting about having trouble with either buying the game, patching the game, loading into the game, or playing the game.
There is a big differance between people having troubles and a system broken by design.
- PotBS pre order box shipments - broken by design
- PotBS pre order key - broken by design
- PotBS distribution/advertising - arguably broken by design, at least poor
- PotBS live key - broken by design
- PotBS launching and patching is not broken by design but it is fairly widespread to be flaky and slow as hell.
Most all of the things SoE handles for PotBS are easily done poorly and many are done downright incompetently. It seems to me if you have to argue, true or false, that other things suck as much you are reaching. It is IRRELEVANT whether or not this company or that company do things badly, the conversation is about what SoE does badly and in terms of PotBS that list is about as long as the list of what they do.
--------------------------------
Achiever 60.00%, Socializer 53.00%, Killer 47.00%, Explorer 40.00%
Intel Core i7 Quad, Intel X58 SLi, 6G Corsair XMS DDR3, Intel X-25 SSD, 3 WD Velociraptor SATA SuperTrak SAS EX8650 Array, OCZ 1250W PS, GTX 295, xFi, 32" 1080p LCD
Yes there were alternatives to SOE, but look at it from a marketing point of view, compare these two scenarios:
1) SONY is publishing our game!
2) No one wanted us so were publishing ourselves. Our first game from a small independent company.
3) No one wanted us so we teamed up with another small independent company and hope they remotely have a clue what they are doing.
What would make the game better? What would sell more copies? Who would translate the game to the other languages? Billing? Launcher? Patches? Bandwidth? Honestly I doubt the alternatives were as good as what SOE has to offer.
Hindsight is 20 20. If they went with someone else and the game got half the attention it did because of the lack of controversy, think FLS would have been wishing they had went with SOE?
IF no other company was willing to pick the title up, then I could see SOE as a possible choice compared to utter submission, but it definately should be a warning sign to all who are watching this game, that the devs chose to or were forced to get with a company that was not their first choice, or chose properly.
Either way, there are no positives to this arrangement, only a compromise... and I feel a lot is compromised.
Elite poster by 82
- For the players that have a Station Pass, there is no extra charge to play the game
- For FLS, they got a publisher with incredible distribution/advertising ability and deep pockets.
Good point
- RPG Quiz - can you get all 25 right?
- FPS Quiz - how well do you know your shooters?
Why can't you people get this through your thick skulls? SOE aren't making the game, FLS are! This game isn't Vanguard. FLS haven't let go all their staff, and SOE haven't bought the game. If that happens in the future, fair enough, it happens. But POTBS is quite simply, NOT AT THAT STAGE YET!
Damn...
Honestly, you know what happens when you assume right?
Definately a plus/minus here. Earns you press for good and bad reasons. (But there is no such thing as bad press - is there?)
Oddly though, the "SOE" is not obvious on the box. The badge is the "Platform Publishing" name - so not immediately obvious that it is SONY?
This is NOT FLS'es first title. It is their first MMO if that is what you mean?
But if they had chosen to gone the purely Digital Download route I don't think too many people would have seen it as a negative?
Dev posts at FLS Forums suggest they have a lot of admiration for EvE (CCP) and so they probably looked closely at that model.
In addition, FLS has about 70 staff (Dev post, old FLS forum), so they are not the smallest MMO Dev company.
They don't actaully say who the other company was?
"Independent" does not have to mean inexperianced or incompetent.
Did you consider the fact it could have been CCP(EvE) or Playnet(WWIIoL)?
Teaming up with either of these companies would benefit both parties.
Or how about someone like Paradox Interactive (That would be their first MMO)?
They would certainly be able to handle the language content very well, and have a rapidly growing stable of third party games (OK - most are buggy as hell - but that's not the point! :-P)
It really does depend on who the other party was (which we will probably never know) but SOE is certainly not the be-all and end-all.
Nothing says irony like spelling ideot wrong.
Which begs the question: Where was this ability in relation to PotBS?
Can you link me to more than 1 site promoting PotBS on the net?
List more than 1 Magazine ad you have seen?
They haven't even managed to get Banner Ads HERE on mmorpg - Bounty Bay Online has ads HERE.
So where is this ability?
EDIT: As for distribution, look here for an education http://www.burningsea.com/forums/forumdisplay.php?f=282
If you want to pick one thing - look at all the threads about AMAZON.COM
It seems AMAZON don't have the correct information here or are very confused about what is going on?
It is the distributers job to make sure companies like Amazon get the info they need to retail a product correctly. But have a look at what the FLS Devs are saying: "WE are in contact with Amazon..." (And no, have a proper read, the "we" is clearly not just referring to their SOE partners.)
So, FLS is having to oversee the distribution - a job they contracted out so that they would not have to do it.
Nothing says irony like spelling ideot wrong.
It's obvious that lots of folks here don't like Sony. That's their right.
However, it doesn't seem fair to try to torpedo a new game title because of percieved Sony influence, real, implied or illusory. Ultimately it will be the players who decide whether the game sinks or swims (no pun intended) and not those who will refuse to play the game because they think Sony got their dirty little hands on it. I am not defending Sony because god knows they/ve proven themselves to be royal screwups on more than one occasion. However, rather than bitch and complain about it protest with your wallet and don't buy the game.