Re. Vanguard: according to the wiki, SOE devs worked alongside Sigil devs to create that disaster. SOE also apparently set the release date before Sigil said the game was ready for the public. After they took over completely, they revamped the game. The outcry from the players prompted discussion about the possibility of "classic" servers. That doesn't sound like a glowing report on SOE's involvement.
You're also leaving out perhaps SOE's greatest failure of all time. In fact one of their own senior devs on the project described it as an organizational, epic grade f*ck up. That would be Star Wars Galaxies.
Leaving out SWG when discussing SOE, and trying to point fingers at SOE's partners on many of their other struggling products seems like quite a spin job tbh.
Behind SOE, I wasn't too excited about Funcom's release of Conan or Cryptic's release of STO. I heard Funcom at least made some leadership changes after the fact, and has tried to improve their game. Seems like Cryptic is developing a habit of early release, double-dipping with their fees, and then moving on to another project (e.g. Champions and STO). I used to respect them for their work on City of Heroes. The game was a bit repetative, but it was solid imo.
SOE has made some major blunders and has some serious problems, but they are not nearly the devil incarnate as some would like to paint them:
For example, don't believe everything you read on that wiki website; while SOE hopped in at the end of Vanguard, they hardly worked alongside Sigil until it became clear that what Brad was selling was merely smoke and mirrors. Don't take my word for it though, here is a link to an interview that was done with an (ex-)Sigil employee a day after the infamous parking lot firing: Link
Also while SOE was running SWG when the NGE fiasco hit, people seem to forget that LucasArts insisted on the NGE changes; SOE was just stupid enough to agree to them.
By all means hold SOE accountable for it's problems (such as their horrible 'customer service'), but let's not assign them as the sole guilty party in those areas where the blame needs to be spread around or they weren't to blame in the first place.
"Oh my, how horrible, someone is criticizing a MMO. Oh yeah, that is what a forum is about, looking at both sides. You rather have to be critical of anything in this genre as of late because the track record of these major studios has just been appalling." -Ozmodan
SOE has made some major blunders and has some serious problems, but they are not nearly the devil incarnate as some would like to paint them:
For example, don't believe everything you read on that wiki website; while SOE hopped in at the end of Vanguard, they hardly worked alongside Sigil until it became clear that what Brad was selling was merely smoke and mirrors. Don't take my word for it though, here is a link to an interview that was done with an (ex-)Sigil employee a day after the infamous parking lot firing: Link
Also while SOE was running SWG when the NGE fiasco hit, people seem to forget that LucasArts insisted on the NGE changes; SOE was just stupid enough to agree to them.
By all means hold SOE accountable for it's problems (such as their horrible 'customer service'), but let's not assign them as the sole guilty party in those areas where the blame needs to be spread around or they weren't to blame in the first place.
[1] Pulling a fast one on microsoft might be possible, because they don't make mmos. Even with slick salesmanship and focused demos, microsoft caught on to the problems at sigil. Soe is one of the most experienced mmo developers on the market. If they were stupid enough to fall for some talk and doctored demos, then it really shows why their games struggle so much. However I do not for one second think soe was so blinded to the problems going on at sigil or the condition vanguard was in.
That being said, once soe did take over the game it wasn't long before players were begging for classic servers and speaking about feelings of betrayal. That cannot be blamed on sigil or the release condition of the game. That is just how soe works and common complaints from their customers.
[2]
It has been pointed out many times showing several sources directly from soe employees that the nge was the initiative of soe and not created in response to demands from lucas arts. Soe spawned the concept and campaigned for the changes as the current developers hated the design of the game prior to the nge and wanted to change the game themselves.
Sure other companies they have partnered with share some blame, but the track record of soe speaks for itself with the consitant nature of their troubled games and relationships with their players. It cannot be explained away as the fault of other companies when soe is the one constant in all the situations.
If EA gets involved in your mmo...you pretty can guarantee the fat lady will be singing shortly. So yes, EA gets my vote.
I think EA has only been a publisher for mmos (I could be wrong?), but I agree with your message. EA has a way of ruining games when they get involved.
[1] Pulling a fast one on microsoft might be possible, because they don't make mmos. Even with slick salesmanship and focused demos, microsoft caught on to the problems at sigil. Soe is one of the most experienced mmo developers on the market. If they were stupid enough to fall for some talk and doctored demos, then it really shows why their games struggle so much. However I do not for one second think soe was so blinded to the problems going on at sigil or the condition vanguard was in.
That being said, once soe did take over the game it wasn't long before players were begging for classic servers and speaking about feelings of betrayal. That cannot be blamed on sigil or the release condition of the game. That is just how soe works and common complaints from their customers.
[2]
It has been pointed out many times showing several sources directly from soe employees that the nge was the initiative of soe and not created in response to demands from lucas arts. Soe spawned the concept and campaigned for the changes as the current developers hated the design of the game prior to the nge and wanted to change the game themselves.
Sure other companies they have partnered with share some blame, but the track record of soe speaks for itself with the consitant nature of their troubled games and relationships with their players. It cannot be explained away as the fault of other companies when soe is the one constant in all the situations.
1. I never said SOE was smart, as they continue to make monumental blunders. However, by all accounts, Brad was extremely effective with his dog and pony show for Vanguard. Considering that SOE had worked with him before, I find it entirely feasible that they initally bought into his pitch until it became blatantly evident that Sigil really had nothing solid. Additonally, although I absolutely love Vanguard and dislike EQ2, I really can't fault SOE for not continuing to develop Vanguard. I mean why should they? A fully developed Vanguard would put it in direct competition with EQ2 (a competition I personally think Vanguard would win); that didn't work out so well for Turbine when AC2 launched as direct competition with AC (although in that case AC2 lost the fight).
2. As far as the NGE goes? I never said that LucasArts initiated the plans for the NGE, I said they insisted on the change. A while after the NGE controversy started to settle down a bit, I saw an interview with a lady from LucasArts who was involved in the whole deal. According to her, they (LucasArts) saw the numbers WoW was generating and so LucasArts started pushing hard for the NGE change. I have to take her word on that, so both companies need to share in the blame.
Unfortunately, SOE seems to be outsourcing it's stupidity; first with John Needham (the guy who used to run SOE's infamous 'cusomer service' department) forming Cryptic, and now Gordon Walton working on SW:TOR. Walton's the guy that seems to believe that SWG's Jump to Lightspeed expansion was a bad thing, and was responsible for SWG losing players a month after it launched (when in all actuallity, it was WoW launching at that time and starting out from the gates as a juggernaut). Oh yeah, he also seems to think the average MMO player can't handle full 3D flight mechanics; his influence is probably the primary reason why SW:TOR's space gameplay is going to be a rail shooter.
"Oh my, how horrible, someone is criticizing a MMO. Oh yeah, that is what a forum is about, looking at both sides. You rather have to be critical of anything in this genre as of late because the track record of these major studios has just been appalling." -Ozmodan
The "worse" would be SOE. The WORST would be Cryptic. Only Cryptic would have the cajone's to create MMO's with smaller worlds and less content than many single player games. And do it TWICE.
Somehow Robsolf you have this awesome ability to drive some of these failures to depths deeper than I thought they could hit with me, amazing I never really thought of Cryptic like that.
Heh, a friend of mine told me he tried SOE's clone wars game. He said there isn't even a world to explore lol. So maybe Cryptic's not the only company with the oversized cajone's. He described the game as a cash shop with minigames :P.
Next time tell you friend to first look at what type of game he's entering. As anyone who actually read up some about Clone Wars would have known it wouldn't be a world to explore They way he described the game just shows he just entered the game blindly expecting things the game was not :P
I believe the point remains: Cryptic isn't the only company "with the cajones to create an MMO with smaller worlds and less content than many single player games" -_^. Clone Wars world is even smaller, if it could even be called a world at all.
Since I did read up on the game, I won't be entering it blindly. I won't be enterting it at all. It seems to be little more than an excuse for an item shop with a Star Wars skin.
Since I know you should know what a MMORPG is why do you keep pretending that Clone Wars fits the describtion of a MMO, since this topic is about developers of MMO ( no worries you may say something about SOE's MMO's), but since you did read up as you say on Clone Wars you already know it isn't a MMO why even mention Clone Wars?
Articles like this and many other links describe the Clone Wars game as an MMO:
Like I said, I did read up on the game. What I read described it as an MMO. I'm not pretending anything, as you wrongly suggest. I think you owe me an apology.
Now if you would kindly stop casting aspersions on my comments, I'd like to get back to my dialogue with the other poster about companies who make MMOs with small worlds and limited content. I agree that Cryptic seems to have done this, but it seems they're not alone. I've been disappointed with Cryptic and SOE lately.
Who in your opinion is the worse game developer/publisher in regards to MMO's? My vote will go to SOE for there general lack of commitment to develop and promote their games. Think Vanguard, EQ, Pirates of the Burning Sea, the Matrix Online, plantside and so on and you get the picture of a company that seems indifferent to their own product. But perhaps their greatest sin was creating Everquest 2 when they should of continued to invest in the original. Although Everquest 2 extended comes a close second.
SquareEnix is probably the worse... They don't care about the customers outside of Japan, they play obvious favorites with the JP gamers. SE takes forever to get anything done in regards to updates and they don't listen to anyone/fans... about as stubborn as a pack of mules (I guess that is why FFXIV is so terrible, they don't listen)
Like I said, I did read up on the game. What I read described it as an MMO. I'm not pretending anything, as you wrongly suggest. I think you owe me an apology.
Now if you would kindly stop casting aspersions on my comments, I'd like to get back to my dialogue with the other poster about companies who make MMOs with small worlds and limited content. I agree that Cryptic seems to have done this, but it seems they're not alone. I've been disappointed with Cryptic and SOE lately.
No apology needed towards what I said to you as obvious a player would look at the official website to see what the type of genre the game is, I mean by now we know plenty other websites that often name games but are wrong in their description, for example we can find tons of website's stating Guildwars 1 is a MMORPG where one look at the official site would have shown that Guild Wars is an online roleplaying game. Now look at Clone Wars and we all can agree that it's a is a brand-new action-packed online game, again no mentioning of it being a MMORPG.
Sorry Arc I just wished people would be honost about certain game genre's, would make allot of difference having discussions about them.
That you dislike SOE is alright but please do so for the right reasons as you have done in the past about it.
Like I said, I did read up on the game. What I read described it as an MMO. I'm not pretending anything, as you wrongly suggest. I think you owe me an apology.
Now if you would kindly stop casting aspersions on my comments, I'd like to get back to my dialogue with the other poster about companies who make MMOs with small worlds and limited content. I agree that Cryptic seems to have done this, but it seems they're not alone. I've been disappointed with Cryptic and SOE lately.
No apology needed towards what I said to you as obvious a player would look at the official website to see what the type of genre the game is, I mean by now we know plenty other websites that often name games but are wrong in their description, for example we can find tons of website's stating Guildwars 1 is a MMORPG where one look at the official site would have shown that Guild Wars is an online roleplaying game. Now look at Clone Wars and we all can agree that it's a is a brand-new action-packed online game, again no mentioning of it being a MMORPG.
Sorry Arc I just wished people would be honost about certain game genre's, would make allot of difference having discussions about them.
That you dislike SOE is alright but please do so for the right reasons as you have done in the past about it.
What I took issue with was your suggesting that I'm "pretending" something. You suggest I know something, but pretend otherwise. This was incorrect. I read up on the game, and it was described by staff reviewers at reputable sites as an MMO, many times over.
If I dislike this game, it's because it appears to be a virtual item shop with minigames. That's not my cup of tea. If I dislike SOE, heh, well there are plenty of reasons for that.
I don't actually remember the name of the developer but the folks who made Mourning/Age of Mourning have to be the worst. A pathetic abomination of a game added to a screwed up. rip off billing scam...err..system. Easily the worst ever.
The Moving Finger writes, and, having writ, Moves on: nor all thy Piety nor Wit Shall lure it back to cancel half a Line, Nor all thy Tears wash out a Word of it.
Never been a big fan of Blizzard. In pretty much every game they've made since Lost Vikings, they simply polish the innovations of other games then get credit for redefining the genre.
Never been a big fan of Blizzard. In pretty much every game they've made since Lost Vikings, they simply polish the innovations of other games then get credit for redefining the genre.
Then theres the Activision-blizzard merger too to think about...and warcraft/starcraft being total ripoffs of warhammer/40k. Always bothered me a lil.
What I took issue with was your suggesting that I'm "pretending" something. You suggest I know something, but pretend otherwise. This was incorrect. I read up on the game, and it was described by staff reviewers at reputable sites as an MMO, many times over.
If I dislike this game, it's because it appears to be a virtual item shop with minigames. That's not my cup of tea. If I dislike SOE, heh, well there are plenty of reasons for that.
Okay you're right and I apologize as you didn't pretend, my bad. And I also don't really like Clone Wars, but I aint the target audience for it, but did try the game for about 30 minutes, did actually enjoy Replublic Defender and Droid Programming, up till the point it became more challenging but needed to sub to a Jedi account to get to the more challenging parts, which lost my intrest in it, as like you I don't really like cash shops or paying for alittle more challenge. But I did know when entering CW that it was more of a mini-games game.
Also want to mention that what I feel is very bad about CW is the ability to pay with phone SMS, as these day's many kids do have cell-phones, so the temptation for kids to sub or buy station-cash will be greater then if their payment options would only be CC.
But I still stand with my point that if anyone wants correct info they should look at the info at the official website to see what the game genre actually is. CAs my example about Guildwars 1 is also mentioned plenty of times being a MMO by reputable gaming websites.
But as also said feel that Cryptic is worse of a developer then SOE is as SOE actually has given me a MMORPG experiance with their games where Cryptic never gave me a MMORPG experiance while at the time their games where called or are still called MMORPG's.
And for a personal reason.. F(ail)uncom. For overhyping AoC so much... And blantly lieing about the game before the release. I can understand hype spinning but blunt lies are where i draw the line. This was a real eye opener for me...
I've been uplinked and downloaded, I've been inputted and outsourced. I know the upside of downsizing, I know the downside of upgrading.
I'm a high-tech low-life. A cutting-edge, state-of-the-art, bi-coastal multi-tasker, and I can give you a gigabyte in a nanosecond.
I'm new-wave, but I'm old-school; and my inner child is outward-bound.
I'm a hot-wired, heat-seeking, warm-hearted cool customer; voice-activated and bio-degradable.
Never been a big fan of Blizzard. In pretty much every game they've made since Lost Vikings, they simply polish the innovations of other games then get credit for redefining the genre.
So blizzard is the worst developer for making solid games and some of their fans mistakenly credit them for innovation?
I can see how that is much worse than companies that lie to their customers and also deliver broken unfinished bad games.
What I took issue with was your suggesting that I'm "pretending" something. You suggest I know something, but pretend otherwise. This was incorrect. I read up on the game, and it was described by staff reviewers at reputable sites as an MMO, many times over.
If I dislike this game, it's because it appears to be a virtual item shop with minigames. That's not my cup of tea. If I dislike SOE, heh, well there are plenty of reasons for that.
Okay you're right and I apologize as you didn't pretend, my bad. And I also don't really like Clone Wars, but I aint the target audience for it, but did try the game for about 30 minutes, did actually enjoy Replublic Defender and Droid Programming, up till the point it became more challenging but needed to sub to a Jedi account to get to the more challenging parts, which lost my intrest in it, as like you I don't really like cash shops or paying for alittle more challenge. But I did know when entering CW that it was more of a mini-games game.
Also want to mention that what I feel is very bad about CW is the ability to pay with phone SMS, as these day's many kids do have cell-phones, so the temptation for kids to sub or buy station-cash will be greater then if their payment options would only be CC.
But I still stand with my point that if anyone wants correct info they should look at the info at the official website to see what the game genre actually is. CAs my example about Guildwars 1 is also mentioned plenty of times being a MMO by reputable gaming websites.
But as also said feel that Cryptic is worse of a developer then SOE is as SOE actually has given me a MMORPG experiance with their games where Cryptic never gave me a MMORPG experiance while at the time their games where called or are still called MMORPG's.
Thanks for hearing me. Your point about checking official websites is also well taken. I also appreciate your caution regarding RMT and paying via the cell phone. Happy gaming Reklaw ^_^.
Funcom gets my vote, AoC was horrifically overhyped and WAY too buggy considering their budget and manpower. Not to mention the very sharp decline in quality past tortage.
Comments
If EA gets involved in your mmo...you pretty can guarantee the fat lady will be singing shortly. So yes, EA gets my vote.
SOE, no question.
SOE has made some major blunders and has some serious problems, but they are not nearly the devil incarnate as some would like to paint them:
For example, don't believe everything you read on that wiki website; while SOE hopped in at the end of Vanguard, they hardly worked alongside Sigil until it became clear that what Brad was selling was merely smoke and mirrors. Don't take my word for it though, here is a link to an interview that was done with an (ex-)Sigil employee a day after the infamous parking lot firing: Link
Also while SOE was running SWG when the NGE fiasco hit, people seem to forget that LucasArts insisted on the NGE changes; SOE was just stupid enough to agree to them.
By all means hold SOE accountable for it's problems (such as their horrible 'customer service'), but let's not assign them as the sole guilty party in those areas where the blame needs to be spread around or they weren't to blame in the first place.
"Oh my, how horrible, someone is criticizing a MMO. Oh yeah, that is what a forum is about, looking at both sides. You rather have to be critical of anything in this genre as of late because the track record of these major studios has just been appalling." -Ozmodan
[1] Pulling a fast one on microsoft might be possible, because they don't make mmos. Even with slick salesmanship and focused demos, microsoft caught on to the problems at sigil. Soe is one of the most experienced mmo developers on the market. If they were stupid enough to fall for some talk and doctored demos, then it really shows why their games struggle so much. However I do not for one second think soe was so blinded to the problems going on at sigil or the condition vanguard was in.
That being said, once soe did take over the game it wasn't long before players were begging for classic servers and speaking about feelings of betrayal. That cannot be blamed on sigil or the release condition of the game. That is just how soe works and common complaints from their customers.
[2]
It has been pointed out many times showing several sources directly from soe employees that the nge was the initiative of soe and not created in response to demands from lucas arts. Soe spawned the concept and campaigned for the changes as the current developers hated the design of the game prior to the nge and wanted to change the game themselves.
Sure other companies they have partnered with share some blame, but the track record of soe speaks for itself with the consitant nature of their troubled games and relationships with their players. It cannot be explained away as the fault of other companies when soe is the one constant in all the situations.
I think EA has only been a publisher for mmos (I could be wrong?), but I agree with your message. EA has a way of ruining games when they get involved.
1. I never said SOE was smart, as they continue to make monumental blunders. However, by all accounts, Brad was extremely effective with his dog and pony show for Vanguard. Considering that SOE had worked with him before, I find it entirely feasible that they initally bought into his pitch until it became blatantly evident that Sigil really had nothing solid. Additonally, although I absolutely love Vanguard and dislike EQ2, I really can't fault SOE for not continuing to develop Vanguard. I mean why should they? A fully developed Vanguard would put it in direct competition with EQ2 (a competition I personally think Vanguard would win); that didn't work out so well for Turbine when AC2 launched as direct competition with AC (although in that case AC2 lost the fight).
2. As far as the NGE goes? I never said that LucasArts initiated the plans for the NGE, I said they insisted on the change. A while after the NGE controversy started to settle down a bit, I saw an interview with a lady from LucasArts who was involved in the whole deal. According to her, they (LucasArts) saw the numbers WoW was generating and so LucasArts started pushing hard for the NGE change. I have to take her word on that, so both companies need to share in the blame.
Unfortunately, SOE seems to be outsourcing it's stupidity; first with John Needham (the guy who used to run SOE's infamous 'cusomer service' department) forming Cryptic, and now Gordon Walton working on SW:TOR. Walton's the guy that seems to believe that SWG's Jump to Lightspeed expansion was a bad thing, and was responsible for SWG losing players a month after it launched (when in all actuallity, it was WoW launching at that time and starting out from the gates as a juggernaut). Oh yeah, he also seems to think the average MMO player can't handle full 3D flight mechanics; his influence is probably the primary reason why SW:TOR's space gameplay is going to be a rail shooter.
"Oh my, how horrible, someone is criticizing a MMO. Oh yeah, that is what a forum is about, looking at both sides. You rather have to be critical of anything in this genre as of late because the track record of these major studios has just been appalling." -Ozmodan
Articles like this and many other links describe the Clone Wars game as an MMO:
http://www.wired.com/gamelife/2010/08/clone-wars-beta/
(e.g."Star Wars: Clone Wars Adventures, a new MMO from Sony Online Entertainment...."). See also:
http://www.pcworld.com/article/197697/a_freetoplay_star_wars_mmo_for_families.html and
http://www.joystiq.com/2010/06/01/star-wars-clone-wars-adventures-mmo-announced-by-soe/
Like I said, I did read up on the game. What I read described it as an MMO. I'm not pretending anything, as you wrongly suggest. I think you owe me an apology.
Now if you would kindly stop casting aspersions on my comments, I'd like to get back to my dialogue with the other poster about companies who make MMOs with small worlds and limited content. I agree that Cryptic seems to have done this, but it seems they're not alone. I've been disappointed with Cryptic and SOE lately.
SquareEnix is probably the worse... They don't care about the customers outside of Japan, they play obvious favorites with the JP gamers. SE takes forever to get anything done in regards to updates and they don't listen to anyone/fans... about as stubborn as a pack of mules (I guess that is why FFXIV is so terrible, they don't listen)
SOE hands down.
Cryptic is a distant 2nd
I guess that makes 2 of us.. They banked on the name when it came to LoTRO.
No apology needed towards what I said to you as obvious a player would look at the official website to see what the type of genre the game is, I mean by now we know plenty other websites that often name games but are wrong in their description, for example we can find tons of website's stating Guildwars 1 is a MMORPG where one look at the official site would have shown that Guild Wars is an online roleplaying game. Now look at Clone Wars and we all can agree that it's a is a brand-new action-packed online game, again no mentioning of it being a MMORPG.
Sorry Arc I just wished people would be honost about certain game genre's, would make allot of difference having discussions about them.
That you dislike SOE is alright but please do so for the right reasons as you have done in the past about it.
Cryptic I hate them. They make shitty games with shitty gameplay with some shit on the side! =P
What I took issue with was your suggesting that I'm "pretending" something. You suggest I know something, but pretend otherwise. This was incorrect. I read up on the game, and it was described by staff reviewers at reputable sites as an MMO, many times over.
If I dislike this game, it's because it appears to be a virtual item shop with minigames. That's not my cup of tea. If I dislike SOE, heh, well there are plenty of reasons for that.
I heard that the shit on the side is only available via RMT, and not included in the subscription fee -_^.
I don't actually remember the name of the developer but the folks who made Mourning/Age of Mourning have to be the worst. A pathetic abomination of a game added to a screwed up. rip off billing scam...err..system. Easily the worst ever.
The Moving Finger writes, and, having writ,
Moves on: nor all thy Piety nor Wit
Shall lure it back to cancel half a Line,
Nor all thy Tears wash out a Word of it.
~Omar Khayyam
i agree cryptic is preety shitty there only in it for the money not the passion. STO could be a great game if someone else had it.
Never been a big fan of Blizzard. In pretty much every game they've made since Lost Vikings, they simply polish the innovations of other games then get credit for redefining the genre.
Then theres the Activision-blizzard merger too to think about...and warcraft/starcraft being total ripoffs of warhammer/40k. Always bothered me a lil.
Okay you're right and I apologize as you didn't pretend, my bad. And I also don't really like Clone Wars, but I aint the target audience for it, but did try the game for about 30 minutes, did actually enjoy Replublic Defender and Droid Programming, up till the point it became more challenging but needed to sub to a Jedi account to get to the more challenging parts, which lost my intrest in it, as like you I don't really like cash shops or paying for alittle more challenge. But I did know when entering CW that it was more of a mini-games game.
Also want to mention that what I feel is very bad about CW is the ability to pay with phone SMS, as these day's many kids do have cell-phones, so the temptation for kids to sub or buy station-cash will be greater then if their payment options would only be CC.
But I still stand with my point that if anyone wants correct info they should look at the info at the official website to see what the game genre actually is. CAs my example about Guildwars 1 is also mentioned plenty of times being a MMO by reputable gaming websites.
But as also said feel that Cryptic is worse of a developer then SOE is as SOE actually has given me a MMORPG experiance with their games where Cryptic never gave me a MMORPG experiance while at the time their games where called or are still called MMORPG's.
Cryptic. its not even a contest there
Cryptic hands down.
And for a personal reason.. F(ail)uncom. For overhyping AoC so much... And blantly lieing about the game before the release. I can understand hype spinning but blunt lies are where i draw the line. This was a real eye opener for me...
I've been uplinked and downloaded, I've been inputted and outsourced. I know the upside of downsizing, I know the downside of upgrading.
I'm a high-tech low-life. A cutting-edge, state-of-the-art, bi-coastal multi-tasker, and I can give you a gigabyte in a nanosecond.
I'm new-wave, but I'm old-school; and my inner child is outward-bound.
I'm a hot-wired, heat-seeking, warm-hearted cool customer; voice-activated and bio-degradable.
RIP George Carlin.
SOE gets the prize for me. I could write a lot but it's late and it's all been said before.
So blizzard is the worst developer for making solid games and some of their fans mistakenly credit them for innovation?
I can see how that is much worse than companies that lie to their customers and also deliver broken unfinished bad games.
Thanks for hearing me. Your point about checking official websites is also well taken. I also appreciate your caution regarding RMT and paying via the cell phone. Happy gaming Reklaw ^_^.
Funcom gets my vote, AoC was horrifically overhyped and WAY too buggy considering their budget and manpower. Not to mention the very sharp decline in quality past tortage.