Howdy, Stranger!
It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!
Quick Links
SOE, can't understand
sushimees
Member Posts: 489
I just can't put this thing into my brain, how can such a big game industry, who has made MMORPG's for all their lives make such decisions that affect the community badly?
I mean.. The station exchange, EQ's fees going up, EQ 2 going WoW and SWG's combat upgrade, which is bad for old players and good for new players.
I can't understand, how do they come up with these decisions O.o. It's really weird I think. Other companies, who make MMORPG's don't do such drastic things and their games stay stable, but how can one company do so many flaws, that affect the entire community.
Do they even listen to people or are they just greedy little bastards?
Comments
You pretty much hit on it.The CU wasnt about how they changed the game drastically but more about how they didnt listen to the players.
Want to ENJOY an mmo?
Dont start a guild and dont be a leader or volunteer to be coleader or captain.
Just play the damn game:)
Well...They take a monkey give him a pen and paper to draw on,
then some hippie interprets the drawings and there you go, you have an update
its the truth
But yeah ... I don't know
Don't you worry little buddy. You're dealing with a man of honor. However, honor requires a higher percentage of profit
When SoE makes this drastic decisions they make sure to make a detailed market research.
Their objective is to make the company more profitable, that s why the latest controversial decision to launch Station Exchange.
So if they think that making these changes will bring more subscribers or more money, they won't think it twice.
SoE decided to leave behind the CORE market long time ago, preferring to embrace the more vast and profitable casual player base.
They know that the CORE players are just a limited number and decided to go for the casual market, which number is growing everyday.
Although I understand their reasons, I must say that their decisions were pretty wrong.
They could have kept the loyal EQ fanbase, by making EQ2 more similar to the original game.
Instead they made a watered version of the game, alienating EQ players which won't play EQ2 when they will decide to leave EQ eventually.
So the only hope for EQ2 to survive is to make it more similar to WoW, hoping to grab part of their customers.
Unfortunately for them companies like Blizzard and Arenanet(ex-blizzard), are more experienced in games that appeal casual players.
They know how to make games that are fun and interesting.
SoE only success has been EQ which was designed for CORE players.
SoE doesn't have half the experience of Blizzard or Arenanet in making such games, and in my opinion they should have kept doing what they know best.
Although their are trying to act like a solid company, they look pretty much confused on what they are going to do, that s why they are continuosly changing the features in their game (EQ, EQ2, SWG).
I see a bleak future for SoE if they don't make up their mind soon.
Not that I care, since they behaved like arseholes with all their customers.
Anyway, the customer is the one that has the power to make or break a company, so lets see if their tactics will paid off.
For now we can only criticise their appalling behaviour, but who knows, maybe they were right after all.
In the end is all down to business and making money, it is not about games and having fun anymore.
The only reason that EQ was a success was the timing of its release. It was one of the first MMOGs, was 3D, and came around right around the time that CD-Roms were starting to be used for games, and right around the time that the big computer boom started where tons of people were buying computers. Everybody was excited about "multimedia" programs and applications, and it was one of the first ones.
I don't know the details of it, but I know that somehow these things combined to get them so many subscribers. No doubt they did a huge advertising blitz also at the start of it all. All of these things combined to make EQ a big success.
If EQ came out with 5 other MMOGs coming out at the same time, it wouldn't have been nearly as big. SOE is horrible at making MMOGs. Some of the people who just follow the crowd have praised SOE's name in the past "They're the biggest MMOG company, how can you dog on them", or "they must be doing something right" was basically what they said.. but it's more complicated than that.
And the "crowd" is beginning to be inclined to dislike SOE. Just like anything that is persuasive because it's true. Eventually the crowd accepts it. (Unless there are people in power who have the ability to manipulate public opinion, but that's another story.)
In any case, they're bastards, and the day that they are forced out of the MMOG business, or at least the day when other developers don't see them as the group to emulate, will be a great day for gaming in general.
_______________________________________________________________________
Looking forward (cautiously) to: Age of Conan, Dark Solstice, Armada Online.
Will soon try: Guild Wars
Overall: Amazed and bewhildered at the current sad state of the artform of gaming.
Market timing is, after all, part of the success story of any product.
This is a fairly accurate statement.
They did not do a huge advertising blitz, because MMOGs were still an unproven genre and SOE was not involved in the development of EQ. For the most part, most of the parties involved in EQ were hoping they'd see ROI within 4 years. They achieved ROI in 4 months. This was unexpected, and contributed to many problems in the early days.
That's your theory, but I think you're wrong. Please consider that Meridian 59 and UO were on the market as well, and UO had already been established. People had alternatives, just like they had alternatives with AO, AC, and DAoC when they were released. Yet EQ maintained half a million subscribers...your theory starts to look extremely week in light of that information.
That's a clearly biased and unobjective declaration, and does nothing to support your argument but make you look partisan.
They are equally to blame as you are in making biased, partisan, unobjective statements. Either side hurts the whole.
The numbers of subscribers for their product offering flatly dispute that comment. Perhaps your clique of friends believes so, but the numbers they are fielding are showing a substantial enthusiasm toward their products.
What a preposterous comment. They offer products that people enjoy...many, many people for that matter. Perhaps you are inclined against them...have it your way! The good news is you have many titles to choose from as alternatives. Calling them bastards and hoping for their demise only makes you look as much a fool as anyone who bears blind-faith defense of SOE.
SOE offers the best deal for your monthly entertainment dollars and they offer you a variety of games for that money. Each game appeals to a different style of gamer. SOE has more of a clue than you think. By upping monthly subscription rates for individual games they are encouraging people to get the full station pass as it becomes a better value. That in turn makes the subscription rates to their games go up. You have to look at the big picture to understand their methodology. If you go to a store and see EQ2 or SW:G sitting on the shelf and you think.." hmm i'm already paying for the subscription.. why not buy the box just for casual play?" then they sell more boxes as well as showing stronger subscription numbers across the board. As far as SW:G is concerned anyone who doesnt think the CU was necessary need to recheck what people have been saying since the game came out. They might actually start to grow their subscription base now that they've listened to the people that have quit and changed the game.
If your crack dealer offers you $50 worth of heroin and weed for only $5 more than you normally pay for your rock wouldnt you say sure i'll buy that! Even if its not the best shit out there its still a good deal.
Make a difference!
Copeland, that's kinda stupid. We're talking about money, this isn't like encouraging lazy people to do sports.
Also the CU update was important in some things as I have read the SWG forums, but not all upgrades were neccesary.
And also, lots of people tend to play 1 MMORPG rather than 2 or more.
That will change as time goes on.
Amen to that. I barely have time for 1 MMO nowadays. If i pick up a new MMO i cancel the old one. It's a vicious cycle.
Joined 2004 - I can't believe I've been a MMORPG.com member for 20 years! Get off my lawn!
As usual you make a scary amount of sense Mr Man
EQ was an average game very well timed.....
+-+-+-+-+-+
"MMOs, for people that like think chatting is like a skill or something, rotflol"
http://purepwnage.com
-+-+-+-+-+-+
"Far away across the field, the tolling of the iron bell, calls the faithful to their knees. To hear the softly spoken magic spell" Pink Floyd-Dark Side of the Moon
I agree that EQ came out at the right time, but I disagree that EQ was an average game.
The theory given by Thinman about the reasons why EQ has been a success are quite right, although it has more to do with the boom of fast connection like DSL and T3(and the end of expensive telephone bills), rather than the distribution of games by CD-rom, which were around for quite some time.
Anyway, even if this theory is true, that doesn't explain why after 5 years EQ is still the western MMO with the second largest subscribers base, after WoW.
I mean, if the success of EQ was only due to good timing, after tens of new MMOs that came out after EQ, it will be estinct by now.
Instead is still alive and kicking after 5 years.
This means that EQ has something special, after all.
I agree that EQ is far from perfect, but with all its imperfections, EQ is still the benchmark for all MMOs.
just to tell you...it was so great because it was published by a different company and then SOE came in.
the reason why i love EQ and EQII is because it still has those mature players. its nice to beable to play a game and have them hail you and you get into a decent conversation and make friends and play the game and have fun. while when i tried wow i got called a noob all the time and no one would talk to me.
EQdead's success was a tribute to Verant, primarily Brad Mcquaid(sp?). SOE ruined the game after they gained control by focusing entirely on raid/group content and changing aspects of the game to be solo unfriendly.
For all the supposed market research and experience in the gaming industry, SOE has proven time and again they are out of touch with what CORE or casual players want. EQ2 has not been the success SOE was counting on, and the drastic nerfing of SWG shows no clear vision.
There are immature players in all MMOG's including EQdead and EQ2. Most who played EQdead were exposed to many uberguild assholes who strutted around like peacocks and ridiculed anyone who wasn't part of their clique.
"We feel gold selling and websites that promote it damage games like Vanguard and will do everything possible to combat it."
Brad McQuaid
Chairman & CEO, Sigil Games Online, Inc.
Executive Producer, Vanguard: Saga of Heroes
www.vanguardsoh
SoE have a strategy, and they stick to it, for the better and the worst.
Ste seem to think SoE make no mistakes...I differ, they make many critical mistakes and the way they focus on the ''hardcore raiders''(noobs IMO) just show how deep such a mistake is. They have staff inside their guild, infiltrated to help them and bolster them. They buy them tickets for airplanes...and those players go down the shaft completely, complaining about the details when the structure was great. If Afterlife would have quit on LDoN, maybe I could have understand. But they quit on PoP, which is the closest expension to Kunark you could ever find.
The list of SoE mistakes is pretty long. But they also do make some good moves. However, SoE have troubles to differenciated a good move from a bad move. Listening to Brad would prolly have been better then what they did so far. Now dont take me wrong, Brad do mistakes to, but he have a plan, a vision, a goal. See, even if my ideas would come clashing with Brad's ideas, Brad is not utterly bent on abusing a group of players or on been in a position of power(well, maybe in the office and company, but that I have no idea, I am talking from a player point of view). It change nothing to Brad if little Anofalye is uber or weak. SoE stop listening to Brad and start listening to SOME players. However, they didnt have a plan on who to listen, on what to listen, on anything at all, and they consider every single idea on a 1 to 1 basic, without any long term vision or idea. Everyone have good and bad ideas, and to say otherwise is to been blinded.
See, let say I have 1 good idea, a raid leader in Afterlife have another good idea, and Jorev have another good idea. You tell yourself, wow, 3 good ideas, this is soooo going to be good. It is not necessarily the case(well, especially in Afterlife case, I mean, they like to screw everyone whenever they can, for the pleasure of it, how can you trust such folks? Aint they bitching at how lame WoW is by now?).
What is a good short term decision(LDoN and never following up in this idea could be an exemple, LDoN would have been wonderfull, but it was needing further developpment and progression...it never got any real development but a few phantom clones in later expensions) is not necessarily a good long term decision. And uberguilds dont build communities as everyone realize by now, they feed on them and destroy the communities. See, a nice prospering group of 1 minority specy(uberguilds) bearing plague but immune to it, will cause havoc and massive deaths on the others group, on the community at large. Uberguilds are plague bearers, and SoE will not admit it.
- "If I understand you well, you are telling me until next time. " - Ren
EQ has had a lot less subscribers than it did at its peak for quite some time now. SOE fudges the numbers. I'm not going to go into describing the evidence and whatnot, because I've had to do it like 10 times in my life and I'm tired of it.
But EQ is not nearly close to 500k subs anymore. Just look at how much activity there is in the EQ boards on this site, and the nature of the posts. You can glean the state of the game from this, I think.
And to say that because I have a "biased" opinion, it is no longer valid is just silly. You could sit on the fence in everything in life, but you could never come to any real conclusions in anything.
For everything in life, there is something that that thing really is. People can have a large variety of opinions on that thing, but there is always the one thing that it is. I'm not claiming that I know what this thing is, but I think that from my experience, I'm able to get a pretty good idea, when it comes to SOE. And I get the feeling that more and more people are feeling the same way about them.
_______________________________________________________________________
Looking forward (cautiously) to: Age of Conan, Dark Solstice, Armada Online.
Will soon try: Guild Wars
Overall: Amazed and bewhildered at the current sad state of the artform of gaming.
That will change as time goes on.
Replying to Sushimees's quote -
Not true!
I agree that the majority of MMORPG players do play 1 MMORPG.
BUT there is a sizeable number who either play more than 1 MMORPG at the same time.... and/or have 2 or more seperate accounts (which is the same as playing mor ethan 1 mmorpg, even if all their seperate accounts are for the same MMORPG LOL!)
Based on my MMORPG experience, I would say it is 25% of all MMORPG players at the most before WoW came out. After WoW came out, it is now more like 15% to 10% of all MMORPG players. BUT as Lord British pointed out, and I have loooong been pointing out, WoW will do what SWG did, but better! In 1-4 years from now, WoW will have expanded the player base for all MMORPGs, including the hardcore players. So in the near future after WoW's playerbase matures, it might be back to 25% and even higher the number of players who play 2 or more MMORPGs at the same time.
As someone already stated, SOE did not create EQ1. If they had, it would have sucked.
nethervoid - Est. '97
[UO|EQ|SB|SWG|PS|HZ|EVE|NWN|WoW|VG|DF|AQW|DN|SWTOR|Dofus|SotA|BDO|AO|NW|LA] - Currently Playing EQ1
20k+ subs YouTube Gaming channel
Maybe my use of the word average to describe EQ1 was not quite the best choice so I will re-phrase a bit.
EQ1 was an exercise in attempting to deliver the most broadly apealing game that could possibly be done. Because this will inevitably result in not being "excellent" in some areas but good in most, I used the word average to describe the overall effect.
I played EQ1 for almost 2 years. I freely admit when I first logged in as a Barb Shaman in Everfrost I was completely blown away by the whole game. Having played UO for 6 years I expected EQ to deliver the same lasting apeal, it did not. This was because it didnt have any of the freedom and depth of UO, it was only delivered on a very shallow level. Without raving on anymore I would say this.
Whoever developed what.... if DAoC came out at the same time as EQ1 I personally think it would have had a similar size player base maybe even bigger because at the end of the day it offered everything EQ did but with the best PvP / RvR action you can get and that is STILL largely true.
Thats why I think its fair to say that most of EQ's success was due to timing. The size of the player base is still relatively high because it takes a long time to get anywhere in EQ and no one wants to just throw away their hard work. I stopped playing UO in earnest over a year before I quit for good because I was just so attached to all my stuff... the same would be true of many EQ accounts today.
+-+-+-+-+-+
"MMOs, for people that like think chatting is like a skill or something, rotflol"
http://purepwnage.com
-+-+-+-+-+-+
"Far away across the field, the tolling of the iron bell, calls the faithful to their knees. To hear the softly spoken magic spell" Pink Floyd-Dark Side of the Moon
No its not stupid its economics.. SOE knows what they're trying to achieve. They have a plan and they'll follow through with it. I play several games as do most of the people i know. The station pass is the best value even if none of the games offered are the best out. There is plenty of entertainment to be had for the amount you pay. I still prefer eve-online and saga of ryzom but i also pay for the station pass just so i can play eq or eq2 when i feel interested (which isnt often lol). I also play Project Entropia and Guild Wars. Granted you can really only play 1 or 2 games seriously but the others are just part time pleasures. I spend about $60 a month on video games but then i used to spend $100 a month on smokes so it's not so bad and video games are alot more fun than smoking..
Anyway don't underestimate soe just because you dont happen to like a couple of their moves. They never look at their core fans they look down the road. The've ruined EQ but i think it will help SW:G and EQ2.. oh yeah i'd expect a major change to EQ2 down the road just like you're seeing with SW:G.. I don't think theres many people who care for the mass instancing and lockout combat system they have in place.
Make a difference!
That is such a ridiculous statement I don't know where to start. Think about what you just said. If a 2005 Model Ferrari had been released at the same time as the Model-T-Ford, which do you think would have sold more copies?
Except the Model T was released in 1903 and the 2005 Ferrari in 2005 making a difference of almost 100 years. If I compared EQ to a game to be released in about 95 years time Id cop that on the chin...
However the 2 games I compared were released only a bit over 18 months apart so you can untwist your shorts a little and allow yourself to breath
EQ1 2000 - DAoC OCT /2001 (internet source Gamespot)
Incidentally GS rated DAoC 9.1 and EQ 8.4..... Im happy with my comments
http://gamespot.com/pc/rpg/everquest/index.html?q=everquest
http://gamespot.com/pc/rpg/darkageofcamelot/review.html
Excerpt from the review.....
"You don't need 20/20 hindsight to see why the successful early-October launch of Dark Age of Camelot was such a significant event in PC gaming. It's safe to say that this impressive online role-playing game marks the dawning of a new era in a gaming genre that has steadily gained prominence since Ultima Online made national headlines in 1997. Developed by the experienced but heretofore little-known Mythic Entertainment, Dark Age of Camelot squarely takes aim at other popular online role-playing games--namely, Sony and Verant's definitive EverQuest, Microsoft and Turbine's Asheron's Call, and Funcom's recent sci-fi-themed Anarchy Online--and, by and large, it blows them away"
+-+-+-+-+-+
"MMOs, for people that like think chatting is like a skill or something, rotflol"
http://purepwnage.com
-+-+-+-+-+-+
"Far away across the field, the tolling of the iron bell, calls the faithful to their knees. To hear the softly spoken magic spell" Pink Floyd-Dark Side of the Moon