Howdy, Stranger!
It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!
Quick Links
Is EQNext Vaporware?
This discussion has been closed.
It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!
Comments
I don't completely disagree with you, Nan. MMORPG players are a fickle lot.
But BurntVet makes a very good point. CN is not a game development company. They will not have the same tolerance for 'business as usual' when it comes to how SOE operated. Expecting them to take the same attitude as Sony (a company providing products at various levels within the entertainment industry) is asking for something that's not going to happen.
You've used the term 'R&D game' to reference the EQ:N several times. It sets my teeth on edge. R&D is an operation to develop, advance or deploy technology -- it is, essentially, an educational process. Developing a game is a consumer-oriented process. The two are completely different processes. R&D will not produce a game. Trying to imply a concept of open-ended research to a modern technological company, particularly a technology company backed by a aggressive venture capitalist company, seems like an excuse to explain away 'slow development'.
Maybe SOE/DGC are trying to make a game by discovering new techniques to incorporate unproved technology. If so, that's a clear sign that they don't have an understanding of what they are doing. "It will be ready when it's ready" sounds like excuses from undereducated employees. Would you wait 45 minutes for an otherwise empty restaurant to cook a simple steak? Would you be a happy customer when the server gives you the 'ready when ready' line?
You and I and many of our fellow forum members would have had a lot less angst over this issue if Sony had simply kept quiet about its projects in development, or they had simply named the project 'Free Realms: Next'.
Finally, addressing Arclan's concern. Maybe other development companies will take this whole EQ:N project as an object lesson, to keep their plans in-house, and their marketing department out-of-the-loop until there is something definitive product in the pipeline. A multiple year wait for a product hurts the market for that product.
Logic, my dear, merely enables one to be wrong with great authority.
Wait one second... SOE did in fact slap an EQN stamp on a game, released it for sale and told players to play that. I'm not sure how you can overlook something like that and instead blame players for not being thrilled.
As Mendel said, SOE could have easily shut up about their project until they could actually get some concepts set or maybe even have a real idea of where the project is going and when it might possibly be done. Yet that is not what they did and the backlash they are receiving is their own fault.
The short and sweet is that when companies over promise and under deliver there will be backlash. Seems to fit this situation exactly.
The company can claim they have the luxury of taking their time to get things right, but clearly that time ran out at SOE and I doubt Daybreak is going to be any more generous. The problem is they have already shown they are willing to release buggy, unfinished, boring game well before they get anything right.
Actions > words.
Not sure what game your talking about? Unless you mean Landmark? If you mean Landmark that game is nothing like EQN, one is a MMOrpg and the other is a building game. They made Landmark (devs words) because the tools they were using to make EQN were so much fun they wanted to put them in the players hands.
Haters gona hate, as my post above. Game takes to long gamers bitch. Game comes out to soon, gamers bitch. Game ends up being the top seller on steam, gamers bitch. Backlash is everywhere on the internet and IMO 90% its not worth reading and life goes on and games keep selling and most people have fun. Heck WoW the biggest MMO out there is still going strong and people cant stop bitching about that one as well. Landmark is doing fine and the game keeps getting developed and has an AWESOME in game community, one of the best I have seen in my 17 years of MMOing.
That only happened in the mind of the few hardcore people that even take time to come to forums like these. Most people just wait for games to release and play them. When EQN and Landmark release as in done their beta process and if they are quality games at that time, people will play it. Backlash means little when most of the market for these games are not part of it.
You call it released, the devs do not. You can keep calling them released but that only lowers your cred as you dont know what beta means. When a game is testing Alpha systems for another game, how you can call it anything but beta shows how little many know about game development. DGC is far from out of time. They build a good game, people will play it even if they HATE EQ or DGC. Why? Gamers are suckers for any quality game. Now we just need to wait and see if it will be =-) DGC has the skill to make the game the only question with so much RD will the systems come together to be the game people will play. So far I dont like the direction of combat at all. I hope they get the combat down right. From devs words lately, thats a big part of what they are doing now. So when they update Landmarks combat we will see if they are getting it right.
On one hand you claim the developers will not do something like slap the EQ name on an unfinished game and put it to market, because they are going to take their time and get things right.
On the other you have a clear example of the developer putting the EQ name on an unfinished game and putting it out to market before they got things right.
I see no need to argue semantics about marketing terms or continually trying to blame players. It is what it is. There really is no arguing against that.
It is painfully clear that what the company says and what the actually does are often a complete contradiction.
Sorry, but are you new here or something? Are you totally ignorant to what a beta is?
Nothing is released. Not a hard concept to wrap your head around.
If you're referring to being able to pay your way into testing....welcome to the last 10 years bud.
You cannot sell beta testing on Steam.
As I said early, why argue about terminology. They put out an unfinished game with the EQ name slapped on it.
People feel better when a rushed unfinished game is presented as "early access!!" or "paid beta testing!!!". It doesn't change what it is.
When people say that EQN is vaporware, some point to Landmark as evidence of all the great work being done on EQN, because Landmark is the core base of EQN.
When Landmark is being criticized, it is a completely different game than EQN or some ambiguous pre-alpha thing that can't be used to judge EQN.
The latter is the truth of the matter. Nobody knows exactly how much of landmark is going to show up in EQN.
No he has you. You can sell anything if people will buy it. If people are willing to buy into alpha and beta programs then its viable. Hell people sell domain names and thats as an undone product as you can get. Its a name and nothing more. At that point you cant get upset because it does not come with a web page. As long as development teams label their games as Alpha, Beta or Early Access its buyers own fault if they dont like the state of what they bought. DGC has been very fair, if you buy access to a beta program and you are not having fun testing, they refund you. Where do you get that with a finished product?
Semantics. (again).
You can sell anything, yes. But that implies trade, and trade is defined and protected by local, state, federal and international law. Buyers have rights -- one of those is the right to expect a product that they have been sold. Developers may not be adequately labeling the products they are collecting money for to accurately, and misleading customers about what they are buying is a big no-no. That's a massively slippery slope that many game developers appear to be avoiding, for the moment. All it will take is one really annoyed rich person with way too much time (and money) on their hands, and an overwhelming aversion to all the semantics issues between 'alpha', 'beta', 'early access', 'founders programs' and all other semantic attempts to obscure the fact that product X isn't finished, and there will be a lawsuit. Messy for everyone, and no one will 'win'.
Steam's aversion to selling Beta testing appears to be an effort at complying with fair trade laws, no matter how many developers plead otherwise.
There is no 'he has you' moment here, despite your apparent glee, Nan. For all you or I know, Daffid might be that umpty-zillionaire who knows way too many lawyers.
Logic, my dear, merely enables one to be wrong with great authority.
You still believe huh? You bought what dave sold(and was fired for) hook line and sinker. I believe what they did to sell Landmark was criminal (most likely was thus the name change), and that the guy who made WarZ was closer to delivering on his promises than SOE/DGC ever will be. A true shame.
edit- One more thing, no one will ever play Landmark, but the 300 die-hard fans the game has. They will keep buying it though, because DGC will keep selling and marketing it.
edit-Sorry... It just pisses me off everytime I think about what could have been with EQL:N. Then I start to think about it was never meant to be. Weeks of points and ideas in 50+ page threads about what pvp could be like. Remember "you will help us develop"? None of anything was taken into consideration at all.
No its not semantics. If something is labeled Alpha, Beta, or early access and you sue because the game is not done. Then you not any better then that lady in the US who sued because her coffee was hot lol. People like that should be put on a ship and rejected from the planet. If your that dumb you should not be able to take part in making new people here on earth. We just dont need you at that point.
My bet is they will release it but it won't be anything similar to EQ or EQ2 but a utterly shallow be-all-you-want-with-spastic-combat. SOE/Daybreak (or whatever they are these days) cannot deliver, they haven't made a decent game in 10 years. And above all - EQN is so far a complete vaporware because they have nothing to show other than a few buildings from Landmark they haven't even made themselves.
SOE/Daybreak competes in mud league these days and I'm quite sure they won't get out from it.
I don't think it is vaporware but I do think the game will be absolute shit thanks to the culling of visionaries like Dave Georgeson and Jeff Butler. If Next gets made it will a shell of the game it was destined to be with SOE and a capable head at the helm of the studio instead of the blood sucking leech that is daybreak and a certain figurehead.
Sandbox means open world, non-linear gaming PERIOD!
Subscription Gaming, especially MMO gaming is a Cash grab bigger then the most P2W cash shop!
Bring Back Exploration and lengthy progression times. RPG's have always been about the Journey not the destination!!!
EQN was never going to be anything remotely similar to EQ1 or 2 (FOR GOOD REASON)in the first place. Keep that in mind when you post.
Sandbox means open world, non-linear gaming PERIOD!
Subscription Gaming, especially MMO gaming is a Cash grab bigger then the most P2W cash shop!
Bring Back Exploration and lengthy progression times. RPG's have always been about the Journey not the destination!!!
I think the real question here is, does anyone really care if it does get released anymore? If it were to release tomorrow, I wouldn't give a rats ass. There's nothing to this title that we haven't already seen nor have an abundance of already. It's just another throw away MMO.
Dave Georgeson had nothing to do with the vision of EQNext (2 out of 3 of the people who did are still at Daybreak might I add) and Dave was responsible for Landmark taking over the focus of development.
Terry looks a lot more happy and relaxed since he is gone and he was and still is the top guy for both Landmark and EQNext (and one of the visionary too).
I think that's a little ignorant to say seeing as how we don't know jack shit about the game and what it has yet. Pretty much the ONLY thing we HAVE seen so far is the graphic system. We havent seen gameplay(more than what they've barely shown us which is basically nothing), structure, etc, etc, etc. So to say that it's something we have already seen is a little far fetched.
I will give them the benefit of doubt. In any case, if they fail to deliver I doesn't cost me anything. It will be interesting to see what they do.
Epic Music: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vAigCvelkhQ&list=PLo9FRw1AkDuQLEz7Gvvaz3ideB2NpFtT1
https://archive.org/details/softwarelibrary_msdos?&sort=-downloads&page=1
Kyleran: "Now there's the real trick, learning to accept and enjoy a game for what it offers rather than pass on what might be a great playing experience because it lacks a few features you prefer."
John Henry Newman: "A man would do nothing if he waited until he could do it so well that no one could find fault."
FreddyNoNose: "A good game needs no defense; a bad game has no defense." "Easily digested content is just as easily forgotten."
LacedOpium: "So the question that begs to be asked is, if you are not interested in the game mechanics that define the MMORPG genre, then why are you playing an MMORPG?"
Ut oh we got ourselves another fanboi that doesn't see the absolute worst in everything, burn burn burn!
No offense two them, but neither seemed to be very visionary, although I still don't know what either actually contributed to the project. EQN and Landmark seem to be the product of many minds and not one or two folks. While the entire project is forward thinking, it isn't really too far outside the box or "wow I would of never thought of that." Highly doubt the game's future good/bad would be a result of them being there or not.
Did they release the game for sale at a retail site, yes.
Slap the EQ label on the game, yes.
No time taken to get things right before doing that, yes.
It is pretty hard to believe a developers or fans claims when their last several released games directly contradict those claims.
It is hard to blame developers for doing that when players have been conditioned to not only accept and pay for buggy unfinished games, but actively defend the terrible state of those games. Worse yet is they are now convincing people to pay them to build the game as well.
Players assuming the risk of development costs, shouldering development efforts and championing unfinished product releases just by adding a couple words like early access, pre-release or beta. Imagine how much other games like Vanguard or Warhammer could have benefitted from such luxuries.
For me it is the sum of the parts and not each piece.
What was sold was access to participate in Landmark's early development and virtual goods. They were very clear about this as most early access types are and offered (still do?) full refunds if people weren't satisfied. Was and is it an unfinished product? Yes and no reason to think otherwise.
Since their plan was to release F2P, it was pretty clear that we weren't buying the actual game, but the ability to part of everything before hand, which is what it is. Obviously semantics and definitions come into play here, but it is rather pointless.
They sold X and people bought X. If I believe it is J and you believe it is M, that doesn't matter.
Regardless if they called it Alpha, EA, Cardboard Box, they sold it "as is" with a plan in place to improve it.
Landmark isn't a terrible product. They've done a lot of what they promised, but it is still a Work in Progress and hasn't reached open beta or release yet. Sadly doesn't look like it will for a while.
In regards to EQN, it is a very decent "Alpha" or whatever we want to call an early development stage. As both are supposed to share foundations and core assets/tech, it is a good idea of what EQN will at least be at the bare minimum, with the assumption that a ton of work is to come to make a fully fledged mmorpg experience.
So for me, Landmark's progress and any EQN specific development are evidence of EQN being a very slow WIP, but not vaporware or whatever negative term mean all hope is lost. Landmark can be judged on its own, but to judge it as a "finished" product is a bit silly as the folks making it and the buying into it don't believe that.
As someone that bought Warhammer's CE, I'm glad companies are moving towards early access and such things. I was sold a "finished" product, yet that is not what I received, regardless if I had a fun time or not (which i did).
Looking at the wide variety of mmos out there, doesn't seem to matter if 10 or 100 million is spent, the time of development, number of betas or whatever, products still end up being sold as "finished" with bugs, missing content, lack of depth and overall not as promised. Sure don't see many offering refunds after X amount of time once these issues are found out either.
I'd much rather throw cash at smaller products with a more focused team (Crowfall) than pre-order another big name title. Both ways I'm rolling the dice.
Unless EQN is blow your socks off crazy good, I most likely wouldn't pay a dime to try it out. If it turns out being B2P and I can't get into pre-release for free, I'll either never play it or wait a good time for others to try it out which. But in doing so I'll be behind the magical progress bar and probably say forget it anyway.
Gaming comes with a lot of ups and downs and I'm tired of paying for them blindly. At least with crowdfunded and early access I know that I'm getting a unfinished product. It does make me feel better I guess and I get to be part of the development and have some insignificant say in what the final product might look like.
If people don't like it, oh well. I don't like buying unfinished "finished" products.
Landmark is a sloppy kickstarter for EQN. It isn't some other game as being presented.
also, I don't understand how paying for a game that is knowingly unfinished somehow solves the problem of being tired of buying unfinished games as you say. All it does is remove the possibility of getting a finished game and ensure you will be playing a buggy unfinished game for year(s).
Rewarding big developers with money for releasing unfinished games just enables them to continue doing the same. Even worse they will continue to push those borders as long as players continue to reward them. You can see examples of that in Daybreaks games as they usher in cash shops and subscription fees to "pre-release" betas games.
These are the same poor releases from years ago, just disguised as betas and early access.
With the few MMOs currently in development people seems to have given up on getting a product that actually releases in a good shape.
I mean most of us can live with some bugs (no matter how annoying that is), GW2s release was acceptable but AoC to mention one wasn't.
But the problem still is that very few games can come back from a really bad launch (Eve and FF XIV comes to mind) so while releasing the game early might give you some cash fast it will severly limit your income after the first month. Devs should know this by now. Many fans might defend the crappy launch but the fact is that most average players still will leave after a week.
I hope Daybreak finally learned the lesson SOE never learned and focus on long term income by making a fun game that wont be a pain to play for the first 6+ months.