microsoft dropped vg because the MS overseeing folk didn't like what they saw. did SOE not install ANY overseeing types? did SOE not give sigil any terms such as "release by X date" when sigil asked to push the release out?
you can blame a lot on sigil and it's asshat of a leader. but SOE is the corporation that allowed vanguard to release and blessed it releasing in the condition it did.
spin it away from soe any way you so desire; but they are directly responsible for vanguard being released in the condition it was released.
Well let's be realistic here, MS dropped VG for good reasons and I didn't see companies lining up to bail out Sigil, did you? Brad fought for control over VG and Sigil and got it, with the condition that SOE funds would dry up by a certain date. Brad attempted to push this date back by getting more investors but no-one wanted to know.
I'm spinning nothing, I despise SOE and Smed but on this one the guy is clean. He gave Brad a second chance to make his "vision" reality when no-one else would. If Brad had run his company like a CEO instead of like a second hand car salesman he would still be the online games guru of enlightenment he was before VG crashed and burned. Smed did nothing more than make an offer of the funds he was willing to provide and sign an agreement to publish VG, Brad didn't have a gun to his head when he signed that piece of paper.
Saying SOE is directly responsible for the condition that VG was released in makes you sound like a...well I don't wanna be banned (again) so I'll just ask you to stop being one. No SOE=no VG that's the simple equation that even Brad McQuaid could understand, can you? VG was a steaming pile when MS dumped Sigil, 75% of VG was programmed after the deal with SOE was signed. So without SOE the game would've been worse or non-existant, so under your reasoning SOE is responsible for programming 75% within 9 months and getting Sigils butt into gear?
As for PotBS go to their website and work out what the situation is before spreading conspiracy theories please. FLS is self financed and in a good position, I'm not happy with their decision to work with SOE but who ever said life would be fair? They seem to have cut a good deal with SOE and we'll all see how it goes, but I'll be playing PotBS and if it is a decent game I'll be having fun. Because life is what you make it, so I decided not to wallow in my misery whilst watching others have fun on the high seas.
"Of all tyrannies, a tyranny sincerely exercised for the good of its victims may be the most oppressive. It would be better to live under robber barons than under omnipotent moral busybodies. The robber baron's cruelty may sometimes sleep, his cupidity may at some point be satiated; but those who torment us for our own good will torment us without end for they do so with the approval of their own conscience"
Since the thread that inspired this was closed, and since this one has started to devolve into baiting and circular arguments, shouldn't this thread be closed as well?
But, before it is, let me add this:
I like PotBS, alot. I like the concept, the design, and the team. I like it better than any of the proposed mmo's for '08, right now.
I followed PotBS for about 2 years. I had quite a few discussions on the forums with the devs themselves.(and they weren't all positive) I got frustrated at the delays, excited at the additions, and nervous at the contract negotiations.
I refuse to pay for anything associated with SOE, because I took a personal stand against their business practices, quite some time ago.
As such, despite the first two statements, I'm not buying PotBS. That's my decision, for my own reasons, and I will stick to it.
But, I'm leaving it at that! I've made my decision, and I'm moving on. I'm not trying to berate the FLS team over their choice, or mine. I'm not inventing theories on what did, or will happen. I'll speak with my wallet, and, when asked, explain why I'm doing so, but that's it (except for this post, oviously) Why can't folks just do the same? What benefit comes from arguing about the potential future of a game you have no intention of buying? You're just wasting your own valuable time. You think it's going to fail? Great, say it once, if you think you'll need to prove your intelligence later on, and then move on. Someone probably needs your feedback on a game you actually play, or are planning to play. You think its going to succeed. Great. Let the game come out, support it with your wallet, and, if it does succeed, help promote it to other potential players. Forget convincing the unconvincable (word?). Let the dead horse get buried.
This constant need to argue over a moot point is just plain ridiculous. The FLS team thinks their decision was fine, they predict good things, and are prepared for any outcome. The fans of the game are going to buy it, and play, until they aren't fans anymore. And, those that won't buy it because of SOE, won't buy it.
Done and done people. Time for EVERYONE to move on, no?
First of all I can not understand why people freak out over an obvious and straight forward business transaction. Secondly just by posting baseless comments about SOE taking over Flying Labs or any other company with no 'real' evidence is downright stupid. What sums it up for me is how people slam SOE for messing up Starwars etc. However when they make major fixes, tweaks, bug correction and additional content to other games like Vanguard everyone keeps quiet. I like to see a post labelled 'SOE well done on fixing Vanguard'. Let them distribute PotBS and shut the hell up about them ruining the game. I know that if PotBS has some unpolished elements (which it will) there will be muliple posts from trolls blaming SOE. SOE is a company that makes mistakes and also runs a successful business. They are not out to FU every mmo in the marketplace. Sick of these type of posts and NO I don't work for PotBS or SOE.
sigil released vanguard when they did because soe gave them a release date. did soe not have anyone overseeing sigil? even microsoft had the foresight to put people in place to monitor progress and microsoft dropped vanguard. so yes, SOE is directly responsible for vanguard being released in the condition it was released. these are facts that aren't really up to debate. no need to thank soe for fixing what they allowed to be broken in the first place.
that's not a hater or hatred. that's someone keeping up with a trend of how soe interacts with it's *partners* and how it treats it's customers. don't confuse them.
soe stated their goal is to have a bunch of average/so-so mmos under the station pass. so their stated goal is to NOT make/support anything stellar or groundbreaking and are instead shooting to support mediocrity.
personally, i'm worried with the amount of people who can't be bothered to remember how things actually have gone down. and instead choose to pick/choose bits and pieces to remember. i choose to not have faith in a corporation building a game. i'll trust them, as far as they've earned the trust. i'll also not trust them to the extent they've earned that.
partnering with someone like SOE, who has an established track record (swg, vg, gnh) ... makes people stop and think. you go from swg (oh lucas arts made us do it), to vg (oh, we just had people overseeing it and making sure they were on track for release, and because we at soe were tracking it's progress, we figured it was ready for release), to gnh (oh, you can't blame us, we were just publishing it = the curse).
then add to that the matrix (does anyone play this?), and personally, i've never cared a whit for eq or eq2 and i've tried them several times.
what potbs has going for it, is it's not orcs and elves. what's going against it (other than associating in any fashion with SOE), is there are other pirate games out or in development.
i hope this game is great fun. i honestly do. i have my doubts about the "once a country takes over all the cities, game resets" thing that i've read about. not sure how that's going to be implemented and that could be a game breaker.
but, after watching all these soe-friendly games being released (or not release - gnh); i'll definitely be one of the ones watching a few months after retail to see what happens.
could we please get correspondent writers and moderators, on the eve forum at mmorpg.com, who are well-versed on eve-online and aren't just passersby pushing buttons? pretty please?
Who cares? All you people still bitter about SWG need to get over it. It's very childish to have this little SOE grudge. Not every SOE game is gonna pull a SWG.
microsoft dropped vg because the MS overseeing folk didn't like what they saw. did SOE not install ANY overseeing types? did SOE not give sigil any terms such as "release by X date" when sigil asked to push the release out?
you can blame a lot on sigil and it's asshat of a leader. but SOE is the corporation that allowed vanguard to release and blessed it releasing in the condition it did.
spin it away from soe any way you so desire; but they are directly responsible for vanguard being released in the condition it was released.
Well let's be realistic here, MS dropped VG for good reasons and I didn't see companies lining up to bail out Sigil, did you? Brad fought for control over VG and Sigil and got it, with the condition that SOE funds would dry up by a certain date. Brad attempted to push this date back by getting more investors but no-one wanted to know.
I'm spinning nothing, I despise SOE and Smed but on this one the guy is clean. He gave Brad a second chance to make his "vision" reality when no-one else would. If Brad had run his company like a CEO instead of like a second hand car salesman he would still be the online games guru of enlightenment he was before VG crashed and burned. Smed did nothing more than make an offer of the funds he was willing to provide and sign an agreement to publish VG, Brad didn't have a gun to his head when he signed that piece of paper.
Saying SOE is directly responsible for the condition that VG was released in makes you sound like a...well I don't wanna be banned (again) so I'll just ask you to stop being one. No SOE=no VG that's the simple equation that even Brad McQuaid could understand, can you? VG was a steaming pile when MS dumped Sigil, 75% of VG was programmed after the deal with SOE was signed. So without SOE the game would've been worse or non-existant, so under your reasoning SOE is responsible for programming 75% within 9 months and getting Sigils butt into gear?
As for PotBS go to their website and work out what the situation is before spreading conspiracy theories please. FLS is self financed and in a good position, I'm not happy with their decision to work with SOE but who ever said life would be fair? They seem to have cut a good deal with SOE and we'll all see how it goes, but I'll be playing PotBS and if it is a decent game I'll be having fun. Because life is what you make it, so I decided not to wallow in my misery whilst watching others have fun on the high seas.
after microsoft dropped vg, how did sigil keep it going?
financing from soe?
so WITHOUT soe, vg would've never launched. correct?
under SOE's watchful eyes, soe decided that they would release vg on X date. correct?
we have two logical options at this point:
1- soe was not aware of the state of vg at release. in which case they put less effort into this game than microsoft. makes soe look REALLY bad (read - incompetent).
2-soe made the decision to have vg released in the condition it was, with some sort of soe personnel in-place monitoring sigil's progress. hmm. is that better than being incompetent? or would that be non-caring about the customer and looking to buy up the game super cheap after SOE forced it to fail?
notice the logical line of thought here. not really an opinion, just presenting logical possibilities.
i'm sorry. if soe had not picked up funding. vg would have died. if soe had not said "release on this date, period"; then vg would not have been released in the condition it was. did soe have NO ONE involved in overseeing this investment at all? i say again, even microsoft had the good sense to put people in place to monitor sigil's progress.
what am i stating that is not fact? what am i stating that you can counter with fact and prove is incorrect?
i'm even giving soe the benefit of the doubt -- that they, an established producer of MMOs -- were too trusting and naive to actually have any SOE employees watch over sigil's progress. this would alleviate some of the guilt of the release from soe, at the cost of making them be total and complete buffoons, incompetents, and fools.
which would you rather? believe that soe has calculated evil people? that soe has incompetent buffoons?
having said all of that. again, i hope the best for potbs. but just associating with an atrocity like soe is enough to make me wait a quarter or two after release, to see how this "publishing" relationship turns out.
but please, counter my statements with fact. not conjecture. not your opinion of why something is/isn't.
could we please get correspondent writers and moderators, on the eve forum at mmorpg.com, who are well-versed on eve-online and aren't just passersby pushing buttons? pretty please?
Who cares? All you people still bitter about SWG need to get over it. It's very childish to have this little SOE grudge. Not every SOE game is gonna pull a SWG.
how did you make this post when, in the post DIRECTLY above yours, i touched on most every game SOE has been involved (negatively) with? perhaps you should lay off the hater-aid and step away from the refriger-hater and read what's been stated.
potbs could be a fantastic game. time will tell. i hope it can ignore/overcome the soe "curse" and the stigma associated with being associated with soe.
haters, are people who choose to stereotype others, without bothering to pay attention to what's been said/not said. that is beyond childish and needs to stop.
best of luck to potbs and fls. i'm still interested in hearing how the game reseting after a country takes over all the ports will happen and if/when clan/single housing will be introduced and if the city controlling will influence it.
could we please get correspondent writers and moderators, on the eve forum at mmorpg.com, who are well-versed on eve-online and aren't just passersby pushing buttons? pretty please?
BTW when Rick Saada does push ups he doesn't...he pushes the world down FACT!
Lets not go too far here. I'm *not* Chuck Norris, and I don't need him showing up at my door to break me into little tiny pieces for being a pretender!
Damn right you're not Chuck Norris!
Chuck Norris is king. Then comes Mista Seagull (lol, however you spell it ya know what I mean ^^)
And then comes you Rick!
Cannons dont kill people, RickSaada kills people! (I think thats a good one for you)
BTW when Rick Saada does push ups he doesn't...he pushes the world down FACT!
Lets not go too far here. I'm *not* Chuck Norris, and I don't need him showing up at my door to break me into little tiny pieces for being a pretender!
Damn right you're not Chuck Norris!
Chuck Norris is king. Then comes Mista Seagull (lol, however you spell it ya know what I mean ^^)
And then comes you Rick!
Cannons dont kill people, RickSaada kills people! (I think thats a good one for you)
This is heresy!
Rick Saada had a show down with Chuck Norris some years ago, Saada went to shake the outstretched hand of Norris. Norris then quickly withdrew his hand and did a lightning fast roundhouse kick to Saada's face! After striking Ricks face his ankle snapped and Norris was left groveling on the floor begging for mercy as Rick laughed at his pathetic state. Rick showed mercy to an opponent for the first time, as he felt that being associated with the movie "Delta Force" was more punishment than he could ever inflict on Norris!
BTW the Japanese didn't surrender because the U.S.A dropped two atomic bombs on them. No, Hirohito was informed that the U.S had no more A-bombs left so were going to drop Rick Saada into Tokyo from a B-25 bomber. Hirohito and the Japanese goverment were in shock for several hours and surrendered as soon as Hirohito was able to speak again...FACT!
"Of all tyrannies, a tyranny sincerely exercised for the good of its victims may be the most oppressive. It would be better to live under robber barons than under omnipotent moral busybodies. The robber baron's cruelty may sometimes sleep, his cupidity may at some point be satiated; but those who torment us for our own good will torment us without end for they do so with the approval of their own conscience"
SoE will end up owning this game although it probably won't happen as fast as it did with VG. If the game does really well then SoE will remain in it's current role as publisher but as soon as things don't go well they will run in and scoop up the game for cheap just like they did to Sigil. This game will most likely have a small but loyal player base that survives on station pass, but doesn't make alot of money on it's own.
Yeah, we understand that. And we're sorry you feel that way. As I've said elsewhere I respect your willingness to stand by your convictions. But I can't make a bad business decision for the company based on that respect. And while signing with SOE may cost us a thousand or so die hard Sony haters, it will put the game in front of tens of thousands of fans who wouldn't have seen it otherwise. Hopefully, if we do *our* job well and produce a solid game, some of you will give it a try in spite of Sony distributing our boxes. After all, if we ship a solid game, and they do their part well, and keep their hands off our stuff, isn't that the change you're trying to get them to make? And if not, well I wish you the pleasure of your steadfastness, because there's not much else I can do.
Soe will never get another dollar from me, whether directly or indirectly. Playing your game could cure cancer and make peace in the middle east and I still wouldn't play. Besides, from what I've heard from beta testers its not very good anyway. Sounds a lot like Guild Wars at sea to me with everything from towns to pvp and pve areas being instances.
Is a man not entitled to the herp of his derp?
Remember, I live in a world where juggalos and yugioh players are real things.
Yeah, we understand that. And we're sorry you feel that way. As I've said elsewhere I respect your willingness to stand by your convictions. But I can't make a bad business decision for the company based on that respect. And while signing with SOE may cost us a thousand or so die hard Sony haters, it will put the game in front of tens of thousands of fans who wouldn't have seen it otherwise. Hopefully, if we do *our* job well and produce a solid game, some of you will give it a try in spite of Sony distributing our boxes. After all, if we ship a solid game, and they do their part well, and keep their hands off our stuff, isn't that the change you're trying to get them to make? And if not, well I wish you the pleasure of your steadfastness, because there's not much else I can do.
Soe will never get another dollar from me, whether directly or indirectly. Playing your game could cure cancer and make peace in the middle east and I still wouldn't play. Besides, from what I've heard from beta testers its not very good anyway. Sounds a lot like Guild Wars at sea to me with everything from towns to pvp and pve areas being instances.
You're not getting it.
They don't care that you hate SOE. If you don't buy the game it's a shame because you'll be missing out on a great thing. But hey, you're welcome to shoot yourself in the face to spite SOE all you like.
Bottom line: SOE Haters not buying the game isn't going to convince them not to go with SOE because without SOE they can't market it to as large an audience. They're not going to try to appease a few hundred SOE haters and lose exposure to MILLIONS of customers they wouldn't otherwise reach. Just not going to happen.
"A ship-of-war is the best ambassador." - Oliver Cromwell
Yeah, we understand that. And we're sorry you feel that way. As I've said elsewhere I respect your willingness to stand by your convictions. But I can't make a bad business decision for the company based on that respect. And while signing with SOE may cost us a thousand or so die hard Sony haters, it will put the game in front of tens of thousands of fans who wouldn't have seen it otherwise. Hopefully, if we do *our* job well and produce a solid game, some of you will give it a try in spite of Sony distributing our boxes. After all, if we ship a solid game, and they do their part well, and keep their hands off our stuff, isn't that the change you're trying to get them to make? And if not, well I wish you the pleasure of your steadfastness, because there's not much else I can do.
Soe will never get another dollar from me, whether directly or indirectly. Playing your game could cure cancer and make peace in the middle east and I still wouldn't play. Besides, from what I've heard from beta testers its not very good anyway. Sounds a lot like Guild Wars at sea to me with everything from towns to pvp and pve areas being instances.
You're not getting it.
They don't care that you hate SOE. If you don't buy the game it's a shame because you'll be missing out on a great thing. But hey, you're welcome to shoot yourself in the face to spite SOE all you like.
Bottom line: SOE Haters not buying the game isn't going to convince them not to go with SOE because without SOE they can't market it to as large an audience. They're not going to try to appease a few hundred SOE haters and lose exposure to MILLIONS of customers they wouldn't otherwise reach. Just not going to happen.
Yah what he said. I dont like SOE either but I will be buying this game. BUt your argument went from "SOE owns you" to "Well SOE really doesn't own you but I hate them anyways and you guys are kinda with them so I hate you too for no reason, and I am going to come in this forum and bash your game because I really dont have anything better to do with my time." KTHXBAI
The ironic thing is that just by talking about SOE and going on and on about them, negative or otherwise, SoE gets free advertising which ultimately will translate to more $$$. Every post complaining about SOE is an opportunity for people that aren't familiar with the mmorpg world and dont care about this 'rivalry' to start looking into whatever game happens to be the current topic. Whereas if nobody said anything, the word would not have gotten out about the title.
So I imagine SOE is thanking each and every hater for the amount of attention they bring to their games. Indirectly, they are only earning them money by making a big stink about them. People that already hate them will go on hating them, but people that never heard about them and dont care will be drawn into their games. And that number of new interests will dwarf any that would have been steered away.
I believe a wise man once said it quite eloquantly.... "GG Noobs".
Waiting for: A skill-based MMO with Freedom and Consequence. Woe to thee, the pierce-ed.
Yeah, we understand that. And we're sorry you feel that way. As I've said elsewhere I respect your willingness to stand by your convictions. But I can't make a bad business decision for the company based on that respect. And while signing with SOE may cost us a thousand or so die hard Sony haters, it will put the game in front of tens of thousands of fans who wouldn't have seen it otherwise. Hopefully, if we do *our* job well and produce a solid game, some of you will give it a try in spite of Sony distributing our boxes. After all, if we ship a solid game, and they do their part well, and keep their hands off our stuff, isn't that the change you're trying to get them to make? And if not, well I wish you the pleasure of your steadfastness, because there's not much else I can do.
Soe will never get another dollar from me, whether directly or indirectly. Playing your game could cure cancer and make peace in the middle east and I still wouldn't play. Besides, from what I've heard from beta testers its not very good anyway. Sounds a lot like Guild Wars at sea to me with everything from towns to pvp and pve areas being instances.
You're not getting it.
They don't care that you hate SOE. If you don't buy the game it's a shame because you'll be missing out on a great thing. But hey, you're welcome to shoot yourself in the face to spite SOE all you like.
Bottom line: SOE Haters not buying the game isn't going to convince them not to go with SOE because without SOE they can't market it to as large an audience. They're not going to try to appease a few hundred SOE haters and lose exposure to MILLIONS of customers they wouldn't otherwise reach. Just not going to happen.
I don't care that they don't care or that you don't care, sunshine. Just stating my point of view, which is what this forum is sort of for right? I don't think I'm missing out on much either. Theres plenty of other games out there to happily spend my money on and enjoy. Actually, I could spend my money on a variety of things that are better than PotBS, like going to the movies, putting more money on my car payments or mortage or going on a trip.
I understand their decision to go with soe but if you don't think the "soe haters" will have an effect on the bottom line of this game then why does every company that associates itself with soe try and put as much distance between themselves and soe?
Anyway, I think all this will be for nothing because from what I've heard from beta testers the game as it stands now sucks donkeys. If thats the case, then I'm glad I won't have wasted any money on it.
Keep drinking that kool aid fellas.
Is a man not entitled to the herp of his derp?
Remember, I live in a world where juggalos and yugioh players are real things.
Anyway, I think all this will be for nothing because from what I've heard from beta testers the game as it stands now sucks donkeys. If thats the case, then I'm glad I won't have wasted any money on it.
Keep drinking that kool aid fellas.
I love how anyone who points out the flaws in a person's arguements is somehow a 'kool aid' drinker. As if pointing out the obvious is somehow a bad thing? I neither support nor oppose the decisions of FLS to partner with SOE. Frankly, as a customer, it's none of my business how they do business. It's their company. I can, of course, choose to take my business elsewhere. But taking it to the point of flaming them every chance I get on a forum would be immature...
Oh wait...
As to whether the game is going to be good or not? I cannot comment on that. Trusting anything you read people post about the game at this point is trusting skewed information. Since the only people willing ot break the NDA are people who dislike the game anyway and aren't worried about being banned from it by FLS for NDA violations. Once the NDA is lifted then we can start trusting what people post because those who actually ENJOY the game will be able to post details about it that we aren't otherwise going to get right now.
"A ship-of-war is the best ambassador." - Oliver Cromwell
As to whether the game is going to be good or not? I cannot comment on that. Trusting anything you read people post about the game at this point is trusting skewed information. Since the only people willing ot break the NDA are people who dislike the game anyway and aren't worried about being banned from it by FLS for NDA violations. Once the NDA is lifted then we can start trusting what people post because those who actually ENJOY the game will be able to post details about it that we aren't otherwise going to get right now.
Personally, I don't listen to anything posted by alleged beta testers before the NDA has been lifted for one reason: They're liars.
Either they're lying about being in beta and have no actual firsthand knowledge of the game OR they verified themselves to be liars by signing and subsequently breaking the NDA, so why should we trust what they post on various forums? I couldn't care less if people are posting rave reviews or absolutely slamming a game; the fact is they're liars.
Anyway, I think all this will be for nothing because from what I've heard from beta testers the game as it stands now sucks donkeys. If thats the case, then I'm glad I won't have wasted any money on it.
Keep drinking that kool aid fellas.
I love how anyone who points out the flaws in a person's arguements is somehow a 'kool aid' drinker. As if pointing out the obvious is somehow a bad thing? I neither support nor oppose the decisions of FLS to partner with SOE. Frankly, as a customer, it's none of my business how they do business. It's their company. I can, of course, choose to take my business elsewhere. But taking it to the point of flaming them every chance I get on a forum would be immature...
Oh wait...
As to whether the game is going to be good or not? I cannot comment on that. Trusting anything you read people post about the game at this point is trusting skewed information. Since the only people willing ot break the NDA are people who dislike the game anyway and aren't worried about being banned from it by FLS for NDA violations. Once the NDA is lifted then we can start trusting what people post because those who actually ENJOY the game will be able to post details about it that we aren't otherwise going to get right now.
People boycott corporations all the time and are quite vocal about it too. Walmart, Exxon, tobacco companies, companies that use child labor sweat shops and companies that benefit from morally bankrupt practices like selling blood diamonds all have had or continue have vocal opposition directed at them. Do you think theres some sort of time limit on how long people can voice their opinions about those companies? I would hope not. It's been only 2 years since the swg debacle, where soe continually lied to and deceived its customers. When Jabbas palace went missing for a awhile soe claimed it was a bug of some sorts and they were working on it. We all know now that they removed it to get it ready for the nge. And the list goes on. Sorry, but when a company lies to me I plan on letting as many people know for as long as I feel like it. If you were lied to and ripped off by say a car dealership, do you think you should keep quiet or let as many people as you can know about what happened to you and others? If you think you should let others know then why is it any different when it comes to how your treated by a gaming company like soe? It seems people like you aren't willing to apply the same standards to a company that makes a game to a company that makes your car or sells you a t-shirt. I've never understood that.
As for the quality of the game and the accuracy of what some beta testers have been saying, who knows. I just know a few people in the beta and all of them are saying this game is crap as it is now. Will it get better? Maybe, who knows.
Is a man not entitled to the herp of his derp?
Remember, I live in a world where juggalos and yugioh players are real things.
Anyway, I think all this will be for nothing because from what I've heard from beta testers the game as it stands now sucks donkeys. If thats the case, then I'm glad I won't have wasted any money on it.
Keep drinking that kool aid fellas.
I love how anyone who points out the flaws in a person's arguements is somehow a 'kool aid' drinker. As if pointing out the obvious is somehow a bad thing? I neither support nor oppose the decisions of FLS to partner with SOE. Frankly, as a customer, it's none of my business how they do business. It's their company. I can, of course, choose to take my business elsewhere. But taking it to the point of flaming them every chance I get on a forum would be immature...
Oh wait...
As to whether the game is going to be good or not? I cannot comment on that. Trusting anything you read people post about the game at this point is trusting skewed information. Since the only people willing ot break the NDA are people who dislike the game anyway and aren't worried about being banned from it by FLS for NDA violations. Once the NDA is lifted then we can start trusting what people post because those who actually ENJOY the game will be able to post details about it that we aren't otherwise going to get right now.
People boycott corporations all the time and are quite vocal about it too. Walmart, Exxon, tobacco companies, companies that use child labor sweat shops and companies that benefit from morally bankrupt practices like selling blood diamonds all have had or continue have vocal opposition directed at them. Do you think theres some sort of time limit on how long people can voice their opinions about those companies? I would hope not. It's been only 2 years since the swg debacle, where soe continually lied to and deceived its customers. When Jabbas palace went missing for a awhile soe claimed it was a bug of some sorts and they were working on it. We all know now that they removed it to get it ready for the nge. And the list goes on. Sorry, but when a company lies to me I plan on letting as many people know for as long as I feel like it. If you were lied to and ripped off by say a car dealership, do you think you should keep quiet or let as many people as you can know about what happened to you and others? If you think you should let others know then why is it any different when it comes to how your treated by a gaming company like soe? It seems people like you aren't willing to apply the same standards to a company that makes a game to a company that makes your car or sells you a t-shirt. I've never understood that.
As for the quality of the game and the accuracy of what some beta testers have been saying, who knows. I just know a few people in the beta and all of them are saying this game is crap as it is now. Will it get better? Maybe, who knows.
Without trying to belittle your obvious trauma in the "NGE debacle", trying to equate it in anyway, either by association or just poor taste, with people who out of principe boycott child labour using company's, seems a tad unfair ,even on Sony. Ethical consumerism is a great idea, I just don't think we can really stretch that analogy to losing some digital items/ideas, however "traumatic" the event was.
What I don't really understand, is the opposite of what you have just said, people that can get so mad over a game ,but are quite happy to tuck into, for instance, a McDonald's hamburger (or the multitude of other unethical products, this is a generalization not a slight at yourself). Mabey I'm just weird like that.
I really was quite annoyed when my CH went to digital heaven/hell, but I think I might just be over it now. Maybe it time to stop trying to drag down anything that is associated with Sony and give Flying Lab the benefit of the doubt, at least until they have released the game?
Explain on how they would be doing that, based on that SIGIL actually needed alot more subscribers for Vanguard to go around then what POTBS apperantly needs.
(And I think the conclusion made from those that play Vanguard is that they are content that SOE picked it up rather then have SIGIL go broke/fail and close the servers. So it really is not that good of an example as one could hope that they do the same for POTBS in any unlikely event that FLS dont want to run the game anymore for whatever unlikely reason that would be.)
Exactly, Vanguard [Sigil] was literally "saved" by Sony and we're all thankful for it (whereas Star Wars Galaxies was ruined by them, but at least that was a Sony product start-to-finish to propel or destroy as they saw fit...albeit sadly). PotBS is simply in a symbiotic relationship w/Sony and frankly that's fine by me as well (and most of us clearly agree). All you negative peeps (you scurvy bilge rats) can suck the excess wind left over from me sails, matey. Can't wait for the game...GO FLS...GO SONY...GO GO GADGET SEXTON!
Now (PC online): Eq2, Vanguard, Planetside, SWG Now (PC offline): Medieval Total War 2 (w/Kingdoms), Rome Total War (w/Barbarian Invasion) Now (PS2): Madden 2008, Gran Turismo 3 & 4, Star Wars Battlefront I & II Soon (PC online): Pirates of the Burning Sea, Age of Conan, Star Trek Online, (Gods & Heroes)? RIP (PC Online): EQ, EVE
Anyway, I think all this will be for nothing because from what I've heard from beta testers the game as it stands now sucks donkeys. If thats the case, then I'm glad I won't have wasted any money on it.
Keep drinking that kool aid fellas.
I love how anyone who points out the flaws in a person's arguements is somehow a 'kool aid' drinker. As if pointing out the obvious is somehow a bad thing? I neither support nor oppose the decisions of FLS to partner with SOE. Frankly, as a customer, it's none of my business how they do business. It's their company. I can, of course, choose to take my business elsewhere. But taking it to the point of flaming them every chance I get on a forum would be immature...
Oh wait...
As to whether the game is going to be good or not? I cannot comment on that. Trusting anything you read people post about the game at this point is trusting skewed information. Since the only people willing ot break the NDA are people who dislike the game anyway and aren't worried about being banned from it by FLS for NDA violations. Once the NDA is lifted then we can start trusting what people post because those who actually ENJOY the game will be able to post details about it that we aren't otherwise going to get right now.
People boycott corporations all the time and are quite vocal about it too. Walmart, Exxon, tobacco companies, companies that use child labor sweat shops and companies that benefit from morally bankrupt practices like selling blood diamonds all have had or continue have vocal opposition directed at them. Do you think theres some sort of time limit on how long people can voice their opinions about those companies? I would hope not. It's been only 2 years since the swg debacle, where soe continually lied to and deceived its customers. When Jabbas palace went missing for a awhile soe claimed it was a bug of some sorts and they were working on it. We all know now that they removed it to get it ready for the nge. And the list goes on. Sorry, but when a company lies to me I plan on letting as many people know for as long as I feel like it. If you were lied to and ripped off by say a car dealership, do you think you should keep quiet or let as many people as you can know about what happened to you and others? If you think you should let others know then why is it any different when it comes to how your treated by a gaming company like soe? It seems people like you aren't willing to apply the same standards to a company that makes a game to a company that makes your car or sells you a t-shirt. I've never understood that.
As for the quality of the game and the accuracy of what some beta testers have been saying, who knows. I just know a few people in the beta and all of them are saying this game is crap as it is now. Will it get better? Maybe, who knows.
Without trying to belittle your obvious trauma in the "NGE debacle", trying to equate it in anyway, either by association or just poor taste, with people who out of principe boycott child labour using company's, seems a tad unfair ,even on Sony. Ethical consumerism is a great idea, I just don't think we can really stretch that analogy to losing some digital items/ideas, however "traumatic" the event was.
What I don't really understand, is the opposite of what you have just said, people that can get so mad over a game ,but are quite happy to tuck into, for instance, a McDonald's hamburger (or the multitude of other unethical products, this is a generalization not a slight at yourself). Mabey I'm just weird like that.
I really was quite annoyed when my CH went to digital heaven/hell, but I think I might just be over it now. Maybe it time to stop trying to drag down anything that is associated with Sony and give Flying Lab the benefit of the doubt, at least until they have released the game?
I really don't have a beef with the devs of the pirates game. I understand their reasoning. They're a small company looking for someone big to help push their game. However, after teaming up with soe, they should expect negative comments and opinions about their deal. While my examples may be a little extreme to some, the fact is that soe have been lying and ripping people off for awhile now, and haven't done anything genuine to do right by their customers. it doesn't matter that it was just some "digital items/ideas", its still a product/service people were paying for. Why should we have different standards for game companies then other types of business'? I've never been traumatized or anything by all of this, just annoyed and pissed off, esp. when people say shit like "just get over it, its been 2 years" or something to that effect. I'm "over it" its just that I feel its necessary to remind people of kind of company soe is and how they treat their customers since its often brushed off by the ignorant and the fanbois.
If Flying lab wasn't associated with soe, meaning soe would get some of my money if I played, then I would wish them all the luck and hope they can pull it off, since the mmo world needs different types of genres that steer away from fantasy like EQ or WoW. However, now, I can't say the same thing. I hope they crash and burn (or better yet, change partners) and serve as a lesson to other would be mmo devs what being linked to soe can bring to you.
Is a man not entitled to the herp of his derp?
Remember, I live in a world where juggalos and yugioh players are real things.
Comments
microsoft dropped vg because the MS overseeing folk didn't like what they saw. did SOE not install ANY overseeing types? did SOE not give sigil any terms such as "release by X date" when sigil asked to push the release out?
you can blame a lot on sigil and it's asshat of a leader. but SOE is the corporation that allowed vanguard to release and blessed it releasing in the condition it did.
spin it away from soe any way you so desire; but they are directly responsible for vanguard being released in the condition it was released.
Well let's be realistic here, MS dropped VG for good reasons and I didn't see companies lining up to bail out Sigil, did you? Brad fought for control over VG and Sigil and got it, with the condition that SOE funds would dry up by a certain date. Brad attempted to push this date back by getting more investors but no-one wanted to know.
I'm spinning nothing, I despise SOE and Smed but on this one the guy is clean. He gave Brad a second chance to make his "vision" reality when no-one else would. If Brad had run his company like a CEO instead of like a second hand car salesman he would still be the online games guru of enlightenment he was before VG crashed and burned. Smed did nothing more than make an offer of the funds he was willing to provide and sign an agreement to publish VG, Brad didn't have a gun to his head when he signed that piece of paper.
Saying SOE is directly responsible for the condition that VG was released in makes you sound like a...well I don't wanna be banned (again) so I'll just ask you to stop being one. No SOE=no VG that's the simple equation that even Brad McQuaid could understand, can you? VG was a steaming pile when MS dumped Sigil, 75% of VG was programmed after the deal with SOE was signed. So without SOE the game would've been worse or non-existant, so under your reasoning SOE is responsible for programming 75% within 9 months and getting Sigils butt into gear?
As for PotBS go to their website and work out what the situation is before spreading conspiracy theories please. FLS is self financed and in a good position, I'm not happy with their decision to work with SOE but who ever said life would be fair? They seem to have cut a good deal with SOE and we'll all see how it goes, but I'll be playing PotBS and if it is a decent game I'll be having fun. Because life is what you make it, so I decided not to wallow in my misery whilst watching others have fun on the high seas.
"Of all tyrannies, a tyranny sincerely exercised for the good of its victims may be the most oppressive. It would be better to live under robber barons than under omnipotent moral busybodies. The robber baron's cruelty may sometimes sleep, his cupidity may at some point be satiated; but those who torment us for our own good will torment us without end for they do so with the approval of their own conscience"
CS Lewis
Since the thread that inspired this was closed, and since this one has started to devolve into baiting and circular arguments, shouldn't this thread be closed as well?
But, before it is, let me add this:
I like PotBS, alot. I like the concept, the design, and the team. I like it better than any of the proposed mmo's for '08, right now.
I followed PotBS for about 2 years. I had quite a few discussions on the forums with the devs themselves.(and they weren't all positive) I got frustrated at the delays, excited at the additions, and nervous at the contract negotiations.
I refuse to pay for anything associated with SOE, because I took a personal stand against their business practices, quite some time ago.
As such, despite the first two statements, I'm not buying PotBS. That's my decision, for my own reasons, and I will stick to it.
But, I'm leaving it at that! I've made my decision, and I'm moving on. I'm not trying to berate the FLS team over their choice, or mine. I'm not inventing theories on what did, or will happen. I'll speak with my wallet, and, when asked, explain why I'm doing so, but that's it (except for this post, oviously) Why can't folks just do the same? What benefit comes from arguing about the potential future of a game you have no intention of buying? You're just wasting your own valuable time. You think it's going to fail? Great, say it once, if you think you'll need to prove your intelligence later on, and then move on. Someone probably needs your feedback on a game you actually play, or are planning to play. You think its going to succeed. Great. Let the game come out, support it with your wallet, and, if it does succeed, help promote it to other potential players. Forget convincing the unconvincable (word?). Let the dead horse get buried.
This constant need to argue over a moot point is just plain ridiculous. The FLS team thinks their decision was fine, they predict good things, and are prepared for any outcome. The fans of the game are going to buy it, and play, until they aren't fans anymore. And, those that won't buy it because of SOE, won't buy it.
Done and done people. Time for EVERYONE to move on, no?
sigil released vanguard when they did because soe gave them a release date. did soe not have anyone overseeing sigil? even microsoft had the foresight to put people in place to monitor progress and microsoft dropped vanguard. so yes, SOE is directly responsible for vanguard being released in the condition it was released. these are facts that aren't really up to debate. no need to thank soe for fixing what they allowed to be broken in the first place.
that's not a hater or hatred. that's someone keeping up with a trend of how soe interacts with it's *partners* and how it treats it's customers. don't confuse them.
soe stated their goal is to have a bunch of average/so-so mmos under the station pass. so their stated goal is to NOT make/support anything stellar or groundbreaking and are instead shooting to support mediocrity.
personally, i'm worried with the amount of people who can't be bothered to remember how things actually have gone down. and instead choose to pick/choose bits and pieces to remember. i choose to not have faith in a corporation building a game. i'll trust them, as far as they've earned the trust. i'll also not trust them to the extent they've earned that.
partnering with someone like SOE, who has an established track record (swg, vg, gnh) ... makes people stop and think. you go from swg (oh lucas arts made us do it), to vg (oh, we just had people overseeing it and making sure they were on track for release, and because we at soe were tracking it's progress, we figured it was ready for release), to gnh (oh, you can't blame us, we were just publishing it = the curse).
then add to that the matrix (does anyone play this?), and personally, i've never cared a whit for eq or eq2 and i've tried them several times.
what potbs has going for it, is it's not orcs and elves. what's going against it (other than associating in any fashion with SOE), is there are other pirate games out or in development.
i hope this game is great fun. i honestly do. i have my doubts about the "once a country takes over all the cities, game resets" thing that i've read about. not sure how that's going to be implemented and that could be a game breaker.
but, after watching all these soe-friendly games being released (or not release - gnh); i'll definitely be one of the ones watching a few months after retail to see what happens.
could we please get correspondent writers and moderators, on the eve forum at mmorpg.com, who are well-versed on eve-online and aren't just passersby pushing buttons? pretty please?
Who cares? All you people still bitter about SWG need to get over it. It's very childish to have this little SOE grudge. Not every SOE game is gonna pull a SWG.
microsoft dropped vg because the MS overseeing folk didn't like what they saw. did SOE not install ANY overseeing types? did SOE not give sigil any terms such as "release by X date" when sigil asked to push the release out?
you can blame a lot on sigil and it's asshat of a leader. but SOE is the corporation that allowed vanguard to release and blessed it releasing in the condition it did.
spin it away from soe any way you so desire; but they are directly responsible for vanguard being released in the condition it was released.
Well let's be realistic here, MS dropped VG for good reasons and I didn't see companies lining up to bail out Sigil, did you? Brad fought for control over VG and Sigil and got it, with the condition that SOE funds would dry up by a certain date. Brad attempted to push this date back by getting more investors but no-one wanted to know.
I'm spinning nothing, I despise SOE and Smed but on this one the guy is clean. He gave Brad a second chance to make his "vision" reality when no-one else would. If Brad had run his company like a CEO instead of like a second hand car salesman he would still be the online games guru of enlightenment he was before VG crashed and burned. Smed did nothing more than make an offer of the funds he was willing to provide and sign an agreement to publish VG, Brad didn't have a gun to his head when he signed that piece of paper.
Saying SOE is directly responsible for the condition that VG was released in makes you sound like a...well I don't wanna be banned (again) so I'll just ask you to stop being one. No SOE=no VG that's the simple equation that even Brad McQuaid could understand, can you? VG was a steaming pile when MS dumped Sigil, 75% of VG was programmed after the deal with SOE was signed. So without SOE the game would've been worse or non-existant, so under your reasoning SOE is responsible for programming 75% within 9 months and getting Sigils butt into gear?
As for PotBS go to their website and work out what the situation is before spreading conspiracy theories please. FLS is self financed and in a good position, I'm not happy with their decision to work with SOE but who ever said life would be fair? They seem to have cut a good deal with SOE and we'll all see how it goes, but I'll be playing PotBS and if it is a decent game I'll be having fun. Because life is what you make it, so I decided not to wallow in my misery whilst watching others have fun on the high seas.
after microsoft dropped vg, how did sigil keep it going?
financing from soe?
so WITHOUT soe, vg would've never launched. correct?
under SOE's watchful eyes, soe decided that they would release vg on X date. correct?
we have two logical options at this point:
1- soe was not aware of the state of vg at release. in which case they put less effort into this game than microsoft. makes soe look REALLY bad (read - incompetent).
2-soe made the decision to have vg released in the condition it was, with some sort of soe personnel in-place monitoring sigil's progress. hmm. is that better than being incompetent? or would that be non-caring about the customer and looking to buy up the game super cheap after SOE forced it to fail?
notice the logical line of thought here. not really an opinion, just presenting logical possibilities.
i'm sorry. if soe had not picked up funding. vg would have died. if soe had not said "release on this date, period"; then vg would not have been released in the condition it was. did soe have NO ONE involved in overseeing this investment at all? i say again, even microsoft had the good sense to put people in place to monitor sigil's progress.
what am i stating that is not fact? what am i stating that you can counter with fact and prove is incorrect?
i'm even giving soe the benefit of the doubt -- that they, an established producer of MMOs -- were too trusting and naive to actually have any SOE employees watch over sigil's progress. this would alleviate some of the guilt of the release from soe, at the cost of making them be total and complete buffoons, incompetents, and fools.
which would you rather? believe that soe has calculated evil people? that soe has incompetent buffoons?
having said all of that. again, i hope the best for potbs. but just associating with an atrocity like soe is enough to make me wait a quarter or two after release, to see how this "publishing" relationship turns out.
but please, counter my statements with fact. not conjecture. not your opinion of why something is/isn't.
could we please get correspondent writers and moderators, on the eve forum at mmorpg.com, who are well-versed on eve-online and aren't just passersby pushing buttons? pretty please?
how did you make this post when, in the post DIRECTLY above yours, i touched on most every game SOE has been involved (negatively) with? perhaps you should lay off the hater-aid and step away from the refriger-hater and read what's been stated.
potbs could be a fantastic game. time will tell. i hope it can ignore/overcome the soe "curse" and the stigma associated with being associated with soe.
haters, are people who choose to stereotype others, without bothering to pay attention to what's been said/not said. that is beyond childish and needs to stop.
best of luck to potbs and fls. i'm still interested in hearing how the game reseting after a country takes over all the ports will happen and if/when clan/single housing will be introduced and if the city controlling will influence it.
could we please get correspondent writers and moderators, on the eve forum at mmorpg.com, who are well-versed on eve-online and aren't just passersby pushing buttons? pretty please?
Lets not go too far here. I'm *not* Chuck Norris, and I don't need him showing up at my door to break me into little tiny pieces for being a pretender!
Damn right you're not Chuck Norris!
Chuck Norris is king. Then comes Mista Seagull (lol, however you spell it ya know what I mean ^^)
And then comes you Rick!
Cannons dont kill people, RickSaada kills people! (I think thats a good one for you)
Lets not go too far here. I'm *not* Chuck Norris, and I don't need him showing up at my door to break me into little tiny pieces for being a pretender!
Damn right you're not Chuck Norris!
Chuck Norris is king. Then comes Mista Seagull (lol, however you spell it ya know what I mean ^^)
And then comes you Rick!
Cannons dont kill people, RickSaada kills people! (I think thats a good one for you)
This is heresy!
Rick Saada had a show down with Chuck Norris some years ago, Saada went to shake the outstretched hand of Norris. Norris then quickly withdrew his hand and did a lightning fast roundhouse kick to Saada's face! After striking Ricks face his ankle snapped and Norris was left groveling on the floor begging for mercy as Rick laughed at his pathetic state. Rick showed mercy to an opponent for the first time, as he felt that being associated with the movie "Delta Force" was more punishment than he could ever inflict on Norris!
BTW the Japanese didn't surrender because the U.S.A dropped two atomic bombs on them. No, Hirohito was informed that the U.S had no more A-bombs left so were going to drop Rick Saada into Tokyo from a B-25 bomber. Hirohito and the Japanese goverment were in shock for several hours and surrendered as soon as Hirohito was able to speak again...FACT!
"Of all tyrannies, a tyranny sincerely exercised for the good of its victims may be the most oppressive. It would be better to live under robber barons than under omnipotent moral busybodies. The robber baron's cruelty may sometimes sleep, his cupidity may at some point be satiated; but those who torment us for our own good will torment us without end for they do so with the approval of their own conscience"
CS Lewis
SoE will end up owning this game although it probably won't happen as fast as it did with VG. If the game does really well then SoE will remain in it's current role as publisher but as soon as things don't go well they will run in and scoop up the game for cheap just like they did to Sigil. This game will most likely have a small but loyal player base that survives on station pass, but doesn't make alot of money on it's own.
WHAT WILL HAPPEN:
1-SOE SUCKS
2-SOE SUCKS POTBS
3-POTBS SUCKS
Lol, this thread is still alive?
Sony doesn't own PotBS...I own it.
But really, I still believe they (SOE) will end up holding the basket with all the eggs inside in the end.
__________________
Playing: EVE & Runescape @ work : P
Thank God!!! Sony has killed sooo many games it is rediculous!
EQ, Vanguard, SWG to name a few...
Hope PotBS does everything they say they will...
The tinfoil is strong in this thread.
"A ship-of-war is the best ambassador." - Oliver Cromwell
Soe will never get another dollar from me, whether directly or indirectly. Playing your game could cure cancer and make peace in the middle east and I still wouldn't play. Besides, from what I've heard from beta testers its not very good anyway. Sounds a lot like Guild Wars at sea to me with everything from towns to pvp and pve areas being instances.
Is a man not entitled to the herp of his derp?
Remember, I live in a world where juggalos and yugioh players are real things.
Soe will never get another dollar from me, whether directly or indirectly. Playing your game could cure cancer and make peace in the middle east and I still wouldn't play. Besides, from what I've heard from beta testers its not very good anyway. Sounds a lot like Guild Wars at sea to me with everything from towns to pvp and pve areas being instances.
You're not getting it.
They don't care that you hate SOE. If you don't buy the game it's a shame because you'll be missing out on a great thing. But hey, you're welcome to shoot yourself in the face to spite SOE all you like.
Bottom line: SOE Haters not buying the game isn't going to convince them not to go with SOE because without SOE they can't market it to as large an audience. They're not going to try to appease a few hundred SOE haters and lose exposure to MILLIONS of customers they wouldn't otherwise reach. Just not going to happen.
"A ship-of-war is the best ambassador." - Oliver Cromwell
Soe will never get another dollar from me, whether directly or indirectly. Playing your game could cure cancer and make peace in the middle east and I still wouldn't play. Besides, from what I've heard from beta testers its not very good anyway. Sounds a lot like Guild Wars at sea to me with everything from towns to pvp and pve areas being instances.
You're not getting it.
They don't care that you hate SOE. If you don't buy the game it's a shame because you'll be missing out on a great thing. But hey, you're welcome to shoot yourself in the face to spite SOE all you like.
Bottom line: SOE Haters not buying the game isn't going to convince them not to go with SOE because without SOE they can't market it to as large an audience. They're not going to try to appease a few hundred SOE haters and lose exposure to MILLIONS of customers they wouldn't otherwise reach. Just not going to happen.
Yah what he said. I dont like SOE either but I will be buying this game. BUt your argument went from "SOE owns you" to "Well SOE really doesn't own you but I hate them anyways and you guys are kinda with them so I hate you too for no reason, and I am going to come in this forum and bash your game because I really dont have anything better to do with my time." KTHXBAI
The ironic thing is that just by talking about SOE and going on and on about them, negative or otherwise, SoE gets free advertising which ultimately will translate to more $$$. Every post complaining about SOE is an opportunity for people that aren't familiar with the mmorpg world and dont care about this 'rivalry' to start looking into whatever game happens to be the current topic. Whereas if nobody said anything, the word would not have gotten out about the title.
So I imagine SOE is thanking each and every hater for the amount of attention they bring to their games. Indirectly, they are only earning them money by making a big stink about them. People that already hate them will go on hating them, but people that never heard about them and dont care will be drawn into their games. And that number of new interests will dwarf any that would have been steered away.
I believe a wise man once said it quite eloquantly.... "GG Noobs".
Waiting for: A skill-based MMO with Freedom and Consequence.
Woe to thee, the pierce-ed.
Soe will never get another dollar from me, whether directly or indirectly. Playing your game could cure cancer and make peace in the middle east and I still wouldn't play. Besides, from what I've heard from beta testers its not very good anyway. Sounds a lot like Guild Wars at sea to me with everything from towns to pvp and pve areas being instances.
You're not getting it.
They don't care that you hate SOE. If you don't buy the game it's a shame because you'll be missing out on a great thing. But hey, you're welcome to shoot yourself in the face to spite SOE all you like.
Bottom line: SOE Haters not buying the game isn't going to convince them not to go with SOE because without SOE they can't market it to as large an audience. They're not going to try to appease a few hundred SOE haters and lose exposure to MILLIONS of customers they wouldn't otherwise reach. Just not going to happen.
I don't care that they don't care or that you don't care, sunshine. Just stating my point of view, which is what this forum is sort of for right? I don't think I'm missing out on much either. Theres plenty of other games out there to happily spend my money on and enjoy. Actually, I could spend my money on a variety of things that are better than PotBS, like going to the movies, putting more money on my car payments or mortage or going on a trip.
I understand their decision to go with soe but if you don't think the "soe haters" will have an effect on the bottom line of this game then why does every company that associates itself with soe try and put as much distance between themselves and soe?
Anyway, I think all this will be for nothing because from what I've heard from beta testers the game as it stands now sucks donkeys. If thats the case, then I'm glad I won't have wasted any money on it.
Keep drinking that kool aid fellas.
Is a man not entitled to the herp of his derp?
Remember, I live in a world where juggalos and yugioh players are real things.
I love how anyone who points out the flaws in a person's arguements is somehow a 'kool aid' drinker. As if pointing out the obvious is somehow a bad thing? I neither support nor oppose the decisions of FLS to partner with SOE. Frankly, as a customer, it's none of my business how they do business. It's their company. I can, of course, choose to take my business elsewhere. But taking it to the point of flaming them every chance I get on a forum would be immature...
Oh wait...
As to whether the game is going to be good or not? I cannot comment on that. Trusting anything you read people post about the game at this point is trusting skewed information. Since the only people willing ot break the NDA are people who dislike the game anyway and aren't worried about being banned from it by FLS for NDA violations. Once the NDA is lifted then we can start trusting what people post because those who actually ENJOY the game will be able to post details about it that we aren't otherwise going to get right now.
"A ship-of-war is the best ambassador." - Oliver Cromwell
Personally, I don't listen to anything posted by alleged beta testers before the NDA has been lifted for one reason: They're liars.
Either they're lying about being in beta and have no actual firsthand knowledge of the game OR they verified themselves to be liars by signing and subsequently breaking the NDA, so why should we trust what they post on various forums? I couldn't care less if people are posting rave reviews or absolutely slamming a game; the fact is they're liars.
I love how anyone who points out the flaws in a person's arguements is somehow a 'kool aid' drinker. As if pointing out the obvious is somehow a bad thing? I neither support nor oppose the decisions of FLS to partner with SOE. Frankly, as a customer, it's none of my business how they do business. It's their company. I can, of course, choose to take my business elsewhere. But taking it to the point of flaming them every chance I get on a forum would be immature...
Oh wait...
As to whether the game is going to be good or not? I cannot comment on that. Trusting anything you read people post about the game at this point is trusting skewed information. Since the only people willing ot break the NDA are people who dislike the game anyway and aren't worried about being banned from it by FLS for NDA violations. Once the NDA is lifted then we can start trusting what people post because those who actually ENJOY the game will be able to post details about it that we aren't otherwise going to get right now.
People boycott corporations all the time and are quite vocal about it too. Walmart, Exxon, tobacco companies, companies that use child labor sweat shops and companies that benefit from morally bankrupt practices like selling blood diamonds all have had or continue have vocal opposition directed at them. Do you think theres some sort of time limit on how long people can voice their opinions about those companies? I would hope not. It's been only 2 years since the swg debacle, where soe continually lied to and deceived its customers. When Jabbas palace went missing for a awhile soe claimed it was a bug of some sorts and they were working on it. We all know now that they removed it to get it ready for the nge. And the list goes on. Sorry, but when a company lies to me I plan on letting as many people know for as long as I feel like it. If you were lied to and ripped off by say a car dealership, do you think you should keep quiet or let as many people as you can know about what happened to you and others? If you think you should let others know then why is it any different when it comes to how your treated by a gaming company like soe? It seems people like you aren't willing to apply the same standards to a company that makes a game to a company that makes your car or sells you a t-shirt. I've never understood that.As for the quality of the game and the accuracy of what some beta testers have been saying, who knows. I just know a few people in the beta and all of them are saying this game is crap as it is now. Will it get better? Maybe, who knows.
Is a man not entitled to the herp of his derp?
Remember, I live in a world where juggalos and yugioh players are real things.
I love how anyone who points out the flaws in a person's arguements is somehow a 'kool aid' drinker. As if pointing out the obvious is somehow a bad thing? I neither support nor oppose the decisions of FLS to partner with SOE. Frankly, as a customer, it's none of my business how they do business. It's their company. I can, of course, choose to take my business elsewhere. But taking it to the point of flaming them every chance I get on a forum would be immature...
Oh wait...
As to whether the game is going to be good or not? I cannot comment on that. Trusting anything you read people post about the game at this point is trusting skewed information. Since the only people willing ot break the NDA are people who dislike the game anyway and aren't worried about being banned from it by FLS for NDA violations. Once the NDA is lifted then we can start trusting what people post because those who actually ENJOY the game will be able to post details about it that we aren't otherwise going to get right now.
People boycott corporations all the time and are quite vocal about it too. Walmart, Exxon, tobacco companies, companies that use child labor sweat shops and companies that benefit from morally bankrupt practices like selling blood diamonds all have had or continue have vocal opposition directed at them. Do you think theres some sort of time limit on how long people can voice their opinions about those companies? I would hope not. It's been only 2 years since the swg debacle, where soe continually lied to and deceived its customers. When Jabbas palace went missing for a awhile soe claimed it was a bug of some sorts and they were working on it. We all know now that they removed it to get it ready for the nge. And the list goes on. Sorry, but when a company lies to me I plan on letting as many people know for as long as I feel like it. If you were lied to and ripped off by say a car dealership, do you think you should keep quiet or let as many people as you can know about what happened to you and others? If you think you should let others know then why is it any different when it comes to how your treated by a gaming company like soe? It seems people like you aren't willing to apply the same standards to a company that makes a game to a company that makes your car or sells you a t-shirt. I've never understood that.As for the quality of the game and the accuracy of what some beta testers have been saying, who knows. I just know a few people in the beta and all of them are saying this game is crap as it is now. Will it get better? Maybe, who knows.
Without trying to belittle your obvious trauma in the "NGE debacle", trying to equate it in anyway, either by association or just poor taste, with people who out of principe boycott child labour using company's, seems a tad unfair ,even on Sony. Ethical consumerism is a great idea, I just don't think we can really stretch that analogy to losing some digital items/ideas, however "traumatic" the event was.What I don't really understand, is the opposite of what you have just said, people that can get so mad over a game ,but are quite happy to tuck into, for instance, a McDonald's hamburger (or the multitude of other unethical products, this is a generalization not a slight at yourself). Mabey I'm just weird like that.
I really was quite annoyed when my CH went to digital heaven/hell, but I think I might just be over it now. Maybe it time to stop trying to drag down anything that is associated with Sony and give Flying Lab the benefit of the doubt, at least until they have released the game?
If it's a good game, no matter who owns it i will pay them, simple as
Explain on how they would be doing that, based on that SIGIL actually needed alot more subscribers for Vanguard to go around then what POTBS apperantly needs.
(And I think the conclusion made from those that play Vanguard is that they are content that SOE picked it up rather then have SIGIL go broke/fail and close the servers. So it really is not that good of an example as one could hope that they do the same for POTBS in any unlikely event that FLS dont want to run the game anymore for whatever unlikely reason that would be.)
Exactly, Vanguard [Sigil] was literally "saved" by Sony and we're all thankful for it (whereas Star Wars Galaxies was ruined by them, but at least that was a Sony product start-to-finish to propel or destroy as they saw fit...albeit sadly). PotBS is simply in a symbiotic relationship w/Sony and frankly that's fine by me as well (and most of us clearly agree). All you negative peeps (you scurvy bilge rats) can suck the excess wind left over from me sails, matey. Can't wait for the game...GO FLS...GO SONY...GO GO GADGET SEXTON!
Now (PC online): Eq2, Vanguard, Planetside, SWG
Now (PC offline): Medieval Total War 2 (w/Kingdoms), Rome Total War (w/Barbarian Invasion)
Now (PS2): Madden 2008, Gran Turismo 3 & 4, Star Wars Battlefront I & II
Soon (PC online): Pirates of the Burning Sea, Age of Conan, Star Trek Online, (Gods & Heroes)?
RIP (PC Online): EQ, EVE
I love how anyone who points out the flaws in a person's arguements is somehow a 'kool aid' drinker. As if pointing out the obvious is somehow a bad thing? I neither support nor oppose the decisions of FLS to partner with SOE. Frankly, as a customer, it's none of my business how they do business. It's their company. I can, of course, choose to take my business elsewhere. But taking it to the point of flaming them every chance I get on a forum would be immature...
Oh wait...
As to whether the game is going to be good or not? I cannot comment on that. Trusting anything you read people post about the game at this point is trusting skewed information. Since the only people willing ot break the NDA are people who dislike the game anyway and aren't worried about being banned from it by FLS for NDA violations. Once the NDA is lifted then we can start trusting what people post because those who actually ENJOY the game will be able to post details about it that we aren't otherwise going to get right now.
People boycott corporations all the time and are quite vocal about it too. Walmart, Exxon, tobacco companies, companies that use child labor sweat shops and companies that benefit from morally bankrupt practices like selling blood diamonds all have had or continue have vocal opposition directed at them. Do you think theres some sort of time limit on how long people can voice their opinions about those companies? I would hope not. It's been only 2 years since the swg debacle, where soe continually lied to and deceived its customers. When Jabbas palace went missing for a awhile soe claimed it was a bug of some sorts and they were working on it. We all know now that they removed it to get it ready for the nge. And the list goes on. Sorry, but when a company lies to me I plan on letting as many people know for as long as I feel like it. If you were lied to and ripped off by say a car dealership, do you think you should keep quiet or let as many people as you can know about what happened to you and others? If you think you should let others know then why is it any different when it comes to how your treated by a gaming company like soe? It seems people like you aren't willing to apply the same standards to a company that makes a game to a company that makes your car or sells you a t-shirt. I've never understood that.As for the quality of the game and the accuracy of what some beta testers have been saying, who knows. I just know a few people in the beta and all of them are saying this game is crap as it is now. Will it get better? Maybe, who knows.
Without trying to belittle your obvious trauma in the "NGE debacle", trying to equate it in anyway, either by association or just poor taste, with people who out of principe boycott child labour using company's, seems a tad unfair ,even on Sony. Ethical consumerism is a great idea, I just don't think we can really stretch that analogy to losing some digital items/ideas, however "traumatic" the event was.What I don't really understand, is the opposite of what you have just said, people that can get so mad over a game ,but are quite happy to tuck into, for instance, a McDonald's hamburger (or the multitude of other unethical products, this is a generalization not a slight at yourself). Mabey I'm just weird like that.
I really was quite annoyed when my CH went to digital heaven/hell, but I think I might just be over it now. Maybe it time to stop trying to drag down anything that is associated with Sony and give Flying Lab the benefit of the doubt, at least until they have released the game?
I really don't have a beef with the devs of the pirates game. I understand their reasoning. They're a small company looking for someone big to help push their game. However, after teaming up with soe, they should expect negative comments and opinions about their deal. While my examples may be a little extreme to some, the fact is that soe have been lying and ripping people off for awhile now, and haven't done anything genuine to do right by their customers. it doesn't matter that it was just some "digital items/ideas", its still a product/service people were paying for. Why should we have different standards for game companies then other types of business'? I've never been traumatized or anything by all of this, just annoyed and pissed off, esp. when people say shit like "just get over it, its been 2 years" or something to that effect. I'm "over it" its just that I feel its necessary to remind people of kind of company soe is and how they treat their customers since its often brushed off by the ignorant and the fanbois.
If Flying lab wasn't associated with soe, meaning soe would get some of my money if I played, then I would wish them all the luck and hope they can pull it off, since the mmo world needs different types of genres that steer away from fantasy like EQ or WoW. However, now, I can't say the same thing. I hope they crash and burn (or better yet, change partners) and serve as a lesson to other would be mmo devs what being linked to soe can bring to you.
Is a man not entitled to the herp of his derp?
Remember, I live in a world where juggalos and yugioh players are real things.