hi you're special. all i'm saying is that ppl are naive to think that EA or MS are going to be any better than SOE. sorry didn't know that wasn't clear enough for you.
hi you're special. all i'm saying is that ppl are naive to think that EA or MS are going to be any better than SOE. sorry didn't know that wasn't clear enough for you.
I'm not saying that M$ and EA are perfect. Far from it. More often than not, those two companies do get other people's MMORPGs to market without a hitch. With SoE, you can't show me one example of where SoE was responsible with publishing/marketing/distribution of someone else's MMORPG where it was without problems, yet there own stuff shows up on shelves like magic most of the time!
Fear not fanbois, we are not trolls, let's take off your tin foil hat and learn what VAPORWARE is:
"Vaporware is a term used to describe a software or hardware product that is announced by a developer well in advance of release, but which then fails to emerge after having well exceeded the period of development time that was initially claimed or would normally be expected for the development cycle of a similar product."
Lol, this is old news...a very old old news. FLS doesn't listen to what we said before and do not hold your breath that they will now. PotBS will be ruin and thanks to SOE. Another SCORE for SOE!
To FLS, you guys better get a good marketing company. SOE stinks! And it's all over the net, almost all of the gaming board that I go to has issues about SOE. Goodluck, I hope I see you ingame!
__________________ Playing: EVE & Runescape @ work : P
hi you're special. all i'm saying is that ppl are naive to think that EA or MS are going to be any better than SOE. sorry didn't know that wasn't clear enough for you.
I'm not saying that M$ and EA are perfect. Far from it. More often than not, those two companies do get other people's MMORPGs to market without a hitch. With SoE, you can't show me one example of where SoE was responsible with publishing/marketing/distribution of someone else's MMORPG where it was without problems, yet there own stuff shows up on shelves like magic most of the time!
what other games are you talking about? as far as I know the only game soe did that they didn't own is vanguard. matrix they had nothing to do with until after it was dead then they picked it up...
lol. this game is going down hill, there going to take out PoTBS, i can assure you they will. with how the launch is going right now. EA/GWF would do a much better job then SOE.EA selling alot of good games and not having problems. GWF would have a good publishing and distribution.
Originally posted by Bloodlust221 lol. this game is going down hill, there going to take out PoTBS, i can assure you they will. with how the launch is going right now. EA/GWF would do a much better job then SOE.EA selling alot of good games and not having problems. GWF would have a good publishing and distribution.
And we would have so much to play with: PotbS´08, PotbS: Most Wanted, PotbS Revenge. Then PotbS ´09...
The problem with SoE is they pick up all these games but put no effort or money into them. They ditched G&H because they weren't willing to invest anything into the development. So basically they were willing to publish a crappy game as long as they make money off of it but they aren't willing to take the risk. They forced vanguard out about a year ahead of what it should have been for the same reason. To cash in and take over the game knowing it would never succeed in the shape it was in. Why anyone would play any game that has anything to do with SoE is beyond me. They have been screwing over their customers for years with all their piss poor management of MMO's. They don't give a flying fuck about putting out a solid game they only care about the bottom line. It's too bad they can't figure out that making a good game would make them alot more money than all these bullshit deals with all the games they destroy.
The problem with SoE is they pick up all these games but put no effort or money into them. They ditched G&H because they weren't willing to invest anything into the development. So basically they were willing to publish a crappy game as long as they make money off of it but they aren't willing to take the risk. They forced vanguard out about a year ahead of what it should have been for the same reason. To cash in and take over the game knowing it would never succeed in the shape it was in. Why anyone would play any game that has anything to do with SoE is beyond me. They have been screwing over their customers for years with all their piss poor management of MMO's. They don't give a flying fuck about putting out a solid game they only care about the bottom line. It's too bad they can't figure out that making a good game would make them alot more money than all these bullshit deals with all the games they destroy.
Actually, SOE wasn't ever an investor in G&H. That was all Perpetual's baby. Just like us, Perpetual contracted with SoE Platform Publishing to do distribution (although they chose to do their own billing). SOE was only going to make money off the box sales, and spent quite a bit on marketing for ship dates that Perpetual kept failing to meet. Eventually they chose to distance themselves from the game because they could see where things were going. They *did* put money and effort into the marketing (magazine and web ads) but not into the development. It's not that they ditched G&H because they cut off Perpetual's money, that was never the arrangement. They may have had an opportunity to step in when Perpetual started to implode that they chose not to take (I don't know about that), but they distanced themselves just because they *didn't* want their name on the crappy game G&H was looking to be.
As for Vanguard, as has been covered numerous times, they didn't *force* anything. Sigil, and it's CEO Brad McQuaid, were the ones who chose to ship the game before it was ready. SOE was just left to pick up the pieces after Sigil imploded. SOE should get credit for the fact that Vanguard is still operating at all, not blame for Sigil's mistakes.
''Microsoft had wanted to launch this thing in July of 2006,'' Mr. Smedley said. ''We felt like the game needed more time, and we have given it more time, but at some point enough is enough, and we have to ship the game and start generating revenue.'' -John Smedley
Sorry Rick, SOE pulled the trigger on the release date. Saying the Sigil "chose" to launch is about as far from the truth as one could spin things.
SOE had all the bargaining power in the deal and I'm sure John is no dummy seeing what the likely outcome would be if the game failed.
The problem with SoE is they pick up all these games but put no effort or money into them. They ditched G&H because they weren't willing to invest anything into the development. So basically they were willing to publish a crappy game as long as they make money off of it but they aren't willing to take the risk. They forced vanguard out about a year ahead of what it should have been for the same reason. To cash in and take over the game knowing it would never succeed in the shape it was in. Why anyone would play any game that has anything to do with SoE is beyond me. They have been screwing over their customers for years with all their piss poor management of MMO's. They don't give a flying fuck about putting out a solid game they only care about the bottom line. It's too bad they can't figure out that making a good game would make them alot more money than all these bullshit deals with all the games they destroy.
Actually, SOE wasn't ever an investor in G&H. That was all Perpetual's baby. Just like us, Perpetual contracted with SoE Platform Publishing to do distribution (although they chose to do their own billing). SOE was only going to make money off the box sales, and spent quite a bit on marketing for ship dates that Perpetual kept failing to meet. Eventually they chose to distance themselves from the game because they could see where things were going. They *did* put money and effort into the marketing (magazine and web ads) but not into the development. It's not that they ditched G&H because they cut off Perpetual's money, that was never the arrangement. They may have had an opportunity to step in when Perpetual started to implode that they chose not to take (I don't know about that), but they distanced themselves just because they *didn't* want their name on the crappy game G&H was looking to be.
As for Vanguard, as has been covered numerous times, they didn't *force* anything. Sigil, and it's CEO Brad McQuaid, were the ones who chose to ship the game before it was ready. SOE was just left to pick up the pieces after Sigil imploded. SOE should get credit for the fact that Vanguard is still operating at all, not blame for Sigil's mistakes.
I agree w/this completely, even as a long time SOE customer w/mixed emotions (Eq1 and Eq2 are superior and the benchmark for the ENTIRE industry, yet look at what they did to SWG which could have been the finest video game in the known universe).
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
Look at SWG. No advertising for the game whatsoever until the NGE hit. Then it's all over the TV and internet. Too bad they didn't promote the game when it was in its greatness.
hawkeye74, looked at your sig and see you love Star Wars. Shame G&H or STO wont be making it to launch.
To me... SOE's mistake with SWG is hard to ignore since I was directly hit by it. I dont care about Vanguard or EQ. I was always a UO guy anyway. Even owned a boat in that game too.
A company that can ignore a playerbase and not even bat an eyelash at losing 75% sub base doesnt scream "trustworthy quality game makers". So of course people are hesitant to deal business with them. The whole problems with the pre-order didnt help either.
Originally posted by Rekit Flying lab came back saying that they were looking for a publisher and said it would not be likley SOE would be involved. Then when it was publicly known that SOE got the contract, they defended the choice saying SOE has experience, funding, knowledge, resources and that they would not be involved in development to reassure the public SOE could not ruin the game.
LOL oh god that's such a bummer, SOE probably waved a wad of money in FLB's face while brainwashing them. They don't have to be involved in development to destroy a game, the devs however becomes puppets of the decision makers from SOE. This was proven in PlanetSide before they moved their office from San Diego to Austin.
I'm very curious of how POTB will turn out a year or so later, I'm not going to even try this game anyhow.
Originally posted by ShanniaOriginally posted by project8six
hi you're special. all i'm saying is that ppl are naive to think that EA or MS are going to be any better than SOE. sorry didn't know that wasn't clear enough for you.
I'm not saying that M$ and EA are perfect. Far from it. More often than not, those two companies do get other people's MMORPGs to market without a hitch. With SoE, you can't show me one example of where SoE was responsible with publishing/marketing/distribution of someone else's MMORPG where it was without problems, yet there own stuff shows up on shelves like magic most of the time!
what other games are you talking about? as far as I know the only game soe did that they didn't own is vanguard. matrix they had nothing to do with until after it was dead then they picked it up...
Gods and Heroes, you know the game that folded after collecting preorder money and now is in bankruptcy.
''Microsoft had wanted to launch this thing in July of 2006,'' Mr. Smedley said. ''We felt like the game needed more time, and we have given it more time, but at some point enough is enough, and we have to ship the game and start generating revenue.'' -John Smedley
Sorry Rick, SOE pulled the trigger on the release date. Saying the Sigil "chose" to launch is about as far from the truth as one could spin things. SOE had all the bargaining power in the deal and I'm sure John is no dummy seeing what the likely outcome would be if the game failed.
Well, if by "pulled the trigger" you mean "didn't give Sigil more money to waste" than I suppose they did. But the fact is that Sigil spend 10's of millions of Microsoft's dollars and blew through that, and then blew through the additional money that Sony gave them that was supposed to be enough to finish the game, and then came back for more. Eventually Sony said no to pouring more cash in. Sigil ran out of cash through bad management, but it's not Sony's fault if they didn't want to pour money into the black hole.
Sigil couldn't find anyone else to invest money in their project, so they decided to ship what they had. Now I suppose you can argue that having agreed to publish Vanguard Sony should have thrown endless money at it until it was in better shape, but that would be a poor business decision on their part.
Agree to publish != Agree to spend endless dollars
It's easy to say they should have spent more money when it's not your money being spent. When you're writing the checks it's a different story.
Vanguard is just now getting around to being release ready a year later. It probably needs another year to be at the point of a real release. In hindsight I would say that SOE did the right thing. They are obviously making money on it since it is still up and running and they are improving it. Not only that but it seems to have a small but loyal following.
Therefore I would argue that SOE make the right move with VG.
Seems like soe and their partners like POTBS want to distance themselves from the soe brand name, because they know what trouble it can bring. Soe has created a new brand called "Platform Publishing" to go along with a new logo, and POTBS will be using this logo instead of the soe one on their retail boxes. I'm pretty sure some people are just going to say its a coincidence and has nothing to do with the bad press soe has gotten over the years. Its pretty strange, though, how soe is hiding itself behind a sort of shell company brand name. A "hater" might even suggest that its been done in an attempt to trick people who have no intention of doing so into buying soe products. But I mean, really, its not like soe has a history of shady business practices or lying and cheating their customers right?
If you check out the link and look at the box, you'll see the new logo at the bottom of the box. I'd post an picture of it but I'm a noob when it comes to inserting image on this site.
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.
Seems like soe and their partners like POTBS want to distance themselves from the soe brand name, because they know what trouble it can bring. Soe has created a new brand called "Platform Publishing" to go along with a new logo, and POTBS will be using this logo instead of the soe one on their retail boxes. I'm pretty sure some people are just going to say its a coincidence and has nothing to do with the bad press soe has gotten over the years. Its pretty strange, though, how soe is hiding itself behind a sort of shell company brand name. A "hater" might even suggest that its been done in an attempt to trick people who have no intention of doing so into buying soe products. But I mean, really, its not like soe has a history of shady business practices or lying and cheating their customers right?
From SOE's perspective the platform publishing thing is smart. If a company like FLS in this case comes to them with a finished product all they have to do is publish it and take their cut. That lowers their risk and cuts out the years of development. Yes, I can understand wanting to distance oneself from SOE, but the new logo would be because it's a different department, it's billing, distribution and packaging, not development. The 'haters' are justified to some extent, but mostly conspiracies are more fun than actually stopping to think about it from a business perspective.
Seems like soe and their partners like POTBS want to distance themselves from the soe brand name, because they know what trouble it can bring. Soe has created a new brand called "Platform Publishing" to go along with a new logo, and POTBS will be using this logo instead of the soe one on their retail boxes. I'm pretty sure some people are just going to say its a coincidence and has nothing to do with the bad press soe has gotten over the years. Its pretty strange, though, how soe is hiding itself behind a sort of shell company brand name. A "hater" might even suggest that its been done in an attempt to trick people who have no intention of doing so into buying soe products. But I mean, really, its not like soe has a history of shady business practices or lying and cheating their customers right?
From SOE's perspective the platform publishing thing is smart. If a company like FLS in this case comes to them with a finished product all they have to do is publish it and take their cut. That lowers their risk and cuts out the years of development. Yes, I can understand wanting to distance oneself from SOE, but the new logo would be because it's a different department, it's billing, distribution and packaging, not development. The 'haters' are justified to some extent, but mostly conspiracies are more fun than actually stopping to think about it from a business perspective.
From a business perspective it does make sense. The soe name has been tarnished for quite awhile now (not just because of swg either) and being able to not have have to put the soe logo on the box is a way to make it appear like soe has nothing to do with it. I just find it funny that even soe and their partners know the soe logo on a box is a minus rather than a plus in terms of marketing.
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.
Seems like soe and their partners like POTBS want to distance themselves from the soe brand name, because they know what trouble it can bring. Soe has created a new brand called "Platform Publishing" to go along with a new logo, and POTBS will be using this logo instead of the soe one on their retail boxes. I'm pretty sure some people are just going to say its a coincidence and has nothing to do with the bad press soe has gotten over the years. Its pretty strange, though, how soe is hiding itself behind a sort of shell company brand name. A "hater" might even suggest that its been done in an attempt to trick people who have no intention of doing so into buying soe products. But I mean, really, its not like soe has a history of shady business practices or lying and cheating their customers right?
From SOE's perspective the platform publishing thing is smart. If a company like FLS in this case comes to them with a finished product all they have to do is publish it and take their cut. That lowers their risk and cuts out the years of development. Yes, I can understand wanting to distance oneself from SOE, but the new logo would be because it's a different department, it's billing, distribution and packaging, not development. The 'haters' are justified to some extent, but mostly conspiracies are more fun than actually stopping to think about it from a business perspective.
From a business perspective it does make sense. The soe name has been tarnished for quite awhile now (not just because of swg either) and being able to not have have to put the soe logo on the box is a way to make it appear like soe has nothing to do with it. I just find it funny that even soe and their partners know the soe logo on a box is a minus rather than a plus in terms of marketing.
Funny thing is based on some of the threads here, it would appear SOE is working towards ruining their platform publishing logo also.
Ethion, We are not talking about the game here. We are talking about marketing and distribution. SoE launched PoTBS's official pre-order campaign. SoE put those boxes together. That is their job. Boxes that people are buying at stores are all screwed up. Some boxes are empty. Other boxes have codes in them with no CDs. Still other boxes have CDs in them without any codes. Combine that with SoE's patching servers on the Stress Test weekend where people are taking over 18 hours to download a PATCH for a game and you are combining for a horrible experience. All of this is/was SoE's responsiblity. No one is bashing anyone. We are just explaining facts. The fact of the matter is, intentional or not, FLS and PoTBS is bent over the coals by SoE. How on earth is that SoE bashing?
Er..... can you please link any news stories you have that report that the distribution of the PotBS pre-orders are "all" screwed up? I did a quick search, found some articles about the delays due to the fires in CA, but can't find this other information you've reference.
Regardless, there's a month or more till the game starts, plenty of time to straighten out any issues.....
Xmas anyone? Amazon.co.uk already tells that anything ordered now will likely arrive at least a week after xmas.
There is a lot going wrong with pre-order boxes, it's documented in the www.burningseas.com forums, long thread in public section.
I don't understand why people even care. The pre-order start isn't until Jan 7th. What difference does it make if people don't get their boxes this week - or even this month? As long as they get them by Jan 6th, it really makes very little difference.
I don't understand why people even care. The pre-order start isn't until Jan 7th. What difference does it make if people don't get their boxes this week - or even this month? As long as they get them by Jan 6th, it really makes very little difference.
- the pre-order box (the only way to get the parrot) is currently unavailable in Europe
- I have yet to find a store that has HEARD of the game, they don't even have it in their 'coming soon' lists
- amazon.co.uk, the only place where you CAN preorder the game (though this is the retail edition, not the pre-order one) says it will not be able to ship before xmas (and probably not for at least one week after) due to Xmas being crazy busy. Even at the best of times, ordering from them means delivery can take anything from 3 days to 3 weeks.
- amazon.com will not deliver to Europe due to region restriction, and only carry the regular retail box anyway
- best buy and gamespot do not deliver to Europe, period.
- even if the US stores shipped to Europe, this can take anywhere from 3 days to 8 weeks.
Yes, we can (probably) do the digital download, but only if that doesn't have region restrictions. Which might be the case, it happened to me before.
''Microsoft had wanted to launch this thing in July of 2006,'' Mr. Smedley said. ''We felt like the game needed more time, and we have given it more time, but at some point enough is enough, and we have to ship the game and start generating revenue.'' -John Smedley
Sorry Rick, SOE pulled the trigger on the release date. Saying the Sigil "chose" to launch is about as far from the truth as one could spin things. SOE had all the bargaining power in the deal and I'm sure John is no dummy seeing what the likely outcome would be if the game failed.
Well, if by "pulled the trigger" you mean "didn't give Sigil more money to waste" than I suppose they did. But the fact is that Sigil spend 10's of millions of Microsoft's dollars and blew through that, and then blew through the additional money that Sony gave them that was supposed to be enough to finish the game, and then came back for more. Eventually Sony said no to pouring more cash in. Sigil ran out of cash through bad management, but it's not Sony's fault if they didn't want to pour money into the black hole.
Sigil couldn't find anyone else to invest money in their project, so they decided to ship what they had. Now I suppose you can argue that having agreed to publish Vanguard Sony should have thrown endless money at it until it was in better shape, but that would be a poor business decision on their part.
Agree to publish != Agree to spend endless dollars
It's easy to say they should have spent more money when it's not your money being spent. When you're writing the checks it's a different story.
I could hear those exact words from you before I even posted my first reply. Your first said that sigil somehow chose to release and that somehow SOE is the savior that swooped in to rescue VG. As you can see from the Smedley quote that is not the really the case and SOE has their fair share or responsibility for Vanguard launching the way it did (along with Brad).
I never expected SOE to write blank checks, but I knew that you would say that. I do not accept that SOE made a good business decision by just funding Sigil and not having enough oversight to make sure the exact same thing didn't happen that happened with Sigil/Microsoft. Sigil blew it the first time, and there is no one else to blame but Sigil. SOE revived Sigil just enough to let if bomb again? Would you call that a wise business decision, because just like you said SOE in effect gave Sigil "money to waste"? Writing blank checks is just as irresponsible as giving funding to a company that already failed with a massive budget/time frame and then not having control enough to make sure the same thing didn't happen. SOE should have either gone the distance with Vanguard or they shouldn't have touched it (from a consumer standpoint that is, SOE seems to have come out on top from a business view). If Sony didn't want to "pour money into the black hole" they shouldn't have gotten into bed with Sigil in the first place. The project troubles weren't exactly secret and SOE had enough bargaining power to dictate whatever terms they wanted.
Honestly vanguard was only a couple months away from being launch ready even with the massive "layoffs". SOE sure had enough to buy the game, but not enough to make sure it was launched in a functional state? Who came out on top from that decision.
Food for thought or call it tinfoil hat if you will. Say SOE did continue to fund Vanguard and it launched in a fairly solid state. Where would Vanguard get most of its subscriber base from? Who stood to lose the most from that?
Comments
hi you're special. all i'm saying is that ppl are naive to think that EA or MS are going to be any better than SOE. sorry didn't know that wasn't clear enough for you.
die.
I'm not saying that M$ and EA are perfect. Far from it. More often than not, those two companies do get other people's MMORPGs to market without a hitch. With SoE, you can't show me one example of where SoE was responsible with publishing/marketing/distribution of someone else's MMORPG where it was without problems, yet there own stuff shows up on shelves like magic most of the time!
Fear not fanbois, we are not trolls, let's take off your tin foil hat and learn what VAPORWARE is:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vaporware
"Vaporware is a term used to describe a software or hardware product that is announced by a developer well in advance of release, but which then fails to emerge after having well exceeded the period of development time that was initially claimed or would normally be expected for the development cycle of a similar product."
Lol, this is old news...a very old old news. FLS doesn't listen to what we said before and do not hold your breath that they will now. PotBS will be ruin and thanks to SOE. Another SCORE for SOE!
To FLS, you guys better get a good marketing company. SOE stinks! And it's all over the net, almost all of the gaming board that I go to has issues about SOE. Goodluck, I hope I see you ingame!
__________________
Playing: EVE & Runescape @ work : P
I'm not saying that M$ and EA are perfect. Far from it. More often than not, those two companies do get other people's MMORPGs to market without a hitch. With SoE, you can't show me one example of where SoE was responsible with publishing/marketing/distribution of someone else's MMORPG where it was without problems, yet there own stuff shows up on shelves like magic most of the time!
what other games are you talking about? as far as I know the only game soe did that they didn't own is vanguard. matrix they had nothing to do with until after it was dead then they picked it up...---
Ethion
lol. this game is going down hill, there going to take out PoTBS, i can assure you they will. with how the launch is going right now. EA/GWF would do a much better job then SOE.EA selling alot of good games and not having problems. GWF would have a good publishing and distribution.
The problem with SoE is they pick up all these games but put no effort or money into them. They ditched G&H because they weren't willing to invest anything into the development. So basically they were willing to publish a crappy game as long as they make money off of it but they aren't willing to take the risk. They forced vanguard out about a year ahead of what it should have been for the same reason. To cash in and take over the game knowing it would never succeed in the shape it was in. Why anyone would play any game that has anything to do with SoE is beyond me. They have been screwing over their customers for years with all their piss poor management of MMO's. They don't give a flying fuck about putting out a solid game they only care about the bottom line. It's too bad they can't figure out that making a good game would make them alot more money than all these bullshit deals with all the games they destroy.
As for Vanguard, as has been covered numerous times, they didn't *force* anything. Sigil, and it's CEO Brad McQuaid, were the ones who chose to ship the game before it was ready. SOE was just left to pick up the pieces after Sigil imploded. SOE should get credit for the fact that Vanguard is still operating at all, not blame for Sigil's mistakes.
Rick Saada - FLS Dev & EPFBM
Rick,
You're going to have to stop interjecting logic, reasoning, an facts in your posts. The anti-SOE folks won't know how to deal with them.
/tk
''Microsoft had wanted to launch this thing in July of 2006,'' Mr. Smedley said. ''We felt like the game needed more time, and we have given it more time, but at some point enough is enough, and we have to ship the game and start generating revenue.'' -John Smedley
Sorry Rick, SOE pulled the trigger on the release date. Saying the Sigil "chose" to launch is about as far from the truth as one could spin things.
SOE had all the bargaining power in the deal and I'm sure John is no dummy seeing what the likely outcome would be if the game failed.
As for Vanguard, as has been covered numerous times, they didn't *force* anything. Sigil, and it's CEO Brad McQuaid, were the ones who chose to ship the game before it was ready. SOE was just left to pick up the pieces after Sigil imploded. SOE should get credit for the fact that Vanguard is still operating at all, not blame for Sigil's mistakes.
I agree w/this completely, even as a long time SOE customer w/mixed emotions (Eq1 and Eq2 are superior and the benchmark for the ENTIRE industry, yet look at what they did to SWG which could have been the finest video game in the known universe).
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
Look at SWG. No advertising for the game whatsoever until the NGE hit. Then it's all over the TV and internet. Too bad they didn't promote the game when it was in its greatness.
hawkeye74, looked at your sig and see you love Star Wars. Shame G&H or STO wont be making it to launch.
To me... SOE's mistake with SWG is hard to ignore since I was directly hit by it. I dont care about Vanguard or EQ. I was always a UO guy anyway. Even owned a boat in that game too.
A company that can ignore a playerbase and not even bat an eyelash at losing 75% sub base doesnt scream "trustworthy quality game makers". So of course people are hesitant to deal business with them. The whole problems with the pre-order didnt help either.
I'm very curious of how POTB will turn out a year or so later, I'm not going to even try this game anyhow.
I'm not saying that M$ and EA are perfect. Far from it. More often than not, those two companies do get other people's MMORPGs to market without a hitch. With SoE, you can't show me one example of where SoE was responsible with publishing/marketing/distribution of someone else's MMORPG where it was without problems, yet there own stuff shows up on shelves like magic most of the time!
what other games are you talking about? as far as I know the only game soe did that they didn't own is vanguard. matrix they had nothing to do with until after it was dead then they picked it up...Gods and Heroes, you know the game that folded after collecting preorder money and now is in bankruptcy.
Sigil couldn't find anyone else to invest money in their project, so they decided to ship what they had. Now I suppose you can argue that having agreed to publish Vanguard Sony should have thrown endless money at it until it was in better shape, but that would be a poor business decision on their part.
Agree to publish != Agree to spend endless dollars
It's easy to say they should have spent more money when it's not your money being spent. When you're writing the checks it's a different story.
Rick Saada - FLS Dev & EPFBM
Vanguard is just now getting around to being release ready a year later. It probably needs another year to be at the point of a real release. In hindsight I would say that SOE did the right thing. They are obviously making money on it since it is still up and running and they are improving it. Not only that but it seems to have a small but loyal following.
Therefore I would argue that SOE make the right move with VG.
Seems like soe and their partners like POTBS want to distance themselves from the soe brand name, because they know what trouble it can bring. Soe has created a new brand called "Platform Publishing" to go along with a new logo, and POTBS will be using this logo instead of the soe one on their retail boxes. I'm pretty sure some people are just going to say its a coincidence and has nothing to do with the bad press soe has gotten over the years. Its pretty strange, though, how soe is hiding itself behind a sort of shell company brand name. A "hater" might even suggest that its been done in an attempt to trick people who have no intention of doing so into buying soe products. But I mean, really, its not like soe has a history of shady business practices or lying and cheating their customers right?
piratesoftheburningsea.station.sony.com/preorderpromo/
If you check out the link and look at the box, you'll see the new logo at the bottom of the box. I'd post an picture of it but I'm a noob when it comes to inserting image on this site.
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.
From SOE's perspective the platform publishing thing is smart. If a company like FLS in this case comes to them with a finished product all they have to do is publish it and take their cut. That lowers their risk and cuts out the years of development. Yes, I can understand wanting to distance oneself from SOE, but the new logo would be because it's a different department, it's billing, distribution and packaging, not development. The 'haters' are justified to some extent, but mostly conspiracies are more fun than actually stopping to think about it from a business perspective.
From SOE's perspective the platform publishing thing is smart. If a company like FLS in this case comes to them with a finished product all they have to do is publish it and take their cut. That lowers their risk and cuts out the years of development. Yes, I can understand wanting to distance oneself from SOE, but the new logo would be because it's a different department, it's billing, distribution and packaging, not development. The 'haters' are justified to some extent, but mostly conspiracies are more fun than actually stopping to think about it from a business perspective.
From a business perspective it does make sense. The soe name has been tarnished for quite awhile now (not just because of swg either) and being able to not have have to put the soe logo on the box is a way to make it appear like soe has nothing to do with it. I just find it funny that even soe and their partners know the soe logo on a box is a minus rather than a plus in terms of marketing.
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.
From SOE's perspective the platform publishing thing is smart. If a company like FLS in this case comes to them with a finished product all they have to do is publish it and take their cut. That lowers their risk and cuts out the years of development. Yes, I can understand wanting to distance oneself from SOE, but the new logo would be because it's a different department, it's billing, distribution and packaging, not development. The 'haters' are justified to some extent, but mostly conspiracies are more fun than actually stopping to think about it from a business perspective.
From a business perspective it does make sense. The soe name has been tarnished for quite awhile now (not just because of swg either) and being able to not have have to put the soe logo on the box is a way to make it appear like soe has nothing to do with it. I just find it funny that even soe and their partners know the soe logo on a box is a minus rather than a plus in terms of marketing.
Funny thing is based on some of the threads here, it would appear SOE is working towards ruining their platform publishing logo also.
Regardless, there's a month or more till the game starts, plenty of time to straighten out any issues.....
Xmas anyone? Amazon.co.uk already tells that anything ordered now will likely arrive at least a week after xmas.
There is a lot going wrong with pre-order boxes, it's documented in the www.burningseas.com forums, long thread in public section.
Linna
I don't understand why people even care. The pre-order start isn't until Jan 7th. What difference does it make if people don't get their boxes this week - or even this month? As long as they get them by Jan 6th, it really makes very little difference.
- I have yet to find a store that has HEARD of the game, they don't even have it in their 'coming soon' lists
- amazon.co.uk, the only place where you CAN preorder the game (though this is the retail edition, not the pre-order one) says it will not be able to ship before xmas (and probably not for at least one week after) due to Xmas being crazy busy. Even at the best of times, ordering from them means delivery can take anything from 3 days to 3 weeks.
- amazon.com will not deliver to Europe due to region restriction, and only carry the regular retail box anyway
- best buy and gamespot do not deliver to Europe, period.
- even if the US stores shipped to Europe, this can take anywhere from 3 days to 8 weeks.
Yes, we can (probably) do the digital download, but only if that doesn't have region restrictions. Which might be the case, it happened to me before.
Linna
Sigil couldn't find anyone else to invest money in their project, so they decided to ship what they had. Now I suppose you can argue that having agreed to publish Vanguard Sony should have thrown endless money at it until it was in better shape, but that would be a poor business decision on their part.
Agree to publish != Agree to spend endless dollars
It's easy to say they should have spent more money when it's not your money being spent. When you're writing the checks it's a different story.
I could hear those exact words from you before I even posted my first reply. Your first said that sigil somehow chose to release and that somehow SOE is the savior that swooped in to rescue VG. As you can see from the Smedley quote that is not the really the case and SOE has their fair share or responsibility for Vanguard launching the way it did (along with Brad).
I never expected SOE to write blank checks, but I knew that you would say that. I do not accept that SOE made a good business decision by just funding Sigil and not having enough oversight to make sure the exact same thing didn't happen that happened with Sigil/Microsoft. Sigil blew it the first time, and there is no one else to blame but Sigil. SOE revived Sigil just enough to let if bomb again? Would you call that a wise business decision, because just like you said SOE in effect gave Sigil "money to waste"? Writing blank checks is just as irresponsible as giving funding to a company that already failed with a massive budget/time frame and then not having control enough to make sure the same thing didn't happen. SOE should have either gone the distance with Vanguard or they shouldn't have touched it (from a consumer standpoint that is, SOE seems to have come out on top from a business view). If Sony didn't want to "pour money into the black hole" they shouldn't have gotten into bed with Sigil in the first place. The project troubles weren't exactly secret and SOE had enough bargaining power to dictate whatever terms they wanted.
Honestly vanguard was only a couple months away from being launch ready even with the massive "layoffs". SOE sure had enough to buy the game, but not enough to make sure it was launched in a functional state? Who came out on top from that decision.
Food for thought or call it tinfoil hat if you will. Say SOE did continue to fund Vanguard and it launched in a fairly solid state. Where would Vanguard get most of its subscriber base from? Who stood to lose the most from that?