Those that are faithful and stick to a game, immersing and getting attatched to chars and friends will loose it suddenly and like that because SOE do not care about you.
I will never invest a single coin in a SOE game because of this. Maybe others will do the same, but so far I havent seen it in any MMORPG I have played besides Sony games.
Offcourse the game should have been f2p..
Maybe I've missed something, but what game other than Matrix online did SOE shut down? From everything I can tell had Lucas Arts allowed SOE to renew the liscense they would have kept SWG open, I don't think it would have seen a lot of love and development, but it wasn't losing them money either.
It wasn't losing money yet. But with TOR coming out, the anticipated losses were probably too much to keep projections in the black.
So I started to walk into the water. I won't lie to you boys...I was terrified. But I pressed on, and as I made my way past the breakers, a strange calm came over me. I don't know if it was divine intervention or the kinship of all living things, but I tell you, Jerry, at that moment ... I was a marine biologist.
If it weren't for SOE the Matrix would have shut down long before it did and Vanguard wouldn't have made it out of development. Both of the original developer/operators of those games had run out of operating funds. I understand why people have a beef with them over SWG, but blaming SOE for the fate of The Matrix or Vanguard is insane. You should be thanking them that those games operated as long as they did (still operating in Vanguard's case).
If it weren't for SOE the Matrix would have shut down long before it did and Vanguard wouldn't have made it out of development. Both of the original developer/operators of those games had run out of operating funds. I understand why people have a beef with them over SWG, but blaming SOE for the fate of The Matrix or Vanguard is insane. You should be thanking them that those games operated as long as they did (still operating in Vanguard's case).
SOE only got involved with The Matrix Online so they could get the DC license. Beyond that they let the Matrix rot on life support. Can't really say they are doing a bang up job with the DC license either.
Vanguard would have seen release, but the end result would have been the same. Terrible release, Sigil files for bankruptcy, someone scoops up the game for loose change. SOE didn't "save" Vanguard from anything.
I really don't see any of that as being worthy of thanks or congratulations.
If it weren't for SOE the Matrix would have shut down long before it did and Vanguard wouldn't have made it out of development. Both of the original developer/operators of those games had run out of operating funds. I understand why people have a beef with them over SWG, but blaming SOE for the fate of The Matrix or Vanguard is insane. You should be thanking them that those games operated as long as they did (still operating in Vanguard's case).
SOE only got involved with The Matrix Online so they could get the DC license. Beyond that they let the Matrix rot on life support. Can't really say they are doing a bang up job with the DC license either.
Vanguard would have seen release, but the end result would have been the same. Terrible release, Sigil files for bankruptcy, someone scoops up the game for loose change. SOE didn't "save" Vanguard from anything.
I really don't see any of that as being worthy of thanks or congratulations.
If its not "worthy of congratulations" then why is it worthy of scorn? TMO was a disaster, there's no way it stayed operating unless SOE bought it no matter their reasons. No other publisher was willing to even touch it. And if the end result would have been the same for Vanguard no matter what then again why hate SOE? Sony wasn't responsible for either crappy game and kept them operating well past the point when many other mmo's had folded.
Its illogical ... then again its the mmorpg.com forums, so rage on I guess.
At least SoE announced the closing pretty far in advance, despite the fact that doing so will cost them revenue. They could have waited until mid october to announce, say they still gave people notice, but milk an extra couple of month in TCG sales (I wonder if LA gets a cut in those sales? I would imagine they have to since its technically a seperate product from SWG)
Most of you do know that you can chargeback alot of the money you have put into SWG right ? , because you bought and paid for a service that can only be used online, when they take away that service, you have lost alot of time and money on something that is not there anymore, just as what happened with the first go around with All Points Bulletin from real time worlds, when that shut down, i chargedback my fee + sub for the game.
The wonders if modern banking is on your side in some instances, this is one of them, im already in a class act lawsuit against sony for losing my personal and creditcard information which i havent even been compensated for yet.
So yea, chargeback away while you can.
This is pretty scary if you can do this. Its fraud. You pay to access the servers for that time frame. And you got what you paid for. Anyone that does this is actually less ethical than SoE has been.
If its not "worthy of congratulations" then why is it worthy of scorn? TMO was a disaster, there's no way it stayed operating unless SOE bought it no matter their reasons. No other publisher was willing to even touch it. And if the end result would have been the same for Vanguard no matter what then again why hate SOE? Sony wasn't responsible for either crappy game and kept them operating well past the point when many other mmo's had folded.
Its illogical ... then again its the mmorpg.com forums, so rage on I guess.
It isn't worthy of congratulations, because SOE did a horrible job with both games. It is worthy of "scorn" as you put it, because SOE didn't live up to their promises. Just because SOE was able to continue the failure of both games doesn't mean people should applaud them, unless someones standards are so low that paying industry premium subscription fees for a game that has zero developers and updates for periods of time that can be measured in years can be viewed as good.
Buying a failed game with no intention of at least trying to make a recovery effort isn't praise worthy. One of the first things SOE did to the Matrix was cease the storytelling/live event features that was a corner stone of the game. Their first action actually made the game worse.
As for Vanguard, do you think SOE lived up to their promises to players? link SOE had two chances to turn vanguard around. Once when they were funding the game as the publisher and the second when they purchased the game and promised the same level of support that their other games receive all the way up to expansion packs. I guess what SOE meant was the same level of support games like EQMax, EQOA, Planetside, Matrix get and not the level of support of EQ/EQ2.
So no I don't think people need to stop complaining and settle to be happy with sustained failure. Praise is earned from doing something, not sitting back and letting the status quo continue.
That goes for the subject of the thread also. That is excatly why SWG is in the situation it is currently in. There just are not enough people left willing to pay premium industry rates, receive so little in return and feel happy about it.
If its not "worthy of congratulations" then why is it worthy of scorn? TMO was a disaster, there's no way it stayed operating unless SOE bought it no matter their reasons. No other publisher was willing to even touch it. And if the end result would have been the same for Vanguard no matter what then again why hate SOE? Sony wasn't responsible for either crappy game and kept them operating well past the point when many other mmo's had folded.
Its illogical ... then again its the mmorpg.com forums, so rage on I guess.
It isn't worthy of congratulations, because SOE did a horrible job with both games. It is worthy of "scorn" as you put it, because SOE didn't live up to their promises. Just because SOE was able to continue the failure of both games doesn't mean people should applaud them, unless someones standards are so low that paying industry premium subscription fees for a game that has zero developers and updates for periods of time that can be measured in years can be viewed as good.
Buying a failed game with no intention of at least trying to make a recovery effort isn't praise worthy. One of the first things SOE did to the Matrix was cease the storytelling/live event features that was a corner stone of the game. Their first action actually made the game worse.
As for Vanguard, do you think SOE lived up to their promises to players? link SOE had two chances to turn vanguard around. Once when they were funding the game as the publisher and the second when they purchased the game and promised the same level of support that their other games receive all the way up to expansion packs. I guess what SOE meant was the same level of support games like EQMax, EQOA, Planetside, Matrix get and not the level of support of EQ/EQ2.
So no I don't think people need to stop complaining and settle to be happy with sustained failure. Praise is earned from doing something, not sitting back and letting the status quo continue.
That goes for the subject of the thread also. That is excatly why SWG is in the situation it is currently in. There just are not enough people left willing to pay premium industry rates, receive so little in return and feel happy about it.
I want to point something out. Yes, SWG had lost many many players but it had a core dedicated player base. Starsider was very active prior to the closing annoucement. No it wasn't Pre-NGE levels but it was a steady income to LA & SOE with the minimal support the game got. It didn't generate positive press for the brand but had reached a point that didn't create negative press for the few that discovered it. In other words, it made enough to keep the servers running. I believe Lucas Arts intended to keep SWG running while TOR launched as they know there would be folks that wouldn't go for the new play style.
IMHO, I think EA approached LA and said kill SWG. We what its core players. EA is known for its hate of direct compition. Based on the LA/SOE contract, all LA had to do was go up on the Licenes a few thousand each. making SWG then cost prohibitive. The reasoning for both companies: "Look, TOR is coming out very soon and will drop SWG sub below operation cost. Lets just end it." This allowed Smedley to state it was a "mutal" decision.
SOE dosen't close game as long as one person still logs in. They tend to playcate to there core dedicated players and think they are fine. In truth, today, they are not doing well. With DCUO's failure, so went the Agancy. They realized a niche market like that just wasn't going to do well on multi platform. Since DCUO is more stable (in subs) on the PS3, they will probably shift furture invesments that way. ...just my opionion.
As for Vanguard, do you think SOE lived up to their promises to players? link SOE had two chances to turn vanguard around. Once when they were funding the game as the publisher and the second when they purchased the game and promised the same level of support that their other games receive all the way up to expansion packs. I guess what SOE meant was the same level of support games like EQMax, EQOA, Planetside, Matrix get and not the level of support of EQ/EQ2.
Okay lets look at that link:
Hello Everyone,
Today I would like to formally announce that SOE has acquired the assets of Sigil Games Online, including Vanguard: Saga of Heroes. As a part of this acquisition, we are bringing on approx 50 people from Sigil in order to insure that Vanguard continues to grow. SOE is dedicated to making sure that Vanguard is well taken care of and that we provide the same level of service we do for our other titles. In the near future we will come out with a publishing plan that will largely be driven by the strong player community that Vanguard has already built up. We plan on supporting Vanguard for many years to come, and you can expect many content updates as part of your subscription. Down the line we will of course be coming out with new expansion packs, but right now the focus is on making sure Vanguard is running the way it should be.
We are also officially opening up forums. In the past, our deal with Sigil didn't allow for this, but as with our other games we fill this is an important part of communicating with the playerbase. You can expect a strong presence from our community team as well as the development team members. While we realize that Sigil had said they wouldn't open up general forums, at SOE we fill this hampers our efforts to communicate effectively with the players. We will continue to support the fansites in a big way, and will be contacting many of them directly to discuss what this change means. By no means do we want to lose the strong fansite support by making this change, but we do think it's important to have a forum for players to communicate directly with SOE.
A few other items I wanted to mention
1. Brad McQuaid will be consultant to SOE as a creative advisor for Vanguard. Dave Gilbertson will be the person directly responsible for the day-to-day management of both the Sigil Carlsbad office as well as Vanguard.
2. We do not plan on making any major changes to Vanguard. Any changes are going to come from the team itself. We aren't mandating any big changes to the game. We've learned a thing or two with our experiences with the NGE and don't plan on repeating mistakes from the past and not listening to the players.
3. We do plan on spending a lot of time cleaning up legacy issues with Vanguard and making sure the game's performance improves.
By way of comparison, this team is approx. the same size as the EQ2 team and I feel like that team has done an amazing job improving EQ2 since it's launch. We intend to do the same thing for Vanguard and it is our hope that the players feel like we're doing right by them.
Smed
Sure, the first paragraph promises expansions. SoE made the huge mistake here of trusting their customers who seemed to say 'if Vanguard was fixed up it would be a hit. Well guess what? SoE held true to everything on the list initially. But the playerbase kept shrinking and shrinking despite the game being playable. They did add content. The game went from an unstable, bug ridden mess to something much smoother. They did not make any major changes to the gameplay.
But the game didnt deliver revenue. Players left SoE no choice but to shrink the staff. SoE put the time and money in, running at a loss initially, because the players said 'fix it and wwell come back'. But they fixed it and the players didnt come back. This was 100% a case of not SoE letting the players down, but the players letting SoE down.
What you've already paid in sub fees has no bearing on the current value of your subscription or account. That money is gone forever. It's like buying a movie ticket. Once you've paid for the ticket, the money is gone. It doesn't matter if the movie is terrible or if you missed the show. The money is still gone and the ticket in your hand is just a piece of paper.
Sub fees for an MMO are the same way. Once you pay the fee, that's it. The money is gone, no matter what happens after that.
Sure, the first paragraph promises expansions. SoE made the huge mistake here of trusting their customers who seemed to say 'if Vanguard was fixed up it would be a hit. Well guess what? SoE held true to everything on the list initially. But the playerbase kept shrinking and shrinking despite the game being playable. They did add content. The game went from an unstable, bug ridden mess to something much smoother. They did not make any major changes to the gameplay.
But the game didnt deliver revenue. Players left SoE no choice but to shrink the staff. SoE put the time and money in, running at a loss initially, because the players said 'fix it and wwell come back'. But they fixed it and the players didnt come back. This was 100% a case of not SoE letting the players down, but the players letting SoE down.
You dismiss that first paragraph like it isn't meaningful and the SOE somehow did live up to their other promises. Then you turn around and find some way to blame the players. Really you are kidding about that right? Can you point out where players promised SOE they would continue to pay money for a game that doesn't work properly? For a game that is one of the biggest flops in mmo history? That is really where you want to point blame?
You know what the very first action SOE took when they purchased Vanguard? They moved the most talented developers OFF the team and put them on other SOE projects. Sorry, but SOE didn't put in the effort to fix this game and players were under no obligation to financially support Vanguard until SOE got around to fixing the basic problems... years later.
The game didn't deliver revenue, because the game didn't deliver quality. That might come as a surprise to you, but that is pretty much how it works.
I want to point something out. Yes, SWG had lost many many players but it had a core dedicated player base. Starsider was very active prior to the closing annoucement. No it wasn't Pre-NGE levels but it was a steady income to LA & SOE with the minimal support the game got. It didn't generate positive press for the brand but had reached a point that didn't create negative press for the few that discovered it. In other words, it made enough to keep the servers running. I believe Lucas Arts intended to keep SWG running while TOR launched as they know there would be folks that wouldn't go for the new play style.
IMHO, I think EA approached LA and said kill SWG. We what its core players. EA is known for its hate of direct compition. Based on the LA/SOE contract, all LA had to do was go up on the Licenes a few thousand each. making SWG then cost prohibitive. The reasoning for both companies: "Look, TOR is coming out very soon and will drop SWG sub below operation cost. Lets just end it." This allowed Smedley to state it was a "mutal" decision.
SOE dosen't close game as long as one person still logs in. They tend to playcate to there core dedicated players and think they are fine. In truth, today, they are not doing well. With DCUO's failure, so went the Agancy. They realized a niche market like that just wasn't going to do well on multi platform. Since DCUO is more stable (in subs) on the PS3, they will probably shift furture invesments that way. ...just my opionion.
First, Smedley has already stated that SOE didn't even try to negotiate an extension for the swg license. If they didn't even try to extend the game, then I don't see why LA would need to try to force the game closed. SOE seemed pretty set on letting the game come to an end. I don't really think Lucas Arts was ever worried about SWG being some competition to SWTOR (especially since they would be making 2 sub fees from some people).
Closing SWG makes sense in a lot of ways. For one it finally puts an end to the drama that swg has become. As long as swg was running it would be something that people could actively point to.
On top of that SOE is in the middle of a serious money problem and cutting huge chunks of staff for the last 3 years. Return on investment for 1 swg employee is going to be much less than someone working on EQ. Perhaps a bit overly simplified, but there is truth there and SOE is more than likely heading towards more layoffs as their overall situation doesn't seem to be improving.
SOE recently sold off one of their facebook games, closed another facebook game, cancelled the agency as well as closing SWG/Matrix. SOE is no longer a company that doesn't close games.
Honestly, what does SOE gain from keeping SWG running?
Sure, the first paragraph promises expansions. SoE made the huge mistake here of trusting their customers who seemed to say 'if Vanguard was fixed up it would be a hit. Well guess what? SoE held true to everything on the list initially. But the playerbase kept shrinking and shrinking despite the game being playable. They did add content. The game went from an unstable, bug ridden mess to something much smoother. They did not make any major changes to the gameplay.
But the game didnt deliver revenue. Players left SoE no choice but to shrink the staff. SoE put the time and money in, running at a loss initially, because the players said 'fix it and wwell come back'. But they fixed it and the players didnt come back. This was 100% a case of not SoE letting the players down, but the players letting SoE down.
You dismiss that first paragraph like it isn't meaningful and the SOE somehow did live up to their other promises. Then you turn around and find some way to blame the players. Really you are kidding about that right? Can you point out where players promised SOE they would continue to pay money for a game that doesn't work properly? For a game that is one of the biggest flops in mmo history? That is really where you want to point blame?
You know what the very first action SOE took when they purchased Vanguard? They moved the most talented developers OFF the team and put them on other SOE projects. Sorry, but SOE didn't put in the effort to fix this game and players were under no obligation to financially support Vanguard until SOE got around to fixing the basic problems... years later.
The game didn't deliver revenue, because the game didn't deliver quality. That might come as a surprise to you, but that is pretty much how it works.
Actually how things work seems to come as a surprise to you. Name a single mmo developer/publisher that doesn't fall under the entirely subjective criteria of "players paying for a game that doesn't work properly". Yet so many of the professional complainers on these and other mmo forums single SOE out while ignoring the mmo charity they've given to many crappy games.
You are complaining that SOE ran their business like a business. Gosh they didn't throw another trancher of funding into the failed dev team they just bought out of bankruptcy. What maroons!1 You better believe those "talented" Vanguard developers were happy to be getting a paycheck from SOE after blowing through Sigil's cash reserves to produce what was basically an advanced alpha at release.
All of the games you listed that SOE supposedly ruined were commercial failures with subscriber bases below 100k, most of them closer to 50k. How many games have other publishers simply closed down at that point? SOE has kept most of them running and maintained staffs providing at least bug and update fixes. Several of them received expansions including SWG and Planetside. In fact Planetside is getting a kickass looking sequel .. a sequel for a game with what, 120k subs at peak? Yes SOE really is the devil. /eyeroll
You dismiss that first paragraph like it isn't meaningful and the SOE somehow did live up to their other promises. Then you turn around and find some way to blame the players. Really you are kidding about that right? Can you point out where players promised SOE they would continue to pay money for a game that doesn't work properly? For a game that is one of the biggest flops in mmo history? That is really where you want to point blame?
You know what the very first action SOE took when they purchased Vanguard? They moved the most talented developers OFF the team and put them on other SOE projects. Sorry, but SOE didn't put in the effort to fix this game and players were under no obligation to financially support Vanguard until SOE got around to fixing the basic problems... years later.
The game didn't deliver revenue, because the game didn't deliver quality. That might come as a surprise to you, but that is pretty much how it works.
You *really* want to say SoE didnt put effort in to fix vanguard? You realize the horrendous shape that the game was in at the time? Atrocious stability, bugged to hell, and no endgame content. Those were the three major flaws. SoE did infact address all 3.
But their investment provided no signs AT ALL that people would come back. because they didnt, even when what they asked for was done.
Yes, the players failed Vanguard. If Vanguard had shown positive growth theres a strong chance SoE would have continued the devleopment they planned. But it didnt. People just talk on sites like this about how great a game it is now blah blah blah, but no one plays it. Or you could just say maybe Vanguard wasnt very good to begin with, but then that isnt SoEs fault either. A polished turd is still a turd.
Now people seem to think SoE should do charity work for those 10,000 (if that, most likely quite a bit lower) that still play it.
Honestly, what does SOE gain from keeping SWG running?
Nothing. It would be a desolate wasteland once TOR comes out anyway. Smed would have ended up paying for a license that wasn't generating any real revenue once Bioware launches their game.
Better to end the game now and put SWG out to pasture than to drag it on any further.
Actually how things work seems to come as a surprise to you. Name a single mmo developer/publisher that doesn't fall under the entirely subjective criteria of "players paying for a game that doesn't work properly" Yet so many of the professional complainers on these and other mmo forums single SOE out while ignoring the mmo charity they've given to many crappy games.
You are complaining that SOE ran their business like a business. Gosh they didn't throw another trancher of funding into the failed dev team they just bought out of bankruptcy. What maroons!1 You better believe those "talented" Vanguard developers were happy to be getting a paycheck from SOE after blowing through Sigil's cash reserves to produce what was basically an advanced alpha at release.
All of the games you listed that SOE supposedly ruined were commercial failures with subscriber bases below 100k, most of them closer to 50k. How many games have other publishers simply closed down at that point? SOE has kept most of them running and maintained staffs providing at least bug and update fixes. Several of them received expansions including SWG and Planetside. In fact Planetside is getting a kickass looking sequel .. a sequel for a game with what, 120k subs at peak? Yes SOE really is the devil. /eyeroll
You are being unreasonable.
I'm not complaining that SOE ran their business like a business or other companies charging for subjective incomplete games. You have me all wrong. I never expected SOE to actually invest in reviving Vanguard, so that assumption is incorrect.
I'm pointing out that picking up a failed project and making no changes will simply result in continued failure. That is just common sense.
Also, that buying a bankrupt game that has already lost most of its players and in danger of losing the rest without increased investment would only continue the decline. Seems pretty simple enough would you agree? I'm just pointing out what happened.
As for your comments about complete being a subjective term, true enough. MMOs are always a work in progress and some things will be broken and incomplete in every game. However to try to downplay one game by generalizing it with the entire genre isn't being genuine to the issue at hand. Sure Vanguard, SWG, Wow and every mmo all have issues, but would it be fair to say that the issues in SWG or Vanguard are on the same level as issues in eq2 or wow? Are they so similar in nature that any mention of lack of quality can be dismissed by simply saying something to the effect of "all games have problems".
So planetside is getting a sequel, great! I always thought it was a cool concept, even though it didn't hold my interest for to long.
Now how many years... years... has it been since planetside has had regular support and updates? Even minor support and updates.
Same question for EQ-Mac, EQOA, Matrix (prior to closing), Vanguard.
Is it being unreasonable to expect similar levels of support that other similarly priced games receive? Is it being unresonable to expect any support in some cases?
Is any of that really something we should look at a developer for doing and tell them what a good job they are doing and thanks for the hard work? Is that really the message we want to send?
What you've already paid in sub fees has no bearing on the current value of your subscription or account. That money is gone forever. It's like buying a movie ticket. Once you've paid for the ticket, the money is gone. It doesn't matter if the movie is terrible or if you missed the show. The money is still gone and the ticket in your hand is just a piece of paper.
Sub fees for an MMO are the same way. Once you pay the fee, that's it. The money is gone, no matter what happens after that.
You see there is different laws depending on which country your from, in the US yea your money might be gone, i might not own the virtual property, but then again SOE owes me compensation for them being hacked, them being incompetent, them being useless in every other way, and now shutting down something some of us have paid for , for years.
You bet your ass once i present this to my bank on top of the compensation they own me, they will back charge the money, its all done automaticly.
SoE thought they could buy me of with 45 free days of subscription for every game they own to the PC, their wrong.
This is just my way of getting a sweet little payback on smedley who fucked with a game he should never had laid his hands on.
I very much want SWG to continue and hope by some little chance that it may happen. But, I actually have to commend SOE for giving us over a 5 month warning for the shutdown. They could have easily gave us 30 days or less of a notice. Although, I have not played much since the announcment, so it kind of feels shut down already. It is sad the game is shutting down . The next update sounds great and would have kept player busy for easily a year.
Agreed. Remember how Ashron's Call 2 was done? Be very thankful. As far as SWG sticking around. Not a chance, it's Star Wars and as such, George Lucas owns the rights. Without paying him the stupid fees, they have no right to market the game. Besides, Smed has already admitted they didn't even bother with an attempt at renewing because they knew SWTOR was coming out and that would do nothing but bleed subscribers from Galaxies.
SWG was always a fallback game for me when I had nothing else to play, have subbed off and on since the beginning, it sucks that it has come to this but let's be honest, I haven't been subbed for over a year now so I played my part in keeping the game dead and so have many man others. Going to miss it but, maybe just maybe if people had kept their subs going and they had a healthy population the would have kept the game around but sadly that is not the case. I loved the game but refused to pay for a server transfer off my dead server(Sunrunner) during the last time I played, hitting the bazaar and not even seeing any armor or weapons for sale was a real drag. Will miss my toons and to anyone who remembers Mr-Bungle of Sunrunner that was my main since 03'.
Yes. You are expecting SWG/Vanguard/Planetside/Matrix to get the same amount of publisher support/investment as SWG/EQ2 because they have the same monthly sub fee. That is unreasonable because it leaves out the other half of the money equation, number of subscribers. As someone else pointed out, SOE did invest in these games and it didn't attract any more subscribers. So they'd be crazy to double down.
That's just the way the mmo world works. MMO's have one chance at release to retain subscribers, it doesn't matter what a company does to fix things 3-6 months later. I happen to think that is unfair as I think you do but it doesn't change the facts.
Vanguard and The Matrix were indeed lucky to have SOE acquire them and keep them alive as long as they did (are still with Vanguard).
I don't see how LA/EA/BW could have possibly wanted SWG to continue operating. Just imagine how many people would mistakenly purchase SWG instead of SWTOR when they searched for a star wars mmo. No, not the people that frequent mmo forums but the millions of mmo neophytes that are going to be trying their first mmo because its the star wars ip.
Which is also another good indicator of when its going to be released since SWG sales are stopping what, Oct 1st?
Yes. You are expecting SWG/Vanguard/Planetside/Matrix to get the same amount of publisher support/investment as SWG/EQ2 because they have the same monthly sub fee. That is unreasonable because it leaves out the other half of the money equation, number of subscribers. As someone else pointed out, SOE did invest in these games and it didn't attract any more subscribers. So they'd be crazy to double down.
That's just the way the mmo world works. MMO's have one chance at release to retain subscribers, it doesn't matter what a company does to fix things 3-6 months later. I happen to think that is unfair as I think you do but it doesn't change the facts.
Vanguard and The Matrix were indeed lucky to have SOE acquire them and keep them alive as long as they did (are still with Vanguard).
Very valid points. EVE is about the only game on the market that I know of that had a horrible launch and was able to recover to the point they are a huge success. Look at WoW and EQ. They both launched with a month of each other. Proof is in the pudding that you never get a second chance to make a first impression in the MMORPG world.
You see there is different laws depending on which country your from, in the US yea your money might be gone, i might not own the virtual property, but then again SOE owes me compensation for them being hacked, them being incompetent, them being useless in every other way, and now shutting down something some of us have paid for , for years.
This isn't about specific laws. It's Economics 101. Once you spend the money, it's gone. Poof. The current value of an item is no longer contingent on what you spent on it in the past.
It's like trying to get a refund from a movie theater that's closing after you spent six years going to see a bunch of different films there. They don't owe you anything just because you spent a lot of money there. The money you spent is gone.
Comments
It wasn't losing money yet. But with TOR coming out, the anticipated losses were probably too much to keep projections in the black.
So I started to walk into the water. I won't lie to you boys...I was terrified. But I pressed on, and as I made my way past the breakers, a strange calm came over me. I don't know if it was divine intervention or the kinship of all living things, but I tell you, Jerry, at that moment ... I was a marine biologist.
If it weren't for SOE the Matrix would have shut down long before it did and Vanguard wouldn't have made it out of development. Both of the original developer/operators of those games had run out of operating funds. I understand why people have a beef with them over SWG, but blaming SOE for the fate of The Matrix or Vanguard is insane. You should be thanking them that those games operated as long as they did (still operating in Vanguard's case).
I for one am glad they are putting this game out of its misery. Left after CU and never looked back. My pre-CU Jedi and my 4 accounts
SOE only got involved with The Matrix Online so they could get the DC license. Beyond that they let the Matrix rot on life support. Can't really say they are doing a bang up job with the DC license either.
Vanguard would have seen release, but the end result would have been the same. Terrible release, Sigil files for bankruptcy, someone scoops up the game for loose change. SOE didn't "save" Vanguard from anything.
I really don't see any of that as being worthy of thanks or congratulations.
If its not "worthy of congratulations" then why is it worthy of scorn? TMO was a disaster, there's no way it stayed operating unless SOE bought it no matter their reasons. No other publisher was willing to even touch it. And if the end result would have been the same for Vanguard no matter what then again why hate SOE? Sony wasn't responsible for either crappy game and kept them operating well past the point when many other mmo's had folded.
Its illogical ... then again its the mmorpg.com forums, so rage on I guess.
I'm not seeing why Sony is being hated on by the community.
I don't love Sony either but you have to give them credit that they stick with MMOs that are way past their financial viability.
Gdemami -
Informing people about your thoughts and impressions is not a review, it's a blog.
At least SoE announced the closing pretty far in advance, despite the fact that doing so will cost them revenue. They could have waited until mid october to announce, say they still gave people notice, but milk an extra couple of month in TCG sales (I wonder if LA gets a cut in those sales? I would imagine they have to since its technically a seperate product from SWG)
This is pretty scary if you can do this. Its fraud. You pay to access the servers for that time frame. And you got what you paid for. Anyone that does this is actually less ethical than SoE has been.
It isn't worthy of congratulations, because SOE did a horrible job with both games. It is worthy of "scorn" as you put it, because SOE didn't live up to their promises. Just because SOE was able to continue the failure of both games doesn't mean people should applaud them, unless someones standards are so low that paying industry premium subscription fees for a game that has zero developers and updates for periods of time that can be measured in years can be viewed as good.
Buying a failed game with no intention of at least trying to make a recovery effort isn't praise worthy. One of the first things SOE did to the Matrix was cease the storytelling/live event features that was a corner stone of the game. Their first action actually made the game worse.
As for Vanguard, do you think SOE lived up to their promises to players? link SOE had two chances to turn vanguard around. Once when they were funding the game as the publisher and the second when they purchased the game and promised the same level of support that their other games receive all the way up to expansion packs. I guess what SOE meant was the same level of support games like EQMax, EQOA, Planetside, Matrix get and not the level of support of EQ/EQ2.
So no I don't think people need to stop complaining and settle to be happy with sustained failure. Praise is earned from doing something, not sitting back and letting the status quo continue.
That goes for the subject of the thread also. That is excatly why SWG is in the situation it is currently in. There just are not enough people left willing to pay premium industry rates, receive so little in return and feel happy about it.
I want to point something out. Yes, SWG had lost many many players but it had a core dedicated player base. Starsider was very active prior to the closing annoucement. No it wasn't Pre-NGE levels but it was a steady income to LA & SOE with the minimal support the game got. It didn't generate positive press for the brand but had reached a point that didn't create negative press for the few that discovered it. In other words, it made enough to keep the servers running. I believe Lucas Arts intended to keep SWG running while TOR launched as they know there would be folks that wouldn't go for the new play style.
IMHO, I think EA approached LA and said kill SWG. We what its core players. EA is known for its hate of direct compition. Based on the LA/SOE contract, all LA had to do was go up on the Licenes a few thousand each. making SWG then cost prohibitive. The reasoning for both companies: "Look, TOR is coming out very soon and will drop SWG sub below operation cost. Lets just end it." This allowed Smedley to state it was a "mutal" decision.
SOE dosen't close game as long as one person still logs in. They tend to playcate to there core dedicated players and think they are fine. In truth, today, they are not doing well. With DCUO's failure, so went the Agancy. They realized a niche market like that just wasn't going to do well on multi platform. Since DCUO is more stable (in subs) on the PS3, they will probably shift furture invesments that way. ...just my opionion.
Okay lets look at that link:
Hello Everyone,
Today I would like to formally announce that SOE has acquired the assets of Sigil Games Online, including Vanguard: Saga of Heroes. As a part of this acquisition, we are bringing on approx 50 people from Sigil in order to insure that Vanguard continues to grow. SOE is dedicated to making sure that Vanguard is well taken care of and that we provide the same level of service we do for our other titles. In the near future we will come out with a publishing plan that will largely be driven by the strong player community that Vanguard has already built up. We plan on supporting Vanguard for many years to come, and you can expect many content updates as part of your subscription. Down the line we will of course be coming out with new expansion packs, but right now the focus is on making sure Vanguard is running the way it should be.
We are also officially opening up forums. In the past, our deal with Sigil didn't allow for this, but as with our other games we fill this is an important part of communicating with the playerbase. You can expect a strong presence from our community team as well as the development team members. While we realize that Sigil had said they wouldn't open up general forums, at SOE we fill this hampers our efforts to communicate effectively with the players. We will continue to support the fansites in a big way, and will be contacting many of them directly to discuss what this change means. By no means do we want to lose the strong fansite support by making this change, but we do think it's important to have a forum for players to communicate directly with SOE.
A few other items I wanted to mention
1. Brad McQuaid will be consultant to SOE as a creative advisor for Vanguard. Dave Gilbertson will be the person directly responsible for the day-to-day management of both the Sigil Carlsbad office as well as Vanguard.
2. We do not plan on making any major changes to Vanguard. Any changes are going to come from the team itself. We aren't mandating any big changes to the game. We've learned a thing or two with our experiences with the NGE and don't plan on repeating mistakes from the past and not listening to the players.
3. We do plan on spending a lot of time cleaning up legacy issues with Vanguard and making sure the game's performance improves.
By way of comparison, this team is approx. the same size as the EQ2 team and I feel like that team has done an amazing job improving EQ2 since it's launch. We intend to do the same thing for Vanguard and it is our hope that the players feel like we're doing right by them.
Smed
Sure, the first paragraph promises expansions. SoE made the huge mistake here of trusting their customers who seemed to say 'if Vanguard was fixed up it would be a hit. Well guess what? SoE held true to everything on the list initially. But the playerbase kept shrinking and shrinking despite the game being playable. They did add content. The game went from an unstable, bug ridden mess to something much smoother. They did not make any major changes to the gameplay.
But the game didnt deliver revenue. Players left SoE no choice but to shrink the staff. SoE put the time and money in, running at a loss initially, because the players said 'fix it and wwell come back'. But they fixed it and the players didnt come back. This was 100% a case of not SoE letting the players down, but the players letting SoE down.
Except that your account isn't worth thousands just because you paid a sub fee for years. Allow me to introduce you to a concept called sunk costs:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sunk_costs#Description
What you've already paid in sub fees has no bearing on the current value of your subscription or account. That money is gone forever. It's like buying a movie ticket. Once you've paid for the ticket, the money is gone. It doesn't matter if the movie is terrible or if you missed the show. The money is still gone and the ticket in your hand is just a piece of paper.
Sub fees for an MMO are the same way. Once you pay the fee, that's it. The money is gone, no matter what happens after that.
You dismiss that first paragraph like it isn't meaningful and the SOE somehow did live up to their other promises. Then you turn around and find some way to blame the players. Really you are kidding about that right? Can you point out where players promised SOE they would continue to pay money for a game that doesn't work properly? For a game that is one of the biggest flops in mmo history? That is really where you want to point blame?
You know what the very first action SOE took when they purchased Vanguard? They moved the most talented developers OFF the team and put them on other SOE projects. Sorry, but SOE didn't put in the effort to fix this game and players were under no obligation to financially support Vanguard until SOE got around to fixing the basic problems... years later.
The game didn't deliver revenue, because the game didn't deliver quality. That might come as a surprise to you, but that is pretty much how it works.
First, Smedley has already stated that SOE didn't even try to negotiate an extension for the swg license. If they didn't even try to extend the game, then I don't see why LA would need to try to force the game closed. SOE seemed pretty set on letting the game come to an end. I don't really think Lucas Arts was ever worried about SWG being some competition to SWTOR (especially since they would be making 2 sub fees from some people).
Closing SWG makes sense in a lot of ways. For one it finally puts an end to the drama that swg has become. As long as swg was running it would be something that people could actively point to.
On top of that SOE is in the middle of a serious money problem and cutting huge chunks of staff for the last 3 years. Return on investment for 1 swg employee is going to be much less than someone working on EQ. Perhaps a bit overly simplified, but there is truth there and SOE is more than likely heading towards more layoffs as their overall situation doesn't seem to be improving.
SOE recently sold off one of their facebook games, closed another facebook game, cancelled the agency as well as closing SWG/Matrix. SOE is no longer a company that doesn't close games.
Honestly, what does SOE gain from keeping SWG running?
Actually how things work seems to come as a surprise to you. Name a single mmo developer/publisher that doesn't fall under the entirely subjective criteria of "players paying for a game that doesn't work properly". Yet so many of the professional complainers on these and other mmo forums single SOE out while ignoring the mmo charity they've given to many crappy games.
You are complaining that SOE ran their business like a business. Gosh they didn't throw another trancher of funding into the failed dev team they just bought out of bankruptcy. What maroons!1 You better believe those "talented" Vanguard developers were happy to be getting a paycheck from SOE after blowing through Sigil's cash reserves to produce what was basically an advanced alpha at release.
All of the games you listed that SOE supposedly ruined were commercial failures with subscriber bases below 100k, most of them closer to 50k. How many games have other publishers simply closed down at that point? SOE has kept most of them running and maintained staffs providing at least bug and update fixes. Several of them received expansions including SWG and Planetside. In fact Planetside is getting a kickass looking sequel .. a sequel for a game with what, 120k subs at peak? Yes SOE really is the devil. /eyeroll
You are being unreasonable.
You *really* want to say SoE didnt put effort in to fix vanguard? You realize the horrendous shape that the game was in at the time? Atrocious stability, bugged to hell, and no endgame content. Those were the three major flaws. SoE did infact address all 3.
But their investment provided no signs AT ALL that people would come back. because they didnt, even when what they asked for was done.
Yes, the players failed Vanguard. If Vanguard had shown positive growth theres a strong chance SoE would have continued the devleopment they planned. But it didnt. People just talk on sites like this about how great a game it is now blah blah blah, but no one plays it. Or you could just say maybe Vanguard wasnt very good to begin with, but then that isnt SoEs fault either. A polished turd is still a turd.
Now people seem to think SoE should do charity work for those 10,000 (if that, most likely quite a bit lower) that still play it.
Nothing. It would be a desolate wasteland once TOR comes out anyway. Smed would have ended up paying for a license that wasn't generating any real revenue once Bioware launches their game.
Better to end the game now and put SWG out to pasture than to drag it on any further.
I'm not complaining that SOE ran their business like a business or other companies charging for subjective incomplete games. You have me all wrong. I never expected SOE to actually invest in reviving Vanguard, so that assumption is incorrect.
I'm pointing out that picking up a failed project and making no changes will simply result in continued failure. That is just common sense.
Also, that buying a bankrupt game that has already lost most of its players and in danger of losing the rest without increased investment would only continue the decline. Seems pretty simple enough would you agree? I'm just pointing out what happened.
As for your comments about complete being a subjective term, true enough. MMOs are always a work in progress and some things will be broken and incomplete in every game. However to try to downplay one game by generalizing it with the entire genre isn't being genuine to the issue at hand. Sure Vanguard, SWG, Wow and every mmo all have issues, but would it be fair to say that the issues in SWG or Vanguard are on the same level as issues in eq2 or wow? Are they so similar in nature that any mention of lack of quality can be dismissed by simply saying something to the effect of "all games have problems".
So planetside is getting a sequel, great! I always thought it was a cool concept, even though it didn't hold my interest for to long.
Now how many years... years... has it been since planetside has had regular support and updates? Even minor support and updates.
Same question for EQ-Mac, EQOA, Matrix (prior to closing), Vanguard.
Is it being unreasonable to expect similar levels of support that other similarly priced games receive? Is it being unresonable to expect any support in some cases?
Is any of that really something we should look at a developer for doing and tell them what a good job they are doing and thanks for the hard work? Is that really the message we want to send?
You see there is different laws depending on which country your from, in the US yea your money might be gone, i might not own the virtual property, but then again SOE owes me compensation for them being hacked, them being incompetent, them being useless in every other way, and now shutting down something some of us have paid for , for years.
You bet your ass once i present this to my bank on top of the compensation they own me, they will back charge the money, its all done automaticly.
SoE thought they could buy me of with 45 free days of subscription for every game they own to the PC, their wrong.
This is just my way of getting a sweet little payback on smedley who fucked with a game he should never had laid his hands on.
List of SOE lies
Agreed. Remember how Ashron's Call 2 was done? Be very thankful. As far as SWG sticking around. Not a chance, it's Star Wars and as such, George Lucas owns the rights. Without paying him the stupid fees, they have no right to market the game. Besides, Smed has already admitted they didn't even bother with an attempt at renewing because they knew SWTOR was coming out and that would do nothing but bleed subscribers from Galaxies.
Power to the Sheeple
SWG was always a fallback game for me when I had nothing else to play, have subbed off and on since the beginning, it sucks that it has come to this but let's be honest, I haven't been subbed for over a year now so I played my part in keeping the game dead and so have many man others. Going to miss it but, maybe just maybe if people had kept their subs going and they had a healthy population the would have kept the game around but sadly that is not the case. I loved the game but refused to pay for a server transfer off my dead server(Sunrunner) during the last time I played, hitting the bazaar and not even seeing any armor or weapons for sale was a real drag. Will miss my toons and to anyone who remembers Mr-Bungle of Sunrunner that was my main since 03'.
Yes. You are expecting SWG/Vanguard/Planetside/Matrix to get the same amount of publisher support/investment as SWG/EQ2 because they have the same monthly sub fee. That is unreasonable because it leaves out the other half of the money equation, number of subscribers. As someone else pointed out, SOE did invest in these games and it didn't attract any more subscribers. So they'd be crazy to double down.
That's just the way the mmo world works. MMO's have one chance at release to retain subscribers, it doesn't matter what a company does to fix things 3-6 months later. I happen to think that is unfair as I think you do but it doesn't change the facts.
Vanguard and The Matrix were indeed lucky to have SOE acquire them and keep them alive as long as they did (are still with Vanguard).
I don't see how LA/EA/BW could have possibly wanted SWG to continue operating. Just imagine how many people would mistakenly purchase SWG instead of SWTOR when they searched for a star wars mmo. No, not the people that frequent mmo forums but the millions of mmo neophytes that are going to be trying their first mmo because its the star wars ip.
Which is also another good indicator of when its going to be released since SWG sales are stopping what, Oct 1st?
Very valid points. EVE is about the only game on the market that I know of that had a horrible launch and was able to recover to the point they are a huge success. Look at WoW and EQ. They both launched with a month of each other. Proof is in the pudding that you never get a second chance to make a first impression in the MMORPG world.
Power to the Sheeple
This isn't about specific laws. It's Economics 101. Once you spend the money, it's gone. Poof. The current value of an item is no longer contingent on what you spent on it in the past.
It's like trying to get a refund from a movie theater that's closing after you spent six years going to see a bunch of different films there. They don't owe you anything just because you spent a lot of money there. The money you spent is gone.