Howdy, Stranger!
It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!
Quick Links
I'm actually glad EQN is unlikely to be released
This discussion has been closed.
It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!
Comments
Dave and Smed utterly trashed a wonderful IP that could have been taken in the most amazing direction. It's too bad no one with authority over those two shook them until their teeth rattled to try to make them see the stupidity of their design directions before it was too late.
Your TRUE FACT #1:
The EQNext design has been completely scrapped and rebooted 3 times prior to SOE being sold. I'm not sure that any of the lead developers still being in charge of EQN is a positive.
Additionally, you left out the fact that Smedley is still at the company and he is the man who has developed the working culture at SOE/Daybreak. I'm not seeing a lot of evidence here that anything is going to change for the positive.
Your TRUE FACT #2:
You are making an assumption that the developers that have remained will work more cooperatively as a result of the layoffs. The last few years have seen SOE do similar rounds of massive layoffs and if those did not resolve the dysfunction with the developers, why is this time going to be any different?
What is causing developers to flee from making new/better games is the nonstop stream of underdeveloped buggy unfinished MMOs that crash and burn at release. Putting a project out of its misery before that happens is a far better situation for the gaming industry than watching yet another failed release by a large developer.
I'm sure most would love to see EQN be a great success and be a solid game, but that requires a ton of blind hope and ignoring all evidence to the contrary. Consider the EQNext has been in development since 2009 and there isn't anything to show for that.
Then consider the last decade of SOE's gaming efforts.
The Agency: 6 years in development and a completely failed project.
Free Realms: released with limited content, unfinished, went through massive player loss and closed down in a few year.
DCU: released with limited content, unfinished, went through massive player loss and slumps along with a tiny player base.
PS2: released with limited content, unfinished, went through massive player loss and slumps along with a tiny player base.
Landmark: released in an alpha status with limited content, a dying playerbase, looking to repeat the trend.
H1Z1: released in alpha status with limited content. Next is going to be the player drop off.
Notable game closures:
Star Wars Galaxies
Star Wars clone wars adventures
PoxNora
Wizardry Online
Magic The Gathering: Tactics
Vanguard Saga of Heroes
The Matrix Online
What would possibly make anyone think that SOE/Daybreak is now going to deliver a successful game in EQNext?
One step further, what would possibly suggest to you that EQNext is going to release in such a way that "pushes the MMO genre forward"?
You would be hard pressed to find another company that has done more damage to the MMO genre than SOE.
I like how people have a list of games they don't want to be made that exceeds the total number of games that they do want to be made.
It was very disappointing to see what they had planned for EQN.
I remember when I was still enjoying EQ talks of the so called EverQuest Next coming out being the updated version of EQ1.... well the rumor of EQN was true... the part about being anything similar to EQ... not so much.
EQ is the MMO I have best memories from. However if they do EQ3 instead of EQN I really hope they make the game less focused on grouping than EQ was. However I think they will sadly continue doing the FPS like EQN with the disney graphic which don't look fun to play (the little I have seen).
And in other news in fairy tale land, hordes of winged glowing monkeys will be flying around tommorow, and a land of chocolate and honey will appear on an island in the sky.
And btw, seriously man? Wildstar is a failure, but TSW, GW2, ESO, etc, aren't?
Do you actually know what reality is?
"The surest way to corrupt a youth is to instruct him to hold in higher esteem those who think alike than those who think differently."
- Friedrich Nietzsche
My list of games i don't want to be made is all of 1, EQN. The rest of the games that in process right now. Don't really care about whether they come out or not, particularly since they're not pissing on a beloved IP.
"The surest way to corrupt a youth is to instruct him to hold in higher esteem those who think alike than those who think differently."
- Friedrich Nietzsche
You know i was going to argue this last point with you, but i had a good long look at it, and yeah, i think you're right. Oh how the mighty do fall.
"The surest way to corrupt a youth is to instruct him to hold in higher esteem those who think alike than those who think differently."
- Friedrich Nietzsche
A couple of things.
Firstly I for one would be happy if they (and you) just stopped pretending that the game associated with Landmark has anything to do with Everquest and simply called it something else. It is clearly not Everquest and was never intended to be a sequel or a reboot of the franchise. Succeed or fail it is a completely different game and not part of the IP that is Everquest.
Therefore no matter how many people this new product attracts and however long they play they will not be in an EQ world.
Finally you widely underestimate the number of people still playing Everquest they are numbered in the tens of thousands not the ridiculous figure you made up. Everquest II also l has a significant number of players many of whom pay their monthly sub and a lot of them do so on multiple accounts.
EQ1/EQ2 player here.
In my opinion graphics and mechanics have nothing to do with making a game Everquest. Hell, even EQ1/EQ2 have largely varying mechanics and art. What makes Everquest is adventure. A massive world, with tons to explore and do with that un-quantifiable feel to it.
While I know the EQ franchise isn't everyone's cup of tea, just because EQ:N is slated to have action combat and cartoon characters doesn't make it not Everquest, to me as long as it has that sense of exploration and wonder,
It isn't just about EQN having poor visuals or action combat. It has a lot to do with not trusting SOE, based on how badly they have screwed up everything they touch with everquest... actually any of their games really.
To use an example: would you trust George Lucas to make another Star Wars trilogy or Indiana Jones film? Sure there was a time when he was a visionary writer director and made something wonderful, but then his own success changed everything. Marketing and merchandise took front seat and he no longer had either passion or vision to create compelling stories on the big screen.
SOE is nearly identical to this. They have a huge list of bullet points that sound like they would make an awesome game, but they have no idea how to cohesively put it together into a solid game nor the ability to do it in a reasonable fashion.
SOE really hasn't done anything since EQ1 besides over promise and under deliver on every title.
Ummmmmmmmmmm, no.
Star Wars Galaxies - 8-year run
Star Wars clone wars adventures - 4 years
PoxNora - 5 years
Wizardry Online - 1 year
Magic The Gathering: Tactics - 5 years
Vanguard Saga of Heroes - 7 years
The Matrix Online - 4 years
DCUO - 4 years (and running)
Free Realms - 3 years
PS2 - 3 years and expanding onto consoles (maybe still??)'
Unfortunately, I think you've got a very unrealistic expectation of what a "successful" MMO is. If they're successful in creating games, consistently, that last for 3+ years, that's definitely not a failure. They have had failures, but for the most part they have been able to create successful titles. Content is all relative to the support they receive. When it comes to actually running the games, they manage to keep servers up longer than most companies would. Shoot, just look at someone like NCSoft, closing CoH when it was still viable.
Crazkanuk
----------------
Azarelos - 90 Hunter - Emerald
Durnzig - 90 Paladin - Emerald
Demonicron - 90 Death Knight - Emerald Dream - US
Tankinpain - 90 Monk - Azjol-Nerub - US
Brindell - 90 Warrior - Emerald Dream - US
----------------
If SOE had created successful titles as you suggest, they would still be SOE and not sold off as an unprofitable division to some investment firm.
Towards the point I was making: Do you think other game developers look at that list of SOE games and think that is how successful games are made and they should follow SOE's example or do you think those other companies see continuous failures from SOE even when they have some of the most hottest IP's to base their games off of?
Throwing the game servers in a closet for years and leaving them running with little to no developer support is not what anyone should define as a success.
I bet you every one of those games lost 90% of their subscriber base within 12-24 months.
If you can tell me 10 games which maintained 90% of their user base for longer than 12-24 months, released in the past 5 years, I'd be very interested to hear about it.
I actually do think that developers would love to have a portfolio of games and IP like SOE had. Obviously an investment firm did, too. Someone doesn't buy a sinking ship for nostalgia. They buy something if they feel that there is value there, whether they can make money running it as a company or selling it off in pieces. Either way, there is obviously value there.
Now, I can only pull population stats from steam as a baseline, but 24-hour peaks are NOT bad:
DCUO - 1250
PS2 - 4280
EQ2 - 250
H1Z1 - 21500
PS2 is actually in the top 10 of most popular F2P games on steam. DCUO is in the top 25 of most popular F2P games on Steam. H1Z1 has the 12th highest 24-hour peak of any game on steam right now.
This doesn't account for whatever other clients they might have installed out there. Also, there were reports at one point that said DCUO saw 70% of it's revenues coming from PS3. Not sure if console is still that big a chunk for them, but if it is, then it could be a much bigger number than shows here. Also, with PS2 possibly still porting over? Maybe? They could actually see a big boost from that as well. Same goes for H1Z1.
F2P isn't an easy gig. It's an up-at-dawn, pride swallowing siege that I'm sure they'll never fully tell us about. Fact is, though, that SOE did have some pretty good titles, relative to what's available. They had All Access, which was a stroke of brilliance, if they could manage to convert people to it. Also, their collective, daily population across all games is high. So, really, it's converting those people into paying customers that they may not have been doing as well as they would have liked. Also, they've got 3 titles on the go at once, spreading their resources thin and, really, delaying their release process of all games. So you're basically enduring that monthly burn for 3 times as long. If you want to have a skunkworks team doing projects like H1Z1, go for it!! However, why they were doing Landmark and EQN at the same time, I'll never fully understand. I'm a little disconnected from the community, though, so maybe there's information I'm not aware of.
I think that the biggest problems with SOE was management and monetization. If you really think that companies wouldn't jump at the chance to buy up their portfolio, though, you're kidding yourself.
Crazkanuk
----------------
Azarelos - 90 Hunter - Emerald
Durnzig - 90 Paladin - Emerald
Demonicron - 90 Death Knight - Emerald Dream - US
Tankinpain - 90 Monk - Azjol-Nerub - US
Brindell - 90 Warrior - Emerald Dream - US
----------------
Sony as a whole is losing money, they sold off SoE to save them selves. SoE one area worth selling and thats the end of it. Investment Firms dont buy companies that wont make money. Only question remains is will they still make money under the new owners? Sure they lost 60 mill last year but they do have 3 MMOs under development and we all know the cost of making an MMO, 100-200 mill seems to be the norm reported now days. Pay day is around the corner for that work.
Do you seriously even listen to the things you say before you post them?
You act like an investment is a guaranteed success that carries no risk. Just how far do you have to go in order to redefine financial reason to make SOE seem viable? Columbus Nova is taking a RISK in buying SOE . That is the end of it. You can't redefine financial principles just to support your devotion to a game.
As for Sony, yes they are losing money as a whole. Notice how they are not selling the computer entertainment division, the movie division or any other division that is making money? Notice how they sold or are looking to sell the divisions that are not making money?
It is funny how you focus on half the information in order to support your views. Yes SOE lost $60 millions dollars and had 3 games in development, but you seem to ignore that SOE has roughly a dozen games running and still was running negative for years and years. What possibly makes you think payday is around the corner when the previous dozen or so games didn't deliver?
Lets look at the payday you think is coming:
1) Landmark: already released. Development already stalled. Playerbase already dead. Sony collected all the money for that and Columbus Nova will see next to nothing for it.
2) H1Z1. Again, already released and the sales money from that went directly to Sony, not Columbus Nova. The peak player numbers are around 20,000. Using Johns Smedleys own formula about peak population vs total population (that being 20% of a playerbase is logged in during peak hours).
20,0000 * 5 = 100,000 players/
100,000 * $20 steam price = 2 million dollars
2 million dollars - 30% steam cut = $1.4 million dollars.
That is the big payday for H1Z1? $1.4 million dollars. Lets be generous and give them $1 million a month take home in microtransactions. How many years will it take to recoup the 100-200 million you think gets spend on game like this?
If H1Z1 was making any serious money to offset the losses SOE was suffering, Sony would not have sold SOE. Think about that. Why would Sony sell SOE if H1Z1 was making serious amounts of money?
3) EQNext:
At this point calling it vaporware would be a fair statement, but most realize that the Landmark is all that really exists of EQNext. I know you will cry out that Landmark isn't EQNext, but it really is. SOE has convinced people that the development team working on the most important project in the history of the company was somehow retasked with working on some new minecraft game right in the middle of developing EQN? That the team somehow "splits" time working on two games, but they continue to only show one game.
Sorry, but it was a desperation money grab by SOE to generate some form of revenue in order to avoid being sold off.
I honestly have no idea which games in the last five years have found success in their releases. However what does that have to do with anything?
By comparing the failures of other companies somehow change the failures of SOE into successes?
You point to steam numbers and say they "are not bad", which first of all is a terrible endorsement for something you are trying to argue is a success. Secondly, you are pointing to numbers in the couple of hundred to a couple thousand and suggesting those represent success?
Think about this: 2005
Everquest: 550,000 subscribers
Everquest 2: 350,000 subscribers
Star Wars Galaxies: 250,000 subscribers.
You know what the difference between your numbers and those are? SOE once had over 1 million PAYING subscribers.
Now their playerbase numbers are a small fraction of that and many of those play completely free.
It doesn't really matter where 70% of SOEs revenues came from, because percentages are meaningless when the division was posting 60 million dollar losses.
Lets be honest, SOE had a massive stable of games with what most companies could only dream of for intellectual properties to build off.... and SOE failed to run profitably. Most of their games were shut down, many in complete disgrace and SOE was sold off to an investment firm that is hacking away the companies resources.
Sorry, but there are no amount of excuses you can make that will turn that story into one that represents success.
SOE was once a success and a major player in the MMO space. They were leaders for quite a while, but that was over a decade ago. There just isn't anything that can be pointed to from SOE anymore that is a success.
Devotion? As I said, lets see if CN can make money with DGC. I have no clue if EQN will be a good game. I like some of what they are doing, other parts like the twitch combat I do not. As an EQ fan, been playing EQ since 1999. I will read up and follow this game. Watching 2 people on these forums posting miss information and lies, I will set the record straight. Im waiting to see of this game will be any good. I suggest you do the same or bail. As you making stuff up just removes your cred on these forums.
As always filled with miss information.
Not released in beta, has a great core of gamers and a really tight community. I play it often and know many of the big names in that game.
In early access not released and doing very well. Its one of the top games on Steam.
Being a F2P game, cash shop is where they make their money, while you are making up numbers and guessing. Why dont you take a shot at what their cash shop is making? LOL
Calling EQN as vaporware is just funny as always. Yes Nova bought them out after looking under the hood and went yes lets buy a company where its main project is vaporware lol. As always filled with miss information or just making crap up. Have fun with that =-)
Ummmmmm, 2000 or 4000 peak users in a 24 hour period doesn't mean 2000-4000 subscribers. Shoot, it could mean there are 2000-4000 new people every minute. It's concurrent users. You can then take those numbers and compare them against concurrent users in other games. As mentioned, H1Z1's 21500 represents the 12th most popular game on all of steam. The 99th most popular game has something like 1200 or something like that. So 3 of the 4 mentioned games are in the top 100 on steam. That's a huge portion of their current stable of games, too.
How else would you measure success? I'm providing side-by-side comparison in a fair marketplace against every other game in every other genre on the whole. Is that not a fair measure of success? Are we to assume that only 1% of companies, or games, are actually making money? You can answer that, it's an honest question.
I'm measuring success based on the popularity of the game, not the money it generated. If I had statistics to show how much money they made, I'm sure I could make a stronger case. If you'd like to tear mine down, though, feel free to find some actual, measurable data, like individual game financials.
Subscriptions mean nothing relative to the numbers I'm quoting. We're talking about concurrent users. So show me some numbers on EQ, EQ2, or SWG concurrent numbers and then they are relative. Shoot, if you want to just fire out numbers, in 2013 DCUO had 11 million registered users. By 2014 DCUO had 18 million registered users. So their growth year-over-year is actually still going up. And the number of people who have played DCUO is probably higher than EQ in it's entire history, or most other paid games for that matter.
As far as losses are concerned, they have THREE GAMES in development. You look at anyone currently developing an MMORPG and you'll see losses. Again, this is a management issue, in my opinion. The monthly burn on an operation like SOE is ridiculous. It was only worse for them since they were developing in parallel, meaning their costs were, effectively, doubled.
Crazkanuk
----------------
Azarelos - 90 Hunter - Emerald
Durnzig - 90 Paladin - Emerald
Demonicron - 90 Death Knight - Emerald Dream - US
Tankinpain - 90 Monk - Azjol-Nerub - US
Brindell - 90 Warrior - Emerald Dream - US
----------------
Because of the bigger picture people dont see right now.
Todays mmorpgs are not developed by devs as much as they are controlled by community organizers and SCRUM development structure. In short development moves in what is projected to be the next popular phase. This Phase includes Voxels, sandbox elements, PVP centered games some with political systems some with not, most with weapon based combat mechanics and psudo crafting.
The last big phase was Psudo DAOC pvp, pve centric games with twitch action combat.
Its not just this game, I am sure all the Elder Scrolls fans would want a redo on that POS excuse for an Elder Scrolls mmo.
I'm no fan of EQN, but to see some of the concepts go down with it is bad news. I had hoped EQN would essentially spur someone else to make a more serious game that built on some of the features such as the strategy game approach to mobs, and the ... well the strategy game approach to mobs.
The destructible world and building seemed like something they later regretted, as the talk continually went in the direction of limiting those aspects in EQN (Building in the world, destruction in the world). They should have made digging for instance, be something that was more permanent but ate some resource while you delved.
Combat and art style are the two biggest weaknesses of the game, which basically translates into a foundation of mush for the rest of the game in my opinion.