Not exactly how it would work, if they owned property (not the house kind but the possession kind) then the bank could also go to court obtain an order (since they were the sole owner of the company) and loom to recoup their losses. Not that it would work 100% of the time bit depending on the contract...
Well depends on how the company was set up, and it would be pretty foolish to be a sole proprietor if this was your plan, but yes, the property would also be forfeit, but if it was worth say, 500K and you took loans out for 800K, you pretty much just sold your land for a 300K profit to a bank.
Well.. I can't speak for anyone else. but I have a lot of respect for people that are willing to bet on their own horse. Even if it Seed money from selling extra property to keep the company in their name, which.. is really a sign of faith that they think this will work.
If they planned to fail, they would be smarter to take out huge loans, rank up the debt, write insane paychecks, and then when things crashed and burned, toss the company as a whole to the bank as a credit collection and walk away, now richer, with a fat wallet, dump that into stocks and bonds and just go get another job at a high paying computer company.
What bank would do this? If someone had to sell their property it’s likely because there was no bank or publisher. Or just have bad business sense.
Lots of banks make bad loan choices, and, as long as they could not prove it was a con job, IE: the Company at least tried to do something (Which CoE has done already).. people failing happens, for example, tons of people get into real estate every year thinking they will strike it big, and bomb out, that is why the banks would take the company and the land (at a loss) as collateral, that is also why banks are constantly auctioning off houses, land and other means of liquidated wealth.
While most of the claims come from a sincere attempt that failed, anyone with a clue looking to pull a con job would make it look sincere as well.. but would just make sure they were playing with other peoples money.
When you play with your own money.. well.. then you only con yourself.. a kinda foolish thing to do.. not that people don't do that as well.
Egotism is the anesthetic that dullens the pain of stupidity, this is why when I try to beat my head against the stupidity of other people, I only hurt myself.
Also, your game can't be so like other games of the genre that it feels like you already played it before, it need to stand out enough so people both think it is fun and it gives them a new experience.
This is some serious Truth here.
This is what launched GW2 into fame, to try new things, build a new way to play a game, (They have since abandoned this structure, and have opted to become more generic MMO like, which I think really killed the game)
But, making something new.. is the key here.
Look at Day-Z, it was a bad overall game.. but gave a very unique feel in how you play it.
Others game try to capture that.
But really, you nailed this, when you said if want to make the next big thing... you need to break from the mold, so the game stands out.
Egotism is the anesthetic that dullens the pain of stupidity, this is why when I try to beat my head against the stupidity of other people, I only hurt myself.
Not exactly how it would work, if they owned property (not the house kind but the possession kind) then the bank could also go to court obtain an order (since they were the sole owner of the company) and loom to recoup their losses. Not that it would work 100% of the time bit depending on the contract...
Well depends on how the company was set up, and it would be pretty foolish to be a sole proprietor if this was your plan, but yes, the property would also be forfeit, but if it was worth say, 500K and you took loans out for 800K, you pretty much just sold your land for a 300K profit to a bank.
Well.. I can't speak for anyone else. but I have a lot of respect for people that are willing to bet on their own horse. Even if it Seed money from selling extra property to keep the company in their name, which.. is really a sign of faith that they think this will work.
If they planned to fail, they would be smarter to take out huge loans, rank up the debt, write insane paychecks, and then when things crashed and burned, toss the company as a whole to the bank as a credit collection and walk away, now richer, with a fat wallet, dump that into stocks and bonds and just go get another job at a high paying computer company.
What bank would do this? If someone had to sell their property it’s likely because there was no bank or publisher. Or just have bad business sense.
Lots of banks make bad loan choices, and, as long as they could not prove it was a con job, IE: the Company at least tried to do something (Which CoE has done already).. people failing happens, for example, tons of people get into real estate every year thinking they will strike it big, and bomb out, that is why the banks would take the company and the land (at a loss) as collateral, that is also why banks are constantly auctioning off houses, land and other means of liquidated wealth.
While most of the claims come from a sincere attempt that failed, anyone with a clue looking to pull a con job would make it look sincere as well.. but would just make sure they were playing with other peoples money.
When you play with your own money.. well.. then you only con yourself.. a kinda foolish thing to do.. not that people don't do that as well.
You understand and yet misunderstand me.
I said it exactly because yes there is ways around it.
But also when I said property I meant all of his/her possessions, cars, Tv's, Computers, everything
Not exactly how it would work, if they owned property (not the house kind but the possession kind) then the bank could also go to court obtain an order (since they were the sole owner of the company) and loom to recoup their losses. Not that it would work 100% of the time bit depending on the contract...
Well depends on how the company was set up, and it would be pretty foolish to be a sole proprietor if this was your plan, but yes, the property would also be forfeit, but if it was worth say, 500K and you took loans out for 800K, you pretty much just sold your land for a 300K profit to a bank.
Well.. I can't speak for anyone else. but I have a lot of respect for people that are willing to bet on their own horse. Even if it Seed money from selling extra property to keep the company in their name, which.. is really a sign of faith that they think this will work.
If they planned to fail, they would be smarter to take out huge loans, rank up the debt, write insane paychecks, and then when things crashed and burned, toss the company as a whole to the bank as a credit collection and walk away, now richer, with a fat wallet, dump that into stocks and bonds and just go get another job at a high paying computer company.
What bank would do this? If someone had to sell their property it’s likely because there was no bank or publisher. Or just have bad business sense.
Lots of banks make bad loan choices, and, as long as they could not prove it was a con job, IE: the Company at least tried to do something (Which CoE has done already).. people failing happens, for example, tons of people get into real estate every year thinking they will strike it big, and bomb out, that is why the banks would take the company and the land (at a loss) as collateral, that is also why banks are constantly auctioning off houses, land and other means of liquidated wealth.
While most of the claims come from a sincere attempt that failed, anyone with a clue looking to pull a con job would make it look sincere as well.. but would just make sure they were playing with other peoples money.
When you play with your own money.. well.. then you only con yourself.. a kinda foolish thing to do.. not that people don't do that as well.
You understand and yet misunderstand me.
I said it exactly because yes there is ways around it.
But also when I said property I meant all of his/her possessions, cars, Tv's, Computers, everything
They can't take that unless it was put up as collateral.
IE: If he took a loan out on some land he owned and his company start up, then no matter what happens, they can only go after that land, as that was only what was offered as collateral.
Playing with Loans and Equity is not the same as building up a generic credit debt or bills, which, allows the collector to go after anything you own. That is it's own other kind of game.
But.. I stand by what I said.. I have a lot of respect for people willing to bet on their own horse.
Egotism is the anesthetic that dullens the pain of stupidity, this is why when I try to beat my head against the stupidity of other people, I only hurt myself.
Also, your game can't be so like other games of the genre that it feels like you already played it before, it need to stand out enough so people both think it is fun and it gives them a new experience.
This is some serious Truth here.
This is what launched GW2 into fame, to try new things, build a new way to play a game, (They have since abandoned this structure, and have opted to become more generic MMO like, which I think really killed the game)
But, making something new.. is the key here.
Look at Day-Z, it was a bad overall game.. but gave a very unique feel in how you play it.
Others game try to capture that.
But really, you nailed this, when you said if want to make the next big thing... you need to break from the mold, so the game stands out.
Well, that is just the start (or as you said, Day-Z would have been huge) but I don't think the next thing could feel like any older MMO.
But most devs seems to either go for remaking whatever is relatively popular now with better graphics or trying to remake a more classic game (like UO or EQ). And that worked for Wow but that was mainly because so few people had played EQ when it came out and the fact that MMOs were low budget games with a lot of bugs before that. It wont work a second time.
I think GW2 while a pretty good game lost it's chanse to be the next big one several years before launch when Strain left it though. They started to water down his vision as soon as he left and when they added heart quests and nerfed the difficulty before launch it lost the chanse to become number one (there were a lot more before that but those were the 2 final nails in the coffin).
I still like GW2 but it could have been a lot more.
And copying it with some improvements would fail as badly as copying Wow or ESO with some improvements.
The only question is how much it needs to stand out but I would rather go a bit further then not far enough. And honestly, if you look on the myriads of good unique pen and paper roleplaying games and the many interesting and different singleplayer RPGs that have been made you can see that it isn't that hard to make a new fun system either. How fun would the Witcher games be if they were just like Baldurs gate after all? Or Shadowrun or Vampire if they just were like D&D?
Most players don't give a fuck about MMOs anymore, mainly in west. In the age of battle royale and MOBAs (competitive gaming as a whole) dominating the space there is no interest for AAA PC MMOs anymore, at least in west. Mobile MMOs are growing mainly in east Asia and I think most people from now on will play mostly MMOs on mobiles over there. The only PC MMO i'm still waiting is Project TL, in case it's another dissapointment, I will probably stay out of the MMO genre as a whole.
Well, at this point there are several things that would greatly contribute to success. One would be willingness to invent a new role system that doesn't put too much responsibility for party survival onto one guy and too little onto a truck load of others. That would deal with the massive DPS bottleneck in the queues that plague the genre. Any queue times above 10 mins is a huge barrier to playing the game and needs to be tackled, but too many games hamstrung themselves by taking the old trinity. Another would be willingness to recognize that themepark is not dead and that they do not need to invent an entirely new genre of mmorpg just to compete in the market. Plus, a successful company needs to take a page from Star Citizen. The enthusiasm for that game cannot be understated and it says a lot about how to do crowdfunding right. The crowdfunding part is a project just as much as the game is.
Most players don't give a fuck about MMOs anymore, mainly in west. In the age of battle royale and MOBAs (competitive gaming as a whole) dominating the space there is no interest for AAA PC MMOs anymore, at least in west. Mobile MMOs are growing mainly in east Asia and I think most people from now on will play mostly MMOs on mobiles over there. The only PC MMO i'm still waiting is Project TL, in case it's another dissapointment, I will probably stay out of the MMO genre as a whole.
It's dying due to more practical reasons than a competing genre. MOBA and battle royale are PVP centric games. MMORPGs are PVE centric. MMO's are losing popularity because development isn't being done to address deep seeded issues that have existed for years, like how the role system affects queue times. Those are problems that have to be addressed during development and not on a finished project because they go to the heart of how encounters are balanced.
It's dying due to more practical reasons than a competing genre. MOBA and battle royale are PVP centric games. MMORPGs are PVE centric. MMO's are losing popularity because development isn't being done to address deep seeded issues that have existed for years, like how the role system affects queue times. Those are problems that have to be addressed during development and not on a finished project because they go to the heart of how encounters are balanced.
I dunno, a lot of the problem is that most MMOs are very similar and the average former players tired of more of the same. It is kinda like eating in the same hamburger joint every day for a long time, eventually you tire and want something else.
There are of course the nostalgic fans who want a new version of their old favorite games (EQ and SWG fans tend to be loudest) but I don't think there are many enough of them to get a tripple A dev interested in delivering for them.
If the genre truly want to attract large crowds of new players we need rather different MMOs from what we seen so far. You certainly could be inspired of certain old feature a game tried out in the early days but the main gameplay need to be new. If you plan to make anything that feels very similar to an older game and is going for more then 50K players you can just give it up.
Take the trinity combat, while you certainly could improve itthe game you get out will still feel a lot like Wow to the majority of your potential customers and that don't work anymore besides possibly for Wow. Same thing with borrowing GW2s or Neverwinters systems, they have been done and all the improvement you need to add to make the system feeling new and unique probably means it is cheaper to make something new instead of trying to fix the old systems.
The current system have already been "improved" a couple of times too many.
Now, if you instead remade the trinity from the start, skipping how it handles aggro and focus on offensive classes, defensive classes and support you could possibly turn out something that is both fun and new. Consider what lies behind the mechanics and how you could do things a different way still filling the needs for goup mechanics and co-operation you get potential to change things.
And the trinity is just an example, there are many other things that needs reworking. How you gain power through experience for example and how you choose to portion out the story (usually done through linear quests today).
Fixing an excisting system isn't good enough anymore, it was some years back.
make getting hurtful spells and attacks hard to get. Make combat hard so it's frustrating sometimes. Make killing another player a gamble Make mobs hard to kill
force people to socialize to beat the game
The ideal combat system is "simple to learn but difficult to master".
Essentially what the means is that it should be intuitive as possible. Easy to pick up, and just mastering the basics shouldn't be that difficult.
But it should have depth and complexities that if mastered really allow you to shine above everyone else.
For instance picking up a melee weapon and whacking someone with it IRL. Not too hard. But knowing how to whack someone doesn't make you a master swordsman.
make getting hurtful spells and attacks hard to get. Make combat hard so it's frustrating sometimes. Make killing another player a gamble Make mobs hard to kill
force people to socialize to beat the game
You are spot on except for one thing: no pvp in the game.....For me quite often PVP ruins the whole experience....I've never played a game where it was done well or done right.
Comments
Lots of banks make bad loan choices, and, as long as they could not prove it was a con job, IE: the Company at least tried to do something (Which CoE has done already).. people failing happens, for example, tons of people get into real estate every year thinking they will strike it big, and bomb out, that is why the banks would take the company and the land (at a loss) as collateral, that is also why banks are constantly auctioning off houses, land and other means of liquidated wealth.
While most of the claims come from a sincere attempt that failed, anyone with a clue looking to pull a con job would make it look sincere as well.. but would just make sure they were playing with other peoples money.
When you play with your own money.. well.. then you only con yourself.. a kinda foolish thing to do.. not that people don't do that as well.
This is what launched GW2 into fame, to try new things, build a new way to play a game, (They have since abandoned this structure, and have opted to become more generic MMO like, which I think really killed the game)
But, making something new.. is the key here.
Look at Day-Z, it was a bad overall game.. but gave a very unique feel in how you play it.
Others game try to capture that.
But really, you nailed this, when you said if want to make the next big thing... you need to break from the mold, so the game stands out.
Never forget 3 mile Island and never trust a government official or company spokesman.
I said it exactly because yes there is ways around it.
But also
when I said property I meant all of his/her possessions, cars, Tv's, Computers, everything
IE: If he took a loan out on some land he owned and his company start up, then no matter what happens, they can only go after that land, as that was only what was offered as collateral.
Playing with Loans and Equity is not the same as building up a generic credit debt or bills, which, allows the collector to go after anything you own. That is it's own other kind of game.
But.. I stand by what I said.. I have a lot of respect for people willing to bet on their own horse.
But most devs seems to either go for remaking whatever is relatively popular now with better graphics or trying to remake a more classic game (like UO or EQ).
And that worked for Wow but that was mainly because so few people had played EQ when it came out and the fact that MMOs were low budget games with a lot of bugs before that.
It wont work a second time.
I think GW2 while a pretty good game lost it's chanse to be the next big one several years before launch when Strain left it though. They started to water down his vision as soon as he left and when they added heart quests and nerfed the difficulty before launch it lost the chanse to become number one (there were a lot more before that but those were the 2 final nails in the coffin).
I still like GW2 but it could have been a lot more.
And copying it with some improvements would fail as badly as copying Wow or ESO with some improvements.
The only question is how much it needs to stand out but I would rather go a bit further then not far enough. And honestly, if you look on the myriads of good unique pen and paper roleplaying games and the many interesting and different singleplayer RPGs that have been made you can see that it isn't that hard to make a new fun system either. How fun would the Witcher games be if they were just like Baldurs gate after all? Or Shadowrun or Vampire if they just were like D&D?
There are of course the nostalgic fans who want a new version of their old favorite games (EQ and SWG fans tend to be loudest) but I don't think there are many enough of them to get a tripple A dev interested in delivering for them.
If the genre truly want to attract large crowds of new players we need rather different MMOs from what we seen so far. You certainly could be inspired of certain old feature a game tried out in the early days but the main gameplay need to be new. If you plan to make anything that feels very similar to an older game and is going for more then 50K players you can just give it up.
Take the trinity combat, while you certainly could improve itthe game you get out will still feel a lot like Wow to the majority of your potential customers and that don't work anymore besides possibly for Wow. Same thing with borrowing GW2s or Neverwinters systems, they have been done and all the improvement you need to add to make the system feeling new and unique probably means it is cheaper to make something new instead of trying to fix the old systems.
The current system have already been "improved" a couple of times too many.
Now, if you instead remade the trinity from the start, skipping how it handles aggro and focus on offensive classes, defensive classes and support you could possibly turn out something that is both fun and new. Consider what lies behind the mechanics and how you could do things a different way still filling the needs for goup mechanics and co-operation you get potential to change things.
And the trinity is just an example, there are many other things that needs reworking. How you gain power through experience for example and how you choose to portion out the story (usually done through linear quests today).
Fixing an excisting system isn't good enough anymore, it was some years back.
Essentially what the means is that it should be intuitive as possible. Easy to pick up, and just mastering the basics shouldn't be that difficult.
But it should have depth and complexities that if mastered really allow you to shine above everyone else.
For instance picking up a melee weapon and whacking someone with it IRL. Not too hard. But knowing how to whack someone doesn't make you a master swordsman.