Not so many years ago SOE, at John Smedley's direction, gutted and ruined SWG, basically causing a legendary mass exodus from the game.
A few years later, SOE aquires Sigil games and forces the premature release of Vanguard, which was regarded by many to be one of the worst launches of any major MMO.
At the time of Vanguard's release (arguably the first iteration of EQN), Smedley promised long term support and upcoming expansion packs. We all know how that went.
So how is it that everyone is suddenly so confident that EQN will be such a great game? Do the words "Everquest" and "sandbox" mentioned in the same sentence suddenly activate a chemical in the brain that causes selective amnesia?
LA called the shots not SOE. It was there idea to change SWG in order to bring in more players. Just like how it was LA's decision to not renew the license because they didn't want SWG to compete with SWTOR.
And SOE didn't force the early release of Vanguard. They infact bought the game when all other companies declined to help Sigil who were really hurting financially and were unable to release the game.
SOE was the only company who agreed to release the game. Vanguard was in deep trouble long before SOE even came into picture.
Next time you want to bash a company i suggest atleast get your information right.
So sick of you Sony apologists and your absolute idiocy regarding swg. Smedley said, and I quote "How can I do this? How can I not do this?" It wasn't LA forcing the NGE it was LA saying to SOE "Dude, you suck. Pick up the numbers or we do not renew." See, SOE had to renew their license every year and there were milestones to be met, that SOE could not meet. So, smedley had the main team working on the Combat Upgrade and ReBalance.
On the backside he had a small group working in secret. One of the leads of that project ended up at Spacetime Studios working on mobile mmos and, sadly, prematurely left this earth. This secret project was what Smedley referred to as he was saying How can Id o this, how can I not do this. Then, he replaced the CURB (which was what was supposed to be worked on and had cool things added for in the Obi Wan expansion (taming gear for CH, the cube etc)) that all were completely thrown out with the NGE which hit with a huge bait and switch. That's when they started with things like Chris Cao (fuktard) who said "The players do not know what they want, we will tell you what you want". And also Smedley with things like "No one wants to be Uncle Owen or Aunt Beru, thats not Star Warsy. Everyone wants to be Luke Skywalker or Darth Vader".
SOE didn't rescue Vigil, Smedley rescued his ahole buddy Brad McQuaid. As soon as Smedley cut Brad a check he called a meeting in the Parking lot and fired everyone. And I quote "On May 14, 2007 the staff of Sigil Games Online were told to meet in the parking lot at 4:30 pm and to take with them what they would need for the rest of the day. The employees were then told that the launch had not gone well, the company was in trouble and that they were selling to SOE. Director of Production, Andy Platter then told the employees "You're all fired"" (1) en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sigil_Games_Online
The game launched January 2007 under Sigil Games, as Smedley had fronted McQuaid the cash needed to buy the game out from Microsoft. Was taken over by SOE in May 2007. It did not launch as an SOE game. Too bad the only way you can defend Smedley and his fuptardedness is through revisionist history, lies and just outright fantasy.
Now who's revising history, or interpreting facts to suit your opinion? That quote wasn't Smed, it was Nancy MacIntyre, a VP @ LucasArts who was overseeing SWG for LA. Here is the quote from this NY-Times article...
"We really just needed to make the game a lot more accessible to a much broader player base," said Nancy MacIntyre, the game's senior director at LucasArts. "There was lots of reading, much too much, in the game. There was a lot of wandering around learning about different abilities. We really needed to give people the experience of being Han Solo or Luke Skywalker rather than being Uncle Owen, the moisture farmer. We wanted more instant gratification: kill, get treasure, repeat. We needed to give people more of an opportunity to be a part of what they have seen in the movies rather than something they had created themselves."
Not saying you don't have some points (specifically w/ the Cao quote, and Smed taking partial blame over the years), but those who live in glass houses and all that. Regardless of who you want to blame, the blame for the CU and NGE don't lay solely @ SoE's feet. It was initiated by what LA thought people wanted, b/c of the poor subs they were seeing, and they, together w/ SoE got together and the CU and NGE is what we got. But to try and say that SoE was solely responsible is a misnomer.
As for Vanguard you are taking snippets and using them to lay the blame solely at the feet of SoE, and Smedley in particular. The story you pulled from Wikipedia is a well known story, but you use the quotes from that story to imply that Smed cut Brad a check, which directly resulted in all Sigil employees being fired, which just isn't what happened. Yes, most of the staff were laid off in that manner, but more than anything, the way that all went down was due to Brad McQuaids lack of business savvy, or any discernible personnel management skills. Vanguards fate lay solely in Brad's lap, the guy may have had some really good ideas, but he totally failed at managing the day to day operations of a dev team, and all the problems resulted from that.
In fact, if any publisher is to blame for what happened to Vanguard, it's Microsoft. As has been established, the people @ MS never really knew what they were doing when it came to MMO's, as evidenced by what happened to Mythica, Vanguard, Marvel Universe Online, True Fantasy Online, and Halo Online. The problems Sigil had w/ MS were bad to begin w/, but what little support MMO's had at all, just up and disappeared when Ed Freis left MS, the people that took over knew even less about what it took to develop an MMO, and that's what led to SoE stepping in. Had SoE not stepped in, Vanguard probably never would have seen the light of day.
Now, I'm now saying SoE made all the right moves w/ Vanguard, they probably should have not taken a larger role in managing Sigil, pushed the release back, and sunk more money into the game. Then, the game might have had a chance, but at least w/ SoE it stood some chance. Yes, SoE made promises that were never met, and the game was put into "maintenance mode" for years, only to emerge recently. But Vanguards problems started WAAAY before SoE and Smed stepped in, and even trying to put half the blame at SoE's doorstep is revisionist history, lies and just outright fantasy.
Not so many years ago SOE, at John Smedley's direction, gutted and ruined SWG, basically causing a legendary mass exodus from the game.
A few years later, SOE aquires Sigil games and forces the premature release of Vanguard, which was regarded by many to be one of the worst launches of any major MMO.
At the time of Vanguard's release (arguably the first iteration of EQN), Smedley promised long term support and upcoming expansion packs. We all know how that went.
So how is it that everyone is suddenly so confident that EQN will be such a great game? Do the words "Everquest" and "sandbox" mentioned in the same sentence suddenly activate a chemical in the brain that causes selective amnesia?
Well simple really, I never fell for either of those games in the first place. In fact EQNext will be my first SOE game I've ever played so they haven't done me any wrong.
Secondly I am not a hypocrite, I play Neverwinter currently and a lot of people bash cryptic and PWI but I am impressed in everything they do so why wouldn't I give another "perceived Evil" studio a chance?
Sandbox means open world, non-linear gaming PERIOD!
Subscription Gaming, especially MMO gaming is a Cash grab bigger then the most P2W cash shop!
Bring Back Exploration and lengthy progression times. RPG's have always been about the Journey not the destination!!!
If EQN drops and it's fun, I could not care less about any SOE mistakes - perceived, actual, or otherwise - from the past. The entertainment industry is full of "what have you done for me lately"?
Regarding SWG, all things being equal, SOE did a fine job holding it together for as long as they did. I'd happily take that game - bugs, flying ewoks, second trilogy art, and etc. - over every single MMO on the market today. The game at least let me do what the heck I wanted to do in a virtual world. It engaged my imagination and creativity in ways that no other MMO has managed to do since.
There's absolutely nothing wrong with hoping EQN can recapture some of that.
I honestly can't think of anything more important to someone who actually plans to play an MMO long term than how the company behind it supports their games. Certainly it is more important to me than some "features" vaguely hinted at by a two faced money grubber like Smedley.
Which is why I look at the Everquest Franchise's history. What better way to gauge SoE's commitment to Everquest Next?
If you like the way they handled those games then sure. But if you simply liked Everquest and EQ2 up until a point, then this is still the same company that drastically changed those games. Whereas much of the original creative force behind them and development teams have long since departed. Smedley is still here, Brad is gone as are many others.
Personally everyone I know who played Everquest quit because of SOE's mishandling of the game, and the same goes for EQ2 and Vanguard (which imo is related to the franchise given it was created by the series creator). We are all nostalgic for them, but not for SOE as a company. Which is still run by the same people. Why should anyone believe things will change there?
I don't care if people want to get hyped about this game for whatever reason because they just love anything that says sandbox, because they are convinced it will have X feature they've dreamed up. But as long as everything about this game relies on trusting the word of John Smedley then it is certainly relevant for people who do not like the man or his business practices.
I hope it is a good game, however it turns out, and that fans of it get a good experience and aren't treated the way myself and many others feel we were mistreated by the company. SOE defenders can call us all sorts of names, say we are jaded etc, but we supported SOE MMORPG's and in return we got burned. There is no way around that (speaking of SWG, Matrix Online, and Vanguard two of which were shut down a cardinal sin imo for an MMO studio that didn't also close its doors on the same day). People subscribe to MMORPG's, and invest in their character they do have a right to feel owed something in return.
Obviously I can't get my money back for Vangaurd, I was happy to give it when it was going to the development/developers of the game. But SOE kept taking my money long after they dropped support for the game, all the while misleading us about future plans and I can't forgive that.
If EQN drops and it's fun, I could not care less about any SOE mistakes - perceived, actual, or otherwise - from the past. The entertainment industry is full of "what have you done for me lately"?
Regarding SWG, all things being equal, SOE did a fine job holding it together for as long as they did. I'd happily take that game - bugs, flying ewoks, second trilogy art, and etc. - over every single MMO on the market today. The game at least let me do what the heck I wanted to do in a virtual world. It engaged my imagination and creativity in ways that no other MMO has managed to do since.
There's absolutely nothing wrong with hoping EQN can recapture some of that.
I support that sentiment 100% !
Right on. I agree as well. Also, see picture for my face below.
Not so many years ago SOE, at John Smedley's direction, gutted and ruined SWG, basically causing a legendary mass exodus from the game.
A few years later, SOE aquires Sigil games and forces the premature release of Vanguard, which was regarded by many to be one of the worst launches of any major MMO.
At the time of Vanguard's release (arguably the first iteration of EQN), Smedley promised long term support and upcoming expansion packs. We all know how that went.
So how is it that everyone is suddenly so confident that EQN will be such a great game? Do the words "Everquest" and "sandbox" mentioned in the same sentence suddenly activate a chemical in the brain that causes selective amnesia?
So, your post is entirely inaccurate.
First, Lucas was calling the shots on the change with SWG, of course Smed took the fall, he eludes to this in old ass interviews.
Second, SoE did not purchase assets of Sigil until months AFTER Vanguard had already launched. The only reason Vanguard is still around is because of SoE.
While I agree with your second point, the NGE isn't that easy to absolve dear old Smed of. The man is a total snake, and missed his calling as a politician. Of course, he would attempt to shift the blame. Its what politicians do.
If you like the way they handled those games then sure. But if you simply liked Everquest and EQ2 up until a point, then this is still the same company that drastically changed those games. Whereas much of the original creative force behind them and development teams have long since departed. Smedley is still here, Brad is gone as are many others.
Obviously I can't get my money back for Vangaurd, I was happy to give it when it was going to the development/developers of the game. But SOE kept taking my money long after they dropped support for the game, all the while misleading us about future plans and I can't forgive that.
Brad is back.... and move on if you "can't forgive that".
Again, it's like some of you have never played another game before. Every company has fucked up at some point in time, people move on. If EQN turns out to be great, many people beating the I hate SoE drum will play it anyway.
Actually I care because EQ MMO made by Craptic, Anet and many others would have been complete disaster in my eyes If EQN is anything Everquest then it'll be great game.
I honestly can't think of anything more important to someone who actually plans to play an MMO long term than how the company behind it supports their games. Certainly it is more important to me than some "features" vaguely hinted at by a two faced money grubber like Smedley.
Which is why I look at the Everquest Franchise's history. What better way to gauge SoE's commitment to Everquest Next?
If you like the way they handled those games then sure. But if you simply liked Everquest and EQ2 up until a point, then this is still the same company that drastically changed those games.
Personally everyone I know who played Everquest quit because of SOE's mishandling of the game, and the same goes for EQ2 and Vanguard (which imo is related to the franchise given it was created by the series creator). We are all nostalgic for them, but not for SOE as a company. Which is still run by the same people. Why should anyone believe things will change there?
I don't care if people want to get hyped about this game for whatever reason because they just love anything that says sandbox, because they are convinced it will have X feature they've dreamed up. But as long as everything about this game relies on trusting the word of John Smedley then it is certainly relevant for people who do not like the man or his business practices.
I hope it is a good game, however it turns out, and that fans of it get a good experience and aren't treated the way myself and many others feel we were mistreated by the company. SOE defenders can call us all sorts of names, say we are jaded etc, but we supported SOE MMORPG's and in return we got burned. There is no way around that (speaking of SWG, Matrix Online, and Vanguard two of which were shut down a cardinal sin imo for an MMO studio that didn't also close its doors on the same day). People subscribe to MMORPG's, and invest in their character they do have a right to feel owed something in return.
Obviously I can't get my money back for Vangaurd, I was happy to give it when it was going to the development/developers of the game. But SOE kept taking my money long after they dropped support for the game, all the while misleading us about future plans and I can't forgive that.
I enjoyed EQ from classic to Planes of Power, in which case I moved to Daoc. I am currently playing EQ2 for the umpteenth time, I continue to enjoy it each time I play it. I've never been driven from a game by SoE, nor has anyone I have had the pleasure of playing any Everquest title with. I trust nothing Smedley states, the only thing I know is SoE is developing EQN which will be their iteration of a Sandbox.
Simply put .. Vanguard players are lucky SoE life supported the game at all, the same goes for MxO players. If you can demonstrate that SoE continued to insist they would support Vanguard for years after the plugged it in ... I'd love to see it. I remember years ago having family play it, their comments being " It's fun but it won't ever receive any love , which is a shame ". So ... was there legitimate deception as you imply?
I won't even discuss MxO ... that game deserved to be shut down, people are lucky SoE even kept it on as long as they did.
If you like the way they handled those games then sure. But if you simply liked Everquest and EQ2 up until a point, then this is still the same company that drastically changed those games. Whereas much of the original creative force behind them and development teams have long since departed. Smedley is still here, Brad is gone as are many others.
Obviously I can't get my money back for Vangaurd, I was happy to give it when it was going to the development/developers of the game. But SOE kept taking my money long after they dropped support for the game, all the while misleading us about future plans and I can't forgive that.
Brad is back.... and move on if you "can't forgive that".
Again, it's like some of you have never played another game before. Every company has fucked up at some point in time, people move on. If EQN turns out to be great, many people beating the I hate SoE drum will play it anyway.
I could see your point if there was information out there on the game, or it was in beta and people had any idea about the game other than the word of John Smedley. But they don't, so it isn't really "beating a drum" and refusing to look at the facts. It is refusing to trust a man who lost our trust.
Show me and I'll look with an open mind, but I'm not going to take a dirtbag like John Smedley's word for it. Yes every company "makes mistakes", but John Smedley has kept his job all these years and he is still the face of SOE. Other companies attempt to fix their issues, I just haven't seen any evidence of that from SOE.
I played Planetside 2 being a fan of the original, but I didn't play it based on Smedley's word. I was disappointed in it so I really have no reason to be hyped for this game. You clearly do because either you have never felt burned by SOE/Smedley and so you just trust that he is going to bring you the best game ever.
I once did that with an MMO. It was made by a producer that had given me both my favorite MMO, and altered it to the point I no longer wanted to play it. I trusted Tanaka with the original version of 1.0, and despite there being no concrete evidence to support it I simply trusted his word that the game would be "revolutionary" and "completely change the landscape of MMO's forever". It didn't turn out that way, but at least Square Enix finally fired the man and brought in someone to completely remake the game for its fans.
I don't see John Smedley ever falling on his sword no matter how many countless mistakes the man makes, he is the epitome of a sleazy executive. Gordon Gekko in the flesh.
I honestly can't think of anything more important to someone who actually plans to play an MMO long term than how the company behind it supports their games. Certainly it is more important to me than some "features" vaguely hinted at by a two faced money grubber like Smedley.
Which is why I look at the Everquest Franchise's history. What better way to gauge SoE's commitment to Everquest Next?
If you like the way they handled those games then sure. But if you simply liked Everquest and EQ2 up until a point, then this is still the same company that drastically changed those games. Whereas much of the original creative force behind them and development teams have long since departed. Smedley is still here, Brad is gone as are many others.
Personally everyone I know who played Everquest quit because of SOE's mishandling of the game, and the same goes for EQ2 and Vanguard (which imo is related to the franchise given it was created by the series creator). We are all nostalgic for them, but not for SOE as a company. Which is still run by the same people. Why should anyone believe things will change there?
I don't care if people want to get hyped about this game for whatever reason because they just love anything that says sandbox, because they are convinced it will have X feature they've dreamed up. But as long as everything about this game relies on trusting the word of John Smedley then it is certainly relevant for people who do not like the man or his business practices.
I hope it is a good game, however it turns out, and that fans of it get a good experience and aren't treated the way myself and many others feel we were mistreated by the company. SOE defenders can call us all sorts of names, say we are jaded etc, but we supported SOE MMORPG's and in return we got burned. There is no way around that (speaking of SWG, Matrix Online, and Vanguard two of which were shut down a cardinal sin imo for an MMO studio that didn't also close its doors on the same day). People subscribe to MMORPG's, and invest in their character they do have a right to feel owed something in return.
Obviously I can't get my money back for Vangaurd, I was happy to give it when it was going to the development/developers of the game. But SOE kept taking my money long after they dropped support for the game, all the while misleading us about future plans and I can't forgive that.
I've played too many MMORPGs in my lifetime. Often right at day 1 launch, or before that. Including titles such as EQ, SWG, Shadowbane, AO, DAoC, GW, EQ2, SWTOR, Aion, Planetside, Planetside 2, Warhammer, Mortal Online, Eve, Darkfall, Vanguard, just to name a small few of the many MMORPGs I have played over all these years.
I just want to say I disagree with how you feel about SOE. Vanguard was doomed before SOE even touched it. The fact that they even kept the game on life support should be good thing, not a negative thing, especially since they had a huge mess on their hands to start with through no fault of their own, and could have easily pulled the plug to cut losses. You complain that they gutted the dev team, but by a few months in, server pop during prime time was down to the hundreds. You can't commit a massive dev team to something with such poor income/fanbase. It would be a terrible business decision!
SWG's downfall was apparent from the first month. I personally loved the game, but it was bleeding subs. Hard. No denying that, it's simply a fact. Plus the licensor (LA) was forcing their hand. The end result was NGE and no one was happy about it. Not even the devs or Smedley.
The point I'm trying to make here is that I think your hate for SOE is extremely misguided. They are by no means perfect, but no game company is. Not a single one. And in comparison to a lot of companies, SOE is a shining beacon of hope lol.
Everyone has had high hopes for many MMORPGs. Most recently, ESO was supposed to be great. Heck, as an ES fan myself, how could I not get excited to take my elder scrolls experience online. But then when people got their hands on it, it was overwhelmingly mediocre. The reactions of most people who saw it or played it was "Meh, it's ok".
EQN might turn out to just be "ok" or maybe even bad. But so far, everyone that's seen it and everyone who's working on it is talking about it like it's the next big thing.
What does that have to do with anything? Whether I would want a game to die or not doesn't change the fact that SOE put Vanguard on maintenance mode barely a year after its release. They were down to a single developer working on bugs for quite a few years and have only recently started investing into the game again, yet it is a slow go even now.
Was that LA employee privy to the upper management decisions at SOE? These companies are not idiots, they do go into IP contracts with the intent on protecting their own interests and if you think for one moment that a very large and very powerful company like Sony is going to let LA push them around without some kind of contingencies, then you are clueless. License holders have a lot of power, but so do the companies using said IPs. The only explanation for SOE going down the Cu / NGE road is that they agreed with LA that the changes would be in the best interests of the stock holders. They made a gamble that failed and Smedley was unwilling to own up to their share of the blame.
You are extremely* confused on how licensing works for video games. Liscensors have a ton of power in how their product is used and legal documents can only go so far.
LA had a huge amount of influence on SWG. There is no doubt about that, and NGE was pushed from LA.
Read the second paragraph again carefully before you insert foot into mouth.
You're wrong about your business assumptions and especially about anything with George Lucas' name on it. You think that the group with the strongest stranglehold on any particular IP in modern history is going to let a game developer - irrespective of who - effectively do what they want with their IP? That's not how it works with any cross-licensing endeavor and especially with Lucasarts. You should assume, barring an overt denial from Nancy MacIntyre, that she was not only in complete control but also chartered with maintaining Lucas' own vision of continuity and consistency within the Star Wars universe. This paradigm in dealing with Lucasarts back then is well documented.
The IP holder typically puts forth the design vision and have full veto power on any and all decisions. Full stop. The developer creates the technology to support the design vision which the IP holder then must agree to. When both agree, development is moved forward and eventually is pushed to production.
You can think differently, but you might as well think Santa Claus/ToothFairy/Jesus/et al are real and there will be some group out there who agree with you, but those of us with real world experience know differently. You're not connecting the dots correctly and it's not your fault, except when you steadfastly refuse to acknowledge you might be mistaken and re-evaluate your position.
In the end, SOE signed up to make the changes that they all got caught up in and it flopped. It was an opportunity squandered and that's why Smedley DID apologize publicly (which you say he didn't?) as he has always been the public face of SoE.
When a developer and publisher are the same entity, there's only one party to blame. In the SWG debacle, the blame falls firmly on Lucasarts as in the end, they had to approve any and all changes.
You assume that Sony would be stupid enough to invest in and develop a game with no say so whatsoever? You're the one sounding foolish my friend. What company in their right mind would let the IP holder dictate the business decisions when they are only there for IP integrity and no actual financial investment or obligation other than to get their royalties? SOE would have gone out of business a long time ago if they actually did things the way you paint them.
I honestly can't think of anything more important to someone who actually plans to play an MMO long term than how the company behind it supports their games. Certainly it is more important to me than some "features" vaguely hinted at by a two faced money grubber like Smedley.
Which is why I look at the Everquest Franchise's history. What better way to gauge SoE's commitment to Everquest Next?
If you like the way they handled those games then sure. But if you simply liked Everquest and EQ2 up until a point, then this is still the same company that drastically changed those games. Whereas much of the original creative force behind them and development teams have long since departed. Smedley is still here, Brad is gone as are many others.
Personally everyone I know who played Everquest quit because of SOE's mishandling of the game, and the same goes for EQ2 and Vanguard (which imo is related to the franchise given it was created by the series creator). We are all nostalgic for them, but not for SOE as a company. Which is still run by the same people. Why should anyone believe things will change there?
I don't care if people want to get hyped about this game for whatever reason because they just love anything that says sandbox, because they are convinced it will have X feature they've dreamed up. But as long as everything about this game relies on trusting the word of John Smedley then it is certainly relevant for people who do not like the man or his business practices.
I hope it is a good game, however it turns out, and that fans of it get a good experience and aren't treated the way myself and many others feel we were mistreated by the company. SOE defenders can call us all sorts of names, say we are jaded etc, but we supported SOE MMORPG's and in return we got burned. There is no way around that (speaking of SWG, Matrix Online, and Vanguard two of which were shut down a cardinal sin imo for an MMO studio that didn't also close its doors on the same day). People subscribe to MMORPG's, and invest in their character they do have a right to feel owed something in return.
Obviously I can't get my money back for Vangaurd, I was happy to give it when it was going to the development/developers of the game. But SOE kept taking my money long after they dropped support for the game, all the while misleading us about future plans and I can't forgive that.
I've played too many MMORPGs in my lifetime. Often right at day 1 launch, or before that. Including titles such as EQ, SWG, Shadowbane, AO, DAoC, GW, EQ2, SWTOR, Aion, Planetside, Planetside 2, Warhammer, Mortal Online, Eve, Darkfall, Vanguard, just to name a small few of the many MMORPGs I have played over all these years.
I just want to say I disagree with how you feel about SOE. Vanguard was doomed before SOE even touched it. The fact that they even kept the game on life support should be good thing, not a negative thing, especially since they had a huge mess on their hands to start with through no fault of their own, and could have easily pulled the plug to cut losses. You complain that they gutted the dev team, but by a few months in, server pop during prime time was down to the hundreds. You can't commit a massive dev team to something with such poor income/fanbase. It would be a terrible business decision!
SWG's downfall was apparent from the first month. I personally loved the game, but it was bleeding subs. Hard. No denying that, it's simply a fact. Plus the licensor (LA) was forcing their hand. The end result was NGE and no one was happy about it. Not even the devs or Smedley.
The point I'm trying to make here is that I think your hate for SOE is extremely misguided. They are by no means perfect, but no game company is. Not a single one. And in comparison to a lot of companies, SOE is a shining beacon of hope lol.
Everyone has had high hopes for many MMORPGs. Most recently, ESO was supposed to be great. Heck, as an ES fan myself, how could I not get excited to take my elder scrolls experience online. But then when people got their hands on it, it was overwhelmingly mediocre. The reactions of most people who saw it or played it was "Meh, it's ok".
EQN might turn out to just be "ok" or maybe even bad. But so far, everyone that's seen it and everyone who's working on it is talking about it like it's the next big thing.
All I can say is.
August 2nd can't get here fast enough.
And EQN, best in show. FTW.
According to Bill Murphy.
ESO won best in show from IGN.
FFXIV won best in show from Destructoid.
Only one of these games is available for widespread public testing without an NDA, but if you really trust the word of Bill Murphy... (then again you are trusting the word of John Smedley so I guess that's a given).
If I hadn't experienced the miracle of support given by Square Enix after FFXIV's failed launch maybe I would see SOE as a "beacon of light" too, because yes there are a ton of crappy gaming companies. PWI, Cryptic, Funcom yeah I agree with you these are worse. But for a long time it was SOE for me, and now I just have higher standards for the companies I choose to "believe" when they talk about the future of their games.
You assume that Sony would be stupid enough to invest in and develop a game with no say so whatsoever? You're the one sounding foolish my friend. What company in their right mind would let the IP holder dictate the business decisions when they are only there for IP integrity and no actual financial investment or obligation other than to get their royalties? SOE would have gone out of business a long time ago if they actually did things the way you paint them.
SOE has some say depending on how the negotiations ended up and how the legal documents are written. The thing is that the Star Wars IP is an extremely hard IP to deal with, and the license needs to be renewed. Upsetting or refusing to compromise (or even completely bend to) a licensor would be a disaster.)
SOE had an extremely small amount of input when it came to NGE.
What company would let a licensor do this? A company that made a game completely based on that specific IP. If the NFL told EA's Madden team that they wanted something, EA would jump through hoops to appease them and do as they wish, because a football game without the NFL license would be trash and wouldn't sell.
In SOE SWG case, LA got what LA wanted. If they had denied LA their demands, LA would have not renewed the license and then the entire game would have had to be recreated from the ground up to not use any Star Wars IP, or shut it down when the license expired.
When it comes to some games, licenses may not be a big deal. For example, not getting licensed to use real world gun models in your game (M4, M16, M240b) isn't a huge deal because you can just change the name and tweak the looks a tiny bit (as many games often do). However, when you game is completely based on an IP, the licensor owns you. That's why so many companies try to create original IPs and stick to stuff they own or create.
Take some classes on game design. They cover all this in the freshmen year.
SWG - Believe it or not, Lucas Arts had creative control, they said to jump, and by contract SoE had to say how high. No one voluntarily changes a mmo that much without being made to do so imo. SWG needed fixes, but it needed some balancing, and more content, but content in the style of what SWG already was, it also needed buffs to be nerfed some if the balancing didn't fix the issues.
Vanguard - Yeah, Microsoft dropped them I think it was, when they found out what state the game was in, SoE stepped in as a publisher, then bought them. SoE did a rush of work on VG, but then kind of lost interest after that. So they get credit for the initial work, but then they were supposed to have a re-launch after fixing issues. That never happened way back when...So they did make promises on the game, and nothing really happened till years later. I loved VG, but I left when PvP support stopped and the PvP servers were abandoned and it felt like SoE abandoned the game. So overall, I think they have some blame, even though they saved the game, so it is kind of complicated. Without them, I probably would of never got to play it.
EQ - I loved EQ, started playing within the first month, I was a UO holdover and didn't want to switch, but the rubberbanding and lag in UO got so horrible at a point, I yielded to people telling me I had to try EQ. I loved EQ, until all the new expansions became over instanced. Dislike what it became all I want, I still got many years of enjoyment and it is easily my most favorite themepark ever.
So add in UO and DAoC, these are my top 5 mmos, with SWG being #5, loved the game, but it did have a lot of issues, it needed work, just not NGE work. SWG was made by a ton of people that made UO, it was pretty apparent from playing it.
So SoE had 3 of my top 5, I did not like how they changed EQ, they made the agreement with LA, so guess they share some fault, but it is what LA made you do....VG was a mixed bag of fault/hope/abandonment....But that's what happens, I cannot stand the new skill systems in UO (2d client doesn't bother me), but it has been changed.
Developers often tweak stuff in a direction they think will make the game better, and for the people that liked the original game, it makes it worse to a point to where people quit. I never liked WoW, but how many times to people say 'Vanilla WoW' around here? Blizzard did it, everyone does. It would be nice if they would stop it, and just make new mmos for that 'new' crowd that they butcher their old mmo for.
What does that have to do with anything? Whether I would want a game to die or not doesn't change the fact that SOE put Vanguard on maintenance mode barely a year after its release. They were down to a single developer working on bugs for quite a few years and have only recently started investing into the game again, yet it is a slow go even now.
Was that LA employee privy to the upper management decisions at SOE? These companies are not idiots, they do go into IP contracts with the intent on protecting their own interests and if you think for one moment that a very large and very powerful company like Sony is going to let LA push them around without some kind of contingencies, then you are clueless. License holders have a lot of power, but so do the companies using said IPs. The only explanation for SOE going down the Cu / NGE road is that they agreed with LA that the changes would be in the best interests of the stock holders. They made a gamble that failed and Smedley was unwilling to own up to their share of the blame.
You are extremely* confused on how licensing works for video games. Liscensors have a ton of power in how their product is used and legal documents can only go so far.
LA had a huge amount of influence on SWG. There is no doubt about that, and NGE was pushed from LA.
You have a forum full of people who have never worked in the business or dealt with 3rd party IP Development assuming they know it all.
Smed said a few years ago working with a 3rd party IP is a bad idea.
Quote from him.
"It’s often frustrating to work with third party IP. There’s a constant battle over what the right direction is for the game, and from our own recent experience, it’s not something we enjoy. It very often puts handcuffs on what we can and can’t do and, frankly speaking, it’s a lot harder to make great games when the IP holders don’t understand the online gaming market."
Sounds like to me the IP holder actually had direct influence on the games design.
It sounds more like a fight over the mechanics / content that don't support the IP's lore. Even still, it ultimately falls on the developer to decide if the game can be a money maker despite the limitations of the IP and that was squarely on Smedley's lap. I am not even remotely implying that LA didn't play a part or even significant part in the fiasco, but I'm tired of the apologists acting as if SOE / Smedley had their hands tied when they ultimately had the power to not go there. I've seen MMOs cancelled for less of a reason than fights over the IP and how it's implemented into the mechanics.
Only one of these games is available for widespread public testing without an NDA, but if you really trust the word of Bill Murphy... (then again you are trusting the word of John Smedley so I guess that's a given).
If I hadn't experienced the miracle of support given by Square Enix after FFXIV's failed launch maybe I would see SOE as a "beacon of light" too, because yes there are a ton of crappy gaming companies. PWI, Cryptic, Funcom yeah I agree with you these are worse. But for a long time it was SOE for me, and now I just have higher standards for the companies I choose to "believe" when they talk about the future of their games.
Ten Ton Hammer agrees as well. Everyone that sees EQN, say it exceeded their already high expectations. Also, why exactly was SOE your previous "Bad guy company"? I'd be interested in hearing your reasoning.
Not so many years ago SOE, at John Smedley's direction, gutted and ruined SWG, basically causing a legendary mass exodus from the game.
A few years later, SOE aquires Sigil games and forces the premature release of Vanguard, which was regarded by many to be one of the worst launches of any major MMO.
At the time of Vanguard's release (arguably the first iteration of EQN), Smedley promised long term support and upcoming expansion packs. We all know how that went.
So how is it that everyone is suddenly so confident that EQN will be such a great game? Do the words "Everquest" and "sandbox" mentioned in the same sentence suddenly activate a chemical in the brain that causes selective amnesia?
LA called the shots not SOE. It was there idea to change SWG in order to bring in more players. Just like how it was LA's decision to not renew the license because they didn't want SWG to compete with SWTOR.
And SOE didn't force the early release of Vanguard. They infact bought the game when all other companies declined to help Sigil who were really hurting financially and were unable to release the game.
SOE was the only company who agreed to release the game. Vanguard was in deep trouble long before SOE even came into picture.
Next time you want to bash a company i suggest atleast get your information right.
So sick of you Sony apologists and your absolute idiocy regarding swg. Smedley said, and I quote "How can I do this? How can I not do this?" It wasn't LA forcing the NGE it was LA saying to SOE "Dude, you suck. Pick up the numbers or we do not renew." See, SOE had to renew their license every year and there were milestones to be met, that SOE could not meet. So, smedley had the main team working on the Combat Upgrade and ReBalance.
On the backside he had a small group working in secret. One of the leads of that project ended up at Spacetime Studios working on mobile mmos and, sadly, prematurely left this earth. This secret project was what Smedley referred to as he was saying How can Id o this, how can I not do this. Then, he replaced the CURB (which was what was supposed to be worked on and had cool things added for in the Obi Wan expansion (taming gear for CH, the cube etc)) that all were completely thrown out with the NGE which hit with a huge bait and switch. That's when they started with things like Chris Cao (fuktard) who said "The players do not know what they want, we will tell you what you want". And also Smedley with things like "No one wants to be Uncle Owen or Aunt Beru, thats not Star Warsy. Everyone wants to be Luke Skywalker or Darth Vader".
SOE didn't rescue Vigil, Smedley rescued his ahole buddy Brad McQuaid. As soon as Smedley cut Brad a check he called a meeting in the Parking lot and fired everyone. And I quote "On May 14, 2007 the staff of Sigil Games Online were told to meet in the parking lot at 4:30 pm and to take with them what they would need for the rest of the day. The employees were then told that the launch had not gone well, the company was in trouble and that they were selling to SOE. Director of Production, Andy Platter then told the employees "You're all fired"" (1) en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sigil_Games_Online
The game launched January 2007 under Sigil Games, as Smedley had fronted McQuaid the cash needed to buy the game out from Microsoft. Was taken over by SOE in May 2007. It did not launch as an SOE game. Too bad the only way you can defend Smedley and his fuptardedness is through revisionist history, lies and just outright fantasy.
So you said what i was saying? LA called the shots and NGE was their idea. Now whatever the reason might be behind that but like OP claimed 'it was SOE's decision'. Nope it wasn't. here for your reading pleasure once again. They didn't just say SOE you suck but gave them the whole roadmap of NGE.
Nancy MacIntyre, the game's senior director at LucasArts, responded to the changes in the game and the angry objections by disgruntled players. I quote her remarks from the article at length, since, um, you have to see them to believe them.
Ms. MacIntyre: "We really just needed to make the game a lot more accessible to a much broader player base ... There was lots of reading, much too much, in the game. There was a lot of wandering around learning about different abilities. We really needed to give people the experience of being Han Solo or Luke Skywalker rather than being Uncle Owen, the moisture farmer. We wanted more instant gratification: kill, get treasure, repeat. We needed to give people more of an option to be part of what they have seen in the movies rather than something they had created themselves."
Moreover, doesn't matter whom SOE rescued. Fact remains that Microsoft backed out and no other company wanted to touch Vanguard. If it wasn't for SOE game would never see the light of the day.
If sticking to facts is called being apologist these days than i am guilty of that.
"The problem is that the hardcore folks always want the same thing: 'We want exactly what you gave us before, but it has to be completely different.' -Jesse Schell
"Online gamers are the most ludicrously entitled beings since Caligula made his horse a senator, and at least the horse never said anything stupid." -Luke McKinney
You assume that Sony would be stupid enough to invest in and develop a game with no say so whatsoever? You're the one sounding foolish my friend. What company in their right mind would let the IP holder dictate the business decisions when they are only there for IP integrity and no actual financial investment or obligation other than to get their royalties? SOE would have gone out of business a long time ago if they actually did things the way you paint them.
SOE has some say depending on how the negotiations ended up and how the legal documents are written. The thing is that the Star Wars IP is an extremely hard IP to deal with, and the license needs to be renewed. Upsetting or refusing to compromise (or even completely bend to) a licensor would be a disaster.)
SOE had an extremely small amount of input when it came to NGE.
What company would let a licensor do this? A company that made a game completely based on that specific IP. If the NFL told EA's Madden team that they wanted something, EA would jump through hoops to appease them and do as they wish, because a football game without the NFL license would be trash and wouldn't sell.
In SOE SWG case, LA got what LA wanted. If they had denied LA their demands, LA would have not renewed the license and then the entire game would have had to be recreated from the ground up to not use any Star Wars IP, or shut it down when the license expired.
When it comes to some games, licenses may not be a big deal. For example, not getting licensed to use real world gun models in your game (M4, M16, M240b) isn't a huge deal because you can just change the name and tweak the looks a tiny bit (as many games often do). However, when you game is completely based on an IP, the licensor owns you. That's why so many companies try to create original IPs and stick to stuff they own or create.
Take some classes on game design. They cover all this in the freshmen year.
Stop equating your crystal ball as truth and I might take your arguments more seriously. There has been plenty of evidence that SOE had more than a little input on NGE. In fact, there is evidence showing that they are the sole architect of the NGE. LA's role was to push SOE to make some kind of change and that is what SOE came up with.
If I hadn't experienced the miracle of support given by Square Enix after FFXIV's failed launch maybe I would see SOE as a "beacon of light" too, because yes there are a ton of crappy gaming companies. PWI, Cryptic, Funcom yeah I agree with you these are worse. But for a long time it was SOE for me, and now I just have higher standards for the companies I choose to "believe" when they talk about the future of their games.
You have been tooting FFXIV's horn even before they showed a single video or any concrete real info about the game. You supported them regardless of failure of the first game.
So how is it any different for those who want to believe SOE and in their vision of EQnext? if you can get all excited about FFXIV ARR just on basis of the words being said by Yoshi and his promises why not others can do the same for EQnext? why the double standards?
"The problem is that the hardcore folks always want the same thing: 'We want exactly what you gave us before, but it has to be completely different.' -Jesse Schell
"Online gamers are the most ludicrously entitled beings since Caligula made his horse a senator, and at least the horse never said anything stupid." -Luke McKinney
It sounds more like a fight over the mechanics / content that don't support the IP's lore. Even still, it ultimately falls on the developer to decide if the game can be a money maker despite the limitations of the IP and that was squarely on Smedley's lap. I am not even remotely implying that LA didn't play a part or even significant part in the fiasco, but I'm tired of the apologists acting as if SOE / Smedley had their hands tied with they ultimately have the power to not go there. I've seen MMOs cancelled for less of a reason than fights over the IP and how it's implemented into the mechanics.
You're not quite understanding the situation. They made the game and the design of the game was OKed by LA's licensing people and SOE (for the first round). When it comes to most games, say a single player game. It's not a big deal if your license isn't revoked. You made your product and already shipped it by that point.
However, with an MMORPG, you have to keep renewing your license or else you can't continue to keep the game operational or add new content to it.
This makes things much more complex and gives a licensor a lot more power than they should have. They knew that SOE wouldn't dare back down from their demands once the game had shipped. They would already been in too deep by that point and would do anything they could to keep the license and the game alive at that point.
You assume that Sony would be stupid enough to invest in and develop a game with no say so whatsoever? You're the one sounding foolish my friend. What company in their right mind would let the IP holder dictate the business decisions when they are only there for IP integrity and no actual financial investment or obligation other than to get their royalties? SOE would have gone out of business a long time ago if they actually did things the way you paint them.
SOE has some say depending on how the negotiations ended up and how the legal documents are written. The thing is that the Star Wars IP is an extremely hard IP to deal with, and the license needs to be renewed. Upsetting or refusing to compromise (or even completely bend to) a licensor would be a disaster.)
SOE had an extremely small amount of input when it came to NGE.
What company would let a licensor do this? A company that made a game completely based on that specific IP. If the NFL told EA's Madden team that they wanted something, EA would jump through hoops to appease them and do as they wish, because a football game without the NFL license would be trash and wouldn't sell.
In SOE SWG case, LA got what LA wanted. If they had denied LA their demands, LA would have not renewed the license and then the entire game would have had to be recreated from the ground up to not use any Star Wars IP, or shut it down when the license expired.
When it comes to some games, licenses may not be a big deal. For example, not getting licensed to use real world gun models in your game (M4, M16, M240b) isn't a huge deal because you can just change the name and tweak the looks a tiny bit (as many games often do). However, when you game is completely based on an IP, the licensor owns you. That's why so many companies try to create original IPs and stick to stuff they own or create.
Take some classes on game design. They cover all this in the freshmen year.
Stop equating your crystal ball as truth and I might take your arguments more seriously. There has been plenty of evidence that SOE had more than a little input on NGE. In fact, there is evidence showing that they are the sole architect of the NGE. LA's role was to push SOE to make some kind of change and that is what SOE came up with.
Really? Everything people have posted so far says otherwise. What evidence do you speak of?
As far as Smed goes... a Smed does not change his spots. He has lied/mislead/mis-stated to customers so many times, there is no way you can believe anything he says. As to the whole SWG situation, for whatever LA did (or didn't do) they never, ever wrote even a single line of code for SWG. One of SWG's biggest problems from the beginning and 10X worse after the NGE was that it was a buggy mess. And all of that is wholly on SOE. (For the record, LA and SOE were co-publishers of SWG, so for every decision that was made, good or bad, both deserve equal blame, and an extra share for SOE for the crappy coding and bad game management.)
I honestly can't think of anything more important to someone who actually plans to play an MMO long term than how the company behind it supports their games. Certainly it is more important to me than some "features" vaguely hinted at by a two faced money grubber like Smedley.
Which is why I look at the Everquest Franchise's history. What better way to gauge SoE's commitment to Everquest Next?
If you like the way they handled those games then sure. But if you simply liked Everquest and EQ2 up until a point, then this is still the same company that drastically changed those games. Whereas much of the original creative force behind them and development teams have long since departed. Smedley is still here, Brad is gone as are many others.
Personally everyone I know who played Everquest quit because of SOE's mishandling of the game, and the same goes for EQ2 and Vanguard (which imo is related to the franchise given it was created by the series creator). We are all nostalgic for them, but not for SOE as a company. Which is still run by the same people. Why should anyone believe things will change there?
I don't care if people want to get hyped about this game for whatever reason because they just love anything that says sandbox, because they are convinced it will have X feature they've dreamed up. But as long as everything about this game relies on trusting the word of John Smedley then it is certainly relevant for people who do not like the man or his business practices.
I hope it is a good game, however it turns out, and that fans of it get a good experience and aren't treated the way myself and many others feel we were mistreated by the company. SOE defenders can call us all sorts of names, say we are jaded etc, but we supported SOE MMORPG's and in return we got burned. There is no way around that (speaking of SWG, Matrix Online, and Vanguard two of which were shut down a cardinal sin imo for an MMO studio that didn't also close its doors on the same day). People subscribe to MMORPG's, and invest in their character they do have a right to feel owed something in return.
Obviously I can't get my money back for Vangaurd, I was happy to give it when it was going to the development/developers of the game. But SOE kept taking my money long after they dropped support for the game, all the while misleading us about future plans and I can't forgive that.
I've played too many MMORPGs in my lifetime. Often right at day 1 launch, or before that. Including titles such as EQ, SWG, Shadowbane, AO, DAoC, GW, EQ2, SWTOR, Aion, Planetside, Planetside 2, Warhammer, Mortal Online, Eve, Darkfall, Vanguard, just to name a small few of the many MMORPGs I have played over all these years.
I just want to say I disagree with how you feel about SOE. Vanguard was doomed before SOE even touched it. The fact that they even kept the game on life support should be good thing, not a negative thing, especially since they had a huge mess on their hands to start with through no fault of their own, and could have easily pulled the plug to cut losses. You complain that they gutted the dev team, but by a few months in, server pop during prime time was down to the hundreds. You can't commit a massive dev team to something with such poor income/fanbase. It would be a terrible business decision!
SWG's downfall was apparent from the first month. I personally loved the game, but it was bleeding subs. Hard. No denying that, it's simply a fact. Plus the licensor (LA) was forcing their hand. The end result was NGE and no one was happy about it. Not even the devs or Smedley.
The point I'm trying to make here is that I think your hate for SOE is extremely misguided. They are by no means perfect, but no game company is. Not a single one. And in comparison to a lot of companies, SOE is a shining beacon of hope lol.
Everyone has had high hopes for many MMORPGs. Most recently, ESO was supposed to be great. Heck, as an ES fan myself, how could I not get excited to take my elder scrolls experience online. But then when people got their hands on it, it was overwhelmingly mediocre. The reactions of most people who saw it or played it was "Meh, it's ok".
EQN might turn out to just be "ok" or maybe even bad. But so far, everyone that's seen it and everyone who's working on it is talking about it like it's the next big thing.
All I can say is.
August 2nd can't get here fast enough.
And EQN, best in show. FTW.
According to Bill Murphy.
ESO won best in show from IGN.
FFXIV won best in show from Destructoid.
Only one of these games is available for widespread public testing without an NDA, but if you really trust the word of Bill Murphy... (then again you are trusting the word of John Smedley so I guess that's a given).
If I hadn't experienced the miracle of support given by Square Enix after FFXIV's failed launch maybe I would see SOE as a "beacon of light" too, because yes there are a ton of crappy gaming companies. PWI, Cryptic, Funcom yeah I agree with you these are worse. But for a long time it was SOE for me, and now I just have higher standards for the companies I choose to "believe" when they talk about the future of their games.
I DON'T trust ANYONE! I will let the end result speak for itself. Just because we are speculating/hoping/wishing for something doesn't make us blind dupes or drones that believe everything and buy everything that is being told to us.
Hell, none of us know what the game will be, but the forums popped up, and I imagine a lot of us are not playing a mmo right now, we are playing single player or lobby games, but not a mmo. So I am hopeful this will be the next mmo I play, but I fully tell myself I could either love it or I could hate what they bring out, I don't know.
Hope /= Blind Faith
All I know is I cannot stand the over instanced, too quick to level, daily list driven mmos that are out now for the most part. If EQN sucks, then I will give ArcheAge a look (even though I do not like all of its aspects)...If it doesn't work out, I may be done with mmos, and I will probably stick to other games. Not these watered down mmos though.
Comments
I don't care what company releases it.
It's EVERQUEST!
Now who's revising history, or interpreting facts to suit your opinion? That quote wasn't Smed, it was Nancy MacIntyre, a VP @ LucasArts who was overseeing SWG for LA. Here is the quote from this NY-Times article...
"We really just needed to make the game a lot more accessible to a much broader player base," said Nancy MacIntyre, the game's senior director at LucasArts. "There was lots of reading, much too much, in the game. There was a lot of wandering around learning about different abilities. We really needed to give people the experience of being Han Solo or Luke Skywalker rather than being Uncle Owen, the moisture farmer. We wanted more instant gratification: kill, get treasure, repeat. We needed to give people more of an opportunity to be a part of what they have seen in the movies rather than something they had created themselves."
Not saying you don't have some points (specifically w/ the Cao quote, and Smed taking partial blame over the years), but those who live in glass houses and all that. Regardless of who you want to blame, the blame for the CU and NGE don't lay solely @ SoE's feet. It was initiated by what LA thought people wanted, b/c of the poor subs they were seeing, and they, together w/ SoE got together and the CU and NGE is what we got. But to try and say that SoE was solely responsible is a misnomer.
As for Vanguard you are taking snippets and using them to lay the blame solely at the feet of SoE, and Smedley in particular. The story you pulled from Wikipedia is a well known story, but you use the quotes from that story to imply that Smed cut Brad a check, which directly resulted in all Sigil employees being fired, which just isn't what happened. Yes, most of the staff were laid off in that manner, but more than anything, the way that all went down was due to Brad McQuaids lack of business savvy, or any discernible personnel management skills. Vanguards fate lay solely in Brad's lap, the guy may have had some really good ideas, but he totally failed at managing the day to day operations of a dev team, and all the problems resulted from that.
In fact, if any publisher is to blame for what happened to Vanguard, it's Microsoft. As has been established, the people @ MS never really knew what they were doing when it came to MMO's, as evidenced by what happened to Mythica, Vanguard, Marvel Universe Online, True Fantasy Online, and Halo Online. The problems Sigil had w/ MS were bad to begin w/, but what little support MMO's had at all, just up and disappeared when Ed Freis left MS, the people that took over knew even less about what it took to develop an MMO, and that's what led to SoE stepping in. Had SoE not stepped in, Vanguard probably never would have seen the light of day.
Now, I'm now saying SoE made all the right moves w/ Vanguard, they probably should have not taken a larger role in managing Sigil, pushed the release back, and sunk more money into the game. Then, the game might have had a chance, but at least w/ SoE it stood some chance. Yes, SoE made promises that were never met, and the game was put into "maintenance mode" for years, only to emerge recently. But Vanguards problems started WAAAY before SoE and Smed stepped in, and even trying to put half the blame at SoE's doorstep is revisionist history, lies and just outright fantasy.
Well simple really, I never fell for either of those games in the first place. In fact EQNext will be my first SOE game I've ever played so they haven't done me any wrong.
Secondly I am not a hypocrite, I play Neverwinter currently and a lot of people bash cryptic and PWI but I am impressed in everything they do so why wouldn't I give another "perceived Evil" studio a chance?
Sandbox means open world, non-linear gaming PERIOD!
Subscription Gaming, especially MMO gaming is a Cash grab bigger then the most P2W cash shop!
Bring Back Exploration and lengthy progression times. RPG's have always been about the Journey not the destination!!!
I support that sentiment 100% !
If you like the way they handled those games then sure. But if you simply liked Everquest and EQ2 up until a point, then this is still the same company that drastically changed those games. Whereas much of the original creative force behind them and development teams have long since departed. Smedley is still here, Brad is gone as are many others.
Personally everyone I know who played Everquest quit because of SOE's mishandling of the game, and the same goes for EQ2 and Vanguard (which imo is related to the franchise given it was created by the series creator). We are all nostalgic for them, but not for SOE as a company. Which is still run by the same people. Why should anyone believe things will change there?
I don't care if people want to get hyped about this game for whatever reason because they just love anything that says sandbox, because they are convinced it will have X feature they've dreamed up. But as long as everything about this game relies on trusting the word of John Smedley then it is certainly relevant for people who do not like the man or his business practices.
I hope it is a good game, however it turns out, and that fans of it get a good experience and aren't treated the way myself and many others feel we were mistreated by the company. SOE defenders can call us all sorts of names, say we are jaded etc, but we supported SOE MMORPG's and in return we got burned. There is no way around that (speaking of SWG, Matrix Online, and Vanguard two of which were shut down a cardinal sin imo for an MMO studio that didn't also close its doors on the same day). People subscribe to MMORPG's, and invest in their character they do have a right to feel owed something in return.
Obviously I can't get my money back for Vangaurd, I was happy to give it when it was going to the development/developers of the game. But SOE kept taking my money long after they dropped support for the game, all the while misleading us about future plans and I can't forgive that.
http://xivpads.com/?1595680
http://guildwork.com/users/murugan
Right on. I agree as well. Also, see picture for my face below.
Legends of Kesmai, UO, EQ, AO, DAoC, AC, SB, RO, SWG, EVE, EQ2, CoH, GW, VG:SOH, WAR, Aion, DF, CO, MO, DN, Tera, SWTOR, RO2, DP, GW2, PS2, BnS, NW, FF:XIV, ESO, EQ:NL
While I agree with your second point, the NGE isn't that easy to absolve dear old Smed of. The man is a total snake, and missed his calling as a politician. Of course, he would attempt to shift the blame. Its what politicians do.
Brad is back.... and move on if you "can't forgive that".
Again, it's like some of you have never played another game before. Every company has fucked up at some point in time, people move on. If EQN turns out to be great, many people beating the I hate SoE drum will play it anyway.
Actually I care because EQ MMO made by Craptic, Anet and many others would have been complete disaster in my eyes
If EQN is anything Everquest then it'll be great game.
I enjoyed EQ from classic to Planes of Power, in which case I moved to Daoc. I am currently playing EQ2 for the umpteenth time, I continue to enjoy it each time I play it. I've never been driven from a game by SoE, nor has anyone I have had the pleasure of playing any Everquest title with. I trust nothing Smedley states, the only thing I know is SoE is developing EQN which will be their iteration of a Sandbox.
Simply put .. Vanguard players are lucky SoE life supported the game at all, the same goes for MxO players. If you can demonstrate that SoE continued to insist they would support Vanguard for years after the plugged it in ... I'd love to see it. I remember years ago having family play it, their comments being " It's fun but it won't ever receive any love , which is a shame ". So ... was there legitimate deception as you imply?
I won't even discuss MxO ... that game deserved to be shut down, people are lucky SoE even kept it on as long as they did.
I could see your point if there was information out there on the game, or it was in beta and people had any idea about the game other than the word of John Smedley. But they don't, so it isn't really "beating a drum" and refusing to look at the facts. It is refusing to trust a man who lost our trust.
Show me and I'll look with an open mind, but I'm not going to take a dirtbag like John Smedley's word for it. Yes every company "makes mistakes", but John Smedley has kept his job all these years and he is still the face of SOE. Other companies attempt to fix their issues, I just haven't seen any evidence of that from SOE.
I played Planetside 2 being a fan of the original, but I didn't play it based on Smedley's word. I was disappointed in it so I really have no reason to be hyped for this game. You clearly do because either you have never felt burned by SOE/Smedley and so you just trust that he is going to bring you the best game ever.
I once did that with an MMO. It was made by a producer that had given me both my favorite MMO, and altered it to the point I no longer wanted to play it. I trusted Tanaka with the original version of 1.0, and despite there being no concrete evidence to support it I simply trusted his word that the game would be "revolutionary" and "completely change the landscape of MMO's forever". It didn't turn out that way, but at least Square Enix finally fired the man and brought in someone to completely remake the game for its fans.
I don't see John Smedley ever falling on his sword no matter how many countless mistakes the man makes, he is the epitome of a sleazy executive. Gordon Gekko in the flesh.
http://xivpads.com/?1595680
http://guildwork.com/users/murugan
I've played too many MMORPGs in my lifetime. Often right at day 1 launch, or before that. Including titles such as EQ, SWG, Shadowbane, AO, DAoC, GW, EQ2, SWTOR, Aion, Planetside, Planetside 2, Warhammer, Mortal Online, Eve, Darkfall, Vanguard, just to name a small few of the many MMORPGs I have played over all these years.
I just want to say I disagree with how you feel about SOE. Vanguard was doomed before SOE even touched it. The fact that they even kept the game on life support should be good thing, not a negative thing, especially since they had a huge mess on their hands to start with through no fault of their own, and could have easily pulled the plug to cut losses. You complain that they gutted the dev team, but by a few months in, server pop during prime time was down to the hundreds. You can't commit a massive dev team to something with such poor income/fanbase. It would be a terrible business decision!
SWG's downfall was apparent from the first month. I personally loved the game, but it was bleeding subs. Hard. No denying that, it's simply a fact. Plus the licensor (LA) was forcing their hand. The end result was NGE and no one was happy about it. Not even the devs or Smedley.
The point I'm trying to make here is that I think your hate for SOE is extremely misguided. They are by no means perfect, but no game company is. Not a single one. And in comparison to a lot of companies, SOE is a shining beacon of hope lol.
Everyone has had high hopes for many MMORPGs. Most recently, ESO was supposed to be great. Heck, as an ES fan myself, how could I not get excited to take my elder scrolls experience online. But then when people got their hands on it, it was overwhelmingly mediocre. The reactions of most people who saw it or played it was "Meh, it's ok".
EQN might turn out to just be "ok" or maybe even bad. But so far, everyone that's seen it and everyone who's working on it is talking about it like it's the next big thing.
All I can say is.
August 2nd can't get here fast enough.
And EQN, best in show. FTW.
Legends of Kesmai, UO, EQ, AO, DAoC, AC, SB, RO, SWG, EVE, EQ2, CoH, GW, VG:SOH, WAR, Aion, DF, CO, MO, DN, Tera, SWTOR, RO2, DP, GW2, PS2, BnS, NW, FF:XIV, ESO, EQ:NL
You assume that Sony would be stupid enough to invest in and develop a game with no say so whatsoever? You're the one sounding foolish my friend. What company in their right mind would let the IP holder dictate the business decisions when they are only there for IP integrity and no actual financial investment or obligation other than to get their royalties? SOE would have gone out of business a long time ago if they actually did things the way you paint them.
According to Bill Murphy.
ESO won best in show from IGN.
FFXIV won best in show from Destructoid.
Only one of these games is available for widespread public testing without an NDA, but if you really trust the word of Bill Murphy... (then again you are trusting the word of John Smedley so I guess that's a given).
If I hadn't experienced the miracle of support given by Square Enix after FFXIV's failed launch maybe I would see SOE as a "beacon of light" too, because yes there are a ton of crappy gaming companies. PWI, Cryptic, Funcom yeah I agree with you these are worse. But for a long time it was SOE for me, and now I just have higher standards for the companies I choose to "believe" when they talk about the future of their games.
http://xivpads.com/?1595680
http://guildwork.com/users/murugan
SOE has some say depending on how the negotiations ended up and how the legal documents are written. The thing is that the Star Wars IP is an extremely hard IP to deal with, and the license needs to be renewed. Upsetting or refusing to compromise (or even completely bend to) a licensor would be a disaster.)
SOE had an extremely small amount of input when it came to NGE.
What company would let a licensor do this? A company that made a game completely based on that specific IP. If the NFL told EA's Madden team that they wanted something, EA would jump through hoops to appease them and do as they wish, because a football game without the NFL license would be trash and wouldn't sell.
In SOE SWG case, LA got what LA wanted. If they had denied LA their demands, LA would have not renewed the license and then the entire game would have had to be recreated from the ground up to not use any Star Wars IP, or shut it down when the license expired.
When it comes to some games, licenses may not be a big deal. For example, not getting licensed to use real world gun models in your game (M4, M16, M240b) isn't a huge deal because you can just change the name and tweak the looks a tiny bit (as many games often do). However, when you game is completely based on an IP, the licensor owns you. That's why so many companies try to create original IPs and stick to stuff they own or create.
Take some classes on game design. They cover all this in the freshmen year.
Legends of Kesmai, UO, EQ, AO, DAoC, AC, SB, RO, SWG, EVE, EQ2, CoH, GW, VG:SOH, WAR, Aion, DF, CO, MO, DN, Tera, SWTOR, RO2, DP, GW2, PS2, BnS, NW, FF:XIV, ESO, EQ:NL
SWG - Believe it or not, Lucas Arts had creative control, they said to jump, and by contract SoE had to say how high. No one voluntarily changes a mmo that much without being made to do so imo. SWG needed fixes, but it needed some balancing, and more content, but content in the style of what SWG already was, it also needed buffs to be nerfed some if the balancing didn't fix the issues.
Vanguard - Yeah, Microsoft dropped them I think it was, when they found out what state the game was in, SoE stepped in as a publisher, then bought them. SoE did a rush of work on VG, but then kind of lost interest after that. So they get credit for the initial work, but then they were supposed to have a re-launch after fixing issues. That never happened way back when...So they did make promises on the game, and nothing really happened till years later. I loved VG, but I left when PvP support stopped and the PvP servers were abandoned and it felt like SoE abandoned the game. So overall, I think they have some blame, even though they saved the game, so it is kind of complicated. Without them, I probably would of never got to play it.
EQ - I loved EQ, started playing within the first month, I was a UO holdover and didn't want to switch, but the rubberbanding and lag in UO got so horrible at a point, I yielded to people telling me I had to try EQ. I loved EQ, until all the new expansions became over instanced. Dislike what it became all I want, I still got many years of enjoyment and it is easily my most favorite themepark ever.
So add in UO and DAoC, these are my top 5 mmos, with SWG being #5, loved the game, but it did have a lot of issues, it needed work, just not NGE work. SWG was made by a ton of people that made UO, it was pretty apparent from playing it.
So SoE had 3 of my top 5, I did not like how they changed EQ, they made the agreement with LA, so guess they share some fault, but it is what LA made you do....VG was a mixed bag of fault/hope/abandonment....But that's what happens, I cannot stand the new skill systems in UO (2d client doesn't bother me), but it has been changed.
Developers often tweak stuff in a direction they think will make the game better, and for the people that liked the original game, it makes it worse to a point to where people quit. I never liked WoW, but how many times to people say 'Vanilla WoW' around here? Blizzard did it, everyone does. It would be nice if they would stop it, and just make new mmos for that 'new' crowd that they butcher their old mmo for.
It sounds more like a fight over the mechanics / content that don't support the IP's lore. Even still, it ultimately falls on the developer to decide if the game can be a money maker despite the limitations of the IP and that was squarely on Smedley's lap. I am not even remotely implying that LA didn't play a part or even significant part in the fiasco, but I'm tired of the apologists acting as if SOE / Smedley had their hands tied when they ultimately had the power to not go there. I've seen MMOs cancelled for less of a reason than fights over the IP and how it's implemented into the mechanics.
Ten Ton Hammer agrees as well. Everyone that sees EQN, say it exceeded their already high expectations. Also, why exactly was SOE your previous "Bad guy company"? I'd be interested in hearing your reasoning.
Legends of Kesmai, UO, EQ, AO, DAoC, AC, SB, RO, SWG, EVE, EQ2, CoH, GW, VG:SOH, WAR, Aion, DF, CO, MO, DN, Tera, SWTOR, RO2, DP, GW2, PS2, BnS, NW, FF:XIV, ESO, EQ:NL
So you said what i was saying? LA called the shots and NGE was their idea. Now whatever the reason might be behind that but like OP claimed 'it was SOE's decision'. Nope it wasn't. here for your reading pleasure once again. They didn't just say SOE you suck but gave them the whole roadmap of NGE.
Nancy MacIntyre, the game's senior director at LucasArts, responded to the changes in the game and the angry objections by disgruntled players. I quote her remarks from the article at length, since, um, you have to see them to believe them.
Ms. MacIntyre: "We really just needed to make the game a lot more accessible to a much broader player base ... There was lots of reading, much too much, in the game. There was a lot of wandering around learning about different abilities. We really needed to give people the experience of being Han Solo or Luke Skywalker rather than being Uncle Owen, the moisture farmer. We wanted more instant gratification: kill, get treasure, repeat. We needed to give people more of an option to be part of what they have seen in the movies rather than something they had created themselves."
Moreover, doesn't matter whom SOE rescued. Fact remains that Microsoft backed out and no other company wanted to touch Vanguard. If it wasn't for SOE game would never see the light of the day.
If sticking to facts is called being apologist these days than i am guilty of that.
"The problem is that the hardcore folks always want the same thing: 'We want exactly what you gave us before, but it has to be completely different.'
-Jesse Schell
"Online gamers are the most ludicrously entitled beings since Caligula made his horse a senator, and at least the horse never said anything stupid."
-Luke McKinney
Stop equating your crystal ball as truth and I might take your arguments more seriously. There has been plenty of evidence that SOE had more than a little input on NGE. In fact, there is evidence showing that they are the sole architect of the NGE. LA's role was to push SOE to make some kind of change and that is what SOE came up with.
You have been tooting FFXIV's horn even before they showed a single video or any concrete real info about the game. You supported them regardless of failure of the first game.
So how is it any different for those who want to believe SOE and in their vision of EQnext? if you can get all excited about FFXIV ARR just on basis of the words being said by Yoshi and his promises why not others can do the same for EQnext? why the double standards?
"The problem is that the hardcore folks always want the same thing: 'We want exactly what you gave us before, but it has to be completely different.'
-Jesse Schell
"Online gamers are the most ludicrously entitled beings since Caligula made his horse a senator, and at least the horse never said anything stupid."
-Luke McKinney
You're not quite understanding the situation. They made the game and the design of the game was OKed by LA's licensing people and SOE (for the first round). When it comes to most games, say a single player game. It's not a big deal if your license isn't revoked. You made your product and already shipped it by that point.
However, with an MMORPG, you have to keep renewing your license or else you can't continue to keep the game operational or add new content to it.
This makes things much more complex and gives a licensor a lot more power than they should have. They knew that SOE wouldn't dare back down from their demands once the game had shipped. They would already been in too deep by that point and would do anything they could to keep the license and the game alive at that point.
Legends of Kesmai, UO, EQ, AO, DAoC, AC, SB, RO, SWG, EVE, EQ2, CoH, GW, VG:SOH, WAR, Aion, DF, CO, MO, DN, Tera, SWTOR, RO2, DP, GW2, PS2, BnS, NW, FF:XIV, ESO, EQ:NL
Really? Everything people have posted so far says otherwise. What evidence do you speak of?
Legends of Kesmai, UO, EQ, AO, DAoC, AC, SB, RO, SWG, EVE, EQ2, CoH, GW, VG:SOH, WAR, Aion, DF, CO, MO, DN, Tera, SWTOR, RO2, DP, GW2, PS2, BnS, NW, FF:XIV, ESO, EQ:NL
I DON'T trust ANYONE! I will let the end result speak for itself. Just because we are speculating/hoping/wishing for something doesn't make us blind dupes or drones that believe everything and buy everything that is being told to us.
Hell, none of us know what the game will be, but the forums popped up, and I imagine a lot of us are not playing a mmo right now, we are playing single player or lobby games, but not a mmo. So I am hopeful this will be the next mmo I play, but I fully tell myself I could either love it or I could hate what they bring out, I don't know.
Hope /= Blind Faith
All I know is I cannot stand the over instanced, too quick to level, daily list driven mmos that are out now for the most part. If EQN sucks, then I will give ArcheAge a look (even though I do not like all of its aspects)...If it doesn't work out, I may be done with mmos, and I will probably stick to other games. Not these watered down mmos though.