Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!

Fuzzy Avatars Solved! Please re-upload your avatar if it was fuzzy!

A concerning Hartsman quote.

xAPOCxxAPOCx Vineland, NJPosts: 869Member

While reading the interview with Hartsman, one of his replies was very unsettleing for me.

 

HARTSMAN: Everyone wants the same thing, which is great: A great game that's
accessible, fair, and enjoyable to the largest number of people
possible. Truly.

 

This statement right here has me very worried. Were these some of the changes that were alluded to buy Hartsman from XLGames themselves? Will the "accessible, fair, and enjoyable to the largest number of people" version of AA be a shell of its Korean counterpart?

 

I think we were left with many more questions then ones that were answered by Hartsman. The bottom line is after reading that Q&A, I'm more worried then ever about the fate of the NA version of AA.

image

«1

Comments

  • DihoruDihoru ConstantaPosts: 2,731Member
    Originally posted by xAPOCx

    While reading the interview with Hartsman, one of his replies was very unsettleing for me.

     

    HARTSMAN: Everyone wants the same thing, which is great: A great game that's
    accessible, fair, and enjoyable to the largest number of people
    possible. Truly.

     

    This statement right here has me very worried. Were these some of the changes that were alluded to buy Hartsman from XLGames themselves? Will the "accessible, fair, and enjoyable to the largest number of people" version of AA be a shell of its Korean counterpart?

     

    I think we were left with many more questions then ones that were answered by Hartsman. The bottom line is after reading that Q&A, I'm more worried then ever about the fate of the NA version of AA.

    You missed a word in your rant. EVE-Online is a fair game for example yet it isn't a kind game (even with the accessibility upgrades given to it for the low end players).

    image
  • xAPOCxxAPOCx Vineland, NJPosts: 869Member
    Originally posted by Dihoru
    Originally posted by xAPOCx

    While reading the interview with Hartsman, one of his replies was very unsettleing for me.

     

    HARTSMAN: Everyone wants the same thing, which is great: A great game that's
    accessible, fair, and enjoyable to the largest number of people
    possible. Truly.

     

    This statement right here has me very worried. Were these some of the changes that were alluded to buy Hartsman from XLGames themselves? Will the "accessible, fair, and enjoyable to the largest number of people" version of AA be a shell of its Korean counterpart?

     

    I think we were left with many more questions then ones that were answered by Hartsman. The bottom line is after reading that Q&A, I'm more worried then ever about the fate of the NA version of AA.

    You missed a word in your rant. EVE-Online is a fair game for example yet it isn't a kind game (even with the accessibility upgrades given to it for the low end players).

    Im sorry you were trying to make sense?  Lets not single out words so its suits you. Lets work on the full statement and go from there shall we.

    image

  • flizzerflizzer Manchester, NHPosts: 1,550Member Uncommon
    Seems like the generic CEO response that aims to answer the question without really revealing anything.  No alarm bells here. 
  • DistopiaDistopia Baltimore, MDPosts: 16,916Member Uncommon

    Accessible= Not bogged down by overly complicated controls or excessive micro management.

    Fair= a balanced play-field

    Enjoyable to the largest player-base possible= Successful.

    What is wrong with any of this?

    For every minute you are angry , you lose 60 seconds of happiness."-Emerson

    It is a sign of a defeated man, to attack at ones character in the face of logic and reason- Me

  • DihoruDihoru ConstantaPosts: 2,731Member
    Originally posted by xAPOCx
    Originally posted by Dihoru
    Originally posted by xAPOCx

    While reading the interview with Hartsman, one of his replies was very unsettleing for me.

     

    HARTSMAN: Everyone wants the same thing, which is great: A great game that's
    accessible, fair, and enjoyable to the largest number of people
    possible. Truly.

     

    This statement right here has me very worried. Were these some of the changes that were alluded to buy Hartsman from XLGames themselves? Will the "accessible, fair, and enjoyable to the largest number of people" version of AA be a shell of its Korean counterpart?

     

    I think we were left with many more questions then ones that were answered by Hartsman. The bottom line is after reading that Q&A, I'm more worried then ever about the fate of the NA version of AA.

    You missed a word in your rant. EVE-Online is a fair game for example yet it isn't a kind game (even with the accessibility upgrades given to it for the low end players).

    Im sorry you were trying to make sense?  Lets not single out words so its suits you. Lets work on the full statement and go from there shall we.

    Indeed and you single out the word accessible and use it to turn the sentence into something it is not (which as mentioned previously is a generic CEO statement devoid of any real meaning) because lets face it if you scratch out the word accessible you will look like a fool grasping at straws (nothing new there my overly athletic friend).

    image
  • BraindomeBraindome Posts: 769Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by Distopia

    Accessible= Not bogged down by overly complicated controls or excessive micro management.

    That is complete opinion.

    Some people like micro management and some people like complicated controls.

    Take for example classic Resident Evil compared to current Resident Evil as it is the best example of this and has overall been a failure because it lacked what made it survival horror vs. action spam fest.

  • winterwinter El Paso, TXPosts: 2,276Member Uncommon

     Try perception.

     

     Whats not overly bogged down and complicated to one is insipidly easy to another

     

    A Balanced playing field? Seriously have you ever known there to be a playing field that all players considered fair? Balance is once again a matter of perception, and the majority of players that lose will believe (and claim, holler, and Yell) that it was because the playing field was not balanced properly no matter how many years a cmpan puts in to trying to make it so.

     

    Lastly the more you try and please the masses, the more watered down a game becomes to the point it really doesn't appeal that much to anyone.

  • DistopiaDistopia Baltimore, MDPosts: 16,916Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by Braindome
    Originally posted by Distopia

    Accessible= Not bogged down by overly complicated controls or excessive micro management.

    That is complete opinion.

    Some people like micro management and some people like complicated controls.

    Take for example classic Resident Evil compared to current Resident Evil as it is the best example of this and has overall been a failure because it lacked what made it survival horror vs. action spam fest.

    Two of my favorite game series are X and ARMA both of which have complicated control schemes and excessive micro management. Your point is?

    Mine was, that's a big part of what has kept those games in the place they are, niche...

    For every minute you are angry , you lose 60 seconds of happiness."-Emerson

    It is a sign of a defeated man, to attack at ones character in the face of logic and reason- Me

  • BraindomeBraindome Posts: 769Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by Distopia
    Originally posted by Braindome
    Originally posted by Distopia

    Accessible= Not bogged down by overly complicated controls or excessive micro management.

    That is complete opinion.

    Some people like micro management and some people like complicated controls.

    Take for example classic Resident Evil compared to current Resident Evil as it is the best example of this and has overall been a failure because it lacked what made it survival horror vs. action spam fest.

    Two of my favorite game series are X and ARMA both of which have complicated control schemes and excessive micro management. Your point is?

    Mine was, that's a big part of what has kept those games in the place they are, niche...

    My point was that he has no idea what the "majority" of players like these days and I used Resident Evil as an example as it has been a failure in comparison to past titles and has suffered major backlash.

    Niche is indeed the point here and hopefully it will find a niche if its lucky, which obviously it will not with the statement he made. He only seems to care about what the numbers %'s and $$$ says. Thought that was the whole point of the thread. 

  • TorvalTorval Oregon CountryPosts: 7,223Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by Dihoru
    Originally posted by xAPOCx
    Originally posted by Dihoru
    Originally posted by xAPOCx

    While reading the interview with Hartsman, one of his replies was very unsettleing for me.

     

    HARTSMAN: Everyone wants the same thing, which is great: A great game that's
    accessible, fair, and enjoyable to the largest number of people
    possible. Truly.

     

    This statement right here has me very worried. Were these some of the changes that were alluded to buy Hartsman from XLGames themselves? Will the "accessible, fair, and enjoyable to the largest number of people" version of AA be a shell of its Korean counterpart?

     

    I think we were left with many more questions then ones that were answered by Hartsman. The bottom line is after reading that Q&A, I'm more worried then ever about the fate of the NA version of AA.

    You missed a word in your rant. EVE-Online is a fair game for example yet it isn't a kind game (even with the accessibility upgrades given to it for the low end players).

    Im sorry you were trying to make sense?  Lets not single out words so its suits you. Lets work on the full statement and go from there shall we.

    Indeed and you single out the word accessible and use it to turn the sentence into something it is not (which as mentioned previously is a generic CEO statement devoid of any real meaning) because lets face it if you scratch out the word accessible you will look like a fool grasping at straws (nothing new there my overly athletic friend).

    There is an added level of humor and irony when you consider the answer the OP distorted was phrased within the context of the Russian payment model and how it would affect the players.

  • TorvalTorval Oregon CountryPosts: 7,223Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by Braindome
    Originally posted by Distopia

    Accessible= Not bogged down by overly complicated controls or excessive micro management.

    That is complete opinion.

    Some people like micro management and some people like complicated controls.

    Take for example classic Resident Evil compared to current Resident Evil as it is the best example of this and has overall been a failure because it lacked what made it survival horror vs. action spam fest.

    The problem is you're talking about "B" when the OP was distorting an answer referencing "A" to make it look like Hartsman was answering "B". In the context of the discussion thread Hartsman was repeatedly questioned about the revenue system and payment model for the game and how it would affect players. His answer wasn't focused so much on game mechanics as in accessibility to the game itself.

    Remember he's got his CEO hat on now and not his game designer hat. He's coming from the perspective of making sure as many people as possible have an opportunity to play the game. That's a bad thing how?

  • drivendawndrivendawn montgomery, ALPosts: 1,253Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by Torvaldr
    Originally posted by Braindome
    Originally posted by Distopia

    Accessible= Not bogged down by overly complicated controls or excessive micro management.

    That is complete opinion.

    Some people like micro management and some people like complicated controls.

    Take for example classic Resident Evil compared to current Resident Evil as it is the best example of this and has overall been a failure because it lacked what made it survival horror vs. action spam fest.

    The problem is you're talking about "B" when the OP was distorting an answer referencing "A" to make it look like Hartsman was answering "B". In the context of the discussion thread Hartsman was repeatedly questioned about the revenue system and payment model for the game and how it would affect players. His answer wasn't focused so much on game mechanics as in accessibility to the game itself.

    Remember he's got his CEO hat on now and not his game designer hat. He's coming from the perspective of making sure as many people as possible have an opportunity to play the game. That's a bad thing how?

    Sounds like they are scared of it not being hardcore enough they don't want those horrible casual people screwing up their game.

  • xAPOCxxAPOCx Vineland, NJPosts: 869Member
    Originally posted by Dihoru
    Originally posted by xAPOCx
    Originally posted by Dihoru
    Originally posted by xAPOCx

    While reading the interview with Hartsman, one of his replies was very unsettleing for me.

     

    HARTSMAN: Everyone wants the same thing, which is great: A great game that's
    accessible, fair, and enjoyable to the largest number of people
    possible. Truly.

     

    This statement right here has me very worried. Were these some of the changes that were alluded to buy Hartsman from XLGames themselves? Will the "accessible, fair, and enjoyable to the largest number of people" version of AA be a shell of its Korean counterpart?

     

    I think we were left with many more questions then ones that were answered by Hartsman. The bottom line is after reading that Q&A, I'm more worried then ever about the fate of the NA version of AA.

    You missed a word in your rant. EVE-Online is a fair game for example yet it isn't a kind game (even with the accessibility upgrades given to it for the low end players).

    Im sorry you were trying to make sense?  Lets not single out words so its suits you. Lets work on the full statement and go from there shall we.

    Indeed and you single out the word accessible and use it to turn the sentence into something it is not (which as mentioned previously is a generic CEO statement devoid of any real meaning) because lets face it if you scratch out the word accessible you will look like a fool grasping at straws (nothing new there my overly athletic friend).

    I didnt single out any one word. I quoted a full statement made my Hartsman himself. If you bring nothing to this conversation but snide remarks, then dont even bother responding to anything in this thread.

     

    [mod edit]

     

     

    image

  • xAPOCxxAPOCx Vineland, NJPosts: 869Member
    Originally posted by flizzer
    Seems like the generic CEO response that aims to answer the question without really revealing anything.  No alarm bells here. 

    Be that as it may but how may of these "generic CEO responses" have lead to generic MMOs with generic game play? By the statement made by Hartsman, it would seem like AA is being steered in the direction that most other MMOs have gone in the past. Time will tell.

    image

  • TheLizardbonesTheLizardbones Arkham, VAPosts: 10,910Member

    A great game - a game that sells well to the audience it targets.

    Accessible - People can get into the game with a minimum of fuss and faffing about with things that don't matter to them.

    Fair - The game won't be arbitrary in it's distribution of wealth, progression, etc. In addition, the developer will take steps to make sure players don't exploit game mechanics to make things easier than they were intended by the developer.

    Enjoyable to the largest number of people possible - given the game's setting and content, make everything work as well as it possibly can, so that as many people as possible enjoy the game.

    Dur. Who in the world wants a cr@ppy game that's hard to install or get into, where the game arbitrarily kills you or where the progression isn't based on anything the player does and where few if anyone actually enjoys the game, even if they enjoy the idea of the game?

    This is one of those statements that's just there to sound good, but doesn't really add any new information. The only disturbing part about it is how bland it is, and how much new information it doesn't contain about whatever Trion is doing.

    **

    Someone else already did a definition run down thing. :-(

    I can not remember winning or losing a single debate on the internet.

  • xAPOCxxAPOCx Vineland, NJPosts: 869Member
    Originally posted by Distopia

    Accessible= Not bogged down by overly complicated controls or excessive micro management.

    Fair= a balanced play-field

    Enjoyable to the largest player-base possible= Successful.

    What is wrong with any of this?

    You know damn well what type of game is made when following this formula.

    image

  • RebelScum99RebelScum99 Mesa, AZPosts: 1,090Member
    Originally posted by Distopia

    Accessible= Not bogged down by overly complicated controls or excessive micro management.

    Fair= a balanced play-field

    Enjoyable to the largest player-base possible= Successful.

    What is wrong with any of this?

    Haven't you heard?  If a game is popular and easy to learn, it's not worthy.  It needs to be overly and unnecessarily tedious, and so difficult that only a small amount of players actually play it.  

    It's the gaming version of a hipster bar.  

  • DMKanoDMKano Gamercentral, AKPosts: 8,587Member Uncommon
    ?Originally posted by xAPOCx

    While reading the interview with Hartsman, one of his replies was very unsettleing for me.

     

    HARTSMAN: Everyone wants the same thing, which is great: A great game that's
    accessible, fair, and enjoyable to the largest number of people
    possible. Truly.

     

    This statement right here has me very worried. Were these some of the changes that were alluded to buy Hartsman from XLGames themselves? Will the "accessible, fair, and enjoyable to the largest number of people" version of AA be a shell of its Korean counterpart?

     

    I think we were left with many more questions then ones that were answered by Hartsman. The bottom line is after reading that Q&A, I'm more worried then ever about the fate of the NA version of AA.

    OP - you left out the QUESTION - this response was to what type of payment model AA would be.

    So obviously accessible to all, fair and enjoyable are alluding to the fact that ArcheAge will be F2P with the same model as Rift (which is IMO the best model on the market)

    So Hartsman is NOT talking about ArcheAge gameplay at all, he is talking about payment model - the game will still have open world PvP that is brutal like it is in Korea.

    So please stop taking things out of context - ArcheAge in US/EU will be exactly the same gameplay wise.

     

  • iridescenceiridescence Elliot Lake, ONPosts: 1,486Member
    Originally posted by RebelScum99
     

    Haven't you heard?  If a game is popular and easy to learn, it's not worthy.  It needs to be overly and unnecessarily tedious, and so difficult that only a small amount of players actually play it.  

    It's the gaming version of a hipster bar.  

     

    Nah...I just like micromanagement and complexity in  games because overly  simplistic games get boring after a while. Keep burning down that strawman though.

     

  • ExcessionExcession NottinghamPosts: 367Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by xAPOCx

    While reading the interview with Hartsman, one of his replies was very unsettleing for me.

     

    HARTSMAN: Everyone wants the same thing, which is great: A great game that's
    accessible, fair, and enjoyable to the largest number of people
    possible. Truly.

     

    This statement right here has me very worried. Were these some of the changes that were alluded to buy Hartsman from XLGames themselves? Will the "accessible, fair, and enjoyable to the largest number of people" version of AA be a shell of its Korean counterpart?

     

    I think we were left with many more questions then ones that were answered by Hartsman. The bottom line is after reading that Q&A, I'm more worried then ever about the fate of the NA version of AA.

    Im left wondering why the OP wants to buy Hartsman from XLGames........

    A creative person is motivated by the desire to achieve, not the desire to beat others.

  • xAPOCxxAPOCx Vineland, NJPosts: 869Member
    Originally posted by Torvaldr
    Originally posted by Dihoru
    Originally posted by xAPOCx
    Originally posted by Dihoru
    Originally posted by xAPOCx

    While reading the interview with Hartsman, one of his replies was very unsettleing for me.

     

    HARTSMAN: Everyone wants the same thing, which is great: A great game that's
    accessible, fair, and enjoyable to the largest number of people
    possible. Truly.

     

    This statement right here has me very worried. Were these some of the changes that were alluded to buy Hartsman from XLGames themselves? Will the "accessible, fair, and enjoyable to the largest number of people" version of AA be a shell of its Korean counterpart?

     

    I think we were left with many more questions then ones that were answered by Hartsman. The bottom line is after reading that Q&A, I'm more worried then ever about the fate of the NA version of AA.

    You missed a word in your rant. EVE-Online is a fair game for example yet it isn't a kind game (even with the accessibility upgrades given to it for the low end players).

    Im sorry you were trying to make sense?  Lets not single out words so its suits you. Lets work on the full statement and go from there shall we.

    Indeed and you single out the word accessible and use it to turn the sentence into something it is not (which as mentioned previously is a generic CEO statement devoid of any real meaning) because lets face it if you scratch out the word accessible you will look like a fool grasping at straws (nothing new there my overly athletic friend).

    There is an added level of humor and irony when you consider the answer the OP distorted was phrased within the context of the Russian payment model and how it would affect the players.

    Hartsman in that statement referred to the "game". Perhaps he ment it as payment model but it doesn't read that way. When he said "game" instead of "payment model" it changed the way one would perceive his answer. Even withing the context of the question.

    If he is indeed just speaking on payment model then my bad. If however his comment was broader in scoop and referred the "game" as a whole then thats something different all together.

    image

  • xAPOCxxAPOCx Vineland, NJPosts: 869Member
    Originally posted by DMKano
    ?Originally posted by xAPOCx

    While reading the interview with Hartsman, one of his replies was very unsettleing for me.

     

    HARTSMAN: Everyone wants the same thing, which is great: A great game that's
    accessible, fair, and enjoyable to the largest number of people
    possible. Truly.

     

    This statement right here has me very worried. Were these some of the changes that were alluded to buy Hartsman from XLGames themselves? Will the "accessible, fair, and enjoyable to the largest number of people" version of AA be a shell of its Korean counterpart?

     

    I think we were left with many more questions then ones that were answered by Hartsman. The bottom line is after reading that Q&A, I'm more worried then ever about the fate of the NA version of AA.

    OP - you left out the QUESTION - this response was to what type of payment model AA would be.

    So obviously accessible to all, fair and enjoyable are alluding to the fact that ArcheAge will be F2P with the same model as Rift (which is IMO the best model on the market)

    So Hartsman is NOT talking about ArcheAge gameplay at all, he is talking about payment model - the game will still have open world PvP that is brutal like it is in Korea.

    So please stop taking things out of context - ArcheAge in US/EU will be exactly the same gameplay wise.

     

    This remains to be seen.

    And i hope that what he meant and wasn't generalizing the entire game its self.

    image

  • InporylemQQInporylemQQ asdasadsPosts: 165Member

    In Korea they already tried to make it enjoyable for largest number of people and it failed miserably, since probably that wasn't what people wanted, they wanted ArcheAge what it was. All the changes to make it more theme parkish and appealing to everyone did not work. So what if Hartsman knows anything about Korean release he would do everything completely opposite or even better publish an older version of the game and stop fingering the game completely.

    Sadly reading all those comments from the AMA shows he might have some outdated data of how the game is doing at Korea atm. ("We have a lot of faith that XL is on the right track with what they're doing with the game. ")

    ArcheAge, Black Desert and Bless videos InporylemQQ Youtube

  • niceguy3978niceguy3978 Gainesville, FLPosts: 2,000Member
    Originally posted by xAPOCx
    Originally posted by Dihoru
    Originally posted by xAPOCx

    While reading the interview with Hartsman, one of his replies was very unsettleing for me.

     

    HARTSMAN: Everyone wants the same thing, which is great: A great game that's
    accessible, fair, and enjoyable to the largest number of people
    possible. Truly.

     

    This statement right here has me very worried. Were these some of the changes that were alluded to buy Hartsman from XLGames themselves? Will the "accessible, fair, and enjoyable to the largest number of people" version of AA be a shell of its Korean counterpart?

     

    I think we were left with many more questions then ones that were answered by Hartsman. The bottom line is after reading that Q&A, I'm more worried then ever about the fate of the NA version of AA.

    You missed a word in your rant. EVE-Online is a fair game for example yet it isn't a kind game (even with the accessibility upgrades given to it for the low end players).

    Im sorry you were trying to make sense?  Lets not single out words so its suits you. Lets work on the full statement and go from there shall we.

    What was the question?  It sounds like an answer to a business model type question, but I can only guess, since you only stated the answer and not the question.

    Edit:  I should have read through to the end, I see someone already answered this.  

  • cylon8cylon8 lodi, NJPosts: 335Member Uncommon
    irregardless of how dumbed down it is, which I doubt as a publisher trion has much say in that, the extended localization delay is pushing this game out of gamers interest....all it will take is one Asian publisher to push out a similar game and trion might as well not even bother.

    so say we all

«1
Sign In or Register to comment.