Before he came on board, the game was to be Heroes of Telara. Yes, the name was boring, but it was a lot more dynamic. Scott ripped most of the dynamic stuff out and made the whole thing a lot more like WoW and only kept the rifts.
my personal opinion is that rift is a great game..but i burnt out on it too quickly..tried to many classes in Beta and that ruined the game for me.in the end i left after playing 6 months..which i think was quite a long time..then i thought i would get the xpac.so i subbed for a year costing £62 and i got the xpac for free..but after playing the xpac for 3 days i hit a wall again..it just felt too much of a grind and damn repeatables just put me off.thats not saying the xpac is bad..its not.it has some great features..but i,m done with rift.shame really because trion are a fantastic company.glad they got AA though so i will be back with them soon enough.
Before he came on board, the game was to be Heroes of Telara. Yes, the name was boring, but it was a lot more dynamic. Scott ripped most of the dynamic stuff out and made the whole thing a lot more like WoW and only kept the rifts.
Alpha players couldn't deal with having their quest hubs turning into invasions. The whole experience was too nerve wracking for the players, so they changed it and made it more of a hybrid.
As I have said similarly in the past, if I had a ship that was sinking like Trion I woulds sail it to my island made of money and enjoy the weather. Most companies can only hope to be half as successful.
Before he came on board, the game was to be Heroes of Telara. Yes, the name was boring, but it was a lot more dynamic. Scott ripped most of the dynamic stuff out and made the whole thing a lot more like WoW and only kept the rifts.
Ah yes the good ol days when Rift was a sandbox........
Playing: FFXIV, DnL, and World of Warships Waiting on: Ashes of Creation
Before he came on board, the game was to be Heroes of Telara. Yes, the name was boring, but it was a lot more dynamic. Scott ripped most of the dynamic stuff out and made the whole thing a lot more like WoW and only kept the rifts.
Alpha players couldn't deal with having their quest hubs turning into invasions. The whole experience was too nerve wracking for the players, so they changed it and made it more of a hybrid.
If you're talking about the small hubs not transforming into invasions, they did that after release. It was called something else too.
I think sinking ship is way too strong of term to describe the current condition, however to pass off the mediocre success and declining base is disingenuous. The game has seen a marked decline from the post launch fallout (the time after the first month/3 month subs expire and people move on). They have merged and dumped servers over and over again.
It can still be a great game though and much more successful than it has been in the past if they just correct their course and iron out some wrinkles.
I'm not talking about the small hubs not transforming, but yes they did that too. It's called a foothold and that still exists.
The only other part I'll mention is calling Rift a mediocre success. Rift was a huge success for them. Huge.
How big? 4 games either developed/published and they just got ArcheAge.
Rift's success is what allowed Trion to be a full fledge publisher. You don't get that from mediocre success.
Oh and they made 70 million their first year of the game.
Originally posted by jdnyc Originally posted by cyranaBefore he came on board, the game was to be Heroes of Telara. Yes, the name was boring, but it was a lot more dynamic. Scott ripped most of the dynamic stuff out and made the whole thing a lot more like WoW and only kept the rifts.
Alpha players couldn't deal with having their quest hubs turning into invasions. The whole experience was too nerve wracking for the players, so they changed it and made it more of a hybrid. I'm talking before Rift even came out for alpha- they did a major change six months before its first release date and redid things. Originally it had a system like GW2 with dynamic towns and other events. It is true that they toned down even the invasions, but that's their own fault for having a weird WoW clone with just a few dynamic elements. I enjoyed the crazy invasions at the start, but still wish it had been like Heroes of Telara. It would have been a lot like GW2 in some ways, but a lot earlier.
Before he came on board, the game was to be Heroes of Telara. Yes, the name was boring, but it was a lot more dynamic. Scott ripped most of the dynamic stuff out and made the whole thing a lot more like WoW and only kept the rifts.
Yes, but I am still wondering whether it was his decision. I suspect the decisionto to scale down Heroes of Telara was made just before he got hired and Scott just had to manage within those confines. Did they not fire a lot of people just before Scott was hired as part of scaling down Heroes of Telara to the size of Rift? Or is my memory playing tricks on me?
Originally posted by VikingGamer As I have said similarly in the past, if I had a ship that was sinking like Trion I woulds sail it to my island made of money and enjoy the weather. Most companies can only hope to be half as successful.
Any talk of Trion being successful is pure speculation.
They had to get rid of 1/3rd of the staff on their only released game.
A game they were relying on as a publisher for some extra income turned out to be a no-go, and they decided to dump money into it to salvage it.
Their big project has gotten very mediocre feedback so far and its not exactly in a high-demand genre
And Rift is having a major identity crisis right now. not to mention its been almost 3 months since SL and the only patch was a raid that was already done and just delayed a little, and the next patch on the horizon's big feature is PA tier 3, which has been in place for months. Sure, they will likely retune it a little but its not like its a major addition. So content has certainly slowed. "quality of life" changes are being made where many feel they shouldnt be, and there is no indication whatsoever of a direction or 'vision' from trion.
And all this and Trion has that debt to pay off still.
Yes, they just did get the Archeage deal so its not all doom and gloom, but I would say Trion's status right now is shaky at best. This is also speculation, but evidence points this way.
At least SOMEONE is talking about it. Conversation about this on the Rift forums is virtually non-existent. I guess most people don't have much to say. My guild seems to be completely ignoring it, although I can't blame them. They are playing Rift and enjoying the game as is. :-)
Elsewhere it was observed that Hartsman isn't good at staying on for too many years after a product launch. Fine, he's gotta go, he's gotta go. With some good fortune the rest of us players staying behind will be able to look forward to a few more years of Rift. I hope.
At least SOMEONE is talking about it. Conversation about this on the Rift forums is virtually non-existent. I guess most people don't have much to say. My guild seems to be completely ignoring it, although I can't blame them. They are playing Rift and enjoying the game as is. :-)
Elsewhere it was observed that Hartsman isn't good at staying on for too many years after a product launch. Fine, he's gotta go, he's gotta go. With some good fortune the rest of us players staying behind will be able to look forward to a few more years of Rift. I hope.
There were two big threads (the state of the game threads) where there was a lot of discussion but Trion moved them to a board no one looks at.
Rift forums are a pretty volatile place right now (the falling damage debate is like world war 3)
I think Hartsman is a smart guy and think Rift is a far better product than EQ2 was. But EQ2 has improved since his leaving, and so I anticipate with smart decisions Rift can continue to improve also.
And since I think he's pretty smart, I think his next project will be yet another improvement to the genre.
As a personal note, I was at an SOE convention in Vegas at EQ2's reveal (or at least I think it was the reveal). I remember Hartsman very well - he led the presentation and discussion. It was a good time.
I think Hartsman is a smart guy and think Rift is a far better product than EQ2 was. But EQ2 has improved since his leaving, and so I anticipate with smart decisions Rift can continue to improve also.
And since I think he's pretty smart, I think his next project will be yet another improvement to the genre.
As a personal note, I was at an SOE convention in Vegas at EQ2's reveal (or at least I think it was the reveal). I remember Hartsman very well - he led the presentation and discussion. It was a good time.
I wish him the best -
When Hartsman left EQ2 it was a better game than Rift is now. EQ2 was subpar at launch but by EoF and RoK it was great.
Comments
Been playing again and I think the majority of posters here haven't seen Storm Legion or the changes Rift has made.
It's traditional themepark. But one of the best if not the best out there.
Pretty surprised at how well they've done tbh.
Before he came on board, the game was to be Heroes of Telara. Yes, the name was boring, but it was a lot more dynamic. Scott ripped most of the dynamic stuff out and made the whole thing a lot more like WoW and only kept the rifts.
Ningen wa ningen da.
----
http://twitter.com/Ciovala
Alpha players couldn't deal with having their quest hubs turning into invasions. The whole experience was too nerve wracking for the players, so they changed it and made it more of a hybrid.
All die, so die well.
Ah yes the good ol days when Rift was a sandbox........
Playing: FFXIV, DnL, and World of Warships
Waiting on: Ashes of Creation
I'm not talking about the small hubs not transforming, but yes they did that too. It's called a foothold and that still exists.
The only other part I'll mention is calling Rift a mediocre success. Rift was a huge success for them. Huge.
How big? 4 games either developed/published and they just got ArcheAge.
Rift's success is what allowed Trion to be a full fledge publisher. You don't get that from mediocre success.
Oh and they made 70 million their first year of the game.
I'm talking before Rift even came out for alpha- they did a major change six months before its first release date and redid things. Originally it had a system like GW2 with dynamic towns and other events. It is true that they toned down even the invasions, but that's their own fault for having a weird WoW clone with just a few dynamic elements. I enjoyed the crazy invasions at the start, but still wish it had been like Heroes of Telara. It would have been a lot like GW2 in some ways, but a lot earlier.
Ningen wa ningen da.
----
http://twitter.com/Ciovala
Yes, but I am still wondering whether it was his decision. I suspect the decisionto to scale down Heroes of Telara was made just before he got hired and Scott just had to manage within those confines. Did they not fire a lot of people just before Scott was hired as part of scaling down Heroes of Telara to the size of Rift? Or is my memory playing tricks on me?
It takes one to know one.
Any talk of Trion being successful is pure speculation.
They had to get rid of 1/3rd of the staff on their only released game.
A game they were relying on as a publisher for some extra income turned out to be a no-go, and they decided to dump money into it to salvage it.
Their big project has gotten very mediocre feedback so far and its not exactly in a high-demand genre
And Rift is having a major identity crisis right now. not to mention its been almost 3 months since SL and the only patch was a raid that was already done and just delayed a little, and the next patch on the horizon's big feature is PA tier 3, which has been in place for months. Sure, they will likely retune it a little but its not like its a major addition. So content has certainly slowed. "quality of life" changes are being made where many feel they shouldnt be, and there is no indication whatsoever of a direction or 'vision' from trion.
And all this and Trion has that debt to pay off still.
Yes, they just did get the Archeage deal so its not all doom and gloom, but I would say Trion's status right now is shaky at best. This is also speculation, but evidence points this way.
At least SOMEONE is talking about it. Conversation about this on the Rift forums is virtually non-existent. I guess most people don't have much to say. My guild seems to be completely ignoring it, although I can't blame them. They are playing Rift and enjoying the game as is. :-)
Elsewhere it was observed that Hartsman isn't good at staying on for too many years after a product launch. Fine, he's gotta go, he's gotta go. With some good fortune the rest of us players staying behind will be able to look forward to a few more years of Rift. I hope.
There were two big threads (the state of the game threads) where there was a lot of discussion but Trion moved them to a board no one looks at.
Rift forums are a pretty volatile place right now (the falling damage debate is like world war 3)
he stuck with EQ2, post launch, for 3 years before he left in late 2007
http://www.mobygames.com/developer/sheet/view/developerId,67164/
EQ2 fan sites
I think Hartsman is a smart guy and think Rift is a far better product than EQ2 was. But EQ2 has improved since his leaving, and so I anticipate with smart decisions Rift can continue to improve also.
And since I think he's pretty smart, I think his next project will be yet another improvement to the genre.
As a personal note, I was at an SOE convention in Vegas at EQ2's reveal (or at least I think it was the reveal). I remember Hartsman very well - he led the presentation and discussion. It was a good time.
I wish him the best -
When Hartsman left EQ2 it was a better game than Rift is now. EQ2 was subpar at launch but by EoF and RoK it was great.