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!

After SWG and Vanguard, How Do People Continue to Fall For SOE (Smedley) Hype?

16791112

Comments

  • BurntvetBurntvet Baltimore, MDPosts: 2,948Member Uncommon
    The thing with the MacIntyre statement was made well AFTER the NGE changes were done and all in place, and as part of the damage control that was going on at the time. Just because this particular time, it was an LA producer saying the same/similar thing as the SOE people had already said, does not mean that LA was wholly responsible for the decision (granted, she was a bit more candid about what the collective "they" wanted to do). All it means is that one of the co-publishers (LA), was saying the same/similar things to what the other co-publisher was and had said. Both Freeman and Rubenfeld speak to what was going on behind the curtain. (And it was even Freeman himself that came up with and pushed the terrible combat changes in the NGE, he said that, explicitly. No mention of LA saying "do this" or "do that" at all.)
  • BurntvetBurntvet Baltimore, MDPosts: 2,948Member Uncommon
    And further more, even after the changes, it was not certain they would not go back to the old version: Rubenfeld said in the blog entry they maintained the old code in parallel to the NGE for 6 weeks after. That does not sound like a hard and fast decision by anyone to me.
  • IridescentOrkIridescentOrk Ellicott City, MDPosts: 157Member
    Originally posted by Iadien
    Originally posted by IridescentOrk
    no game play vids or demo to say the game is good, but it's fine, there will be popcorn to enjoy the aftermath

    So, based on no vids, you're expecting it to be terrible? How is that any different than people hoping it's good? lol

    read again, I didn't say the game is terrible

    gameplay > graphics

  • DoogiehowserDoogiehowser ParisPosts: 1,873Member
    Originally posted by Burntvet
    The thing with the MacIntyre statement was made well AFTER the NGE changes were done and all in place, and as part of the damage control that was going on at the time. Just because this particular time, it was an LA producer saying the same/similar thing as the SOE people had already said, does not mean that LA was wholly responsible for the decision (granted, she was a bit more candid about what the collective "they" wanted to do). All it means is that one of the co-publishers (LA), was saying the same/similar things to what the other co-publisher was and had said. Both Freeman and Rubenfeld speak to what was going on behind the curtain. (And it was even Freeman himself that came up with and pushed the terrible combat changes in the NGE, he said that, explicitly. No mention of LA saying "do this" or "do that" at all.)

    No it means that LA had full control over  their license and nothing changes in the game without them giving it a green light. That is why i gave example of Warhammer IP and Games Workshop to show that companies don't let anyone just do whatever they desire with their IP's. To say it was just 'SOE's decision and completely their fault' is just absurd.

    "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

    image

  • IadienIadien Charleston, WVPosts: 638Member
    Originally posted by IridescentOrk
    Originally posted by Iadien
    Originally posted by IridescentOrk
    no game play vids or demo to say the game is good, but it's fine, there will be popcorn to enjoy the aftermath

    So, based on no vids, you're expecting it to be terrible? How is that any different than people hoping it's good? lol

    read again, I didn't say the game is terrible

    Enjoy the aftermath?

  • BurntvetBurntvet Baltimore, MDPosts: 2,948Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by Doogiehowser

    Originally posted by Burntvet
    The thing with the MacIntyre statement was made well AFTER the NGE changes were done and all in place, and as part of the damage control that was going on at the time. Just because this particular time, it was an LA producer saying the same/similar thing as the SOE people had already said, does not mean that LA was wholly responsible for the decision (granted, she was a bit more candid about what the collective "they" wanted to do). All it means is that one of the co-publishers (LA), was saying the same/similar things to what the other co-publisher was and had said. Both Freeman and Rubenfeld speak to what was going on behind the curtain. (And it was even Freeman himself that came up with and pushed the terrible combat changes in the NGE, he said that, explicitly. No mention of LA saying "do this" or "do that" at all.)

    No it means that LA had full control over  their license and nothing changes in the game without them giving it a green light. That is why i gave example of Warhammer IP to show that companies don't let anyone just do whatever they desire with their IP's. To say it was just 'SOE's decision and completely their fault' is just absurd.

     

    I did not say it was solely SOE's fault for the decision. That was a joint decision between the two, because it had to be, contractually. What was SOE fault was the design, implementation, and coding. LA did none of that... they simply approved of changing the game into a more simplified, themepark experience in an attempt to get more customers, that SOE proposed. All the rest is on SOE, because they DID it.
  • Gallus85Gallus85 Winter Park, FLPosts: 1,092Member
    Originally posted by Iadien
    Originally posted by IridescentOrk
    Originally posted by Iadien
    Originally posted by IridescentOrk
    no game play vids or demo to say the game is good, but it's fine, there will be popcorn to enjoy the aftermath

    So, based on no vids, you're expecting it to be terrible? How is that any different than people hoping it's good? lol

    read again, I didn't say the game is terrible

    Enjoy the aftermath?

    I think he meant you can grab some popcorn, sit back and watch the results of August 2nd.  Good or bad.

    All the nay sayers will be drooling over EQN if it is great.

    All the nay sayers will be throwing it up in everyone's face if it isn't.

    Either way, there will be popcorn.

    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

  • Gallus85Gallus85 Winter Park, FLPosts: 1,092Member
    Originally posted by Burntvet
    Originally posted by Doogiehowser
    Originally posted by Burntvet
    The thing with the MacIntyre statement was made well AFTER the NGE changes were done and all in place, and as part of the damage control that was going on at the time. Just because this particular time, it was an LA producer saying the same/similar thing as the SOE people had already said, does not mean that LA was wholly responsible for the decision (granted, she was a bit more candid about what the collective "they" wanted to do). All it means is that one of the co-publishers (LA), was saying the same/similar things to what the other co-publisher was and had said. Both Freeman and Rubenfeld speak to what was going on behind the curtain. (And it was even Freeman himself that came up with and pushed the terrible combat changes in the NGE, he said that, explicitly. No mention of LA saying "do this" or "do that" at all.)

    No it means that LA had full control over  their license and nothing changes in the game without them giving it a green light. That is why i gave example of Warhammer IP to show that companies don't let anyone just do whatever they desire with their IP's. To say it was just 'SOE's decision and completely their fault' is just absurd.

     

    I did not say it was solely SOE's fault for the decision. That was a joint decision between the two, because it had to be, contractually. What was SOE fault was the design, implementation, and coding. LA did none of that... they simply approved of changing the game into a more simplified, themepark experience in an attempt to get more customers, that SOE proposed. All the rest is on SOE, because they DID it.

    You are close, but not close enough to be correct.  Go back and read.

    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

  • XssivXssiv Haskell, NJPosts: 359Member
    Originally posted by Doogiehowser
    Originally posted by Xssiv
    Originally posted by Hrimnir

    As i've always said, the whole smed/soe hate is mostly unfounded bandwagoning blind hate because its popular to do so.

    The reality is, only at most about 350 thousand people have any justifiable RIGHT to be pissed at SOE.  These are the people who were directly affected by the NGE.  Even that being said, it was later identified that Lucasarts was the force (tee hee) behind the NGE and that anybody who is of sound rational mind would subsequently take this new information and be pissed at lucasarts rather than SOE.

    The rest of the hate you see is people bandwagoning onto the NGE thing because they think it will give them more MMO street cred or something.  Either way its become a complete and utter joke of absurdity.

    If you take WOW out of the mix, SOE has far and away the best corral and most successful mmo's out there.

    Considering that this thread is 20+ pages and not one person has been able to produce any evidence of LA forcing the NGE onto SOE, I think people need to stop citing this as fact.

     

    You are amazingly stubborn. So that article where Nancy openly admits the reason why NGE was released means nothing? even though she uses the word 'we' repeatedly?

    And how many times people have to explain to you that ofcourse Smedly will take the responsibility not LA? Smedly is face of SOE and he was always going to take the fall for it. You were also told many many times over 20 pages that SOE can not take decisions on its own. It is LA who takes decisions  and SOE follows.

    It is amazing how stubborn you are...online ego is a big deal i guess. When she says 'we' over and over again obviously she is talking about LA since they are the decision makers not SOE.

    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."

    I don't know much more crystal clear it can get? but oh no she has to say 'We forced NGE on SOE' otherwise it was all SOE's decision. Do you know how liscensing works? i will give you an example of Game Workshop. Nothing in Warhammer MMO happened without their agreement.They have full control over Warhammer and no company can add an inch without consulting them.

    What makes you think a company as huge as LA would just let SOE do whatever they desire?

    I'm not denying that LA was onboard with the NGE but your article never once suggests that LA forced it on SOE and I think people are suddenly developing selective amnesia if they are gonna give SOE / Smedley a pass on this.  

     

    At this point, I think we can both agree to disagree on this one as I cannot make my point(s) any clearer and have provided more than enough credible sources for my information. 

  • IadienIadien Charleston, WVPosts: 638Member
    Originally posted by Gallus85
    Originally posted by Iadien
    Originally posted by IridescentOrk
    Originally posted by Iadien
    Originally posted by IridescentOrk
    no game play vids or demo to say the game is good, but it's fine, there will be popcorn to enjoy the aftermath

    So, based on no vids, you're expecting it to be terrible? How is that any different than people hoping it's good? lol

    read again, I didn't say the game is terrible

    Enjoy the aftermath?

    I think he meant you can grab some popcorn, sit back and watch the results of August 2nd.  Good or bad.

    All the nay sayers will be drooling over EQN if it is great.

    All the nay sayers will be throwing it up in everyone's face if it isn't.

    Either way, there will be popcorn.

    I would agree with you, if his post had periods in there.

  • DoogiehowserDoogiehowser ParisPosts: 1,873Member
    Originally posted by Burntvet
    Originally posted by Doogiehowser
    Originally posted by Burntvet
    The thing with the MacIntyre statement was made well AFTER the NGE changes were done and all in place, and as part of the damage control that was going on at the time. Just because this particular time, it was an LA producer saying the same/similar thing as the SOE people had already said, does not mean that LA was wholly responsible for the decision (granted, she was a bit more candid about what the collective "they" wanted to do). All it means is that one of the co-publishers (LA), was saying the same/similar things to what the other co-publisher was and had said. Both Freeman and Rubenfeld speak to what was going on behind the curtain. (And it was even Freeman himself that came up with and pushed the terrible combat changes in the NGE, he said that, explicitly. No mention of LA saying "do this" or "do that" at all.)

    No it means that LA had full control over  their license and nothing changes in the game without them giving it a green light. That is why i gave example of Warhammer IP to show that companies don't let anyone just do whatever they desire with their IP's. To say it was just 'SOE's decision and completely their fault' is just absurd.

     

    I did not say it was solely SOE's fault for the decision. That was a joint decision between the two, because it had to be, contractually. What was SOE fault was the design, implementation, and coding. LA did none of that... they simply approved of changing the game into a more simplified, themepark experience in an attempt to get more customers, that SOE proposed. All the rest is on SOE, because they DID it.

    People who have an axe to grind with SOE have already made up their mind. It is a lynch mob mentality really and no amount of proof is going to change that. Even the statement given by Nancy has been shrugged off as nothing more than a 'damage control'. Even though she openly admits that 'we' LA studio took the decisions for making radical changes. Even word of the lead producer isn't good enough but we are somehow suppossed to believe some random posters on message board.

    I agree with others, mods need to burn down this topic because it was never made for having prudent and reasonable discussion and after 20 pages it is still the same.

    "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

    image

  • MuruganMurugan D, COPosts: 1,494Member
    Originally posted by Gallus85
    Originally posted by Murugan

    Who cares about Ten Ton Hammer?  Do you?  Do you think they are some kind of righteous authority on what you enjoy?  I don't, I don't trust Destructoid's "Best of" article writer either, or IGN's.  It means nothing, but doubly so because the two people who proclaimed EQ Next "Best of Show" have nothing to show for it, and their audience has nothing to base a belief in their review on.  Because they know nothing about the game other than what John Smedley tells them.

     Well I wouldn't say I will take their word for it and preorder the game right now, but my point was that it bodes well for the game and it's most likely more than just "hype".  

    SOE wasnt' my previous "Bad guy company" it was my previous go-to MMO company.  I played EQ, EQ2, Vanguard, SWG, Planetside, Matrix Online, I pre-ordered and beta'd most of these games.  They trashed all of these games (my opinion), and they have put out crap since.  Not only that but I grew tired of their constant lying and misleading of people, their bait and switch business practices, constant shuffling of development teams, and apparent general lack of appreciation for people who paid a subscription to them every single month.

     That's an interesting opinion.  I played all those games as well (except MxO) and I found them all to be pretty solid titles, espeically EQ and Planetside.  I've also recently reinstalled EQ, EQ2 and Vaguard, just to check in and see what the games are like now, and they seem way better.  Vanguard is a lot more polished, with more active players than when I left.  EQ has an insane amount of content compared to when I played it.  Same with EQ2.  In my eyes, SOE saved Vanguard from destruction and has continued to support their games faithfully.

    Now yes, they are my "bad guy company" based on my extensive experiences as a subscriber to many of their MMO's and "station pass" holder for many years, and that bad guy specifically?  John Smedley.  Maybe if they hang him from the tree outside SOE headquarters (not literally, I don't condone murder) I will stop being weary of everything they do.

     Your comments are very general.  You say things like "Business practices" and "Shuffling of development teams" but don't really state anything they did wrong.

    Anyways I'm not here to bash EQ Next, I hope it is good for you I don't like to troll what other people enjoy (although to be fair none of you enjoy EQ Next you don't even know what kind of game it will be, I bet many of you will hate it come August 2 when/if you get real information). 

     That could be very true. EQN might not be the game for me.  However, they said sandbox, and EQ was one of my all time favorite MMORPGs that I played from day 1 launch and for years after it.  That's enough to be "excited" for EQN.  But yes, we won't know for sure until August 2.

    This is my opinion of the company, it isn't based on forums or being "jaded" (jaded means someone who grows tired and impatient with something they previously enjoyed, I still enjoy MMORPG's I just dislike how SOE handles them), but on my experiences as an SOE customer.  I'm entitled to my opinion, it is far from frivolous and I retain an open mind if more information about an SOE game surfaces not from the mouth of the serpent.  Still "faith" in developers is important to me as a non-game hopping long term MMORPG player, and they have done everything they could to piss away my faith countless times in every SOE title I have played.

    More general statements.  You still haven't stated exactly what Smedley did to upset you.  Or even SOE for that matter.

     

    During the development of APW for Vanguard (AFTER SOE TOOK OVER) there were many developers working on the game, you can see their names referenced in the bosses there.  I talked to many of them on the test server.  Over the time I was SUBSCRIBED to the game along with many other people.

     

    Back when the game had more than one server.

     

    Back when the game had people paying for it every month.

     

    Way back then... they decided to shuffle the development team to EQ2 and other titles, then add in some interns from EQ2 and a community manager who became lead devs.  Then most of them even left, it was bad enough when Sillius was put in charge and ran the game into the ground with his absolute mockery of any lore people had clearly worked very hard to establish or serious nature of the game's design instead turning the game into one big "Sillius joke", but hell they even shipped him off and gave us a new director that was pretty much only in charge of himself as he was the only one left working on the game.

     

    I know people who still play Vanguard, I'm glad they are finally getting content again.  I just don't understand why SOE had to bleed the game dry when they did have subscribers.  There is no way the population of the game is even close to what it was when APW was in its heyday.  I was hardly greedy, I gave them plenty of time patiently paying my subscription and supporting the game.  I brought friends into the game telling them how much it had improved, but they stripped the dev team long before the game had its final and (imo) fatal flop following BoD and PoTA's introduction (which were long delayed, and very lackluster, again in my opinion).

     

    They left no hope, and so me and many people I played with unsubscribed.

     

    I don't think Vanguard is a bad game, if a cash shop is what it takes to make it work and them to develop content for it then at least I'm happy for my friends who continue to play it.  But these to me are bad business practices.  It is "bait and switch" for Smedley to promise support for Vanguard DESPITE its unpopularity and declining sub numbers at the time of the aquisition.  To run campaigns to get people to come back to Vanguard with the promise that they had fixed it and will now support it and expansions would come.

     

    You can blame that on the game not being successful enough, and not enough people playing it.  Hell I'm sure that is Smedley's excuse, but that is HIS failing as an executive not mine as a paying player.  He promised me support and didn't deliver.  He did the same thing with Planetside, SWG and the same thing with MxO.  SOE made those games fail, not the players.

     

    Now all their games are f2p with cash shops, and I'm not happy about that either.

     

    Make excuses for them all you want, they failed and Smedley won't ever own up to it and step down to get his rightful punishment of being fired by cannon into the sun.

  • HrimnirHrimnir Qeynos, COPosts: 1,597Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by Xssiv
    Originally posted by Daranar
    Originally posted by Iadien
    Originally posted by Xssiv

    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.

    ^^This exactly.  OP, do your homework.  SOE was not apart of those flops.  What SOE did do is EQ, EQ2, PS, PS2.   All incredibly successful games in their own right, and games still going on to this day.  Find me an MMO studio that has such successes as SOE's.   Most studios have one, maybe two hits and just as many flops as SOE.   Just remember, people don't hate on crap, they hate on the best.   No one hates the bench warmers for Washington Wizards, but plenty hate Lebron and Kobe.   

    I did do my homework and posted several links to substantiate my argument, the only counter has been one article from Nancy McIntyre which never mentions anything about LA pushing NGE on SOE.

    I on the other hand have referenced wikipedia, an SOE dev blog and an interview with Smedley where he accepts full responsibility for the CU and NGE without any mention of LA.     I was also playing SWG from launch through the NGE and played Vanguard at launch.  Even at launch, I had to use my SOE Station account to log into Vanguard yet many continue to say that SOE was not involved in any way. 

    Somehow none of my evidence counts but some random poster stating that  "Lucas was calling the shots" with zero proof  is what most people are choosing to believe.   Not much I can do about that but please don't tell me to do my homework. 

    Man, you seriously need to understand the difference between a developer and a publisher.  This is getting old.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vanguard:_Saga_of_Heroes

     

    Developer(s) Sony Online Entertainment
    (Formerly Sigil Games Online)
    Publisher(s) Sony Online Entertainment
    Vanguard: Saga of Heroes is a high fantasy-themed massively multiplayer online role-playing game (MMORPG) created by Sigil Games Online, and now developed and run by Sony Online Entertainment. Originally, the game was co-published by Sony Online Entertainment (SOE), and the company producing it, Sigil Games Online. The game was released on January 30, 2007, with an early access date of January 26, 2007 for pre-order customers. On May 15, 2007, it was announced in a press release that Sony Online Entertainment had completed a transaction to purchase key assets of Sigil Games Online, including all rights to Vanguard.
     
    I'm not entirely sure what about that statement is unclear?
     
     
    As far as NGE and lucasarts:
     
    There is no definitive "proof" of this because SOE has NDA's agreements with Lucasarts.  If you do the research with lucasarts though you would know that (at least prior to disney buying them) Lucasarts NEVER relinqueshed creative control of their IP to ANYBODY.  They were the ones who dictate everything about any star wars game, movie, comic, book, etc.  George Lucas was extremely vigorous with what he felt was "protecting" his IP.  When you bring that knowledge into the mix, both with interviews with smed, the focus groups that occurred before the NGE, etc, its a pretty safe conclusion to come to that Lucasarts was the driving force behind the NGE.

    "The surest way to corrupt a youth is to instruct him to hold in higher esteem those who think alike than those who think differently."

    - Friedrich Nietzsche

  • strangiato2112strangiato2112 Richmond, VAPosts: 1,538Member Common

    [mod edit]

     

    SWG: main problem: Lucas Arts

    Vanguard: wasn't a SoE developed game at release

     

     

    And i think SWG is a very good reason to think SoE can pull this off.  This won't be their first sandbox.

     

  • ZorgoZorgo Deepintheheartof, TXPosts: 2,226Member
    Originally posted by Xssiv
    Originally posted by rojo6934
    [mod edit]

    [mod edit]

     

     

    I don't think it his statement is any worse than this:

    "Considering that this thread is 20+ pages and not one person has been able to produce any evidence of LA forcing the NGE onto SOE, I think people need to stop citing this as fact."

    Especially, since you have been presented with evidence - you have simply rejected it. And as far as citing speculation as fact....well look who is calling the kettle black.

    You have looked at your evidence and concluded that SOE and Smed are the problem. Others have looked at evidence and concluded the blame is elsewhere.

    When you cite your speculation as fact then condemn others for doing the same.....well, get over it.

    You wondered why people believed Smed and the hype. They told you. You don't consider their opinion valid and cite your opinion as fact. Yes....this thread needs to burn.

    In the future, don't ask the question if you aren't willing to accept the answer.

  • BurntvetBurntvet Baltimore, MDPosts: 2,948Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by Doogiehowser

    Originally posted by Burntvet
    Originally posted by Doogiehowser
    Originally posted by Burntvet
    The thing with the MacIntyre statement was made well AFTER the NGE changes were done and all in place, and as part of the damage control that was going on at the time. Just because this particular time, it was an LA producer saying the same/similar thing as the SOE people had already said, does not mean that LA was wholly responsible for the decision (granted, she was a bit more candid about what the collective "they" wanted to do). All it means is that one of the co-publishers (LA), was saying the same/similar things to what the other co-publisher was and had said. Both Freeman and Rubenfeld speak to what was going on behind the curtain. (And it was even Freeman himself that came up with and pushed the terrible combat changes in the NGE, he said that, explicitly. No mention of LA saying "do this" or "do that" at all.)

    No it means that LA had full control over  their license and nothing changes in the game without them giving it a green light. That is why i gave example of Warhammer IP to show that companies don't let anyone just do whatever they desire with their IP's. To say it was just 'SOE's decision and completely their fault' is just absurd.

     

    I did not say it was solely SOE's fault for the decision. That was a joint decision between the two, because it had to be, contractually. What was SOE fault was the design, implementation, and coding. LA did none of that... they simply approved of changing the game into a more simplified, themepark experience in an attempt to get more customers, that SOE proposed. All the rest is on SOE, because they DID it.

    People who have an axe to grind with SOE have already made up their mind. It is a lynch mob mentality really and no amount of proof is going to change that. Even the statement given by Nancy has been shrugged off as nothing more than a 'damage control'. Even though she openly admits that 'we' LA studio took the decisions for making radical changes. Even word of the lead producer isn't good enough but we are somehow suppossed to believe some random posters on message board.

    I agree with others, mods need to burn down this topic because it was never made for having prudent and reasonable discussion and after 20 pages it is still the same.

     

    And the same is true for folks that defend SOE at all costs. It is obvious you have never dealt with "corporate culture" much, because there is very little "my way or the highway" mentality among corporate partners. One partner does not simply roll over the other when a mutually beneficial relationship exists and when both parties want it to continue (and LA licensed the Clone Wars crap MMO to SOE well after). People go along to get along, corporately speaking, to keep the gravy train rolling. The idea that LA would force SOE to do anything with SWG is laughable, twice as much something SOE wouldn't want to do. Anyway, it doesn't matter, it is long over, and people that want to excuse SOE's abuses in the past, will continue to do so no matter what anyone says.
  • XssivXssiv Haskell, NJPosts: 359Member
    Originally posted by Hrimnir
    Originally posted by Xssiv
    Originally posted by Daranar
    Originally posted by Iadien
    Originally posted by Xssiv

    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.

    ^^This exactly.  OP, do your homework.  SOE was not apart of those flops.  What SOE did do is EQ, EQ2, PS, PS2.   All incredibly successful games in their own right, and games still going on to this day.  Find me an MMO studio that has such successes as SOE's.   Most studios have one, maybe two hits and just as many flops as SOE.   Just remember, people don't hate on crap, they hate on the best.   No one hates the bench warmers for Washington Wizards, but plenty hate Lebron and Kobe.   

    I did do my homework and posted several links to substantiate my argument, the only counter has been one article from Nancy McIntyre which never mentions anything about LA pushing NGE on SOE.

    I on the other hand have referenced wikipedia, an SOE dev blog and an interview with Smedley where he accepts full responsibility for the CU and NGE without any mention of LA.     I was also playing SWG from launch through the NGE and played Vanguard at launch.  Even at launch, I had to use my SOE Station account to log into Vanguard yet many continue to say that SOE was not involved in any way. 

    Somehow none of my evidence counts but some random poster stating that  "Lucas was calling the shots" with zero proof  is what most people are choosing to believe.   Not much I can do about that but please don't tell me to do my homework. 

    Man, you seriously need to understand the difference between a developer and a publisher.  This is getting old.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vanguard:_Saga_of_Heroes

     

    Developer(s) Sony Online Entertainment
    (Formerly Sigil Games Online)
    Publisher(s) Sony Online Entertainment
    Vanguard: Saga of Heroes is a high fantasy-themed massively multiplayer online role-playing game (MMORPG) created by Sigil Games Online, and now developed and run by Sony Online Entertainment. Originally, the game was co-published by Sony Online Entertainment (SOE), and the company producing it, Sigil Games Online. The game was released on January 30, 2007, with an early access date of January 26, 2007 for pre-order customers. On May 15, 2007, it was announced in a press release that Sony Online Entertainment had completed a transaction to purchase key assets of Sigil Games Online, including all rights to Vanguard.
     
    I'm not entirely sure what about that statement is unclear?
     
     
    As far as NGE and lucasarts:
     
    There is no definitive "proof" of this because SOE has NDA's agreements with Lucasarts.  If you do the research with lucasarts though you would know that (at least prior to disney buying them) Lucasarts NEVER relinqueshed creative control of their IP to ANYBODY.  They were the ones who dictate everything about any star wars game, movie, comic, book, etc.  George Lucas was extremely vigorous with what he felt was "protecting" his IP.  When you bring that knowledge into the mix, both with interviews with smed, the focus groups that occurred before the NGE, etc, its a pretty safe conclusion to come to that Lucasarts was the driving force behind the NGE.

    Based on the lesson you have provided, SOE collects the money but has zero responsibility for the quality of the game.  

    Taking this lesson to the present time, you would say that EA had no affect on the development, launch or ongoing support of SWTOR?   Strange how they took the brunt of the hate when it didn't turn out they way people had hoped.

    To take it a step further, I guess we would also say that Lucas Arts controlled all aspects of development of SWTOR so both EA and Bioware were just following their specific direction.... got it, thanks!  

    Strange how no one blames LA for SWTOR, yet SWG is suddenly all their fault.  

  • BurntvetBurntvet Baltimore, MDPosts: 2,948Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by strangiato2112

    [mod edit]

     

    SWG: main problem: Lucas Arts

    Vanguard: wasn't a SoE developed game at release

     

     

    And i think SWG is a very good reason to think SoE can pull this off.  This won't be their first sandbox.

     

     

    That might be true if anyone of the key people that designed SWG were still there. The chief architect of the sandbox systems of SWG, Raph Koster, is long gone. Same with most of the other people that had any talent at SOE (which is why none of the games they released in the last 6+ years have been any good). The only people remaining at SOE from the SWG days are Smed and his cronies in management, and a few dead-enders that have no place else to go. And a bunch of new hires. Not much to inspire confidence, at all.
  • ZorgoZorgo Deepintheheartof, TXPosts: 2,226Member
    Originally posted by Burntvet
    Originally posted by Doogiehowser
    Originally posted by Burntvet
    Originally posted by Doogiehowser
    Originally posted by Burntvet
    The thing with the MacIntyre statement was made well AFTER the NGE changes were done and all in place, and as part of the damage control that was going on at the time. Just because this particular time, it was an LA producer saying the same/similar thing as the SOE people had already said, does not mean that LA was wholly responsible for the decision (granted, she was a bit more candid about what the collective "they" wanted to do). All it means is that one of the co-publishers (LA), was saying the same/similar things to what the other co-publisher was and had said. Both Freeman and Rubenfeld speak to what was going on behind the curtain. (And it was even Freeman himself that came up with and pushed the terrible combat changes in the NGE, he said that, explicitly. No mention of LA saying "do this" or "do that" at all.)

    No it means that LA had full control over  their license and nothing changes in the game without them giving it a green light. That is why i gave example of Warhammer IP to show that companies don't let anyone just do whatever they desire with their IP's. To say it was just 'SOE's decision and completely their fault' is just absurd.

     

    I did not say it was solely SOE's fault for the decision. That was a joint decision between the two, because it had to be, contractually. What was SOE fault was the design, implementation, and coding. LA did none of that... they simply approved of changing the game into a more simplified, themepark experience in an attempt to get more customers, that SOE proposed. All the rest is on SOE, because they DID it.

    People who have an axe to grind with SOE have already made up their mind. It is a lynch mob mentality really and no amount of proof is going to change that. Even the statement given by Nancy has been shrugged off as nothing more than a 'damage control'. Even though she openly admits that 'we' LA studio took the decisions for making radical changes. Even word of the lead producer isn't good enough but we are somehow suppossed to believe some random posters on message board.

    I agree with others, mods need to burn down this topic because it was never made for having prudent and reasonable discussion and after 20 pages it is still the same.

     

    And the same is true for folks that defend SOE at all costs. It is obvious you have never dealt with "corporate culture" much, because there is very little "my way or the highway" mentality among corporate partners. One partner does not simply roll over the other when a mutually beneficial relationship exists and when both parties want it to continue (and LA licensed the Clone Wars crap MMO to SOE well after). People go along to get along, corporately speaking, to keep the gravy train rolling. The idea that LA would force SOE to do anything with SWG is laughable, twice as much something SOE wouldn't want to do. Anyway, it doesn't matter, it is long over, and people that want to excuse SOE's abuses in the past, will continue to do so no matter what anyone says.

    And pray tell - which company has not exhibited the corporate culture you cite? 

    In my experience, from Turbine to Cryptic, from SOE to Blizzard, from Funcom to Mythic - everyone of them have acted as you state above. 

    If I didn't accept  corporate shinanigans - what game could I play?

    It is the companies job to sell the game. It is the consumers responsibility to buy wisely. And sometimes that means shaking hands with the devil - but being aware of it.

  • strangiato2112strangiato2112 Richmond, VAPosts: 1,538Member Common
    Originally posted by Murugan

    During the development of APW for Vanguard (AFTER SOE TOOK OVER) there were many developers working on the game, you can see their names referenced in the bosses there.  I talked to many of them on the test server.  Over the time I was SUBSCRIBED to the game along with many other people.

     

    Back when the game had more than one server.

     

    Back when the game had people paying for it every month.

     

    Way back then... they decided to shuffle the development team to EQ2 and other titles

    You are 100% wrong with your timeline.

    SoE pulled development *because* no one was playing it.  SoE stopping development was the effect of VG being dead, not the cause.  In fact, it was pretty much dead when SoE acquired it.  They worked on it in hopes people would come back.  they didnt.

     

    Yeah, maybe they had 10k subs when they stopped developing it and that number dropped to 5k.  but even SWG had 50k subs.

  • XssivXssiv Haskell, NJPosts: 359Member
    Originally posted by Zorgo
    Originally posted by Xssiv
    Originally posted by rojo6934
    OP, everyone here is giving you the same answers with different words over and over.... Beg the moderators to burn this thread.... it makes you look bad

    I think it looks bad when people have to resort to personal attacks and condescending remarks to get their points across.  

     

     

    I don't think it his statement is any worse than this:

    "Considering that this thread is 20+ pages and not one person has been able to produce any evidence of LA forcing the NGE onto SOE, I think people need to stop citing this as fact."

    Especially, since you have been presented with evidence - you have simply rejected it. And as far as citing speculation as fact....well look who is calling the kettle black.

    You have looked at your evidence and concluded that SOE and Smed are the problem. Others have looked at evidence and concluded the blame is elsewhere.

    When you cite your speculation as fact then condemn others for doing the same.....well, get over it.

    You wondered why people believed Smed and the hype. They told you. You don't consider their opinion valid and cite your opinion as fact. Yes....this thread needs to burn.

    In the future, don't ask the question if you aren't willing to accept the answer.

    Smed has concluded that SOE and Smed were the problem when it came to the NGE.

     

    http://www.edge-online.com/news/star-wars-galaxies-changes-complete-and-utter-fail-says-soe-president/

     

    The guy accepts full responsibility and apologizes.   I honestly don't know how this can be misconstrued

  • strangiato2112strangiato2112 Richmond, VAPosts: 1,538Member Common
    Originally posted by Xssiv

    Strange how no one blames LA for SWTOR, yet SWG is suddenly all their fault.  

    For one, LA wasnt the publisher for SWtOR so they couldnt force EA to release it early.

    And EA made a WoW-like game, which is what LA wanted the NGE to do to SWG

    It may not be EA's fault that SWtOR is a themepark, but its their fault its a bad themepark.

  • severiusseverius sacramento, CAPosts: 1,514Member Common
    Originally posted by teddyboy420
    Originally posted by severius
    Originally posted by Doogiehowser
    Originally posted by Xssiv

    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.

     

    No.

    Maybe McIntyre also stated it but I am referring directly to Smedley's interview with Gamespot right after the NGE went live:

    "Gamespot: What's the one lesson from your two years of seeing Star Wars Galaxies being played that you wish you knew sooner?

    John Smedley: That straight sandbox games dont work.  And that we needed to focus much more on the Star Wars experience.  I think in the past, what we probably made was the Uncle Owen experience as opposed to the Luke experience.  We needed to deliver more of the Star Wars heroic and epic feeling to the game.  I think we missed there.  That's whatI think we really brought to the game."

    Would love to share with you the forum posts from those days back on forums.station.sony.com but they archived and locked that crap down long ago.  

    Vanguard, I actually had a bit more insight as did a few hundred other gamers with some of what was going on.  You see we were actually playing the game for oh, about a year or so under Microsoft, well if you would call it a game and a good couple months under Sigil.  Will say that the game that Sigil brought back into beta (truncated as it was) was 1000x better than what had been floundering along.  It was a personal loan from SOE/John Smedley to Brad McQuaid to get the game from Microsoft, Microsoft had dumped millions into the game under the impression that the man behind Everquest actually knew something about project management.  They probably should have pulled the plug after some 20 mil but Microsoft has rarely moved quickly on anything.  

    Most of the testers became quite concerned, we had all been through the SOE hell and in response Smedley himself came into the forums stressing how they were only backing, not taking control over the game.  What proof do I have?  None.  I don't steal from companies.  Anyone else that recalls the transition from Microsoft to sigil would be able to comment on it, there were 40 or 50 of us that were active at the time.  Oh, and anyone that played Pirates of the Burning Sea before SOE's involvement would be able to corroborate the similarities between the two situations.

    I don't blame SOE for the condition of the game, that is McQuaid, completely.  I blame SOE for releasing a shite game, knowing it was shite and telling everyone that it was them that was the problem. And I put the onus of that on Smedley because no good deed goes unpunished, and his buddy McQuaid did not, because of the hijinx that are well documented, deserve to be rescued.  It was pushed because they were selling the name and the lie, and Smedley had to cover the loan he had underwritten.  

    Yes, I know it is foolish and naive to ever think that a company would give a crap about its customers.  Especially when their customers act like abused girl friends that convince themselves they deserve the beating they took.

    You can see quite clearly how SOE has treated folks.  and if you think they should be rewarded, then go ahead give them your money and we will watch you vent and rage, and we'll tell you that we told you so and you will rant and rage at us then, at the end of the day, when Smed says he has another pile of shi errr another shiny new toy we can go through this experience again.  It was fun watching MMORPG.COM closing threads and erasing them from existence during the NGE era, and reading them saying no we didn't.  You know back then there were conspiracy theories that SOE had paid MMORPG.COM a crap ton of money so they could have moderation powers over the SWG forums here.  those were the days.   :)

    image

    image
  • MuruganMurugan D, COPosts: 1,494Member
    Originally posted by strangiato2112
    Originally posted by Murugan

    During the development of APW for Vanguard (AFTER SOE TOOK OVER) there were many developers working on the game, you can see their names referenced in the bosses there.  I talked to many of them on the test server.  Over the time I was SUBSCRIBED to the game along with many other people.

     

    Back when the game had more than one server.

     

    Back when the game had people paying for it every month.

     

    Way back then... they decided to shuffle the development team to EQ2 and other titles

    You are 100% wrong with your timeline.

    SoE pulled development *because* no one was playing it.  SoE stopping development was the effect of VG being dead, not the cause.  In fact, it was pretty much dead when SoE acquired it.  They worked on it in hopes people would come back.  they didnt.

     

    Yeah, maybe they had 10k subs when they stopped developing it and that number dropped to 5k.  but even SWG had 50k subs.

    When Final Fantasy XIV failed and its subscriber numbers tanked (despite still being under the free trial) that company invested hundreds of millions of dollars into fixing the MMO, and now they are relaunching it to a largely positive reaction from fans.

     

    What is SOE's excuse for not fixing their MMO's that had drops in sub #'s?  They don't have the same pride in their products?  That doesn't inspire confidence in them as publishers.

  • ZorgoZorgo Deepintheheartof, TXPosts: 2,226Member
    Originally posted by Xssiv
    Originally posted by Zorgo
    Originally posted by Xssiv
    Originally posted by rojo6934
    [mod edit]

    [mod edit]

     

     

    I don't think it his statement is any worse than this:

    "Considering that this thread is 20+ pages and not one person has been able to produce any evidence of LA forcing the NGE onto SOE, I think people need to stop citing this as fact."

    Especially, since you have been presented with evidence - you have simply rejected it. And as far as citing speculation as fact....well look who is calling the kettle black.

    You have looked at your evidence and concluded that SOE and Smed are the problem. Others have looked at evidence and concluded the blame is elsewhere.

    When you cite your speculation as fact then condemn others for doing the same.....well, get over it.

    You wondered why people believed Smed and the hype. They told you. You don't consider their opinion valid and cite your opinion as fact. Yes....this thread needs to burn.

    In the future, don't ask the question if you aren't willing to accept the answer.

    Smed has concluded that SOE and Smed were the problem when it came to the NGE.

     

    http://www.edge-online.com/news/star-wars-galaxies-changes-complete-and-utter-fail-says-soe-president/

     

    The guy accepts full responsibility and apologizes.   I honestly don't know how this can be misconstrued

    Then why do some think Oliver North is a hero? He accepted full responsibility and apologized for Iran/Contra. Apparently you have never heard of a 'fall guy'. And there is other evidence, also presented here, that this is exactly what smed did. 

    I don't know the answer. I do know however that people have looked at the same facts and reached different conclusions. It is not the facts in question, it is your conclusion.

Sign In or Register to comment.