I've never fallen for the hype. I use my own eyes and experience to judge. EQN could be great or a failure, until either is shown to me, I will be hopeful that it is where I will spend too much time in the future.
While SWG and Vanguard didn't do so well, they were also going up against WoW in one way or another. I think that had a lot to do with any rushing or game changes to try and battle WoW's quick rise to the top. No matter what they did, I feel they were pretty doomed.
Pressure to compete with the best makes for bad/quick decisions and the results aren't usually great. Blame can be put on one person, company, or whatever, but it happened (a long while ago) and there is nothing stopping the same people/company from doing better this time around. Once in a while, people do learn, it can happen...
Again, it is a wait and see situation, but if you have no faith or some hatred towards SOE or those that work there, why bother wasting your time/energy on them? Move on and enjoy something you find more entertaining, unless pointless arguments without any winners is the best you have going currently.
The guy accepts full responsibility and apologizes. I honestly don't know how this can be misconstrued
When you're the top dog in one of the biggest online gaming companies, you don't pass the buck if you're at fault even a little. People will always hold it against you. What he did was honorable, but also political. What better way to show SOE fans that SOE is moving in the right direction than to take responsibility for past mistakes involving your company, regardless of how little you were actually at fault.
According to statements from those in charge at Lucas Arts, SOE and Smedley were hardly at fault. If you can't see this was meant to exonerate him, not condemn him, you aren't as intelligent as you think.
The guy accepts full responsibility and apologizes. I honestly don't know how this can be misconstrued
When you're the top dog in one of the biggest online gaming companies, you don't pass the buck if you're at fault even a little. People will always hold it against you. What he did was honorable, but also political. What better way to show SOE fans that SOE is moving in the right direction than to take responsibility for past mistakes involving your company, regardless of how little you were actually at fault.
According to statements from those in charge at Lucas Arts, SOE and Smedley were hardly at fault. If you can't see this was meant to exonerate him, not condemn him, you aren't as intelligent as you think.
Are people ignorant of fall guys? It sure seems that way.
Honestly with the history behind the development of Vanguard I'm surprised that its still around. When SOE picked it up, they probably thought it was closer to being ready than it was, and they werent prepared to invest more than they did. Bad business move? Yes, evil and coniving? nope.
SWG? that issue is so muddled, who can really say who had the final call. Of course it was gonna be Smed who took the blame, he wants to keep his job. Thats his job, to take the blame when things go bad.
Honestly, Ive never liked a SOE game, but I hope EQnext does well.
The guy accepts full responsibility and apologizes. I honestly don't know how this can be misconstrued
When you're the top dog in one of the biggest online gaming companies, you don't pass the buck if you're at fault even a little. People will always hold it against you. What he did was honorable, but also political. What better way to show SOE fans that SOE is moving in the right direction than to take responsibility for past mistakes involving your company, regardless of how little you were actually at fault.
According to statements from those in charge at Lucas Arts, SOE and Smedley were hardly at fault. If you can't see this was meant to exonerate him, not condemn him, you aren't as intelligent as you think.
Are people ignorant of fall guys? It sure seems that way.
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?
Your wearing some awful big rose glasses there.
NGE happened because SWG wasn't a success to SOE and wasn't doing well in there eyes (the only ones that really matter in the end). Yea it was the wrong cure to the issue but the issue still existed.
Vanguard was saved by SOE not killed. If SOE hadn't stepped forward it would have died. To this day I don't really understand why they did it since they already had 2 fantasy MMO's at the time. They could have done nothing and watched it die. I was in Vanguard closed beta and remember the events of the month up to launch very well. Yea SOE should have stepped up and put release on hold once they saw the mess that it was but that was more about what Sigil told SOE about the game vs where it really was. Sigil was to blame for Vanguard not SOE and people should be happy Sony keep it going as long as they did instead of just cutting their loses like other game publishers do.
WoW all this about a game that started 10 years ago when there was a major change in the way mmos were going. I played SWG from beta up till they closed and although original swg was a great idea and huge fun it wasn't perfect. After they changed it it was a different game but still a great game. That was all thanks to SOE even if LA did cause the changes to SWG ( which i am sure it was from reading the press back in the day ) They kept SWG going for all them years when they had EQ and EQ2 both suffering from the wow effect.
We are again in a time of change like we were in 04 when wow changed it all but the big question is will it be EQN that sets the way for the next 10 years. I hope so.
You assume that Sony would be stupid enough to invest in and develop a game with no say so whatsoever? You're the one sounding foolish my friend. What company in their right mind would let the IP holder dictate the business decisions when they are only there for IP integrity and no actual financial investment or obligation other than to get their royalties? SOE would have gone out of business a long time ago if they actually did things the way you paint them.
SOE has some say depending on how the negotiations ended up and how the legal documents are written. The thing is that the Star Wars IP is an extremely hard IP to deal with, and the license needs to be renewed. Upsetting or refusing to compromise (or even completely bend to) a licensor would be a disaster.)
SOE had an extremely small amount of input when it came to NGE.
What company would let a licensor do this? A company that made a game completely based on that specific IP. If the NFL told EA's Madden team that they wanted something, EA would jump through hoops to appease them and do as they wish, because a football game without the NFL license would be trash and wouldn't sell.
In SOE SWG case, LA got what LA wanted. If they had denied LA their demands, LA would have not renewed the license and then the entire game would have had to be recreated from the ground up to not use any Star Wars IP, or shut it down when the license expired.
When it comes to some games, licenses may not be a big deal. For example, not getting licensed to use real world gun models in your game (M4, M16, M240b) isn't a huge deal because you can just change the name and tweak the looks a tiny bit (as many games often do). However, when you game is completely based on an IP, the licensor owns you. That's why so many companies try to create original IPs and stick to stuff they own or create.
Take some classes on game design. They cover all this in the freshmen year.
Wasting your breath on that one, Gallus.
He might as well be claiming the universe is geocentric. Thankfully, there are those in the universe who know and acknowledge that was proven false many centuries ago - similar with this case. Many just don't have the education and/or the experience to interpret data correctly.
The internet is an amazing platform for some people to showcase their deficiencies as a person.
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?
Man this Smed guy sounds like some sort of super villain! Too bad everything you said was inaccurate....
Playing: Smite, Marvel Heroes Played: Nexus:Kingdom of the Winds, Everquest, DAoC, Everquest 2, WoW, Matrix Online, Vangaurd, SWG, DDO, EVE, Fallen Earth, LoTRo, CoX, Champions Online, WAR, Darkfall, Mortal Online, Guild Wars, Rift, Tera, Aion, AoC, Gods and Heroes, DCUO, FF14, TSW, SWTOR, GW2, Wildstar, ESO, ArcheAge Waiting On: Nothing. Mmorpg's are dead.
I would say people who enjoyed EverQuest hope to recapture that kind of experience. Oddly enough before November of 2004... EQ was most likely the largest subscription MMO in the western market. I make the distinction "western" because I believe that likely L1 or another game was much larger in Asia... those games didn't really take off in the west and vice versa with EQ.
So that is a reason why a lot of people look at a game like EQN.
I don't really want to talk about SWG at all because... its been done already and it really has nothing to do with a title in the EverQuest franchise.
As to Vanguard... I really don't know why people ever bring that game up as being an SOE problem. Vanguard was a Microsoft game. I originally signed up and started to beta test the game as a Microsoft title. One particular day Microsoft dumped what was a pile of crap .. that not only was a pile of crap but had managed to spend what was quoted at the time to be 60 Million dollars of Microsofts money to be that shiney pile of crap.
The game was essentially dead at that point. SOE if anything picked up the title as a favor to Brad since he obviously was a large part of EQ. In that situation you are talking about a company paying production costs for a project they had never budgeted for... you can't really expect them to suddenly be able to pull a full budget out of their dark side to finish the game.
Of course SOE only gave them so much time to "finish" the game. If they had fully funded Vanguard enough to fix it and launch it right.. it would have been the most expensive MMO ever made. It most likely at launch was one of the most expensive simply due to the massive amount of money wasted before SOE ever got involved.
So why on earth would I ever put SOE to blame for Vanguard? It certainly would have been better for SOE to simply let the game vanish. Considering the amount of money already spent for the state the game was in at that time (prior to any development under SOE) ... no other company would have financed it. Unless they were trying to drop down a corporate tax bracket or two..
*short version* Never believe hype for any game. You are only going to be let down in the long run with MMO's. Even if the game you test or buy is your dream game.. its going to change into something you never would have paid for. That happens with all MMO's and that's why their numbers tend to suddenly drop off at one point or another. They just don't call the changes "NGE".
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.
Off the top of my head, I would say MGM and Cheyenne Mountain studios (or whatever the name of those scam artists was), who had the license to do a Stargate MMO. After a whole lot of financial shenanigans and investor lawsuits and the like, MGM revoked the license to Stargate. Plus Mircosoft originally pulling out of Vanguard (where they pulled funding instead of pulling an IP, but MS was the "major partner in that one). It is a rare thing for that to happen, but it does occasionally.
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.
Unfortunately, you are wrong sir.
The SWG NGE was a decision made my management at SOE Austin to attempt to relaunch the game. This had nothing to do with Lucas or Lucas Arts
Unfortunately for you, repeating wishful thinking over and over does not, in any way, make it true.
Having sat for a couple of hours and listened to Julio Torres speak extensively on the matter, I can say with confidence that it is you who are incorrect--or, if you prefer, wrong. Repeating over and over that it was SOE Austin won't make you right.
But why should you believe me? I'm just some gamer. Here, directly quoted, are Torres' own words as they appeared on the SWG boards announcing the NGE on November 2, 2005:
Greetings Star Wars Galaxies Players, Fans, and Other Denizens of the Galaxy:
My name is Julio Torres and I am the Producer on Star Wars Galaxies for LucasArts. We wanted you, the great members of the Galaxies community, to be the first to hear some exciting news about the current and future plans for Star Wars Galaxies!
Over the past year we have been working hard to respond to feedback we have gotten from players, fans, focus groups, and other research. This feedback has ultimately centered on one key area: the game does not feel like a heroic Star Wars experience. Currently, the early game has a steep learning curve and there is no clearly defined path of advancement or adventure. Many of our fans who bought the game did not see enough Star Wars style action early-on and ultimately left our world. It is our goal to change this and improve the experience for all players.
We are introducing a series of game enhancements to Star Wars Galaxies this month that include both significant enhancements to the live game as well as a completely redesigned experience for new players. The primary areas of focus include combat and profession and character development. The combat depicted in the Star Wars films, fiction, and canon that we have all come to know and love is fast-paced, action-packed, and visually intense. In order to stay true to the Star Wars fiction as well as to make the combat system more engaging, we have shifted the turn-based paradigm towards a much more engaging fast-action combat system where you control every move! After receiving feedback from members of the community, conducting extensive focus tests, and evaluating the combat systems of other games in the genre, we are confident this new fast-action combat truly delivers what players, fans, and gamers have come to expect from a Star Wars experience.
As mentioned earlier, combat is not the only area where we decided to focus our improvement efforts. We have also improved and brought more clarity to the profession and character development system.
Changing a live game is never easy. We realize that players do not like to have their experience altered. These enhancements will take some getting used to and for that reason we lined-up some incentives for the current players to enjoy as our thanks for your loyalty to our game.
We value our community and want you to stay with us. Our goal is to continuously improve the Star Wars experience, the one we all know and love from the films and fiction; action-packed, story-driven, Star Wars fun. With these features and enhancements we are setting the stage for incredible things to come for Galaxies with more announcements happening in the coming months.
I'd like to thank you all for your continued support of Star Wars Galaxies and for making it one of the premier gaming experiences online today.
May The Force Be With You,
Julio Torres, Producer - LucasArts
Huh. That's interesting. What is that title after his name? It seems to be "Producer, LucasArts."
Yes, OP, that is correct: Julio Torres, the man generally villified by gamers and gaming journalists alike as having spearheaded the perfect example of what not to ever do with a video game was indeed an employee of LucasArts and, according to what he stated repeatedly to those of us who met him in person, face-to-face, was in fact the liaison between SOE and LucasArts.
Now, I am not saying that SOE and Smedley were completely innocent or ignorant of the overwhelming lunacy that was the NGE, but Torres has frequently stood up and said it was his idea. And Torres was a LucasArts employee; he was never an SOE employee--his actions or inactions reflect on Lucas and LucasArts, not on SOE (Austin or otherwise) and/or Smedley.
"You are obviously confusing a mature rating with actual maturity." -Asherman
Maybe MMO is not your genre, go play Modern Warfare...or something you can be all twitchy...and rank up all night. This is seriously getting tired. -Ranyr
Every large company has had successes and failures. MMO producers are no different. With that said, keep in mind SoE has the most experience..by a considerable margin. That's why you should care. Pretty simple.
If Ford promised to release an amazing new affordable Mustang line which promised to change the way people drive, you'd be interested wouldn't you? Even if you've had problems with Ford and it's cars in the past, you'd still want to know more info. Why? Because Ford was the first successful mass producer of cars. The same is true with SoE and MMORPGs.
These issues may have already been addressed, but in case they haven't:
LucasArts ruined SWG, not SOE. LucasArts was unhappy that the game had become niche and not an across the board success. They told SOE to make it so it was easier to become a Jedi, and gutted the game. This is not Smedley OR SOE's fault. Your laying of the blame at his feet is misguided at best, and highly biased at worst.
SOE bought Vanguard with the sole intent of letting it wither on the vine so that they would not have competition for EQ2 (in hindsight, perhaps they should have bought out WoW instead). They never intended to give it resources required to upkeep the game or make it successful. It was as much if a surprise to them as it was the fans that the game was actually pretty good for its time. After a cult following for several years, they have since assigned a team to start making the game better. Again, your assessment that this is Smedley's fault is wrong. This came from someone high above him, I assure you. The games he actually put effort into (EQ, EQ2, etc.), and wasn't cuckolded by an outside entity, were all critical successes and are still up and running with a healthy community.
So your assessment is not only completely wrong, it reeks of other game fanboi-ism.
I think the OP is correct in at least questioning the hype surrounding EQN given SOE track record. They Failed to keep EQ up to date in terms of graphics, engine and UI. If they did that, EQ will still be a major player in the genre. EQII could also do with some updates, plus I didn't like the way EQII was wowerfied. The FTP models of both of the EQ games is a little messy to say the least. Instead tead of updating the old zones and graphics continually they seem to prefer to pump out expansions that do little to attract new players since they are purely for existing players. Plus some of these expansions have been poor.
Vanguard has been in a sorry state for years. Irrespective of who was originally to blame, SOE seemed content to just make it barely playable and let it lie. VG could of been an amazing game, there was a classic somewhere amongst the bugs and poor iterations, but again SOE refused to lift a finger until it went f2p, which by that time VG was already looking and feeling dated.
I havent played the Matrix online, Pirates of the Burning Sea or planetside 1, or SWG so can't comment on these games. I did enjoy Planetside 2 until the hacker began to annoy me, but it's par for the course with shooters.
The guy accepts full responsibility and apologizes. I honestly don't know how this can be misconstrued
When you're the top dog in one of the biggest online gaming companies, you don't pass the buck if you're at fault even a little. People will always hold it against you. What he did was honorable, but also political. What better way to show SOE fans that SOE is moving in the right direction than to take responsibility for past mistakes involving your company, regardless of how little you were actually at fault.
According to statements from those in charge at Lucas Arts, SOE and Smedley were hardly at fault. If you can't see this was meant to exonerate him, not condemn him, you aren't as intelligent as you think.
Are people ignorant of fall guys? It sure seems that way.
It does indeed.
Smedley retained his position to this day, so not really a fall guy.
The guy accepts full responsibility and apologizes. I honestly don't know how this can be misconstrued
When you're the top dog in one of the biggest online gaming companies, you don't pass the buck if you're at fault even a little. People will always hold it against you. What he did was honorable, but also political. What better way to show SOE fans that SOE is moving in the right direction than to take responsibility for past mistakes involving your company, regardless of how little you were actually at fault.
According to statements from those in charge at Lucas Arts, SOE and Smedley were hardly at fault. If you can't see this was meant to exonerate him, not condemn him, you aren't as intelligent as you think.
Are people ignorant of fall guys? It sure seems that way.
It does indeed.
Smedley retained his position to this day, so not really a fall guy.
Sometimes when one plays the part of the fall guy to save the relationship of two partnering companies, they get looked at as a team player. Team Players get to keep their jobs.
Because one day, they might need that fall guy again
There are 3 types of people in the world. 1.) Those who make things happen 2.) Those who watch things happen 3.) And those who wonder "What the %#*& just happened?!"
Originally posted by Murugan Originally posted by DullahanOriginally posted by IadienOriginally posted by DullahanOriginally posted by XssivSmed 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
When you're the top dog in one of the biggest online gaming companies, you don't pass the buck if you're at fault even a little. People will always hold it against you. What he did was honorable, but also political. What better way to show SOE fans that SOE is moving in the right direction than to take responsibility for past mistakes involving your company, regardless of how little you were actually at fault.According to statements from those in charge at Lucas Arts, SOE and Smedley were hardly at fault. If you can't see this was meant to exonerate him, not condemn him, you aren't as intelligent as you think.Are people ignorant of fall guys? It sure seems that way.It does indeed.Smedley retained his position to this day, so not really a fall guy.
Not only that, fall guys aren't usually on board with being blamed for everything. When the NGE happened, there may have been people who were running the companies who disagreed (i.e. their opinions didn't matter), but all the people who were heading up SOE or LA were all in on the change. They were all sold on the idea that changing the game would keep it from sinking further than it already had.
It doesn't matter if Lucas Arts was pushing for a change, because SOE was more than happy to do it. It doesn't matter if Lucas Arts was pushing for a change, because SOE implemented the change.
The only upside is that it's possible that SOE and Smedley have learned some ways to not do things. Maybe.
I can not remember winning or losing a single debate on the internet.
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.
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.
Here's an idea, stop putting words into my mouth and actually try to read and understand what i said.
Lucasarts does not relinquesh CREATIVE CONTROL. They does not mean they control every aspect of development.
I'll give you an example of what creative control means. Lets say lucasarts gets together with Ubisoft to make a jedi game. Lucasarts licenses them to work with the Star Wars IP. During the development of said game, Ubisoft makes the decision to put into the game a sub race of 8 foot tall ewoks, and call them uberwoks. Lucasarts can step in and say, "Hey Ubisoft, take that out of the game, its not consistent with the star wars universe and we don't want it to potentially taint our Intellectual Property". Because they retained the creative rights to the game, if Ubisoft doesnt do this, they can legally make ubisoft cease production of the game.
As for your frankly ridiculous point regarding SWTOR, we dont blame Lucasarts because the game didnt suck due to a conflict of direction/style of game. The game sucked because it was a buggy piece of crap, and a glorified single player RPG. Given that the NGE was to change SWG to be more like what SW:TOR eventually became, stylistically, its not exactly hard to see why Lucasarts wouldnt have had a problem with the direction of the development of SW:TOR.
"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."
I say we just leave it with 'They were both at fault for what was done to SWG'
LA is at fault for demanding a drastic 180* style change for the game...
And
SOE is at fault for making this change as subtle as a hand grenade....
There are 3 types of people in the world. 1.) Those who make things happen 2.) Those who watch things happen 3.) And those who wonder "What the %#*& just happened?!"
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?
Regardless of the proper alignment in facts there, I totally agree! I actually have not suffered this 'amnesia', like so many others. I love and prefer sandbox and open world games, but if there is anything I have no doubt about, it's that SoE needs to stop making MMOs. Period.
Regardless of the proper alignment in facts there, I totally agree! I actually have not suffered this 'amnesia', like so many others. I love and prefer sandbox and open world games, but if there is anything I have no doubt about, it's that SoE needs to stop making MMOs. Period.
??? Why??
I see two possibilities for this statement:
You would like SOE to concentrate on some other kind of game
You would like to see them go out of business thus putting 1,000+ people out of a job and causing a loss in overall capital to be invested in MMOs
Comments
Amazed this isn't locked yet, but...
I've never fallen for the hype. I use my own eyes and experience to judge. EQN could be great or a failure, until either is shown to me, I will be hopeful that it is where I will spend too much time in the future.
While SWG and Vanguard didn't do so well, they were also going up against WoW in one way or another. I think that had a lot to do with any rushing or game changes to try and battle WoW's quick rise to the top. No matter what they did, I feel they were pretty doomed.
Pressure to compete with the best makes for bad/quick decisions and the results aren't usually great. Blame can be put on one person, company, or whatever, but it happened (a long while ago) and there is nothing stopping the same people/company from doing better this time around. Once in a while, people do learn, it can happen...
Again, it is a wait and see situation, but if you have no faith or some hatred towards SOE or those that work there, why bother wasting your time/energy on them? Move on and enjoy something you find more entertaining, unless pointless arguments without any winners is the best you have going currently.
When you're the top dog in one of the biggest online gaming companies, you don't pass the buck if you're at fault even a little. People will always hold it against you. What he did was honorable, but also political. What better way to show SOE fans that SOE is moving in the right direction than to take responsibility for past mistakes involving your company, regardless of how little you were actually at fault.
According to statements from those in charge at Lucas Arts, SOE and Smedley were hardly at fault. If you can't see this was meant to exonerate him, not condemn him, you aren't as intelligent as you think.
Are people ignorant of fall guys? It sure seems that way.
Honestly with the history behind the development of Vanguard I'm surprised that its still around. When SOE picked it up, they probably thought it was closer to being ready than it was, and they werent prepared to invest more than they did. Bad business move? Yes, evil and coniving? nope.
SWG? that issue is so muddled, who can really say who had the final call. Of course it was gonna be Smed who took the blame, he wants to keep his job. Thats his job, to take the blame when things go bad.
Honestly, Ive never liked a SOE game, but I hope EQnext does well.
It does indeed.
Your wearing some awful big rose glasses there.
NGE happened because SWG wasn't a success to SOE and wasn't doing well in there eyes (the only ones that really matter in the end). Yea it was the wrong cure to the issue but the issue still existed.
Vanguard was saved by SOE not killed. If SOE hadn't stepped forward it would have died. To this day I don't really understand why they did it since they already had 2 fantasy MMO's at the time. They could have done nothing and watched it die. I was in Vanguard closed beta and remember the events of the month up to launch very well. Yea SOE should have stepped up and put release on hold once they saw the mess that it was but that was more about what Sigil told SOE about the game vs where it really was. Sigil was to blame for Vanguard not SOE and people should be happy Sony keep it going as long as they did instead of just cutting their loses like other game publishers do.
WoW all this about a game that started 10 years ago when there was a major change in the way mmos were going. I played SWG from beta up till they closed and although original swg was a great idea and huge fun it wasn't perfect. After they changed it it was a different game but still a great game. That was all thanks to SOE even if LA did cause the changes to SWG ( which i am sure it was from reading the press back in the day ) They kept SWG going for all them years when they had EQ and EQ2 both suffering from the wow effect.
We are again in a time of change like we were in 04 when wow changed it all but the big question is will it be EQN that sets the way for the next 10 years. I hope so.
Wasting your breath on that one, Gallus.
He might as well be claiming the universe is geocentric. Thankfully, there are those in the universe who know and acknowledge that was proven false many centuries ago - similar with this case. Many just don't have the education and/or the experience to interpret data correctly.
The internet is an amazing platform for some people to showcase their deficiencies as a person.
Regards,
Sarethor
Man this Smed guy sounds like some sort of super villain! Too bad everything you said was inaccurate....Playing: Smite, Marvel Heroes
Played: Nexus:Kingdom of the Winds, Everquest, DAoC, Everquest 2, WoW, Matrix Online, Vangaurd, SWG, DDO, EVE, Fallen Earth, LoTRo, CoX, Champions Online, WAR, Darkfall, Mortal Online, Guild Wars, Rift, Tera, Aion, AoC, Gods and Heroes, DCUO, FF14, TSW, SWTOR, GW2, Wildstar, ESO, ArcheAge
Waiting On: Nothing. Mmorpg's are dead.
I would say people who enjoyed EverQuest hope to recapture that kind of experience. Oddly enough before November of 2004... EQ was most likely the largest subscription MMO in the western market. I make the distinction "western" because I believe that likely L1 or another game was much larger in Asia... those games didn't really take off in the west and vice versa with EQ.
So that is a reason why a lot of people look at a game like EQN.
I don't really want to talk about SWG at all because... its been done already and it really has nothing to do with a title in the EverQuest franchise.
As to Vanguard... I really don't know why people ever bring that game up as being an SOE problem. Vanguard was a Microsoft game. I originally signed up and started to beta test the game as a Microsoft title. One particular day Microsoft dumped what was a pile of crap .. that not only was a pile of crap but had managed to spend what was quoted at the time to be 60 Million dollars of Microsofts money to be that shiney pile of crap.
The game was essentially dead at that point. SOE if anything picked up the title as a favor to Brad since he obviously was a large part of EQ. In that situation you are talking about a company paying production costs for a project they had never budgeted for... you can't really expect them to suddenly be able to pull a full budget out of their dark side to finish the game.
Of course SOE only gave them so much time to "finish" the game. If they had fully funded Vanguard enough to fix it and launch it right.. it would have been the most expensive MMO ever made. It most likely at launch was one of the most expensive simply due to the massive amount of money wasted before SOE ever got involved.
So why on earth would I ever put SOE to blame for Vanguard? It certainly would have been better for SOE to simply let the game vanish. Considering the amount of money already spent for the state the game was in at that time (prior to any development under SOE) ... no other company would have financed it. Unless they were trying to drop down a corporate tax bracket or two..
*short version* Never believe hype for any game. You are only going to be let down in the long run with MMO's. Even if the game you test or buy is your dream game.. its going to change into something you never would have paid for. That happens with all MMO's and that's why their numbers tend to suddenly drop off at one point or another. They just don't call the changes "NGE".
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.
Off the top of my head, I would say MGM and Cheyenne Mountain studios (or whatever the name of those scam artists was), who had the license to do a Stargate MMO. After a whole lot of financial shenanigans and investor lawsuits and the like, MGM revoked the license to Stargate. Plus Mircosoft originally pulling out of Vanguard (where they pulled funding instead of pulling an IP, but MS was the "major partner in that one). It is a rare thing for that to happen, but it does occasionally.Unfortunately for you, repeating wishful thinking over and over does not, in any way, make it true.
Having sat for a couple of hours and listened to Julio Torres speak extensively on the matter, I can say with confidence that it is you who are incorrect--or, if you prefer, wrong. Repeating over and over that it was SOE Austin won't make you right.
But why should you believe me? I'm just some gamer. Here, directly quoted, are Torres' own words as they appeared on the SWG boards announcing the NGE on November 2, 2005:
Greetings Star Wars Galaxies Players, Fans, and Other Denizens of the Galaxy:
My name is Julio Torres and I am the Producer on Star Wars Galaxies for LucasArts. We wanted you, the great members of the Galaxies community, to be the first to hear some exciting news about the current and future plans for Star Wars Galaxies!
Over the past year we have been working hard to respond to feedback we have gotten from players, fans, focus groups, and other research. This feedback has ultimately centered on one key area: the game does not feel like a heroic Star Wars experience. Currently, the early game has a steep learning curve and there is no clearly defined path of advancement or adventure. Many of our fans who bought the game did not see enough Star Wars style action early-on and ultimately left our world. It is our goal to change this and improve the experience for all players.
We are introducing a series of game enhancements to Star Wars Galaxies this month that include both significant enhancements to the live game as well as a completely redesigned experience for new players. The primary areas of focus include combat and profession and character development. The combat depicted in the Star Wars films, fiction, and canon that we have all come to know and love is fast-paced, action-packed, and visually intense. In order to stay true to the Star Wars fiction as well as to make the combat system more engaging, we have shifted the turn-based paradigm towards a much more engaging fast-action combat system where you control every move! After receiving feedback from members of the community, conducting extensive focus tests, and evaluating the combat systems of other games in the genre, we are confident this new fast-action combat truly delivers what players, fans, and gamers have come to expect from a Star Wars experience.
As mentioned earlier, combat is not the only area where we decided to focus our improvement efforts. We have also improved and brought more clarity to the profession and character development system.
Changing a live game is never easy. We realize that players do not like to have their experience altered. These enhancements will take some getting used to and for that reason we lined-up some incentives for the current players to enjoy as our thanks for your loyalty to our game.
We value our community and want you to stay with us. Our goal is to continuously improve the Star Wars experience, the one we all know and love from the films and fiction; action-packed, story-driven, Star Wars fun. With these features and enhancements we are setting the stage for incredible things to come for Galaxies with more announcements happening in the coming months.
I'd like to thank you all for your continued support of Star Wars Galaxies and for making it one of the premier gaming experiences online today.
May The Force Be With You,
Julio Torres, Producer - LucasArts
Huh. That's interesting. What is that title after his name? It seems to be "Producer, LucasArts."
Yes, OP, that is correct: Julio Torres, the man generally villified by gamers and gaming journalists alike as having spearheaded the perfect example of what not to ever do with a video game was indeed an employee of LucasArts and, according to what he stated repeatedly to those of us who met him in person, face-to-face, was in fact the liaison between SOE and LucasArts.
Now, I am not saying that SOE and Smedley were completely innocent or ignorant of the overwhelming lunacy that was the NGE, but Torres has frequently stood up and said it was his idea. And Torres was a LucasArts employee; he was never an SOE employee--his actions or inactions reflect on Lucas and LucasArts, not on SOE (Austin or otherwise) and/or Smedley.
Firebrand Art
"You are obviously confusing a mature rating with actual maturity." -Asherman
Maybe MMO is not your genre, go play Modern Warfare...or something you can be all twitchy...and rank up all night. This is seriously getting tired. -Ranyr
Every large company has had successes and failures. MMO producers are no different. With that said, keep in mind SoE has the most experience..by a considerable margin. That's why you should care. Pretty simple.
If Ford promised to release an amazing new affordable Mustang line which promised to change the way people drive, you'd be interested wouldn't you? Even if you've had problems with Ford and it's cars in the past, you'd still want to know more info. Why? Because Ford was the first successful mass producer of cars. The same is true with SoE and MMORPGs.
These issues may have already been addressed, but in case they haven't:
LucasArts ruined SWG, not SOE. LucasArts was unhappy that the game had become niche and not an across the board success. They told SOE to make it so it was easier to become a Jedi, and gutted the game. This is not Smedley OR SOE's fault. Your laying of the blame at his feet is misguided at best, and highly biased at worst.
SOE bought Vanguard with the sole intent of letting it wither on the vine so that they would not have competition for EQ2 (in hindsight, perhaps they should have bought out WoW instead). They never intended to give it resources required to upkeep the game or make it successful. It was as much if a surprise to them as it was the fans that the game was actually pretty good for its time. After a cult following for several years, they have since assigned a team to start making the game better. Again, your assessment that this is Smedley's fault is wrong. This came from someone high above him, I assure you. The games he actually put effort into (EQ, EQ2, etc.), and wasn't cuckolded by an outside entity, were all critical successes and are still up and running with a healthy community.
So your assessment is not only completely wrong, it reeks of other game fanboi-ism.
I think the OP is correct in at least questioning the hype surrounding EQN given SOE track record. They Failed to keep EQ up to date in terms of graphics, engine and UI. If they did that, EQ will still be a major player in the genre. EQII could also do with some updates, plus I didn't like the way EQII was wowerfied. The FTP models of both of the EQ games is a little messy to say the least. Instead tead of updating the old zones and graphics continually they seem to prefer to pump out expansions that do little to attract new players since they are purely for existing players. Plus some of these expansions have been poor.
Vanguard has been in a sorry state for years. Irrespective of who was originally to blame, SOE seemed content to just make it barely playable and let it lie. VG could of been an amazing game, there was a classic somewhere amongst the bugs and poor iterations, but again SOE refused to lift a finger until it went f2p, which by that time VG was already looking and feeling dated.
I havent played the Matrix online, Pirates of the Burning Sea or planetside 1, or SWG so can't comment on these games. I did enjoy Planetside 2 until the hacker began to annoy me, but it's par for the course with shooters.
I don't trust Smed because of some of his antics when he was just doing EQ.
But hey, I'm not ignoring any game he gets his mitts into, after all, despite his best efforts it may still be a fun game.
Then again, I'm not going to be holding my breath or anything.
Of course, I've seen a lot of promising games fail to deliver, or even go backwards because of a few stupid choices.
Of course, that's just my opinion, you have your own.
Lost my mind, now trying to lose yours...
Smedley retained his position to this day, so not really a fall guy.
http://xivpads.com/?1595680
http://guildwork.com/users/murugan
Sometimes when one plays the part of the fall guy to save the relationship of two partnering companies, they get looked at as a team player. Team Players get to keep their jobs.
Because one day, they might need that fall guy again
There are 3 types of people in the world.
1.) Those who make things happen
2.) Those who watch things happen
3.) And those who wonder "What the %#*& just happened?!"
Are people ignorant of fall guys? It sure seems that way.
It does indeed.
Smedley retained his position to this day, so not really a fall guy.
Not only that, fall guys aren't usually on board with being blamed for everything. When the NGE happened, there may have been people who were running the companies who disagreed (i.e. their opinions didn't matter), but all the people who were heading up SOE or LA were all in on the change. They were all sold on the idea that changing the game would keep it from sinking further than it already had.
It doesn't matter if Lucas Arts was pushing for a change, because SOE was more than happy to do it. It doesn't matter if Lucas Arts was pushing for a change, because SOE implemented the change.
The only upside is that it's possible that SOE and Smedley have learned some ways to not do things. Maybe.
I can not remember winning or losing a single debate on the internet.
Here's an idea, stop putting words into my mouth and actually try to read and understand what i said.
Lucasarts does not relinquesh CREATIVE CONTROL. They does not mean they control every aspect of development.
I'll give you an example of what creative control means. Lets say lucasarts gets together with Ubisoft to make a jedi game. Lucasarts licenses them to work with the Star Wars IP. During the development of said game, Ubisoft makes the decision to put into the game a sub race of 8 foot tall ewoks, and call them uberwoks. Lucasarts can step in and say, "Hey Ubisoft, take that out of the game, its not consistent with the star wars universe and we don't want it to potentially taint our Intellectual Property". Because they retained the creative rights to the game, if Ubisoft doesnt do this, they can legally make ubisoft cease production of the game.
As for your frankly ridiculous point regarding SWTOR, we dont blame Lucasarts because the game didnt suck due to a conflict of direction/style of game. The game sucked because it was a buggy piece of crap, and a glorified single player RPG. Given that the NGE was to change SWG to be more like what SW:TOR eventually became, stylistically, its not exactly hard to see why Lucasarts wouldnt have had a problem with the direction of the development of SW:TOR.
"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
I agree with you completely - but you have to admit that typo makes for some good irony
I say we just leave it with 'They were both at fault for what was done to SWG'
LA is at fault for demanding a drastic 180* style change for the game...
And
SOE is at fault for making this change as subtle as a hand grenade....
There are 3 types of people in the world.
1.) Those who make things happen
2.) Those who watch things happen
3.) And those who wonder "What the %#*& just happened?!"
Regardless of the proper alignment in facts there, I totally agree! I actually have not suffered this 'amnesia', like so many others. I love and prefer sandbox and open world games, but if there is anything I have no doubt about, it's that SoE needs to stop making MMOs. Period.
??? Why??
I see two possibilities for this statement: