I pre-ordered and skipped betas. Bottomline: they didn't account for the slam of late pre-orders. They upgraded capacity fairly quickly. In the meantime, it kind of sucked, and people wouldn't log out... BUT, they STOPPED TAKING MONEY. A game company REFUSED to TAKE MONEY to improve CUSTOMER SERVICE.
It doesn't really do anything new. It does standard things well, and looks good doing it. Level curve isn't very steep. You don't feel any grind until your leveling additional classes, and don't have the quests. FATE grinding is far faster than quests, but the quests break up the monotony. The exp bonus from your 50 helps. Obviously, it also helps if you like the addition class. I sort of hate the one I'm leveling right now to grab a 34 skill. I've been playing less as a result. Crafting is a real grind. Save your leves for trade/field craft. After 20-25 (field/craft), it gets rough.
It's an enjoyable game, the end game content is fun. Only problem I have with it is that castor and praetor have sort of broken cutscenes. You need to skip them, or you'll come out of a cut scene with mobs/Bosses killing you or you already dead.
I wish more of the story was voice acted..but it is a solid MMO. I'd recommend it.
As far as I'm concerned, every MMO has some kind of screwed up launch. I'm used to it. It always sucks, but I don't rage on the forums or anything. They gave everyone a free extra week, which seemed very fair. They refused to take money while they were making sure they could handle more people. Most importantly, IT. IS. FUN.
It's sad, in my opinion, that as consumers we are complacent about poor game launches because it sends a message to companies that it is acceptable and the norm. Do we put up with this with any other product?
In the case of FFXIV, they are on their second try and had every opportunity in the world to prepare. It seems like alot of bad decisions were made.
This is what I've been saying.You can't blame companies for continually launching badly when no one holds them accountable.
Why launch with a thoroughly tested game and expensive backup plans to account forincreased demand when your consumer base will accept anything and even make excuses for you?Might as well let them and save the money.
This post is full of ridiculous idealism.
It is 100% impossible to ensure a smooth launch. no matter what you do, how many precautions you take, osmething can go wrong. Now, SE wasnt as prepared as they could have been, but preparation doesnt stop everything.
The reason companies launch badly is because MMORPGs are a *very* difficult thing to launch. For one, you can't properly stress test. Most people simply arent going to do the beta stress test. So should we hold everyone that didnt do the stress test (myself included) accountable as well?
And how are we supposed to hold SE accountable? By not playing an enjoyable game? Thats called cutting off your nose to spite your face. Its not like SE hasnt generated massive amounts of complaints about this. And if a company deserves to be held accountable for something, it usually is. Look at NGE. SoE paid for that. Look at vanguard, Sigil launched an unfinished, buggy game and it cost them their company.
And then there is this: Many, many people, myself included, would rather have dealt with the week one issues than have the launch delayed. because once you got in the game, it was great. And its not like we apid for it anyway, that week was free.
And what money did SE save? This cost them more money most likely, because they had to rush to get the servers ready. they had to deal with the negativity on top of that. they earned it, but you are acting like there were no consequences. Good thing for them they have a good product to overcome this.
Put it this way: If a chef I like is opening a brand new restaurant and due to errors in the reservation system it takes me 2 hours to get a table. When i sit down at the table the service is atrocious and the food takes forever to get there. but when it comes, its amazing.
Now, the reservation system should have been better tested and the staff better trained. I filed a complaint about it, and i got a free meal out of it. Am i going to let these issues stop me form going back and enjoying a great meal in the future, especially given that now the reservation works and theyve replaced most of the staff?
I didn't read the whole thread.... BUT do launches always go 100% smooth? No, but they should still be accountable. That doesn't mean they have to kiss everyone's ass and let them play for free, but it does mean they should accomodate the paying (for the client) and future playing customer. Was it a good idea to let hardcore players stay AFK while others are trying to get on? Was it a good idea to stop digital sales? I don't know but I can only guess what the marketing people were saying. After 30 days who's going to stay and pay and who's going to move on to the next latest and greatest beta test?
The success of any MMO will be based on how it fares down the line, not on the angst of game of the moment prima donnas. Why have you even bought the game so early, before the reviews? Stop following this months hype, wait for the proper reviews.
How long before we have threads about how bad the game is from players who could not wait a month but had to rush in like lemmings? And we will get threads like that as no MMO is going to suit everyone.
Bill mentions Rift has a smooth launch, but it had a security flaw that a player, not Trion, found about. Trion was telling their customers that they did something wrong when it was their fault. While less annoying to the average person than the FFXIV debacle, its really just as bad.
This whole FFXIV thing at this stage is a non issue. I dont htink you can consider it a truly bad launch when
a) the servers almost never crashed
b) no game breaking bugs
c) the major issues were made mostly non issues within the first 2 weeks
AO was a bad launch. Vanguard was a bad launch.
While FFXIV's launch is far from smooth, its far from a disaster.
Problem with the whole "well at least the game was stable!" spin, is that it doesn't mean a whole lot how good the game is... if thousands of people can't play it due to various issues preventing them from logging in. They have paid for a service they are now unable to use. In any other area, with any other kind of product, that would be called "poor service".
In order to experience something, you have to be able to use it. Being able to use it is part of the product experience, and a pretty core one at that.
If a car's ignition is busted and you can't even start it, you can't say "well, you can't really say it's a botched product. The engine is great once it's running! The car is fine! It's just the ignition that's messed up!"
To accept, nevermind attempt to dismiss it, because "well, most MMOs have bad launches" doesn't demonstrate some kind of "patience and wisdom". It demonstrates very low standards and a willingness to accept poor service "because you like the game".
The problems SE faced were mostly preventable, or at least could have been greatly mitigated if they had given more time to testing and fine-tuning the NA/EU servers, and didn't leave it 'til so late in the process to even get them going.
It could have been mititaged for launch if, after having those problems in Open Beta, they extended it, delayed the release if necessary (something Yoshi-P stated unequivocally he was prepared to do) to make sure things really were working as intended before launch. They didn't.
The apologists defending any and everything SE does with this game really need to give it up. It's more than a bit absurd at this point. If you're prepared to accept it, then that's fine; it's your choice what kind of service you accept. But trying to dismiss it or make it sound like it wasn't as bad as it was is plain dishonest.
I still can not buy this game via digital download. This is beyond unacceptable. Half a month has gone by with me wanting to buy this. I have tried many times local stores as well with no luck. Amazon was out of stock everytime I checked with them. I'm sure I can find it somewhere, but come on.
I would love to see MMORPG.com come up with a million dollar AAA title and launch it. Then I would create an article and exclaim how horrible it went and they are the ones bitching about how they want this and want that about successful launches.
The game didn't go so well for the first week. Big whoop. It just sounds like you are the hardcore elitist jerks who want to rush to max level and defeat the end game in less than a week and then what? You'll end up quitting soon and just whine about how it was a bad launch, but it seems like you got to play just fine.
It took them less than a week to completely nullify the problem with login issues and networking, and everything has been smooth sailing since the first huge update. Better launch than I can remember of any MMO to date that I was there for. Seriously, keep it in your pants and enjoy what you have.
The success of any MMO will be based on how it fares down the line, not on the angst of game of the moment prima donnas. Why have you even bought the game so early, before the reviews? Stop following this months hype, wait for the proper reviews.
How long before we have threads about how bad the game is from players who could not wait a month but had to rush in like lemmings? And we will get threads like that as no MMO is going to suit everyone.
You're right, but it helps if you keep players past 30 days without pissing them off too much.
Bill: The problem I see is that this isn’t new territory anymore. Just because something is and or has been the case in terms of MMO launches doesn’t mean it always needs to be that way.
Originally posted by Evokerz Perhaps Anet has patented their Overflow Server system, that's why no other game dev implemented this feature on their game. Overflow server system is really revolutionary.
Except its not. It was in EQ2 9 years ago. Its in SWTOR. Im sure it was in a game before EQ2.
When did SWTOR have an overflow system? I haven't played it in a while but last time I played they had a queue system. Did they add this feature in?
About EQ2, I don't know. I played it at launch but don't remember any such system then.
Been through a few of these things myself. However I do recall several fairly bug free launches. best would be LoTRO, 2nd place GW2 and as I recall even EQ2's was pretty pain free.
AO for #1 in the worst column with second going to SWG. Vanguard , Horizons, and AOC were pretty awful
I give UO a break here because it was breaking new ground
DAoC also had less people trying to play during launch, much much less. Hell the game peaked around 250k users (iirc). DAoC was a great game, and had a lovely launch (I was there day 1), but at least compare apples to apples when making comparisons. DAoC did have the best launch of any pre-WoW era mmo though, Mythic did a lot right for the time.
I won't say FF had a perfect launch, because it didn't, but aside from server lock and login issues, the game had less issues than WoW did when it launched. WoW was by far and away the most popular mmo launch of the era. There were login issues, plus people would get loot locked when looting or attempting to gather from a broken gathering node (flowers/mineral veins). The queue issues persisted for months on many servers, which is why they had to break up the populations of many of the largest servers.
Compared to many other equally popular mmo titles, FFXIV had a pretty smooth launch.
Completely moot point.
You're comparing 250k against today's tech and overall industry experience in launching and maintaining a MMO. Not really a fair comparison.
You have to compare it to the tech and overall experience in the industry in 2001, when the game was launched.
MMORPGs in 2001 were still a very, very new and mostly unexplored genre. Hardware was far less powerful than it is now, bandwidth wasn't as fast as it is now, and there was far less data to draw on for what would work and what wouldn't. DAoC had every reason to not launch smoothly at that time - yet it did.
Also remember that back then 250k players would be like saying 3 million players now. EQ1 was the 800 lb. gorilla with its 500k players.
It's really funny how people will spin, make excuses and otherwise try to dismiss any examples given to them of smoothly launched games, just so they can cling to their defense of SE's botched release of ARR. It's sad how willing they are to readily accept sub-par releases from game developers - and then expect everyone else to - simply because they like the game.
"Compared to many other equally popular MMOs" or not, FFXIV still had a really poor launch.
DAoC also had less people trying to play during launch, much much less. Hell the game peaked around 250k users (iirc). DAoC was a great game, and had a lovely launch (I was there day 1), but at least compare apples to apples when making comparisons. DAoC did have the best launch of any pre-WoW era mmo though, Mythic did a lot right for the time.
I won't say FF had a perfect launch, because it didn't, but aside from server lock and login issues, the game had less issues than WoW did when it launched. WoW was by far and away the most popular mmo launch of the era. There were login issues, plus people would get loot locked when looting or attempting to gather from a broken gathering node (flowers/mineral veins). The queue issues persisted for months on many servers, which is why they had to break up the populations of many of the largest servers.
Compared to many other equally popular mmo titles, FFXIV had a pretty smooth launch.
Completely moot point.
You're comparing 250k against today's tech and overall industry experience in launching and maintaining a MMO. Not really a fair comparison.
You have to compare it to the tech and overall experience in the industry in 2001, when the game was launched.
MMORPGs in 2001 were still a very, very new and mostly unexplored genre. Hardware was far less powerful than it is now, bandwidth wasn't as fast as it is now, and there was far less data to draw on for what would work and what wouldn't. DAoC had every reason to not launch smoothly at that time - yet it did.
Also remember that back then 250k players would be like saying 3 million players now. EQ1 was the 800 lb. gorilla with its 500k players.
It's really funny how people will spin, make excuses and otherwise try to dismiss any examples given to them of smoothly launched games, just so they can cling to their defense of SE's botched release of ARR. It's sad how willing they are to readily accept sub-par releases from game developers - and then expect everyone else to - simply because they like the game.
Definitely an excellent rebuttal. And I agree that people will not only make excuses to dismiss great launches like Mythic's Dark Age of Camelot, as you stated, but there is a line of people ready to tear down Elder Scrolls Online and Camelot Unchained - as if they "fear" games such as these lifting the bar from the back of a cave where it sits now and into the sunlight at last.
Let us hope there is a Socrates out there, ready to lead those who dwell in caves watching shadows at play, to lead them out and into common sense.
They can make a claim that technology should have made it smoother run, but technology fails and has it's own limits if you can not predict the numbers.
Rift went smoothly because it was not nearly as popular as Final Fantasy, one being it was a unknown game practically and two it didn't have an established title to boost sales.
With beta's you can try and fix what might be wrong, though you can not predict if that patch is going to cause other bugs and with what i've seen from patches you should expect new bugs. Yes they had an idea of what was going on with head start, but they did not get if fixed fast enough and they had their own problems with the players (the ones who stayed logged in, because of no time-outs) that caused additional problems.
There's simply no excuse for it in the modern age, a proper server architecture can be scaled up within minutes - and as importantly scaled down as the launch window effect subsides. When WoW/AoC etc. launched, server hardware took a few weeks to come from Dell etc, now it takes a click to allocate more in the cloud.
Many more sophisticated systems are launched flawlessly in the business world, and anything less costs people their jobs. Here of course it's accepted as the norm, and while it is it'll never improve.
Trion did a fine job with Rift's launch and even Defiance was smooth. Sure they're a smaller scale but that actually doesn't mean a whole lot. Properly designed modern software limits should be so far above what they can sell any kind of overload is sure evidence of a flaw that really shouldn't have made it to launch.
Actually read most of the points and I'mma gonna put my 2 cents in in fairly easy points
Cost money for SE: Partially, they did STOP digital sales BECAUSE it EXCEEDED expectations. In SE's outlook saying you've "sold out" isn't as bad as saying "you have an overflow of stuff to sell" Keep in mind tons of popular products sell out and still maintains popular fan bases (Apple anyone?)
Bad launch and destroyed FFXIV: I have to disagree on this one. If you had the same bad reviews from before then yes but given the positive reviews now, no. They also seemed to have resolved server login issues for the majority of players, haven't had any game destroying bugs reported and have offered a free week.
A company can release smoothly: partially agree with the denial worlds example but, let's face it, people want to login to their ACTUAL server. It just doesn't make you rage as much. Also you would have to really kill the cap that you let players join servers; if servers can hold "X" number of players then for a smooth release you have to assume that for launch that number will be on either on AFK status or just because they want to. That would impact overall server population as the game hits month 4-6. So I agree that unless you have a universe as expansive as EvE or Everquest where maybe whole zones have few ppl in it; it's a catch-22.
The "it has to be this way" attitude: if the idea is you can login and you're not paying for it and you're still pissed then frankly, there is no pleasing you. Also comparing game expectations from several years ago to now and saying we expect "then" for "now" is like saying "why doesn't my flat screen last as long as my 90's tube television" or saying "kids went outdoors more often than they do now". Yea see these references to the past are a load of bull! You can DEMAND more changes but you have to prioritize those demands as well: crappy game versus good game, good mechanics versus bad, login issues versus none. The question is how you place and rank those demands. I do rank avoiding a crappy game higher of a priority than login.
No one is walking away from this game. I mean, maybe one or two people, but the rage will eventually fade away and everyone is gonna play.
So what you if couldn't play for a couple of days? So what if you still can't play with your friends? Server transfers are just around the corner. Just focus on leveling, which is something you basically do alone, and when the time comes transfer over to your friends' server and be happy.
Well this is what happened to me, but I guess i'm just an Optimistic Idiot.
No one is walking away from this game. I mean, maybe one or two people, but the rage will eventually fade away and everyone is gonna play.
I am one of those "one or two" walking away. It may not make a difference, but I'm not in the habit of giving money to companies that give me poor service quality.
So what you if couldn't play for a couple of days? So what if you still can't play with your friends? Server transfers are just around the corner.
So I buy a game that says it is going to be playable on a date. It isn't. Once it is, I can't play with my friends, which was the only reason I wanted to play in the first place. And then I get to pay again for a server transfer? Source; 'FFXIV:ARR' And Naoki Yoshida At PAX Prime 2013. That's having the piss.
Just focus on leveling, which is something you basically do alone,
Not really, no. Always been a group leveler.
and when the time comes transfer over to your friends' server and be happy.
Maybe, we'll never know now.
Well this is what happened to me, but I guess i'm just an Optimistic Idiot.
Comments
I pre-ordered and skipped betas. Bottomline: they didn't account for the slam of late pre-orders. They upgraded capacity fairly quickly. In the meantime, it kind of sucked, and people wouldn't log out... BUT, they STOPPED TAKING MONEY. A game company REFUSED to TAKE MONEY to improve CUSTOMER SERVICE.
It doesn't really do anything new. It does standard things well, and looks good doing it. Level curve isn't very steep. You don't feel any grind until your leveling additional classes, and don't have the quests. FATE grinding is far faster than quests, but the quests break up the monotony. The exp bonus from your 50 helps. Obviously, it also helps if you like the addition class. I sort of hate the one I'm leveling right now to grab a 34 skill. I've been playing less as a result. Crafting is a real grind. Save your leves for trade/field craft. After 20-25 (field/craft), it gets rough.
It's an enjoyable game, the end game content is fun. Only problem I have with it is that castor and praetor have sort of broken cutscenes. You need to skip them, or you'll come out of a cut scene with mobs/Bosses killing you or you already dead.
I wish more of the story was voice acted..but it is a solid MMO. I'd recommend it.
As far as I'm concerned, every MMO has some kind of screwed up launch. I'm used to it. It always sucks, but I don't rage on the forums or anything. They gave everyone a free extra week, which seemed very fair. They refused to take money while they were making sure they could handle more people. Most importantly, IT. IS. FUN.
I didn't read the whole thread.... BUT do launches always go 100% smooth? No, but they should still be accountable. That doesn't mean they have to kiss everyone's ass and let them play for free, but it does mean they should accomodate the paying (for the client) and future playing customer. Was it a good idea to let hardcore players stay AFK while others are trying to get on? Was it a good idea to stop digital sales? I don't know but I can only guess what the marketing people were saying. After 30 days who's going to stay and pay and who's going to move on to the next latest and greatest beta test?
The success of any MMO will be based on how it fares down the line, not on the angst of game of the moment prima donnas. Why have you even bought the game so early, before the reviews? Stop following this months hype, wait for the proper reviews.
How long before we have threads about how bad the game is from players who could not wait a month but had to rush in like lemmings? And we will get threads like that as no MMO is going to suit everyone.
Problem with the whole "well at least the game was stable!" spin, is that it doesn't mean a whole lot how good the game is... if thousands of people can't play it due to various issues preventing them from logging in. They have paid for a service they are now unable to use. In any other area, with any other kind of product, that would be called "poor service".
In order to experience something, you have to be able to use it. Being able to use it is part of the product experience, and a pretty core one at that.
If a car's ignition is busted and you can't even start it, you can't say "well, you can't really say it's a botched product. The engine is great once it's running! The car is fine! It's just the ignition that's messed up!"
To accept, nevermind attempt to dismiss it, because "well, most MMOs have bad launches" doesn't demonstrate some kind of "patience and wisdom". It demonstrates very low standards and a willingness to accept poor service "because you like the game".
The problems SE faced were mostly preventable, or at least could have been greatly mitigated if they had given more time to testing and fine-tuning the NA/EU servers, and didn't leave it 'til so late in the process to even get them going.
It could have been mititaged for launch if, after having those problems in Open Beta, they extended it, delayed the release if necessary (something Yoshi-P stated unequivocally he was prepared to do) to make sure things really were working as intended before launch. They didn't.
The apologists defending any and everything SE does with this game really need to give it up. It's more than a bit absurd at this point. If you're prepared to accept it, then that's fine; it's your choice what kind of service you accept. But trying to dismiss it or make it sound like it wasn't as bad as it was is plain dishonest.
I would love to see MMORPG.com come up with a million dollar AAA title and launch it. Then I would create an article and exclaim how horrible it went and they are the ones bitching about how they want this and want that about successful launches.
The game didn't go so well for the first week. Big whoop. It just sounds like you are the hardcore elitist jerks who want to rush to max level and defeat the end game in less than a week and then what? You'll end up quitting soon and just whine about how it was a bad launch, but it seems like you got to play just fine.
It took them less than a week to completely nullify the problem with login issues and networking, and everything has been smooth sailing since the first huge update. Better launch than I can remember of any MMO to date that I was there for. Seriously, keep it in your pants and enjoy what you have.
You're right, but it helps if you keep players past 30 days without pissing them off too much.
Bill: The problem I see is that this isn’t new territory anymore. Just because something is and or has been the case in terms of MMO launches doesn’t mean it always needs to be that way.
Do i need to say more? Bill gets my vote.
When did SWTOR have an overflow system? I haven't played it in a while but last time I played they had a queue system. Did they add this feature in?
About EQ2, I don't know. I played it at launch but don't remember any such system then.
Been through a few of these things myself. However I do recall several fairly bug free launches. best would be LoTRO, 2nd place GW2 and as I recall even EQ2's was pretty pain free.
AO for #1 in the worst column with second going to SWG. Vanguard , Horizons, and AOC were pretty awful
I give UO a break here because it was breaking new ground
I miss DAoC
Completely moot point.
You're comparing 250k against today's tech and overall industry experience in launching and maintaining a MMO. Not really a fair comparison.
You have to compare it to the tech and overall experience in the industry in 2001, when the game was launched.
MMORPGs in 2001 were still a very, very new and mostly unexplored genre. Hardware was far less powerful than it is now, bandwidth wasn't as fast as it is now, and there was far less data to draw on for what would work and what wouldn't. DAoC had every reason to not launch smoothly at that time - yet it did.
Also remember that back then 250k players would be like saying 3 million players now. EQ1 was the 800 lb. gorilla with its 500k players.
It's really funny how people will spin, make excuses and otherwise try to dismiss any examples given to them of smoothly launched games, just so they can cling to their defense of SE's botched release of ARR. It's sad how willing they are to readily accept sub-par releases from game developers - and then expect everyone else to - simply because they like the game.
Definitely an excellent rebuttal. And I agree that people will not only make excuses to dismiss great launches like Mythic's Dark Age of Camelot, as you stated, but there is a line of people ready to tear down Elder Scrolls Online and Camelot Unchained - as if they "fear" games such as these lifting the bar from the back of a cave where it sits now and into the sunlight at last.
Let us hope there is a Socrates out there, ready to lead those who dwell in caves watching shadows at play, to lead them out and into common sense.
Too deep for this kind of topic...but meh.
Indeed...
All I can say to that is, despite all evidence to the contrary, some people still insist the Earth is flat.
They can make a claim that technology should have made it smoother run, but technology fails and has it's own limits if you can not predict the numbers.
Rift went smoothly because it was not nearly as popular as Final Fantasy, one being it was a unknown game practically and two it didn't have an established title to boost sales.
With beta's you can try and fix what might be wrong, though you can not predict if that patch is going to cause other bugs and with what i've seen from patches you should expect new bugs. Yes they had an idea of what was going on with head start, but they did not get if fixed fast enough and they had their own problems with the players (the ones who stayed logged in, because of no time-outs) that caused additional problems.
There's simply no excuse for it in the modern age, a proper server architecture can be scaled up within minutes - and as importantly scaled down as the launch window effect subsides. When WoW/AoC etc. launched, server hardware took a few weeks to come from Dell etc, now it takes a click to allocate more in the cloud.
Many more sophisticated systems are launched flawlessly in the business world, and anything less costs people their jobs. Here of course it's accepted as the norm, and while it is it'll never improve.
Trion did a fine job with Rift's launch and even Defiance was smooth. Sure they're a smaller scale but that actually doesn't mean a whole lot. Properly designed modern software limits should be so far above what they can sell any kind of overload is sure evidence of a flaw that really shouldn't have made it to launch.
Actually read most of the points and I'mma gonna put my 2 cents in in fairly easy points
No one is walking away from this game. I mean, maybe one or two people, but the rage will eventually fade away and everyone is gonna play.
So what you if couldn't play for a couple of days? So what if you still can't play with your friends? Server transfers are just around the corner. Just focus on leveling, which is something you basically do alone, and when the time comes transfer over to your friends' server and be happy.
Well this is what happened to me, but I guess i'm just an Optimistic Idiot.
Clever things.