AAA Publisher did not release anything good since World of Warcraft. The permanent hunt for better ways to get our money sucks. Indies at least try to make a good game to be noticed and think about money second.... that is how the whole MMO genre started and it rocked. Now tho,... ugh
MMOs finally replaced social interaction, forced grouping and standing in a line while talking to eachother.
Now we have forced soloing, forced questing and everyone is the hero, without ever having to talk to anyone else. The evolution of multiplayer is here! We won,... right?
But I really wish people would get away from these attitudes like "AAA=only cares about money" vs. "independent=only doing it for the games". They ALL care about making money, and most, at least those people doing the actual work, are doing it for the games. That they bother to code for a game at all instead of coding software for a company that gets no bid defense contracts says it all. They sure as hell don't do it for job security.
This is a bit of an ignorant statement. Of course its a business and they're all doing it for money.
Thank you for saying my statement is ignorant, then agreeing with me.
But for the smaller companies like City State, this is their dream job, that they understand better than anyone, and they get to do it the way they want.
Explain to me what part of this isn't opinion based on something you couldn't possibly state as fact even if you were a "City State" employee?
Whereas AAA companies have their games designed by publishers who are ONLY interested in a massive non niche success, and will ONLY fund WoW clones.
"Designed by Publishers? You do know the difference between developers and publishers... right?
The people designing and building these games, from the producers down to the coders down to the guy that makes sure backups are successful overnight, generally care a lot about the game they are trying to create, and are trying to make the most entertaining and fun game they know how to make. It may not be a game you or I like. It may not even be a game that's successful. Or it may be a AAA game, and you or I may not be interested in it but a lot of other people are...
But the assumption that the budget of a game determines the heart and soul that goes into it, and then assume that more budget=less soul... =ignorance2
But I really wish people would get away from these attitudes like "AAA=only cares about money" vs. "independent=only doing it for the games". They ALL care about making money, and most, at least those people doing the actual work, are doing it for the games. That they bother to code for a game at all instead of coding software for a company that gets no bid defense contracts says it all. They sure as hell don't do it for job security.
This is a bit of an ignorant statement. Of course its a business and they're all doing it for money.
Thank you for saying my statement is ignorant, then agreeing with me.
But for the smaller companies like City State, this is their dream job, that they understand better than anyone, and they get to do it the way they want.
Explain to me what part of this isn't opinion based on something you couldn't possibly state as fact even if you were a "City State" employee?
Whereas AAA companies have their games designed by publishers who are ONLY interested in a massive non niche success, and will ONLY fund WoW clones.
"Designed by Publishers? You do know the difference between developers and publishers... right?
Very VERY basic knowledge of how the industry works. If you ever read interviews with devs who worked for publishers, such as Brian Fargo, they talk about the massive amount of restrictions in place dictated BY THE PUBLISHING COMPANIES.
In order to get funding to begin with, the initial pitches need to have a certain amount of common features, and during development in increments publishers will continue to tweak what gets put in the game, under threat of pulling funding.
Many indie MMOs, like Darkfall, talk about all their meetings with publishers and how they wouldn't have seen a cent unless their game had quest based leveling, and they removed PvP and full loot.
I say you're ignorant because it's clear you are, entirely ignorant of how much impact publishers have on the direction of a game. There are for sure people working in every gaming company just for a buck OR because they love to do it, but the difference is, with City State, it's being run by someone who is passionate about making virtual worlds, has decades of knowledge and, this time, the FREEDOM to use that knowledge.
Originally posted by VengeSunsoar Let's not forget that both eq and uo were made by big developer/publisher companies. There was nothing indy about them.
They were given budgets and freedom, major difference.
They were run by MUD enthusiasts who the publishers gave a lot of freedom to. Because at the time there was no proven formula.
Originally posted by VengeSunsoar Let's not forget that both eq and uo were made by big developer/publisher companies. There was nothing indy about them.
They were given budgets and freedom, major difference.
They were run by MUD enthusiasts who the publishers gave a lot of freedom to. Because at the time there was no proven formula.
That, ladies and gentlemen, is called making crap up.
But I really wish people would get away from these attitudes like "AAA=only cares about money" vs. "independent=only doing it for the games". They ALL care about making money, and most, at least those people doing the actual work, are doing it for the games. That they bother to code for a game at all instead of coding software for a company that gets no bid defense contracts says it all. They sure as hell don't do it for job security.
This is a bit of an ignorant statement. Of course its a business and they're all doing it for money.
Thank you for saying my statement is ignorant, then agreeing with me.
But for the smaller companies like City State, this is their dream job, that they understand better than anyone, and they get to do it the way they want.
Explain to me what part of this isn't opinion based on something you couldn't possibly state as fact even if you were a "City State" employee?
Whereas AAA companies have their games designed by publishers who are ONLY interested in a massive non niche success, and will ONLY fund WoW clones.
"Designed by Publishers? You do know the difference between developers and publishers... right?
Very VERY basic knowledge of how the industry works. If you ever read interviews with devs who worked for publishers, such as Brian Fargo, they talk about the massive amount of restrictions in place dictated BY THE PUBLISHING COMPANIES.
For better or for worse. So let's use your example... was W2(free of publishers) better than Fallout 1 and 2? About the same, IMO.
In order to get funding to begin with, the initial pitches need to have a certain amount of common features, and during development in increments publishers will continue to tweak what gets put in the game, under threat of pulling funding.
No... under threat of no agreement for funding in the first place; that's different than starting a project based on an idea and then somebody deciding they don't want it anymore. See... there's these things called "contracts" in the business world which prevent those sorts of situations...
Again... Fallout 1 and 2... not as good as Wasteland 2? IMO, W2 is great, but I can't seem to figure out, other than obvious tech upgrades, how it's any better than Fallout 1 and 2. The lore even goes down a few notches.
Many indie MMOs, like Darkfall, talk about all their meetings with publishers and how they wouldn't have seen a cent unless their game had quest based leveling, and they removed PvP and full loot.
And they "bravely" went against their mighty oppressors! And they bravely made an embarrassing game that almost nobody wants to play, including many who wanted full loot PvP that can get that from... pretty much nowhere else.
I say you're ignorant because it's clear you are, entirely ignorant of how much impact publishers have on the direction of a game. There are for sure people working in every gaming company just for a buck OR because they love to do it, but the difference is, with City State, it's being run by someone who is passionate about making virtual worlds, has decades of knowledge and, this time, the FREEDOM to use that knowledge.
Originally posted by VengeSunsoar Let's not forget that both eq and uo were made by big developer/publisher companies. There was nothing indy about them.
They were given budgets and freedom, major difference.
They were run by MUD enthusiasts who the publishers gave a lot of freedom to. Because at the time there was no proven formula.
That, ladies and gentlemen, is called making crap up.
I can assure you they had stats figures research and a whole lot of numbers to back up their ideas and were able to convince themselves and their bosses that the venture would likely make money.
Just like today
Just because you don't like it doesn't mean it is bad.
Originally posted by VengeSunsoar Let's not forget that both eq and uo were made by big developer/publisher companies. There was nothing indy about them.
They were given budgets and freedom, major difference.
They were run by MUD enthusiasts who the publishers gave a lot of freedom to. Because at the time there was no proven formula.
That, ladies and gentlemen, is called making crap up.
No. That is called being correct.
Nope, not correct at all. Stretching the truth at best, complete fiction if you are feeling uncharitable. It is kind of like the oft repeated lie that Verant was independent of Sony.
Originally posted by VengeSunsoar Let's not forget that both eq and uo were made by big developer/publisher companies. There was nothing indy about them.
They were given budgets and freedom, major difference.
They were run by MUD enthusiasts who the publishers gave a lot of freedom to. Because at the time there was no proven formula.
That, ladies and gentlemen, is called making crap up.
No. That is called being correct.
Nope, not correct at all. Stretching the truth at best, complete fiction if you are feeling uncharitable. It is kind of like the oft repeated lie that Verant was independent of Sony.
What's truly saddening is that hundreds if not thousands of game developers out there developed something that failed to take $ from me in the last 5 years. The concept of merging, teamwork and coming together to build something greater is something many coming to realize now.
MMORPG's are the most advanced and complex form of gaming and WOW is just example how they can turn into a billion dollar annual revenue when developed properly that can last for over a decade. So, yes they require a lot of $, but that is why if done right they can return far more.
Blizzard had tons of $ on hand to spend thx to WOW and build many other sequels like Diablo, Star Craft and other games aside, while also spending tons of $ on high end advertising and cinematic trailers as well as make a WOW movie in near future. Bottom line is MMORPG's are not project any indie/small studio should be undertaking.
What's truly saddening is that hundreds if not thousands of game developers out there developed something that failed to take $ from me in the last 5 years. The concept of merging, teamwork and coming together to build something greater is something many coming to realize now.
MMORPG's are the most advanced and complex form of gaming and WOW is just example how they can turn into a billion dollar annual revenue when developed properly that can last for over a decade. So, yes they require a lot of $, but that is why if done right they can return far more.
Blizzard had tons of $ on hand to spend thx to WOW and build many other sequels like Diablo, Star Craft and other games aside, while also spending tons of $ on high end advertising and cinematic trailers as well as make a WOW movie in near future. Bottom line is MMORPG's are not project any indie/small studio should be undertaking.
Kopogero, you make a number of excellent points, but what is your opinion with regard to indy hits like A Tale in the Desert and excellent indy projects like Fallen Earth.
Of course you might find these mmos less than desirable, but they did have their day in the sun -- since that is a pun, I'll go with it. These mmos had their successes and at a fraction of the cost you'd associate with AAA.
I liked fallen earth but dint pretend it was a success. It never made any money under icarus and was sold in less than a year for a fraction of The cost and changed to f2p. That's when it started to make money finally and even then extremely low population means extremely low revenue
Just because you don't like it doesn't mean it is bad.
Originally posted by VengeSunsoar I liked fallen earth but dint pretend it was a success. It never made any money under icarus and was sold in less than a year for a fraction of The cost and changed to f2p. That's when it started to make money finally and even then extremely low population means extremely low revenue
According to Icarus themselves they build platforms to sell. I never said it was highly successful, but I did say it was an excellent indy project.
Originally posted by VengeSunsoar Let's not forget that both eq and uo were made by big developer/publisher companies. There was nothing indy about them.
They were given budgets and freedom, major difference.
They were run by MUD enthusiasts who the publishers gave a lot of freedom to. Because at the time there was no proven formula.
That, ladies and gentlemen, is called making crap up.
Really? Go look at the documentaries for both games. EQ was basically Smed talking to Sony about an online game, they gave him a budget, and he hired 2 designers (Brad and another guy) and let them run with it.
UO was owned by EA, but still mainly overseen by Garriot at that point, who let Koster and a few others run the show while he worked on the next singleplayer game, where EA's main attention was focused.
Those games were INSANELY free form development wise.
But I really wish people would get away from these attitudes like "AAA=only cares about money" vs. "independent=only doing it for the games". They ALL care about making money, and most, at least those people doing the actual work, are doing it for the games. That they bother to code for a game at all instead of coding software for a company that gets no bid defense contracts says it all. They sure as hell don't do it for job security.
This is a bit of an ignorant statement. Of course its a business and they're all doing it for money.
Thank you for saying my statement is ignorant, then agreeing with me.
But for the smaller companies like City State, this is their dream job, that they understand better than anyone, and they get to do it the way they want.
Explain to me what part of this isn't opinion based on something you couldn't possibly state as fact even if you were a "City State" employee?
Whereas AAA companies have their games designed by publishers who are ONLY interested in a massive non niche success, and will ONLY fund WoW clones.
"Designed by Publishers? You do know the difference between developers and publishers... right?
Very VERY basic knowledge of how the industry works. If you ever read interviews with devs who worked for publishers, such as Brian Fargo, they talk about the massive amount of restrictions in place dictated BY THE PUBLISHING COMPANIES.
For better or for worse. So let's use your example... was W2(free of publishers) better than Fallout 1 and 2? About the same, IMO.
Fallout 1 and 2 were not budgeted in the hundreds of millions, with as strict guidelines put on them. Though even then Fargo started talking about the clamps coming down from publishers. FO1 and 2 were indie, by today's standards.
In order to get funding to begin with, the initial pitches need to have a certain amount of common features, and during development in increments publishers will continue to tweak what gets put in the game, under threat of pulling funding.
No... under threat of no agreement for funding in the first place; that's different than starting a project based on an idea and then somebody deciding they don't want it anymore. See... there's these things called "contracts" in the business world which prevent those sorts of situations...
Showing your ignorance again because many times, especially if there are shifts of personel at publishing companies, they'll come in and demand you change features. It happened to Vanguard under Microsoft when they got a new CEO.
Many indie MMOs, like Darkfall, talk about all their meetings with publishers and how they wouldn't have seen a cent unless their game had quest based leveling, and they removed PvP and full loot.
And they "bravely" went against their mighty oppressors! And they bravely made an embarrassing game that almost nobody wants to play, including many who wanted full loot PvP that can get that from... pretty much nowhere else.
That "embarassing game" is still running, on a subscription model. Their team went from 15 devs to over 40, they moved into a bigger office, they released expansions, opened a second server, and GREW. That's more than just about any AAA MMO can say in recent memory.
What's more, that's entirely unrelated to the point. The point is that publishers dictate game design. But nice try.
I say you're ignorant because it's clear you are, entirely ignorant of how much impact publishers have on the direction of a game. There are for sure people working in every gaming company just for a buck OR because they love to do it, but the difference is, with City State, it's being run by someone who is passionate about making virtual worlds, has decades of knowledge and, this time, the FREEDOM to use that knowledge.
Originally posted by VengeSunsoar Let's not forget that both eq and uo were made by big developer/publisher companies. There was nothing indy about them.
They were given budgets and freedom, major difference.
They were run by MUD enthusiasts who the publishers gave a lot of freedom to. Because at the time there was no proven formula.
That, ladies and gentlemen, is called making crap up.
Really? Go look at the documentaries for both games. EQ was basically Smed talking to Sony about an online game, they gave him a budget, and he hired 2 designers (Brad and another guy) and let them run with it.
UO was owned by EA, but still mainly overseen by Garriot at that point, who let Koster and a few others run the show while he worked on the next singleplayer game, where EA's main attention was focused.
Those games were INSANELY free form development wise.
I don't know about EQ, but you're mostly right about UO.
The way I understand it, UO was a pet project of Garriot's that was agreed to by EA as part of the deal that bought out Garriot's company (which made the Ultima series). And they were making Ultima 8 at the time too, as you pointed out.
Originally, the UO team was almost hidden away from the rest of the company. They were placed on a floor where the entire rest of the floor was under construction. Most people working at EA weren't even aware they were there unless they happened to run into them in other parts of the building (cafeteria, elevator, etc.).
But once news of UO spread and wildly excited interest picked up, EA took notice and flushed a bunch more money into UO's development. According to Koster, they did little intervention and gave them lots of support. So at that time EA was a real boon to UO in a hands off sort of way, more curious and less control.
I don't think it changed much until the PvP started hurting the bottom line in a big way. That's when EA jumped in and started telling the UO team what was going to be.
But UO wasn't what I'd call "indie". They had something like 15-20 people once they started coding (after designing the game plan).
Originally posted by lugal I think it will be good if the big publishers leave the genre. Less emphasis on monetization of every aspect and more on gameplay is my hope if the big publishers leave.
You mean, being stuck with pathetic attempts of a game full of bugs
Originally posted by lugal I think it will be good if the big publishers leave the genre. Less emphasis on monetization of every aspect and more on gameplay is my hope if the big publishers leave.
You mean, being stuck with pathetic attempts of a game full of bugs and with poor production quality ?
Err no, thanks.
That person is probably talking about independent minds giving rise to original ideas that allow hack companies like blizzard to make billions off of 13 year olds (in mind if not body). I respect any indy company or group that earnestly tries new ideas, I can only imagine that mind that wouldn't respect that (see Qui-gon Jinn for details).
Originally posted by lugal I think it will be good if the big publishers leave the genre. Less emphasis on monetization of every aspect and more on gameplay is my hope if the big publishers leave.
You mean, being stuck with pathetic attempts of a game full of bugs and with poor production quality ?
Err no, thanks.
That person is probably talking about independent minds giving rise to original ideas that allow hack companies like blizzard to make billions off of 13 year olds (in mind if not body). I respect any indy company or group that earnestly tries new ideas, I can only imagine that mind that wouldn't respect that (see Qui-gon Jinn for details).
Are you really citing a Star Wars character as a source of authority and wisdom?
Are you really calling Blizzard, the maker of what is far and away the most successful MMORPG today as a 'hack company'? Exactly what definition of 'hack' are you using?
The public has spoken and the AAA guys have listened and gave up. They realized they weren't making WoW money with the well polished clones and folded up shop. They will now be aiming their sites on the MOBA genre and squeezing the blood out of that until its dry.
The only AAA polished games you will see now are eastern F2P games that will probably just be a rehash on all the others with different characters and monsters.
The public has spoken and the AAA guys have listened and gave up. They realized they weren't making WoW money with the well polished clones and folded up shop. They will now be aiming their sites on the MOBA genre and squeezing the blood out of that until its dry.
The only AAA polished games you will see now are eastern F2P games that will probably just be a rehash on all the others with different characters and monsters.
There's only so many ways 3-lanes 5-characters kill-enemy-base can be packed. MOBAs won't be the next MMOs.
Never said they would be the next MMO's.
Just saying that is what we will be seeing coming out from AAA dev's as they try and cash in on them.
Comments
Good thing in my book.
AAA Publisher did not release anything good since World of Warcraft. The permanent hunt for better ways to get our money sucks. Indies at least try to make a good game to be noticed and think about money second.... that is how the whole MMO genre started and it rocked. Now tho,... ugh
MMOs finally replaced social interaction, forced grouping and standing in a line while talking to eachother.
Now we have forced soloing, forced questing and everyone is the hero, without ever having to talk to anyone else. The evolution of multiplayer is here! We won,... right?
The people designing and building these games, from the producers down to the coders down to the guy that makes sure backups are successful overnight, generally care a lot about the game they are trying to create, and are trying to make the most entertaining and fun game they know how to make. It may not be a game you or I like. It may not even be a game that's successful. Or it may be a AAA game, and you or I may not be interested in it but a lot of other people are...
But the assumption that the budget of a game determines the heart and soul that goes into it, and then assume that more budget=less soul... =ignorance2
Very VERY basic knowledge of how the industry works. If you ever read interviews with devs who worked for publishers, such as Brian Fargo, they talk about the massive amount of restrictions in place dictated BY THE PUBLISHING COMPANIES.
In order to get funding to begin with, the initial pitches need to have a certain amount of common features, and during development in increments publishers will continue to tweak what gets put in the game, under threat of pulling funding.
Many indie MMOs, like Darkfall, talk about all their meetings with publishers and how they wouldn't have seen a cent unless their game had quest based leveling, and they removed PvP and full loot.
I say you're ignorant because it's clear you are, entirely ignorant of how much impact publishers have on the direction of a game. There are for sure people working in every gaming company just for a buck OR because they love to do it, but the difference is, with City State, it's being run by someone who is passionate about making virtual worlds, has decades of knowledge and, this time, the FREEDOM to use that knowledge.
They were given budgets and freedom, major difference.
They were run by MUD enthusiasts who the publishers gave a lot of freedom to. Because at the time there was no proven formula.
That, ladies and gentlemen, is called making crap up.
No. That is called being correct.
http://wyrdblogging.blogspot.com/
Just like today
Nope, not correct at all. Stretching the truth at best, complete fiction if you are feeling uncharitable. It is kind of like the oft repeated lie that Verant was independent of Sony.
Just like today.
It is certain that you weren't Privy to either.
http://wyrdblogging.blogspot.com/
What's truly saddening is that hundreds if not thousands of game developers out there developed something that failed to take $ from me in the last 5 years. The concept of merging, teamwork and coming together to build something greater is something many coming to realize now.
MMORPG's are the most advanced and complex form of gaming and WOW is just example how they can turn into a billion dollar annual revenue when developed properly that can last for over a decade. So, yes they require a lot of $, but that is why if done right they can return far more.
Blizzard had tons of $ on hand to spend thx to WOW and build many other sequels like Diablo, Star Craft and other games aside, while also spending tons of $ on high end advertising and cinematic trailers as well as make a WOW movie in near future. Bottom line is MMORPG's are not project any indie/small studio should be undertaking.
Kopogero, you make a number of excellent points, but what is your opinion with regard to indy hits like A Tale in the Desert and excellent indy projects like Fallen Earth.
Of course you might find these mmos less than desirable, but they did have their day in the sun -- since that is a pun, I'll go with it. These mmos had their successes and at a fraction of the cost you'd associate with AAA.
http://wyrdblogging.blogspot.com/
According to Icarus themselves they build platforms to sell. I never said it was highly successful, but I did say it was an excellent indy project.
http://wyrdblogging.blogspot.com/
Really? Go look at the documentaries for both games. EQ was basically Smed talking to Sony about an online game, they gave him a budget, and he hired 2 designers (Brad and another guy) and let them run with it.
UO was owned by EA, but still mainly overseen by Garriot at that point, who let Koster and a few others run the show while he worked on the next singleplayer game, where EA's main attention was focused.
Those games were INSANELY free form development wise.
Are you done yet?
I don't know about EQ, but you're mostly right about UO.
The way I understand it, UO was a pet project of Garriot's that was agreed to by EA as part of the deal that bought out Garriot's company (which made the Ultima series). And they were making Ultima 8 at the time too, as you pointed out.
Originally, the UO team was almost hidden away from the rest of the company. They were placed on a floor where the entire rest of the floor was under construction. Most people working at EA weren't even aware they were there unless they happened to run into them in other parts of the building (cafeteria, elevator, etc.).
But once news of UO spread and wildly excited interest picked up, EA took notice and flushed a bunch more money into UO's development. According to Koster, they did little intervention and gave them lots of support. So at that time EA was a real boon to UO in a hands off sort of way, more curious and less control.
I don't think it changed much until the PvP started hurting the bottom line in a big way. That's when EA jumped in and started telling the UO team what was going to be.
But UO wasn't what I'd call "indie". They had something like 15-20 people once they started coding (after designing the game plan).
Once upon a time....
Oh wait let me guess you are waiting for those eastern releases with high currency cash shops. LOL.
So... same as AAA WoW clones?
Oh wait let me guess you are waiting for those eastern releases with high currency cash shops. LOL.
"my prejudices are better"
That person is probably talking about independent minds giving rise to original ideas that allow hack companies like blizzard to make billions off of 13 year olds (in mind if not body). I respect any indy company or group that earnestly tries new ideas, I can only imagine that mind that wouldn't respect that (see Qui-gon Jinn for details).
http://wyrdblogging.blogspot.com/
Are you really citing a Star Wars character as a source of authority and wisdom?
Are you really calling Blizzard, the maker of what is far and away the most successful MMORPG today as a 'hack company'? Exactly what definition of 'hack' are you using?
The public has spoken and the AAA guys have listened and gave up. They realized they weren't making WoW money with the well polished clones and folded up shop. They will now be aiming their sites on the MOBA genre and squeezing the blood out of that until its dry.
The only AAA polished games you will see now are eastern F2P games that will probably just be a rehash on all the others with different characters and monsters.
Never said they would be the next MMO's.
Just saying that is what we will be seeing coming out from AAA dev's as they try and cash in on them.