A positive Brand Recongnition leads to a positive Brand Loyality that endures even some lows as long you dont dissatisfy People that much their brand loyality breaks up and becomes Brand Dissastisfaction which is what happened to Blizzard and SoE.
Blizzard thrives (or stagnates at a high level which is ok bcs it is already on the Mount Everest of Successes) and SoE is in (Add)Venture-Hell.
SoE worked hard for years and years to become that famed to make it there...as a Business they rightfully deserve anything happen.
Rockstar and Bethesda could compete Blizzard if they would not lack the percived Onlinegame-Competence which would/does hamper them seriously and Rockstar lacks a good potential MMO-IP anyway.
Let the Age of shitty mobile games commence further...
"Torquemada... do not implore him for compassion. Torquemada... do not beg him for forgiveness. Torquemada... do not ask him for mercy. Let's face it, you can't Torquemada anything!"
Originally posted by Phry Sony would never have parted with SOE unless it was losing them money, that they were unwilling to restructure the division themselves rather than sell it off, probably is an indication of just how serious that was. Investment companies don't tend to gamble on the 'future' they tend deal with what they have in front of them, the recent lay offs are probably just the tip of the iceberg, one thing is for sure, SOE, now Daybreak, will not be allowed to lose any more money, they will do what they have to, to make this so, probably using measures that Sony would have considered unthinkable.
I don't know why Sony sold off SOE - but I just wanted to comment - Companies spin off/sell assets all the time, even some that are profitable.
I don't know SOE's balance sheets, or if they were making money or not (I would bet they were making money though, their F2P model has done very well for them from what I can gather and they have done a (too?) good job reducing costs on maintenance and development of existing projects).
Maybe Sony didn't see Western-style games in it's corporate values. Maybe Sony didn't see a PC-centric gaming studio to their advantage. Maybe Smedley just couldn't leverage SOE titles to push PS4 hardware fast enough. Maybe they didn't see any gaming studio fitting in with their corporate image -- after all, how many First-Party titles exist for the Playstation any more? Maybe shifting tax codes make it non-advantageous to have a studio in a foreign country, even/especially if they are profitable?
There are a lot of reasons why Sony could have spun this off, and most of them don't have to do with just profit. Sure if it were making crazy amounts of cash, they probably would have structured their company around it, but likewise even if it weren't profitable and it fit very well within their corporate structure they may have nurtured and kept it afloat. Money is very significant, but it's not the only reason companies do things.
-----
I do agree that the current layoffs are probably just the tip of the iceberg with regard to "restructuring".
Had to stop reading after the OP stated the sale of SOE must mean the IP isn't worth much. There's just no point trying to reason with someone who draws a conclusion to support his point of view. Always better to craft an opinion around conclusions, rather than vice versa.
You can gauge the interest when there is something to show in order to get said interest but until then there's no way to know. We've seen and heard bits, theorized how they can fit together but the complete picture has not been seen. True.. but.. Trust me, Columbus Nova and Sony saw "A LOT" more of the complete picture and took action..
IMO the point of EQN was to revitalize the brand by creating a newer model to stand next to the existing ones (EQ/EQ2). I don't think EQ/EQ2 hold active numbers that are something to brag about.. IMO.. actually EQ isn't growing and it's been on life support for years.. It theoretically is poised to bring in a whole new audience. I'm not sure about the stigma you're referring to. Maybe you wanted EQN to be EQ3 and since it's not would rather just see the brand retired? I could see that point of view but I wouldn't hold your breath.
What should of been done, considering the stagnant condition of both EQ 1&2 is to create a brand new EQ3 that encompasses everything good about the first two, and can the OLD games.. I would of been MORE then happy to support that and jump on board to help make it happen.. But it was clear that Georgie and others have NO intention to give EQ 1&2 any serious love..
EQ1 has some serious problems, that is condoned and supported by SOE/Daybreak, which shows why both EQ1 &2 have a hard time breaking into the top 200 games according to game time played.. It's one thing to have X amount of customers, it's another thing to register how many hours are being played.. IMO.. Play time per customers says a lot more..
My gues is that this mmo might also face what all the other mmo's had to endure.
Not enough players to make it succesfull, maybe the launch is good, but after that its going to drop like a brick as we have seen with 95% off all the mmo;s that came out after the mammoths of ancient times.
Cartoon graphics with action combat and half assed healers is not going to do well.
This is my opinion offcourse, but prove me wrong and i shall eat my words.
Its hillarious how bad the mmo market is for the past decade.
FFARR and GW2 are doing good, all the other mmo's just barely survive and need to shut down server after server untill 1 or 2 servers can make it to medium population.
EQN could have been something fresh and new, but its hype and so far it has nothing to show for after years of development.
My gues is that this mmo might also face what all the other mmo's had to endure.
Not enough players to make it succesfull, maybe the launch is good, but after that its going to drop like a brick as we have seen with 95% off all the mmo;s that came out after the mammoths of ancient times.
Cartoon graphics with action combat and half assed healers is not going to do well.
This is my opinion offcourse, but prove me wrong and i shall eat my words.
Its hillarious how bad the mmo market is for the past decade.
FFARR and GW2 are doing good, all the other mmo's just barely survive and need to shut down server after server untill 1 or 2 servers can make it to medium population.
EQN could have been something fresh and new, but its hype and so far it has nothing to show for after years of development.
^ This. They can't even get the horrible voxel engine to look half decent. Landmark is extremely bad. I got my free access in closed Alpha and nothing significant has changed since then, only some fluff got added. The base is rotten and it will never be fixed.
Originally posted by Dren_Utogi I think the fact that Sony sold an entire division speaks volumes.
Yes, it does.
It tells us that Sony finally decided to concentrate on their core business to get their company back on track. And making MMO's is not a Sony core business. It's a legacy of the old idea of "owning the channel". Sony started as a hardware manufacturer making electronic goods (TV's, Walkman's, game consoles, medical equipment, etc.), and they wanted to also make the content that is consumed via their entertainment devices. So since the late 80's, Sony has been trying to transform itself into a media company. Hence the existence of SOE (Sony Online Entertainment), SPE (Sony Pictures Entertainment) and SME (Sony Music Entertainment).
But what looks good on paper doesn't always translate into success in the real world. Most mega-corps at some point realised (or will realise) that they are involved in too many different things and simply couldn't hack it. That's when consolidation and re-organization and "focusing on core business" becomes the fashionable buzzwords in the boardroom.
Sony's core business (hardware manufacturer) is under threat from Korean and Chinese rivals, and that's why they're getting back to basics. Any unprofitable division not aligned to core business will be unceremoniously sold in the near future.
Yes, the 'virgin' experience. We always compare from that baseline.
There are some things though I could do without when it comes to EQ. But there's also a lot of stuff that I miss, that was that 'core' of having fun in that game.
Though, regrettably, the genre has moved quite a bit away from such game design, that I doubt we'll see much of a recurrence.
EQ Next.
I'd be psyched, if there was actually something to look at. For me, Landmark doesn't count.
I never really got into EQ, played it on my suite mates account in the college dorms for a bit, but was always more into UO - until SWG came out, and then later WoW.
I did however maintain a subscription to EQ2 for a while, enjoyed it quite a bit, but just didn't have the social element I was looking for (which was my fault for not really looking too hard to find a guild.)
I don't see Everquest in Landmark.
Or in what little tidbits they've shown from Next.
I see a "hop on the voxel bandwagon" attempt to cash in on something while it's hot... but it's already too little, too late. Typical SOE thinking, IMO.
Just like the CU/NGE for SWG (to try and bring back the the mass of player leaving for WoW), the Matrix Online, and H1Z1.
I mean, how many of their games HAVE closed? Free Realm, Vanguard, Matrix...
Vanguard was maybe the most interesting and original thing they have made since Everquest, but the support for the game at all levels and its management were an absolute mess. That game wasn't even given a chance to being good.
I hope Landmark survives, as a stand alone title focused on building and exploration and community, maybe even modding - so Daybreak's F2P Minecraft / Trove / Terraria etc. competitor/clone.
I good addition to the portfolio with a recognized name.
But if they want to keep Everquest going, they need to do a real Everquest 3.
They might want to hire some software engineers from Activision/Blizzard and Arenanet though, as every SOE game I've ever played has had terrible, un-optimized, jumpy, quirky game engines.
You really can't put a price on smooth gameplay - ask Ubisoft!
... and people wonder how/why games like WoW, Diablo 3, and Destiny have done so well despite their flaws.
Smooth, engaging, fun core gameplay >>>>>>>>>>>>>> all.
Vanguard was maybe the most interesting and original thing they have made since Everquest, but the support for the game at all levels and its management were an absolute mess. That game wasn't even given a chance to being good.
They didn't make Vanguard, they were just the publisher after Microsoft pulled out. They lost money with it and probably decided that they would never see that money back even if they invested more money to "fix it".
Is it at all possible the company bought it so they can sell the code and other trademarks to make money. It wouldn't surprise me one bit if they dismantle and sell it all off. At this point who can guess what they are going to do.
It really depends on what EQN ends up being. If it ends up being a quest hub level grind than do we really need another one even set in Norrath? If it ends up being what they have been promising a open world sandbox with dynamic content and NPC who's behavior changes based on the players actions than that might be something worth at least looking at. It at least from what the developers are saying has been trying to stretch out beyond what MMO's are today both the Sandbox and Theme park variants neither of which seems to be able to capture the average player's attention for very long.
Originally posted by Dren_Utogi I think the fact that Sony sold an entire division speaks volumes.
Yes, and there is a specific reason for that. Sony losing billions and any non-PS4 games not being a part of Sony's "pillars" going forward. I'm not saying Daybreak is pulling in record breaking numbers but they had to have some value in order to be acquired by CN, maintaining the titles, and still actively developing future ones.
Ahhhhhh, I remember the days when Sony was known for more than just a console name. Walkman anyone?
Originally posted by Brenics Is it at all possible the company bought it so they can sell the code and other trademarks to make money. It wouldn't surprise me one bit if they dismantle and sell it all off. At this point who can guess what they are going to do.
These are my thoughts. Ding ding ding.... investment company.
@ Dren: One kids opinion above, So here is mine to counter.
EQ was my first MMO Id love to see the original aspects from back then in a new engine. Issue with mmos today is they lost touch in what they originally were.
This.
Just make EQ 3 with a gameplay style like it was in the early days of EQ. Everything through Velious was awesome.
I think most EQ fans will agree, its not the graphics (never was), the game play (maybe) ist the LORE and the feeling of accomplishment when you completed something. The story in EQ is what fans remember, its what fans want. Its the Jboots you camped endless hours to get the parts to make it. Its that fricken griffon you camped for weeks on end to get the eye patch of plunder, or the EPIC weapon quests which took some people months upon months to complete.
All of these things + the LORE is what made EQ what it was. Sony can never have a successful Everquest without adding Everquest lore and familiarity. They can not even put the name Everquest on something if the new game doesnt build on the old game or give fans somewhat of a " This brings back memories" feeling.
Anything else they do without these factors will never be appreciated and loved by REAL EQ fans.
Comments
A positive Brand Recongnition leads to a positive Brand Loyality that endures even some lows as long you dont dissatisfy People that much their brand loyality breaks up and becomes Brand Dissastisfaction which is what happened to Blizzard and SoE.
Blizzard thrives (or stagnates at a high level which is ok bcs it is already on the Mount Everest of Successes) and SoE is in (Add)Venture-Hell.
SoE worked hard for years and years to become that famed to make it there...as a Business they rightfully deserve anything happen.
Rockstar and Bethesda could compete Blizzard if they would not lack the percived Onlinegame-Competence which would/does hamper them seriously and Rockstar lacks a good potential MMO-IP anyway.
Let the Age of shitty mobile games commence further...
"Torquemada... do not implore him for compassion. Torquemada... do not beg him for forgiveness. Torquemada... do not ask him for mercy. Let's face it, you can't Torquemada anything!"
MWO Music Video - What does the Mech say: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FF6HYNqCDLI
Johnny Cash - The Man Comes Around: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y0x2iwK0BKM
I don't know why Sony sold off SOE - but I just wanted to comment - Companies spin off/sell assets all the time, even some that are profitable.
I don't know SOE's balance sheets, or if they were making money or not (I would bet they were making money though, their F2P model has done very well for them from what I can gather and they have done a (too?) good job reducing costs on maintenance and development of existing projects).
Maybe Sony didn't see Western-style games in it's corporate values.
Maybe Sony didn't see a PC-centric gaming studio to their advantage.
Maybe Smedley just couldn't leverage SOE titles to push PS4 hardware fast enough.
Maybe they didn't see any gaming studio fitting in with their corporate image -- after all, how many First-Party titles exist for the Playstation any more?
Maybe shifting tax codes make it non-advantageous to have a studio in a foreign country, even/especially if they are profitable?
There are a lot of reasons why Sony could have spun this off, and most of them don't have to do with just profit. Sure if it were making crazy amounts of cash, they probably would have structured their company around it, but likewise even if it weren't profitable and it fit very well within their corporate structure they may have nurtured and kept it afloat. Money is very significant, but it's not the only reason companies do things.
-----
I do agree that the current layoffs are probably just the tip of the iceberg with regard to "restructuring".
- Nellus
What should of been done, considering the stagnant condition of both EQ 1&2 is to create a brand new EQ3 that encompasses everything good about the first two, and can the OLD games.. I would of been MORE then happy to support that and jump on board to help make it happen.. But it was clear that Georgie and others have NO intention to give EQ 1&2 any serious love..
EQ1 has some serious problems, that is condoned and supported by SOE/Daybreak, which shows why both EQ1 &2 have a hard time breaking into the top 200 games according to game time played.. It's one thing to have X amount of customers, it's another thing to register how many hours are being played.. IMO.. Play time per customers says a lot more..
My gues is that this mmo might also face what all the other mmo's had to endure.
Not enough players to make it succesfull, maybe the launch is good, but after that its going to drop like a brick as we have seen with 95% off all the mmo;s that came out after the mammoths of ancient times.
Cartoon graphics with action combat and half assed healers is not going to do well.
This is my opinion offcourse, but prove me wrong and i shall eat my words.
Its hillarious how bad the mmo market is for the past decade.
FFARR and GW2 are doing good, all the other mmo's just barely survive and need to shut down server after server untill 1 or 2 servers can make it to medium population.
EQN could have been something fresh and new, but its hype and so far it has nothing to show for after years of development.
^ This. They can't even get the horrible voxel engine to look half decent. Landmark is extremely bad. I got my free access in closed Alpha and nothing significant has changed since then, only some fluff got added. The base is rotten and it will never be fixed.
It's dead already, No need to shut anything down.
Yes, it does.
It tells us that Sony finally decided to concentrate on their core business to get their company back on track. And making MMO's is not a Sony core business. It's a legacy of the old idea of "owning the channel". Sony started as a hardware manufacturer making electronic goods (TV's, Walkman's, game consoles, medical equipment, etc.), and they wanted to also make the content that is consumed via their entertainment devices. So since the late 80's, Sony has been trying to transform itself into a media company. Hence the existence of SOE (Sony Online Entertainment), SPE (Sony Pictures Entertainment) and SME (Sony Music Entertainment).
But what looks good on paper doesn't always translate into success in the real world. Most mega-corps at some point realised (or will realise) that they are involved in too many different things and simply couldn't hack it. That's when consolidation and re-organization and "focusing on core business" becomes the fashionable buzzwords in the boardroom.
Sony's core business (hardware manufacturer) is under threat from Korean and Chinese rivals, and that's why they're getting back to basics. Any unprofitable division not aligned to core business will be unceremoniously sold in the near future.
OP actually never played EQ.
He's just pretending.
My first MMO also was Everquest.
Yes, the 'virgin' experience. We always compare from that baseline.
There are some things though I could do without when it comes to EQ. But there's also a lot of stuff that I miss, that was that 'core' of having fun in that game.
Though, regrettably, the genre has moved quite a bit away from such game design, that I doubt we'll see much of a recurrence.
EQ Next.
I'd be psyched, if there was actually something to look at. For me, Landmark doesn't count.
I agree with the OP, kind of.
I never really got into EQ, played it on my suite mates account in the college dorms for a bit, but was always more into UO - until SWG came out, and then later WoW.
I did however maintain a subscription to EQ2 for a while, enjoyed it quite a bit, but just didn't have the social element I was looking for (which was my fault for not really looking too hard to find a guild.)
I don't see Everquest in Landmark.
Or in what little tidbits they've shown from Next.
I see a "hop on the voxel bandwagon" attempt to cash in on something while it's hot... but it's already too little, too late. Typical SOE thinking, IMO.
Just like the CU/NGE for SWG (to try and bring back the the mass of player leaving for WoW), the Matrix Online, and H1Z1.
I mean, how many of their games HAVE closed? Free Realm, Vanguard, Matrix...
Vanguard was maybe the most interesting and original thing they have made since Everquest, but the support for the game at all levels and its management were an absolute mess. That game wasn't even given a chance to being good.
I hope Landmark survives, as a stand alone title focused on building and exploration and community, maybe even modding - so Daybreak's F2P Minecraft / Trove / Terraria etc. competitor/clone.
I good addition to the portfolio with a recognized name.
But if they want to keep Everquest going, they need to do a real Everquest 3.
They might want to hire some software engineers from Activision/Blizzard and Arenanet though, as every SOE game I've ever played has had terrible, un-optimized, jumpy, quirky game engines.
You really can't put a price on smooth gameplay - ask Ubisoft!
... and people wonder how/why games like WoW, Diablo 3, and Destiny have done so well despite their flaws.
Smooth, engaging, fun core gameplay >>>>>>>>>>>>>> all.
They didn't make Vanguard, they were just the publisher after Microsoft pulled out. They lost money with it and probably decided that they would never see that money back even if they invested more money to "fix it".
They run a business, not a charity.
I Think the shode re-name the game! Becuse Eq-Next are not Everguest in the way we now everquest !
It a totaly difrent game whit the same name.
x1muft.png
Star Citizen – The Extinction Level Event
4/13/15 > ELE has been updated look for 16-04-13.
http://www.dereksmart.org/2016/04/star-citizen-the-ele/
Enjoy and know the truth always comes to light!
It really depends on what EQN ends up being. If it ends up being a quest hub level grind than do we really need another one even set in Norrath? If it ends up being what they have been promising a open world sandbox with dynamic content and NPC who's behavior changes based on the players actions than that might be something worth at least looking at. It at least from what the developers are saying has been trying to stretch out beyond what MMO's are today both the Sandbox and Theme park variants neither of which seems to be able to capture the average player's attention for very long.
Ahhhhhh, I remember the days when Sony was known for more than just a console name. Walkman anyone?
These are my thoughts. Ding ding ding.... investment company.
Ignore OP.
Some men just want to watch the world burn.
You stay sassy!
EQN becomes Heroes of Norrath the MOBA!!!
OH BOY I CAN'T WAIT!
Evolution is built on piles upon piles of death.
This.
Just make EQ 3 with a gameplay style like it was in the early days of EQ. Everything through Velious was awesome.
I think most EQ fans will agree, its not the graphics (never was), the game play (maybe) ist the LORE and the feeling of accomplishment when you completed something. The story in EQ is what fans remember, its what fans want. Its the Jboots you camped endless hours to get the parts to make it. Its that fricken griffon you camped for weeks on end to get the eye patch of plunder, or the EPIC weapon quests which took some people months upon months to complete.
All of these things + the LORE is what made EQ what it was. Sony can never have a successful Everquest without adding Everquest lore and familiarity. They can not even put the name Everquest on something if the new game doesnt build on the old game or give fans somewhat of a " This brings back memories" feeling.
Anything else they do without these factors will never be appreciated and loved by REAL EQ fans.