No one should excuse any game - indie or AAA - for bugs or technical problems.
THIS. I 100% agree with.
But to be blind to the fact that they will exist in every game, to varying levels, is foolish.
How bad they are is up to each player to decide by how they spend their money.
Again we agree. You decide on the quality of the product, not grade on a curve because it's some indy company. A badly bugged game from an indy company is no better than a badly bugged game from EA. The only possible mitigating factor would be cost. If title X costs half of what title Y does... I would tend to be more forgiving. If they both cost similarly... I will judge both similarly.
Agreed. If a company charges AAA prices, they should deliver a AAA product.
I don't judge indie films the same way I judge films made by top studios. Lower budget, less staff, lower expectations. Those indie films can still be entertaining. They charge the same price, too.
I don't judge self-published books the same way I judge books from top publishers. Those self-published books can still be informative, entertaining, and enduring.
Why should I judge indie games the same way I judge games from top distributors? It doesn't make sense.
Get some perspective, people.
Playing | GW2 Wanting | Pantheon Watching | Crowfall Retired | WAR, Cabal, MO, CO, SHK, WoW, FFXIV: ARR
I don't judge indie films the same way I judge films made by top studios. Lower budget, less staff, lower expectations. Those indie films can still be entertaining. They charge the same price, too.
I don't judge self-published books the same way I judge books from top publishers. Those self-published books can still be informative, entertaining, and enduring.
Why should I judge indie games the same way I judge games from top distributors? It doesn't make sense.
Get some perspective, people.
you pay a relatively nominal fee to see an indie film once. With a MMO like Mortal Online, for example, you pay full retail price for the license and then a monthly subscription fee that's on par with the same rates charged by AAA titles. Additionally, books and films are finite objects. Once they're done, they're done. A MMO is never really "done". Regardless, an indie film or a self-published book still has to be "good" for people to accept it. With a game, that's even more important, due to the revenue model. How long are players expected to excuse a substandard product based on the "it's indie" argument? As I mentioned above, the companies that develop games are businesses. As such, they're responsible for creating a quality, marketable product. Also, like every other business, they're responsible for ensuring they have a sound business plan, solid management and talent, adequate capita, appropriate licensing, etc... If they can do these things, they'll probably succeed. If they can't, they'll fail. It's economic natural selection and no different than what happens to brick-and-mortar enterprises who suffer the same failures.
you pay a relatively nominal fee to see an indie film once. With a MMO like Mortal Online, for example, you pay full retail price for the license and then a monthly subscription fee that's on par with the same rates charged by AAA titles. Additionally, books and films are finite objects. Once they're done, they're done. A MMO is never really "done". Regardless, an indie film or a self-published book still has to be "good" for people to accept it. With a game, that's even more important, due to the revenue model. How long are players expected to excuse a substandard product based on the "it's indie" argument? As I mentioned above, the companies that develop games are businesses. As such, they're responsible for creating a quality, marketable product. Also, like every other business, they're responsible for ensuring they have a sound business plan, solid management and talent, adequate capita, appropriate licensing, etc... If they can do these things, they'll probably succeed. If they can't, they'll fail. It's economic natural selection and no different than what happens to brick-and-mortar enterprises who suffer the same failures.
~Ripper
Nothing that you said changes the fact that I judge indie films different from major studio films. Or that I judge self-published books different than mass market books from giant publishing houses.
So why should I judge an indie MMORPG differently?
Because it's not finite? As you say, "A MMO is never really 'done.'" That has nothing to do with whether or not it's indie or AAA. Either way it's never really done.
You also say, "Regardless, an indie film or a self-published book still has to be "good" for people to accept it." No kidding? Interesting that you put good in quotes. Good in the same standard as a major film studio good or good in an indie film studio good? No one expects an indie film to rival Transformers in terms of special effects, for instance. That's my opinion. So they need to make up for that. Either with story or with characters.
Same with indie games. I don't expect the same amount of polish or content as a super distributor like EA. So the indie company needs to make up for that in game play.
"How long are players expected to excuse a substandard product based on the 'it's indie' argument?" If they can't tolerate a "substandard" product, they probably should not play indie games. No different than if they want nothing less than Transformers, they shouldn't watch indie films.
Perspective. It's free for everyone.
Playing | GW2 Wanting | Pantheon Watching | Crowfall Retired | WAR, Cabal, MO, CO, SHK, WoW, FFXIV: ARR
Okay, Okay Regarding Tabula Rasa and Vanguard, I concede the point. In both cases, they were spearheaded by a major personality, such that the producers were in the background, but they clearly were still there.
Other prior positions held by Kingsisle employees---Midway's Senior Vice President - Administration and Operations http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Midway_Games Chief Technical Officer of the Communication Business of Tektronix, Inc ; Vice President of Marketing for Hoover's, Inc ; co-founder of the online game company Wolfpack Studios, Inc. (X2) ; co-founded two of the industry's most well known software development studios- id Software and ION Storm. While It may be an "indy" company there is obviously plenty of corporate experience and resources to go around.
Corporate development is geared towards the highest possible profit. As such, it is prone to play to the lowest common denominator and become too "polished", to the point of losing any character and becoming very much like many of the other product on the market. Indy offerings will be rougher around the edges usually, but are more likely to avoid playing to the lowest common denominator.
I want to buy MO, not to support an indi company because i can careless about poor guys. I support it because its the only mmorpg who got the kind of core feature i want.
I think that what people accusing independent gaming studios are after, is that they should build up small, i.e., what they think they can manage rather than go massive and hope for the best. There are a number of independent gaming studios that do produce good games and don't have such a pedigree as those working for, say, Kingsisle. For example Frozenbyte's Trine was somewhat of a success and I doubt many of us has played their previous titles and there are a number of other gaming companies that build up slowly and steadily. Then we have independent MMOG developing studios that are created at whim and they have limited prior experience (Mortal Online, Darkfall Online, Xsyon, Dawntide, &c.)
This is a set-up that might work or then it might not. I do not think that Mortal Online is that bad a game considering that it is the first gaming project most of its developers have ever been part. It did stick to its original idea and they do have a chance to flesh out the game if they just manage to keep it profitable. It just might have been a tad easier for them would they have had a few projects under their belt that would have familiarised them with the possible problems. Also, prior success would have made it a whole lot easier to get financial support from the market. A prime example of such independent gaming studio "progress" might be, say, RedLynx with its Trials HD that became a massive hit (I guess past 1,000,000 purchases already). Their first Trials games weren't all that great but after a decade or so of practice they managed to create both visually appealing and entertaining a game.
I just think that the main gripe with independent and MMOG is that the former implies limited resources and the latter implies vast expenses. To create a massive gaming world with detailed graphics to please modern customer and then have a well-programmed features does take quite some time and time equals money. Recently emerged third-party tools such as HeroEngine will certainly reduce the needed expertise but it might not lessen the costs all that much. Hence, it remains sort of an oxymoron to have an independent MMOG developing gaming studio. You need loads of money and you cannot have such money without either prior success or prior experience. If you have had a successful game before you already are something more than what independent tends to imply. If you have loads of prior experience with which you can get funding (cf. e.g. En Masse or said Kingsisle) you are in a similar position as bigger players which is not what most mean when they state something is independent. After all, also Funcom is independent but I don't think any would refer AoC an indy title (not a good example as the launch was a mess, but I guess most figure out what I mean).
As a business model, I agree that starting with a simpler product is a much better idea. Along with the examples you give I would add "World of Goo" or such classics as Tetris. Starting with an MMO is clearly very ambitious and is an excellent set up for failure.
Indy developers need to bring something compelling and different to their project if they are going to be so ambitious. Otherwise all they are bringing to the table is a poorly executed version of the same thing the big studios are doing. Most of the advocates of MO feel that Starvault do so, and to an extent that excuses there current number of flaws. At least some of the critics ignore that completely and focus only on the flaws.
One thing that is present in EVE, Darkfall and MO (and planned for Xsyon and Dawntide) is PVP where the players define the "teams" and how they relate to each other, instead of being assigned to one of 2 or 3 developer defined factions. I'm not sure how it works in Conan, but to the best of my knowledge, no other large title offers such a thing currently.
Comments
Agreed. If a company charges AAA prices, they should deliver a AAA product.
I don't judge indie films the same way I judge films made by top studios. Lower budget, less staff, lower expectations. Those indie films can still be entertaining. They charge the same price, too.
I don't judge self-published books the same way I judge books from top publishers. Those self-published books can still be informative, entertaining, and enduring.
Why should I judge indie games the same way I judge games from top distributors? It doesn't make sense.
Get some perspective, people.
Playing | GW2
Wanting | Pantheon
Watching | Crowfall
Retired | WAR, Cabal, MO, CO, SHK, WoW, FFXIV: ARR
you pay a relatively nominal fee to see an indie film once. With a MMO like Mortal Online, for example, you pay full retail price for the license and then a monthly subscription fee that's on par with the same rates charged by AAA titles. Additionally, books and films are finite objects. Once they're done, they're done. A MMO is never really "done". Regardless, an indie film or a self-published book still has to be "good" for people to accept it. With a game, that's even more important, due to the revenue model. How long are players expected to excuse a substandard product based on the "it's indie" argument? As I mentioned above, the companies that develop games are businesses. As such, they're responsible for creating a quality, marketable product. Also, like every other business, they're responsible for ensuring they have a sound business plan, solid management and talent, adequate capita, appropriate licensing, etc... If they can do these things, they'll probably succeed. If they can't, they'll fail. It's economic natural selection and no different than what happens to brick-and-mortar enterprises who suffer the same failures.
~Ripper
Nothing that you said changes the fact that I judge indie films different from major studio films. Or that I judge self-published books different than mass market books from giant publishing houses.
So why should I judge an indie MMORPG differently?
Because it's not finite? As you say, "A MMO is never really 'done.'" That has nothing to do with whether or not it's indie or AAA. Either way it's never really done.
You also say, "Regardless, an indie film or a self-published book still has to be "good" for people to accept it." No kidding? Interesting that you put good in quotes. Good in the same standard as a major film studio good or good in an indie film studio good? No one expects an indie film to rival Transformers in terms of special effects, for instance. That's my opinion. So they need to make up for that. Either with story or with characters.
Same with indie games. I don't expect the same amount of polish or content as a super distributor like EA. So the indie company needs to make up for that in game play.
"How long are players expected to excuse a substandard product based on the 'it's indie' argument?" If they can't tolerate a "substandard" product, they probably should not play indie games. No different than if they want nothing less than Transformers, they shouldn't watch indie films.
Perspective. It's free for everyone.
Playing | GW2
Wanting | Pantheon
Watching | Crowfall
Retired | WAR, Cabal, MO, CO, SHK, WoW, FFXIV: ARR
Okay, Okay Regarding Tabula Rasa and Vanguard, I concede the point. In both cases, they were spearheaded by a major personality, such that the producers were in the background, but they clearly were still there.
Regarding Kingsisle and Wizard 101, I still have to say that is not a good example of an "indy" developer. http://www.kingsisle.com/corporate/management
Other prior positions held by Kingsisle employees---Midway's Senior Vice President - Administration and Operations http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Midway_Games Chief Technical Officer of the Communication Business of Tektronix, Inc ; Vice President of Marketing for Hoover's, Inc ; co-founder of the online game company Wolfpack Studios, Inc. (X2) ; co-founded two of the industry's most well known software development studios- id Software and ION Storm. While It may be an "indy" company there is obviously plenty of corporate experience and resources to go around.
Corporate development is geared towards the highest possible profit. As such, it is prone to play to the lowest common denominator and become too "polished", to the point of losing any character and becoming very much like many of the other product on the market. Indy offerings will be rougher around the edges usually, but are more likely to avoid playing to the lowest common denominator.
I want to buy MO, not to support an indi company because i can careless about poor guys. I support it because its the only mmorpg who got the kind of core feature i want.
C:\Users\FF\Desktop\spin move.gif
I think that what people accusing independent gaming studios are after, is that they should build up small, i.e., what they think they can manage rather than go massive and hope for the best. There are a number of independent gaming studios that do produce good games and don't have such a pedigree as those working for, say, Kingsisle. For example Frozenbyte's Trine was somewhat of a success and I doubt many of us has played their previous titles and there are a number of other gaming companies that build up slowly and steadily. Then we have independent MMOG developing studios that are created at whim and they have limited prior experience (Mortal Online, Darkfall Online, Xsyon, Dawntide, &c.)
This is a set-up that might work or then it might not. I do not think that Mortal Online is that bad a game considering that it is the first gaming project most of its developers have ever been part. It did stick to its original idea and they do have a chance to flesh out the game if they just manage to keep it profitable. It just might have been a tad easier for them would they have had a few projects under their belt that would have familiarised them with the possible problems. Also, prior success would have made it a whole lot easier to get financial support from the market. A prime example of such independent gaming studio "progress" might be, say, RedLynx with its Trials HD that became a massive hit (I guess past 1,000,000 purchases already). Their first Trials games weren't all that great but after a decade or so of practice they managed to create both visually appealing and entertaining a game.
I just think that the main gripe with independent and MMOG is that the former implies limited resources and the latter implies vast expenses. To create a massive gaming world with detailed graphics to please modern customer and then have a well-programmed features does take quite some time and time equals money. Recently emerged third-party tools such as HeroEngine will certainly reduce the needed expertise but it might not lessen the costs all that much. Hence, it remains sort of an oxymoron to have an independent MMOG developing gaming studio. You need loads of money and you cannot have such money without either prior success or prior experience. If you have had a successful game before you already are something more than what independent tends to imply. If you have loads of prior experience with which you can get funding (cf. e.g. En Masse or said Kingsisle) you are in a similar position as bigger players which is not what most mean when they state something is independent. After all, also Funcom is independent but I don't think any would refer AoC an indy title (not a good example as the launch was a mess, but I guess most figure out what I mean).
@ Harkkum:
As a business model, I agree that starting with a simpler product is a much better idea. Along with the examples you give I would add "World of Goo" or such classics as Tetris. Starting with an MMO is clearly very ambitious and is an excellent set up for failure.
Indy developers need to bring something compelling and different to their project if they are going to be so ambitious. Otherwise all they are bringing to the table is a poorly executed version of the same thing the big studios are doing. Most of the advocates of MO feel that Starvault do so, and to an extent that excuses there current number of flaws. At least some of the critics ignore that completely and focus only on the flaws.
One thing that is present in EVE, Darkfall and MO (and planned for Xsyon and Dawntide) is PVP where the players define the "teams" and how they relate to each other, instead of being assigned to one of 2 or 3 developer defined factions. I'm not sure how it works in Conan, but to the best of my knowledge, no other large title offers such a thing currently.
That depends on your definition of large. By most standards Darkfall, Mortal, Xyson and Dawntide are small, niche titles.
All time classic MY NEW FAVORITE POST! (Keep laying those bricks)
"I should point out that no other company has shipped out a beta on a disc before this." - Official Mortal Online Lead Community Moderator
Proudly wearing the Harbinger badge since Dec 23, 2017.
Coined the phrase "Role-Playing a Development Team" January 2018
"Oddly Slap is the main reason I stay in these forums." - Mystichaze April 9th 2018