Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!

How EQN Landmark killed the idea of NDAs for good

2»

Comments

  • SavageHorizonSavageHorizon Member EpicPosts: 3,465
    Originally posted by Roxtarr

    Wrong, wrong, wrong.

    They took my money, I should be able to talk about my experience as a customer. Yes, a customer.  Plus, this doesn't even address the fact that Landmark a social/building game. There's not epic storyline they're hiding. 

    NDA is a good thing in many cases, but in this game it made no sense since they already have our money.

    I agree 100%, now dropping the NDA on EQN would get more respect imo. People forget that the WOW beta didn't have an NDA only early friends and devs alpha but the actual beta from phase one had no NDA and it had open forums. Granted you had to be in beta to post but you could read and watch all vids.

    ArcheAge had no NDA, the OP is trying to give SOE props for something that is pretty unimportant and not new.




  • PyatraPyatra Member Posts: 644
    Originally posted by SavageHorizon
    Originally posted by Roxtarr

    Wrong, wrong, wrong.

    They took my money, I should be able to talk about my experience as a customer. Yes, a customer.  Plus, this doesn't even address the fact that Landmark a social/building game. There's not epic storyline they're hiding. 

    NDA is a good thing in many cases, but in this game it made no sense since they already have our money.

    I agree 100%, now dropping the NDA on EQN would get more respect imo. People forget that the WOW beta didn't have an NDA only early friends and devs alpha but the actual beta from phase one had no NDA and it had open forums. Granted you had to be in beta to post but you could read and watch all vids.

    ArcheAge had no NDA, the OP is trying to give SOE props for something that is pretty unimportant and not new.

    Huh?  ArcheAge had a huge NDA that they went after people like junkyard dogs in Russia... or do you mean the NA localization.... because an NDA isn't required for spell checking Google translate.

  • Dreamo84Dreamo84 Member UncommonPosts: 3,713
    I think gamers are far more aware of the development process than in the past. Most people know what a beta test is now, and more are learning what alpha is. As long as the players are smart enough to understand what to expect from a beta/alpha there is no reason to have an NDA.

    image
  • PyatraPyatra Member Posts: 644
    Originally posted by Fendel84M
    I think gamers are far more aware of the development process than in the past. Most people know what a beta test is now, and more are learning what alpha is. As long as the players are smart enough to understand what to expect from a beta/alpha there is no reason to have an NDA.

    I think these forums prove the main point that players don't know what a beta test is and still no clue on the alpha.  I believe you are right, but until I stop seeing "alpha looks like crap" comments to so many games on game forums, I say NDA on most games is probably still needed.

  • TamanousTamanous Member RarePosts: 3,024
    Originally posted by StonesDK

    You can't have NDA's anymore. The availability of streaming technology for the average user has practically made it impossible.

     

    People started streaming before the NDA was lifted and there's simply no way to control that.

    There are many other reasons for an NDA. You only consider late stage development when many players are allowed to test a nearly finished product. EQN Landmark offered paid testing which completely opens the flood gates to players far earlier in development. If testing was left internally that game would be under an NDA most likely. The degree of public involvement in testing should very well be a considering factor.

     

    The NDA will always be part of development and the nature of the product may necessitate a longer NDA. What many players are failing to differentiate here is the benefits of an NDA for the security and secrecy of a project versus their personal frustration to play or receive information about a game. A company should consider the timing of ending their NDA carefully however once marketing and selling of the game commences. This is where may developers make there mistake.

     

    The primary factor for not having an NDA when public testing is involved is simply the apparent fact that few have the capacity to adhere to NDA restrictions. The average reader here does not have that level of professionalism (this is not an insult but reality. It takes time to develop the concept of professionalism and many jobs simply do not seek it in their employees much anymore). This is proven on any page of any thread for any game under an NDA. Because of this it ends up often being very hard on the fans of the game in question. You may have very excited people wanting to discuss the game yet the very websites used to advertise the games are banning these players ... the players the developers WANT talking about there game.

     

    The end result is that players adhering to the NDA cannot say anything good or bad and those breaking the NDA with negative reviews succeed in disseminating their information as they do not care of the consequences and those trying to defend only become penalized. The NDA thus ONLY hurts the fans of the game.

    You stay sassy!

  • fantasyfreak112fantasyfreak112 Member Posts: 499

    Lmao you think NDA's are there for embarrassed designers?

     

    They are purely for slowing down the theft of ideas, however vain an attempt it may be.

  • Niall18Niall18 Member Posts: 31

    2 me this is really sad. I mean ever since "Founder Packs" with beta access came out there really has been no such thing as a launch? Theres no excitment for games anymore. I mean, Excited that BF4 is coming out soon? 2 bad people have been playing the game for 3 months prier. Excited to get Gw2 in the mail & be one of the 1st on the server on midnight, 2 bad people who had gotten in beta wave 1 & 2 have already been playing for 6-7months.

    Things like Founder Packs & Steam early access is in my books things that ruin this industry. And its only getting worse with no sign of it getting better.

    Check out my Blog for MMO News, Rants & Fun!

    http://MMO-Elitist.blogger.com

  • Kevyne-ShandrisKevyne-Shandris Member UncommonPosts: 2,077
    Originally posted by Elikal

    This. Simply this. If a game is good, the game speaks for itself. If a company has faith in their game, there is no reason to hide it. The proof is, as usual, in the pudding.

    I guess that permanently and profoundly finishes the idea of NDAs.

     

    No matter how Landmark turns out for me, it gains a lot of respect points in SOE, as the entire totally open debate about all issues in their Alpha forum. They don't suga coat anything, they speak how EVERY issue came to be and what they do about it. THAT is how I want MMO development to be. 100% transparent.

     

    I guess that is one of the most important changes in MMO development and I hope this soon makes NDAs a thing of the past. They NEVER served the good of MMOs development ever.

    Oh, yeah.

     

    Truth in advertizing is not hiding a game behind Fort Knox, it's showing it off on the catwalk.

     

    If devs are proud of their creation -- it will show -- and gamers can see why hype is hype (and not just tacked on for a fast buck).

     

    Add that SOE is including their family of products under a $15/mon subscription plan, it's also quite affordable. Like the ease of multiple games under one plan to keep up with the billing, just like utility billing. Only other option I wish SOE (and other publishers) would offer is resyncing of bills (especially if buying a second account, so both can be paid at a specific time -- those who are paid monthly, end of month billing is bad, bad and BAD).

  • GuyClinchGuyClinch Member CommonPosts: 485

    If NDAs lead to a game that's more fun - then I love them. Players make exceedingly bad developers IMHO. WoW went down when they started lettting players dicate development. So the longer you keep the ideas of the masses (usually nerf everything) out - the better your game.

    The very best games have always come from the singularr vision of a few developers involved in the project - whether it was EQ or Burning Crusade WoW or Doom. People are too stupid to know what really makes them tick. You don't want them designing yoru game or coloring feedback. Developers are generally much more intelligent individuals then the players. Yeah that hurts some - but its true.

    You can still make a bad game with an NDA - but they seem to make it easier to make a good one. Let your beta testers give advice about bugs - and keep the NDA up. I don't think the pretty relaxed betas of GW2 helped them much.. Game was actually more challenging in beta.

     

  • DSWBeefDSWBeef Member UncommonPosts: 789

    NDAs are useless now. In the last TESO beta test I counted almost 30 people streaming the beta. People dont care people will find out what they need from streams or leak sites. If I ever developed an mmo I would have NO NDA what so ever. After swtor any mmo with an NDA is fishy to me.

     

    Clarification edit: I think and NDA should be removed as soon as you open testing to a large number of the public. Internal testing, FnF alpha, ect. Should all still be NDA. BUt as soon as potential customers can "test" it then remove the NDA.

    Playing: FFXIV, DnL, and World of Warships
    Waiting on: Ashes of Creation

Sign In or Register to comment.