| 46 posts found | |
|---|---|
Originally posted by xpiher
Nope not at all. I'm merely pointing out that not everything goes to plan and instead of pointing fingers on our end, we rather try to move forward.
I can completely understand everything wasn't going as planned, it's painfully obvious it didn't. What i cant understand was launching AoC pretending it had, and than 'moving forward' from there. As for pointing fingers, I don't think we need names and home telephone numbers of those responsible. Just apologies and refunds.
I'd even settle for a free copy of 'The Secret World' if it ever launches.
FC is a small company when compared to EA, SoE, and Billzard and they probably have 3/5 of the total staff working on any one of their games compared to either of these compaines. And that explains what? And if you want to know why they released a unfinished product you should as Edios, they had all the say when the game would be released. Ohh, what a convenient thing to say, my heart is broken now... poor FC! Who are you trying to kid...
|
|
Originally posted by silkworm
I can completely understand everything wasn't going as planned, it's painfully obvious it didn't. What i cant understand was launching AoC pretending it had, and than 'moving forward' from there. As for pointing fingers, I don't think we need names and home telephone numbers of those responsible. Just apologies and refunds.
I'd even settle for a free copy of 'The Secret World' if it ever launches.
FC is a small company when compared to EA, SoE, and Billzard and they probably have 3/5 of the total staff working on any one of their games compared to either of these compaines. And that explains what? And if you want to know why they released a unfinished product you should as Edios, they had all the say when the game would be released. Ohh, what a convenient thing to say, my heart is broken now... poor FC! Who are you trying to kid...
Its a fact of the gaming world. The publisher decides the state of a released game for the most part. Look at WAR, they removed half the game during beta to make it launch. Why, because the publisher told them that the game WILL launch reguardless of the state its in. AoC,VG, SWG, WAR, EQ2, etc all suffered the same fate. Hell, even WoW did. The staff size explains why it takes FC longer to do things than thoes companies, nothing more. |
|
Originally posted by AmazingAvery
They still haven't fixed this problem? Jeez, what an abortion this game is. Good to know there is no reason to take a second look at least. -------------------------------- |
|
Originally posted by xpiher
I can completely understand everything wasn't going as planned, it's painfully obvious it didn't. What i cant understand was launching AoC pretending it had, and than 'moving forward' from there. As for pointing fingers, I don't think we need names and home telephone numbers of those responsible. Just apologies and refunds.
I'd even settle for a free copy of 'The Secret World' if it ever launches.
FC is a small company when compared to EA, SoE, and Billzard and they probably have 3/5 of the total staff working on any one of their games compared to either of these compaines. And that explains what? And if you want to know why they released a unfinished product you should as Edios, they had all the say when the game would be released. Ohh, what a convenient thing to say, my heart is broken now... poor FC! Who are you trying to kid...
Its a fact of the gaming world. The publisher decides the state of a released game for the most part. Look at WAR, they removed half the game during beta to make it launch. Why, because the publisher told them that the game WILL launch reguardless of the state its in. AoC,VG, SWG, WAR, EQ2, etc all suffered the same fate. Hell, even WoW did. The staff size explains why it takes FC longer to do things than thoes companies, nothing more.
So what you essentially say is that FC was working without a given timeframe. At any time Eidos could decide the release of AOC, be it 1 hour or 50 years from the time FC started developing it. That I find a "bit" hard to believe. |
|
Originally posted by FC-Famine
Oh wow this is rich. You made the same mistakes with Anarchy Online! You people didn't seem to learn a god damn thing. Maybe having some accountability internally will actually allow you to live up to the history you are re-writing. You over-hyped and under delivered. You lied to the player base to string them along all the while ignoring the criticism, deferring the responsibility and just outright make the most incompetent decisions I've ever seen.
|
|
|
Holy cow!
I must say, I am impressed. Never spent much time in this forum but it really is something seeing a company representative explaining its product, instead of one like (rhymes with "scammer") who has its fanbois answer all their questions.
"You know, you have such a stunningly superficial knowledge of what went on that it's almost embarrassing to listen to you." Zbigniew Brzezinski to Joe Scarborough regarding Clinton and the Middle East on the "Morning Joe" program. |
|
Originally posted by popinjay
hahhaha sure you do.. Now why do I have a problem believing that... maybe because your entire posting history is slamming other games ( mostly Warhammer) and singing the praises of WoW? But you are right LoTRO is not gear dependent as much as it is skill dependent. You would probably hate that because it might be hard to do your Intro to Algebra homework while doing a raid. And AoC would be completly out of the question w/o upgrading from that 9800 pro video card.
|
|
Originally posted by silkworm FC is a small company when compared to EA, SoE, and Billzard and they probably have 3/5 of the total staff working on any one of their games compared to either of these compaines. And that explains what? And if you want to know why they released a unfinished product you should as Edios, they had all the say when the game would be released. Ohh, what a convenient thing to say, my heart is broken now... poor FC! Who are you trying to kid...
Its a fact of the gaming world. The publisher decides the state of a released game for the most part. Look at WAR, they removed half the game during beta to make it launch. Why, because the publisher told them that the game WILL launch reguardless of the state its in. AoC,VG, SWG, WAR, EQ2, etc all suffered the same fate. Hell, even WoW did. The staff size explains why it takes FC longer to do things than thoes companies, nothing more.
So what you essentially say is that FC was working without a given timeframe. At any time Eidos could decide the release of AOC, be it 1 hour or 50 years from the time FC started developing it. That I find a "bit" hard to believe.
They probably went back to ask for another set back and Edios said "Nope. Launch her on time"
does that make it a bit more believeable? ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- |
|
Originally posted by Capn23 FC is a small company when compared to EA, SoE, and Billzard and they probably have 3/5 of the total staff working on any one of their games compared to either of these compaines. And that explains what? And if you want to know why they released a unfinished product you should as Edios, they had all the say when the game would be released. Ohh, what a convenient thing to say, my heart is broken now... poor FC! Who are you trying to kid...
Its a fact of the gaming world. The publisher decides the state of a released game for the most part. Look at WAR, they removed half the game during beta to make it launch. Why, because the publisher told them that the game WILL launch reguardless of the state its in. AoC,VG, SWG, WAR, EQ2, etc all suffered the same fate. Hell, even WoW did. The staff size explains why it takes FC longer to do things than thoes companies, nothing more.
So what you essentially say is that FC was working without a given timeframe. At any time Eidos could decide the release of AOC, be it 1 hour or 50 years from the time FC started developing it. That I find a "bit" hard to believe.
They probably went back to ask for another set back and Edios said "Nope. Launch her on time"
does that make it a bit more believeable? Yeah thats exactly what I think happened. They got the bulk of the game done, got a publisher, and then ran into to unforseen problems during beta and Edios said SOL. Same thing happened with WAR so WAR removed half its content to get the game launch ready and it was still bug ridden. |
|
|
all I am going to say is there is some armor (new) well been awhile that to this very day not ONE person has it nor seen in on AH. But its just a empty game.. looks beautiful but empty.. Dont believe go try it. |
|
Originally posted by xpiher
Its a fact of the gaming world. The publisher decides the state of a released game for the most part. Look at WAR, they removed half the game during beta to make it launch. Why, because the publisher told them that the game WILL launch reguardless of the state its in. AoC,VG, SWG, WAR, EQ2, etc all suffered the same fate. Hell, even WoW did. The staff size explains why it takes FC longer to do things than thoes companies, nothing more.
So what you essentially say is that FC was working without a given timeframe. At any time Eidos could decide the release of AOC, be it 1 hour or 50 years from the time FC started developing it. That I find a "bit" hard to believe.
They probably went back to ask for another set back and Edios said "Nope. Launch her on time"
does that make it a bit more believeable? Yeah thats exactly what I think happened. They got the bulk of the game done, got a publisher, and then ran into to unforseen problems during beta and Edios said SOL. Same thing happened with WAR so WAR removed half its content to get the game launch ready and it was still bug ridden.
Post a link to the details of the Eidos/Funcom Publishing Deal. You two are completely speculating. Not every game Publishing Deal includes Financing. Most of the time all the Publishing House does is publish the game (i.e. print the box, burn the discs and distribute to retail). Just because some game companies have blamed their Financial Backers (some being the Publisher) for having to launch rubbish, doesnt make it so in every case. You like to forget who took multiple years and many millions of dollars came up with rubbish in the first place ... it wasn't the Publisher. |
|
Boy, someone is defensive about something.. not sure what but.. whatever floats the boat. I play LOTRO and while its more skill based (?), its kinda snorey too. Nothing wrong with calling a spade a spade.
Easy to slam Warhammer, there's almost no sport in it really with the blunders made there daily. And its extremely easy to sing the praises of the business model run by Blizzard. They did something most companies wish they could and are still doing it four years with no one to catch them. They brought more people to MMO gaming than every single MMO Jackdog has played in his life combined. Whether or not you chose to recognize their achievement is immaterial. The world already has.. you can keep right on ostriching, I guess... that's fun as well. They are really the New York Yankees of MMOs.. they are at the top and are the most hated. So .. yup. But I guess only adults could recognize this. Immature people have a problem giving credit where credit is due. I came here to drop a positive on a rep of a game who looks like they appear to want to know what posters think. Not sure how many times I've seen a Warhammer rep over in the next room answering questions. Oh wait... I am. Never. I guess someone getting a compliment and NOT talking about Warhammer in a glowing term at the same time is too much to handle? "You know, you have such a stunningly superficial knowledge of what went on that it's almost embarrassing to listen to you." Zbigniew Brzezinski to Joe Scarborough regarding Clinton and the Middle East on the "Morning Joe" program. |
|
Originally posted by Unfinished
Its a fact of the gaming world. The publisher decides the state of a released game for the most part. Look at WAR, they removed half the game during beta to make it launch. Why, because the publisher told them that the game WILL launch reguardless of the state its in. AoC,VG, SWG, WAR, EQ2, etc all suffered the same fate. Hell, even WoW did. The staff size explains why it takes FC longer to do things than thoes companies, nothing more.
So what you essentially say is that FC was working without a given timeframe. At any time Eidos could decide the release of AOC, be it 1 hour or 50 years from the time FC started developing it. That I find a "bit" hard to believe.
They probably went back to ask for another set back and Edios said "Nope. Launch her on time"
does that make it a bit more believeable? Yeah thats exactly what I think happened. They got the bulk of the game done, got a publisher, and then ran into to unforseen problems during beta and Edios said SOL. Same thing happened with WAR so WAR removed half its content to get the game launch ready and it was still bug ridden.
Post a link to the details of the Eidos/Funcom Publishing Deal. You two are completely speculating. Not every game Publishing Deal includes Financing. Most of the time all the Publishing House does is publish the game (i.e. print the box, burn the discs and distribute to retail). Just because some game companies have blamed their Financial Backers (some being the Publisher) for having to launch rubbish, doesnt make it so in every case. You like to forget who took multiple years and many millions of dollars came up with rubbish in the first place ... it wasn't the Publisher. Then the blame lays on the investors who would only make money on the box sales, which is my point. Yes, I assumed that the publisher in this regards had more weight in the decision then they may of actually had. However, the publisher and some investors would only see money from the box sales and if thats all they cared about the end result will always be a buggy game at launch. P.S. Although its specualtion its based on years of past exp with compaines who do this on a regular basis ie Sony and EA |
|
Originally posted by xpiher
Its a fact of the gaming world. The publisher decides the state of a released game for the most part. Look at WAR, they removed half the game during beta to make it launch. Why, because the publisher told them that the game WILL launch reguardless of the state its in. AoC,VG, SWG, WAR, EQ2, etc all suffered the same fate. Hell, even WoW did. The staff size explains why it takes FC longer to do things than thoes companies, nothing more.
So what you essentially say is that FC was working without a given timeframe. At any time Eidos could decide the release of AOC, be it 1 hour or 50 years from the time FC started developing it. That I find a "bit" hard to believe.
They probably went back to ask for another set back and Edios said "Nope. Launch her on time"
does that make it a bit more believeable? Yeah thats exactly what I think happened. They got the bulk of the game done, got a publisher, and then ran into to unforseen problems during beta and Edios said SOL. Same thing happened with WAR so WAR removed half its content to get the game launch ready and it was still bug ridden.
Post a link to the details of the Eidos/Funcom Publishing Deal. You two are completely speculating. Not every game Publishing Deal includes Financing. Most of the time all the Publishing House does is publish the game (i.e. print the box, burn the discs and distribute to retail). Just because some game companies have blamed their Financial Backers (some being the Publisher) for having to launch rubbish, doesnt make it so in every case. You like to forget who took multiple years and many millions of dollars came up with rubbish in the first place ... it wasn't the Publisher. Then the blame lays on the investors who would only make money on the box sales, which is my point. Yes, I assumed that the publisher in this regards had more weight in the decision then they may of actually had. However, the publisher and some investors would only see money from the box sales and if thats all they cared about the end result will always be a buggy game at launch. P.S. Although its specualtion its based on years of past exp with compaines who do this on a regular basis ie Sony and EA
Investors?? Its a publically traded company, the stockholders were not given ballots saying "Should FunCom launch Age of Conan in May of 2008?" Enough with the fictional 'Big Bad Man' forcing FC to do something they tried everything to stop from happening .... It's a fairy tale of your own invention. |
|
Originally posted by Unfinished
Its a fact of the gaming world. The publisher decides the state of a released game for the most part. Look at WAR, they removed half the game during beta to make it launch. Why, because the publisher told them that the game WILL launch reguardless of the state its in. AoC,VG, SWG, WAR, EQ2, etc all suffered the same fate. Hell, even WoW did. The staff size explains why it takes FC longer to do things than thoes companies, nothing more.
So what you essentially say is that FC was working without a given timeframe. At any time Eidos could decide the release of AOC, be it 1 hour or 50 years from the time FC started developing it. That I find a "bit" hard to believe.
They probably went back to ask for another set back and Edios said "Nope. Launch her on time"
does that make it a bit more believeable? Yeah thats exactly what I think happened. They got the bulk of the game done, got a publisher, and then ran into to unforseen problems during beta and Edios said SOL. Same thing happened with WAR so WAR removed half its content to get the game launch ready and it was still bug ridden.
Post a link to the details of the Eidos/Funcom Publishing Deal. You two are completely speculating. Not every game Publishing Deal includes Financing. Most of the time all the Publishing House does is publish the game (i.e. print the box, burn the discs and distribute to retail). Just because some game companies have blamed their Financial Backers (some being the Publisher) for having to launch rubbish, doesnt make it so in every case. You like to forget who took multiple years and many millions of dollars came up with rubbish in the first place ... it wasn't the Publisher. Then the blame lays on the investors who would only make money on the box sales, which is my point. Yes, I assumed that the publisher in this regards had more weight in the decision then they may of actually had. However, the publisher and some investors would only see money from the box sales and if thats all they cared about the end result will always be a buggy game at launch. P.S. Although its specualtion its based on years of past exp with compaines who do this on a regular basis ie Sony and EA
Investors?? Its a publically traded company, the stockholders were not given ballots saying "Should FunCom launch Age of Conan in May of 2008?" Enough with the fictional 'Big Bad Man' forcing FC to do something they tried everything to stop from happening .... It's a fairy tale of your own invention.
All gaming companies are publically traded for the most part. So by your logic no game should be launched in a state that we see time and time again: broken and drabe. Its not a fairy tell of my creation, its a common fact in MMOs. Someone outside the developing company pulls the strings for a release. Its doesn't excuse the what FC did, but I do undestand that its not entirely their fault. |
|
Originally posted by xpiher
You are trying to popularize what is basicaly an Urban Legend, Site any example of these mysterious figures 'pulling the strings'. Name me the games that had a premature launches because a Publisher / Financer 'forced' them to launch on Date X It certainly wasn't Vanguard, Tabula Rasa, Warhammer, DDO, Hellgate:London, SWG, or Anarchy Online.
|
|
Originally posted by Unfinished
You are trying to popularize what is basicaly an Urban Legend, Site any example of these mysterious figures 'pulling the strings'. Name me the games that had a premature launches because a Publisher / Financer 'forced' them to launch on Date X It certainly wasn't Vanguard, Tabula Rasa, Warhammer, DDO, Hellgate:London, SWG, or Anarchy Online.
Oh rly? None of thoes hu. Tabula Rasa had the same publisher and producer i think (NCSoft right?) so that ones off the list. But I know that VG and WAR had sperate publishers and both were launched early most likely because of them. I can't prove it because I'm not an insider, but it doesn't take an insider to know when a developer and publisher announce a release date they have to meet that "dead line" |
|
Originally posted by xpiher
Oh rly? None of thoes hu. Tabula Rasa had the same publisher and producer i think (NCSoft right?) so that ones off the list. But I know that VG and WAR had sperate publishers and both were launched early most likely because of them. I can't prove it because I'm not an insider, but it doesn't take an insider to know when a developer and publisher announce a release date they have to meet that "dead line"
NCSoft self publishes they own TR. VG ... M$ stopped funding, it wasn't turning out the way they hoped. McQuaid tried to get other financing, failed so he launched what they had. Warhammer, Mythic is owned by EA, self-published again.
NONE of these are some outside publisher / investor 'pulling strings' and forcing launches.
The INVESTOR PUBLISHING BOOGEY MAN you are looking for is about as real as BIG FOOT
So yeah ~ RLY!! ~ |
|
Originally posted by popinjay yeah yeah and I played WoW, 2 weeks at release and again 2 hours last summer. The graphics made my eyes bleed, the "lore" made me groan, and the game play was about as simple as it gets. I know they have a lot of subs but then when you are limited to a EMachine or Dads hand me down Macbook your choices in MMO's is pretty narrow. Arguing WoW is a quality game because of it's subscriber base is like arguing that McDonalds is gourmet food, Walmart is high fashion, double wide trailers are architectural masterpieces. People buy what they can afford and play what their computer and game skill can handle and the world is full of mediocrity. can't recall where I have never slammed Blizzards business model it was obviously wildly successful. I simply cannot enjoy WoW's graphics and game play. If it was the only MMO my box would run at over 20FPS I would probably play it or if I thought a good quest would be to follow a pixiated dog around to retrieve items from it's poo. But then if I am running late some mornings I will sometimes grab a McDs breakfast sandwich. I really like to try to treat myself better than that though. Would you like fries with your game?
|
|
Originally posted by Unfinished
Oh rly? None of thoes hu. Tabula Rasa had the same publisher and producer i think (NCSoft right?) so that ones off the list. But I know that VG and WAR had sperate publishers and both were launched early most likely because of them. I can't prove it because I'm not an insider, but it doesn't take an insider to know when a developer and publisher announce a release date they have to meet that "dead line"
NCSoft self publishes they own TR. VG ... M$ stopped funding, it wasn't turning out the way they hoped. McQuaid tried to get other financing, failed so he launched what they had. Warhammer, Mythic is owned by EA, self-published again.
NONE of these are some outside publisher / investor 'pulling strings' and forcing launches.
The INVESTOR PUBLISHING BOOGEY MAN you are looking for is about as real as BIG FOOT
So yeah ~ RLY!! ~
Mythic is the developer EA is the publisher hmmm. Even if the company is ownd by EA, doesn't remove the fact that they work independantly, the difference is that revenue from subs may be shared. The glove still fits VG - M$ did stop funding it this is true, but then Sony bought it and we know that SoE is just a cash Cow. I did say NCSoft produce and published TR. Sorry, but I think you are wrong. |
|
|
Deathstrike2
 Novice Member
Joined: 2/04/06
"We must accept finite disappointment, but never lose infinite hope." - Martin Luther King, Jr. |
Originally posted by xpiher
NCSoft self publishes they own TR. VG ... M$ stopped funding, it wasn't turning out the way they hoped. McQuaid tried to get other financing, failed so he launched what they had. Warhammer, Mythic is owned by EA, self-published again.
NONE of these are some outside publisher / investor 'pulling strings' and forcing launches.
The INVESTOR PUBLISHING BOOGEY MAN you are looking for is about as real as BIG FOOT
So yeah ~ RLY!! ~
Mythic is the developer EA is the publisher hmmm. Even if the company is ownd by EA, doesn't remove the fact that they work independantly, the difference is that revenue from subs may be shared. The glove still fits VG - M$ did stop funding it this is true, but then Sony bought it and we know that SoE is just a cash Cow. I did say NCSoft produce and published TR. Sorry, but I think you are wrong.
Don't feel bad. Not everyone is paid to think. |
