SOE's rampant acts of hubris have burned bridges with customers for a very long time.

The company is run by out-of-touch proffiteers looking to make hard cash in a field they do not fully understand.

Look at the price structure by their in house development teams on their micro-purchase based games (Magic tactics for example) and the completely moronic changes they forced on to the former-cult-hit SWG with the NGE that alienated most of it's player base and was drivin by market research and focus groups (not making that up, find ANY article where SOE defends the NGE nad they will reference focus groups at least once).

SOE is not a good company.

They have never been run by people with the players/fans in mind.

The fact that thier security was comprimised shows that they spend money in the wrong places. If they focused less on marketing and focus groups and spent some cash hiring third party security firms to test their network security then they wouldn't be in this mess.

But, no!

Hubris.

They were so sure they were safe because they are SOE, just like they were sure that the NGE wouldn't completely F-up their most promising new product (at the time) because it was Star Wars.

SOE does't deserve the talent they have on staff, they don't deserve the licences they own, and they certainly don't deserve the client base that they regularly abuse and insult.

Also, if Sony-at-large is about to take a big loss and has to shut it's doors on one of it's gaming divisions, which one do you think will get the ax?

They have, maybe, one more try at a successful launch but they will make the same mistake that NC soft made with Auto Assault and Tabula Rasa, the same mistake EA made with Warhammer age of Reckoning, the same mistake Cryptic made with Champions and Star Trek, the same mistake FunCom made with Age of Conan (the list goes on): They will give the game two years development time and push a half-finished product out into the world that is wrapped in excessive advertising and early game shiny-bits that don't hold up past the bugs and exploits.

SOE will go out with a whimper, and it is completely what they have comming. I am just sad that so many good development teams and potentially great games may go under with them as well.

Originally posted by teakbois

Originally posted by knox1711

 

A prime example...look at the way SOE handled the TCG and SWG.  <<snip>>

 

You can thank Blizzard for this.   

And I would imagine that the time it takes to design that stuff is pretty insignificant.  its not like SWG is lacking for housing items and mounts.

What are you talking about?  SOE was the trail blazer for adding cash shops, in game virtual card games with loot, direct player to player cash for virtual items sales.  Smedbucks has had his eye on microtransactions for the better part of the first decade.

Why is it anytime someone brings up a problem with SOE you try to drag some other company into the mix?

Oh anyone could have gotten hacked.  Oh people should be just as mad at NCSoft, because they are bad too.  Oh blizzard somehow forced SOE to go batshit crazy with trying to monetize everything in their games.  Oh Lucas Arts made them do it. 

Enough with the danm excuses already.  Lets judge SOE for the choices that SOE has made and hold them responsible instead of trying to downplay how their company has turned out as a result of thier business practices.  No one forced SOE to make any of the choices they have. 

Originally posted by Daffid011

Originally posted by teakbois

Originally posted by knox1711

 

A prime example...look at the way SOE handled the TCG and SWG.  <<snip>>

 

You can thank Blizzard for this.   

And I would imagine that the time it takes to design that stuff is pretty insignificant.  its not like SWG is lacking for housing items and mounts.

What are you talking about?  SOE was the trail blazer for adding cash shops, in game virtual card games with loot, direct player to player cash for virtual items sales.  Smedbucks has had his eye on microtransactions for the better part of the first decade.

Why is it anytime someone brings up a problem with SOE you try to drag some other company into the mix?

Oh anyone could have gotten hacked.  Oh people should be just as mad at NCSoft, because they are bad too.  Oh blizzard somehow forced SOE to go batshit crazy with trying to monetize everything in their games.  Oh Lucas Arts made them do it. 

 

Enough with the danm excuses already.  Lets judge SOE for the choices that SOE has made and hold them responsible instead of trying to downplay how their company has turned out as a result of thier business practices.  No one forced SOE to make any of the choices they have. 

 

 

 

 

You really should look up facts before you post.  Look up when Blizzard released their card game with loot cards and look up when SoE did theirs.  Then come back and tell me SoE paved the way.

Tell me how any of the other major companies customer service is any better.

Tell me where you see it written that lucas Arts did not have a huge hand in NGE when all evidence contradicts that

You really have demonstrated that you can not see both sides, or even bother to look up the facts.  Its not like I praise SoE either.  But I look at the overall picture, which is something that you most obviously do not.

Originally posted by teakbois

1.  This hack really shouldnt change anyone's opinions about the SoE division, it speaks much more prominently about Sony itself.  There were 2, possibly 3, seperate divisions of Sony that got hacked.  (I say possibly 3 because that sweepstakes database last I saw had no division attached to it.  Could have been a sweepstakes to win a new DVD player back in 2001 for all we know).  That means its Sony itself that has the seemingly lax attitude about security.  

Also I am in the 'it could have happened to anyone' camp.  Im sure Blizzard and NCSoft and others have ways in too if people look hard enough.

 

2.  I agree with firing Smedley.  And I dont blame him for the NGE, and I think a lot of people's common SoE gripes are ones that should be leveled towards any other company (Blizzard is no less greedy and customer unfriendly as SoE for instance)

However it seems ot me SoE has a communication problem, within itself.  Its seems like one department doesnt know what the other is doing.  This ship isnt being run tightly at all.

Combine that with the PR boost SoE would get from firing Smedley.  I guarantee there would be a substantial rise in reactivated accounts if that were too happen.  For that reason alone Sony should step in and get rid of Smed.

 

3.  SoEs biggest issue with their actual games is optimization.  They run like crap, period.  Good computers still struggle with EQ2, theres no reason for this.  

1) It could be anyone, but it happened to SOE.  On top of that SOE told everyone their information was not stolen and it was safe.  They told everyone their servers were secure.  The fact is that they were wrong on both accounts.  Their customer information was stolen and it took them almost two weeks to figure it out.  Their servers were not secure and had to be taken offline for almost two weeks AFTER they promised they were secure.

2) Firing Smedly might give SOE a chance with players in their future games, but it isn't going to surge populations now.  Firing Smed isn't going to make DCU have more content just for example.  Nor would it fix any of the other number of problems that plague SOE games across the board.

If people wanted to play the games so badly they would be doing it right now.  It isn't like Smed is the only one at SOE that delivers garbage and pisses on the customers. 

3) Optimization is only one problem of SOE games.  Sure EQ2s game engine is crap, but the devs can't seem to make consistant choices about the game.  The constant back and forth of major changes that never really result in the desired effect is aggravating to players.   There have been five leadership changes for EQ2 and an equal number of game direction changes. 

As for your comments about vanguard, swg and other soe games.  It isn't like any of SOEs game have turned out awesome.  Regardless of if they purchased a troubled title, working with a partner or in sole control of the project.  They just find a way to screw things up and drive players away.  

You can give out all the B's and C's you want, but the consistant trend is that SOE finds a way to drive players away and quickly. 

Originally posted by knox1711

Where are you getting those numbers from?  I seriously doubt they are authoritative.

Irregardless, we know one thing for sure, whatever they were before teh NGE, they were much worse after the NGE and the game never recovered.

 

http://rubenfield.com/?p=86

Its an SoE developer that did the prototype for the combat system.  Now he never singles anyone out, and he cant legally, but

'However, we made a mistake. A BIG mistake.

Somewhere during the discussions it was strongly recommended that we

streamline our characters.

People wanted something simpler, more direct, more accessible.

We told them. “If you do this, you will lose all of our subscribers. It is that significant.”

The response was that we would gain more due to the marketing push and relaunch.'

Originally posted by Daffid011

 

As for your comments about vanguard, swg and other soe games.  It isn't like any of SOEs game have turned out awesome.  Regardless of if they purchased a troubled title, working with a partner or in sole control of the project.  They just find a way to screw things up and drive players away.  

You can give out all the B's and C's you want, but the consistant trend is that SOE finds a way to drive players away and quickly. 

 

1.  Im of the opinion there is no 'amazing'  MMO.  there is a lot of mediocrity with games like WoW and Lotro where somethings are done right and others are lacking.  I honestly cant say that EQ2, WoW, or LOTRO is a better game.  Blizzard does the best job at presenting their game and had the bigger target audience and made the first 'solo is fastest leveling'  MMO, sp they got the huge customer base.  But the actual core game is merely decent, not spectacular.  EQ from Velious through LDoN era was as close to amazing as weve seen.

2.  You say SoE drives away customers, but EQ1 has had incredible long term retention and EQ2 has held steady for years too.  Yes, EQ2 fell short of what they wanted but tis retention afetr the dust settled ahs actually been decent compared to other, non-WoW games.

There arent many game with 100k players based in this market.  There is WoW, LOTRO, EvE, EQ and EQ2.  And now Rift.  Maybe Im missing one.  I know games like FFXI, Aion, and Lineage have more worldwide, but they arent games targeted towards this audience.

Originally posted by teakbois

[1] You really should look up facts before you post.  Look up when Blizzard released their card game with loot cards and look up when SoE did theirs.  Then come back and tell me SoE paved the way.

 

[2] Tell me how any of the other major companies customer service is any better.

 

[3] Tell me where you see it written that lucas Arts did not have a huge hand in NGE when all evidence contradicts that

 

[4] You really have demonstrated that you can not see both sides, or even bother to look up the facts.  Its not like I praise SoE either.  But I look at the overall picture, which is something that you most obviously do not.

 

1)

Blizzard release a completely seperate game with real physical cards that did not require a world of warcraft account.

SOE released a 100% ingame virtual (no real cards) loot lottery system that requires an active SOE account.  For fucks sake, they don't even market the gameplay of the card game, but instead they spam the holy hell out of the loot cards players can  get lucky.

So why should anyone blame Blizzard for that? 

2)

I think it was last years Fan Faire where Alan Crosby was addressing the opening ceremony (might have been the year before last).  He announced that SOE was no longer going to outsource their customer service and instead do it inhouse. 

The audience erupted.  Not like some nice little round of appluase, but they went nuts.  The crowd was louder than when SOE announced the next expansions for EQ and EQ2.   There is really only one reason people cheered that loud. 

3)

Sure lucas arts was involved, but several SOE developers flat out admitted the NGE was their idea.  When you can find me one single Lucas Arts employee who admits they forced SOE to do anything then you can talk.  Otherwise the facts of the situation have already been presented.  Lucas Arts involved, but SOE was the catalyst.

Who really cares though, because SOEs track record for developing SWG speaks for itself.  From day 1 it was sloppy, incomplete, mismanaged and SOE was already lying to the players before the game even released.  This same style of development can be seen repeated in every game they run.  

It isn't like Lucas Arts forced SOE to make one mistake and outside of that the company has a sterling reputation.  SOE has a long ugly history of mistakes in almost everything they touch. 

4)

Tell me what I'm not seeing, but be specific.    Just because I don't want to blame other companies for the misadventures of SOE doesn't mean I don't see your points.  They are just flawed. 

Originally posted by teakbois

2.  You say SoE drives away customers, but EQ1 has had incredible long term retention and EQ2 has held steady for years too.  Yes, EQ2 fell short of what they wanted but tis retention afetr the dust settled ahs actually been decent compared to other, non-WoW games.

There arent many game with 100k players based in this market.  There is WoW, LOTRO, EvE, EQ and EQ2.  And now Rift.  Maybe Im missing one.  I know games like FFXI, Aion, and Lineage have more worldwide, but they arent games targeted towards this audience.

SOE didn't take over everquest until after it was already a runaway success while Verrant was still in charge and during a time when there was almost no competition and the market was growing faster than they were losing players (the last part straight from Smeds mouth).  With 2 years of forcing Brad out SOE infurated EQ players so much they organized a formal boycott of the next expansion, because the previous expansion was so poorly done there were many game breaking issues unresolved.    SOE had to organize some "player summit" with over 100 influential players/website hosts to promise how they would listen to the players more. 

EQ2 closed like 10 servers within the first year of release and closed all the eastern servers shortly after that.  It wasn't that EQ2 didn't perform to expectations.  It is just another example of SOE rushing a game to market unfinished and it terrible condition.  That is why SOE spent the first year revamping all the major systems of the game.  EQ2 was a complete mess at release and still suffering from many of those problems to this very day.  Keep in mind that the entire mmo market was growing by MILLIONS of players while SOE was merging servers. 

Again, what does it matter about other companies having 100k susbscribers?  SOE used to have over 1 million combined between EQ, EQ2 and SWG.  I honestly doubt they have any game with over 100k players anymore, but just judging SOE games based on how they performed and you arrive at this thread.  Think about that. 

Originally posted by teakbois

Originally posted by knox1711

Where are you getting those numbers from?  I seriously doubt they are authoritative.

Irregardless, we know one thing for sure, whatever they were before teh NGE, they were much worse after the NGE and the game never recovered.

 

http://rubenfield.com/?p=86

 

Its an SoE developer that did the prototype for the combat system.  Now he never singles anyone out, and he cant legally, but

 

'However, we made a mistake. A BIG mistake.

Somewhere during the discussions it was strongly recommended that we

streamline our characters.

People wanted something simpler, more direct, more accessible.

We told them. “If you do this, you will lose all of our subscribers. It is that significant.”

The response was that we would gain more due to the marketing push and relaunch.'

 

 

 OK, so I read that web page.  One can hope that rubenfield will never be allowed near a computer ever again in his life.  The article was basically.  Yes we messed up, we knew we were going to mess up.  Then it was still like soe was with the statements he was proud of the work he had done with the NGE.  How can you be proud of a game that relaunched worse than it did the first time, and managed to chase of 85-95% of your game base.   It is the arogance of devs like him and his boss smedley that give soe a bad name.  So now I Know the programmer to blame,  I see his name crop up on any games well then, I know to bypass them as we know he is proud of what he does even if it destroys your game.

Wow that article was just enough to make you want to scream why!  All I can say is marketing did not undstand their playerbase and sure did not care if they lost their playerbase, and that is a crime.

Originally posted by Daffid011

1)

Blizzard release a completely seperate game with real physical cards that did not require a world of warcraft account.

SOE released a 100% ingame virtual (no real cards) loot lottery system that requires an active SOE account.  For fucks sake, they don't even market the gameplay of the card game, but instead they spam the holy hell out of the loot cards players can  get lucky.

So why should anyone blame Blizzard for that? 

 

2)

I think it was last years Fan Faire where Alan Crosby was addressing the opening ceremony (might have been the year before last).  He announced that SOE was no longer going to outsource their customer service and instead do it inhouse. 

The audience erupted.  Not like some nice little round of appluase, but they went nuts.  The crowd was louder than when SOE announced the next expansions for EQ and EQ2.   There is really only one reason people cheered that loud. 

 

3)

Sure lucas arts was involved, but several SOE developers flat out admitted the NGE was their idea.  When you can find me one single Lucas Arts employee who admits they forced SOE to do anything then you can talk.  Otherwise the facts of the situation have already been presented.  Lucas Arts involved, but SOE was the catalyst.

Who really cares though, because SOEs track record for developing SWG speaks for itself.  From day 1 it was sloppy, incomplete, mismanaged and SOE was already lying to the players before the game even released.  This same style of development can be seen repeated in every game they run.  

It isn't like Lucas Arts forced SOE to make one mistake and outside of that the company has a sterling reputation.  SOE has a long ugly history of mistakes in almost everything they touch. 

 

4)

Tell me what I'm not seeing, but be specific.    Just because I don't want to blame other companies for the misadventures of SOE doesn't mean I don't see your points.  They are just flawed. 

 

1.  Right.  You obviously dont see how one led to the other.  You dont think the WoW TCG's big draw was the in game loot cards?  You think all those sales were because of people playing the game?

And as for SoE, the online TCG had been around LONG before SoE started doing it.  The system actually connects people that want to play the game far better than Blizzard's system does.  If you actaully enjoy the Blizzard TCG but dont have friends that do, youa re SOL as the tournaments for it are few and far between.  The EQ one?  Just hop online and play it.  Also im fairly certain the SoE games do not require a subscription to their game either.  I know they didnt at release.

2.  That proves little.  My argument is that its inconsistent just like every other games customer service.  

3.  Show me where someone admits that the streamlining of classes, which is the crux of the NGE issue, was their idea.  Reread that developer post, its a few posts above.  They were all working under orders.  But orders from whom?

I agree that the SWG release was a disaster.  The game was a turd with an unequaled crafting system and a great skill/class system.  But the skill/class system was imbalanced beyond ridiculousness and perhaps would have never been able to be reasonably balanced.

I also will say that the EQ2 release was fine technically, just some of their ideas sucked.  Which they later changed.  But wait, SoE doesn't listen to their customers.

4.  Your answer to #1 is all anyone needs.  You take something painfully obvious (that WoWs TCG cash in was the inspiration for the EQ TCG) and try to say that they were unrelated?

Originally posted by teakbois

1.  Right.  You obviously dont see how one led to the other.  You dont think the WoW TCG's big draw was the in game loot cards?  You think all those sales were because of people playing the game?

 

And as for SoE, the online TCG had been around LONG before SoE started doing it.  The system actually connects people that want to play the game far better than Blizzard's system does.  If you actaully enjoy the Blizzard TCG but dont have friends that do, youa re SOL as the tournaments for it are few and far between.  The EQ one?  Just hop online and play it.  Also im fairly certain the SoE games do not require a subscription to their game either.  I know they didnt at release.

 

2.  That proves little.  My argument is that its inconsistent just like every other games customer service.  

 

3.  Show me where someone admits that the streamlining of classes, which is the crux of the NGE issue, was their idea.  Reread that developer post, its a few posts above.  They were all working under orders.  But orders from whom?

 

I agree that the SWG release was a disaster.  The game was a turd with an unequaled crafting system and a great skill/class system.  But the skill/class system was imbalanced beyond ridiculousness and perhaps would have never been able to be reasonably balanced.

 

I also will say that the EQ2 release was fine technically, just some of their ideas sucked.  Which they later changed.  But wait, SoE doesn't listen to their customers.

 

4.  Your answer to #1 is all anyone needs.  You take something painfully obvious (that WoWs TCG cash in was the inspiration for the EQ TCG) and try to say that they were unrelated?

1)

You have something from SOE saying they were inspired by blizzards real life trading card game?   You just admitted that the virtual online card games had been around long before SOEs game, so why couldn't they be the inspiration for SOEs virtual card games?

For that matter who cares.  SOE made their own choice and this thread is a result of that.   You can try to drag other companies down with SOE, but it doesn't change the situation SOE has put itself into does it?

2)

Right, because all companies are so bad that people have such extreme reactions to announcements of their customer service.  Like I said, you keep dragging other companies into the discussion as if it changes anything about how SOE operates.

3)

Like I said, several SOE employees have admitted to creating the NGE and pushing for it.

Can you show me ANY Lucas Arts employees saying they created anything in the NGE? 

Again you just try to drag other companies to dismiss the consistent actions and results from SOE in their games.  There is always someone else to shoulder the blame right?

4)

Oh it is painfully obvious, because you say so? 

Does blizzard have their own online virtual trading card game that requires wow to play?  No. 

Did other companies have non-mmo releated online virtual card games before blizzard/soe?  Yes, but those could not possibly have effected SOEs decision making process right?  It has to be blizzard.

Did SOE purchase one of those online trading card companies to create virtual trading cards for their mmos?  Yup....

Did SOE put those same virtual card games in four of their mmos?  Yup.

Is SOE the only company doing this?  Looks like it.

You are right.  Lets forget about all the things that SOE has done and find someone else to blame.  That way every company looks as bad as SOE right? 

Lets go read the blogs about if Blizzard, NCSoft, Lucas Arts or any of the other companies you mention to see if people think they are going to make it.  Oh wait...

Originally posted by erictlewis

 OK, so I read that web page.  One can hope that rubenfield will never be allowed near a computer ever again in his life.  The article was basically.  Yes we messed up, we knew we were going to mess up.  Then it was still like soe was with the statements he was proud of the work he had done with the NGE.  How can you be proud of a game that relaunched worse than it did the first time, and managed to chase of 85-95% of your game base.   It is the arogance of devs like him and his boss smedley that give soe a bad name.  So now I Know the programmer to blame,  I see his name crop up on any games well then, I know to bypass them as we know he is proud of what he does even if it destroys your game.

Wow that article was just enough to make you want to scream why!  All I can say is marketing did not undstand their playerbase and sure did not care if they lost their playerbase, and that is a crime.

 

I dont see it as arrogance at all.  I see it as supporting his team.  He basically said we didnt like what we had to do but we got it done an an extremely limited time frame.  Basically they made the fluffy bunny as well as they could have given 1/5th the time it takes to draw a bunny and a ridiculously ugly bunny concept art.

But yes, you are right about the marketing being despicable.  And which company was the one telling people after it released how great it was?  It was Lucas Arts.  there were an awful lot of people involved in this debacle, that much is clear.

Originally posted by Daffid011

Originally posted by teakbois

2.  You say SoE drives away customers, but EQ1 has had incredible long term retention and EQ2 has held steady for years too.  Yes, EQ2 fell short of what they wanted but tis retention afetr the dust settled ahs actually been decent compared to other, non-WoW games.

There arent many game with 100k players based in this market.  There is WoW, LOTRO, EvE, EQ and EQ2.  And now Rift.  Maybe Im missing one.  I know games like FFXI, Aion, and Lineage have more worldwide, but they arent games targeted towards this audience.

SOE didn't take over everquest until after it was already a runaway success while Verrant was still in charge and during a time when there was almost no competition and the market was growing faster than they were losing players (the last part straight from Smeds mouth).  With 2 years of forcing Brad out SOE infurated EQ players so much they organized a formal boycott of the next expansion, because the previous expansion was so poorly done there were many game breaking issues unresolved.    SOE had to organize some "player summit" with over 100 influential players/website hosts to promise how they would listen to the players more. 

EQ2 closed like 10 servers within the first year of release and closed all the eastern servers shortly after that.  It wasn't that EQ2 didn't perform to expectations.  It is just another example of SOE rushing a game to market unfinished and it terrible condition.  That is why SOE spent the first year revamping all the major systems of the game.  EQ2 was a complete mess at release and still suffering from many of those problems to this very day.  Keep in mind that the entire mmo market was growing by MILLIONS of players while SOE was merging servers. 

 

Again, what does it matter about other companies having 100k susbscribers?  SOE used to have over 1 million combined between EQ, EQ2 and SWG.  I honestly doubt they have any game with over 100k players anymore, but just judging SOE games based on how they performed and you arrive at this thread.  Think about that. 

 

 

(mod edit)

Yes.  'SoE acquired Verant in 2000'  But EQ was always Sony's product and guess who was in charge of it?  the guy that HIRED MCQuaid in the mid 90s?  Yup, Jon Smedley.  

And EQ2 had steady growth for 3 years after that, and still shwoed growth right up until the days WoW and EQ2 launched.  According to MMOCHARTS even beyond that btu I dotn believe it personally.

And yes, people did not like GoD expansion.  It was poorly balanced so only the top % of players could experience it, and even for them it was hard.  Yet EQs population did not decline during this period.   It was the first subpar expansion and the next one was back on track in players eyes.  But they DID hold that player summit.  How is this a bad thing?  Oh but SoE doesnt listen to their customers.

And EQ2 was NOT unfinished.  At least no more than ither games (all launch with content not in some place or another).  It just didnt perform well so they changed things.  there is a huge difference between something  not being well received and something not being finished.

Eh enough of this, Im done feeding the troll as the previous poster said.  I know he meant it the other way around, but at least I can see both sides of the picture.  

Originally posted by Daffid011

 

3)

Like I said, several SOE employees have admitted to creating the NGE and pushing for it.

 

 

Okay one last thing.  I quoted an SoE employee directly saying that he told his higher ups that the class streamling was a bad idea.  thats the crux of the NGE.  Thats what killed the game.

Link me a quote saying SoE pushed for this.   Either you have seen it, or you are just twisting words around for your weak argument.

How do you get access to.. STAR WARS

And... fail?

How, do, you, do, that....

Un-believable.

Originally posted by CujoSWAoA

How do you get access to.. STAR WARS

And... fail?

How, do, you, do, that....

Un-believable.

You know thats happened alot.

It's called exploiting the IP. To some individuals, that's what IP's are for. Think about the how great the game would have been if their goal was to make the greatest SW experience ever.

Originally posted by teakbois

Originally posted by Daffid011

 

3)

Like I said, several SOE employees have admitted to creating the NGE and pushing for it.

 

 

Okay one last thing.  I quoted an SoE employee directly saying that he told his higher ups that the class streamling was a bad idea.  thats the crux of the NGE.  Thats what killed the game.

 

Link me a quote saying SoE pushed for this.   Either you have seen it, or you are just twisting words around for your weak argument.

He never said it was a bad idea.

SOE was the developer.

Any development they do is pushed for by an SOE employee.

SOE marketing team told their peers,"dont make the same mistake we did".

A look at SOE history of all their games, the NGE is par for the coarse.

Excuses have been made for SOE for years and has only hurt them. But by all means, continue. It only gives others with knowledge a chance to share.

Originally posted by Hornitos

EQ2 is a solid game but it's not enough to keep SOE afloat long term.  All their other games are crap *snip*

All their other games are not crap.  Vanguard is a case in point.  For me and many others, VG is the deepest and most interesting MMO out there.  I'm just hoping they have to sell off some assets to stay afloat, and that a decent studio get the chance to pick up the game and give it some dev love.

Re-subs would fly in thick and fast !!

~wolf

Most gamers are uniformed and dont give a hoot what company is developing what.  If its a game that has good hype, people will buy it.  If that game actually lives up to the hype after release, people will continue to play it.  Sony really only needs one good game to come back, no matter how many disgruntleds are by the way side.  There are very few companies that have the market in-roads that SONY has as far as getting the boxes onto the shelves and processing the payments.  If they actually learned anything from customer service about this, they may not even need the one smash hit.   

Originally posted by CujoSWAoA

How do you get access to.. STAR WARS

And... fail?

How, do, you, do, that....

Un-believable.

You should ask Cryptic that about Star Trek....