Originally posted by Bigbadwlf

First a quick history lesson. A long long time ago there was no game reviewers there were just people that made games, and people that brought them. Most games made back then were trash but they sold because they had some IP we liked like Ghost Busters or Ninja Turtles. Eventually people got angry, like the Angry Video Game Nerd and started actually reviewing games. Developers still made trash games but almost nobody brought them because there was a whole media division of Quality Control professional game reviewers that could tell us if a game was good or not before we brought it.
 

There have been games reviewers pretty much since there have been games. Hell, even Pong was reviewed in it's day. So much for the 'history lesson', which your version of comes across as a bit ridiculous tbh.

That aside...

Yeah, big business has discovered your hobby and they have discovered that you will gratefully pay through the nose for it and that it's worth the effort and cost to hire shills and buy reviews.

I agree this isn't a good thing.

It will also only get worse though as the internet and media becomes ever more controlled and ghettoised, so my advice is to disengage from it and learn to look at information and make judgements for yourself. Rely on facts and not opinions and don't base your purchase on fashion or what some stranger on the internet (who, all else aside, probably has different tastes and requirements froma game to you) tells you is 'good'.

You will still buy some bad games, that's unavoidable, but you will feel less betrayed and get less 'angry' maybe that way.

I used to trust reviews in mags when I was a kid like Crash and CVG, but those days have obviously passed. Buying games in those days though was still a risk... I bought plenty of crap alongside the classics. I never got 'angry' though.

These days I trust no opinion of anyone I read, especially on the internet, unless I personally know that person.

actually, NM, don't think I want to follow this any more tbh

Originally posted by Markusan

Originally posted by Vesavius

Originally posted by Markusan

I cannot fathom how so many companies over and over fail. One thing that strikes me is that companies think that big-name stars will translate into large number of players.

For instance: 38 Studios hires RA salvatore. That didnt do anything to save 38 Studios. His story wasnt even that great to start with. And couldnt anyone come up with a better story for less than 5? million USD?

 

He was not paid 5kk, so if that's the basis of your worry I wouldn't sweat it too much.

But yes, obviously bad choices have been made on where to focus the cash in the past.

Actually, RA Salvatore was reported to be handed 5M USD in royalties after 38 studios went up in smoke and Schilling took back his invested 4 million USD..

You're kind of right.

"...R.A. Salvatore, is slated to receive over $ 5 million in royalties from the sale of the initial game, “Kingdoms of Amalur” from a revolving line of credit that was created out of the original loan."I ""

I will trust that you know the difference between what you are saying and what I am saying.

Originally posted by Markusan

I cannot fathom how so many companies over and over fail. One thing that strikes me is that companies think that big-name stars will translate into large number of players.

For instance: 38 Studios hires RA salvatore. That didnt do anything to save 38 Studios. His story wasnt even that great to start with. And couldnt anyone come up with a better story for less than 5? million USD?

He was not paid 5kk, so if that's the basis of your worry I wouldn't sweat it too much.

But yes, obviously bad choices have been made on where to focus the cash in the past.

Originally posted by ozmono

Originally posted by Sylvarii

Fact is they made a crap game,its as simple as that,KOA is shite.Talked up a good one but delivered a sub par game that some of these gaming sites,including this one,claimed KOA was on par with the likes of Skyrim,lmfao.

This is the buttom line and the cold hard truth.With games like The Witcher 2 and Skyrim,KOA needed to be special and it was a pile of rehashed Fabled type RPG that wasn't even as good as Fabled and that's saying something their.

They had all the tools at their disposal but used none of them,they lost.

Kurt..boohoo,living on your name will not sell a crap game.

Unfortunately I don't think he'll be feeling the pain like some of his employees and taxpayers may.

http://www.golocalprov.com/politics/donna-perry-taxpayers-are-owed-transparent-answers-by-the-edc/

"Finally, it’s worth noting there are also reports this week that despite the financial problems, Schilling apparently tapped the loan to pay back himself some $ 4 million he personally invested in the company, and that high-priced creative talent, like writer R.A. Salvatore, is slated to receive over $ 5 million in royalties from the sale of the initial game, “Kingdoms of Amalur” from a revolving line of credit that was created out of the original loan.As things stand at this moment, it seems accurate to say the opposite of royalty is the treatment that’s destined for the anonymous characters playing in the real life roles of the taxpayers in the unforgiving kingdom of Rhode Island."

I was feeling bad for Schilling until I read this.

If it's true that's pretty scummy tbh.

Originally posted by Phry

Originally posted by joocheese

Originally posted by Vesavius

Originally posted by Loke666

Originally posted by Rockhide

The fact that nobody came in to rescue the Copernicus project doesn't seem to say anything very positive about how it was being developed and/or what state it's currently in, despite claims that we could be playing it within the year.

To be fair is it possible that someone wait a little while to do that so they could get a good price, SOE could do it to mention one company, like they did with Vanguard.

But it seems like the game is rather like Wow and most companines seems to have realized that the genre need something new.

I can't see SOE touching this... they are pretty cash strapped themselves these days and the VG deal was I think a result of a personal relationship as well as a business one.

Sadly, if another dev/ publisher picks this up it will probbly be some crappy Chinese F2P thing. They seem to be owning and directing the market right now.

Though more and more chinese businesses are investing in gaming companies (specifically mmo gaming companies). I would say that the direction of the mmo market, as of right now, is primarily being didctated by the korean dev companies. Having said that, it does appear that the "fat cow" of the mmo market is still NA; though I'm sure tha the Chinese market is continuously growing. But, without a doubt, I would say that the current leader in the mmo market is Korea.

not sure how come to that conclusion, as struggle to name any successful Korean games, at least, ones that are successful in the west

Companies like Nexon are staggeringly huge globally, to be fair to him.

We weren't also just talking about the West ;)

Originally posted by TROLL_HARD

I think the world and the art style are pretty cool and could work well as an mmorpg. 

Any thoughts for or against? How would you like to see an mmorpg developed from this game? 

I think it would be as generic and boring as hell... The Diablo franchise has never really been about the world or lore, just OCD grinding, and the artstyle to me is nothing spectacular or interesting.

Plus it sells better just as it is then pretty much any Western MMORPG so I am not sure why they would bother, not when they have a pretty obvious presence in that market already.

Originally posted by ironhelix

Originally posted by wormywyrm

As a huge PS1 fan I am still a little disappointed with the progress of PS2's development.  You can tell by the trailer that the game is not even in alpha-working condition yet since they had no enemy troops.

It was not a terrible trailer but the music was sorta strange and flying around in a ship around empty bases and shooting rockets at 10 unmanned tanks?  That is not the amazing game of PS that I know.

The music is from the helicopter raid in Apocalypse Now, and makes perfect sense.

Kids...

lol :)

Have to say I am FAR from dissapointed by what SOE are building here... it looks pretty ambitious and impressive to me so far.

Leave it to them to screw it up somehow though.

Originally posted by joocheese

Though more and more chinese businesses are investing in gaming companies (specifically mmo gaming companies). I would say that the direction of the mmo market, as of right now, is primarily being didctated by the korean dev companies.

Yeah, fair point, I guess I was just thinking of Perfect World etc.

I am not sure that changes the underlying point though ;)

Originally posted by Loke666

Originally posted by Rockhide

The fact that nobody came in to rescue the Copernicus project doesn't seem to say anything very positive about how it was being developed and/or what state it's currently in, despite claims that we could be playing it within the year.

To be fair is it possible that someone wait a little while to do that so they could get a good price, SOE could do it to mention one company, like they did with Vanguard.

But it seems like the game is rather like Wow and most companines seems to have realized that the genre need something new.

I can't see SOE touching this... they are pretty cash strapped themselves these days and the VG deal was I think a result of a personal relationship as well as a business one.

Sadly, if another dev/ publisher picks this up it will probbly be some crappy Chinese F2P thing. They seem to be owning and directing the market right now.

Originally posted by Beowulfsam

Well with my experiences with Ncsoft and more specifically with NCWest (mainly Aion, but played few other titles as well) I say good riddance NCsoft. At least in the west their support and listening to playerbase was pretty abysmal. Do I want a company like that around? No. Are the other companies better? Some are, some are not and I hope that gamers will support the companies that give a damn about their customers.

What other titles? Please specify?

I personally have played a few NC Soft titles, including Lineage II, CoH, and GW, and I think they make and publish good titles. Even Aion, though very flawed, had it's strengths.

GW2 is very good so far as well, and B&S and Wildstar look fun. As a dev and publisher, I like them and their product on the whole.

I have never had any issues with NC Soft CS.

All in all, NC Soft offer, IMO, a pretty good service and generally very good games.

Match them up against the utter crap Nexon push out and their abysmal CS? NC Soft ANY time. Not even a competition.

(I suspect maybe you have only played Aion and are basing your opinion on some kind of emotional hurt off that and have padded out your 'resume' for credibility. I also suspect you may not have had much experience with F2P CS)

Originally posted by lasttime

This post isn't about the quality of the game or whether its good or bad its just about something I found rather ingenious. ArenaNet shows some footage of the... /yahdeyah

So, what you are saying is that people who have bought it and the press that have played it LIKE IT?

Excellent, then we agree.

The game is good, as good as the marketing has said it would be.

Originally posted by Kuppa

I actually like the look.

Same.

I enjoy a lot of styles, as long as they are done well, and these look done well.

I like Wildstar for the same reason.

Originally posted by marz.at.play

In the original Guild Wars, the charr were brutish, savage zealots, and their names reflected this, echoing growls and roars – “Maim Deathrain” “Slaug Firehide” “Kaargoth Bloodclaw” and the like. 250 years later, the charr are the most technologically advanced race on Tyria, and their legions (though competitive as always) have fortified themselves into a far more organized and ranked force.

Really? Animals smarter then humans in 250 years of evolution. Does that make sense to anyone, or did I miss something completely here?

Yeah, you are missing something completely.

Originally posted by JC-Smith

Originally posted by Vesavius

But... YES, having a minority of vulnerables being relied on to generate the profit IS exploitative of that minority. The percentage is actually irrelevant.

(and that's even if I believe the 10% figure you throw around. I have never heard anyone that dosen't have a direct investment in the F2P model being succesful quote that figure)

The 10% number has been thrown around everywhere with Micros. That's your average number of paying customers. They make their money from the 1% of players who spend lavishly.

Just because something is said a lot does not make it true.

Links like I asked? From reliable sources not with direct interests in promoting F2P?

Just you parroting something you read somewhere is pointless.

But here's the direct quote of what you said before.

"It is a scam that relies on letting the most vulnerable (the young, the badly educated, the addicted) to foot the bill."

How was my post a misrepresentation of what you said?

Because 'young' does not mean 10 year olds or whatever using their parents credit card like you tried to make out. 'Young', as I have explained already, can mean a naive 19 year old. You deliberatly suggested I was talking about children using parents credit cards and attempted to turn it in to something else based on that in an effort to twist my words.

If you are gonna debate, debate. Don't use these sneaky tactics to twist what the other guy is clearly saying so you can score cheap goals.

First you called the model a scam.

Yes, and it is.

Then your trying to make decisions for other people. Your attempting to protect them from themselvesbecause you think you know better than them.

The vulnerable are called 'vulnerable' for a reason. I don't say I know better then everyone, but I do care about the vulnerable getting exploited. I get that society is made up of different groups with different life experience and different decision making skills.

For instance I know, through charity work, that a lot of young people with Aspergers play MMORPGs.

I personally understand that not everyone over 18 with internet access is on an equal footing when it comes to being tricked with hidden costs, impulse buying mechanics, and drip feed charging.

Basically, I care about more then just myself. I am sorry thats such a huge stumbling block for you.

That IS exactly the same logic... /snip because it's all just nonsense selfish waffle that refuses to look beyond your own little bubble.

Just because you don't like a model, doesn't mean its a bad model.

You are trying to twist what I am saying again.

I am not talking about whether I like it personally or not right now, I am talking about how it targets vulnerable (the young, the uneducated, the addicted, and others) groups in order to take a lot of money through hidden costs and other means.

 

Originally posted by JC-Smith

@Vesuvius: So your saying if the parent gives their kids a credit card, and the kids then spend it on somethng stupid that its the game developers fault? That's the same kind of logic that got buttered popcorn banned from theaters. Maybe if we just put children into a plastic bubble at birth we can solve all the problems in the world...

I don't see how a revenue model where only 10% of the players pay anything is exploitative.

 

Lets look at your post...

First you paraphrase me, attempting to twist my point by using an singular example which I didn't discuss or touch upon, and then you dismiss the logic of what i say by linking your reinvented interpretation of my words to... buttered popcorn and somehow being over protective of kids...

Great debate technique you have there, must say.

Look, I didn't say that. Don't put words in my mouth. Don't reinvent or paraphrase me, use direct quotes if you want to represent what I am saying. That is what the feature is for.

When I said 'the young' I fully meant anyone up to 25 who are still on the whole pretty worldy stupid (they obviously don't think they are, young adults think they know it all obviously, but they usually are) and easily sucked into things like impulse buying.

But... YES, having a minority of vulnerables being relied on to generate the profit IS exploitative of that minority. The percentage is actually irrelevant.

(and that's even if I believe the 10% figure you throw around. I have never heard anyone that dosen't have a direct investment in the F2P model being succesful quote that figure)

Originally posted by Serelisk

Originally posted by Gruug
 

So, you SPENT about $200 per year for a 5 year span on EQ which was f2p? Was it? Anyway, if it was f2p and you spent real money there it wasn't actually "free" to play.

The whole "f2p" argument is getting old as more and more people realise that it is just one big scam.

 

How is the f2p argument getting old? It's not a scam. People will pay for what they want to play with...

It IS a scam, one based on an exploitative model of hidden costs and drip feed charging.

It is a scam that relies on letting the most vulnerable (the young, the badly educated, the addicted) to foot the bill.

Sometimes people need to step back and ask themselves who exactly is paying all this money that is making companies like Nexon so powerful... The money comes from somewhere, right? Sometimes, I think, people need to look outside their selfish little bubbles and at the wider picture and just think a bit about whats going on.

Originally posted by Theocritus

            FOr myself, the reason why f2p games are appealing is I can move from game to game without spending a dime...

Oh great... so speaks the transient super fickle breed of player.

Y'know, the guys that have screwed the modern MMORPG in to the ground.

Originally posted by laokoko

I don't understand why you have to enjoy f2p games.  If you dont' like it don't play it.

People don't play most F2P games because they like them more then AAA pay to play ones... 'Free' overrides everything. People will piss their lives away playing uttter crap as long as it's free.

AND they will spend money in the cash shop while they do it... still thinking it's good because it's 'free'.

All games that lock off in game rewards behind a cash shop wall are Pay to Win, because buying character development in a RPG (in any sense) is paying to not play the game and going straight to the prize.