IMO if you want to run with the big boys (as it were) you best be able to stand the heat.  If you want to charge the same price (or maybe more depending on how the exchange rate works, as I've not seen if they are going 15$ us or the exchange of 18$us), then expect to be given no more slack than Turbine, SOE, NCSoft, etal will get.  If you charge a fraction of the price (ie 25$ for the game and a 10$ monthly fee) then slack is warranted as you aren't saying your product is as good as the big boy, yet.

Me, I give noone in the gaming industry slack, they are asking for my dollar, they damn better earn it.

I don't think cutting them slack is in their best interests or ours.  I for one am getting sick of the crap releases and the companies thinking they can get away with it.  It is time we stood up for what we are paying for, IMO.  As long as we cut ANY of them any slack, we are short changing ourselves as customers by agreeing to take less than a complete product at the complete price.

It is a shame it has taken this long to get to this point, but maybe it will do some good.

that may be, but at least it isn't a clone of EQ...  Too many of those out there now (EQ, EQ2, WoW, DAoC, WAR, AoC, LotRO...)

I too wish them luck.  We need a game that isn't a clone to do well to hopefully break us out of the clone wars that have existed in the MMO arena for some time now

Originally posted by GrayGhost79

Originally posted by Raston

As an aside, what destroyed shadowbane was the excessive exploiting and engine holes (centaurs being able to run through locked doors, druids and their ability to get past walls by casting a certain spell and warp themselves though, the rapid fire dagger exploit, etc) and the lag issues (like running through a building to have the boxes in the corner spawn after you ran in and now you are trapped behind them ;))

I am a big fan of sandbox games, expecially non level based ones.  I was a long time player of the west end games PnP game Torg (as well as shatterzone and the master book system) and I also enjoy a good game of World of Darkness (especially the Magic based one, not so much werewolfs and vampires).  That being said, I won't touch DF with a 10 foot pole, which is a shame as I'd love to find a game that could replace Shadowbane, but DF isn't that in my eyes (and neither was AoC, unfortunately).

The problem for me isn't the sandbox/little to do, the social-political stuff should help with that, my issues are strictly combat related, as in I absolutely HATE FPS style MMORPGs.

I guess what I'd really like to see is something like DAoC with Shadowbane style keeps in the wild lands but using a non linear combat system like UO has...  Gives a place for the little guy, gives a place for the siege happy crazy people (of which I am included at some points) and would possibly allow people to be more effective in combat much earlier in their careers...

Ah well, maybe someone will do something like that some time.

 

Yeah, the combat is going to be a double edged sword in DFO. It will drive many off simply because it's manual aiming, FPV for Magic and ranged and etc. At the same time I believe it will bring many to the game as well.  It's got more of that Hack and Slash feel to it. Which some will like and some won't. May see a fair amount of Single player RPG fans giving it a shot simply since the combat is more like a single player RPG, but in an MMORPG setting.

 

It really will be interesting to see how things go in the future. Not a lot of chance for DFO to outright fail at this point at the same time, it's garunteed to be a niche game. The interesting thing will be to see just how big of a niche.

Yah, I loved games like Heavenly sword, but that was a game you could play for an hour and then put away for a day or two if you were bored, and even then you beat it in a couple of days (think it took me a week, but I suck at those types of games).  But I don't consider HS to be a RPG, but, as you put it, a hack and slash style of game, which ISN'T what I look for in a RPG.  Probably one of the reasons I felt AoC bombed so much for me as that was pure hack and slash and button mashing to the extreme (and constant).  Yet with Shadowbane, it felt more RP oriented to me, had a great back lore that I'd spend hours reading...  shame they didn't really implement that lore into the game, but hey...

I'm a person who can do without the quests or games that really put you into a position to do your own quests (I loved AC as an example), but when it comes to combat, I want something that makes sense, doesn't rely as much upon my hand-eye-mouse cordination to pull off (I'm not the fastest person in the world with a mouse).

Then you add in the issue of time and I log in at odd hours to my guild alot of times (I am able to come home at lunch for example, most of my guild can't), thus a game that I can't play solo in at all (which you can't with a game like DF due to gank squads) isn't really a game I can entertain seriously, thus why I like the RvR concept a bit more than a full blown, anything goes FFA system.

Like I said, maybe some day someone will make one, but alas, I am not going to hold my breath.

As an aside, what destroyed shadowbane was the excessive exploiting and engine holes (centaurs being able to run through locked doors, druids and their ability to get past walls by casting a certain spell and warp themselves though, the rapid fire dagger exploit, etc) and the lag issues (like running through a building to have the boxes in the corner spawn after you ran in and now you are trapped behind them ;))

I am a big fan of sandbox games, expecially non level based ones.  I was a long time player of the west end games PnP game Torg (as well as shatterzone and the master book system) and I also enjoy a good game of World of Darkness (especially the Magic based one, not so much werewolfs and vampires).  That being said, I won't touch DF with a 10 foot pole, which is a shame as I'd love to find a game that could replace Shadowbane, but DF isn't that in my eyes (and neither was AoC, unfortunately).

The problem for me isn't the sandbox/little to do, the social-political stuff should help with that, my issues are strictly combat related, as in I absolutely HATE FPS style MMORPGs.

I guess what I'd really like to see is something like DAoC with Shadowbane style keeps in the wild lands but using a non linear combat system like UO has...  Gives a place for the little guy, gives a place for the siege happy crazy people (of which I am included at some points) and would possibly allow people to be more effective in combat much earlier in their careers...

Ah well, maybe someone will do something like that some time.

For me, what makes it horrible is a matter of preference, not necessarily something wrong with the game.  I do not enjoy FPS style combat.

I think it looks a little clunky, but that is probably a necessary thing due to large scale PvP asperations, and the UI issues can be fixed over time (though it would keep me from playing at release).

The other biggest issue is the mentality of the players of FFA PvP games.  I find it attracts two kinds of people, those who enjoy gaming with other people and look foward to the challenge a thinking AI provides and those who will cheat, exploit and gank other people simply to get their jollies off, then whine and moan when there isn't anyone to kill, never seeming to realize they are the ones who created that situation.

While Shadowbane had it's issues, you could see this very clearly there...  Some people would use every exploit they could just to prove they could win and those who refused to use the exploits were often left out in the cold.  That mentality really frustrates those of us who simply want good competition and something more intelligent than mob AI.

All in all, I do hope that DF does well, I'm getting sick of all the EQ clones out there and we need a 'non clone game' to do well to get people out of the mentality that only the EQ formula works.

I agree with you Ihmotepp, just not my style of combat, but I do hope it does well, if for no other reasons as it will hopefully stimulate the innovation in MMOs again instead of leaving us with EQ clones for the rest of our existances.

And I thought I heard that some state agencies (I know I heard Texas thrown out in regards to this) were looking into whether SOE didn't violate some gambling laws by not listings odds of 'winning' certain cards.

I'd add a 3rd type to that...  the kind that has felt they were lied to and/or feel they were promised a product that they do not see in the game right now.  I think of all the trolls, they have the most right to be upset.

I really don't fall under any of them, I hope Darkfall releases, but I have no desire to play it (I don't like the combat style myself).  I also hope it does well as we need a progressive game to do well or we will be doomed to 3-4 more years of EQ clones (which will probably end my desire to play MMOs to be honest).

edit:

Lets add a 4th while we are at it, all the fanbois who won't listen to honest and real critism of a game and retort with the now famed expression, 'gtfo and go back to WoW'

But you do get into the question of how statistically relevant the data is.

Don't get me wrong, I neither care how accurate the poll is or how successful Darkfall is (or how fast it fails/succeeds), the game is not my style of game (due to the combat style, not the FFA pvp, I am a shadowbane vet after all).  But polls can be asked in such a way to get the response they want AND are statistically irrelevant if the sample is too small.

Game forums are not the most...  visited of the forum systems and alot of people never visit them for any reason.  I have found that over the years the two biggest reasons people go to the boards is, they like the game and can't be in at that time (work, out of town, etc) OR they are pissed about something...  There are a couple of other reasons (looking for info, looking for a guild, etc) but these are lesser reasons and then once in their guild or find their answer they don't go back until they have another such need (which may be months down the road).

So a poll taken on a game forum is most likely not statistically accurate, due to those criteria for visiting the forum.  Most average people NEVER visit the boards and those are the vast majority of your players.

I really hope DF does well, we need a MMO launch that does so, but I'm not going to hold my breath on it either.

This old AC player isn't rising up to claim DF as the second coming, hell, IMO, it isn't even good enough to be the second coming of Shadowbane and SB wasn't even as good as AC was.

I will neither preorder nor order this game.  Can't stand FPSes that pretend to be character based RPGs.  Nothing against those who do, just not my style.

Shame really, would of been nice to see a suitable replacement out there for shadowbane, guess I'll keep looking.

If I have to say anything about the pre CU game that is remembered fondly, it was that the character development was different.  Open and adaptable to how YOU wanted to play.

Were there problems?  Oh yah, but this whole EQ style of games is really for the birds and does get old after awhile.

I'm not seeing anything on it.

Darth Greedious or Darth Dumbass would be my picks.

I only had a couple issues with Vanguard...

1)  The character models are horrid...  I'd rather see EQ1 style avatars than those things in Vanguard, they look like plastic barbie dolls...

2)  I'm done with SOE and will never play another SOE MMO again.  The adding of cash shops into EQ2 and the upcoming fubar tanking patch were more than I could handle...  they just won't leave well enough alone and have to break what isn't broken and add things noone really wants.

3)  my computer at release wouldn't even play the game at 10fps...  My current one would do be able to do much better, but due to #2, I will never do so.

That being said, I absolutely loved diplomacy in the game.  I think I spent more time on that in beta than I did any other system.  Was a refreshing way to deal with faction.

What is sad is FC has plenty of examples of PvP systems that do work and they chose to institute an idiot one...  One more reason I'm glad I left when I did.

Originally posted by Nebless

And neither is NGE. Face it, it’s time for both sides to take off the rose-colored glasses and admit that SWG; be it orig/pre/post or whatever was and is a flawed game. Which one is more flawed? Can’t say, that’s so subjective as to fall into the ‘how many digits can you take Pi to?’ argument. Which IS more playable? Hands down its NGE; BECAUSE it’s the only one SOE now offers. IF SOE offered both pre & post versions than you could argue which one, but they don’t.

A lot of players voted with their dollars when NGE came out and it didn’t seem to have as much or enough effect. Will anything down the road? Who knows?

So on that happy thought let’s take a trip down memory lane and look at some of the flaws in both...

- Professions
Old
32 skills. Be all you can be, how ever you wanted to be. Except there quickly became THE template everyone just had to have to be the best. So you can say 32 different, but the reality was a bunch of template clones

New
9 choices. Some variation, but not enough

- Jedi
Old
Super hard to get (way too hard?), the fix: holocron’s. You finally unlocked it? Now take a number and wait for the old man to come get you and take you to the super secret training village. I was all for only having a few in game, but they just handled it in such a strange way.

New
Starter profession, now it’s way too easy

- Leveling
Old
Level grinding and even worse macro level grinding. Camp a good NPC spawn point, set up your macro, go to bed and wake up the next day with a shiny new high level toon. Or go out and slaughter so much wildlife that PETA would drop dead from the shock.

New
Quest level grinding. One size fits all professions, factions and flavors. Some good stories, some bad, some really bad.

- Clutter
Old
Housing everywhere you could think of. The Theed and Moinia Vendor lines. The Valley of the Lag between Bestine and AH.

New
It’s still there except it’s just a dead world.

- Broken things
Old
Broken/nerf’d story lines, professions and missions. ‘I went there, where’s the NPC?’, Carbineer, mission points inside buildings.

New
Left over animations, crafting lines, missions. If you’re going to put in new, clean out the old! Mission points still inside buildings.

- Canon
This would pop up from time to time usually in the context of ‘we can’t do that, it’s not canon’.
Old
Mummer thugs, fighting pets

New
All the Clone Wars marketing tie in’s

And we could go on and on. Both games have their problems. I’d say NGE’s are worse if only because they have so many pre-NGE one’s they didn’t clean up.

Something I personally think, is that WE the players helped to screw up the pre-NGE game. Why?

- Buffing a level 1 to the max, outfitting him in the best comp armor around and running him through the hard missions to level him up fast. And then whining that the game needed more and more harder high level stuff to ‘challenge’ them. This is where the DWB and Corvette came from. No one wanted to take their time and just play at a lower level, everyone just HAD to be max’d out.

And because the dev’s were stuck in this rat race of coming up with new challenging stuff, they blew off the low level bugs and nerf’s since players were just blowing by them anyway, so why fix them. How often did we hear the mantra ‘X profession is nerf’d; we’ll fix it next build’ and it would just get pushed farther and farther back? How far? I think they were hoping so far back that people just forgot about it.

So in the end what did we end up with? I’d have to say two totally different games. SOE should have just given SWG:NGE a different name. Linking it to the old was one of the biggest dis-services they could have done.

 

aye, it just goes to show that even when they develop a good game system (the underlying system) they will screw it up some other way...  I still say to this day that the two best character development systems were SWG (original) and AO...  both of which flopped for reasons other than their character development systems...

Your numbers look all fancy and sincere, but you are making one major flaw in your logic.  You are assuming (and incorrectly) that all costs are variable in nature (thus the static 14/account cost).

Salaries are salaries are salaries and while there is SOME coorelation between # of accounts and personnel, it isn't a variable cost and must be used as a fixed cost when looking at cost analysis.  Also, intrastructure is a fixed cost, not variable.  Until now, they haven't reduced the number of servers, so while the amount of bandwidth is varialble, the maintaince, updating, depreciation and control of the servers is a fixed cost.

Thus, if you want to make the assumption that at 150k subs it was a 14$/account expense (which would be ridiculous when you consider they offer one year subs for about 12.95, you honestly think they'd want to take a loss of 1.05/account???)

So in that regard, with out what their fixed costs were, we can't do our own analysis.