If the game comes out and actually has good reviews and word of mouth, then yes I believe that most people would try the game. However, if you ignore the the past consistant trends of endeavors by SOE and have an expectation for success you are simply a fool setting themselves up for disappointment.

The statment that past preformance is no indication of future outcome is not only misapplied to this situation because it has to do with potential profit not enjoyment of an activity (it is quite possible for a game to make money, but still be crap and mismanaged) , but completely nieave. This statment isn't meant to abolish fear of copmpanies that are obviousely ran poorly, but to signfy that just because a product line doesn't succeed that futured product lines by the company may succeed. We already know that MMOS can succeed from a financial aspect, but anyone with any since also knows that SOE will  likely rush ther product to market and then nerph the hell out of it until it no longer resembles anything like the game that the people who contined throught the crap release enjoyed palying.

Originally posted by Ryun511

 SOE gave Sigil 6 more months to try and complete the game, not take 6 six away. Microsoft wanted to release the game (on schedule) by summer of '06, and because they could not meet their deadline MS dropped them/Brad McQ went to go find another publisher. SOE bought Sigil and Vanguard maybe 4-6 months after release. Get your facts straight please. Vanguard was Sigil's fault

 

SOE bought  Vanguard 4-6 monthes before release realising it wasn't going to be ready for realease and pushed it into release anyway. How is this not SOE's fault?

Originally posted by therain93

 

Originally posted by godpuppet

 

Originally posted by therain93

 

By the way, the cardinal rule of investing is that  "past performance is no indication of future outcome".  It's a factor but you need to assess their current situation, challenges and opportunities as well to account for changes.  Funny enough, that's applicable to everything. 

That may be, but it is woefully naive to invest in a company that is notorious for bad results and to expect flying colours.

Wow, did you ignore that entire sentence that past performance" is only a factor of the entire situation?  I guess you were betting on Lord of the Rings Online to fail since DDO didn't fare as well as everyone expected and Asheron's Call 2 died?  They certainly didn't have a promising future yet managed to pull off a successful game (for casual players).

The difference between Turbine and SoE, is that DDO failed due to design and gameplay mechanics, NOT becuase it was rush released.

Originally posted by bverji

Originally posted by Ryun511

 SOE gave Sigil 6 more months to try and complete the game, not take 6 six away. Microsoft wanted to release the game (on schedule) by summer of '06, and because they could not meet their deadline MS dropped them/Brad McQ went to go find another publisher. SOE bought Sigil and Vanguard maybe 4-6 months after release. Get your facts straight please. Vanguard was Sigil's fault

 

SOE bought  Vanguard 4-6 monthes before release realising it wasn't going to be ready for realease and pushed it into release anyway. How is this not SOE's fault?

It's not SOE's fault because your facts are incorrect.  SOE didn't buy Vanguard until after release.  They entered a publishing contract with Sigil during the period that you specify.  Sigil then went looking for more VC $$$ and when spent, was forced to release.  SOE had no reason to pour money into them ahead of time.

Originally posted by godpuppet

Originally posted by therain93

 

Originally posted by godpuppet

 

Originally posted by therain93

 

By the way, the cardinal rule of investing is that  "past performance is no indication of future outcome".  It's a factor but you need to assess their current situation, challenges and opportunities as well to account for changes.  Funny enough, that's applicable to everything. 

That may be, but it is woefully naive to invest in a company that is notorious for bad results and to expect flying colours.

Wow, did you ignore that entire sentence that past performance" is only a factor of the entire situation?  I guess you were betting on Lord of the Rings Online to fail since DDO didn't fare as well as everyone expected and Asheron's Call 2 died?  They certainly didn't have a promising future yet managed to pull off a successful game (for casual players).

The difference between Turbine and SoE, is that DDO failed due to design and gameplay mechanics, NOT becuase it was rush released.

Yes, that is a difference.  But you seemd to have missed the point that both had poor histories and turbine reversed its fortune.  You also seem to have missed the part where the industry has largely experienced a paradigm shift after witnessing Vanguard crash and burn.  SOE obviously has been taking better care of its existing client base since then and one would expect that perhaps they've learned it's easier to design and implement properly rather than repair after the fact.  Of course we won't know this until the game hits beta and testers and reviewers see it.  Until the, you have nothing to base a judgement on and you're trolling for a reaction.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ fine ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Well it's a fact.

SOE sucks. Plain and simple. I just wish they'd learn from all their faults already so The Agency won't be hit by the SOE-Hammer like SWG,Vanguard, etc. pp.

Arggh!  Stop it, you diehard SoE haters.  It's been years since the SWG debacle, and they've actually been quite good since them.  SoE is one of the major MMO developers and they have some of the best people.  At the same time, they are only human and they have to answer to other people like the business people, so mistakes sometimes get made.

I was a totally hardcore SWG player and I'm totally over it.  Years and years have gone by now.  Let it go!

As for this game, based on the information we have so far, this is my most highly anticipated game.  Of course, like many games, it will probably disappoint.  But for now, it looks great.

Originally posted by Charisi

Originally posted by j1flaw

Yes it's from SOE, but I'm not about to let issues that happened from different developers keep me from getting into this. SWG at launch was bug filled and those issues in game development will always haunt SWG now. A lot has happened in 4 years that I feel these guys are on the ball and know what they are doing.

Haha, on the ball? You're right, a lot has happened in 4 years. To begin with, they butchered SWG. Did everyone forget the NGE while reading up on this game? Also, should I remind you of their other great debacle, Vanguard. Granted they did not create the game, but rather bought out Sigil, then rushed the game to release in typical SOE fashion making the bugs/lag unbearable. Which resulted in yet another SOE flop at launch.

Uh Vanguard was Sigil's fault.  Sigil basically spent a year making demos before they even started the game in an effort to sell it to microsoft.  Microsoft was too smart fr this but SOE bit hook, line, and sinker.   SOE was basically taken in by Sigil's fraud and got suspicious. 

Originally posted by therain93

 

Originally posted by bverji

Originally posted by Ryun511

 SOE gave Sigil 6 more months to try and complete the game, not take 6 six away. Microsoft wanted to release the game (on schedule) by summer of '06, and because they could not meet their deadline MS dropped them/Brad McQ went to go find another publisher. SOE bought Sigil and Vanguard maybe 4-6 months after release. Get your facts straight please. Vanguard was Sigil's fault

 

SOE bought  Vanguard 4-6 monthes before release realising it wasn't going to be ready for realease and pushed it into release anyway. How is this not SOE's fault?

 

It's not SOE's fault because your facts are incorrect.  SOE didn't buy Vanguard until after release.  They entered a publishing contract with Sigil during the period that you specify.  Sigil then went looking for more VC $$$ and when spent, was forced to release.  SOE had no reason to pour money into them ahead of time.

OK they didn't "buy" the game, but you're quibbling the point is SOE choose to publish a game that wasn't ready (as is their MO)  that's their fault. They didn't have to sink any more money into it, but they didn't have to produce it either. SOE choose to swindle customers out of there money...again.

It's unfortunate. This is a interesting sounding game and one I've wanted to see. But seeing the name Sony on it worries me.

Guess what sony haters? You are sadly mistaken. Did you know that Lucas Arts has/had their backhand in SOE's pocket on development this whole time? And did you also know that LucasArts pushed them into doing the NGE?

Try *GASP* talking to SOE developers and Smedly and all of them... they aren't *GASP* EVIL... they are average every day people who play MMO's just like US. Lets not base new games upon old development decisions by different teams that had other companies messing with the mmo's...

And no I do not work for SOE and I do not always agree with SOE either...

SWG isn't the only game that SOE has made. Did lucas arts play a hand in the pit falls of SWG? Perhaps and who knows to what degree, but it's illrevelent. The people who "hate" SOE by-in-large haven't made their decision just based upon the disaster that is SWG. SWG is  the pennacle, but far from an isolated oddity.

SOE has established a patteren of horrible and dismissive customer service, releasing games with little content, unfinished, broaken, having horrible priorities when "fixing" their games, lying to their player base (consistantlly and obviously), and ignoring their loyal base desires in order to try to obtain the mythical player base. So trying to lay SWG's downfall at Lucas's feet simply doesn't hold water because you can see the same patterens in planet side, EQ, EQII, Vanguard, ect.

Wow the smilies on these forums are great =D

Anyways slot of people prefer EQ2 as it is now over how it was at release... (A lot of the people coming back and current players that is) So they are at least doing one game right. And with Vanguard (BLEH) hopefully they don't mess it up (not sure if that is actually possible with what they were given to work with).

Originally posted by JRRTrollkin

It's unfortunate. This is a interesting sounding game and one I've wanted to see. But seeing the name Sony on it worries me.

 

 

Yeah I agree.  The game does look hot though.  

---

Originally posted by Judgemanx

---

Originally posted by soecabal

SOE has yet to sucessfully run anything that didn't have Everquest in it's name.

---

Sad but true and EQ wasnt a creation of SOE I dont belive. When I Played the original EQ before SOE got their mits on it, the opening screen would say Verant. Now im not sure if thats one of SOEs companies or if they simply bought the game from them like they seem to do often nowadays.

---

Verant ( formerly RedEye Interactive )was a sub-division of Sony Online Games. When Sony Online Games and 989 studies re-organzied and merged to make SOE they pulled in Verant. Verant and EQ1 were always part of Sony and thus SOE.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sony_Online_Entertainment#History

Originally posted by Anti-Fanboi

 

---

Originally posted by Judgemanx

---

Originally posted by soecabal

 

SOE has yet to sucessfully run anything that didn't have Everquest in it's name.

---

Sad but true and EQ wasnt a creation of SOE I dont belive. When I Played the original EQ before SOE got their mits on it, the opening screen would say Verant. Now im not sure if thats one of SOEs companies or if they simply bought the game from them like they seem to do often nowadays.

---

 

Verant ( formerly RedEye Interactive )was a sub-division of Sony Online Games. When Sony Online Games and 989 studies re-organzied and merged to make SOE they pulled in Verant. Verant and EQ1 were always part of Sony and thus SOE.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sony_Online_Entertainment#History

 

 

That's quibbling. Verant wasn't under the direct control/management of SONY.  Varant was basically an  independent R&D devison funded by sony but self managed.

I do wish Mmorpg.com would do something about all the the SOE hate on these forums ,its getting beyond a joke and is totally unwarranted. SOE have done alot for the  industry and sadly people have short memories as they have been involved in one of the most succesful Mmo's series to date namely EQ and EQ 2,

And dont start whining again about SWG its become tedious beyond belief listening to all the unwarranted hatred towards Sony.

Sony are a huge part of the Mmorpg Industry and are going to be hopefully for along time.

For god's sake they made one mistake with SWG,and they dont deserve the Hatred ...give em a break and let em get on with what they do best which is make great games .

Originally posted by bverji

Originally posted by Ryun511

 SOE gave Sigil 6 more months to try and complete the game, not take 6 six away. Microsoft wanted to release the game (on schedule) by summer of '06, and because they could not meet their deadline MS dropped them/Brad McQ went to go find another publisher. SOE bought Sigil and Vanguard maybe 4-6 months after release. Get your facts straight please. Vanguard was Sigil's fault

 

SOE bought  Vanguard 4-6 monthes before release realising it wasn't going to be ready for realease and pushed it into release anyway. How is this not SOE's fault?

Vanguard Release: Jan 30 2007

SOE's Purchase : May 15 2007

So um, please research before you make a post like this.. considering it was said previously that your statement was untrue

If SOE was on my country, they would have so much problems (we actually have laws which protects the consumer). In here, a company cant pull something like NGE and get through, there was a lot of comercial promises on the very SOE site for the future of SWG (for example the smuggler revamp),  and then they just wipe it all, change the core of the game, without announcing. They just lied to all their consumers and thats ok... In here this is considered highly illegal. No company can treat their consumers are idiots like this and get well from the law. Advertising something that you know its a lie is illegal on my country.

Ok, not all countries have a good law system, but what scares me most is that a few consumers still think thats its ok to do that.

They are so selfish for thinking only in their belly button, that they still support companies like this one. I have even heard ´its business´. Its not, its scheme, anything that deceive people is a scheme... Countries have laws against it, civilized people despise those companies.

Originally posted by summitus

I do wish Mmorpg.com would do something about all the the SOE hate on these forums ,its getting beyond a joke and is totally unwarranted. SOE have done alot for the  industry and sadly people have short memories as they have been involved in one of the most succesful Mmo's series to date namely EQ and EQ 2,

And dont start whining again about SWG its become tedious beyond belief listening to all the unwarranted hatred towards Sony.

Sony are a huge part of the Mmorpg Industry and are going to be hopefully for along time.

For god's sake they made one mistake with SWG,and they dont deserve the Hatred ...give em a break and let em get on with what they do best which is make great games .

Want people to bring up the screenshots of how "Finished" everquest was during expansions.

40% of Everquests expansion was finished when it was released. 60% was made with $ from subscriptions after release date.

It's easy to forget.

They killed, EQ, they killed SWG, they killed MxO, they killed Gods and Heroes, they killed PS, and I'm sure they'll kill the agency too.