Trending Games | Pirate101 | Guild Wars 2 | Warhammer 40K: Eternal Crusade | World of Warcraft

  Network:  FPSguru RTSguru
Login:  Password:   Remember?  
Show Quick Gamelist Jump to Random Game
Members:2,900,208 Users Online:0
Games:751  Posts:6,269,126
City State Entertainment | Official Site
MMORPG | Genre:Fantasy | Status:Development  (est.rel N/A)  | Pub:City State Entertainment
PVP:Yes | Distribution: | Retail Price:n/a | Monthly Fee:n/a
System Req: PC | Out of date info? Let us know!

Camelot Unchained Forum » General Discussion » Isn't this guy the same guy that hyped up Warhammer Online?

5 Pages « 1 2 3 4 5 » Search
99 posts found
  Scilly

Novice Member

Joined: 2/14/13
Posts: 69

2/17/13 10:09:46 AM#61
Originally posted by MarkJacobs
Originally posted by Storm_Fireblade
Originally posted by MarkJacobs
I am genuinely excited about what the backers and CSE can do over the next few years.

Well, we will create the best RvR experience in the most immersive world ever, of course! *looking around* No, I see no hype here :-)

LOL, if you ever see me say that, please feel free to throw things at me. :)

mark FFS take sunday off and dont burn yourself out before dev even begins!!!! <3

  Icewhite

Made History

Joined: 7/11/11
Posts: 6495

Pink, it's like red but not quite.

2/17/13 10:09:55 AM#62

Mr. Jacobs, with all due respect...there's nothing to be gained from "setting the record straight".

It cannot help.

Self-pity imprisons us in the walls of our own self-absorption. The whole world shrinks down to the size of our problem, and the more we dwell on it, the smaller we are and the larger the problem seems to grow.

  User Deleted
2/17/13 10:10:31 AM#63
Originally posted by MarkJacobs
Originally posted by Storm_Fireblade
Originally posted by MarkJacobs
I am genuinely excited about what the backers and CSE can do over the next few years.

Well, we will create the best RvR experience in the most immersive world ever, of course! *looking around* No, I see no hype here :-)

LOL, if you ever see me say that, please feel free to throw things at me. :)

LOL

  FARGIN_WAR

Novice Member

Joined: 12/19/12
Posts: 169

2/17/13 10:24:04 AM#64
Originally posted by Icewhite

Mr. Jacobs, with all due respect...there's nothing to be gained from "setting the record straight".

It cannot help.

I must respctfully disagree.

 

While I doubt Mark is going to sway MMOexposed away from his preconcieved notions, his setting the record straight here is futher helping to cement the suport of readers such as myself. So as I've said before, Mark, please keep talking.

 

And to MMOExposed. I respect your opinion, but in this case I'm sorry to say I feel you're starting to sound like a child holding onto a grudge like its your favorite toy. If all we ever did was to sit around and dwell on what has happened in the past, there wouldn't be a future.

 

 

If you don’t do stupid things while you’re young, you’ll have nothing to smile about when you’re old.

  tlear

Novice Member

Joined: 12/15/07
Posts: 143

2/17/13 10:24:10 AM#65

Thing with WHA maybe was that there was a very large number of really pissed off beta testers in WAR beta. Considering how long it took for NDA to be removed stuff was leaking all over the place on the web. If anything experience with WAR beta is probably one of the most negative ones I have in beta. But ya WHA turned pretty bad at some point.

 

Beta itself. There were just certain things.. like the original RvR Lakes  with penis shaped rocks design. I remember I got into beta and looking at it I was thinking umm WTF? Remember what it took to somewhat change that? Then scenarios, we knew where that was going, at some point some of the old DAOC crowd went into the full on denial mode(including myself) where I would say to myself you know this is gona work out in the end somehow, right?? RIGHT? Then close my eyes and keep testing other stuff. First I wrote couple of full page on what will happen on release(scenario farmage 24/7). In beta there were many people who wanted to do open RvR no matter what so there were some good fights outside, so we all hoped this will somehow work. But then capital city stuff came out and I kinda lost all hope, still bought game and played it for 4 month. But ya even TOA did not piss me of as much.

 

But credit where credit is due many things in WAR were really new and risky. Was good someone tried them.

 

This is actually a good question for you Mark, what are the plans with NDA?

Also if you can tell us how decision was made to go with 2 sides instead of 3 that would clear a lot of air. Was it that you guys liked the "Push map" dynamic so much? WoW battelground really were that much fun to play ;)? There is no need for names but what were the arguments would be really helpful for me atleast to understand what happened with WAR.

  Scilly

Novice Member

Joined: 2/14/13
Posts: 69

2/17/13 10:30:45 AM#66
Originally posted by FARGIN_WAR
Originally posted by Icewhite

Mr. Jacobs, with all due respect...there's nothing to be gained from "setting the record straight".

It cannot help.

I must respctfully disagree.

 

While I doubt Mark is going to sway MMOexposed away from his preconcieved notions, his setting the record straight here is futher helping to cement the suport of readers such as myself. So as I've said before, Mark, please keep talking.

 

And to MMOExposed. I respect your opinion, but in this case I'm sorry to say I feel you're starting to sound like a child holding onto a grudge like its your favorite toy. If all we ever did was to sit around and dwell on what has happened in the past, there wouldn't be a future.

 

 

it sounds to me hes trying to provoke people into a reaction, id just leave him be. His "name" says it all, hes hiding behind it and trying to cause problems from situations he doesnt understand nor was in a position to really know what went on. MJ has answered him, that should be the end of it. Im not a fanboy but what other game ever has had such a succesful CEO be so keen to look at his future player bases opinions? MJ is acting like a indie dev yet is a well renowed dev of multi million pound mmo's

  Vorthanion

Elite Member

Joined: 7/02/11
Posts: 1936

2/17/13 10:34:06 AM#67
Originally posted by Jetrpg
Originally posted by Gaoxin
Originally posted by Satarious

He's also the legend behind Dark Age of Camelot, which many consider the best pvp mmo.

And by many you mean the DAOC community?^^

No generaly in the vet mmorpg player community.

Really?

  Thane

Hard Core Member

Joined: 8/14/03
Posts: 1919

I'm a leaf on the wind. Watch how I soar.

2/17/13 10:35:49 AM#68
Originally posted by Slapshot1188

I think that was Paul Barnett...

 (...)

yea, paul did an awesome job there :)

"I'll never grow up, never grow up, never grow up! Not me!"

  Xthos

Novice Member

Joined: 4/18/10
Posts: 2650

2/17/13 10:37:01 AM#69
Originally posted by Vorthanion
Originally posted by Jetrpg
Originally posted by Gaoxin
Originally posted by Satarious

He's also the legend behind Dark Age of Camelot, which many consider the best pvp mmo.

And by many you mean the DAOC community?^^

No generaly in the vet mmorpg player community.

Really?

Well, I would say it is known as the best RvR.

  MarkJacobs

CEO City State Entertainment

Joined: 12/18/12
Posts: 405

2/17/13 10:47:55 AM#70
Originally posted by tlear

Thing with WHA maybe was that there was a very large number of really pissed off beta testers in WAR beta. Considering how long it took for NDA to be removed stuff was leaking all over the place on the web. If anything experience with WAR beta is probably one of the most negative ones I have in beta. But ya WHA turned pretty bad at some point.

 

Beta itself. There were just certain things.. like the original RvR Lakes  with penis shaped rocks design. I remember I got into beta and looking at it I was thinking umm WTF? Remember what it took to somewhat change that? Then scenarios, we knew where that was going, at some point some of the old DAOC crowd went into the full on denial mode(including myself) where I would say to myself you know this is gona work out in the end somehow, right?? RIGHT? Then close my eyes and keep testing other stuff. First I wrote couple of full page on what will happen on release(scenario farmage 24/7). In beta there were many people who wanted to do open RvR no matter what so there were some good fights outside, so we all hoped this will somehow work. But then capital city stuff came out and I kinda lost all hope, still bought game and played it for 4 month. But ya even TOA did not piss me of as much.

 

But credit where credit is due many things in WAR were really new and risky. Was good someone tried them.

 

This is actually a good question for you Mark, what are the plans with NDA?

Also if you can tell us how decision was made to go with 2 sides instead of 3 that would clear a lot of air. Was it that you guys liked the "Push map" dynamic so much? WoW battelground really were that much fun to play ;)? There is no need for names but what were the arguments would be really helpful for me atleast to understand what happened with WAR.

As to the NDA, we will have a strict NDA during backer testing but it will be lifted quite early compared to most MMOs. If you look at when Dark Age lifted its NDA you'll see what I mean.

As to 3 vs. 2, that's a good question. I'll try to answer it without crossing my self-imposed line of people tossing. Originally WAR had three realms as per my original vision document. We consulted with Games Workshop (I spent time there before the game went into production) and everything was good to go. We started production on the game and, well, let's simply say that the time estimates that I was given by development initially turned out to be quite a bit off. There were also issues with the racial distribution of each side that and certain IP limitations that, IMO, were going to bite us in the butt if we launched with three realms. My other fear was that a 3-sided game based on the path we were going down was going to end up far more unbalanced than would have been acceptable to players and we really would have ended up with a bad dynamic in terms of realm balancing. Additionally, with what I could see already happening with our cost estimates, I thought going down the 3-sided approach could have ended up sinking Mythic as we were still independent at the time. At the same time this was happening, I was also spending a ton of time being the M&A guy working with our CFO, Mark Gagne, to sell the studio as our investors were insisting that we do since the MMORPG space had been so greatly altered by WoW's success and the average development budget of these games going up by 6-10x on paper. Imperator's budget, for example, was supposed to be 10M when we started the project and now TA saw that we were going to have to spend a lot more on MMOs than we had planned on initially because back in 2003 (when they invested in us), nobody spent that kind of money on an MMORPG, including Sony, as Smed and others have said over the years. Now, fast forward to the EA acqusition. Once EA bought us they made it quite clear that they wanted this game to come out on time and that I had to assure them that once we were part of the company that budgets wouldn't bloat, dev timeline would not go through the roof and I promised the then CEO that we would do our best. Of course during the development of WAR, WoW's first great expansion came out and I then asked EA for a little more time to create WAR since it would have been foolish to try to release WAR without more poilish. They said yes and we were given a bit more time.

So, to sum up. For the reasons detailed above and because *I* did believe and with the full support of the rest of the senior leadership that a 3-realm version of WAR would have taken a lot more time/money to complete and because of percieved realm balance issues, we shifted from the 3 realm design that I initially believed in to 2 realms.

How's that?

Mark Jacobs
CEO, City State Entertainment

  Voiidiin

Novice Member

Joined: 1/13/11
Posts: 827

Soylent green is made from PEOPLE

2/17/13 10:50:08 AM#71

Hmmm i had this really long wall of text made here talking about how the OP posts in other game forums, but i think anyone who takes the time can figure out what i had originally wanted to say, (hint: Go back to GW2 beta days in his posting history).

With that aside, Mark Jacobs, I love you posting here, i hate you having to defend yourself from the wild accusations and clearly misinformed posters who think that since they might have heard a snippet posted in some obscure forums from some obscure guy who might have had a sister who's friend worked at the pastry truck that delivered to Mythic back in the late 90s say soemthing that they heard from a tree designer on DAoC as a fact. I would simply wish that you would not have to do this, but i know you're the only one who can set those arbitrary thought processes at ease.

Here is hoping that the loonies pop their heads out early, like today, and we can now use your replies in future looney posts, making your job (making CU) easier down the road. 

 

Lolipops !

  MarkJacobs

CEO City State Entertainment

Joined: 12/18/12
Posts: 405

2/17/13 11:23:34 AM#72

Originally posted by Scilly

Originally posted by MarkJacobs
Originally posted by Storm_Fireblade
Originally posted by MarkJacobs
I am genuinely excited about what the backers and CSE can do over the next few years.

Well, we will create the best RvR experience in the most immersive world ever, of course! *looking around* No, I see no hype here :-)

LOL, if you ever see me say that, please feel free to throw things at me. :)

mark FFS take sunday off and dont burn yourself out before dev even begins!!!! <3

Thanks but I'm going into the office shortly to work on the levels for MoO and final cleanup of tomorrow's post. I thank you for your kind words though.

Originally posted by Icewhite

Mr. Jacobs, with all due respect...there's nothing to be gained from "setting the record straight".

It cannot help.

I know that it really doesn't matter what I say, that even if I had documents, sworn statements, etc. some people's opinions wouldn't change. I'm really not trying to set the record straight because if I was, I would name names, people toss and swear that it all wasn't my fault (some of it absolutely was) or that everything that happened was the result of me just following orders (it wasn't). Some people have asked some really good questions and if I ignore them, then people will say "See, he refuses to admit mistakes" (this has already happened even though I've probably admitted to mistakes more often here and in the past that 99% of development heads of studios/designers or "See, you can't trust him, he's evasive" (again, happened here) or even worse, "He won't learn from his mistakes!" (once again, with feeling, this has happened here too). I can't answer every question and some I am *absolutely* avoiding because they would entail people tossing and if I lose some backers because I won't engage in that behavior because either they continue to think it is my fault or because they think I'm hiding something, well, I'd rather lose the backers than go down that dark path.

As I've always said, whether back in the early days of Dark Age of Camelot's development or now, if you don't trust me or think that we can do it, that's fine, it's your right.

 

Mark Jacobs
CEO, City State Entertainment

  tlear

Novice Member

Joined: 12/15/07
Posts: 143

2/17/13 11:37:00 AM#73
Originally posted by MarkJacobs
Originally posted by tlear

Thing with WHA maybe was that there was a very large number of really pissed off beta testers in WAR beta. Considering how long it took for NDA to be removed stuff was leaking all over the place on the web. If anything experience with WAR beta is probably one of the most negative ones I have in beta. But ya WHA turned pretty bad at some point.

 

Beta itself. There were just certain things.. like the original RvR Lakes  with penis shaped rocks design. I remember I got into beta and looking at it I was thinking umm WTF? Remember what it took to somewhat change that? Then scenarios, we knew where that was going, at some point some of the old DAOC crowd went into the full on denial mode(including myself) where I would say to myself you know this is gona work out in the end somehow, right?? RIGHT? Then close my eyes and keep testing other stuff. First I wrote couple of full page on what will happen on release(scenario farmage 24/7). In beta there were many people who wanted to do open RvR no matter what so there were some good fights outside, so we all hoped this will somehow work. But then capital city stuff came out and I kinda lost all hope, still bought game and played it for 4 month. But ya even TOA did not piss me of as much.

 

But credit where credit is due many things in WAR were really new and risky. Was good someone tried them.

 

This is actually a good question for you Mark, what are the plans with NDA?

Also if you can tell us how decision was made to go with 2 sides instead of 3 that would clear a lot of air. Was it that you guys liked the "Push map" dynamic so much? WoW battelground really were that much fun to play ;)? There is no need for names but what were the arguments would be really helpful for me atleast to understand what happened with WAR.

As to the NDA, we will have a strict NDA during backer testing but it will be lifted quite early compared to most MMOs. If you look at when Dark Age lifted its NDA you'll see what I mean.

As to 3 vs. 2, that's a good question. I'll try to answer it without crossing my self-imposed line of people tossing. Originally WAR had three realms as per my original vision document. We consulted with Games Workshop (I spent time there before the game went into production) and everything was good to go. We started production on the game and, well, let's simply say that the time estimates that I was given by development initially turned out to be quite a bit off. There were also issues with the racial distribution of each side that and certain IP limitations that, IMO, were going to bite us in the butt if we launched with three realms. My other fear was that a 3-sided game based on the path we were going down was going to end up far more unbalanced than would have been acceptable to players and we really would have ended up with a bad dynamic in terms of realm balancing. Additionally, with what I could see already happening with our cost estimates, I thought going down the 3-sided approach could have ended up sinking Mythic as we were still independent at the time. At the same time this was happening, I was also spending a ton of time being the M&A guy working with our CFO, Mark Gagne, to sell the studio as our investors were insisting that we do since the MMORPG space had been so greatly altered by WoW's success and the average development budget of these games going up by 6-10x on paper. Imperator's budget, for example, was supposed to be 10M when we started the project and now TA saw that we were going to have to spend a lot more on MMOs than we had planned on initially because back in 2003 (when they invested in us), nobody spent that kind of money on an MMORPG, including Sony, as Smed and others have said over the years. Now, fast forward to the EA acqusition. Once EA bought us they made it quite clear that they wanted this game to come out on time and that I had to assure them that once we were part of the company that budgets wouldn't bloat, dev timeline would not go through the roof and I promised the then CEO that we would do our best. Of course during the development of WAR, WoW's first great expansion came out and I then asked EA for a little more time to create WAR since it would have been foolish to try to release WAR without more poilish. They said yes and we were given a bit more time.

So, to sum up. For the reasons detailed above and because *I* did believe and with the full support of the rest of the senior leadership that a 3-realm version of WAR would have taken a lot more time/money to complete and because of percieved realm balance issues, we shifted from the 3 realm design that I initially believed in to 2 realms.

How's that?

Thanks for the explanation it is helpful definitely. Many of us wish something else was cut(less tiers, less races, less pve zones etc) but in that time with how WoW was doing.. I can see how 3rd realm got the cut.

  MarkJacobs

CEO City State Entertainment

Joined: 12/18/12
Posts: 405

2/17/13 11:50:21 AM#74
Originally posted by tlear
Originally posted by MarkJacobs
Originally posted by tlear

Thing with WHA maybe was that there was a very large number of really pissed off beta testers in WAR beta. Considering how long it took for NDA to be removed stuff was leaking all over the place on the web. If anything experience with WAR beta is probably one of the most negative ones I have in beta. But ya WHA turned pretty bad at some point.

 

Beta itself. There were just certain things.. like the original RvR Lakes  with penis shaped rocks design. I remember I got into beta and looking at it I was thinking umm WTF? Remember what it took to somewhat change that? Then scenarios, we knew where that was going, at some point some of the old DAOC crowd went into the full on denial mode(including myself) where I would say to myself you know this is gona work out in the end somehow, right?? RIGHT? Then close my eyes and keep testing other stuff. First I wrote couple of full page on what will happen on release(scenario farmage 24/7). In beta there were many people who wanted to do open RvR no matter what so there were some good fights outside, so we all hoped this will somehow work. But then capital city stuff came out and I kinda lost all hope, still bought game and played it for 4 month. But ya even TOA did not piss me of as much.

 

But credit where credit is due many things in WAR were really new and risky. Was good someone tried them.

 

This is actually a good question for you Mark, what are the plans with NDA?

Also if you can tell us how decision was made to go with 2 sides instead of 3 that would clear a lot of air. Was it that you guys liked the "Push map" dynamic so much? WoW battelground really were that much fun to play ;)? There is no need for names but what were the arguments would be really helpful for me atleast to understand what happened with WAR.

As to the NDA, we will have a strict NDA during backer testing but it will be lifted quite early compared to most MMOs. If you look at when Dark Age lifted its NDA you'll see what I mean.

As to 3 vs. 2, that's a good question. I'll try to answer it without crossing my self-imposed line of people tossing. Originally WAR had three realms as per my original vision document. We consulted with Games Workshop (I spent time there before the game went into production) and everything was good to go. We started production on the game and, well, let's simply say that the time estimates that I was given by development initially turned out to be quite a bit off. There were also issues with the racial distribution of each side that and certain IP limitations that, IMO, were going to bite us in the butt if we launched with three realms. My other fear was that a 3-sided game based on the path we were going down was going to end up far more unbalanced than would have been acceptable to players and we really would have ended up with a bad dynamic in terms of realm balancing. Additionally, with what I could see already happening with our cost estimates, I thought going down the 3-sided approach could have ended up sinking Mythic as we were still independent at the time. At the same time this was happening, I was also spending a ton of time being the M&A guy working with our CFO, Mark Gagne, to sell the studio as our investors were insisting that we do since the MMORPG space had been so greatly altered by WoW's success and the average development budget of these games going up by 6-10x on paper. Imperator's budget, for example, was supposed to be 10M when we started the project and now TA saw that we were going to have to spend a lot more on MMOs than we had planned on initially because back in 2003 (when they invested in us), nobody spent that kind of money on an MMORPG, including Sony, as Smed and others have said over the years. Now, fast forward to the EA acqusition. Once EA bought us they made it quite clear that they wanted this game to come out on time and that I had to assure them that once we were part of the company that budgets wouldn't bloat, dev timeline would not go through the roof and I promised the then CEO that we would do our best. Of course during the development of WAR, WoW's first great expansion came out and I then asked EA for a little more time to create WAR since it would have been foolish to try to release WAR without more poilish. They said yes and we were given a bit more time.

So, to sum up. For the reasons detailed above and because *I* did believe and with the full support of the rest of the senior leadership that a 3-realm version of WAR would have taken a lot more time/money to complete and because of percieved realm balance issues, we shifted from the 3 realm design that I initially believed in to 2 realms.

How's that?

Thanks for the explanation it is helpful definitely. Many of us wish something else was cut(less tiers, less races, less pve zones etc) but in that time with how WoW was doing.. I can see how 3rd realm got the cut.

You're welcome and if I had to take it back and do it again, I would have tried even harder to find a way to back the three realm setup work well. We did try but there were some issues that we couldn't overcome.

That's one of the biggest reasons I want to create a three realm game now using non-licensed IP. I've done a lot of games with licensed IP and I think the world of GW and its IP but for this game, we need to craft the races/classes/world to fit beautifully into the game not the other way around. Maybe one day I'll do another licensed IP-based game but who knows? The freedom of just being able to do what we need to do to make a great game with no need to go through the IP review and approval process is just too enticing at this point even when we had a great partner like GW.

Off to work I go, be back on later tonight.

Mark Jacobs
CEO, City State Entertainment

  Rohn

Hard Core Member

Joined: 7/02/08
Posts: 3754

2/17/13 11:57:13 AM#75
Originally posted by MarkJacobs
Originally posted by tlear
Originally posted by MarkJacobs
Originally posted by tlear

Thing with WHA maybe was that there was a very large number of really pissed off beta testers in WAR beta. Considering how long it took for NDA to be removed stuff was leaking all over the place on the web. If anything experience with WAR beta is probably one of the most negative ones I have in beta. But ya WHA turned pretty bad at some point.

 

Beta itself. There were just certain things.. like the original RvR Lakes  with penis shaped rocks design. I remember I got into beta and looking at it I was thinking umm WTF? Remember what it took to somewhat change that? Then scenarios, we knew where that was going, at some point some of the old DAOC crowd went into the full on denial mode(including myself) where I would say to myself you know this is gona work out in the end somehow, right?? RIGHT? Then close my eyes and keep testing other stuff. First I wrote couple of full page on what will happen on release(scenario farmage 24/7). In beta there were many people who wanted to do open RvR no matter what so there were some good fights outside, so we all hoped this will somehow work. But then capital city stuff came out and I kinda lost all hope, still bought game and played it for 4 month. But ya even TOA did not piss me of as much.

 

But credit where credit is due many things in WAR were really new and risky. Was good someone tried them.

 

This is actually a good question for you Mark, what are the plans with NDA?

Also if you can tell us how decision was made to go with 2 sides instead of 3 that would clear a lot of air. Was it that you guys liked the "Push map" dynamic so much? WoW battelground really were that much fun to play ;)? There is no need for names but what were the arguments would be really helpful for me atleast to understand what happened with WAR.

As to the NDA, we will have a strict NDA during backer testing but it will be lifted quite early compared to most MMOs. If you look at when Dark Age lifted its NDA you'll see what I mean.

As to 3 vs. 2, that's a good question. I'll try to answer it without crossing my self-imposed line of people tossing. Originally WAR had three realms as per my original vision document. We consulted with Games Workshop (I spent time there before the game went into production) and everything was good to go. We started production on the game and, well, let's simply say that the time estimates that I was given by development initially turned out to be quite a bit off. There were also issues with the racial distribution of each side that and certain IP limitations that, IMO, were going to bite us in the butt if we launched with three realms. My other fear was that a 3-sided game based on the path we were going down was going to end up far more unbalanced than would have been acceptable to players and we really would have ended up with a bad dynamic in terms of realm balancing. Additionally, with what I could see already happening with our cost estimates, I thought going down the 3-sided approach could have ended up sinking Mythic as we were still independent at the time. At the same time this was happening, I was also spending a ton of time being the M&A guy working with our CFO, Mark Gagne, to sell the studio as our investors were insisting that we do since the MMORPG space had been so greatly altered by WoW's success and the average development budget of these games going up by 6-10x on paper. Imperator's budget, for example, was supposed to be 10M when we started the project and now TA saw that we were going to have to spend a lot more on MMOs than we had planned on initially because back in 2003 (when they invested in us), nobody spent that kind of money on an MMORPG, including Sony, as Smed and others have said over the years. Now, fast forward to the EA acqusition. Once EA bought us they made it quite clear that they wanted this game to come out on time and that I had to assure them that once we were part of the company that budgets wouldn't bloat, dev timeline would not go through the roof and I promised the then CEO that we would do our best. Of course during the development of WAR, WoW's first great expansion came out and I then asked EA for a little more time to create WAR since it would have been foolish to try to release WAR without more poilish. They said yes and we were given a bit more time.

So, to sum up. For the reasons detailed above and because *I* did believe and with the full support of the rest of the senior leadership that a 3-realm version of WAR would have taken a lot more time/money to complete and because of percieved realm balance issues, we shifted from the 3 realm design that I initially believed in to 2 realms.

How's that?

Thanks for the explanation it is helpful definitely. Many of us wish something else was cut(less tiers, less races, less pve zones etc) but in that time with how WoW was doing.. I can see how 3rd realm got the cut.

You're welcome and if I had to take it back and do it again, I would have tried even harder to find a way to back the three realm setup work well. We did try but there were some issues that we couldn't overcome.

That's one of the biggest reasons I want to create a three realm game now using non-licensed IP. I've done a lot of games with licensed IP and I think the world of GW and its IP but for this game, we need to craft the races/classes/world to fit beautifully into the game not the other way around. Maybe one day I'll do another licensed IP-based game but who knows? The freedom of just being able to do what we need to do to make a great game with no need to go through the IP review and approval process is just too enticing at this point even when we had a great partner like GW.

Off to work I go, be back on later tonight.

 

That's one of the major pitfalls of using an established IP that is not public domain.  On the positive side, there's the instant recognition and pre-existing fanbase.  But, in my opinion, the limitations of such an IP outweight the positives, in that the developer is often forced to try to stick a square peg in a round hole in trying to fit the IP into another medium.

I'm looking forward to the potential of this game.

Hell hath no fury like an MMORPG player scorned.

  mad-hatter

Novice Member

Joined: 3/15/04
Posts: 237

2/17/13 11:57:39 AM#76
You guys act like he solely went out and destroyed DAOC and WAR, don't forget the greedy puppetmasters behind the scenes controlling the direction a game is developed to make the most money they can out of it.  At least with this one, if the kickstarter reaches it's goal, he'll be putting money out of his own pocket into it to further fund the project, instead of EA guiding his vision.
  MMOExposed

Spotlight Poster

Joined: 6/17/10
Posts: 6107

 
OP  2/17/13 12:09:43 PM#77
Originally posted by FARGIN_WAR
Originally posted by Icewhite

Mr. Jacobs, with all due respect...there's nothing to be gained from "setting the record straight".

It cannot help.

I must respctfully disagree.

 

While I doubt Mark is going to sway MMOexposed away from his preconcieved notions, his setting the record straight here is futher helping to cement the suport of readers such as myself. So as I've said before, Mark, please keep talking.

 

And to MMOExposed. I respect your opinion, but in this case I'm sorry to say I feel you're starting to sound like a child holding onto a grudge like its your favorite toy. If all we ever did was to sit around and dwell on what has happened in the past, there wouldn't be a future.

 

 

Well all has been said and done.

Mark must really think I am a amateur when it comes to exposing hype. But I said what needed to be said, and even Marks words added to my original point.

See a lot of new accounts on this forum, and Mark has come out. At least he not shilling it like most developers do here, oh wait,,,

but keep in mind people.

History is studied for a reason. To prevent past mistakes, and learn from them.

History show, that in the MMO genre, many developers/publishers over the years exploit consumers with massive hype brainwashing marketing tactics.

Warhammer Online and GW2 were two of the biggest examples of this.

like I pointed out, which even Mark admits, but in a politically corrected tone, he originally requested that the Warhammer Alliance public forum would BAN and BLOCK ANY NEGATIVE TALK about Warhammer Online.
The Warhammer Alliance staff refused, so he pulled support of the forum.

If you really wanted to improve the game, why would you want the criticism silenced? Because Warhammer as we know has much deserved criticism.  

Seem like you were more out to cover your own ass with more box sells, than to actually continue improving a product to please your consumers.

And here you are Mark, with your well thought-out words of hype.I read your comments, and I can see your clever tricks.
I wont insult you for your clever use of words to hype the masses here, since most developers do the same.

My words go more out to the consumers than the developers and publishers behind titles like this, to keep a straight mind when it comes to dealing with sellers like Mark, because they have only 1 goal in mind, even if they not a puppet under a larger corp. And they will sacrifice all else for that 1 goal.

Look for the red flags, and perhaps learn from the past MMO marketing exploitations, and see past the blinders.

Thats all I will say on this and leave it there.
Mark you are clever, but hopefully the community here after my years of preaching to the choir here on this site about exposing hype, will see past your cleverness and do their own exposing from here on out.

 

:-/

  Scilly

Novice Member

Joined: 2/14/13
Posts: 69

2/17/13 12:13:27 PM#78
Originally posted by MMOExposed
Originally posted by FARGIN_WAR
Originally posted by Icewhite

Mr. Jacobs, with all due respect...there's nothing to be gained from "setting the record straight".

It cannot help.

I must respctfully disagree.

 

While I doubt Mark is going to sway MMOexposed away from his preconcieved notions, his setting the record straight here is futher helping to cement the suport of readers such as myself. So as I've said before, Mark, please keep talking.

 

And to MMOExposed. I respect your opinion, but in this case I'm sorry to say I feel you're starting to sound like a child holding onto a grudge like its your favorite toy. If all we ever did was to sit around and dwell on what has happened in the past, there wouldn't be a future.

 

 

Well all has been said and done.

Mark must really think I am a amateur when it comes to exposing hype. But I said what needed to be said, and even Marks words added to my original point.

See a lot of new accounts on this forum, and Mark has come out. At least he not shilling it like most developers do here, oh wait,,,

but keep in mind people.

History is studied for a reason. To prevent past mistakes, and learn from them.

History show, that in the MMO genre, many developers/publishers over the years exploit consumers with massive hype brainwashing marketing tactics.

Warhammer Online and GW2 were two of the biggest examples of this.

like I pointed out, which even Mark admits, but in a politically corrected tone, he originally requested that the Warhammer Alliance public forum would BAN and BLOCK ANY NEGATIVE TALK about Warhammer Online.
The Warhammer Alliance staff refused, so he pulled support of the forum.

If you really wanted to improve the game, why would you want the criticism silenced? Because Warhammer as we know has much deserved criticism.  

Seem like you were more out to cover your own ass with more box sells, than to actually continue improving a product to please your consumers.

And here you are Mark, with your well thought-out words of hype.I read your comments, and I can see your clever tricks.
I wont insult you for your clever use of words to hype the masses here, since most developers do the same.

My words go more out to the consumers than the developers and publishers behind titles like this, to keep a straight mind when it comes to dealing with sellers like Mark, because they have only 1 goal in mind, even if they not a puppet under a larger corp. And they will sacrifice all else for that 1 goal.

Look for the red flags, and perhaps learn from the past MMO marketing exploitations, and see past the blinders.

Thats all I will say on this and leave it there.
Mark you are clever, but hopefully the community here after my years of preaching to the choir here on this site about exposing hype, will see past your cleverness and do their own exposing from here on out.

 

:-/

all i read is a one sided opinion not willing to consider what he has already said in reply.

  Cryptor

Advanced Member

Joined: 10/03/06
Posts: 473

2/17/13 12:13:41 PM#79

Paul Barnett sis the hype for Warhammer.  This is Mark Jacobs, the guy  that created Mythic (the company that made Dark Age of Camelot and Warhammer).

Warhammer suffered from EA rushing it out, though I still think it's a pretty good game :)

  Rohn

Hard Core Member

Joined: 7/02/08
Posts: 3754

2/17/13 12:18:26 PM#80
Originally posted by Cryptor

Paul Barnett sis the hype for Warhammer.  This is Mark Jacobs, the guy  that created Mythic (the company that made Dark Age of Camelot and Warhammer).

Warhammer suffered from EA rushing it out, though I still think it's a pretty good game :)

 

I enjoyed my time in WAR, and would probably still be playing it if EA, Bioware, and Mythic had not decided to stop developing it.  If they would have kept adding to it, while fixing some of the problems, the story for WAR could have likely been different from the way it turned out.

To be honest, Paul Barnett was the true hype machine for the game.  Granted, Mythic and Mark Jacobs let him do it, so they bear some of the responsibility.

Hell hath no fury like an MMORPG player scorned.

5 Pages « 1 2 3 4 5 » Search