| Mail |
You might also like: WoW Insider, Joystiq, and more

Reader Comments (37)

Posted: Sep 5th 2008 12:26PM (Unverified) said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
Kevin, you are right that most sensible folk now wait until after release to buy a game, once the first month at least has passed and the 'truth' comes out from the actual player base.

The problem is this: I want to play a game at launch and I want it to be good.

This attitude of 'just expect it to be shit and don't buy it - shut your mouth because you didn't learn last time' doesn't help things at all! The trend is to release a crap product and that's what we expect now - why is that ok?!? People damn well should be QQ'ing up a storm because companies can't release a finished product, or at least one that includes what it's supposed to and works in a reasonable fashion (some server bumps etc can be expected.. to an extent).

Of course, maybe if people QQ'd and also didn't buy it, companies would listen - but then the QQ wouldn't count because people haven't played it.

Maybe it's idealism, but the best way to make money IMO is to make a good product. An honest company who doesn't make crap wouldn't have anything to worry about in giving open beta/demo/trial right at/before release. And until that happens, I will support QQ at these worthless companies who think that releasing crap products is just fine as long as they can put enough features on the box (but not in the game) so people will buy it.

Also, you are confusing hype and lying. It's one thing to say "Raisin Bran has amazing juicy raisins!" and really 1/500 in the box are juicy. Oh well, still not a lie. But to say "Raisin Bran has amazing juicy raisins!" and then there isn't a single f'ing raisin in the box - that's a lie and the consequent QQ is very justified.

Posted: Sep 5th 2008 10:08AM (Unverified) said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
"The best way to make money IMO is to make a good product"

Oh how I *wish* that were true. You're right, of course, that making a good game will help a company make money, but there are other factors involved.

Time to market
Competitive landscape
Hardware specs

I've written about this in previous columns, but it's not enough to be "good".

A more accurate statement would be "The key factor in the LONG TERM success of a product is the quality of the product."

Age of Conan made a bundle of money. 800,000 units sold at 50 bucks/each is a nice chunk of change. Maybe even enough to make the product profitable if estimates of their development budget are correct. However, will they be able to milk that cash cow over the course of the next few years? That's the question that will be answered by how good the product is.

Look at Warhammer... It'll sell enough copies at launch to pay for it's development and then some... But will it be sustainable like WoW is? Only if it's a good game.

Not to be too pithy on the subject, especially because I want to believe otherwise as much as you do, but if crap software didn't make money, nobody would release crap software.

Again, I have to give kudos to the folks at Blizzard. They ship when they are good and ready. When a game is GOOD ENOUGH, it goes live. That's not to say it's perfect, but they have high standards, and won't put their name on something unless it meets those standards. As a result of that philosophy, they have a reputation for making games that causes customers to line up to buy the next one almost as soon as it is announced. (How many of you will pick up Diablo III?)

You can be profitable and not have that kind of reputation, and in some cases it costs more to have high standards, but again, that's the difference between short term and long term thinking. Do you want to make money? or do you want to be the best?

-K
Reply

Posted: Sep 5th 2008 10:28AM Scopique said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
What I don't understand is why people consider bugs to mean that a game is a POS. I've played many, many MMOs (as many here have, of course) and while a lot of people have complained about bugs, that the game was "a paid beta test", etc., I continued to play on. If the game is a total train-wreck, if it's got bugs up the wazoo, if it's "unplayable", as so many people claim, then why was _I_ able to continue to play with the game is such a state? Usually, these "problems" are in the eye of the beholder. I have no tolerance for people who complain about a lack of "end game content" three days after a game's launch. These things have a planned lifespan of YEARS, and yet some people just blow through the whole thing, apparently so they can b1tch and moan.

Some people like the sound of their own voice too much. How many times have you seen someone trolling an MMO forum where they complain out one side of their mouth that they're SHOCKED that the game was released in such a buggy state, yet out of the other side they list their personal MMO pedigree as if it paints them an expert on the genre? What does that solve? Do these people expect that others will be in awe of their experience? Do they expect that a whole host of industry news outlets and bloggers will descend upon their houses to catch the pearls of wisdom that fall from their lips?

Kevin is right. No game has a perfect launch, and in this Internet age, none ever will. I would say that if you're an absolute noob to gaming in ANY genre, then your outrage is forgivable -- you probably don't know any better. But when you've grown up (which some people have yet to do) in the Internet Age, foul mouthed indignation over receiving a product who's very mandate is to be updated incrementally over time just paints you a a whiner who's looking for attention.

Posted: Sep 5th 2008 3:38PM (Unverified) said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
Journalist: One who engages is journalism... Well that's not much help. How about...

Source: http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/journalism

Main Entry: jour·nal·ism \ˈjər-nə-ˌli-zəm\
Function: noun
Date: 1828

1 a: the collection and editing of news for presentation through the media b: the public press c: an academic study concerned with the collection and editing of news or the management of a news medium

2 a: writing designed for publication in a newspaper or magazine b: writing characterized by a direct presentation of facts or description of events without an attempt at interpretation c: writing designed to appeal to current popular taste or public interest

-----------------

Criteria 1 is out. I don't do news, and I don't do "academia".

Criteria 2 is out. I interpret the hell out of the things I write about. That's the nature of a columnist or one who writes opinion pieces.

"Designed to appeal to current popular taste or public interest"?

I dunno... Does calling a significant portion of my audience "whiny emo crybabies" sound like I'm trying to appeal to current popular taste to you?

I guess if you said that I write for a mass audience then you could call me a journalist. Of course, that would apply equally to folks who write the labels on soup cans or folks who write novels or folks who write those oh-so-clever ads that they show on scoreboards during football games. Make a net broad enough, and you'll catch every fish in the ocean.

Thanks for the page hits, but I think we've gone as far as we're going in this discussion. Have an excellent weekend.

-K

Posted: Sep 5th 2008 10:08PM Russell Clarke said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
I suppose we can't lay the blame entirely at the feet of the software marketing teams that spin the bullshit. They just create it, but it's also down to the plethora of gamer websites who should know better (this one included, on several occasions) that just parrot the press releases and get everyone even more frothed up about a game that nobody knows enough about to judge, all in the name of website hits. They are a major part of the problem of unrealistic expectations being created in the minds of gullible gamers (it's not every gamer - but it seems to be the loudest bunch!)

So don't believe the marketers, and don't believe the uncritical journalists. And I don't include you, Kevin, in that group - I have always thoroughly enjoyed your insights into the industry :)

Posted: Sep 5th 2008 7:27PM (Unverified) said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
Here is yet another reason that I don't consider myself a journalist. Ideally, journalists are impartial chroniclers (not a word? too bad, it sounds right) and don't get emotionally involved in the things they cover.

I'm a fan. There are games that I want to succeed because I like the concept, or even because I like the people who produce the game. I wanted Age of Conan to be a runaway success because I see the Funcom guys at events like Dragon*Con every year. I wanted Pirates of the Burning Sea to be "the next big thing" because I think anything with pirates in it is "chock full of winly goodness".

That said, I do my best to be evenhanded in both praise and criticism, but I'm absolutely sure that my bias peeks through from time to time. Rather than over-process and over-refine my words to the point that they no longer sound like me, I'd rather just let it fly and give you my opinions as I see them.

Am I always right? Nope. Am I always fair? Nope. The difference between me and a "real journalist" is that I won't pretend otherwise. If I'm wrong or unfair about something, I expect you guys to let me hear about it. That's why I don't mind when some of you have rather vociferous disagreements with me about the things I write. Your opinion counts just as much as mine does.

Sure, we can degenerate into name calling and flaming, but I've learned over the years that getting into a flame war on the Internet is an exercise in futility.

"Never argue with an idiot, they'll just drag you down to their level then beat you with experience" - Robert A. Heinlein

Have a good weekend,

-K
Reply

Posted: Sep 6th 2008 4:52PM (Unverified) said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
"They have a right to cry, Kevin. You do not have the right to redirect their voices, squelch them, or or otherwise dissuade them from their opinions, or their prerogative to espouse said opinion as they see fit."

Actually, he does have that right. It's called 'free speech.' One of the worst problems I find in our society is that people seem to think their rights include being immune from criticism, however reasonable.

Second, I don't believe Kevin here has dodged anything. The central truth of the matter is that indeed many customers feel they are owed something that isn't really there and that they're essentially crying about being suckered by advertising. No one forces you to play any game, you have very little invested in it even if you pre-ordered.

Second, painting Kevin as a shill for corporate interests is remarkably disingenuous; simply look at how bitingly he characterises corporate interest and advertising itself. You think any of that would be used in a GE marketing campaign? The thrust of his message here is to *armour yourself* as a consumer and don't get taken in by hype.

Be sceptical, be critical and analytical. You can help that process by analysing a game fairly and reasonably- and telling your friends that MMO X isn't living up to its hype. Complaining about betrayal and such really only indicates a sense of being spoiled and self-entitled.

I love my games, and I readily admit to being irked when changes are made that I don't like. But I also remember that I always have the ultimate power, my word of mouth and my wallet, if things ever become too unpalatable. That mouth, however, will not be expressing absurd amounts of self-pitying whining.

I really do fail to see how asserting that consumers should be smarter, more sceptical, and more selective hurts their cause. I especially fail to see how hammering home a point that says "ADVERTISING IS BULL!" hurts *consumers.* Corporations would like you to forget that, and they would like their advertising to- as George Carlin expertly put it- lull you to sleep.

Advocating against that is as anti-corporate as one could get, and I've been called a "communist" for advocating less.

So in the end it seems like you're one of the handful of gamers I most detest. The intelligent sort that can write well, but is ultimately possessed of little wisdom. Kevin is on our side here.

Posted: Sep 6th 2008 5:01PM (Unverified) said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
Wow. You took one sentence, and blew it up into an entire topic, completely, and intentionally missing all of the points I've made.

Way to miss the fucking point, Kevin.

You're aim is to silence the consumer, and you've tactfully avoided commenting on this issue because you can't possibly defend your possition.

You're just snot-nosed blogger. Suck it up, you're wrong.

Posted: Sep 7th 2008 5:55PM Russell Clarke said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
I think this troll has escaped from one of our MMORPGs...

Posted: Sep 7th 2008 6:06PM (Unverified) said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
Of course he has, but if he can't be bothered to read properly, then why bother responding?

Don't feed the trolls.

-K
Reply

Posted: Sep 7th 2008 9:22PM (Unverified) said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
There is a word for people like the original poster. It is not "journalist". It is "corporate apologist".

Also, as much as it may pain the original poster to have his central thesis rebuked: In Norway, the country in which Funcom operates, misleading or false advertising is a criminal offence.

Not "breach of contract", not "something you can sue them for". Criminal.

Posted: Sep 7th 2008 9:37PM (Unverified) said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
That would be an entertaining case to watch...

Prove to a jury or a judge that Funcom broke the law by advertising product features that didn't make it into the final product.

Hell, I think I'd pay to see that trial.

You should see if you can make that happen. I'll be over here waiting with bated breath.

Or maybe, just maybe, folks like you could be a little less gullible and see advertising for what it really is. You know, like most reasonable adults do.

You weren't lied to.

You weren't cheated.

You weren't mistreated.

Your life is not the plot of a country and western song.

Get over it, and yourselves, and wise up.

You are not a beautiful and unique snowflake no matter how much you want to be one.

"If it please the court, I would like to charge Funcom with deceptive advertising practices. Which has caused damages to the consumer and... HEY! Why are you all laughing?"

-K
Reply

Posted: Sep 7th 2008 10:10PM (Unverified) said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
What a fascinating and well-researched rebuttal from our friend with both feet stuck in his mouth...

Fines for illegal advertising practices is nothing new to norwegian law. There is precedent. In case you do not understand what I am saying: This is not new. This has happened before. Companies have had to pay money due to breaking this law.

So at least in Norway, you'd choke on that laughter.

Posted: Sep 7th 2008 10:37PM (Unverified) said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
Well gosh, you sure showed me with your anecdotal evidence and wild-assed guesswork.

Ya know, I once knew a guy who said he could fly, and since it has been proven that flight is possible, I'm sure he's correct.

(For the slow among you, this is called an analogy)

Ya know, I once knew a guy who had to pay a fine for false advertising in Norway, so I'm sure that Funcom would lose a suit for false advertising.

See the connection yet? Or do I have to use smaller words?

-K
Reply

Posted: Sep 9th 2008 12:50PM (Unverified) said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
Your central thesis is that people should just eat the shit when they bought the shit, because they should know that it is shit, even though the label said "cake". And anyone who complains that it wasn't, in fact, cake, is a loser who doesn't know how the world works, and should shut up.

Eating the shit with the wrapping on and smiling afterwards because you're so tough you can eat any and all shit and not complain does not make you morally superior, Kevin.

I pointed out to you that in Norway, selling shit and calling it cake is a criminal offence, which obviously means that at least in one country the government agrees with the whiners, and not with the smiling people with brown lips.

Your behaviour in this discussion has been as juvenile and unpleasant as your metaphorical eating habits. Farewell.

Posted: Sep 9th 2008 3:05PM (Unverified) said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
There is a difference between refraining from the kind of shrill hysteria that most people learn to ignore (eventually) and "shutting up"

You colossal lack of logic and propensity for jumping to radically incorrect conclusions makes you officially "part of the problem".

Since I'm sure that this is the most attention that you've ever been paid in any forum larger than your family dinner table, let me reiterate my "central thesis" for you one last time.

Hysterical rantings about how you were "cheated", "betrayed", or "screwed" over because you were gullible enough to believe some marketing department when they say that <Insert Game Here> is the greatest thing ever to appear on a computer does not help the consumer. Useful, constructive, and definite feedback is far more useful insofar as it instructs other potential buyers about the shortcomings inherent in a new title as well as lets the developer know exactly which issues are most important to the consumer.

If you're going to go off on yet another internet rant, do us all a favor and shut up. You're not helping. Nobody is paying you any attention. You are part of the problem, and while we're all so very sorry that you are disappointed in your purchase, it is not a global conspiracy to cheat you out of 50 bucks.

What do you think is more beneficial to the community at large?

"OMG Age of Conan sucks! I've been screwed by Funcom for the last time!"

or...

"I found that the lack of DX 10 support and inadequate high end content caused me to lose interest in Age of Conan after playing for only a couple of months."

If you don't understand the difference between the first comment and the second, then yes, it's you. It's not Funcom's, Blizzard's, EA's, or Scientology's fault. It's yours.

I could probably extend this into a "poo" metaphor so that you might understand it a little better, but frankly, you aren't worth the effort.

Have a fantastic day.

-K
Reply

Posted: Sep 26th 2008 12:07AM (Unverified) said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
Vanguard saga of Heroes falls in this category as well. They actually had more stuff in beta than what you see in the live game.

Hopefully when they finally fix the other 5,000 bugs they can get on with releasing a expansion before they shut down the servers.

Featured Stories

Coming soon
Engadget

Engadget

Joystiq

Joystiq

WoW Insider

WoW

TUAW

TUAW