Flight

In the OP, I wasn't knocking the devs. I was questioning SoE's management. They have and have had some great dev staff. Without adequate management they are often rudderless and/or have their terms of reference (eg deliverables) changed (I doubt they even use a proper terms of reference).

By management I meant permanent management structure, QA and project management. I suggested that most of the industry and certainly SoE, could improve their product exponentially by employing people from outside of the industry, in these areas. The knock on effect of not having this certainly engenders poor marketing, as well as poor communication and inter departmental bickering, quite apart from leading to poor product.


Do folks remember this quote from Smed :

'I want us to be the Blizzard of the MMORPG world'.


If they had faced up to their insecurities and not been so incestuous in their staffing and process development, they easily could be. A Westerner called Deming had these kind of ideas rejected by the West 50 years ago. He took them to the Japanese, who embraced them. They directly led to the emergence of Japanese manufacturing and the growth of the country. Many MMORPG companies are presently stunted and its because they are rejecting this idealogy. And that is why we keep getting crap and/or incomplete games thrust upon us.


With the ability of SoEs staff and the experience of Smed, this is the only thing that has ever stopped them being the Blizzard of the MMORPG world. That and a world wide franchise to hook into (and I wasn't joking about Pokemon - sales on that would be massive).

Flight

As an aside, SoE marketing in Europe and particularly the UK is non existent. Not just the marketing, but product placement. I frequently have to buy expansions from the US.

Krakks

Where I had heard EQ2 was in EoF - along with the rumors of RoK... the places in it, the epic weapons - brought me back into Norrath once again. I played a berserker up to 55 - but didn't really enjoy tanking in EQ2 - started again as a warlock - and have (finally) found a class that I really love... (I was a Paladin back at launch).

To some extent, I am still trying to find the "magic" that was in EQ for me for the 5+ years I played it... and while I'm certain I will never find it in EQ2 - I think that where EQ2 is now is light years better than where it was at launch.

To say that the game is lacking direction fails (in my opinion only) to look at the game as a whole - where it is now, compared to where it was then.

In terms of the current expansion - I am certain that, like many expansions before it (across many games) - it has issues. It's plain to see that from the player base here - and plain to see from some dev responses that I've come across that they are working on it.

As always though - the folks most impacted are the folks who attacked the prior expansion the hardest. The folks who consumed it all and are ready for the next expansion. The thing is though - that while these people are a clearly important part of a game's player base - they are also (usually and relatively speaking) a rather SMALL part of a game's player base.

When a gaming company puts an expansion out there - they know it will have bugs (probably nearly impossible to find them all) - and they know that the most avid players will find them fast. They certainly know that these folks WON'T be happy about the bugs - and they know that they will have to spend time fixing them...

However - they simply cannot keep a game locked up forever while they try to find all the bugs themselves... doing so - I would imagine - would be highly cost ineffective for them - especially considering the fact that they ALSO know that the vast majority of the player base consumes the game at a much slower pace - never looks at a forum - and likely WON'T see a lot of the issues.

Like it or not - consuming a game (or expansion) quickly amounts to becoming part of a "live test team". I've been there many times myself - I know it can be frustrating to be out there on the "bleeding edge". Frankly, if/when I am out there, I expect it to be.

In this particular case - I am not. As I say, I came back a few months ago - re-started as a berserker and now re-started again as a warlock. So I have the good fortune (in a manner of speaking) to look towards the Kunark expansion knowing that by the time I get there - you folks will have beaten many (if not all) of the bugs out of it.

So thanks to all of you for that! I hope you all persevere through (as I supsect you will) - and find some joy in the expansion once it is cleaned up a bit.

Flight

I couldn't agree less with pretty much your entire post.


The game has lacked foundation and direction since the earliest conception meetings. Half way through development they sacked most of the senior staff on it, re-allocated developers and brought in a new head Project Manager. They did this because the old lead and staff stood up and said they didnt think what they were being told to do to the game would work and they refused to do it. The game started with no solid foundations and has followed the same path of lacking cohesion ever since.

This has continued throughout its development history, going from one extreme to the other from expansion to expansion. Consider the introduction of T7 to T8.

A prime example is the RoK lvl 1-20. Its fair enough making previous content in the same level less rewarding, though it should still be an option. RoK 1-20 makes the entire game level 1-40 almost defunct item wise, because the rewards are so ridiculously good.



If they spent the extra money on proper management, PM and QA, not only would their costs be cut but they would have better product in quicker time. The MMORPG industry is still in its infancy; it needs to learn the lessons Dr Deming took to the Japanese manufacturing industry.

Those lessons can be hard to learn because of the insecurities of senior management - however, Blizzard has shown us the payoff. One or two other companies already know these lessons. Not coincidentally, one is Japanese - Square with FF. The other I'm suggesting, seems to be heading that way, is Green Monster Games (Curt Schilling, Salvatore, Todd et al).


Smed is on record as saying he wants their revenue to change to being far less subscription based. If he wants any chance of that he needs to grasp these lessons fast.


As an aside, they also need to learn from the past, instead of making bullshit excuses. Can Bruce, now back in charge of EQ2, honestly say that they implemented some really shit ideas at launch rather than beat around the bush about they were the right ideas at the wrong time, or some such ?

Panthera

Throwing money at problems does not solve them and usually just creates more problems. It is business fallacy to suggest simply increasing salaries and budgets will do anything.



You shouldn't compare durable goods to a video game.



Not to be flippant but why should he? What good would that do beyond give a few people some self-satisfaction that they were right all along and EQ2 sucks? Two basic reasons you will likely not hear anything close to a mea culpa:

1.) You don't bad-mouth your own product. Even if it is in the past, you don't admit fault. Ever.

2.) People take things written on a forum or produced in a letter and run with it, spin and throw it back at the writer. The most classic example is the "DPS tier fiasco."

An off hand remark was taken as gospel and is still referenced today.

__________________

Flight

I didn't suggest throwing money at a problem. I suggested spending money to recruit more competent people from outside of the industry. The fact is, there are not people within the industry qualified and experienced enough to handle the areas I've suggested. A prime example is Vanguard, who promoted a couple of GMs to be their QA department, one of whom had been a chef until recently.



That short sighted, narrow minded and symptomatic of my entire point. I've worked in both industries - its a direct comparison, when we are discussing management, project management and quality management. Get it right first time and its ten times cheaper, you don't spend loads of time fixing it, you get a much better end product and lasting customer satisfaction.






You'll note I didn't ask whether he could do it publicly. My question is whether he can realise it for himself. If he can't, what sort of a job is he going to do with EQ2 the second time around ?

Krakks

Clearly having gone away from the game for so long - I am not in a place to speak about the ebb and flow of the game from expansion to expansion.

All I can say is that "where it was at release" and "where it is now" are different - and the "now" is better by far (in my opinion) than the "then".

Beyond that - I agree that, from a customer perspective - it would be great if these things didn't release as buggy as they often seem to. But this is not just an "EQ2" phenomena. It happened with EQ, happens with WoW, etc...

I left EQ2 for WoW - then Vanguard - then WoW - then EQ2... I can say for a certainty that WoW also experiences issues when they release stuff. There were many a night when I'd sit down to play, and could not - because I'd be in a 45, 60, 90 minute login queue for instance - and they too, like EQ2, have bugs that seem to persist forever (like the "loot" bug, where you can get stuck looting something).

This is NOT an attempt to bring WoW into the conversation BTW - just a way of pointing out that EQ2 is not alone.

Also of note is the simple (and oft rehashed) fact that thousands upon thousands of players will find issues that developers never even thought of - just because of the mass of creative brain power.

I am a systems analyst by trade - I design and program stuff. I have long since learned that:

1) I don't think of everything
2) The people who test don't always think of everything

So we go through design reviews, code reviews, testing strategy reviews, etc...

And every now and then, dispite all of our best efforts and intentions, "gotcha" moments still crop up when a user does something that nobody ever thought of... and this is for fairly closed / limited software in comparisson to an MMO.

I believe I saw a dev post about just this idea a week or two ago - it mentioned the idea that positive testing is easy - you know what you intended, you can code that, test that, no problem.

Negative testing - NOT so easy... and the bigger the system, the harder it is to test. MMO's are HUGE systems.

Please note that I am not making excuses for bugs - just saying that I understand well why they occur. They frustrate and tick me off just like they do you, I am sure - and when they impact my game play, as they have - I get even more upset (because it is my free time that is getting interfered with, and I prize my free time).

So - while I understand it (and as I said earlier, expect it), I DO sympathize with all of you who are forging ahead and finding the issues... that's why I posted to begin with - as you will recall - to say thanks to you guys - because I do know it can suck.

AND - I STILL say that the improvement over the past couple of years is HUGE

Nocte

1. Do you play EQ1? Why do you care about what the devs do or don't want in EQ1? I don't really see what this has to do with anything. How does a disagreement between departments prove there is major internal turmoil within a company? Take a look at the relationship between the Finance and Sales departments in just about any company - there's always a struggle going on.

2. YOU have gotten better at Speculation! (384)
Please explain where you came across FACTS that state Bruce was demoted, that he was solely responsible for every problem at any point in development, and/or that he didn't earn his position.

3. Yes, this happened. Some folks got the hook-up. Again, it happens everywhere. (Hell, I give free shit away all the time at my job - that's against the T&Cs, too.) Please explain to me how this explains major inter-company distress within SOE.

4. Companies don't require (or ask for, usually) customer permission to make decisions. They may accept input, but the customers have no decision-making or veto rights to anything that happens with the company. If you don't like it, vote with your wallet and hope for the best. see also: New Coke, circa 1985.

5. Scott is missed, yes. There are plenty of other competant developers that made whatever it is about EQII that you like the way it is. Scott is not solely responsible for everything good with EQII, just as Bruce isn't solely responsible for everything bad.

Panthera

You said "spend extra money." That's what I was addressing.

I get that you have a premise and a theory of how to solve the problem you suggest exists. I simply disagree with you that the "problem" is so severe it warrants such a radical solution as hiring people from different industries.

The first time a change is made that the community disagrees, the uproar will be deafening. Even now, you and others hate RoK so you call into question the abilities of those in charge. Imagine what will be said when people not from the video game industry do things you don't like.

And there's the rub, btw. An entertainment vehicle has so many subjective components that it will rarely get universal acclaim. Some hate RoK and others like it. The same was true of EoF, KoS and even DoF.

__________________

Flight

Who mentioned bugs ? Exactly the problem is that I say QA and most of the industry presumes its about bugs.


QA is FAR more than that. QA is about controlling the project about change management, about keeping in check the project management and making sure a proper terms of reference is enforced.

In effect, it ensures theres a sound strategy in place from day 1 of a games inception. In actuality it would make sure that the creative ability of the devs and designers were fully realised. Short term and long term it produces continuity.


When I say the industry needs more QA I don't mean it would help with bug finding, I mean it would necessitate proper control over a games development and by that I don't mean controlling the designers and devs, I mean controlling the management processes, so you would get project managers who know what the fuck they are doing instead of doing everything on the fly.