Slashdot Mirror


Sony's MMORPG "Sovereign" Dead

Gudlyf writes "Although the main site for this massive-multiplayer game by Sony (once known as Verant) was updated at some point late last year, it seems that according to CNN Money, it's gone quietly dead after 4.5 years in development (reminds me of why I posted my vote in a previous story on vaporware): "Work on 'Sovereign,' a massively multiplayer real time strategy game, has been terminated after more than four-and-a-half years of development. Ambitious in nature, the game had hoped to replicate a continuous global war that supported up to 500 players. Diplomacy would have played as significant a role as the player's tactical abilities. 'We came to a decision that it was not going to be what we wanted it to be,' said McDaniel. 'It never really had the magic.'""

48 of 160 comments (clear)

  1. Man... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

    I guess there's always Duke Nukem Forever to look forward to...

  2. Massive war? by Malicious · · Score: 5, Funny

    Instead of being cancelled, they should admit that instead, a peaceful, diplomatic resolution was found, and thus, the war doesn't have to happen.

    --
    01101001001000000110000101101101001000000110001001 10000101110100011011010110000101101110
    1. Re:Massive war? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Funny

      Quite the opposite. The project was upgraded to a more intensive version that can support up to six billion players. Rollout is imminent.

      You won't believe the realism.

  3. Makes sense by Dr.+Spork · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Why should Sony work hard on something original and interesting when they can just keep reselling Evercrack?

  4. Sound like a lesson in software engineering: by eddy · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Prototype early. If the fun isn't there in the prototype, you're just playing for "luck" to make it a success.

    --
    Belief is the currency of delusion.
    1. Re:Sound like a lesson in software engineering: by startled · · Score: 2, Interesting

      See, that's the thing. I'm sure most people at SOE know this. But the multi-million dollar question is: how the hell does a game that's so far from mainstream get strung along in development for this long?

      I doubt it'll happen, but I really wish Game Dev Mag could get one of their really insightful and honest post-mortems for this project. It'd be an excellent case study of all sorts of things to watch out for.

  5. what?? by xao+gypsie · · Score: 4, Funny

    It never really had the magic

    then it wasnt really an rpg, was it???

    xao

    --


    xao
    http://TheHillforum.hopto.org
  6. "Once known as..." by TheFrood · · Score: 4, Funny

    Although the main site for this massive-multiplayer game by Sony (once known as Verant)

    I'm pretty sure the Sony Corporation was never known as Verant.

    TheFrood

    --
    If you say "I'll probably get modded down for this..." then I will mod you down.
    1. Re:"Once known as..." by $$$$$exyGal · · Score: 2, Informative
      --
      Very popular slashdot journal for adul
  7. Bah! Who need that? by camt · · Score: 3, Informative

    Who needs that when you have Earth 2025?!

  8. No surprise.. by Reedo · · Score: 3, Interesting

    I remember it being announced and thought they were crazy. It really felt like Brad McQuaid and team just went with the first idea they had after they knew Everquest was a hit. "Hey, let's try a massively multiplayer RTS!"

    My question: Why did it take them 4 years to figure out that it wasn't going to be any good?

  9. Saw it at E3 2000 by Washizu · · Score: 4, Informative

    I saw Sovereign at E3 2000 and the graphics looked like ass back then. It scaled up from a single tank to an entire planet, though. The game had some neat features, but it didn't seem to solve any of the obvious problems a MM strategy game would have. In most current persistant world games you don't regress if you haven't been logged on in a while. That doesn't work in a strategy game, so what do you do?

    --
    OddManIn: A Game of guns and game theory.
    1. Re:Saw it at E3 2000 by Tailhook · · Score: 3, Insightful

      "In most current persistent world games you don't regress if you haven't been logged on in a while."

      This is completely wrong.

      Most MM games are constantly evolving. It you don't play regular you do indeed fall behind. Far behind.

      The expansion packs for EQ add lots of new goodies and strata to the game. In level based games the maker can increase the maximum possible levels attainable, or create new abilities and rewards that can only be gained by actively playing.

      An example; If you had stopped playing DAOC five months after release, logging in today you would find yourself completely outclassed. No "epic" armor, no "Realm Abilities," no "spellcrafted" gear, you would have your original gimp spec that has almost certainly been changed dramatically, etc. A player that hasn't logged in since April or May 2002 is so far behind that any attempt to play as-is would be hopeless.

      It's part of the formula. You either put hundreds of hours in or find something better to do with your time.

      --
      Maw! Fire up the karma burner!
  10. 500 players? by BrookHarty · · Score: 4, Funny

    Ambitious in nature, the game had hoped to replicate a continuous global war that supported up to 500 players.

    And at Ambitious $400,000 a month subscriber fee, they might make their money back.

  11. Re:darn by silvaran · · Score: 3, Funny

    I am sure it will still be usefull when DukeNuken is released.

    Yeah, as a paperweight.

    Thanks, you really set me up for that one ;).

  12. War is hell by PizzaFace · · Score: 3, Insightful

    The more realistic you make a war game, the less fun it is.

  13. Which is largely why your next Sony game. . . by kfg · · Score: 4, Interesting

    will still put you back fifty bucks, even though it could turn a profit for less than half that.

    Just as in the book and movie businesses most games are complete busts, after *first* sucking up years of time and millions of dollars in development.

    For the company overall to ever show a profit the ones that *do* hit have to sell for enough to not just make a profit on that one game, but also to cover the losses of all those games they had to develop just to find out *which* one was going to be the winner.

    Want major releases to only cost twenty bucks? It's easy, just find an infallible way to predict before development starts which potential projects will be the best sellers.

    It's an "easy" way for you to become a multi-millionaire in year or two as well.

    Good luck.

    KFG

  14. 4.5 years dev means.. by Whitecloud · · Score: 4, Informative

    Sorry but thats just to long. 4.5 years ago (1998 July)the tools to develop (geforce?) and the platforms available (win98 etc)limit the possibilites available to the dev team. We see this currently with games like Duke Nukem, (..waiting...) and Doom3 where the stated goal for system compatibility is GF3 and higher.

    I am sure some elements of the game are able to be reused, however all the coding and optimization would have to be redone to suit current systems, meaning more time spent waiting. "the magic wasnt really there" is a shocker statement though...was the concept good or not? If it wasnt scratch the game. 4.5 years sheesh, the intial code is obselete before the 4th years even begun!

    --

    Do you need a website upgrade?

    1. Re:4.5 years dev means.. by BrookHarty · · Score: 2, Insightful

      They just might have some killer story that would make a multimillions dollar release. And with awesome content, they might just hold off on release for a couple years till they have a engine worth to release to the public.

      I saw the video of the game, the content looked good, the play looked worthwhile. But who knows, the programmers could be working on other projects till they see an engine worthy of Duke Nukem.

      It worked for George Lucas.

  15. Makes me all nostagic... by mikeophile · · Score: 4, Funny

    Ah, to be funded for over 4 years to work on a project that would never see the light of day. Endless hours checking /. while getting paid. Good times..good times.

  16. All about characters by borkus · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Part of the attachment of any RPG/MUD/MMORPG is playing a charater. You have a persona and that persona has a story. As long as different things happen to that persona, you keep going back. The story keeps changing and the character develops and changes with the story. Moreover, most online RPG's tend to be more open ended than ones you play alone.

    The bigger factor online is the interaction with other characters, whether that's actually playing together or just chatting. RPG's lend themselves to this interaction more than first person real time strategry and slightly more than first person shooters (though I admit that games like CounterStrike and Battlefiled 1942 have more of a social factor since you play on a team).

    It sounds like Sovreign had neither of these things going for it.

  17. What happened? by grub · · Score: 5, Funny


    4 years of looking at pretty concept art and whiteboards then last week someone asked "Let's give this to the programmers.. we did hire programmers in '98, didn't we?"

    --
    Trolling is a art,
  18. Viva Planetside! by viper432 · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Though not a RTS, Planetside offers commanders the same type of control over their troops.

    Planetside.info

  19. Diplomacy? by Best_Username_Ever · · Score: 2, Insightful

    This game sounds too much like the classic board game "Diplomacy". I am not surprised that they couldn't capture the magic of Diplomacy in a MMORPG. The whole point of the game Diplomacy is to be a complete bastard to your friends, and win through underhanded tactics, deceipt, treachery and eavesdropping. It's not the sort of game that I would care to play with a bunch of strangers, I don't really see the point in it.

  20. This is a good thing by WIAKywbfatw · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Unfortunately, failures are part of the creative process - not everyone or everything can succeed.

    For every Van Gogh there are a million artists (with and without both ears) who are never recognised for their talents. Sometimes it's because they don't have any luck, sometimes it's because they just plain suck.

    Sony realised that Sovereign wasn't going to set the world on fire. Rather than waste more money launching what they considered would be a flop they canned the project. Sure, money has been wasted, but not as much as could have been. More importantly, Sony's games division doesn't have a "it-took-you-five-years-to-develop-that-piece-of-c rap" hanging round its neck for the next five years. Which is more than can be said for some game developers...

    Sony should be applauded for its decision. Sure, we want games but we want good games, not ones that even the developers aren't happy putting on their CV.

    BTW, if you're after cheap games, then there's a simple solution: don't buy them when they're launched, just wait six months or so. All titles, especially on the PC platform, are discounted a few months down the line.

    --

    "Accept that some days you are the pigeon, and some days you are the statue." - David Brent, Wernham Hogg
  21. AutoDuel by On+Lawn · · Score: 2, Interesting

    AutoDuel (car wars), now there's a game for a MMORPG. Arena fights at scheduled times, a real economy, cross country errands, and friends. Perhaps there is something out there like it?

    There isn't a month that goes by that I don't wish I was playing it.

    ----------------
    OnRoad: What racing games do to you. My favorite kind of GPL.

    1. Re:AutoDuel by ShooterNeo · · Score: 3, Funny

      That actually sounds interesting. So its an MMORPG set in the real world, where you roadtrip around the country and duel other players? Course, while you're at it would be even more fun to add some GTA3 style elements...the ability to go on a cross country crime spree could be interesting, if well simulated. The only problem is part of the fun of GTA3 is being a thug to anyone without consequences. If EVERYONE in the game (who's a human player) is a thug, it might not be very fun...noone to beat up.

    2. Re:AutoDuel by On+Lawn · · Score: 2, Interesting


      In autoduel, you could sign up to deliver cargo's or steal cargo from other cars and sell it on the black market. That, I think, makes a good balance in economy that would make it profitable for a certain number of people to be thugs, and a certain number of people to be good guys.

      But since black market prices aren't near what you can get on delivery, the economy restricts the number of thugs.

      Think of it, for really important loads you can get your friends to drive with you in a mad-max style caravan and fight off raiders. Or you can run up the ranks in arena matches, or just log on to watch the arena matches.

      Man I wish I had an autoduel mmorpg.

      -----------
      OnRoad: What racing games do to you. My favorite kind of GPL.

  22. Does Sony market a MMORPG in Japan ? by OneInEveryCrowd · · Score: 2

    Last year in Japan there was a very popular anime series called .hack//sign about goings on in an Everquest style game called The World. A series of three playstation games directly related to the series came out also and as far as I know these games are SINGLE PLAYER !

    Anybody know what the story is with MMORPGs in Japan or if I'm wrong about the single player nature of these games ?

    The anime series was very good by the way and if you haven't seen it already I'd recommend you check it out.

  23. Bush administration takes over development by anti-drew · · Score: 5, Funny

    Happily, the US government has indicated their interest in continuing the development of a continuous global war. Sources have even leaked a demo!

    Flash demo of GULF WAR 2

    Ok, it's obvious but I had to post it.

  24. No, it's actually a bit more complicated than that by kfg · · Score: 4, Insightful

    When Theodore developed Sturgeon's Law it wasn't that 90% of all writers are crap that he had in mind. It was that 90% of *everything written* was crap. What he was driving at was that 90% of everything written by a *great* writer was crap, but one of the main differences between a great writer and a hack was that the great writer didn't *publish* the crap.

    Thoreau's Journal is one of the most interesting works in literary history because it gives us an inside view into some of this. His journals are full of bits of Walden and other works while still under development. Of course, Old H.D. was a great writer, so even his journal was heavily edited and polished before publication.

    This applies to Van Gough as well. We don't see his crap because he himself made sure we didn't.

    There's also a story about a king who commissions a drawing of a rooster and when presented with the final bill balks. . .until the artist shows him the trunk full of hundreds of the previous inferior renditions the great artist disposed of before hitting the masterpiece.

    The king was paying for the *total* labor required, not just the final product.

    So Sony is merely doing what any wise artist, writer or businessman would do. When the first draft goes bad, and then the second and third, on the trash heap it goes.

    Crap is as crap does. Admit it before it drags you down to hack status, and at a loss.

    That's the true application of Sturgeon's Law for those with any real talent to peddle.

    KFG

  25. PR-guy admits it's fucked. by eddy · · Score: 4, Interesting

    You've _GOT_ to be kidding me. This is what the article says:

    Meanwhile, "PlanetSide" is nearing completion, with a public beta test scheduled for the end of this month.

    So far, so good... now here's the kicker:

    The game, which has seen "drastic design changes in the last four months" according to McDaniel

    So basically Scott McDaniel, which is the vice president of marketing and public relations for Sony Online Entertainment, is saying that instead of the QA-only sessions meant to go at the end of a project, they've just implemented DRASTIC DESIGN CHANGES and they're going to release it soon?!

    Hello, anyone home? The PR-guy is basically confessing that this is going to be a fucked bugfest which was largely developed with no clear design in mind.

    Sound great. Gotta admire the honesty though. Haha.

    --
    Belief is the currency of delusion.
  26. more about .HACK by mattwolfewvu · · Score: 2, Informative

    http://ps2.ign.com/objects/017/017477.html

    http://dvd.ign.com/articles/385/385585p1.html

    --
    "I think that when you become a Republican, you don't get to score any more." -- Butt-head
  27. MMORPG != MMORTS by LazJen · · Score: 5, Informative

    MMORPG is for roleplaying games.

    This was for a real time strategy game. MMORPG is incorrect. Not all massively multiplayer games are roleplaying games.

  28. why not..... by neilsly · · Score: 3, Insightful

    open source it?

    (this isn't flamebait)

    -neil

    1. Re:why not..... by ramzak2k · · Score: 2, Insightful

      the reason they wouldnt do this is simple. Although the project was a big failure there may be segments of work that could be transferred into other games - 4 years of research work obviously must have taught them something.

      --

      Siggy Say, Siggy Do
  29. Sounds like Eschaton by srichman · · Score: 3, Informative

    Global warfare with diplomacy sounds a bit like Eschaton. (Fingers crossed that that game doesn't meet a similar fate...)

  30. Ah, but they spent time and money. . . by kfg · · Score: 3, Interesting

    on that crappy game just developing the idea, didn't they?

    Everyone does it. Some just catch it earlier than others.

    What's more, even in their sucessful games they make a lot of wrong moves and throw out a lot of bad ideas and code that we don't, as the public, see them throwing out.

    All that goes into the total overhead of a production. Even a successful game can actually lose money if too many costly mistakes are made in getting there and many revered small houses, with nothing but "success" on their resume, have been suddenly trashed by their corporate masters over the bottom line.

    Of course what most of those corporate masters have yet to grasp is the concept of the "status" product. GM hardly makes a dime on Corvettes, but having Corvettes in the line up sold a lot *Chev*ettes. Nissan did away with the "Z" because they were losing money on it, and have had to bring it back because the whole *company* lost tremendously by its absence.

    For that matter GE has been looking for a way to do away with their lightbulb business for decades, and haven't been able to figure out how to do it. To the public the entire GE "nation" loses value ( even though profitablity would go *up*) if it doesn't make lightbulbs. I mean, that's what GE *is*, right?

    Stop making lightbulbs, stop selling as many financial services too. That's just the way it is.

    As it is, Looking Glass is simply gone. Jesus I wish the games companies would buy a clue.

    KFG

  31. Followed it from the Start by Eidolon909 · · Score: 5, Interesting


    I followed Sovereign from when it was first annouced then lost interest as the years kept ticking by.

    It started off as an incredibly cool concept, a modern day world with modern units. You inhabited a single planet, scalable to support to 500 "countries".. so each world would be server. Then had some awesome looking models functioning in the alpha.. aircraft carriers, fighters, nuclear subs. Battle tanks etc. It look like things were progressing smoothly, they had a nice look UI finished, you could zoom into a single infantry man all the way out to the whole planet.. this was supposed to be scaled to what your Satelite technology was. Resource system was in.. you had a character.. which effected how you ruled your empire/citizens.. such as Diplomat, Theocrat, Warmonger etc...

    THEN... they completely ditched the concept and basically started from scratch. So it was 4.5 years for the name "Sovereign" but them dumped the first game after about 2 years and started all over again. The new concept was retarded and thats when I stopped following it. They moved it from modern times to into the future.. where you controlled an entire planet with space ships and other junk. All the cool modern-era tech was replaced with goofy space-shit and all the gorgeous models were replaced with cartoony crap.

    The original concept was ambitious and amazing, too bad they didn't have the balls to make it work. Instead they opted for Trade Wars 2002 MMORPG and it tanked. Glad it happened too.

  32. this immediately made me think of... by gladbach · · Score: 2, Interesting

    "want to play a game?" "global nuclear warfare" *misses the good ol days*

    --
    "Computer games don't affect kids; I mean if Pac-Man affected us as kids, we'd all be running around in darkened rooms,
  33. Re:No, it's actually a bit more complicated than t by zeno_2 · · Score: 3, Insightful
    So Sony is merely doing what any wise artist, writer or businessman would do.

    I think that should be changed to any *rich* artist, writer, etc.. The only reason why this game didn't get released is because Sony is a big company with a lot of money. If this was some smaller game development company, and they spent over 4 years of their time making a game, and scrapped it, they will probably go out of buisness. If it was a smaller company making this game, my guess is that the game would have released and would have probably not done that well. That happens a lot more then a company just giving up after 4+ years..

    It was wise for them to do this though, I believe that the market for games that require a monthly charge (which im guessing this game would have done, i couldn't find anything mentioning that) is a pretty hard one to break into, you are going to need something thats gonna hook a lot of people for many many months to make money on somethin like that. I just hope they do something with all the work they did...

  34. "Looked like ass"? by WG55 · · Score: 4, Funny

    I saw Sovereign at E3 2000 and the graphics looked like ass back then.

    Reading the above, I have no idea whether the graphics looked good or bad. Specifically, who's ass are we using as a reference? Jennifer Lopez's? Strom Thurmond's? I need more information!

  35. This is true... by artemis67 · · Score: 3, Funny

    The more realistic you make a war game, the less fun it is.

    The beta testers' number one complaint about Sovereign was the napalm-spraying USB peripheral included in the box.

  36. A MMPRPG in 4.5 Years? not bad, actually. by Chris+Canfield · · Score: 2, Interesting

    5 years to develop a massively multiplayer title isn't that far off. You are not only developing a AAA title game (3 years), but are also building a thin-client app and a server farm to support it. Your applications must be optimized for speed, graphics, low-bandwidth, and impregnability. Since you are developing an ap that the average user will spend 6 hours per day over the course of four months on, you need to develop major in-game tools to create a content load that makes Master of Orion 3 look like Advance Wars. If I'm not mistaken, the world in Asheron's Call 2 is about the size of Texas. Can you imagine filling Texas with intruiging content?

    And after 5 years the code is not obsolete. Code is just that: code. A lot of that 5 years went to optimizing the code for a server farm and a computer speed that didn't exist before. If they started their server farm 5 years ago on BSD, their code is binary compatible. If they started 5 years ago on NT, their code is binary compatible. Solaris? Linux? Still going strong. In fact the only major changes they would have to make over that time would be to take advantage of multithreading, and a few other speed-up tricks that modern hardware pulls. But since that is backend, they could always compensate for that by buying more servers. On the backend what they optimize for is bandwidth costs, and if they were designing for 56k modems, they should be OK. As for the clients, It's never hard to take advantage of larger texture buffers.

    5 years was the development cycle for Asheron's Call 2, Star Wars Galaxies, and Everquest 2. It takes a very, very long time to make a networked world large enough to entertain thousands of people for thousands of hours. This isn't unreasonable.

    -Chris

    --
    This Sig is a mnemonic device designed to allow you to recognize this author in the future.
  37. My favorite... by John_Sauter · · Score: 5, Funny

    My favorite Massive Multiplayer Role-Playing Game is Slashdot. You get competition, very intelligent opponents, cute graphics, and a persistent score. You can play with a modest PC behind a dial-up line, and you don't need good fine motor skills. Best of all, you can play without paying a monthly fee. How can EverQuest compete with that?
    John Sauter (J_Sauter@Empire.Net)

    1. Re:My favorite... by SlightlyMadman · · Score: 3, Funny

      My favorite Massive Multiplayer Role-Playing Game is Slashdot. You get competition, very intelligent opponents ... How can EverQuest compete with that?

      Very intelligent opponents? Where? Oh, well, I suppose, compared to EverQuest ...

      --

      Money I owe, money-iy-ay
  38. The number of MMORPG's by aliens · · Score: 2, Insightful

    I have a feeling that there's only a certain population out there willing to play MMORPG's. The more that come out, the more you'll find with hardly enough players to support an interesting world. No point in playing a MMORPG when it's just you and a wombat ::)

    --
    -- taking over the world, we are.
  39. After 4.5 years of development by mcmoyer · · Score: 2, Funny

    All they could get the game to do was keep spitting out. "They only way to win is to not play the game"