Slashdot Mirror


Pirates of the Burning Sea Signs With SOE For Publishing

Flying Lab Software has been keeping its upcoming piratical Massively Multiplayer Game, Pirates of the Burning Sea, somewhat close to the chest. There's a Beta running, but outside of the forums and official website information has been thin on the ground. That changed last week with a flurry of posting to the Flying Lab Software site about a number of topics. This week there is big news: the game finally has a publisher. Flying Labs has partnered with SOE's Platform Publishing brand to put out Pirates of the Burning Sea. To clarify, if you're unfamiliar with Platform Publishing, Sony Online Entertainment will only be publishing the game; they will have nothing to do with development. "We had two other paths to launching this fall: going it alone and working with another independent outfit we've been spending time with. Both of these were good options in general (especially the partnership approach, as we really like those guys). But for either of those approaches to work for a fall launch, everything would have to go right the first time and we'd still need some luck. By working with SOE we know it'll just happen."

79 comments

  1. Too bad. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I was looking forward to this game.

    1. Re:Too bad. by Glonoinha · · Score: 1

      The nerfings ... will ... now ... Commence!

      --
      Glonoinha the MebiByte Slayer
  2. Vanguard-itis anyone? by jfodale · · Score: 1
    --
    Waiting for Warhammer Online.
    1. Re:Vanguard-itis anyone? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Informative

      Want to quickly head off some of the more reactionary comments that are sure to appear here.

      First, Flying Labs (the devs) maintain complete creative control. SOE is literally just publishing it. This won't be a SW:G repeat.

      Second, Flying Labs is self financed. They have plenty of cash and aren't going to have the problems Vanguard did.

      SOE has a really bad -- and justly earned -- reputation these days, but it seems like Flying Labs got the deal they needed from them, so I'm thrilled. I've been following this game for like four years now, and they've always been adament about maintaining complete control of their game, and I was starting to get nervous they couldn't find any publisher who'd let them do that.

    2. Re:Vanguard-itis anyone? by Photon+Ghoul · · Score: 1

      This exactly what McQuaid said about the SOE-Vanguard deal. We all know where that went - there's no explanation necessary. Personally, I'll give this one a chance and hope that SOE doesn't screw Flying Labs but I'm extremely skeptical.

    3. Re:Vanguard-itis anyone? by Suzumushi · · Score: 1
      Second, Flying Labs is self financed. They have plenty of cash and aren't going to have the problems Vanguard did.

      Not enough cash apparently, otherwise why involve Sony at all?

      Nothing Sony will ever touch my computer. Sony, in any form, has a terrible track record. Whether it is rootkits, proprietary formats that die from their own strangling DRM requirements, overpriced electronics, boffed publishing, or holier-than-thou decisions on what PS games are permitted to be published stateside; they are bad news. SOE will be the Jonah of this pirate ship me thinks.

    4. Re:Vanguard-itis anyone? by EtoilePB · · Score: 1

      Indeed, anyone who's read the interviews and articles about the last few months of Sigil should understand damn well that the big problems with Vanguard had nothing to do with being distributed by SOE and everything to do with being developed by apparently one of the worst-run companies ever.

      There's all this irrational hatred out there of SOE as distributor. Now, I totally understand why all the people who used to play Galaxies are gun-shy with the company, but that's apples and oranges to this. This is more like HBO or PBS airing an independently-made documentary than it is like Fox studios financing and releasing Star Wars.

    5. Re:Vanguard-itis anyone? by mxmissile · · Score: 1

      Deja-Vu anyone?

    6. Re:Vanguard-itis anyone? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Informative

      "Not enough cash apparently, otherwise why involve Sony at all?"

      Because they already have the marketing, billing, and distribution services in place for us, so we don't have to do those things. We're good at making games. We don't really want to find out if we're good at marketing or not. With this deal, we don't have to.

      Of course, that was in the FA, so I'm sure you already know that and are just ranting. Don't let my facts get in the way of you raging against the machine.

      -isildur (PotBS Lead Designer)

    7. Re:Vanguard-itis anyone? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      holier-than-thou decisions on what PS games are permitted to be published stateside

      you're kidding right? have you ever heard the stories about Nintendo's publishing requirements back in the NES days?

    8. Re:Vanguard-itis anyone? by toolie · · Score: 1

      Now, I totally understand why all the people who used to play Galaxies are gun-shy with the company, but that's apples and oranges to this. This is more like HBO or PBS airing an independently-made documentary than it is like Fox studios financing and releasing Star Wars.

      Except it wasn't SOE calling the shots on SWG, it was LucasArts. Nobody cares about that though, just like they don't care that it was Sigil that fucked Vanguard up.

      --
      -- toolie
    9. Re:Vanguard-itis anyone? by Mike+Buddha · · Score: 0, Troll

      This is totatlly going to be another Vanguard/SWG/Everquest-get-it-out-asap-without-it- being-finished deal. Screw SOE. They ruin everything they touch. It might be ready a year or two after release.

      --
      by Mike Buddha -- Someday the mountain might get him, but the law never will.
    10. Re:Vanguard-itis anyone? by ThePiMan2003 · · Score: 2, Informative

      I am not sure why Sony gets all this bad publicity in the MMO area. Face it SWG sucked before NGE, NGE made it actually FUN for some people. Vanguard is a mess, but it would not exist without Sony, you have Brad to lay that failure at. In fact to me it seems like going with Sony is a great idea. The people in Sony Online Entertainment are not the same people who put root kits on CD's they probably have never even met; nor are they the people who made the PS3, in fact I bet they have not talked a whole heck of a lot either. Sony is a REALLY HUGE company, you shouldn't blanket all of them under one roof.

      As the FA says there is a lot of nasty things involved in setting up a MMOG; billing, bandwidth, and backed hosting. Say what you will about SOE but there servers are MUCH better than anyones (yes they had problems in the early years of EQ, but I have _NEVER_ had to wait in a queue with them; and unscheduled crashes have been very very rare for years). Why should content creators have to spend time worrying about if they have a redundant enough T3? I would rather they spend time making a good game.

    11. Re:Vanguard-itis anyone? by Suzumushi · · Score: 1
      Wow, with hostility like this coming from the lead designer, then I suppose it is in fact a good thing that you have nothing to do with the marketing and billing. :-P

      Good luck with that.

  3. Vanguard by Joe+U · · Score: 1

    Pretty much like Sigil, SOE and Vanguard...

    ok, bad example.

    2 Years later: Welcome to Everquest at Sea.

    1. Re:Vanguard by SatanicPuppy · · Score: 3, Informative

      Nah. They're not selling their IP, they're just contracting with SOE for distribution and hosting.

      Sounds like a good deal for all involved; Flying Labs keeps absolute creative control, and assumes the bulk of the financial risks. SOE makes money on the front end, and skims some off the top for hosting...If it flops, they've got very little stake in it, and if it doesn't they'll get a nice bit of cash, as well as positioning themselves as a friend to the independent MMO developer.

      --
      ad logicam Claiming a proposition is false because it was presented as the conclusion of a fallacious argument.
    2. Re:Vanguard by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That was the line with Sigil, wasn't it?

    3. Re:Vanguard by geekboy642 · · Score: 0, Flamebait

      Just you watch, first it's "absolute creative control", then it turns into "everybody can be a Jedi easily", then you get a raped crafting system and all the experienced players leave the game to the noobs.

      --
      Just another "DOJ fascist authoritarian totalitarian bootlicker" -- Zeio
    4. Re:Vanguard by dopplex · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Different than Vanguard really... I mean, the publishing deal is probably similar - but the only reason that Vanguard's IP ended up getting acquired is due to the failures of Sigil. Provided the Burning Sea guys are less dynsfunctional (and let's face it - it's pretty hard to be more dysfunctional than Sigil was, according to most reports) I see this being a pretty standard publishing arrangement.

      When exactly has SOE meddled with the design of a third party that they were publishing? All of their blunders had to do primarily with IP that they designed themselves. There's a lot of irrational SOE dread out there. Yeah, they screwed up Galaxies - but that was their own game, and you have to think they learned something from that experience.

      --
      "You can take our lives, but you can never take our Flerbage!!!!"
    5. Re:Vanguard by jesdynf · · Score: 1
      --
      Yahoo! Pipes are awesome. How awesome? http://pipes.yahoo.com/jesdynf/slashdot
    6. Re:Vanguard by Tridus · · Score: 1

      Sony's original deal with Sigil was like this, yes.

      Then Sigil released a truly awful game and went bankrupt. Thats when Sony bought the game off them.

      --
      -- "So they told me that using the download page to download something was not something they anticipated." - Bill Gates
    7. Re:Vanguard by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      We'll try avoiding the 'releas[ing] a truly awful game' as our first step, and see where we go from there.

      -isildur (PotBS lead designer)

    8. Re:Vanguard by jollyreaper · · Score: 1

      Nah. They're not selling their IP, they're just contracting with SOE for distribution and hosting.

      Sounds like a good deal for all involved; Flying Labs keeps absolute creative control, and assumes the bulk of the financial risks. SOE makes money on the front end, and skims some off the top for hosting...If it flops, they've got very little stake in it, and if it doesn't they'll get a nice bit of cash, as well as positioning themselves as a friend to the independent MMO developer. The four biggest lies: This'll only hurt for a little while, I'll only put the head of it in, I promise that I'll never try to cum in your mouth, you'll retain full creative control.
      --
      Kwisatz Haderach
      Sell the spice to CHOAM
      This Mahdi took Shaddam's Throne
    9. Re:Vanguard by Midwedge · · Score: 1

      Acutaly if you look at the announcement the breakdown is this: Flying Lab Software Game Development Community Customer Support Server Operations Sony Online Entertainment Billing Launcher Retail Distribution Localization Marketing Flying labs is doing their own servers, even their own fourms, they won't be paying SOE to host for them, SOE is doing the sales/billing side and localization, thats it.

    10. Re:Vanguard by SatanicPuppy · · Score: 1

      I skimmed it. Looked to me like FL was being hyper-careful, and extremely protective of their IP, and that Sony was happy to be able to make some cash off of it, and bulk up their whole Station Pass thing with another title.

      Lot of people here are clearly still massively bitter about SWG. The whole Vanguard/Sigil thing I don't see as a "This is Sony being evil" thing so much as Sony getting fed up with the crap and taking over the bankrupt company. Not like they could have done much worse.

      --
      ad logicam Claiming a proposition is false because it was presented as the conclusion of a fallacious argument.
    11. Re:Vanguard by SydShamino · · Score: 1

      When exactly has SOE meddled with the design of a third party that they were publishing?

      You mean like Verant?

      This publishing deal makes it likely in my opinion, some days down the road, that SoE will have some level of control over the game. Possibly when the buy the independent publisher, possibly when they just buy the game. And that means I won't touch it with a 10 foot pole. Heck, knowing SoE is skimming some off the top of my subscription is enough to keep me away.

      Sorry Flying Lab Software, you might have a good game, but I won't touch it now. Nothing personal with you; it's personal with SoE.

      --
      It doesn't hurt to be nice.
    12. Re:Vanguard by esampson · · Score: 1

      When exactly has SOE meddled with the design of a third party that they were publishing?

      You mean like Verant?

      You need to come up with another example. Verant wasn't a third party being published by SOE. Verant was SOE. It's name was changed from Verant to SOE after Verant was acquired by Sony.

    13. Re:Vanguard by Glonoinha · · Score: 1

      So basically the only step between this being 'as proposed' and 'another royal ass-fucking like Everquest' is for Sony to buy Flying Labs? Sorry to tell you this, but methinks this game is already fucked because that's exactly what is going to happen (Sony buy FL) - there's no way I'm pouring a couple hundred hours into a game only to have SOE do to it what they did to Everquest.

      --
      Glonoinha the MebiByte Slayer
    14. Re:Vanguard by esampson · · Score: 1

      So basically the only step between this being 'as proposed' and 'another royal ass-fucking like Everquest' is for Sony to buy Flying Labs?


      Leaving aside any and all issues about SOE for the moment, that 'only' step your talking about is sort of a big one. It's kind of like saying the only step between FedEx having the ability to have the new Harry Potter book rewritten or not is for them to buy Scholastic.

      I'm not going to try to talk you down from your dislike of SOE. All I was really saying was that your original premise that SOE screwed up a Everquest when it was a third party product is wrong. To date I can't think of a single third party MMO that SOE has distributed where they have influenced the creative process.

    15. Re:Vanguard by billsoxs · · Score: 1

      -isildur (PotBS lead designer)

      Sooo.... if you are the lead designer, what will it come out on and about when?

      --
      This message was brought to you by "Lack of Sleep."
    16. Re:Vanguard by Phil+the+Canuck · · Score: 1

      You forgot the bit where Sigil borrowed millions of dollars from Sony to complete development.

    17. Re:Vanguard by Joe+U · · Score: 1

      Cool, the lead designer replied to a thread I wrote.

      Can I be a GM? I'm really good at it, and this won't happen very often. http://www.penny-arcade.com/comic/2005/01/10, maybe once, twice a week tops.

      Ok, serious note, you know if this will be on Station Access so I have an excuse to re-activate the rest of my account?

    18. Re:Vanguard by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You forgot, "Oops, I didn't mean to stick it in that one."

    19. Re:Vanguard by toolie · · Score: 1

      All of their blunders had to do primarily with IP that they designed themselves. There's a lot of irrational SOE dread out there. Yeah, they screwed up Galaxies - but that was their own game, and you have to think they learned something from that experience.

      What they learned was to never deal with LucasFilms/Arts whatever again. They didn't own the IP for SWG, they licensed it. Then, when LA wanted something changed, SOE had to do the changes as part of the licensing agreement. They might have provided the coders and the original design, but LA called the shots and owned the IP.

      --
      -- toolie
  4. SOE? by jesdynf · · Score: 0

    They're going with SOE? Oh, man. Hope that call made somebody some money. It won't be making mine.

    --
    Yahoo! Pipes are awesome. How awesome? http://pipes.yahoo.com/jesdynf/slashdot
  5. Not going to be a repeat of SW:G or Vanguard by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Informative

    Want to quickly head off some of the more reactionary comments that are sure to appear here.

    First, Flying Labs (the devs) maintain complete creative control. SOE is literally just publishing it. This won't be a SW:G repeat.

    Second, Flying Labs is self financed. They have plenty of cash, and aren't going to have the problems Vanguard did.

    SOE has a really bad -- and justly earned -- reputation these days, but it seems like Flying Labs got the deal they needed from them, so I'm thrilled. I've been following this game for like four years now, and they've always been adament about maintaining complete control of their game, and I was starting to get nervous they couldn't find any publisher who'd let them do that.

    1. Re:Not going to be a repeat of SW:G or Vanguard by vux984 · · Score: 1

      First, Flying Labs (the devs) maintain complete creative control. SOE is literally just publishing it.

      Until SOE buys a big stake in Flying Labs.

      When you dance with an 800 lb gorilla you should expect to get stepped on.

      Even if it promises not to.

    2. Re:Not going to be a repeat of SW:G or Vanguard by Ogive17 · · Score: 1

      They may be maintaining complete control of development, but SOE's reputation is that they eventually ruin every game they touch. It's going to keep jilted people from even trying the game (like me, my SW:G experience went so sour that I'll never touch anything affiliated with SOE again).

      It's not fair, but it's the price you pay when you do a deal with the devil.

      --
      "Action without philosophy is a lethal weapon; philosophy without action is worthless."
    3. Re:Not going to be a repeat of SW:G or Vanguard by Dale512 · · Score: 1

      I think the point is there have been several games in the past that were going to just publish with SOE and maintain all control of development. These all ended up with SOE doing the development. They can say what they want, but their track record speaks differently.

    4. Re:Not going to be a repeat of SW:G or Vanguard by TimboJones · · Score: 1

      You can't force someone to sell if they don't want to and don't need the money.

  6. Enough with the pirates! by Otter · · Score: 1

    I've enjoyed Talk Like A Pirate Day as much as the next guy, but enough already! The pirate thing needs a few years of rest before it becomes fun again.

    1. Re:Enough with the pirates! by clem · · Score: 1

      A few years seems excessive. Let's come to a compromise and reschedule for DecembArrgh!

      Arrgh! Arrgh. Er...

      Sorry.

      --
      Your courageous and selfless spelling corrections have made me a better person.
    2. Re:Enough with the pirates! by El+Torico · · Score: 2, Funny

      Yeah, enough with the Pirates. Now an MMORPG with Ninjas, that would be cool.

      --
      In the land of the blind, the one-eyed man is usually crucified.
    3. Re:Enough with the pirates! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yeah, I love playing a Ninja! I got a free epic just last night with my shaman!!

  7. We all know how this is going to end by Gailin · · Score: 0, Redundant

    SOE have ruined every MMO they had a hand in. The only reason Everquest lasted as long as it did, was because there was shite for alternatives. As soon as one came around (WOW), people flocked to get away from SOE.

    No thanks, I won't pay to watch SOE destroy another MMO with patches and upgrades.

    --
    I wish there was a fscking blue pill
    1. Re:We all know how this is going to end by thelexx · · Score: 4, Informative

      Apparently, neither you or the person who modded you up could even be bothered to read the entire summary:

      "Sony Online Entertainment will only be publishing the game; they will have nothing to do with development."

      Nothing to do with development. As in, no hand in what or when things get patched or upgraded.

      --
      "Gold still represents the ultimate form of payment in the world." - Alan Greenspan, 1999
    2. Re:We all know how this is going to end by Minwee · · Score: 1

      That's about the same deal the Sigil Games signed for Vanguard.

      And golly, look what happened next. The game did poorly, Brad couldn't keep up his payments to the Sony Family so Guido and Nunzio had to drop by and break his knees. Suddenly the boys from Sony are running the show and starts taking a whole lot of hand in when things get patched, upgraded, or accidentally stuffed into a meat grinder.

      It's fine to wave around a piece of paper and crow about "a publisher in our time", but history shows that it doesn't always work out that way.

    3. Re:We all know how this is going to end by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Can you still login and play Vanguard today? Yes.

      Could you have logged into Vanguard today had SOE not published it and picked it up? Likely no.

      Microsoft wouldn't have kept it around for long, (AC2 is a good example), EA isn't known for keeping MMOs around long either, and Blizzard isn't a publisher. Beyond that, Sigil could have tried to run the game themselves, and odds are it would have bankrupted them before they even turned on the first world. They weren't the best run company out there, and with or without SOE, Vanguard would have been in trouble. SOE simply allowed Sigil to still have a chance at releasing their game, something Microsoft was no longer willing to do.

      SOE, while not the greatest gaming company, does actually seem to have an interest in MMOs, and thus far has yet to shutdown any of their games. You could still go pick up a copy of Lord of Everquest and play it today, or still log into Tanarus, even though at this point neither of those have earned SOE a dime in ages, and have quite possibly caused them to lose money.

      Besides, Vanguard was published by SOE proper, and integrated fully beyond the design, as thats the agreement Sigil wanted. Pirates is going under Platform Publishing, so odds are the box won't even have an SOE logo anywhere on it. There isn't one on the Disney Toontown box for example. Platform Publishing simply means SOE is pushing boxes to the shelves, and in this case running the billing and bandwidth for patch services. Flying Lab Software is still running the servers, all community aspects, and complete control of the game.

    4. Re:We all know how this is going to end by Gailin · · Score: 1

      Nope, I read it. I believe that in the end Sony will purchase FL either cheaply when the product fails, or for more if it succeeds. I may be wrong, but I believe that will be the eventuality, as Sony loves nothing more than flogging to death a good franchise.

      That prospect alone is enough to keep me away from the game.

      --
      I wish there was a fscking blue pill
    5. Re:We all know how this is going to end by CronoCloud · · Score: 1

      To me, SOE makes quality games, but then again I'm a console gamer.

      But like some of their PC cousins, SOE still maintains servers for their PS2 titles: EQOA and the two SOE PS2 Diablo clones, Champions of Norrath and Champions Return to Arms.

    6. Re:We all know how this is going to end by deviceb · · Score: 1

      amen man..

      everquest was phen till exploited..

      --
      Kill your TV
  8. Yarr. Say 'Hi' ta Davy Jones for me, Flying Lab... by Bieeanda · · Score: 1
    ...because given SOE's track record with internally developed games and the ones they've merely published, your title's going down with all hands sooner or later.

    Granted that Vanguard was partially bankrolled by SOE, and was developed by a man who spent more time taking visual stock of the insides of his colon than actually developing, but SOE does have a richly deserved reputation as the publisher where MMO titles go to die.

  9. SOE? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Isn't SOE where games go to die? Isn't it a little early to doom yourself? I'm sure they can push some DVD's out the door, but there's such a stigma around SOE...

  10. And... by djones101 · · Score: 1

    Another MMO bites the dust.

    1. Re:And... by jollyreaper · · Score: 1

      Another MMO bites the dust. C'mon, couldn't you take it a bit further?

      SOE walks jauntily down the street,
      With the brim pulled way down low
      Ain't no sound but the sound of hype,
      Checkbook ready to go
      Are you ready, Are you ready for this
      Are you hanging on the edge of your seat
      Across the nation gamers feel ripped
      And another studio falls to defeat

      Another MMO bites the dust
      Another MMO bites the dust
      And another one gone, and another one gone
      Another MMO bites the dust
      Hey, SOE might buy you too
      Another MMO bites the dust

      How do you think I'm going to get along,
      Without that game, it's gone
      You took the MMO for everything it had,
      And dumbed it totally down,

      Are you happy, are you satisfied
      How long can you stand the heat
      Across the nation gamers feel ripped
      And another studio falls to defeat

      Another MMO bites the dust
      Another MMO bites the dust
      Another MMO bites the dust
      Another MMO bites the dust
      There are plenty of ways you can hurt a game
      And drag it to the ground
      You can nerf it
      You can cheat it
      You can bug it and unbalance it
      Drive subscriptions down
      But I'm ready, yes I'm ready for you
      I'm canceling my toons
      Across the nation gamers feel ripped
      And another studio falls to ruin

      Chorus
      --
      Kwisatz Haderach
      Sell the spice to CHOAM
      This Mahdi took Shaddam's Throne
  11. It's not that bad by ceswiedler · · Score: 2, Interesting

    I work on an MMO which is also being published by SOE Platform Publishing. They are not involved at all in game design or implementation--they will be doing publishing only, i.e. box sales, marketing. In my opinion they're a very good choice for publishing MMOs.

    If the game is good or bad, it's the developer's fault, not the publisher's. Don't lump games that are published by SOE in with games that are developed by SOE.

    1. Re:It's not that bad by achan0x · · Score: 1

      most user's aren't going to look at this way, they'll see the SOE logo and simply bypass it.

  12. What a shame by HycoWhit · · Score: 1

    Was looking forward to playing PotBS--not now though. Been burned by SOE too many times. It will be a cold day in Hell before I ever give SOE a credit card number,

    1. Re:What a shame by jjohnson · · Score: 1

      RTFA. SOE is only the distributor; Flying Labs retains all creative control and IP, and operates the servers themselves. This is a fundamentally different deal than all the other crap SOE hosts.

      --
      Anyone who loves or hates any language, platform, or manufacturer, doesn't know what they're talking about.
    2. Re:What a shame by HycoWhit · · Score: 1

      I read the article. I've had more than enough experience with SOE to realize anything that involves SOE is going suck sooner or later. My bet is sooner comes pretty fast. Sure it will be different. After so many SOE screw-ups, how would you exepct the article to read? Other folks can spend their money on PotBS, for me personally--I'll be taking a pass at release. If you lay down with dogs--you are going to get fleas....

    3. Re:What a shame by billsoxs · · Score: 1

      If you lay down with dogs--you are going to get fleas...

      Not if you put that flea and tick repellent stuff on the dog you don't. Of course that is a LOT of dogs at Sony that you would have to cover - but it MIGHT work.

      --
      This message was brought to you by "Lack of Sleep."
  13. Don't call it fear, call it a boycott. by Remus+Shepherd · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Lots of people trying to calm everybody down by explaining how distant the relationship between Flying Labs and SOE will be. Those people are missing the point.

    People choose what games to play based on more than just the quality of the game. I quit Everquest vowing never to give SOE (or any company with Brad McQuaid) another dime, no matter how good their future games might be. And I will avoid this Pirates game, not because I think SOE will somehow screw it up, but because part of its revenue would go to fund SOE. I choose not to fund incompetant and unethical companies.

    Flying Labs just struck a deal with the devil, from many gamers' points of view. They shouldn't be surprised if people quietly cross themselves and scurry away from them, no matter how good their product may be.

    --
    Genocide Man -- Life is funny. Death is funnier. Mass murder can be hilarious.
    1. Re:Don't call it fear, call it a boycott. by jjohnson · · Score: 1

      Fortunately for Flying Labs, and unfortunately for your commendably principled stand, few consumers are as ethically considerate.

      --
      Anyone who loves or hates any language, platform, or manufacturer, doesn't know what they're talking about.
    2. Re:Don't call it fear, call it a boycott. by CronoCloud · · Score: 1

      Could you explain why you hate SOE so much, as I stated above, as a console gamer, SOE does quality games. For example, in some ways I think EQOA is a better game than FFXI, just simply more "fun" and less "work", and the two Snowblind Engine Diablo clones are great games. Even the PSP's Untold Legends is a fun little Diablo clone, not perfect, but I enjoy playing it.

    3. Re:Don't call it fear, call it a boycott. by Panzergheist · · Score: 2, Insightful

      I choose not to fund incompetant [sic] and unethical companies.

      Seeing as you would more than likely need to use some Microsoft product to play MMO games, I think this is a case of selective ethics. That is a lot like condemning snuff films over dinner with a serial rapist.

    4. Re:Don't call it fear, call it a boycott. by jfodale · · Score: 1

      Well, with this announcement and the many delays, I am no longer buying this game on release day. I'll wait 4 or 5 months and if it hasn't faded to obscurity, I'll pick it up then.
       
      So I guess I'm one.

      --
      Waiting for Warhammer Online.
    5. Re:Don't call it fear, call it a boycott. by will_die · · Score: 1

      What people dislike about SOE is that they have published two big games, Vanguard and Star Wars Galaxy, which have both been really horrid games. What they totally ignore is that the head developers for both of thoses games said that SOE gave them free control of the products. SOE just required updates and for them to stick to time schedules that the developers agreed to. However theses people are mainly fanboies and don't want to recognize that people they have been saying could do no wrong and would produce the best MMORPG in world made sucky games.
      Alot of other people are joking because SOE has been buying up a lot of on the verge of failing MMORPG: Vanguard, Matrix and some others, and then using them as content for the SOE all access pass. So that this game is coming under SOE could mean that it is a horrid game that is basicly finished but the developers need money so they are bringing thier creation to SOE so it can live since it could not survive on its own. Or it could be a really good game and SOE has a good history as an MMORPG distributor. SOE has been taking those failed games that look to have some future and changing them around based on users, not fanboies, comments in hopes making a profit off of them.
      SOE does have some problems, customer support in game can take between 1-2 hours during prime time and are generally clueless on the games(compared to people who play it 3-4 hours a day) and they have no problem in allowing the game developers to nerf a class if it is needed for future balance.

    6. Re:Don't call it fear, call it a boycott. by walnutmon · · Score: 1

      I choose not to fund incompetant and unethical companies.

      You still buy gasoline?

      If this game rocks cocks, you will buy it, and if you don't, others will. If you like this kind of game, and it is good, and you don't play it, what justice are you dealing out? If you play games for the companies that publish them, then you need to get a new hobby.

      --
      You take it, I don't want it...
    7. Re:Don't call it fear, call it a boycott. by TimboJones · · Score: 1

      SOE does have some problems, customer support in game can take between 1-2 hours during prime time and are generally clueless on the games


      Flying Lab is in charge of support.
  14. It will get worse... by sgant · · Score: 1

    Now when a concept of a game is announced, before any code is even written, SOE will release it. No more putting out release candidates, or betas or even alphas before they're finished. They will release the game on the same day it's conceived!

    --

    "Leo Fender was in a 'state of grace' when he designed the Stratocaster." -- Paul Reed Smith
  15. SoE by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I don't believe in supporting bad businesses. Such is the driving force behind the invisible hand of capitalism!

    I'd rather skip this game than give SoE any amount of money what-so-ever by buying it.

  16. Ah, well by balthan · · Score: 1

    It's probably for the best. It's one of the few MMORPGs that interested me. I guess I don't have to worry about falling in that trap now.

  17. Pirates of the .. what? by hohokus · · Score: 1

    For a minute I thought this was about "Pirates of the Great Salt Lake".

    http://www.piratesofthegreatsaltlake.com/

  18. SOE is so rich and successful! by Exstarsis · · Score: 1

    Oh no! You'll get food poisoning if you eat at Jack in the Box!
    Oh no! Apple is dead!

    I don't think SOE can afford to burn money; companies that fail over and over again don't last unless they change dramatically. I kind of wonder what SOE's current expected lifespan is if they screw things up this time; Sony has other game divisions.

    Change has to start somewhere.

    1. Re:SOE is so rich and successful! by heartless_ · · Score: 1

      As much as I hate SOE, they are the most profitable portion of Sony at the moment. Change won't start at mother ship Sony by axing their most successful wing.

  19. Care to justify your position? by Shivetya · · Score: 1

    You said nothing in your comment to explain your stance, so either your being irrational in your anti-SOE views or just FUDing for karma (which unfortunately works here)

    Hell I know people who will not touch a Blizzard game. When pressed they eventually fall back on the problems with B-Net and Diablo. Fine, thats their choice. But if your going to FUD something at least tell us why.

    FWIW, unless it personally affects you get over it. Too many people like to make themselves out to be victims to feel as if they are part of something. I was never a victim of SWG's problems (SOE publish), or Vangard, or B-Net, or the browser wars. They were just things I read and at most I noticed them, but hell they had no real effect on my life. Do not assume a problem that isn't yours, it will make your life easier.

    --
    * Winners compare their achievements to their goals, losers compare theirs to that of others.
    1. Re:Care to justify your position? by Remus+Shepherd · · Score: 1

      I was a guide on Everquest, and got to see some of the back room dealings that went on in maintaining the game. I saw GMs giving loot to their favorite guilds, I saw edicts handed down by Sony (then Verant) that we should lie to players to keep them playing, and I saw a corporation whose business plan revolved around free labor and addicted consumers.

      I won't play Blizzard on-line games because I distrust their privacy policy -- IMHO they're not evil, I just don't trust them. I don't shop at Wal-Mart, eat at McDonald's, or buy RIAA music. I use a Microsoft operating system (haven't upgraded past W2k) because no other OS offered the features I needed in 2001 when I last bought a PC. My next PC will likely not be MS. I practice the advice, 'Vote with your Wallet'.

      But now that I've justified myself, let me reiterate that it's not about me. There's a general feeling among gamers that SOE is evil and no good will come from dealing with them. The backlash will have nothing to do with the quality of the Pirates game, it's just that some consumers will be driven away by SOE's stench. It will add up to a weak de facto boycott, not an organized or even conscious one. And Flying Labs should realize that it's coming, and why.

      --
      Genocide Man -- Life is funny. Death is funnier. Mass murder can be hilarious.
  20. Got annoyed, but relaxed then after rtfaing by unity100 · · Score: 1

    To clarify, if you're unfamiliar with Platform Publishing, Sony Online Entertainment will only be publishing the game; they will have nothing to do with development.

    after swg, whenever i see soe anywhere, i get irked. Its good that they were wise only to let them do publishing.
  21. SOE by Josgar · · Score: 1

    People really need to give SOE a chance: Yes they did mess up everquest. Lucas Arts forced them to change SWG... however, they have turned around EQ2 in the past 2 years, and made it more fun. As long as the developers of this game do not go bankrupt, then they should be fine. In an interveiw with an X employee of sigil, the xemployee said that SOE did not touch vanguard at all during that time. Granted that SWG people will be mad, but we all must remember that SOE does not have full control over SWG and was forced to make changes that they regret. RIP PRE-NGE