I've noticed a few people mention putting MMORPGs (along with FPSs, RTSs etc) on the computers for people to play.
I was wondering - due to the sheer size some of these MMORPGs take up on the hard disk, you'd probably have to limit how many MMORPGs you could offer. Would try and only offer the larger MMORPGs such as Everquest, Star Wars Galaxies, Dark Age of Camelot etc? Or would you put on some other MMORPGs for variety - such as Lineage (not big in NA, but big in Asia), Anarchy Online (does well in Europe), or Shadowbane (bugs galore, but PvP is the aim). Or would you go all out and try and have as many MMORPGs as you could?
It's pretty easy to pick the FPSs and RTSs to put in a LAN Cafe, but what MMORPG would you load up?
Hard to see whether this ruling has had a significant effect on SCO stock, because it has been decreasing over the past 5 days, but everyone is invited to my house once it starts it's downhill plummet.
While that does work, it's mostly on the heads of designers, developers and QA to get a product out of beta.
Anarchy Online had incentives like this through beta and still shipped in a state that left many people giving it the dubious title of one of the worst launched MMORPGs.
Honestly, I think it depends on the individual players view as to when a MMORPG is no longer in beta - everyone is going to be looking for something different in a game. If the crafting system is fubar, then the MMOPRPG will still be in beta phase for the player who likes to craft; the PKer won't care at all (until he needs to buy phat lewt later in the game).
For me, I see a few items on my checklist until I feel I'm no longer paying to play a beta:
1. Billing system is operational: it stays up and working under a large load, and only charges me once for signing up.
2. I am able to log in first try: I get no time-outs or "could not find server" when I know that the server is up.
3. I can play for more than a few hours without being disconnected: and I'm being generous here. I don't mind being disconnected after 4 hours play because I decide to run into a full scale guild war with all my graphic settings set to high, but I shouldn't be disconnected when changing zones, or just running along an open area.
4. Quests/Missions etc can be finished: If I start a quest only to find that the NPC I need to talk to doesn't give me the item he/she should, then that's obviously a big red mark against the MMORPG. Q&A testers are there for a reason, dontyaknow...
5. Glaring gaps in gameplay are not fixed: I know over the lifetime of a MMORPG the gameplay (eg combat system, crafting) is going to be tweaked and adjusted to reflect what players are doing, or should not be doing, in the game - but if I'm playing in my first week of a MMORPG and players can't form effective groups because spells aren't anywhere near the level they should be, or a classes abilities are non-functional, then it's back to the beta drawing board for that MMORPG.
I could start getting specific now, about what I feel a MMORPG should be like upon release, but I'll just finish by saying I think it also comes down to what the MMORPG promised. If a MMORPG has promised housing - right up until release - and there is no housing, then it's still in beta. If the MMORPG has promised certain aspects to PvP or 'revolutionary' combat - and there these aspects do not exist - then it's beta, people! Why? Because I know that when these get implemeted on live servers these features that should have been in the MMORPG at release were, in fact, not there and they will also require some fixing/testing.
All this has led me to my current MMORPG of choice: Final Fantasy XI. It's been the first MMORPG in a long while where all the above criteria have been met; and then some. It was so refreshing to play a stable game at the (North American) launch.
I think the answer has many facets which I won't go into while I should be working *grin*, but I just wanted to mention that the US has it's problems with online addiction too - there have been quite a number of articles in newspapers discussing how online games have caused problems for people and their dependants (Everquest is a major contributer to this).
Just quickly though, some of the reason you hear more about this in Asia is because the population is larger (ie more chance of this to happen) and especially in Korea there is large push to get everyone onto broadband (whereas less people have access to a connection able to play games in the US or elsewhere). In fact, Asia as a whole is pushing to be technologically advanced in a major way - the US isn't on the same level in terms of this. More exposure to the internet = more exposure to online games.
Although it's not documented anywhere, I feel another reason may be because not many people in the US etc are prepared to talk about online addiction. There's certainly a bit of a taboo about it being an addiction. Asia seems more ready to admit it.
See, this kid got it all wrong. If you are going to play MMOs and commit a crime, you may as well put them both together.
Nothing like killing two birds with one stone. And the kid learns a life skill or two (ie pimping) so he can use them on the street when his cash runs out.
Blackmailing someone with a digital camera doesn't have the same effect as when you do it with a film-developed picture with "GivE mE $10o00, sCUm!!" scrawled across it in red pen.
"I'm looking for a situation where I have a lot of freedom around the development of our products and the way those products come to market. I've had some of that to date, but not as much as I would like."
So, Microsoft pushes products out the door in an effort to only make profits, with no interest in the integrity and development of its products??
Since we're being anal here, they said take back a hold on the PC gaming market, not take back small budget game creation.
*Looks around* Anal? Nah, looks like you're the only one being anal. I was being ostentatious.:p
But yes, looking back at that quote, I did lose my point there with the last sentence and you picked up on my mistake. Teach me to surf Slashdot at work.
I was merely pointing out that big companies have never tried to look anywhere else but the big budget titles. The quote says they are focused towards uber-budget games; my correction is that they have always been focused there. It's nothing new.
in console gaming, where big budget game companies are focusing, as they said. Sure, those Big Money gaming companies that stay in the PC market will pay for and get more shelf space, but with less market for PC games the theory is that many Big Money companies will move out of the PC arena alltogether and thus leave only the Indie titles
The quote says nothing about big companies focusing on consoles - the focusing is in relation to PC companies. The "massive uber-budget games and MMORPGs" being focused on are on PC, not console.
In that quote I saw no mention of companies moving to console - the point is about consoles outselling PC games. Period. It is an entirely different point to the first point of being focused on MMORPGs etc. The quote is not saying that companies will move from PC to console, but that more console games will be sold than PC games.
Your point is true if it was in regard to game publishers switching platforms, however. I agree.
"I do think that with the big publishers and teams focused on producing massive uber-budget games and MMORPGs, and especially with the consoles starting to dwarf PC sales, I think there is a significant window for the smaller, independent studios to take back some of the PC market."
2 things:
1) Big publishers are defined as having big money, and therefore, naturally, they are going to make "uber-budget" games. Big publishers aren't interested in small budget - that's how indie came to exist. It's nothing new. You can't take back something that you are.
2) If PC sales are being dwarfed then that means relatively, less PC games are being sold. That means with a smaller window, the big budget games will have more shelf space, media coverage, more exposure. That means a smaller window for indie games. How they intend to take back some of the PC market from big-budgets in a smaller environment baffles me.
"I do think that with the big publishers and teams focused on producing massive uber-budget games and MMORPGs, and especially with the consoles starting to dwarf PC sales, I think there is a significant window for the smaller, independent studios to take back some of the PC market."
2 things:
1) Big publishers are defined as having big money, and therefore, naturally, they are going to make "uber-budget" games. Big publishers aren't interested in small budget - that's how indie came to exist. It's nothing new. You can't take back something that you are.
2) If PC sales are being dwarfed then that means relatively, less PC games are being sold. That means with a smaller window, the big budget games will have more shelf space, media coverage, more exposure. That means a smaller window for indie games. How they intend to take back some of the PC market from big-budgets in a smaller environment baffles me.
Nah, I think in Miami Vice they mostly beat up white guys. And everyone knows it's ok to beat up white guys, so no one will sue and everyone will be happy.
I guess the Video Games Industry is becoming more like Hollywood every day.
Whatever happened to the original idea? */slap forehead* Of course! You can't mass produce games that are only designed to saturate the market in hopes someone will buy a few copies if you have to waste all that valuable time coming up with a half-original idea.
I guess we know now how publishers have planned to cut down on production time without sacrificing Q&A - no original ideas.
Ok, I'm finished. Sorry for that - just a case of Mondayitis.
Slashdot Mirror
Damn. Beat me to the pun. Oh well, I'll have to go for sloppy seconds.
1. In Soviet Russia... 2. ??? 3. Profit!
I've noticed a few people mention putting MMORPGs (along with FPSs, RTSs etc) on the computers for people to play.
I was wondering - due to the sheer size some of these MMORPGs take up on the hard disk, you'd probably have to limit how many MMORPGs you could offer. Would try and only offer the larger MMORPGs such as Everquest, Star Wars Galaxies, Dark Age of Camelot etc? Or would you put on some other MMORPGs for variety - such as Lineage (not big in NA, but big in Asia), Anarchy Online (does well in Europe), or Shadowbane (bugs galore, but PvP is the aim). Or would you go all out and try and have as many MMORPGs as you could?
It's pretty easy to pick the FPSs and RTSs to put in a LAN Cafe, but what MMORPG would you load up?
If only I had mod points. :)
Hard to see whether this ruling has had a significant effect on SCO stock, because it has been decreasing over the past 5 days, but everyone is invited to my house once it starts it's downhill plummet.
Free beer for every whine and cry from Darl!
Your anvils will be no match for me when I use my strap-on rocket and rollerskates.
While that does work, it's mostly on the heads of designers, developers and QA to get a product out of beta.
Anarchy Online had incentives like this through beta and still shipped in a state that left many people giving it the dubious title of one of the worst launched MMORPGs.
Honestly, I think it depends on the individual players view as to when a MMORPG is no longer in beta - everyone is going to be looking for something different in a game. If the crafting system is fubar, then the MMOPRPG will still be in beta phase for the player who likes to craft; the PKer won't care at all (until he needs to buy phat lewt later in the game).
For me, I see a few items on my checklist until I feel I'm no longer paying to play a beta:
1. Billing system is operational: it stays up and working under a large load, and only charges me once for signing up.
2. I am able to log in first try: I get no time-outs or "could not find server" when I know that the server is up.
3. I can play for more than a few hours without being disconnected: and I'm being generous here. I don't mind being disconnected after 4 hours play because I decide to run into a full scale guild war with all my graphic settings set to high, but I shouldn't be disconnected when changing zones, or just running along an open area.
4. Quests/Missions etc can be finished: If I start a quest only to find that the NPC I need to talk to doesn't give me the item he/she should, then that's obviously a big red mark against the MMORPG. Q&A testers are there for a reason, dontyaknow...
5. Glaring gaps in gameplay are not fixed: I know over the lifetime of a MMORPG the gameplay (eg combat system, crafting) is going to be tweaked and adjusted to reflect what players are doing, or should not be doing, in the game - but if I'm playing in my first week of a MMORPG and players can't form effective groups because spells aren't anywhere near the level they should be, or a classes abilities are non-functional, then it's back to the beta drawing board for that MMORPG.
I could start getting specific now, about what I feel a MMORPG should be like upon release, but I'll just finish by saying I think it also comes down to what the MMORPG promised. If a MMORPG has promised housing - right up until release - and there is no housing, then it's still in beta. If the MMORPG has promised certain aspects to PvP or 'revolutionary' combat - and there these aspects do not exist - then it's beta, people! Why? Because I know that when these get implemeted on live servers these features that should have been in the MMORPG at release were, in fact, not there and they will also require some fixing/testing.
All this has led me to my current MMORPG of choice: Final Fantasy XI. It's been the first MMORPG in a long while where all the above criteria have been met; and then some. It was so refreshing to play a stable game at the (North American) launch.
Heh, I agree there. This is Slashdot - News for Nerds, isn't it?
I think the answer has many facets which I won't go into while I should be working *grin*, but I just wanted to mention that the US has it's problems with online addiction too - there have been quite a number of articles in newspapers discussing how online games have caused problems for people and their dependants (Everquest is a major contributer to this).
Just quickly though, some of the reason you hear more about this in Asia is because the population is larger (ie more chance of this to happen) and especially in Korea there is large push to get everyone onto broadband (whereas less people have access to a connection able to play games in the US or elsewhere). In fact, Asia as a whole is pushing to be technologically advanced in a major way - the US isn't on the same level in terms of this. More exposure to the internet = more exposure to online games.
Although it's not documented anywhere, I feel another reason may be because not many people in the US etc are prepared to talk about online addiction. There's certainly a bit of a taboo about it being an addiction. Asia seems more ready to admit it.
See, this kid got it all wrong. If you are going to play MMOs and commit a crime, you may as well put them both together.
Nothing like killing two birds with one stone. And the kid learns a life skill or two (ie pimping) so he can use them on the street when his cash runs out.
Would this have been news if it were www.pamelaanderson.com that got overruled?
You realise you're talking to bunch of nerds who don't get to see breasts all that often, don't you?
As the article said, SCO is waiting for IBM to supply the evidence. They like to do things back-to-front and inside-out at SCO.
I'm sure Darl and company also kick up a stink at the hardware store when the checkout boys won't assemble Darl's DIY storage rack.
why are you posting in non english on an english site in response to an english article?
Or...why has it been marked as, thus far, +3 Funny?
Blackmailing someone with a digital camera doesn't have the same effect as when you do it with a film-developed picture with "GivE mE $10o00, sCUm!!" scrawled across it in red pen.
"I'm looking for a situation where I have a lot of freedom around the development of our products and the way those products come to market. I've had some of that to date, but not as much as I would like." So, Microsoft pushes products out the door in an effort to only make profits, with no interest in the integrity and development of its products??
Wow, who'd have thought it?
Awesome analysis. I give a score of 12/10.
Ok, that's it. Surfing Slashdot at work does not equal good HTML skills.
Since we're being anal here, they said take back a hold on the PC gaming market, not take back small budget game creation. *Looks around* Anal? Nah, looks like you're the only one being anal. I was being ostentatious. :p
But yes, looking back at that quote, I did lose my point there with the last sentence and you picked up on my mistake. Teach me to surf Slashdot at work.
I was merely pointing out that big companies have never tried to look anywhere else but the big budget titles. The quote says they are focused towards uber-budget games; my correction is that they have always been focused there. It's nothing new. in console gaming, where big budget game companies are focusing, as they said. Sure, those Big Money gaming companies that stay in the PC market will pay for and get more shelf space, but with less market for PC games the theory is that many Big Money companies will move out of the PC arena alltogether and thus leave only the Indie titles The quote says nothing about big companies focusing on consoles - the focusing is in relation to PC companies. The "massive uber-budget games and MMORPGs" being focused on are on PC, not console.
In that quote I saw no mention of companies moving to console - the point is about consoles outselling PC games. Period. It is an entirely different point to the first point of being focused on MMORPGs etc. The quote is not saying that companies will move from PC to console, but that more console games will be sold than PC games.
Your point is true if it was in regard to game publishers switching platforms, however. I agree.
Mistakingly? I need a break...
Oh yes? Then please explain how ISP fees have decreased as more people have been obtaining access to the Internet.
I hope you aren't looking at some example (eg newspaper prices going up as they become more popular) and mistankingly factoring in inflation.
More people = lower prices in marketplace.
Awww, heck. HTML would be useful. Here you go:
"I do think that with the big publishers and teams focused on producing massive uber-budget games and MMORPGs, and especially with the consoles starting to dwarf PC sales, I think there is a significant window for the smaller, independent studios to take back some of the PC market."
2 things:
1) Big publishers are defined as having big money, and therefore, naturally, they are going to make "uber-budget" games. Big publishers aren't interested in small budget - that's how indie came to exist. It's nothing new. You can't take back something that you are.
2) If PC sales are being dwarfed then that means relatively, less PC games are being sold. That means with a smaller window, the big budget games will have more shelf space, media coverage, more exposure. That means a smaller window for indie games. How they intend to take back some of the PC market from big-budgets in a smaller environment baffles me.
"I do think that with the big publishers and teams focused on producing massive uber-budget games and MMORPGs, and especially with the consoles starting to dwarf PC sales, I think there is a significant window for the smaller, independent studios to take back some of the PC market." 2 things: 1) Big publishers are defined as having big money, and therefore, naturally, they are going to make "uber-budget" games. Big publishers aren't interested in small budget - that's how indie came to exist. It's nothing new. You can't take back something that you are. 2) If PC sales are being dwarfed then that means relatively, less PC games are being sold. That means with a smaller window, the big budget games will have more shelf space, media coverage, more exposure. That means a smaller window for indie games. How they intend to take back some of the PC market from big-budgets in a smaller environment baffles me.
I'm sure Microsoft as intellectual property rights on monopolies.
We've had the warm-up match, now I want tag team action!
Microsoft & SCO VS Apple & Linux
Let's get ready to ruuuuuuummmmbble!!!
Nah, I think in Miami Vice they mostly beat up white guys. And everyone knows it's ok to beat up white guys, so no one will sue and everyone will be happy.
I guess the Video Games Industry is becoming more like Hollywood every day.
Whatever happened to the original idea? */slap forehead* Of course! You can't mass produce games that are only designed to saturate the market in hopes someone will buy a few copies if you have to waste all that valuable time coming up with a half-original idea.
I guess we know now how publishers have planned to cut down on production time without sacrificing Q&A - no original ideas.
Ok, I'm finished. Sorry for that - just a case of Mondayitis.