SOE Deal: Exclusive Interview with SOE and Flying Lab CEO

SOE and Flying Lab Software shocked some people when they announced the SOE's Platform Publishing would bring Pirates of the Burning Sea to market. We wanted to find out what the deal meant, so we go FLS CEO Russell Williams and SOE VP of Business Development David Christensen on the phone to find out the details.

Read on for our exclusive interview:

Yesterday, Flying Lab Software and SOE announced that the MMO giants will publish Pirates of the Burning Sea this fall under their Platform Publishing brand. Platform is the independent wing of Sony Online Entertainment and offers the marketing, organizational and business expertise of SOE to independently financed developers who want to bring their games to market. Today, we interviewed SOE VP of Business Development and International Operations David D. Christensen and Flying Lab Software CEO Russell Williams about the deal and what it means for SOE, FLS and fans of the game.

"Really it all comes down to the platform publishing system that they have," Williams told us.

Throughout the interview, Williams reiterated his enthusiasm for the package SOE offers through Platform Publishing. Williams comes from the single-player industry where traditional publishing deals are nearly universally one-sided and spoke of how most other companies wanted to have the control that is typical of those deals without the financial investment or risk. Flying Lab Software does not need Sony's money to finish the game, they need their marketing and sales network. According to Williams, this deal provides them with access to that and lets FLS keep its focus on the game.

Further to their marketing and sales network, FLS is gaining acces to the Station Pass. SOE revealed for the first time that Pirates of the Burning Sea - unlike their Platform brothers Gods and Heroes - will join the company's All Access Station Pass when it launches this fall. The pass provides subscribers with access to the full SOE library of titles for one monthly fee.

"We wanted to have a good partner to do things that are not our core competency," Williams added. Specifically, he mentioned that instead of hiring people to work on localization, billing, marketing and other areas that are necessary for a successful project, he's able to funnel those resources into QA and the game itself. SOE handles the other parts for them.

"This is their game, they're going to be the ones at the end of the day who really benefit from this game doing very well," SOE's Christensen added. The majority of the financial investment and risk belongs to Flying Lab Software. That is not to say that SOE doesn't benefit from the game's success, but with the risk goes the potential for reward. Too often companies make their publisher rich just before being swallowed whole. The deal with SOE, Williams related, ensures Flying Lab Software can remain an independent company in good position if the game does well.

Further to this deal, both Williams and Christensen confirmed that Flying Lab Software retains complete creative control over their product. That means if for some reason FLS wants to release a Martian invasion expansion pack, SOE can advise them it might be a bad idea, but will not interfere.

The retention of creative control means that the final product will not look all that much different from what people expect. There will likely be more content, simply because the company can now invest more heavily in content creation, and fans overseas can expect better and more timely localization, but the game itself was selected on its merits, not as a project they hope to shoehorn into something it is not.

"We have a group that does evaluations of products," Christensen told us as he explained SOE's process, "but going back to January of this year, Russell was able to provide us with a build and we were able to get 10 guys from our QA group who are trained in evaluating titles to play this game."

That group came back with one of the strongest product reviews they'd ever given, according to Christensen and made SOE's decision much easier.

Ironically, FLS announced this deal at almost exactly the time it had said it would launch. At PAX 2006, June 2007 was unveiled as the launch date. Was this deal the reason the window had been missed?

"What held us back is two things," Williams said. The first was in fact the time it took to hammer out a distribution agreement, while the second was delays in development. Williams told us they had just recently completed a build they feel fully represents the game. Soon, that build will be available to testers, but they want to give it time and not launch a product that needs several patches before it's playable. As such, they'll only say their release date is "this fall."

"We've really refocused efforts on never shipping a project until its ready," Christensen said of SOE. Recent history taught them that lesson with Vanguard, and both sides professed a desire to do it right and not suffer that same fate.

Christensen went on to explain that SOE has made it a priority that they be completely comfortable with when games they publish launch. In the past, that had not always been the case, as developers had more control, he told us. With Pirates of the Burning Sea, both the developer and publisher must agree for the game to go out the door.

"Their position has always been to do whatever it takes to launch this game and do it right," Williams added. He added that they've never pushed them towards a date that is convenient for marketing or any reason other than the long term viability of the project.

A final reason for delay is both companies' desire to launch the game simultaneously in North American and Europe. Christensen mentioned that one mistake publishers make is to treat Europe like second class citizens and release localized versions several months later. History has shown that to be a less than successful approach.

SOE has taken on rapid localization of the game into French, German and potentially other European languages so that the game is ready in each territory this fall.

Williams added that Russian and Asian publishing rights remain unchanged. Akella continues with plans to publish the game in Russia and Williams said FLS is independently moving toward agreements to release the game across Asia.

Thanks to a number of high profile situations, SOE has developed a vocal contingent of detractors in the MMO community. The way the company handled Star Wars Galaxies and the recent launch of Vanguard clearly make some people very worried when they hear a game like Pirates of the Burning Sea is with SOE.

"We're honest enough with ourselves to say there are things we can to improve our current games," added the SOE public relations person who organized the call, in reference to recent improvements in Star Wars Galaxies and EverQuest II.

How would these issues influence the Pirates of the Burning Sea community though?

"I think when you address the issue head on, it's easier for people to accept," Williams told us. He mentioned how the company has long been up front with its community and in this case, things were no different. A long letter from Williams on Monday explained the deal, the division of responsibilities and tried to answer whatever questions people might have. Then, after the press release circulated yesterday, the company hosted a developer chat in IRC so that fans could directly have their voices heard.

Some may never look at the game again simply because of the association, but ultimately, Williams believes that the good the deal does far outweighs the historical negatives of SOE. He also reiterated his excitement of the freedom Platform Publishing provides independent game developers. Flat out, he told us that it would encourage growth in a genre that sees too many "retreads."

Permalink

"Some may never look at the game again simply because of the association ..."

Regrettably, I'm one of 35-40 people I've communicated with in the last two days who had PoTBS on their "to buy" list and crossed it off when this news came out. Based on our SWG experience, we just don't want to send any money to SOE and reward them for their business practices. A regrettable decision by Rusty and the folks at FLS. I wish them the best of luck, but as the old saying goes ..... they're gonna need it.

I played SWG pre CU and hated the changes and I played Vanguard and I was dissapointed.

I'm still gonna play POTBS and I have to say I think it is good for the game if the community has as few haters as possible.

That said one can understand the SOE boycott. Still, I'll be sailing the Carribean in months to come!

Oh and I must stress that the FLS developers are great people. If you don't know much about POTBS you should find out more at the burningsea website!

The only people who wouldn't give this deal a chance are blind. Plain and simple, if you look at the deal it is for the best of the game, not the worse.

Sure, SOE has done some terrible things to SWG with the backing of Lucas Arts. But the problem here is, SOE isn't in control of this game, and never will be. Rusty and the others would rather pull the game off the shelf than release creative control. They looked long and hard for the right deal, and SOE gave them the only deal they could live with ((The only ones who gave them the contract they needed/wanted, with all of the verbal agreements in written form.

If you won't play because SOE gets a little bit of your money for a game that is going to make MMOs something new and exciting, then it's your loss.

Hoopczar:
"Some may never look at the game again simply because of the association ..."

A regrettable decision by Rusty and the folks at FLS.

No.. a regrettable decision by you. You are the one who has decided not to play.

Xanamiar:

Sure, SOE has done some terrible things to SWG with the backing of Lucas Arts ...

If you won't play because SOE gets a little bit of your money for a game that is going to make MMOs something new and exciting, then it's your loss.

Look at what you're saying. "Yes, SOE ripped people off, but that shouldn't stop you from giving them money."

I don't think you really feel that way. What you're saying is that they didn't behave badly ENOUGH for you, personally to take your business elsewhere. But there IS a level of behavior bad enough that you would no longer patronize them, no matter what shiny new thing they were selling.

The only real difference is that they reached my threshhold of "sorry, can't do business with you" and they haven't reached yours. And I believe reasonable minds can (and will) differ about where this level is. It's different for all of us. Like I said, I know 35-40 people personally who reached that point yesterday. FL is rolling the dice that (a) the publishing potential of SOE overcomes the bad PR and (b) everything goes just as hunky dory as they're hoping today without complications and the product succeeds.

My personal guess, and that's all it is, is that the SOE baggage is heavier than they believe, and it will have a more negative effect than they project. But the success of PoTBS .... completely dependent on the quality of the launch, SOE will be a very minor factor in that. Being associated with SOE shrinks their margin for error, though ... they've put a lot of people who are still willing to buy the game at somewhere around DEFCON 3 -- the first indication of SOE creative input and they're gone.

The extreme-boycotting-SOE haters are definitely a significant percentage of the gaming population (my guess would be about 8% who are pissed off enough that they don't care what you tell them they won't buy a station pass ever). 8% of 6,000,000 is 480,000. That said, FLS stands to gain a lot more sales and subscriptions (from global market reach) then it will lose because of an SOE boycott. It was a difficult decision and they knew it would send shockwaves through the community, but the devs at FLS are smarter than SOE Boycotters give them credit. PotBS stands a better chance of success with SOE doing the boxing, selling, and subscriptions than the alternative of not having SOE.
I respect the passion and conviction of boycotters, I have boycotted companies as well.

I too do not like SOE, but nonetheless, I will definately play PotBS regardless of who publishes it. The devs are in complete control. I have faith in FLS as a smaller developer and approve of the decision to go with SOE. The 'first indication of SOE creative input' Hoop is worried about cannot happen due to the terms of the contract. FLS knows what can happen, they in fact WENT to SOE to protect themselves from publishers that would want creative control. SOE was the only reasonable one that would agree to the terms as stated in the devlog on PotBS main site.

Boycotting SOE when they have creative control teaches them to not take creative control.

Buying SOE published products when they DO NOT have creative control teaches them to not take creative control.

Boycotting SOE when they do not have creative control is just for spite. Do you want them to change and become better, or just suffer regardless? I am more forgiving I guess...

And SOE did have infantry online, which was incredibly awesome when it was free and I had no money... :)

Hoopczar:
Look at what you're saying. "Yes, SOE ripped people off, but that shouldn't stop you from giving them money."

I think there's two sides to this coin, though. It's not so much that SOE has ripped people off -- every publisher has to some extent -- but that there are a lot of people who feel that SOE has deeply violated their trust. Galaxies, Everquest, Vanguard -- the people who invested time, energy, money, and most importantly emotion into those games and their communities all see these as glaring examples of how Sony's arrogance makes them an entity not to be trusted. They've HURT people, and I don't blame those people for shying away from them.

But there are also people who either were not deeply as hurt, or who can look past it and let themselves have a little hope. The situation is much different here than it was with SWG, since SOE isn't the developer here. FLS has managed to earn the trust of their community, and has built up a lot of capital with it. They're now spending that capital, and many people, though wary, are still hopeful. They've been assured that the game will turn a profit even if they get only a small fraction of the subscriptions that they expect, and that they're not in anything like the situation Sigil was with Vanguard.

It has very little to do with SOE's behaviour, and everything to do with FLS's. People have put their trust in Rusty Williams and Co, and it's they who now have to deliver.

Of course, having SOE has their publisher not only gives them much wider coverage, and a lot more publicity, but it also takes some of finger pointing off of them if they fail. If PotBS doesn't live up to the hype, everyone's going to blame Sony for it. Rusty has already said it'll be 100% their fault, but it's already very clear that there's a pretty big chunk of the market that can't and won't see past SOE. FLS is now damned if they do, saved if they don't.

Nimiety:

Hoopczar:
Look at what you're saying. "Yes, SOE ripped people off, but that shouldn't stop you from giving them money."

I think there's two sides to this coin, though. It's not so much that SOE has ripped people off -- every publisher has to some extent

I don't know about every publisher, that would be pretty sad ... all I know is from personal experience with SOE at Galaxies. They looked their customers in the eye and lied to them for a buck ... on multiple occasions. They sold them an expansion they knew would be worthless the next week, then belatedly offered refunds when they realized what kind of statutory fraud exposure they were facing in California. That's called bait & switch, and if every publisher engages in that kind of carnie chicanery, lord help us. If every publisher has SOE's ethical standards (or lack thereof), I'd just as soon take a walk as give them a dime.

It's not at all about creative control for me, it's simply that if Rusty thinks these are guys that do his kind of business, I have to take a second look at what kind of business that's going to be. Not the kind I want to financially reward.

But sincerely, I hope it works out for those of you who roll the dice along with Rusty, because I think he went from betting the line to trying for a hard six.

In the MMO publishing industry it's common practise that the publisher gets a say in decisionmaking for the future of that MMO. Contracts with these companies usually involves statements where the publisher gets a say in what direction they take the game, what goes in and what not. SOE was their only way for FLS to keep 100% in charge of their own game, without getting outside influence.

It is understandable that a number of people dislike SOE with a vengeance (due to things they did in SWG and in situations where they feel they were ripped off) or are highly suspicious about SOE's goals when they hear what happened with Vanguard. These are not in the slightest compareable situations however. SWG was a game where the decisionmaking was in SOE's hands, and Sigil went bankrupt, which lead to that they sold their game and company to try and save what was left of Vanguard. FLS does not have money problems. Unless you have such a big gripe over SOE that you really don't want to give them a CENT anymore (note, that they do get a little of money, but the MAJORITY of your monthly fee will go to the good people of FLS!) I think it's well worth getting into this game. And, in this way SOE can maybe do something GOOD for you again... It won't make old hurt go away, but sometimes you just need to stop looking at the past and live on. In other words, if you feel like that: Don't let SOE cause your day to be bad because you were looking for this great game. Go enjoy the game, I have trust in that FLS will not disappoint you.

"Unless you have such a big gripe over SOE that you really don't want to give them a CENT ..."

Bingo. I mean, it's inaccurate to describe this as a 'gripe', it's simple consumerism. You don't go back to patronize businesses that dealt with you in a shady manner, whether it's fixing your transmission, unplugging your toilet or installing a new hard drive. If you come away from dealing with a company feeling like you got slimed, it really doesn't matter whether it's a cent or a grand, you just don't feel inclined to do business with them.

I know there's some perception that gaming is somehow different, like it's "not a business." I assure you, that is ALL it is to SOE. If you treat it any differently, they are Lucy putting down the football, and you are Charlie Brown. Watch your footing.

hmmm there are a lot of new people here... but hey! welcome!

anyway, i was a little worried when i first read this. i know the flying lab people have worked on this game heart and soul for a long time. i really hope they can in fact keep creative control over their game. if so, i'm not that worried. in that case, as long as sony does right by them marketing-wise, it could be a good thing to have the soe machine behind this game.

yarrr!

For the people who say they regret FLS's decision on choosing SOE's Platform Publishing, I would like to point out one thing.

But even before that, I want to express that I understand why it is that you (or at least some of you) claim you no longer will do business with PotBS. Its not because you are afraid SOE is going to take control of the game, its simply that you refuse to do business with SOE ever again. Even though I sometimes see this as being a little narrow-minded, I do understand that under certain situations this can happen.

I would also like to point out the reason why most of you refuse to do business with SOE. Because you feel cheated by them. They were given control in games, and you feel they took advantage of you.

Now, that being said, I will get back to my point. FLS has two options:

Option A: Doing business with SOE. With this, they retain complete control of the game development after launch. This means PotBS will continue as all of you have always wanted it to continue. FLS will make the game that you wanted them to make, and the Publisher (SOE) wont get in the way.

Option B: Doing business with any other publisher. This means you are happy doing business with FLS, because none of your money is going to SOE. You are happy. But this may also mean that FLS no longer has complete control of their game. They may have to sacrafice a few minor things when taking this option. This opens up the possibility that further down the line the game may be compromised because FLS couldn't continue making the game exactly how they wanted. Who knows, maybe it would turn out to be SWG all over again.

Now ask yourself, in this situation, which would you rather go with? Do you want to play the game that is made the way FLS wants it, but SOE earns a few bucks in the process, or do you want to go with the other publisher and ultimitely get screwed over in the end?

I would be guessing you would rather play a game that you enjoyed, but you refuse to play if SOE is anywhere near the PotBS name. This means your only two options are avoiding PotBS regardless of who the publisher is, or being taken advantage of a few months after the release of the game.

Granted, we don't know what exactly would happen while taking option B, but the point is with option A we know we are getting a game we can feel safe with. It may just be me, but if I was one of the people who refused to play a game that SOE is involved with because they took advantage of me, I would still rather SOE be the publisher than a company that could once again take advantage of me.

IrNinjaBob:
For the people who say they regret FLS's decision on choosing SOE's Platform Publishing, I would like to point out one thing.

But even before that, I want to express that I understand why it is that you (or at least some of you) claim you no longer will do business with PotBS. Its not because you are afraid SOE is going to take control of the game, its simply that you refuse to do business with SOE ever again. Even though I sometimes see this as being a little narrow-minded, I do understand that under certain situations this can happen.

So, if you found out your mechanic sold you car parts that were defective and about to be recalled the following week (which he knew), and after a little investigation you found out he had a pattern of that kind of business behavior, it would be 'narrow-minded' to take your business elsewhere and not go back to that shop?

I really don't get that.

Hoopczar:

So, if you found out your mechanic sold you car parts that were defective and about to be recalled the following week (which he knew), and after a little investigation you found out he had a pattern of that kind of business behavior, it would be 'narrow-minded' to take your business elsewhere and not go back to that shop?

I really don't get that.

well well....

i can see you can compare everything with games... but if you think it over this is the platform section of SOE not the other part of SOE.

if i should try to get "down" on your level it would be the same as if you said you hated some big supermarket and you hate it, so then you go over the the other supermarket wich is infact just a diffrent appartment of the other and you love it cause it is so diffrent. well wouldnt you not still like to shop in the appartment you like since it is the best and in this case SOE's platform appartment would be the better half of SOE.

it is time that people stop being so stubborn and try seeing things from alittle more possetive side of view who cares about SOE's other crappy appartments while we only need to use the good appartment i can only say that if they had choosen another company it might have been PotBS nightmare.

also to remember FLS got friends in SOE and in Sigil and they didn't like the sigil affair. but still they think this will go good because they only use the better half of SOE.

they only thing you ever will get from hate and negativity is more hate and negativity and probobly also some invy over that you can't play the game because you hate the middle dealer's this is a kinda lame excuse for hate....

hope it will broughten some of you negativ people's minds

argondo:
[quote=Hoopczar]
they only thing you ever will get from hate and negativity is more hate and negativity and probobly also some invy over that you can't play the game because you hate the middle dealer's this is a kinda lame excuse for hate....

hope it will broughten some of you negativ people's minds

Using terms like 'hate' and 'negativity' confuses the issue ... this isn't about emotionalism, it's about consumer calculation.

If the butcher shop at the supermarket kept selling me bad meat and deliberately giving me a different cut than I'd ordered, I'd stop going there. I wouldn't even go to their bakery ... but not because of 'hate', that's not what it's about. It's about choice. If you find out that a business perpetuates shady business practices to your detriment as a consumer, why do business with them? Plenty of other people in the world to give your money to.

Using labels like 'hate' is just a cheap way of minimizing the calculation someone else has made by ascribing it to emotion instead of intellect, making the choice sound 'irrational.'

This choice is all about rational analysis. Vendor has a pattern of bad behavior and mistreating customers ... shop with other vendors. Games, and their publishers, don't get a free pass on basic consumer decisionmaking.

Hoopczar:

IrNinjaBob:
For the people who say they regret FLS's decision on choosing SOE's Platform Publishing, I would like to point out one thing.

But even before that, I want to express that I understand why it is that you (or at least some of you) claim you no longer will do business with PotBS. Its not because you are afraid SOE is going to take control of the game, its simply that you refuse to do business with SOE ever again. Even though I sometimes see this as being a little narrow-minded, I do understand that under certain situations this can happen.

So, if you found out your mechanic sold you car parts that were defective and about to be recalled the following week (which he knew), and after a little investigation you found out he had a pattern of that kind of business behavior, it would be 'narrow-minded' to take your business elsewhere and not go back to that shop?

I really don't get that.

No. It wouldn't at all. That would make perfect sense. but that example has NOTHING to do with the situation at hand.

Your example explains a situation where you were cheated by one company when you have the oppotunity to go next door and get better service of the same field for the same price. When put in this situation, only a moron would go back to where they were taken advantage of.

Thats completely different in this situation, because its not like you could just take your money elsewhere if you want to play PotBS. You have only one option, not a couple hundred. We aren't just talking about a mechanic that you can easily replace. SOE has been announced Publisher of a game that you have wanted to play. You can't just say "I don't like SOE so I will choose another publisher for the game." If you could, then we wouldn't have any problems in the first place.

The reason I sometimes see this as narrow-minded decision is because you are giving up something that you really wanted to get back at the company, even though this time around their powers have been limited so they wont be able to hurt you again. On the other hand, I also fully understand why you would not want to give any more money to SOE.

So the example of choosing different mechanics when one screws you over really cant be compared to this. This is a completely different situation where you can not just take your business elsewhere. And even more importantly, SOE doesn't have the option to "sell you faulty parts" any longer. So I want to get back to my original point in my previous post. In the current situation (when being faced with either option A or option B) what would you think is the right decision? Keep in mind PotBS was obviously a game you were interested in. Now, do you walk the safe path with SOE, or do you go with a publisher that can eventually hurt you just as SOE has done in the past? Of course, you could say neither. But that would mean no matter what FLS's decision on publisher was, you would have never ended up playing the game.

Hoopczar:

argondo:
[quote=Hoopczar]
they only thing you ever will get from hate and negativity is more hate and negativity and probobly also some invy over that you can't play the game because you hate the middle dealer's this is a kinda lame excuse for hate....

hope it will broughten some of you negativ people's minds

Using terms like 'hate' and 'negativity' confuses the issue ... this isn't about emotionalism, it's about consumer calculation.

If the butcher shop at the supermarket kept selling me bad meat and deliberately giving me a different cut than I'd ordered, I'd stop going there. I wouldn't even go to their bakery ... but not because of 'hate', that's not what it's about. It's about choice. If you find out that a business perpetuates shady business practices to your detriment as a consumer, why do business with them? Plenty of other people in the world to give your money to.

Using labels like 'hate' is just a cheap way of minimizing the calculation someone else has made by ascribing it to emotion instead of intellect, making the choice sound 'irrational.'

This choice is all about rational analysis. Vendor has a pattern of bad behavior and mistreating customers ... shop with other vendors. Games, and their publishers, don't get a free pass on basic consumer decisionmaking.

Again I would like to point out that the example you gave has nothing to do with our current situation. The main reason comes from when you said this: "Plenty of other people in the world to give your money to."

In your example, it is true. You want meat, and you do have plenty of other places to go to purchase it.

In the situation where FLS has chosen SOE to publish their game, it is false. You want to play PotBS, and you only have one company you can get that from.

Its common logic, but it doesn't really answer all of our problems.

Also, I would like to say more on this: "this isn't about emotionalism, it's about consumer calculation."

Excuse me, but that is BS. This is 100% based on emotion and 0% on consumer calculation. You are correct that in your mechanic and butcher examples, those decisions wouldn't have been based on emotion but would have been consumer calculation. But again, that situation and the one you are in are completely different. What you mean by "consumer calculation" is having the knowledge of not going back to a mechanic because he will most likely give you faulty parts again, or not going to the same butcher because last time he gave you bad meat. But this time around, SOE doesn't have the option to give you bad parts or foul meat, those will be given to you by FLS. The reason you are going to not be buying the game is because you don't want to give money to a company that has hurt you in the past. That, my friend, is called emotion.

One more comment: "This choice is all about rational analysis. Vendor has a pattern of bad behavior and mistreating customers ... shop with other vendors. Games, and their publishers, don't get a free pass on basic consumer decisionmaking."

Again, how does this apply to our situation? There aren't other vendors we can shop with. There is only one. That is what changes basic consumer decisionmaking into not buying a game that you really want to play out of spite.

I know this issue is getting tired, but I feel the bad analogies must stop.

None of them really work because SOE is not creating a product, they are only selling it.

When you buy a book, do you really care who published it? So what if a publisher has forced other authors to change the series and has made sucky books? A new book series is coming out by a great new author, that the publisher cannot touch creatively, and you won't buy it simply because the pages are being printed and shipped by a company you don't like? That is not consumerism, that is emotion.

Don't get me wrong, it is ok to have blind hateful emotion, it has been in human history forever, but do not try to mask it as a calculated procedure. It is spite and nothing more.

Well I am pretty much reiterating ninjabob so I will stop.

Once again, the perfect world uses pavlonian consumerism. Punish SOE when they do something bad (i.e. quit SWG), reward them when they do something good (i.e. buy PotBS as SOE does not have creative control). Won't this help them do better?

Oh and don't think that a multi million dollar corporation is "arrogant". You can bet some people got fired for the stuff that went down in the past. They know the reputation they have, it isn't hard to locate SOE hate on the internet, and it looks to me that they are trying to remedy this.

I will give them a chance. If SOE screws up PotBS, then I will quit. If it doesn't, then they are being good publishers.

IrNinjaBob:
Also, I would like to say more on this: "this isn't about emotionalism, it's about consumer calculation."

Excuse me, but that is BS. This is 100% based on emotion and 0% on consumer calculation. You are correct that in your mechanic and butcher examples, those decisions wouldn't have been based on emotion but would have been consumer calculation. But again, that situation and the one you are in are completely different. What you mean by "consumer calculation" is having the knowledge of not going back to a mechanic because he will most likely give you faulty parts again, or not going to the same butcher because last time he gave you bad meat. But this time around, SOE doesn't have the option to give you bad parts or foul meat, those will be given to you by FLS. The reason you are going to not be buying the game is because you don't want to give money to a company that has hurt you in the past.

"Hurt"? I've had a girlfriend hurt me, Smedley and SOE have never been in a position to .... and let's just try to let that mental image die a quick death.

It's as simple as not wanting to financially reward a company after I *know* what kind of company they are, how they treat customers when given a chance. You say I can take it on faith that they won't be given an opportunity to do it here .... okay, those are the dice you're rolling, and I do sincerely wish you good luck. But I already know from personal experience that these are not guys I would enter into a deal with ... any kind of deal. And they're not guys I want to help pay the salary of. That they are dealing with me only as a proxy for FL doesn't really change that.

If SOE had fired some of the execs who operated with such questionable methods in the past, I could rationalize to myself that they'd "learned a lesson" and might genuinely change. But they didn't, so giving them money now would just be saying "Sure you slimed me in the past, but that's really okay with me, have some of my money."

It's not, so they can't. I don't see that as an emotional decision, but it is a value-based decision, sure. Once you know someone is a shady character, choosing to deal with them is endorsing their shadiness, to my way of thinking. Not to yours, and I get that. Best of luck with them.

Hoopczar:

IrNinjaBob:
Also, I would like to say more on this: "this isn't about emotionalism, it's about consumer calculation."

Excuse me, but that is BS. This is 100% based on emotion and 0% on consumer calculation. You are correct that in your mechanic and butcher examples, those decisions wouldn't have been based on emotion but would have been consumer calculation. But again, that situation and the one you are in are completely different. What you mean by "consumer calculation" is having the knowledge of not going back to a mechanic because he will most likely give you faulty parts again, or not going to the same butcher because last time he gave you bad meat. But this time around, SOE doesn't have the option to give you bad parts or foul meat, those will be given to you by FLS. The reason you are going to not be buying the game is because you don't want to give money to a company that has hurt you in the past.

"Hurt"? I've had a girlfriend hurt me, Smedley and SOE have never been in a position to .... and let's just try to let that mental image die a quick death.

It's as simple as not wanting to financially reward a company after I *know* what kind of company they are, how they treat customers when given a chance. You say I can take it on faith that they won't be given an opportunity to do it here .... okay, those are the dice you're rolling, and I do sincerely wish you good luck. But I already know from personal experience that these are not guys I would enter into a deal with ... any kind of deal. And they're not guys I want to help pay the salary of. That they are dealing with me only as a proxy for FL doesn't really change that.

If SOE had fired some of the execs who operated with such questionable methods in the past, I could rationalize to myself that they'd "learned a lesson" and might genuinely change. But they didn't, so giving them money now would just be saying "Sure you slimed me in the past, but that's really okay with me, have some of my money."

It's not, so they can't. I don't see that as an emotional decision, but it is a value-based decision, sure. Once you know someone is a shady character, choosing to deal with them is endorsing their shadiness, to my way of thinking. Not to yours, and I get that. Best of luck with them.

Actually they did do some replacing... they have made promises to not let the NGE fiasco happen again.

http://www.escapistmagazine.com/issue/101/14

They are trying to bring the old SWG back from what I hear. Doesn't that mean they are trying to right the wrongs they have done?

"In May, 2007, SOE acquired the assets of Sigil Games Online, including Vanguard: Saga of Heroes - yet another launch catastrophe. "We do not plan on making any major changes to Vanguard," Smedley wrote in a forum post. "We aren't mandating any big changes to the game. We've learned a thing or two with our experiences with the NGE and don't plan on repeating mistakes from the past."

A very good read relevent to your interests!

Rammaukinn:

Actually they did do some replacing... they have made promises to not let the NGE fiasco happen again.

http://www.escapistmagazine.com/issue/101/14

They are trying to bring the old SWG back from what I hear. Doesn't that mean they are trying to right the wrongs they have done?

"In May, 2007, SOE acquired the assets of Sigil Games Online, including Vanguard: Saga of Heroes - yet another launch catastrophe. "We do not plan on making any major changes to Vanguard," Smedley wrote in a forum post. "We aren't mandating any big changes to the game. We've learned a thing or two with our experiences with the NGE and don't plan on repeating mistakes from the past."

A very good read relevent to your interests!

Filling vacancies left by the original devs and then the second gen of devs that presided over the NGE disaster isn't firing the guy who said yes to all the shady behavior, and that's Smedley. If he's there, my money isn't.

I don't know where you heard they're 'bringing back the old game' but no, they're not. Adding some slapped-together specialties on top of the horrible engine and graphics the NGE runs on (sort of) is not an attempt to bring back the complexity of the original game, and they'll never do that because it would take an investment of money and expertise they're not willing to fund. They don't even believe in that type of game. They sold customers a BMW, snuck into their garage one night and replaced it with a VW with BMW logos pasted to it, and said "See, just the same!" It doesn't matter how many logos they put on it no, no, it's not the same thing. They don't want to hire enough people with enough skills to provide that.

But hey, they'll tell you they want to all day long if it'll keep you paying a subscription fee for another month. It's called Marketing, not changed behavior.

So my question to SoE haters, do you also boycott all LucasArts products and colaberations? and if you don't play any SOE games, how do you know it still sucks? No emotions needed, just simple strait answers please.

I myself have played SOE games in the past, seen the problems they created and left. I have been waiting for PotBS to release and will reactivate my Station pass once again. I see these games as entertainment, not my life-long quest of enlightenment. I don't throw money away, but i'm willing to devote $30 to find out how good this can be. (for most thats just a monthly internet charge or a nice dinner for 2)