Last edited by mirodin; 2012-02-07 at 09:21 AM.
It's coming in 1.2!!!
As for Rift, yeah the 12hr queue times and massive account security holes were amazing ill take less features and be able to trust that i dont need to start logging in before work ....We are still very close post launch there server stability and quick patching are very good signs for the future. My patience is out weighed by my ability to see the broader side of things and whats important for the game now and what can be added soon. Doesn't mean 6 months from now they still dont have some things(improved search function in the ah, they can keep the sorting i like it personally, what they decide to add is up to them just add useful things) that ill be sitting idle still waiting...
$50,000,000 at minimum (real costs est. around close to $60,000,000 actually). 10 times as much would be around 500m.
It also took around 5 years to make.
Considering both MMOs are using different architectural layouts they are not comparable at base. Trion's investment is VC-based (they started off with around $350m which they spread over several games) so they naturally took alot of conservative routes, that probably meant on spending side they couldn't be as generous. Usually - and I am going by experience in a similarly grown company - that means that people have to work with less for more under less-than-ideal circumstances for that one goal of success with alot of shared resources as well. A company like EA would just recoup the losses elsewhere and have no problem with lay-offs in order to survive whereas a company like Trion only has this chance or face closure.
Either way the entire nature of your question is why they accomplished more with less, the real answer lies within the fact that most internal things will always remain undisclosed that includes the decision processes, management sessions, how many times they had to start over things, how many people they had to hire, lay off, what challenges they had to face etc. Also some of the things which Bioware had to overcome were no issue for Trion, like synchronized event scripting, whereas Bioware didn't have to deal with issues unique for Trion such as dynamic world events affecting players. In short: it's not comparable on 1:1 basis, chances are that if roles were reversed none of both may come out better. Bioware made a controversial decision on engine part, Trion made a controversial decision on security part, I don't know - I will take the first over the latter any day.
Besides RIFT didn't have alot of things at launch either (no addons, no LFG tool, no guild banks etc.), alot of features were inserted post-production, I have been playing it as well so I pretty much know how it went and I don't tend to hold it against them. Because companies which listen to their playerbase usually try to cater to the demands, alot demands perceived as standard features are/were not always seen the same way by its developers. It's a matter of view really, you can also find these views being reflected by parts of the playerbase. Case in point: On-going fierce debates about LFG tool, addons/macros and respecs in SW:TOR.
Last edited by Ravenblade; 2012-02-07 at 10:37 AM. Reason: spelling
WoW: Crowcloak (Druid) @ Sylvanas EU (retired)
GW2: Siqqa (Engineer) + Basil Charroktonos (Warrior) @ Piken Square EU (retired)
You brought a meth lab to the airport?
It does feel like there are some who just have to piss in other peoples' sandbox because they didn't like the toys.
've is short for have. C/Sh/Would've or c/sh/would have. Not c/sh/would of.
Oh well. The $60 was worth the leveling experience. If you look at it as KOTOR3 with multiplayer support, it's fine, except once I stop paying the $15/month I don't get to play my single-player game anymore. I've already done everything there is to do on my Imperial character, so I'll probably level a Repub and then unsubscribe. It's a perfectly fine single-player game, but there's just no MMO content.
Almost everything went wrong except story. Bioware made single with sub in the end.
I believe the main issue is that allot of people came in with high expectations / wanting this to be THE WOW KILLER. Like it or not it will be compared to other games and that there have been issues and reoccurring ones at the get go really sucks as others can only compare it to more refined games atm and that does not bode well for retention purposes.
If you are going to leap into a market be ready to be as good as the competition or you will get left behind or have disgruntled clients it's just the nature of the beast!
Youtube Chan : http://www.youtube.com/user/eqbobyboucher
Armory : http://us.battle.net/wow/en/characte...Odina/advanced
I figured that would lighten things up.
Now back on topic:
As others have stated most of the features we would like to see in the game are expectations on our part. Other games released within a similar time period were not released with these features but were implemented rather quickly as the developers heard us shout. However the big difference between other developers and Bioware thus far has been communication. Where one developer is an open book, the other one is guarded and speaking in generalizations.
As a whole I have very little gripes with the game. I enjoy it for what it is and if it should change in the future I would hope it is for the better.