gogojira_sl
shitlord
- 2,202
- 3
Sure, OK.. I'll bite.Not surprised Elidroth drank the "its just a name change" koolaid.
Just by reading that derp thread he made asking people why people play eqemu when they could be playing eqlive is reason enough to think he is a mongoloid
P.S. I'm still at Daybreak.
Good news. Granted, he's worked on EQN's Combat System which, in its current iteration, sucks, but he's also been behind some pretty interesting design choices with itemization which, while not mentioned frequently as a major system of EQN, is going to be one of the more revolutionary pieces. He's a keeper.Michael Mann (Systems Lead, combat dude is still at Daybreak).Michael Mann on Twitter:
Kudos to you for the honest reply.Sure, OK.. I'll bite.
The reason I asked the question, is because rather than sit in my office and pretend I know everything, I chose to go ASK people what they think, so I'd actually know. It's called research. The WORST kind of people in any business are the ones who pat themselves on the back, and pretend they know it all. I'm secure in myself enough to know I don't know everything, and go ask people what they think. Even if I (we) choose to do something different, at least I've asked and gotten feedback.
Oh.. and bite me.
Great post. I agree with everything you said. Frankly, I still think Landmark was a really good idea, even if it will never have a fraction of the popularity of Minecraft (or H1Z1 or EQ1 for that matter.) A lot of the issues that have plagued Landmark were going to take a lot of development time to fix for EQN anyway (performance issues in a voxel-based engine being chief among them, but also things like water, animations, and NPC pathing AI) and the vast, vast majority of the art is going to be used in Next. And frankly, the fact that they now have a small but dedicated playerbase of builders who are taking on major asset creation workstreams that the developers will be able to use is going to be enormously beneficial.I know they were already about to focus on EQN but given all the shit that happened it's not too hard to see them going into open beta and letting Landmark pretty much rot.
That thing was never staged for the success Dave dreamed of. I wonder how much of a distraction it's been and how much it has worked against EQN? I'm sure it was intended to be a financial boost but it has a pretty tiny crowd that follows it and open beta isn't going to do much to boost it. Now their stuck maintaining an ugly duckling.
Good to see Eli is still on board and it seems like most of the core of the development side is still in tact. I'm a softy with all this, I hate seeing people lose their jobs.
Nope. Investment types like these hack and slash everyone and anyone. It's all about the numbers game. This isn't a gaming company or insider, but a group focused on return on investment and lowering costs as fast as possible.I am hearing from a friend that they are cutting infrastructure people like the network and server guys also.....
Don't they usually cut the "creative" types first and then reevaluate in a while before cutting the services guys?
Depends. Usually it's handled first by looking at role redundancies and seeing areas where, say, two people are handling a single job. Then, for project based work, looking at projects that are near completion (this is what I believed happened with Danuser, since most of the lore documentation is already written). Then, it's usually support staff that don't immediately impact the development of a product (e.g. community teams, PR, executive assistants, etc.).I am hearing from a friend that they are cutting infrastructure people like the network and server guys also.....
Don't they usually cut the "creative" types first and then reevaluate in a while before cutting the services guys?
So what the hell is left? There has to be something they want to launch, otherwise why buy it?Also, a massive project like EQNext/landmark is too high a risk to get a reasonable return, consider EQnext dead.
Frankly, Convo, I don't see it. Not sure I understand your argument here - please help me to see it. What specific aspects of Landmark's development do you believe have held up EQN? The only things I can think of would be the User Interface, the Sci Fi props and materials, and potentially parts of the crafting system. Everything else seems like it would have needed to happen anyway regardless of Landmark's existence.EQl was really what daybreak wanted. The rest of us wanted EQN. I really just started to resent that project bc it was holding up the game I actually wanted to play. How did they not see that?
EQNext isn't dead. The hype is still very real, especially among those who are less informed than the posters on Rerolled. The EQNext excitement and H1Z1 are the only things making Daybreak a worthy investment at this point.So what the hell is left? There has to be something they want to launch, otherwise why buy it?
Eql was a test bed for EQN in some aspects. EQN was essentially waiting on EQL to shape it. the resources were put on EQL instead of EQN. It definitely slowed up EQN release. There was a team working on each. Not to mention them waiting for EQL open beta before they ramped up EQN work.Frankly, Convo, I don't see it. Not sure I understand your argument here - please help me to see it. What specific aspects of Landmark's development do you believe have held up EQN? The only things I can think of would be the User Interface, the Sci Fi props and materials, and potentially parts of the crafting system. Everything else seems like it would have needed to happen anyway regardless of Landmark's existence.