email to John Smedley

[I SandRock]

Originally Posted by Vanath

Why share this with us? I might understand sharing the reply but why tell us you sent him an e-mail?

/puts on freudhat

He got into university and probably finished his first or second year and now feels like he's quite the economist. Also playing video games he feels he has a 'special' insight into things due to his study and his acquired certain 'intelligence' on the game industery. An insight that none other could figure out. An insight, which he expects, will blow away the mind of Smed who will subsequently hire him for his great intelligence. Not only that, but it will blow away the mind of anyone reading it, especially on an internet forum, so he felt the need to share it with us so we could tell him how amazing and right he is. And how surely Smed will find this a revolutionary new insight which will make him change the business model and game approach immediately.

It's like when a 5 year old figures out how to whistle or snap their fingers and they want to show the entire world because surely it is the most amazing thing. Until they realize they're really not the unique little butterfly they thought they were


/end psychoanalysis.

The OP and the reply from this other guy have something strange about them. Almost as if it's google translated. I was kind of expecting an advertisement spam bot link in there somewhere :P

[Trafalgar]

If the player is not skilled enough to use a particular item effectively, then it is realistically not available to the player. This is flawed design because it wastes content; it wastes fun.

Oh my gods, if every weapon isn't "point, click, and instagib" it'll be a FLAWED DESIGN because someone won't be able to figure out how to hit anyone with it! It takes TOO MUCH SKILL to hit anyone with a mortar-type weapon, can't have any of those.

I propose the opposite argument, that it is entirely proper to include weapons which require more skill than point and shoot to use effectively, e.g. mortars, or skill-requiring but effective vehicles such as Scythes. (Although one would expect another less difficult combat vehicle for the Vanu as well)

Originally Posted by I SandRock

Have spambots gained consciousness and are debating each other now? What is this madness?

Yes. Yes, they have.

[kertvon]

I think some of your points are valid, but to be honest I think the ace up the sleeve PS2 has is that it is going to be PC exclusive. Not knocking console players or anything because I know plenty of solid gamers that play console, but PC players tend to be hardcore by nature. Look at the numerous threads about people prepping to upgrade their rigs. Most people on this board would eat ramen for a week to get a new video card, sidegrades, and camos if need be. I am married with a baby son on the way, and while my family is my priority, I am still making some personal sacrifices to make sure I am able to play PS2.

I do strongly agree that making titles with a target group in mind is dangerous practice in itself though. While PS1 was not as successful as it could have been, it was mainly due to hardware constraints much less than it was popularity. The world was, from all objective perspectives, not ready for Planetside. Hopefully SOE focused on what they already knew how to do which is make a killer MMOFPS. If anything the main target should be the veteran PS1 players because if you flop with the vets and the target market doesn't catch on then you are left with a pretty looking world with nobody to fight in. Thus far, I think most of these are moot points though; PS2 has already proven itself as a force to be reckoned with when they swept the E3 showroom floors with awards.

Good read though.

[Brusi]

[JHendy]

Originally Posted by AThreatToYou

If the player is not skilled enough to use a particular item effectively, then it is realistically not available to the player. This is flawed design because it wastes content; it wastes fun.

Your views frustrate me deeply, sir.

I propose that learning how to make proper, effective use of that item is fun, due to the fact that it is challenging.

[Baron]

Yea ....first critique


white

space


otherwise great effort.

[Hamma]

Guys..

as super mentioned in his second or third post if you dont care about this don't respond then it goes away..

If you can't be constructive then just don't reply.

[Baneblade]

Combat Arms would like a word with your assertions. FPS players spend plenty.

[StumpyTheOzzie]

Originally Posted by Brusi

You so funny...

[Graywolves]

I only read halfway because my eyes started bleeding.



But from what I read I liked where you were going. I didn't get the impression of selling power, if that's where you ended up I strongly disagree but I don't understand why you would bring up LoL if you decided to go that way.


I do think it's important to stress the importance of depth and strategy though over instant-satisfaction for a game that strongly relies on high players numbers over a period of years. Other FPS games don't need to worry about player retention or sustaining longer gaming sessions because their games aren't set up for that kind of gameplay and they already made their money before you even took the disc out of the box.

So I felt like you definitely had some important things to say in there. I just don't know what your bottom line is.

[Zulthus]

I read the TL;DR though, and once I saw you wanted selling power, you immediately lost any credibility you might have had.

[The Kush]

If you are saying the game should be pay2win like the above posts are claiming (I stopped reading at that made up equation that is complete BS), then I am going to go ahead and ask a mod to please close this. These threads keep on amazing me at how stupid this forum is getting. I mean seriously a few months ago there was only very productive well thought out post being made. Now it's the exact opposite. I know there is a lot of great people on this forum, but threads like this I can only shake my head in sadness..

[Synapse]

Originally Posted by The Kush

If you are saying the game should be pay2win like the above posts are claiming (I stopped reading at that made up equation that is complete BS), then I am going to go ahead and ask a mod to please close this. These threads keep on amazing me at how stupid this forum is getting. I mean seriously a few months ago there was only very productive well thought out post being made. Now it's the exact opposite. I know there is a lot of great people on this forum, but threads like this I can only shake my head in sadness..

First come the people you will shoot with, then come the people you will shoot at.

Now lets hope beta comes soon because I want to unload on these guys.

[The Kush]

Originally Posted by Synapse

First come the people you will shoot with, then come the people you will shoot at.

Now lets hope beta comes soon because I want to unload on these guys.

Hahaha so true Synapse

[Brusi]

Originally Posted by Hamma

Guys..

as super mentioned in his second or third post if you dont care about this don't respond then it goes away..

If you can't be constructive then just don't reply.

Sry if my critique seemed at all unconstructive hamma...

Honestly, my first reaction aside... the limits of my masochistic PS2 obsession know no bounds. So i read the whole thing. It really didn't take that long as i was saved the reading time of all those spaces and paragraphs omited by the OP.

My response stands...

It was hard to get the point that super was trying to make, really. My take was that monetizing the cash shop in a way that raises the learning curve of the game will increase the revenue of the cash shop somewhat linearly, due to the fact that the minority of dedicated players primarily provide the majority of the revenue. Was i close?

Sorry, but i don't buy it... (sorry for the pun)