an accordion_sl
shitlord
- 2,162
- 8
Yo defending that video is fucking hilarious and invalidates your opinion on anything from here on.
Lotro had a lifetime sub and it worked out alright for that. I mean, it never was a wow killer, but it's as old as wow and still going, even though they did have to go F2P a few years back(but apparently the F2P wasn't too bad for it since every now and then I saw people bumping the thread with news and shit in FoH). It released a long time ago though, back when people weren't complete jaded fucks, and also they made a pretty decent game. Combat had a lot of flaws but it still was a nice game in my opinion.My favorite was Hellgate London offering the lifetime subscription fee for 200 bucks. Nothing screams "We have no faith in our product, let's see how many gullible fucks we can snake with this shit" like a lifetime sub.
And that's the truth been custom building my rigs for long time and all the beta's I sign up for I never get in cause they know no matter how shitty the optimization rigs like my 100 lb casket can power through it. I doubt I get in this beta as what can I tell them on hardware side except it runs on 1% percenters machine.Another sign of comedy Gold ahead for the Beta's is they have already said the shittyer you PC specs and Laptop specs are better chance have on geting in on the betas not kidding on this.
For those of us that Build custom Rigs every year or so give or take, have Muti Displays set up,GPU 2,3,4 SLI etc we could have to wait due to that to get, in same with High end gaming laptops that I use when travel.
Running in DX11 doesn't mean anything unless they take advantage of what DX11 offers other than the code path.That interview I linked a bit back has a guy claiming their engine will support high end machines with DX11, etc. If he is lying and I log in to find that I have SWTOR level of graphics and graphic options I'm gonna lose my shit.
I thought TOR was the final nail in the WoW-clone coffin, but I guess there's always one more. I wonder if the corporate level that actually decides to keep paying this is simply unaware of the direction of the the project and market. I just hope we get a well-done Elder scrolls 6, would hate for the single player rpg line to die with this.Nope, look at Skrym sales, look at Fallout NV sales etc... Those single player games are not going anywhere. But maybe this game finally puts the nail in the coffin for wow clones and finally drive some real innovation in this genre which has been pretty much stuck in 2004ville.
There is a lot of decision making, most of it bad, that goes on around sunk costs. Software, and games, are especially prone to this since you are basically spending most of your money on thoughts, which are abstract and ethereal. If your building project goes bust and you have a warehouse full of steel, that steel has some value and you can recoup some or maybe even most of your sunk cost.I thought TOR was the final nail in the WoW-clone coffin, but I guess there's always one more. I wonder if the corporate level that actually decides to keep paying this is simply unaware of the direction of the the project and market. I just hope we get a well-done Elder scrolls 6, would hate for the single player rpg line to die with this.
Tdlr Throwing good money after bad or using dollars to chase dimesThere is a lot of decision making, most of it bad, that goes on around sunk costs. Software, and games, are especially prone to this since you are basically spending most of your money on thoughts, which are abstract and ethereal. If your building project goes bust and you have a warehouse full of steel, that steel has some value and you can recoup some or maybe even most of your sunk cost.
In rational economic terms you are supposed to disregard sunk costs when determining future decisions. Let's say I have a software product that is "80%" complete. It was supposed to cost $100 with an expected return of $120. Well here we are at $120 spent and 20% of the project left to go. There is no way to make money on this product now so it should be canceled. This is actually fallacious reasoning. Because that money is already gone the question is "Will spending more money to finish the last 20% cost less than $120?" If so, you do it and you've lost money, but less than if you outright canceled the project. If it will cost more than $120 to finish you just cancel it.
In the case of a game, it is surprisingly easy string out that sunk cost reasoning to the point where it loses all meaning. You basically end up in a perpetual state of "80%" complete, or at some point where it looks like if you just finish it up and get it out the door you will lose less money than you would by canceling outright. Ironically, as more and more money is shoveled into the failing project, just finishing it looks increasingly attractive from a "rational viewpoint".
Really, that game was like 5% complete when you based your future cost estimates on it being 80% complete the first time around. This is easy to see in hindsight when you can easily take into account the final product and all of its resets because those are actual results and not projected results.
There are VOLUMES written about why software estimates are so bad. Needless to say, they are terrible and the publishers should know that by now.
I'd like to see what people have to say... I live in Seattle, so gotta wait for PAX Prime.Visit the Bethesda booth at PAX East to chat with members of the Dev Team, play The Elder Scrolls Online, and get your hands on some unique ESO items. Read on for all the must-know details.
Yeah, but I'd like to hear a report on gameplay form someone who wasn't a blogger or "journalist." So.. go there and wait in line 2 hours, it's worth itIf it's anything like my past experiences trying out MMOs at PAX, have fun waiting in line for 2+ hours to get fifteen minutes of playtime in the intro area.