Does Atari want ToEE to fail.

[triCritical]

Well the one big knock on ToEE is bugs. And I remember buying the crapfest NWN the first day it was released and having a patch waiting for me. And then two days later another patch. Is Atari to stupid to find bugs in ToEE or did they just decide not to support one of their titles. Civillization is another game that had patches very soon after release as well. Furthermore, when Atari realized that MoO3 was going to suck, they gave them like a whole new year to make it better, didn't help.

Why was nothing done to iron out the problems in ToEE, kind of makes me angry because it is a game that I like alot and wanted to see a sequel. However, I do not think there is going to be one considering they are squabling contract crap over the patch.

Here is my conspiracy theory. Atari wanted ToEE to fail because it is turnbased. Bastards! On that note, everyone that has played the game has said that the highlight is combat. Everyone who has played LH said the problem is combat. Seeing a trend here. They know TB is bettter, so now they want people to associate bugs with TB, so when someone makes a comment like I want a TB game they will say, " so it can be like that Temple of bugs game." Because you know people are stupid.

 

[Ares Draxis]

Probably yes.

 

[Rabby]

The general impression I have of publishers vs. developers is that publishers are folks who have graduated from business school, wear suits, have slick, plastered hair, and see computer games as investments, and view sales as return of investments.

Developers, on the other hand, are more geeky folks who prefer t-shirts and jeans, and have a passion about the game itself in that game-making is first a self-achievement, and only after that is it a device to put food on the table.

Now, wouldn't it make more sense for the suits to see a trend in turn-based gaming, and actually throw more money/time/resources at it? According to my logic, they don't have personal grudges against TB or realtime -- they invested in real-time when it seemed like it worked. Now, with the flop of Lionheart, and the praises for ToEE's tactical combat, they'd invest in turn-based!

I love speculating upon misfounded logic.

 

[EEVIAC]

I love speculating upon misfounded logic.

And therein lies the folly of your ways. To understand marketing logic, one must take the rational arguement and turn it arse-end-backwards.

It does sound to me like Atari had this plan all along to milk their D&D license and Troika's fanbase for a quick money grab. Not offering to pay for a patch is preposterous, considering a patch might not have been needed if they'd allowed a little more QA.

 

[HanoverF]

It sounds like Atari was willing to invest X dollars and Y time in Troika developing a game for them and one or the other were used up...

 

[Saint_Proverbius]

The general impression I have of publishers vs. developers is that publishers are folks who have graduated from business school, wear suits, have slick, plastered hair, and see computer games as investments, and view sales as return of investments.

I tend to add, And are too stupid to get a job elsewhere because no one else would hire them because they fuck up so often to my description of publishers. Very few of these people have any sense at all. Most of them see things in terms of This makes money, this doesn't and don't actually understand what's behind that reality. Most of them also follow the This was good and that was good, so this and that together will be even more good mentality. That's why you see things like The Sims Online, because The Sims sells good and MMORPGs make lots of money, so The Sims with a monthly fee would be really great!

Now, wouldn't it make more sense for the suits to see a trend in turn-based gaming, and actually throw more money/time/resources at it? According to my logic, they don't have personal grudges against TB or realtime -- they invested in real-time when it seemed like it worked. Now, with the flop of Lionheart, and the praises for ToEE's tactical combat, they'd invest in turn-based!

I think Tri missed the mark. It's not that they have a grudge against ToEE, they just didn't think many people would buy it because it's turn based. So, just in case it fails to sell, they're not spending any more on the funding for a patch until they see the goods from it.

I'd say this is also why they decided to do that KaZaa thing. It might not sell, so let's do an experiment on a shareware style model for this game!

 

[Ibbz]

Well the one big knock on ToEE is bugs. And I remember buying the crapfest NWN the first day it was released and having a patch waiting for me. And then two days later another patch. Is Atari to stupid to find bugs in ToEE or did they just decide not to support one of their titles. Civillization is another game that had patches very soon after release as well. Furthermore, when Atari realized that MoO3 was going to suck, they gave them like a whole new year to make it better, didn't help.

Bioware supports the Live team which has been doing the later patches and updates out of its own pocket, Atari dont pay them for it.
MOO3 got an extra year because QuickSilver tried to implement the lead designer's {Alan Emrich, wrote the strategy guide for MOO1} design even though he'd been fired. Of course, without the lead designer there, Quicksilvers implementation was horrid - When Atari exec's saw this, they gave them an extra year to make it "fun." Alan Emrich's original design was basically a MOO 1.5 but this was rejected oddly enough for the empire simulator.

Here is my conspiracy theory. Atari wanted ToEE to fail because it is turnbased. Bastards! On that note, everyone that has played the game has said that the highlight is combat. Everyone who has played LH said the problem is combat. Seeing a trend here. They know TB is bettter, so now they want people to associate bugs with TB, so when someone makes a comment like I want a TB game they will say, " so it can be like that Temple of bugs game." Because you know people are stupid.

That doesnt make alot of sense seems Civilization is turn based and MOO3 is turn based {Not to mention Risk which Atari also publishes} both of them got patches. Civ 3 also has an expansion with another in the works.

 

[Volourn]

At this juncture, I won't be buying no expansion or sequel. This will change if a patch or two fixes the game to my satisfaction.

Like Ibbz stated, BIO made a decision to support NWN fully on their own. If Troika needs Atari to babysit them when it comes to patches, and the like; that's their problem not mine.

Of course, one must also remember that NWN is a game that has whether or not you like it a long play life while TOEE will be a good play through 2-4 times.

No matter what, I just want the damn patch.

 

[Rabby]

And therein lies the folly of your ways. To understand marketing logic, one must take the rational arguement and turn it arse-end-backwards.

You mean something like: "Lets paint the box red and it'll sell reeeaaal well!"?

That doesnt make alot of sense seems Civilization is turn based and MOO3 is turn based {Not to mention Risk which Atari also publishes} both of them got patches. Civ 3 also has an expansion with another in the works.

Hmm. . . but wouldn't these strategy games have their own niche market? A market that's more separate from RTS than TB CRPGs are separate from RT CRPGS? With how the IE games have sold, and how there had been a distinct lack of turn-based CRPGs, I think that argument might actually not apply in this case.

Basically, they KNOW there are Sid Meier and MOO followings, yet they're not sure about the integrity of TB CRPG followings since for one, there is no brand recognition, and two Diablo has done soooooo well in hauling in cash.

If Troika needs Atari to babysit them when it comes to patches, and the like; that's their problem not mine.

I was under the impression that, being under a contract, even putting out a patch requires some sort of legal paperwork. Babysitting may not be the right term to use here if that's the case.

 

[Volourn]

Maybe I'm being overly harsh; but I think after dealing with the game, I'll reserve that right. As far as TOEE goes; I'm extremly bias at this moment against it and its makers.

Still, once again, Atari seems too have no problem with BIO patching NWN. Then again, NWN was a guaranteed hit. Plus, it has two expansions (one of course is not out yet).

I don't think it has anything with a RT vs. TB thing. It has to do with what game Atari invested more money in. That's the point of issue here, I think.

 

[Araanor]

Like Ibbz stated, BIO made a decision to support NWN fully on their own. If Troika needs Atari to babysit them when it comes to patches, and the like; that's their problem not mine.

Uh, well, Bioware are swimming in cash, basically.

You can see in the recent chat that money is a concern for Troika, they can't just do what they feel like. But they have hinted that they might release a patch even if they don't get paid for it.

 

[Volourn]

Have you seen BIO's finanical report? They have money; but they are not swimming at it. One poorly sold game; and it's back to the trenches with Troika. Geez.. People assume too much.

As for the patch; Troika better make a patch.. or their good work with Arcanum would be a waste on this useless game of theirs.

 

[EEVIAC]

I don't think it has anything at all to do with turn-based, that would suggest that marketers and publishers have some interest in content, and I don't think that's the case. D&D and Turn-Based are just bullet-points aimed at certain demographics - Shit-On-A-Stick-Based combat would mean just as much to them.

 

[triCritical]

Bioware supports the Live team which has been doing the later patches and updates out of its own pocket, Atari dont pay them for it.

Well I guess Bio holds more water then Troika. Because according to Troika they cannot release an offcial patch for ToEE. Atari owns the product. Bioware must have had it in their contract to get to release an official patch, because I did not get any unofficial patches. This is also kind of odd considering Bioware shoved me to Atari Tech support.

As for MoO3, the got more money, bottomline.

 

[AlanC9]

I imagine the industry conventional wisdom is that turn-based tactical games aren't much more than a niche product (so are turn-based strategy games, but it's a bigger niche). It's pretty clear that ToEE wasn't expected to sell too well, judging from the few copies on retail shelves. (These low expectations make ToEE look better, so that's not a bad thing.)

LH failing doesn't prove anything, since it can always be rationailzed that the theory was good, but LH was a bad implementation. ToEE would have to sell really well to change the conventional wisdom. Of course, half-assed Atari support makes this less likely. But that's how business works. You don't get fired for supporting the CW.

 

[Zetor]

Kind of OT, but the same thing happened to Irrational Games re: Freedom Force [in their case the publisher / "producer" company went bankrupt, yet still held on to the IP, the official site, rights to PR, etc] and they solved the problem by releasing the patches as "beta patches", not putting them on their homepage and plastering "THIS IS AN UNOFFICIAL PATCH" messages all over the readme files.
I hope Troika does the same with ToEE if it comes to that...


-- Z.

 

[Rayt]

So TOEE isn't selling well then?

 

[AlanC9]

Hard to say. I haven't seen any hard numbers, but it seems to be going off of store shelves quickly. It's hard to find a retail copy in New York, for instance. But they didn't have many copies to begin with.

If I had to guess, I'd say it's making its numbers, but that the game was never expected to be a huge seller.

 

[Volourn]

Kinda early to say since it's been out for a week. I'm sure it's selling well enough.

 

[Rabby]

On a vaguely related note:

Does anyone know if Daggerfall's Parental Control mechanism help it win points in that regard? I know all the nasty, bloody corpses became bone piles (that is good) and the random naked ladies no longer appeared in taverns (that is bad). Was the rating even a big issue then? Do you think a similar option now would help obtain a more vanilla rating and still appeal to those who like blood and gore?

I'll answer my own question with my own opinion. I think that, since parents don't seem to even care about what games their kids play to BEGIN WITH (obviously referring to some of the GTA3 fiascos), they'd probably ignore any similar parental control option in the product.

 

[Visceris]

Its currently sold out here where I live.

 

[Chadeo]

Not wanting to read the official forums, I thought I would ask here. Are there a significant number of people who have major crashing issues with the game? From these boards it looks like everyone but one person can play the game just fine, with a few perhaps having slow mouse issues, but no major crashing issues.

If this is the case then I do not see Atari going out of its way to spend money for a patch. They could care less about a tiny percent that crash as long as the vast majority can play just fine. Now as far as Trokia being willing to spend their own personal money (i.e. work for free) to fix a bug that only affects a tiny percentage of people, who knows. I would like to think that if it was something easy to track down and fix, they would go out of their way to do so.

Though it is also interesting to note that the most vocal anti NWN people remember (or had) major game crashing bugs, and the most vocal pro NWN people (person?) has major game crashing bugs with ToEE. I hope that such a thing is just a coincidence. It would be rather silly for one of the groups to be making things up just to solidify their position on a news board.

But no, I doubt that the marketing people at Atari care if it is turn based or not. They might have a general bias towards real time due to the success of Diablo and bioware, but I find the idea that they would deliberately try to stop a turn based game from succeeding to be stupid. They do not care about games, they care about dollars. Turn based vrs Real time is no different to them than Red widget vrs Blue widget.

This really does look like the case of a large publisher getting burned by prior projects that have run way over budget. So they decide that no new project will be allowed to go over budget, or at least not without a huge justification that they are sure will pay off.

 

[Volourn]

As far as the game crashing goes; I am most definitely in the minority; but there are others. They're just not vocal like I am. Heh.

As for your cojspiracy theory, I am pro NWN; but I am (or at least was) pro TOEE as well other than the obvious stuff until the crashing started...

 

[triCritical]

So TOEE isn't selling well then?

My guess is that it sold very well. The question is how many returns are going to be due to bugs and possibly a drop in the sales due to bugs. This happened to FOT if I recall. Sold well early on and then dropped off.

 

[Psilon]

Partly because FOT sucked. It had the most preorders in Interplay history, but plummeted after about 2 weeks once word of mouth got around.