VWBB (http://volitionwatch.papageorgefamily/vwbb/index.php)
- Red Faction 1/2 Discussion (http://volitionwatch.papageorgefamily/vwbb/forumdisplay.php?forumid=34)
-- No Co-op is INEXCUSABLE! (http://volitionwatch.papageorgefamily/vwbb/showthread.php?threadid=6842)

One last thing, and I am sorry, but I would be shot if a friend knew I didn't at least make the effort.


Ice Fire: It's Never Winter Nights, not Never Winter Knights. Common mistake, everyone understands, but it's also easily clarified. Sorry to be an annoyance.

__________________
You have a face for radio.

Not to beat a dead horse, but this situation is not always the case. Yes, there will always be times when we have decided not to put something in the game, as in this case. But there will also be times when THQ didn't think something should be in the game. Or decided that something should be in the game.

I don't think its fair to blame THQ for everything people don't like about our games. We did make the game But THQ and Volition's goals are typically the same - to make a killer game. Both companies should be blamed.. after all, we are the same company

quote:

---

Ice Fire: It's Never Winter Nights, not Never Winter Knights. Common mistake, everyone understands, but it's also easily clarified. Sorry to be an annoyance.

---

__________________
- IceFire
Volition Watch Project Manager
[url=http://www.volitionwatch.com]Volition Watch[/url], [url=http://freespace.volitionwatch.com/blackwater]BlackWater Operations[/url], [url=http://freespace.volitionwatch.com/babylon]The Babylon Project[/url], [url=http://terra.sourceforge.net]Machina Terra[/url], [url=http://www.3dap.com/hlp/hosted/ott/]Over The Top[/url]

I agree with Brush42. Finally some developer has taken responsibilty for their decisions and stoped blaming someone else.

To Kwilles or whatever,

1) Just because you have a business degree doesn't mean you have any common sense. Your repeated scenarios are clearly things you learned in school and they show clear flaws. Hardly ever do different products get equal stock.
Lets say its National Soda Week. During normal time there are 4 soda brands: Coke, Pepsi, 7-up, and Piss Soda.
Usually there are 1000 units Coke
1000 units Pepsi
800 units 7-up
100 units Piss Soda
total 3000 units

However during this week more soda is purchased. Unlike your scenarios where the 8 new games have equal space it will most likely be like this during Soda Week:
2200 units Super Coke
2000 units Coke (x2 of normal times)
2000 units Pepsi (x2 of normal times)
1800 units Super Soda
1600 units 7-up (x2 of normal times)
200 units Piss Soda (x2 of normal times)
200 units Crap-o-cola
total 10800 units

Your scenario has crappy games getting equal space as great games. The increase will be different for each game although they are all roughly proportional increases.
So don't get caught up in your business degree education; common sense dominates.


2)

quote:

---

Originally posted by ktwiles
Missing Christmas to put in a co-op campaign? Yeah, that'd be a GREAT business decision (/sarcasm). [/B]

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by rfII
however I believe that they can still make Christmas and in the long run they may come out better off with a better game. However I also acknowledge that co-op may not increase sales in the long run. Like Brush42 says, some companies do ethical things and care more about customer satisfaction despite losing a minimal amount of profit.

---

__________________
[url="http://www.dopefish.com"]swim...swim...hungry...[/url]

If you read my other stuff you know what I'm talking about. If missing Christmas is the case then that is obviously unacceptable. I NEVER said it was acceptable. Have you read anything from this thread? My explaination on why I think they can make Christmas is on the 22nd post of this thread.

However, ethics is a poor choice of words, but you should still get what I'm saying.

RF II,

Okay, whatever. Your example is cute, if not wholly exaggerated for the sake of parody. The point I'm trying to drive home is what fosters the competitive balance here. You're saying that co-op is going to make the entire value of the game increase to the point that the lost sales in the early part of the holiday season. I'm disagreeing with you emphatically; holiday sales are not driven by the same demographic that purchases video games the other 9 months of the year. Soccer moms, for the most part, just don't get that co-op makes games better and increases playability for the end user. What drives appeal to this purchasing market is flashy advertising, timeliness in availability, and bright boxes on larger shelf space. We are at a time when a substantial chunk of holiday buyers grew up without the steady diet of video games that you or I have had -- the differentiation of features means less to them than it would to us.

To break it down for you: I like co-op. I wanted co-op too. But I'd like to get a quality game that will best foster continuation of the franchise I enjoy playing. So if sacrificing certain features I want ensures the long term health of RF, I'm all for it.

---------
To Brush 42, I'm sorry if I offended you. Had I known the insults were to be taken so literally, I would have chosen other contexts in which to convey them. In any case, I'm not going to sit and make excuses, just apologize and move on.

If it was my comment about [V] doing the best thing for themselves financially that also irked you, I was not implying that they just pump out crap to make money. (If it wasn't my comment, disregard the rest of this post) The issue I was raising there was one of calculated risk in their careers.

The [V] guys are getting paid right now to make games, a career which I'm sure many of them chased for a long time. Given their degree of financial compensation, wouldn't it seem logical for the devs to be willing to make some compromises here and there? They get to provide for their loved ones while doing something close to their vision. Throwing away that security to do a marginally different game that could just as easily fail and ruin them as it could succeed obviously brings forth the possibility that they lose both their provisional means AND a career which was in line, though not identical, to their dreams.

Clearly, the case would be different if they were putting out Tetris's or puzzle games every four months. Then it's doubtful their hearts would be in it enough to justify the money. But I'm guessing most of the guys doing RF are pretty hardcore FPS fans, and that RF2 isn't that far off from the type of game they dreamed of making as a kid.

I guess I just don't want people to think that everyone who releases a product on a deadline is a sellout or is driven by laziness. I've got a family of my own, and a career which helps me provide for them -- it's not the career I wanted everyday as a kid, but it's not far off and it ensures that I can support my wife and nurture my daughter. Maybe that DOES make us sellouts, but I'm selling out to my family, not to the almighty dollar.

Peace.

Ktwilles,
THQ or Volition would take the minimal loss, not the hardworking developers (unless they get paid in commission which I doubt).



Volition/THQ doesn't want to make a truly great game, but rather a very good one. I'm not saying they are half-assing it; this game will probably make very good sales and profit. However the great game makers that produced great games, like Half-life, are willing to go the extra distance. Those game companies are remembered for it, and their work may influence future purchases of other products.

V/THQ's method is fine and a high profit is relatively insured with the early release. All I'm saying is that if they had spent a month making co-op, profit loss for the Christmas season would be minimal.

quote:

---

Not doing Co-Op was our decision. We decided that, within our schedule and budget, we can't do Co-Op. Having made that decision, we aren't going to ask for more time or money to add something we decided not to add in the first place

---

__________________
[url=http://www.redfactionplanet.com]RFPlanet[/url]
[url=http://www.ut2003-extreme.com]UT2003-Extreme[/url]

quote:

---

Originally posted by rfII
Ktwilles,
THQ or Volition would take the minimal loss, not the hardworking developers (unless they get paid in commission which I doubt).

---

Discussions tends to grow big at this board

Its based on sell-through - number of copies actually sold.

quote:

---

Originally posted by Genxer


rfII can't you read and anyway you think they will lose sales just because there i sno co-op mode, jezz have the games out there don't have it and there do great

---

**yawn**

__________________
Dogma kills.

quote:

---

Originally posted by cece
**yawn**

---

__________________
there was death at its begginning, and there will be death at its end

For a great place for Red Faction map's go to [URL=http://www.aodmeagain.com]Me Again's Map Site[/URL]

IceFire, man, you didn't quote my smilie! I feel offended and hurt. I know he was insignificant in the long run, but damnit, even the little guy deserves a chance!

__________________
You have a face for radio.

quote:

---

Originally posted by shim


lol

[sarcasm] its good to know ya still intrested in this topic CeCe [/sarcasm] :P

---

yeah right... i glanced over this like last week's trash

__________________
Volition Watch Hosting Administrator

[url=http://www.volitionwatch.com/]You Are Here[/url]

Member of the Volition Community since 1998!

quote:

---

Originally posted by ktwiles


Threads are like car accidents. Some people can stare at them forever, some people have to turn away -- but everyone is captivated at the beginning

---

__________________
Dogma kills.

quote:

---

Originally posted by Brando
yeah right... i glanced over this like last week's trash

---

__________________
You have a face for radio.