I'm not saying they shouldn't change at all, but I think they should try to
consider their current customer base and what systems they have before
making drastic changes. Look at Sims. They make expansion packs but they
don't require you to change your system everytime a new expansion comes out.
Considering how addictive EQ is, even without the new graphics engines
people would still be playing. They could still add to the game by making
new zones and such without requiring a change in directx programs. They
could find other ways to make the game better without changing the system
requirements so drastically. What if they expanded the game one day and
changed the system requirements to the point that you could not afford to
upgrade? What then? Would you be a happy camper?
While verant may be getting a few more customers who can handle the higher
end requirements, they are alienating older customers with lower end
systems. In the long run, that kind of attitude toward customers is bad for
business. If Verant doesn't give a fuck about their current customers then
they will start to lose business.
If I were the VP I would find some way so that there would be some servers
set aside so that the lower end systems could still play on them-- which is
what the GMs have been suggesting. And I certainly wouldn't release a game
full of bugs before it had been fully tested. I would also have research
done and surveys to find out just how many people would no longer be able to
play with their current systems and factor that into my decision on what
types of changes could be made without alienating a large customer base.
Change is important in some regard, but so is reliability and integrity. So
far, Verant seems to be lacking the latter two.
-Su
> As a paying customer, I do not want EQ to just survive. I want EQ to
strive
> to be the best game available. No one wants to play a so-so game. I can
> guarantee you, EQ would not be afloat if they had not made any or even a
few
> of the upgrades / expansions they have done. I would hate to think of 3
> years of EQ with no upgrades or expansions. Do you honestly think EQ would
> still be played to today if it were still the original EQ of 3 years ago?
> NOWAY ! EQ would be around right now. But since Verant choose to continue
to
> grow, they still have a strong player base. Sure, some might quit due to
the
> new requirements, but it is better than being out of business if they'd
sat
> on their ass and count the money for the first 1 year.
>
> Thank God Su was not a VP at Verant at the time of EverQuest release or
we'd
> be lining up to kill Vox and Naggy for the 1,000,000th time.
>
> I don't really want Verant to waste my $9.95 a month trying to figure out
a
> way for DirectX8 to work on your 8 MB video card or your neighbors WIN95
> system. I hope they spend my monthly service fee making the game better. I
> hope they keep upgrading the EQ world. You notice, this is the exact
> opposite things you want. Change is good when it comes in the form of an
> upgrade :-) I think that for every person that quits EQ because of the new
> requirements, they keep 2 people playing for months longer by making the
> more enjoyable. People will and do quit after doing everything there is to
> do in EQ.
>
> It is crazy for people to think that a company should hold back and try
not
> to be the best game out on the market. As time goes on the bar that games
> get measured on will continue to grow. As it grows, new requirements are
not
> an option, but a necessity, a must. Once Verant knew the release of
DirectX
> 8, they knew that they MUST use DirectX8 if they wanted to continue to
move
> forward and strive to be the best game out on the market. As a paying
> customer, (some paying more than others) you would have to be crazy not to
> want the same thing. I love the new graphics and sure, I had to do some
> upgrading, but damn, look at the zones today compared to 3 years ago, what
a
> change.
>
> I guess you really don't understand Su, these changes are really not for
the
> fun of it or for show. They are a must. The vast majority of Verant's
> customer base demands that Verant provides the best game possible. The
best
> graphics, the best detail, the best way to interact with the fellow
players,
> the best dynamic role playing world and the best customer service. Do I
> think Verant is the best at all these? No, but atleast I know they are
> striving to be the best. Verant knew that without DirectX8, they couldn't
be
> the best for long. As time goes on, all the best games will be running the
> current DirectX.
>
> SoL left 2 out 3 of my household computers unplayable. My son, who also
> plays EQ, doesn't have a playable computer now. Even though Verant might
> have released SoL a little early and untested, I am happy they released
when
> they did, just before Christmas. Perfect timing for the many people that
> will ask their parents, spouses, grandparents, aunts and uncles ( Mu,
Chase
> needs another stick of RAM for Christmas ) for their upgrades. Computers
get
> outdated just like games do and if expect to play the most popular games,
> you'll have to keep your machine updated. Just be thankful computer
> components are cheep. I still feel like crying when I think about the
money
> I spent on my computer I bought in 1993 or 94. Pakard Bell system for
> $3,400. WOW what I could do with that money today.
>
> The question you should ask yourself is, do you want to play the best game
> available or do you want to play just a so-so game. Maybe Verant is not
the
> company for you, but they're the company for me, they keep pushing the
> envelope. As long as I choose to spend my "relaxing" free time in the
world
> of EverQuest, I pray that Verant will continue to strive to be the best,
> even if this means an upgrade here or there, I'll be there.
>
> By no means is this an insult on you Su, I just really don't see your view
> point.
>
> Sorry, this email is so long. I'm bored at work and this is my last day
> before I start my holiday vacation. I hope I don't have 200 + emails in my
> box when I return in 2002.
>
> Sistily, the gnome warrior
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Su [SMTP:suceress@...]
> Sent: Monday, December 17, 2001 12:16 PM
> To: EverQuest@yahoogroups.com
> Subject: Re: [EverQuest] I hate Shadows of Luclin and I don't
> even own it yet...
>
> I understand you feel strongly about this, but you don't need to
> resort to
> insulting people.
> EQ could easily survive if they didn't constantly change the
> graphics and
> such on the game bc the game is so dynamic with so many places to
> explore
> and things to do that they could leave it the same way for 3 years
> and many
> people would be happy.
> Developing things for old tech, so long as it will work with new
> tech is
> smart. It gives them a broader customer base. Have you ever taken
> any
> business classes?
> -Su
>
>
> Sorry Su, but here's your tissue.
>
> Gawd damn you whine alot.
>
> Some facts:
>
> "are you saying that people with more money are more important?"
>
> Yes, a customer with money is alot more important to a company that
> is
> trying to make a good earning than a customer without money. A
> customer with
> money adds a flavor of long lasting customer relation ships. You
> however,
> doesn't meet these standards (you self who said it). So, you think
> Verant
> should keep the old game just cause some of the old customers, who
> btw
> bought this game which clearly stated on the bottom of the box that
> OS and
> hardware requirments could/will change, can't pay for the new produc
> that.
> You know the product that will keep EQ alive and not let it die
> before the
> end of the year.
>
> Get real Su, if they wouldn't have updated EQ they wouldnt survive a
> month.
> A company that chose to develop shit for a old tech ain't a company
> with a
> long lasting future.
>
> -domi
>
> -----Ursprungligt meddelande-----
> Från: Su [mailto:suceress@...]
> Skickat: den 14 december 2001 23:58
> Till: EverQuest@yahoogroups.com
> Ämne: Re: [EverQuest] I hate Shadows of Luclin and I don't even own
> it
> yet...
>
>
>
> I have seen my friend's computer run. Trust me, it can't handle
> Luclin. It
> probably can't handle velious come to think of it. But now that I
> think
> about it, his system is probably considered obsolete to most
> "serious
> gamers".
> Don't mind me. I'm stressed out bc my neighbor stole stuff from me
> and had
> the gall to cuss at my mother when she asked where the stuff was
> when he was
> the only one who could've taken it. (and so I don't sound like I'm
> just
> jumping to conclusions, he was a tenant in our house for awhile and
> alot of
> the stuff we left in his care is gone).
> *sigh*
> going through unpacking hell right now. moving sucks.
>
>
> > Sorry but if its brand new... It will run, if not theres something
> wrong
> > with your pc. How do you know your friend's system cant handle
> it? If ya
> > want to post things like this please include your hardware so that
> we can
> > get to the bottom of this issue. Basically the only new
> requirements to
> run
> > EQ without Luclin are as follows:
> >
> > DirectX 8.1 That's it... Nothing more :) Enough already.
> >
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Su [mailto:suceress@...]
> > Sent: Friday, December 14, 2001 4:29 PM
> > To: EverQuest@yahoogroups.com
> > Subject: Re: [EverQuest] I hate Shadows of Luclin and I don't even
> own it
> > yet...
> >
> >
> > My sister had a brand new computer-- not a doorstop but even it
> couldn't
> > handle the new changes. EQ does not still support low end. I'm
> worried
> that
> > they will someday upgrade beyond my range of being able to afford
> new
> > hardware. My finances are about to take a hit. My dad is getting
> me new
> RAM.
> > He has the same computer. And I was gonna get a friend of mine to
> start
> > playing EQ but now his system won't be able to handle it. I just
> wish
> things
> > weren't such a hassle. But it could be worse. luv, -Su
> >
> > > Theres a difference between low end and a door stop. EQ still
> > > supports
> > low
> > > end. It's the obsolete systems that were still able to play
> before
> > > that have been left in the cold. Don't worry they will find a
> way to
> > > play.
> > Make
> > > sure ya buy the right memory, if ya need help let us know.
> > >
> > > Memory and other equip.. www.googlegear.com nice, cheap, honest,
> > > reliable.
> > >
> > > -----Original Message-----
> > > From: Su [mailto:suceress@...]
> > > Sent: Friday, December 14, 2001 2:46 PM
> > > To: EverQuest@yahoogroups.com
> > > Subject: Re: [EverQuest] I hate Shadows of Luclin and I don't
> even own
> > > it yet...
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > Yes, and maybe $265 isn't that much for you. But to some other
> people
> > that's
> > > a hell of a lot. I know people who had to get their comps on a
> > > rent-to-own basis and can barely afford EQ as it is. And yeah,
> it's
> > > easy to say they should quit, but they enjoy playing and it's an
> > > escape for them. To
> > suddenly
> > > not be able to play is a major burn. I just wish there was a way
> > > Verant could work it out to be friendlier with their lower end
> not so
> > > financially stable customers. It would be the nice thing to do
> if
> > > nothing else. Btw, someone mentioned where to get good RAM for
> cheap?
> > > Where was that again? I just found out my comp can have up to
> 1Ghz of
> > > RAM with it's motherboard
> > and
> > > chipset. luv, -Su
> > >
> > > > I have to disagree about not being to upgrade. It does not
> cost
> > > > that much. I bought a new chip board case and fan that only
> cost me
> > > > $265 after tax. Most of the other stuff can form my old
> system.
> > > > The chip is a AMD Athlon 950.
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > Visit the EverQuest homepage at http://www.everquest.com
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to
> > > > http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > Visit the EverQuest homepage at http://www.everquest.com
> > >
> > >
> > > Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to
> > > http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > Visit the EverQuest homepage at http://www.everquest.com
> > >
> > >
> > > Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to
> > > http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
> > >
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
> >
> > Visit the EverQuest homepage at http://www.everquest.com
> >
> >
> > Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to
> http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
> >
> >
> >
> > Visit the EverQuest homepage at http://www.everquest.com
> >
> >
> > Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to
> http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
> >
> >
> >
>
>
>
> Visit the EverQuest homepage at http://www.everquest.com
>
>
> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to
> http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
>
>
>
> Visit the EverQuest homepage at http://www.everquest.com
>
>
> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to
> http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
>
>
>
>
>
> ------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor
>
> Visit the EverQuest homepage at http://www.everquest.com
>
>
> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to
> http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
>
>
>
> Visit the EverQuest homepage at http://www.everquest.com
>
>
> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
>
>
>