For the sake of argument, let’s say that I’m a horrible jerk. Yet you don’t really know it. In fact, I’m actually a compadre, as far as you know. This means I am not just an annoying or hateful person, but something more sinister. I’m deceitful. Top it off with this tidbit straight from the cubicle world, I’m willing to bury you and your work to get ahead. In my mind, I believe you’re a cash cow. Someone I can constantly abuse, manipulate and take advantage of for my own gains.

With the anonymity of the Internet behind me, I take my douchebaggery to the extreme. I jump on your account, loot it for everything it’s worth, claim the goods on an alt, redistribute them to my mains and delete the temporary mule. Rather than disappear into the sunset I hang around, consoling you as you complain to me, your “best friend”, how your account was ravaged. I offer a shoulder, in-game currency, even a hot new ride and tell you to keep playing.

Now, let’s say I take it a step too far. I overplay my hand, tipping you off to something odd. Eventually, the authorities realize that it was me. I’m busted and clearly in the wrong. What do you expect to have happen?

Me, I expect the authority figure to take care of it, because, well, they’re the authority. Whomever it is has access to loads of information that I, the victim, cannot see. I believe that the person was given then position because the person is level-headed, analytical and ultimately fair. The information will be poured over, digested and receive the appropriate response, consistent with previous cases. Parties on either side may believe the outcome is unfair to them, but unbiased parties wouldn’t expect anything different.

In APB: Reloaded, a F2P title, a GamersFirst GM decided to let the hackee decide the outcome of the busted hacker.

This decision blows my mind. First of all, Barnarner claims “it is a relatively unique case.” In what universe is this unique? I’ve witnessed these acts a handful of times across my MMOG career. I can’t even count how many times I’ve read of the dastardly act. That’s not even my main concern, that would be the precedent that the GM is setting. Continue Reading

We’ve been following the implosion of Realtime Worlds and APB, its flagship title, since it kicked off earlier this year. If you need a recap, the game had an identity crisis before launch, was buggy and confused mess at launch, didn’t make much money and ultimately was closed in record setting time followed by the studio itself. The debacle lead to EA and Hi-Rez Studios offering some support to those burned.

After weeks of trying, the skeleton crew left on by the creditors have managed to find a company brave enough to purchase the intellectual property, GamersFirst (I’ve never heard of any of the company’s games). The company announced last week that it’d acquire the IP and infrastructure, and even foot the bill for employees left without pay and promised bonuses. Nice of GamersFirst.

The F2P-centric company will relaunch APB as a F2P game entitled APB: Reloaded in early 2011.

GamersFirst’s Bjorn Book-Larsson had the following to say:

“APB was a game that had several exceptional features and some brilliant ideas, even though it was plagued by some initial balance and monetization issues. We want to take all the unique features of this title, such as its unparalleled character, weapon and car customization systems, and convert the game to a true free-to-play game. We are deep into the planning and early execution stages for this next chapter of APB and we will share more details in the near future.”

So pixiestixy will be able to get her fashion business started free of charge now!

In almost-entirely-unrelated news, Bizarre Creations, maker of Blur, Project Gotham Racing and my favorite arcade racer ever, Metropolis Street Racer, was reportedly closed by Activision today. Call of Duty: Blood Stone might have been a better title.

We continue looking at games that, for one reason or another, were canned at various stages of development. Whether you actively played and enjoyed them or couldn’t care less about their collapse, every failed title meant fewer opportunities and choice for players, as well as a loss to the gaming industry in general. Refer to Part I, if you haven’t already done so, and follow along for more entries.

Tabula Rasa

Another Richard Garriot game, albeit canned by a different publisher. Tabula Rasa took what was at the time a fresh concept of mixing elements of a third-person shooter with traditional MMORPG gameplay. Coupled with a comprehensive Sci-Fi setting and a flexible career system, it is easy to see why gamers talk about the loss of the title to this day.

Despite having all those exciting features, the game was just not polished enough at release. According to the developers and the fanbase, if Tabula Rasa was given enough time to shape up and roll out a few expansions, it could realize more of it’s potential and subscriber numbers would rapidly increase. This, however, was not enough for the publisher NCSoft, which claimed that the game was not profitable and worth keeping from a business point of view. Tabula Rasa was estimated to cost $106 million but only made just over $5 million and clearly, the executives were not pleased. On 28 February of 2009, the game got the axe after customers enjoyed some time with it free of charge.

Middle Earth Online Continue Reading

The last couple of years in the MMO industry have been interesting, to say the least. As gaming in general has become more mainstream, online integration has greatly increased in availability and significance in modern media. With the success of games on various social networks such as Facebook, more and more companies are looking at the MMO market as the next logical step; and where attention goes, money usually follows.

While there are certainly positive aspects to this process, one of the downsides is that a number of announced titles seem to have the MMO label slapped on simply for the sake of it. Some of the newer games under this heading are arguably successful in their attempt to differ from the traditional notion of MMOs and the way we view them today. Others, however, seem to use the concept of persistence as a gimmick and never really deliver on the MMO front while still attempting to charge customers the same price of admission as other, more established games in the genre.

What essentially looks like developers pigeonholing themselves into a sub-genre their game isn’t a typical example of actually makes sense from a business point of view. Under the MMO heading, a title may become a much more profitable undertaking and attract more interest from investors. The company then has opportunities to not only charge its customers for a copy of the product but also find additional ways to monetize it. It is also a smart move from a marketing point of view — adding an MMO label to a game has the potential to attract a new market and benefit from customers who might not have been interested otherwise, as well as give the title a way to differentiate itself from primary competitors (i.e. it’s not just another action game). Continue Reading