if by any chance...

[Famous Warrior]

Master of Clan X wrote:
> So when is BS going to be shut down? 1 year? 6 months? Before Tribal Pride ever gets
> completed?
>
> How about betting on it? You're not scared to put your money where your mouth is are
> you?
>
> Anyway anyone who is dumb enough believe your tripe is not worth Tyler's time.

Why does BS need to be shut down? Evolve the game instead of iterating, it's a simple solution. Sure, vets are not going to like the rules being changed because that means that they'll have to come out of their comfort zone and adapt, but hey, it's better than the game dying. BS needs to evolve to a new form that is more appealing to new players and retains them. Being able to play your friends would be a huge start. Right now i can't even do that because of the stupid level restriction which is there because the game is not properly balanced to allow all players to be able to have a match with one another. Also, combat needs to be simpler. Pulling out a pencil and paper to calculate math so i can have the best chance at sinking in my level metagame is a horrible way to have yomi in the game.

What do you want to bet on?

[Famous Warrior]

Sky Tan wrote:
> Btw how much is tribal pride completed?
>
> %?

I had to let go of the last programmer because he refused to work with a team in order to speed things up. Also, he wanted TP to be a clone of Tiberium Alliance and i refused to design it that way. There was also the problem of a game like that being very art heavy which = expensive.

I am talking to a new promising team from India. I just submitted the milestones yesterday. If everything goes well we're talking about 4 months before an alpha version is out.

[Famous Warrior]

Rainbow King wrote:
> Hey Luis, got a proposition for ya:
>
> RELEASE AT LEAST ONE FUCKIN GAME BEFORE YOU TRY TO ACT LIKE YOU KNOW ANY
> DAMN THING ABOUT DEVELOPMENT!!
>
> :3
>
> you can read all those bullshit articles all over the internet and act like
> a guru all you want, but, until you actually have REAL life experience
> doing so, your opinions and words are as credible as EBB's

Except that this particular subject is not about me telling TYLER how to design, but about me as a Clan Master being worried that my people are going to be left hanging by a developer that doesn't care. Again, all the Vampire Wars clans got fucked and Zynga didn't care nor are they the only ones to abandon their hard core players when it suits them.

[Famous Warrior]

Mysterious Captain wrote:
> Dear Luis the idiot,
>
> You want to make a game that is not similar to BS, and yet you can ask
> Tyler NOT to shut down BS? Sounds a little fishy but i think Luis wants to
> copy BS.

Then you are the idiot, because anyone that has bothered to look into it knows that TP is not at all like BS, if anything it is closer to Civilization Worlds or Age Of Empires Online.

Also, it's not like the game will appeal to hardcore fans of naval strategy games, which is what BS attracts nor will want people from this board to come play my game; I'd like to keep it troll free, thank you.

[Famous Warrior]

andrew_wong93 wrote:
> Investing in something doesnt always guarantee good returns there are risks
> in all types of investing

Yeah, but the risk can be mitigated and i don't see TYLER doing that. I see them taking our money to develop games for someone else, this is a red flag.

[Dirty Stallis]

Louis

Which company, in any industry, guarantees that it will never halt production of a particular product offering? Any company who makes this promise is lying, because it is not possible to keep. Even something as simple as going bankrupt could end production. Anyone who believes in an infinate duration of production is a fool.

Which company, in any industry, does not use its profits to diversivy its product offering? It is a smart business decision, because it allows you to withstand fluctuations within any particular segment. Even you have attempted to create several product offering to appeal to different segments of the market. No different than TYLER doing the same with BS, Social Life, Pic Blitz, etc.

Which company, in any industry, will not try to keep its employees engaged in their work? It is much cheaper to keep an employee than train a new one. Even you have diverted resources from one project to another, because the programmer you hired didn't want to work on the project you hired them to complete. No different than TYLER doing the same with BS, Social Life, Pic Blitz, etc.

When you purchase a product, you recieve the product. You don't get to tell the company how it can or can't use the money you spent. It is no longer your money. If that isn't acceptable, then you shouldn't purchase the product.

[Famous Warrior]

Dirty Stallis wrote:
> Louis
>
> Which company, in any industry, guarantees that it will never halt
> production of a particular product offering? Any company who makes this
> promise is lying, because it is not possible to keep. Even something as
> simple as going bankrupt could end production. Anyone who believes in an
> infinate duration of production is a fool.

Ok, fine. You're right. They could still promise as i stated earlier but put a clause for reasonable exceptions, such as bankruptcy and you're golden. They can't just NOT be accountable, because we have all seen where that leads and what happens. They can't just operate with impunity.


> Which company, in any industry, does not use its profits to diversivy its
> product offering? It is a smart business decision, because it allows you
> to withstand fluctuations within any particular segment. Even you have
> attempted to create several product offering to appeal to different
> segments of the market. No different than TYLER doing the same with BS,
> Social Life, Pic Blitz, etc.

It is NOT smart to abandon your core players, they are your brand's advocates, a salesforce that works for free with perhaps the only cost being satisfaction. All these other games didn't need to close, but they did because the developer wants to pull talent from those games to focus on new ones in order to capture that "new game" effect that attracts, but quickly repels" new players. It is a short-term profit thinking created by the incompetent and lazy. When it comes to hard core games, the best strategy is a long term vision based on sustainability and growth. THAT makes more business sense than the "slash and burn" mentally lazy thinking.


> Which company, in any industry, will not try to keep its employees engaged
> in their work? It is much cheaper to keep an employee than train a new
> one. Even you have diverted resources from one project to another, because
> the programmer you hired didn't want to work on the project you hired them
> to complete. No different than TYLER doing the same with BS, Social Life,
> Pic Blitz, etc.

But i didn't cave in and changed the original purpose of TP to be a clone of Tiberium Alliance, i didn't change just to cater to his whims. I am the designer, the producer and the director. I get to say what the game will look like, not my workforce. I pay them to follow my direction.
If TYLER would be so courageous, they would start looking for a new team that does want to work on BS and evolve it to be a better performer. They have no excuse, there are a ton of sites in which to find talent. Freelancer.com, Elance.com, oDesk.com, Guru.com and the list goes on and on. You tell your programmers what to do, you the other way around.


> When you purchase a product, you recieve the product. You don't get to
> tell the company how it can or can't use the money you spent. It is no
> longer your money. If that isn't acceptable, then you shouldn't purchase
> the product.

Ok, so sure, they may use our Ocho money to make games to replace BS and f**k us, so maybe the solution is to not buy anything until they do otherwise.

[Gary Paul]

I am curious how it is that Luis seems to exhibit such a vast wealth of knowledge, experience and business advice when talking about the subject of social gaming and more specifically, Tyler when he himself has royally fcked up in his own endeavours. Does he honestly expect to be taken seriously?

[Andrew Bowman]

Are you French Louis?

[Famous Warrior]

Gary Paul wrote:
> I am curious how it is that Luis seems to exhibit such a vast wealth of
> knowledge, experience and business advice when talking about the subject of
> social gaming and more specifically, Tyler when he himself has royally
> fcked up in his own endeavours. Does he honestly expect to be taken
> seriously?

How did i royally fucked my own efforts? By getting scammed by programmers? I can only do my best and the one thing i am missing is funds, which i slowly generate busting my ass as a stagehand building up and tearing down shows in Las Vegas. If i had the funds i would be making wonders. TYLER has the funds to make wonders but not the will. They do not love BS.

All i can do as a Clan Master to protect my clanmates is to raise a little Hell and troll the devs and hope that they change their minds about closing BS, because if they don't, we and every single other clan out there will be truly and royally fucked.

[TimberWolph]

First, is your business model to go the route of Duke Nukem Forever? Second, there has NEVER been a company that continues to support a game forever and there will never be a company that will. Third, a vendor does not have to give a refund. However, it would be nice but then there wouldn't be a game since they wouldn't have a profit being that any money they made they would have to give back. Fourth, they could operate with impunity if they want too. As long as it doesn't break a law. If you don't like what they are doing, then don't support them. Now a question. What level restriction are you talking about? Another thing.
Famous Warrior wrote:
>It is NOT smart to abandon your core players

Famous Warrior wrote:
>Sure, vets are not going to like the rules being changed because that means that they'll have to come out of their comfort zone and adapt

So it is not smart to abandon your core players but it is smart to screw them over?

[Famous Warrior]

TimberWolph wrote:
> First, is your business model to go the route of Duke Nukem Forever? Second, there
> has NEVER been a company that continues to support a game forever and there will
> never be a company that will. Third, a vendor does not have to give a refund.
> However, it would be nice but then there wouldn't be a game since they wouldn't have
> a profit being that any money they made they would have to give back. Fourth, they
> could operate with impunity if they want too. As long as it doesn't break a law. If
> you don't like what they are doing, then don't support them. Now a question. What
> level restriction are you talking about? Another thing.

I already addressed this whole thing on an earlier post.


> Famous Warrior wrote:
> >It is NOT smart to abandon your core players
>
> Famous Warrior wrote:
> >Sure, vets are not going to like the rules being changed because that means that
> they'll have to come out of their comfort zone and adapt
>
> So it is not smart to abandon your core players but it is smart to screw them over?

That depends on what your definition of "screw them over" is. If the game needs to change to survive, then so be it. They may or may not consider that getting "screwed", but i do know that no matter how you slice it, letting the game die will definitely be considered "screwing over" the vets, along with everyone else.

[TimberWolph]

Since you are attempting to dismiss a whole section by having addressed one question in a previous post I will post it all again without that question.
TimberWolph wrote:
> Second, there has NEVER been a company that continues to support a game forever and there > will never be a company that will. Third, a vendor does not have to give a refund.
> However, it would be nice but then there wouldn't be a game since they wouldn't have
> a profit being that any money they made they would have to give back. Fourth, they
> could operate with impunity if they want too. As long as it doesn't break a law. If
> you don't like what they are doing, then don't support them. Now a question. What
> level restriction are you talking about?

Now wouldn't letting the game die be "abandoning" the vets? You said that changing the game means the vets will have to come out of their comfort zone I would say yeah that would be screwing them over, cause they wouldn't have a comfort zone if they didn't like it where it was at.

[Famous Warrior]

TimberWolph wrote:
> Since you are attempting to dismiss a whole section by having addressed one question
> in a previous post I will post it all again without that question.

No. Go back and read. Someone else already beat you to this argument.


> Now wouldn't letting the game die be "abandoning" the vets? You said that
> changing the game means the vets will have to come out of their comfort zone I would
> say yeah that would be screwing them over, cause they wouldn't have a comfort zone if
> they didn't like it where it was at.

That's not abandoning the vets, no. If BS would become a fundamentally different game tomorrow, like, i dunno, some strategy game based on a combat element system or something, then most of the top players would not like it since they already are masters of the rules and wouldn't want to risk not being the top dogs anymore. But, if the change is such that it allows new players to come in and stay then that's good for the game even if some of the vets would leave in protest. At least the game still exists and it can grow, with the other option of simply letting the game die to focus on a new game to get new players by taking advantage of the newness factor, everyone gets screwed.

[TimberWolph]

TimberWolph wrote:
> Now wouldn't letting the game die be "abandoning" the vets?
Famous Warrior wrote:
> That's not abandoning the vets, no.
Famous Warrior wrote:
> It is NOT smart to abandon your core players