Please create an account to participate in the Slashdot moderation system

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
×
Role Playing (Games)

Nepotism and Incompetence - Sigil's Legacy 68

Visceral Monkey writes "In the wake of SOE's purchase of Sigil and Vanguard , there are a number of questions to be answered. The commentary site F13, purveyors of usefully cynical opinions, have a pair of fascinating interviews on the subject. The first is an anonymous discussion with a former team member, laying out the working conditions at Sigil prior to the end. The second is a talk with Brad McQuaid, one of the men behind EverQuest and the captain of the debacle that is Vanguard. Both interviews highlight the nepotism, incompetence, corruption, and evasion that were the last day of Sigil Online Games."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Nepotism and Incompetence - Sigil's Legacy

Comments Filter:
  • by Anonymous Coward
    Brad wasn't the genius behind EverQuest. EverQuest was just a situation. The right game at the right time with the right design. Vanguard now has become the biggest flop vs hype in MMO history. This guy so poorly managed his company, it's amazing he ever had one to begin with... Anybody following Brad McQuaid might as well drink the poison-laced kool-aid now as he has nothing to offer but broken promises and nothing tangible.
    • Re: (Score:2, Interesting)

      by Anonymous Coward
      Whole heartedly agree..

      As the article states, the thing Brad is very good at is selling and bullshit. I have seen them man in action and he can sell ice to eskimos but backing up the wind....not so much. I was not surprised by the statement of 'the dungeon was made especially to not show the flaws' for E3.

      What I am really surprised by is the nepotism....seriously, rule of thumb is to keep the team seperate at all times. Hell, Brad should have known himself considering there was a few rounds of it under h
    • Re: (Score:2, Insightful)

      by vux984 ( 928602 )
      Brad wasn't the genius behind EverQuest.

      No, but to his credit, he deserves credit for being able to say no to the player base.

      WoW is the natural evolution of Everquest. It does practically everything the players wanted from everquest.

      The irony is that WoW by giving players everything they want, has no point. Its easy. Its dumb. It has no soul. Everquest, by refusing to give in to the players forced the players to adapt and cope. When you accomplished something in Everquest (pre Luclin), it felt like an acco
      • I agree. I started playing just after beta, quit for a while just before Kunark and came back just after Velious was released and then played for 3 years or so. The game was much more enjoyable early on when it was really hard. When it took 2 or 3 hours to cross the continent and then you could only bind in cities. It made the world feel "real" in some way. Another world you could escape into. That's what everyone talks about when they talk about EQ, the hard stuff they did early on. Even the people that co
      • "A game that didn't hold your hand to the point that you almost can't get lost, or fail, or lose anything ever, unless you actually try. EQ was famous for brutally punishing players for mistakes, and often even just arbitrarily (spawning a cyclops 2 feet from you that can kill you in 1 second), but as annoying as that was, it was actually preferable to the risk free 'you can run away from anything mechanics' that dominate later games."

        Ever run into a Fel Reaver?
        • Ever have your name shouted by Cazic Thule?
        • Re: (Score:1, Insightful)

          by Anonymous Coward
          Ever run into a Fel Reaver?

          You miss the point. Losing to anything in the game - including a "fel reaver" - has no consequences. The worst thing that happens? You have to waste some time running back to a corpse (a brief flash in the pan compared to the time sink that is travelling around mindlessly when you're alive) and/or you have to pay a pittance to repair some equipment.

          Warcraft's strong point is that anyone from an idiot to a genius can pick it up and play it, and it's failing point is the same. It's
      • I disagree that a trained monkey can do end game raid content in WoW. Last I heard there's only a handful of hardcore raiding guilds who have even stepped foot in The Eye in Tempest Keep - and so far none have defeated the final boss.

        The guild I'm in (and this isn't too uncommon) hasn't even got to the end of Karazhan.

        EQ was a timesink - nothing more nothing less. If anything WoW a good chunk of that and look where it left EQ... I honestly think most former EQ players (and I run into them all the time on Wo
        • Last I heard there's only a handful of hardcore raiding guilds who have even stepped foot in Plane of Hate - and so far none have defeated Innoruuk.

          The guild I'm in (and this isn't too uncommon) hasn't even got to the end of Fear.


          There, I oldschool Everquested it for ya. To say WoW raiding is somehow better than EQ raiding means you've never raided EQ. I haven't raided EQ for years, but I recall it being a ton of fun, challenging, and very very enjoyable. It's been a while since I've played a game t
        • by vux984 ( 928602 )
          I disagree that a trained monkey can do end game raid content in WoW.

          If you read what I wrote specifically excluded hardcore endgame raiding from what a trained monkey could do.
          So we agree.
      • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

        by Chris Burke ( 6130 )
        A game that didn't hold your hand to the point that you almost can't get lost, or fail, or lose anything ever, unless you actually try. EQ was famous for brutally punishing players for mistakes, and often even just arbitrarily (spawning a cyclops 2 feet from you that can kill you in 1 second), but as annoying as that was, it was actually preferable to the risk free 'you can run away from anything mechanics' that dominate later games.

        A game where death was something that actually hurt, as opposed to the 15 s
        • by Aladrin ( 926209 )
          You can say that all you want, but you and I seem to be in the minority. The average gameplayer WANTS pointless difficulty. They want artificial obstacles. It somehow gives them a feeling of accomplishment.

          I got over that a few years ago. I now only enjoy games if there is an actual reward for my work, instead of just being allowed to grind to the next level. I enjoy plot, puzzles, and other such rewards. I do not enjoy mindless tedium in order to experience more mindless tedium.

          I recently started pla
          • by brkello ( 642429 )
            I think WoW proves that most people don't want pointless difficulty.
          • Re: (Score:3, Informative)

            by Chris Burke ( 6130 )
            You can say that all you want, but you and I seem to be in the minority. The average gameplayer WANTS pointless difficulty. They want artificial obstacles. It somehow gives them a feeling of accomplishment.

            I don't mind difficult. What I do mind is punishment for failing to meet that difficulty, especially since it sounds as though like most game developers SOE can't distinguish "hard" from "cheap".

            It's bad enough that MMOs make you grind, though as you can tell by the fact that I'm subscribed to WoW I put
            • by Alioth ( 221270 )
              There's also having too _little_ risk.

              Back in the late 80s, I used to play a MMORPG called Shades (in those days, they were known as MUDs). It was a proper hack-and-slash MUD, not one of these wimpy 'no PKing allowed' MUDs that came afterwards.

              If you were killed by a bot or by another player, you lost half of your points.
              If you were killed by another player in a fight you started, you lost EVERYTHING.

              There were ways out of fights - for a small points penalty, you could flee (or for a larger points penalty,
        • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

          by vux984 ( 928602 )
          I can't imagine how groups would form in EQ, unless you already knew everyone involved.

          The risk of someone else screwing up and getting you all killed was far less than the risk of getting yourself killed if you tried to do anything interesting by yourself.

          At least, I'd never join a PuG, because I'm never going to want to risk losing 2 hours of actual progress because of someone else's screwup.

          I hear ya man, I mean, I know you only logged in to watch that little xp bar move forwards. The actual socializing,
          • Re: (Score:3, Informative)

            by Chris Burke ( 6130 )
            I notice you don't mention the exp penalty for death once in this post. Did you completely miss the point of my post which was very specific, or are you deliberately ignoring it so that the concept of not liking negative progress is the same as only caring about forward progress?

            Who defined it like that? Everquest wasn't meant to be a game you 'finished'. It was meant to be a game you explored. There was plenty to do at 20th level, and even more to do at 30th. The game at 50th wasn't going to disappear, so
            • Re: (Score:3, Interesting)

              by vux984 ( 928602 )
              I notice you don't mention the exp penalty for death once in this post. Did you completely miss the point of my post which was very specific, or are you deliberately ignoring it so that the concept of not liking negative progress is the same as only caring about forward progress?

              No. I didn't mention it specifically, because negative xp is not the only way it can be handled. Other games have had meaningful death penalties without negative xp.

              That's why in EQ you have the rare spawns that drop the loot that g
              • Trying not to sound like a Brad fanboy, I think EQ original, kunark and velious eras were the most fun. That's about the point in turned into a grindathon and stopped being as much fun. That's also about the time that Brad left. I put the two together, when he left the developers went in a different direction.

                Several things were put in the game that the "hardcore" players kept asking for, faster transport, easier binding, more uber loot in much harder places to get, tying tradeskills to levelling, and chang
        • To stay out of the MMO minefield I will instead use racing games as an example. Grand Prix Legends on the PC and, well any racing game on the consoles.

          GPL is brutal, the cars are a bitch to handle, require real skill, have full length F1 races, are fragile as hell and have random breakdowns. This means that if you make a mistake that could easily be the end of the race, if you drive the full 2 hours succesfully you can still be out by a random failure or simply running out of fuel.

          Compare this to console

          • You got one thing wrong with your otherwise nice description...

            EQ2 no longer makes you go get your corpse to reduce anything. When you die, you suffer a 0.5% xp penalty, which you can either recoup by killing mobs, or if you go off-line for a few hours, it clears itself.

            Even at high levels, it only takes a few mobs to erase 1 death's debt.
      • by brkello ( 642429 )
        Yes...EQ was brilliant. I wish more game developers would design things that served no other purpose but waste hours of your time and effort. They really should integrate that in to single player games. In Final Fantasy, it should erase your last 10 save games are start you out with 0 gold. That way you will really be scared when you fight that last boss! (obvious sarcasm)

        I'm sorry, but the people who actually yearn for this type of game are a much smaller number than the people who play games to enjo
        • by vux984 ( 928602 )
          I'm sorry, but the people who actually yearn for this type of game are a much smaller number than the people who play games to enjoy them.

          What exactly is enjoyable about a game you cannot lose?

          It makes the leveling part of the game quick and enjoyable (for the masses) and made the end game where they would focus on challenge and teamwork (for the "hardcores"). They combined the best of all worlds and dropped most of the boring crap and that is why it is popular.

          The masses and the hardcores are different gro
          • What exactly is enjoyable about a game you cannot lose?


            What exactly is enjoyable about a game you cannot win?

            It's the nature of the genre. It's not win or lose - it's the journey. If I enjoy the journey, what's your beef?
            • by vux984 ( 928602 )
              If I enjoy the journey, what's your beef?

              Nothing. I have no problem with anyone enjoying WoW. In fact I think its great that you have a title that's designed for your tastes.

              I however, don't enjoy the journey in WoW. I find it a pointless endeavour where I don't have to think to progress, where simply being awake is enough. I find that profoundly unsatisfying.

              I would like to play a more challenging game. It would be nice if someone wrote a good one. I don't expect you to play it.

              I had hoped Vangaurd would b
              • Indeed, it is as you say, a matter of tastes. I found Vanguard to be not only a boring grindfest, but one I was lucky to play for an hour without being booted from the server by various bugs. It became a normal part of the game. I slogged my way to level 17 or 18 if I recall, listening to all the folks in the forums tell me how much better it got when you hit the 20s. I couldn't for the life of me imagine why someone would go through uninteresting game play for hours on end just to get to "the good stuf
          • Re: (Score:2, Interesting)

            by theghost ( 156240 )
            "What exactly is enjoyable about a game you cannot lose?"

            It's not that you cannot lose, it's that you have to work to succeed. You can grind out XP and gold on easy mobs all day and be bored stiff, or you can try to solo group quests or go into dungeons that actually require a modicum of teamwork and skill to complete.

            A low death penalty encourages you to take risks and do fun, challenging stuff because the only real penalty for failure is failure itself. You don't have to go do boring stuff for 2 hours to
        • The problem is that people seem to equate playing a game with "work" I enjoyed getting the xp I lost the first time, I will enjoy getting it the second time. Its not a race to max level.
      • Its easy. Its dumb. It has no soul.

        Does that mean 8 million people are soulless idiots? Or that 8 million people just want to fuck off and forget the shit in the lives for short stints could also be made. Who wants to play a "game" and be "entertained" by being "brutally punished." And yes I realize that comment leaves itself open to S&M jokes, but seriously...

        20 minutes of travel and 2 hours of monster killing just to retrieve your corpse? Sounds less like creative/intelligent game design and mo
        • by vux984 ( 928602 )
          Does that mean 8 million people are idiots?

          Yes. The popularity of reality TV adequately proves that.

          Who wants to play a "game" and be "entertained" by being "brutally punished." And yes I realize that comment leaves itself open to S&M jokes, but seriously...

          Civilisation? Masters of Orion II? DialboII "Hardcore" (permadeath)... there is no shortage of games out there that have the capacity to obliterate a player.

          20 minutes of travel and 2 hours of monster killing just to retrieve your corpse? Sounds less
          • "Does that mean 8 million people are idiots?

            Yes. The popularity of reality TV adequately proves that."

            -> How is a person an idiot if they choose a different game than you? Are you the sole arbiter of popular culture?

            "Who wants to play a "game" and be "entertained" by being "brutally punished." And yes I realize that comment leaves itself open to S&M jokes, but seriously...

            Civilisation? Masters of Orion II? DialboII "Hardcore" (permadeath)... there is no shortage of games out there that have the capa
            • by vux984 ( 928602 )
              Oh really? How about... [bunch of stuff]

              So WoW is a game that can be challenging if you deliberately handicap yourself. I don't deny that. Anything can be made hard if you deliberately avoid the easy route and/or handicap yourself. That doesn't make the game itself hard though.

              The point is, a game was made for your tastes, it is called "Vanguard".

              I'm not sure Vangaurd is any good. I haven't played it. The reviews have been terrible... and not because its "hard", but because its not finished yet. The fact t
    • Re: (Score:3, Funny)

      by Dachannien ( 617929 )
      Vanguard now has become the biggest flop vs hype in MMO history.

      I'll take it you've never heard of The Matrix Online.

  • by twistedsymphony ( 956982 ) on Thursday May 17, 2007 @04:06PM (#19168263) Homepage
    Sounds like they subscribe to the Art of Demotivation [despair.com].
  • by volpone ( 551472 ) on Thursday May 17, 2007 @04:16PM (#19168477)
  • by Kohath ( 38547 ) on Thursday May 17, 2007 @05:12PM (#19169583)
    It's pretty easy to criticize when things go wrong. But in order for something like an MMO to be completed and succeed, a tremendous number of things need to go right. And even when that happens, like with Everquest 2 (which is a fun, profitable game), you still get criticized.

    Vanguard had a lot of problems, but if you actually read all the interviews, the core of their problems seems to be excess optimism. They tried to create the end-all and be-all MMO, and they didn't have what it took to succeed.

    They didn't have the money or time to achieve their vision. And they didn't have the discipline to narrow their vision to fit the resources they had.

    A lot of the rest of their problems seem to be less significant (or facets of the lack of discipline). You can say Brad ought to have been in the office at some events, but that doesn't make any money change hands. Employees' feelings don't make an MMO succeed. Hype doesn't make a bad game good or an over-hyped game bad. The practical things are the ones that matter.
    • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

      by dc29A ( 636871 ) *
      It's pretty easy to criticize when things go wrong. But in order for something like an MMO to be completed and succeed, a tremendous number of things need to go right.

      I find Sigil very easy to criticize. ONE QA!? What the hell? Let me repeat that, one single QA. One person to test the entire game. For projects far less complex we use 10 times the number of QA people Sigil used. It's beyond mind boggling that a project of Vanguard's complexity has one single person doing QA. If that is not worth criticising,
      • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

        by Kohath ( 38547 )
        The fact that they had one QA person didn't make the game a failure. The things that made the game a failure led to them only having one QA person.

        Brad explained this in his interview. Focusing on only having 1 QA person misses the big picture.

        You're right about the bad management though.
    • Actually I would say that Employees feelings DO (and not just CAN) make or break any piece of software. Morale is the key motivator. If your employees aren't motivated it doesn't matter how many hours they're working, they won't get the work done and the work they do complete will be sub par. Process, resources and plans are important factors in success but if you don't have morale you have nothing.
    • The reason why this game failed is simple: Bad Management. Not lack of money, not lack of time, not over-hype. Sigil should be a case-study in every MBA program as to how to NOT manage a project.
  • Deja Vu (Score:4, Insightful)

    by Organic Brain Damage ( 863655 ) on Thursday May 17, 2007 @07:02PM (#19171675)
    Sigil = Ion Storm
    Vanguard = Daikatana
    McQuaid = Romero
    EQ1 = DOOM

    Details here... http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Daikatana [wikipedia.org]

    Same as it ever was.
  • by ceswiedler ( 165311 ) * <chris@swiedler.org> on Thursday May 17, 2007 @07:10PM (#19171753)
    The MMO industry is shaping up to be much like the movie industry. There's a ton of money to be made, and everyone knows it, and everyone wants a piece. But making a blockbuster, or even breaking-even, is HARD. Really hard. And expensive. And so the only way to be profitable is to make a lot of them, some good and some bad, and hope you come out ahead.

    Worse, at least the movie business is rather mature. There are lots of people who know what they're doing, more or less. The MMO business is in its infancy. It's as if movies had been invented in 1970, then Jaws comes out in 1976, and you have a dozen production companies striving to reproduce that one huge success.

    In this day and age, just getting an MMO out the door is basically a success.
  • by Anonymous Coward on Friday May 18, 2007 @07:23AM (#19176759)
    I am also an ex-Sigil employee. I was not there for the mass firing... I left earlier. But I have no doubt that it went down exactly as this person says. That's how things are run at Sigil. It's the most unprofessional place I have ever worked. Hell, the McDonald's where I worked when I was a kid was more professional and had better morale than at Sigil. My quality of life went up about 100% after leaving there.

    The meeting was even worse than this guy said. I heard that someone asked if there was going to be any kind of severence for people getting fired and when he didn't get an answer and asked again, Donna Parkinson... a direcor... managment... was overheard to say "would someone please answer this asshole." Nice touch, huh? That doesn't surprise me either.

    There were dozens of problems with this project. But the bottom line comes down to mismanagement. Brad and Jeff isolated themselves from most of the company, leaving management of the the project, company, and personnel to the directors, namely Platter, Gilbertson, and Donna Parkinson (the former Office Manager turned Director of Business Development). And I can't think of one person at the company that has any respect left for any one of them.

    The thing that sucks is that most of us there at Sigil left other jobs to be there. Some people turned down other offers and stuck it out to finish the project and finally get some kind of pay off for the rediculious hours and demands we had put up with. Now we all walk away with nothing. Oh, wait.... not all of us. Some people are house hunting with what they made from the sale of the company. The rest of us got nothing for our years of work and the sacrifices we made.

    I keep reading comments like none of these people should ever be given management positions again. I agree. Hell, I wouldn't hire them to run a hamburger stand. And I will leave any project that they are ever attached to in the future. They don't deserve another chance or one bit of my respect.

    To all of you in management that are moving on to SOE or got paid for your share of the company, I hope you all sleep well tonight and enjoy your new jobs and your money from the sale (I don't care how much you did or didn't get, you got more than the rest of us). I still believe what goes around comes around. So I am hoping that all of us that you have screwed over the past few years find a way to land on our feet again in spite of our names being attached to your company. And I hope other people finally see you for the back-stabbing, greedy, childish assholes the rest of us from Sigil already know you are.
  • by garylian ( 870843 ) on Friday May 18, 2007 @10:31AM (#19178603)
    Just about everyone and their brother was trying to come up with the next WoW, after seeing the money that Blizzard was raking in. Heck, it started before that, with the success of EQ1.

    A MMO that has more than 100,000 subscribers is basically printing money. Keep the customers happy, and you have a great revenue stream that keeps on coming. Sure, you can release some non-MMO and make xx% on those 100,000 copies, and have to patch it. Or, you can release a MMO, make that same money, and keep on making money from your monthly fee while you do those patches. Gee, I wonder what many companies tried to do?

    Yep, make MMOs. LOTS of them. Look at some of the crap NCSoft is putting out. Some of them are old Korean games that are simply getting a re-skin. I liked CoH/V for simple fun, but most of their titles have been crap.

    The problem lies in the fact that most of these MMOs were bad ideas that only got worse as the corruption and nepotism set in. Everyone wants to get in on that "sure thing" revenue stream that a successful MMO has. So, there was some nepotistic investor "bloat".

    Brad simply had a major leg up on the competition. Simply having his name associated with Sigil and V:SoH meant that people were going to pay a LOT more attention to this game than any other new game publisher was going to get. And that extra attention, coupled with the Brad "fanboi" syndrome, meant a guarantee of a certain intial sales figure. Hello, Investors!

    So, this shouldn't really surprise people THAT much. Sure, you wish Brad and Sigil had better motives and intentions, but making and running a MMO is pure business. Brad figured that out, and became just like any other business man. He did his best to ensure his own profits, and screw the guys who really got him there: the developers.

    The sad part here is folks are getting bent out of shape over this, and it happens all the time in other businesses. Someone buys out company, brings in various "pet investor friends", milks the company a little, then sells it off. The employees that made the company get shit on, and the investors make a fortune.

    Welcome to the real world, MMOs!
    • by Valdrax ( 32670 )
      The sad part here is folks are getting bent out of shape over this, and it happens all the time in other businesses. Someone buys out company, brings in various "pet investor friends", milks the company a little, then sells it off. The employees that made the company get shit on, and the investors make a fortune.

      I think that it's far sadder that this sort of behavior no longer provokes outrage in some people, like yourself.
      Do you really that's it's okay that this is business as usual?

      Really, people that pr

The rule on staying alive as a program manager is to give 'em a number or give 'em a date, but never give 'em both at once.

Working...