Posi Confirms: COH Largest and Most Active MMO Ever Shut Down
By
Adar_ICT,
Posted on: 2012-10-29 18:54 in CoH and CoV General Discussions
Quote:
1, you have no idea what I have knowledge in or dont have knowledge in. Do you even know me? I dont recall ever meeting you. Sure, it's profitable now but does that mean it will be that way forever? Maybe maybe not, but given that the profits are not at the level it was when it started off, and front the graphs provided here in this forum, it seemed to have been slipping aka bring in less profits.|
Originally Posted by Arcanaville
My point was that was the stupidest thing I've read in weeks. Its stupid because:
1. Pointing out that you can use other content when content access is revoked completely misses not just the point of Rangle's post, it fails to comprehend what the point of viewing content is. Human beings don't generally view content because they have a content viewing minimum they have to maintain, like calories or oxygen. If someone takes away my copy of The Avengers its not a trivial loss if I can just watch Halloween 5 instead. The loss of access to specific content is not replaceable with completely different content because content is not fungible. 2. Pointing out that other forms of games do not have a revocation problem is missing the point of a discussion of what MMOs *should* be as opposed to what they currently are. That's comparable to saying that if you were opposed to Aparteid, rather than complain about it you should simply avoid countries that practice it. 3. Speaking of analogies, analogizing the shutdown of an MMO to capricious and random ways of dying isn't stupid because of its extreme exaggeration, its stupid because it analogizes the shutdown of MMOs to other situations people would oppose and fight to prevent even more strongly. Which is a case of someone shooting themselves in their own foot, and having the bullet ricochet off the ground and blow a hole in their own forehead. Its implying the exact opposite of what was intended, in a manner worthy of ridicule besides. 4. And it ends with an implied statement about the profitability of the game, a subject you have zero knowledge about and are as a result completely wrong about. The game was, in fact, very profitable, and not in any danger of being unprofitable for the foreseeable future. That's the primary reason the developers themselves were surprised by the shutdown; they are simply barred from commenting on the specific circumstances of the shutdown. Certainty in the face of ignorance, nonsense masquerading as logic, self-annihilating extreme exaggeration without irony, semantics without substance, all with the implication of the exact opposite of its vacuous extent. "Stupid" seemed to cover it colloquially, but I'm generally open to elucidation upon request. |
2, I used that analogy because I've seen people compare this death of a game being compared to someone killing a family member, or death, and or death of a family pet. And yea my point in pointing it out, was that it was not that serious. As you have seem to confirm but didnt call it stupid when others used that anology for the closing up. So it seems it wasnt the content of that statement that made it stupid but more so of who was saying it.
3, Then explain Rangle's point then? I seemed to have missed it. And pelase hold the insults this time if you can.
-Female Player-
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by mauk2
Evil_Legacy became one of my favorite posters with two words.
"Kick Rocks." I laffed so hard.  Never change, E_L! |
Quote:
You think that CO will end up being stand alone? It seems to be already set up for it with the solo centric gameplay and content, more so than COX. Not to mentioned it was once developed with game console in mind. I wonder if that is what they are planning on doing after CO shutters the doors? |
Originally Posted by Electric-Knight
Now, why should that be the case for a video game that you knew was an online only game? The answer to that is that these mmorpgs are not simply just games, but communities built around a game and sustained by customers and hobbyists and people putting in real labors of love. Again, I'm not saying that any of that should legally prevent a closure, but I could certainly see it enabling a backup recompense (that most would feel rather worthless anyway, heh). I know I'd be a lot happier if I could have even just a strictly single-player instance of the game, despite NCSoft being tuna-brained lousy heads (that's a Calvin and Hobbes reference and not some sort of racially/nationally-charge slur!). I like being able to log in as Electric-Knight and zap some baddies now and then and if they won't take my money for it, I'd kindly like to still be able to (without a costume, tasers and the risk of legal ramifications). |
But with that question there is interesting. You think companies at least should give a warnign if things are nothing going well as they like before announcing closure that way players can guage whether their "hard work" (always thought a point of a game was for fun not work) and love can be measured and they know whether or not it's enough or not and a chance to at least try to fix it. With this much zeal over the closing think there would be this much zeal into either spending more, or getting more to join if a warning was given?
-Female Player-
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by mauk2
Evil_Legacy became one of my favorite posters with two words.
"Kick Rocks." I laffed so hard. Never change, E_L! |
Quote:
Perhaps for the last time here:|
Originally Posted by Arcanaville
My point was that was the stupidest thing I've read in weeks.
|
Blood Widow Ricki * Tide Shifter * T-34 * Opposite Reaction * Shaolin Midnight * ChernobylCheerleader
Quote:
One thing that i have to say about Arcanaville that i admire because i've never been able to do it myself: when she criticizes a post she refrains from directly criticizing the poster. Even if a stupid post is actually one of the most intelligent and inspired posts by that poster she still sticks to criticizing the post. i sometimes wish i had that sort of self-restraint.
|
Originally Posted by SpyralPegacyon
Perhaps for the last time here:
|
Dr. Todt's theme.
i make stuff...
Quote:
Of course they will. Never mind that out of all the people arguing about it, only one is in a position to have access to the kind of inside information that would definitively prove that, and only one would have the personal ethics to be unwilling to reveal their source -- even if it meant "losing" the argument -- because it would probably get people in trouble.|
Originally Posted by Tannim222
Despite the circumstancial evidence to support your statement that PS wasn't in the red, those that disagree will simply ask "well what proof do you have?"
 |
I mean, if *I* said that I had that information, nobody would believe me. But Arcana doesn't make those kinds of statements lightly or without consideration.
Of course they won't believe her anyway, because there's no "proof" they can see. So it's just "speculation". Never mind that saying it was unprofitable is speculation as well, but a less likely speculation since the only official statements that have been made have said that opposite.
I'm kind of curious what kind of proof would be acceptable, in the age of electronic documents that can easily be fabricated.
And people say you never learn anything reading forum posts. I can now add the word "fungible" to my vocabulary after looking up what it meant.
Quote:
Yea shouldnt just avoid countries with Aparteid (the shutdown) but whats going on here is not that aparteid is a problem but the real question is why wasnt it an issue when it was happening to other games in other parts(other ncsoft games that have been shutdown) of ther country(NCSoft) but is a big problem when it happens in this part of the country(COX)?|
Originally Posted by Arcanaville
2. Pointing out that other forms of games do not have a revocation problem is missing the point of a discussion of what MMOs *should* be as opposed to what they currently are. That's comparable to saying that if you were opposed to Aparteid, rather than complain about it you should simply avoid countries that practice it. |
Why wasnt the issue addressed then? Or why no speak out against it then like now? Why was apathy appropriate then but not now?
This what makes it seem lees so than people caring about NCSoft done and more so it's only a problem because how dare them shutdown the game they are currently playing.
If aparteid was THAT much of a big deal and so wrong then it should have been addressed a long time ago instead of not giving a crap as long and treated as if it was the proper thing to do but when it happens here it's the most villainous thing that could ever happen to a person.
-Female Player-
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by mauk2
Evil_Legacy became one of my favorite posters with two words.
"Kick Rocks." I laffed so hard. Never change, E_L! |
Quote:
Tortured (ha ha) metaphors aside, many of us *have* talked about NCSoft's similar behavior in the past and even complained directly to them about it.
|
Originally Posted by Evil_Legacy
Yea shouldnt just avoid countries with Aparteid (the shutdown) but whats going on here is not that aparteid is a problem but the real question is why wasnt it an issue when it was happening to other games in other parts(other ncsoft games that have been shutdown) of ther country(NCSoft) but is a big problem when it happens in this part of the country(COX)?
Why wasnt the issue addressed then? Or why no speak out against it then like now? Why was apathy appropriate then but not now? This what makes it seem lees so than people caring about NCSoft done and more so it's only a problem because how dare them shutdown the game they are currently playing. If aparteid was THAT much of a big deal and so wrong then it should have been addressed a long time ago instead of not giving a crap as long and treated as if it was the proper thing to do but when it happens here it's the most villainous thing that could ever happen to a person. |
The Alt Alphabet ~ OPC: Other People's Characters ~ Terrific Screenshots of Cool ~ Superhero Fiction
I have never said CoH was not profitable - just not profitable enough to keep open apparently.
I don't need proof to know that CoH was not VERY profitable. I can discern that from the NCSoft quarterly data myself.
And for the record I am not PRO NCsoft, but I am also not ANTI NCSoft as they have done nothing to make me hate them.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Codewalker
Of course they will. Never mind that out of all the people arguing about it, only one is in a position to have access to the kind of inside information that would definitively prove that, and only one would have the personal ethics to be unwilling to reveal their source -- even if it meant "losing" the argument -- because it would probably get people in trouble.
I mean, if *I* said that I had that information, nobody would believe me. But Arcana doesn't make those kinds of statements lightly or without consideration. Of course they won't believe her anyway, because there's no "proof" they can see. So it's just "speculation". Never mind that saying it was unprofitable is speculation as well, but a less likely speculation since the only official statements that have been made have said that opposite. I'm kind of curious what kind of proof would be acceptable, in the age of electronic documents that can easily be fabricated. |
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Paladiamors
I love you, I Burnt the Toast!
|
Quote:
And for many people firmly committed to a particular narrative no amount of facts or proof will sway them. Take a look Donald Trump and other "birthers", for example. Barring time travel you can't get much stronger proof than your birth being announced in the local paper in addition to having it repeatedly certified by the records department that has paper documents. There's been more proof produced than for any other president ever, and it's still "nuh-uh, I mean 'real' proof, like maybe a movie of the event that was sealed in a tin with the director of the FBI's signature, and if you do produce that I'll demand you also take me there in a time machine to witness it or I'll still doubt it, and even then..." Seriously, sometimes you have to recognize that there's no point in bothering; they already know the truth and no amount of facts will alter that.
|
Originally Posted by Codewalker
Of course they will. Never mind that out of all the people arguing about it, only one is in a position to have access to the kind of inside information that would definitively prove that, and only one would have the personal ethics to be unwilling to reveal their source -- even if it meant "losing" the argument -- because it would probably get people in trouble.
I mean, if *I* said that I had that information, nobody would believe me. But Arcana doesn't make those kinds of statements lightly or without consideration. Of course they won't believe her anyway, because there's no "proof" they can see. So it's just "speculation". Never mind that saying it was unprofitable is speculation as well, but a less likely speculation since the only official statements that have been made have said that opposite. I'm kind of curious what kind of proof would be acceptable, in the age of electronic documents that can easily be fabricated. |
Dr. Todt's theme.
i make stuff...
Quote:
You are wrong in making assumptions about the reason.
|
Originally Posted by I Burnt The Toast
I have never said CoH was not profitable - just not profitable enough to keep open apparently.
|
LOL OK. So if CoH was making 10x the profit they would still be closed down - you know that how? I realize you think NCSoft is an evil company blah blah blah, but if CoH had a much better PROFIT I doubt this thread would even exist. Again.. I stick by my assertion: CoH was profitable just not profitable enough.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Codewalker
You are wrong in making assumptions about the reason.
|
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Paladiamors
I love you, I Burnt the Toast!
|
Quote:
I know you have no knowledge of the profitability of City of Heroes, or you wouldn't be saying what you're saying. Its as simple as that.|
Originally Posted by Evil_Legacy
1, you have no idea what I have knowledge in or dont have knowledge in.
|
Quote:
| 3, Then explain Rangle's point then? I seemed to have missed it. And pelase hold the insults this time if you can. |
As technology has granted intellectual property rights holders more *ability* to control the tangible property, tangible rights have been mostly ignored or discounted in favor of the preeminence of intellectual property rights owners, in defiance of common law tradition. Mostly because IP property rights holders have better legal lobbies.
Common law principles state that when I buy a box, with a CD, with a program on it, I have the right to do anything I want with those things. But the law has been twisted to claim that running a program is copying it (because it has to be copied into memory) so the legal theory is that running a program I purchased can be controlled by the rights holder under their right to control "copying." Which is frankly ludicrous.
Its not automatically obvious that MMO companies have no obligation to either provide for, or at least allow their customers to continue to use the elements of the game they purchased. The legal doctrines that allow MMOs to "license" software and control even the use of the tangible elements of the software packages are very recent in nature. And they are based on interpretations of how technology works that is frankly idiotic.
One day people will have bionic implants for eyes and the current legal doctrine in force today could force such people to close their eyes when attending movies because watching them would be barred as "illegal copying of digital media to an unauthorized medium."
When we subscribe to magazines, we don't buy ownership of the content. But we do buy the right to ownership of the paper, and the use of that paper in basically any way we want, for as long as we want, short of attempting to commercialize the content ourselves. The notion that MMOs can actively prevent people from using the content because "they are owners and owners can do whatever they want" is a legal doctrine that exists primarily for software in the modern age. A content provider that attempted to exercise their rights in that fashion for most other forms of media, like magazines, would theoretically have the same rights, but would be laughed out of court, laughed at in general, and probably draw the ire of the vast majority of consumers.
That legal doctrine only works because it involves very powerful special interests, and the minutia of technological implementations, both beyond the reach of the average consumer.
[Guide to Defense] [Scrapper Secondaries Comparison] [Archetype Popularity Analysis]
In one little corner of the universe, there's nothing more irritating than a misfile...
(Please support the best webcomic about a cosmic universal realignment by impaired angelic interference resulting in identity crisis angst. Or I release the pigmy water thieves.)
Quote:
I don't think NCSoft is evil. I think as a corporate entity, it is amoral by nature.|
Originally Posted by I Burnt The Toast
I realize you think NCSoft is an evil company blah blah blah
|
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by I Burnt The Toast
if CoH had a much better PROFIT I doubt this thread would even exist.
|
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by I Burnt The Toast
So if CoH was making 10x the profit they would still be closed down - you know that how?
Again.. I stick by my assertion: CoH was profitable just not profitable enough. |
Quote:
Ok all of a sudden you know everything about me. Ok that is your opinion but I can clearly say that you are wrong because I know myself and I know what I know. Not sure where you get off all of a sudden telling me what I know and dont know, when you are not even me, and you dont even know me. You view it as you think that I dont have any knowledge on that subject but you cannot say in a definitive manner that you know. Do I go around telling you what you know and dont know? No I would appreciate if you dont do it to me like you been knowing me your entire life. You dont know me like that, ok?|
Originally Posted by Arcanaville
I know you have no knowledge of the profitability of City of Heroes, or you wouldn't be saying what you're saying. Its as simple as that.
|
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Arcanaville
Traditionally, intellectual property rights were subservient to tangible property rights. A magazine publisher cannot claim to own the content on the magazine, and demand you destroy the actual paper you own because they decide they don't want you reading it anymore. They do own the intellectual property printed upon the paper, but as the owner of the actual paper, you can refuse to honor their request to destroy it, or even attempt to erase the content from it or be barred from looking at it. I own it, I will look at it whenever I want.
As technology has granted intellectual property rights holders more *ability* to control the tangible property, tangible rights have been mostly ignored or discounted in favor of the preeminence of intellectual property rights owners, in defiance of common law tradition. Mostly because IP property rights holders have better legal lobbies. Common law principles state that when I buy a box, with a CD, with a program on it, I have the right to do anything I want with those things. But the law has been twisted to claim that running a program is copying it (because it has to be copied into memory) so the legal theory is that running a program I purchased can be controlled by the rights holder under their right to control "copying." Which is frankly ludicrous. Its not automatically obvious that MMO companies have no obligation to either provide for, or at least allow their customers to continue to use the elements of the game they purchased. The legal doctrines that allow MMOs to "license" software and control even the use of the tangible elements of the software packages are very recent in nature. And they are based on interpretations of how technology works that is frankly idiotic. One day people will have bionic implants for eyes and the current legal doctrine in force today could force such people to close their eyes when attending movies because watching them would be barred as "illegal copying of digital media to an unauthorized medium." When we subscribe to magazines, we don't buy ownership of the content. But we do buy the right to ownership of the paper, and the use of that paper in basically any way we want, for as long as we want, short of attempting to commercialize the content ourselves. The notion that MMOs can actively prevent people from using the content because "they are owners and owners can do whatever they want" is a legal doctrine that exists primarily for software in the modern age. A content provider that attempted to exercise their rights in that fashion for most other forms of media, like magazines, would theoretically have the same rights, but would be laughed out of court, laughed at in general, and probably draw the ire of the vast majority of consumers. That legal doctrine only works because it involves very powerful special interests, and the minutia of technological implementations, both beyond the reach of the average consumer. |
What is in it for the company to keep a game running, even if it's hurting their profits, or want to use the resources elsewhere or want to cut back?
From what I get this law would only benefit the consumer which would make the monthly subscription basically mean life time access to the game even if it's hurts the company that made the game in the first place. So why would companies want to make games under those conditions?
-Female Player-
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by mauk2
Evil_Legacy became one of my favorite posters with two words.
"Kick Rocks." I laffed so hard. Never change, E_L! |
Quote:
But they stayed? For years for some of them. If they complained and still continue to give money what was the incentives for them (NCSoft) to even take it serious? |
Originally Posted by Ironik
Tortured (ha ha) metaphors aside, many of us *have* talked about NCSoft's similar behavior in the past and even complained directly to them about it.
|
Why no boycotts? Why no smear campaigns like now? Why no swearing off NCSoft games forever like now? Why no dogging NCSoft on ever media out there like now? Why no "Organized" effort and calling "celebrities" and media and requesting interviews with NCSoft until now? Why wasnt worth a serious effort until now?
Assuming that the "effort" is having as much of an effect as it is having now, why not put that "effort" to work the first two times? Why only when COX is on the chopping block?
-Female Player-
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by mauk2
Evil_Legacy became one of my favorite posters with two words.
"Kick Rocks." I laffed so hard. Never change, E_L! |
Quote:
There could be a get-out clause for the company, that allowed them to sell the game if they were no longer interested in it, or to release it as opensource for the players to see if they could make something of it.
|
Originally Posted by Evil_Legacy
What is in it for the company to keep a game running, even if it's hurting their profits, or want to use the resources elsewhere or want to cut back?
From what I get this law would only benefit the consumer which would make the monthly subscription basically mean life time access to the game even if it's hurts the company that made the game in the first place. So why would companies want to make games under those conditions? |
@Golden Girl
City of Heroes comics and artwork
Quote:
Hyperbole should only be wielded by competent individuals.|
Originally Posted by Evil_Legacy
Ok all of a sudden you know everything about me.
|
Quote:
|
OK. So again. What is in it for the company to keep a game running, even if it's hurting their profits, or want to use the resources elsewhere or want to cut back? |
[Guide to Defense] [Scrapper Secondaries Comparison] [Archetype Popularity Analysis]
In one little corner of the universe, there's nothing more irritating than a misfile...
(Please support the best webcomic about a cosmic universal realignment by impaired angelic interference resulting in identity crisis angst. Or I release the pigmy water thieves.)
Quote:
Here, I'll paraphrase you.|
Originally Posted by Evil_Legacy
But they stayed? For years for some of them. If they complained and still continue to give money what was the incentives for them (NCSoft) to even take it serious?
Why no boycotts? Why no smear campaigns like now? Why no swearing off NCSoft games forever like now? Why no dogging NCSoft on ever media out there like now? Why no "Organized" effort and calling "celebrities" and media and requesting interviews with NCSoft until now? Why wasnt worth a serious effort until now? |
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Evil_Legacy to Evil_Legacy
If you find you don't like the attitude of posters on this forum, you should find other forums to frequent.
|
Quote:
Yes true but what does the company get out of it if they cant sell the game? That is just giving away a product for free when as it stand right now, they can shutdown a game and collect a tax return, they can save it to sell at a later date (although may not be wise to do), or maybe they just want to keep it for nostalgia purposes. |
Originally Posted by Golden Girl
There could be a get-out clause for the company, that allowed them to sell the game if they were no longer interested in it, or to release it as opensource for the players to see if they could make something of it.
|
Yes players put a lot of time and effort into making COX their home and stuff but people tend to realize the company also put alot of time, money, effort into the game either and as players are not easily ready to give it up, why should they be forced to either sell or give it away for free all that hard work?
-Female Player-
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by mauk2
Evil_Legacy became one of my favorite posters with two words.
"Kick Rocks." I laffed so hard. Never change, E_L! |
Quote:
Conveniently not answering the question and topping it off with a pointless ad hom.|
Originally Posted by Arcanaville
I know you have no knowledge of the profitability of City of Heroes, or you wouldn't be saying what you're saying. Its as simple as that.
|
Stay classy, Arcanaville.
Quote:
uhm how is that paraphrasing? That is nothing like what I said or asked here? What that is is just an invention of your mind that you decided to assign to what I said just hoping to probably cause a problem. But maybe you are not tryng to start something and is just an easy way to dodge the questions of why now but not giving a big crap then?
|
Originally Posted by Codewalker
Here, I'll paraphrase you.
|
-Female Player-
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by mauk2
Evil_Legacy became one of my favorite posters with two words.
"Kick Rocks." I laffed so hard. Never change, E_L! |
Quote:
What is with you and the insults today? If you dont want to convo. just say so and we can end this. Dont have to resort to insults every single time now.
|
Originally Posted by Arcanaville
Hyperbole should only be wielded by competent individuals.
. |
-Female Player-
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by mauk2
Evil_Legacy became one of my favorite posters with two words.
"Kick Rocks." I laffed so hard. Never change, E_L! |
Quote:
http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/ad%20hominem|
Originally Posted by Brillig
Conveniently not answering the question and topping it off with a pointless ad hom.
|
An example: "Oh, hey, Shillig finally showed up. Now the trifecta is complete."
Is that something you can link to?