My experience has been as follows:
I have had several NS2 players, follow me around on reddit, social media sites (such as twitter, facebook and forums) 24/7 downvoting and reporting all my efforts as spam.
Without any proof there is no point in discussing this. For all I know it could be serveral NS2 players, could be one NS2 player, could be part of the marketing to get attention.
Your messages have most likely been seen as advertisement, which it is.
I gotten replys from gaming press, that they have been contacted by the NS2 community (even before i send em review keys) - Telling em FLG have stolen NS2 code, and that we are thiefs, and they where treathened by association with the resent gamepress scandals, but also email spam and even in one case a DDoS attack. (From NS2 players that had yet to even play the game).
Again there is no proof provided, care to share the information with us? Print screens, emails. If not your claim has no value in the discussion.
How do you know its from "NS2 players that had yet to even play the game"?
If they were threatened by association with the resent gamepress scandals, I'm assuming you mean the GamerGate one, you cannot possible blame NS2 players for.
A common theme on almost all promotional content, have been:
1. "This is a mod, do not buy!"
2. "Why isnt this free?!?"
and
3. "Why isnt it a 5$ DLC."
Valid points. Have you given a serious answer to it other than "entitled" "muh indedevelopers".
The short and the long story of it all, is that around 100 dissatified NS2 players, have succesfully made the launch far worse than expected.
I am but 1 guy, and while i have worked a average of 15hours each day, all days including weekends, i had no chance in hell to "fight off" 100 angry people, that wanted the game for free. And have actively sabotaged almost all PR and marketing efforts made not only by me, but also reviewers, youtubers and streamers.
Seeing as you are part of the PR and marketing team you cannot possible suggest we read reviews picked by you.
I'd hate to repeat myself but I'll say it again, if my opinions on your product is "harming your indie studio" then you have no place on a commercial market.
None of us can speak on the behalf of an entire community, we're not a single entity. You cannot address us as a single entity.
I'd also like to thank any of the reviews that had the courage to speak their minds.
Giving a copy to a person and getting upset when they give their opinions.
Shame on you this isn't North Korea.
@Runki While I remain sceptical about the "100's of angry people" as well. Your post is definitely uncalled for.
I did not get the impression from Gisp's comment that he was lumping everyone in the same catagory, he's speaking specifically to the wrong doers. And it's absolutely ridiculous to suggest that Gisp cannot link to a reviewer, that is simply asinine.
@Runki While I remain sceptical about the "100's of angry people" as well. Your post is definitely uncalled for.
I did not get the impression from Gisp's comment that he was lumping everyone in the same catagory, he's speaking specifically to the wrong doers. And it's absolutely ridiculous to suggest that Gisp cannot link to a reviewer, that is simply asinine.
Nowhere did I say that he couldn't.
I said that it shouldn't be expected from us to read a review picked by someone on the PR team. I'd hate to make a sloppy comparison or be accused of doing a straw man argument but you wouldn't read a review from someone who is a part of creating the product.,
-Hey Ford i need a new car, what do you suggest?
Hey Ford what do you think of this Ford, made by Ford?
-We gave a Ford to a reviewer, he had the nerve to make his own opinion about it.
Reviewers are so entitled, you should listen to what Hank here has to say instead, he works at Ford.
TotalBiscuit brings up in the first 2 minutes of his video the issue of Combat being a standalone game, how you don't get it for free or discounted if you own NS2, etc and how it will be a "sticking point" for this game. Also, go to 16:45 and 20:55 in the above video and he talks specifically about the value perception of Combat, where I think FLG failed in convincing the current NS2 player why they should buy NS2: Combat. The NS2 player could have been their strongest word of mouth advocate, and instead they have turned it into a source of negativity.
The fact that GISP and Cory are coming on here and outright blaming people who own NS2 for hurting the game because of valid criticism is just downright sickening. If Combat did a well enough job of differentiating itself from NS2, there would not be this outcry. Furthermore, if Combat didn't still have all the issues that NS2 has (huge learning curve, large skill gaps, no tutorial, etc; all things TB brought up in his video btw), then maybe it could stand on its own 2 feet better. TB sounds like he'd rather be getting a colonoscopy than playing NS2: Combat during that video. It just doesn't look fun, and (I'm sorry FLG) it mimics my experience when playing the game.
I am just sick of reading all the blame being passed off. It's time to own your late/nonexistent marketing and advertising, flaws in the game, etc. NS2: Combat isn't selling because of some specific reviews on Steam. It's not selling because frankly its a mod of an already niche unpopular game with a high learning curve that still isn't that fun for the causal gamer.
A word of advice FLG: you should be addressing why TB has such an awful time playing your game and try to fix that, rather than spending time making these threads blaming others.
Absolutely; despite his best efforts to be diplomatic and fair TB clearly has big issues with this game, and it has very little to do with its price point. There are actual problems present with this game, and if UWE and FLG try to brush that aside as just "people who are upset because they didn't get it for free" then all they are doing is ignoring the real problems with the title and passing the blame off unfairly. If UWE wants to live in a universe where they can do no wrong and everyone who complains about them is just a "hater," they can feel free - it might improve their morale as they tank financially. But it would make a lot more sense to actually listen to what negative reviews have to say and try to improve the game based on it
@NotPaLaGi: First point to note is that most of the FLG staff have been avoiding commenting in this thread. We don't want to fan the flames of any debate here.
I want to point out that we have been listening to the feedback from TB and the community and we take it very seriously. Our next hotfix, due next week, will be addressing new player survivability and adding catch-up mechanisms to ease the frustration for new players. Further content updates are planned on the run up to Xmas.
Did anyone consider providing a copy to current NS2 owners on launch for a discounted price of like $7 or something?
That has been a curious point. From my discussions with FLG staff(and I had numerous ones when my review was blowing up) there were steam technical limitations to providing discounts to NS2 owners since they were a different developer than the original NS2. Other concerns were the fact that NS2 has been in bundle deals by now and may have been aquired for as little as $1.
They admittedly discussed how NS2:Combat is not meant to target existing NS2 players or community. The (UWE) theory is that it was meant to attract new players who may not have been willing to give the RTS components of NS2 a chance or to those who tried vanilla NS2 and didn't like it. Repeatedly I was told about how this was not a product being advertised to the existing NS2 playerbase, which I only hope can explain UWE's failure to promote it via NS2 based channels.
Instead of ns2 owners getting a discount or free combat, I would rather see ns2: C get a free or discounted game of ns2. The return from ns2 is probably minimal so lost sales from ns2 is probably(because I do not know for sure) not a big deal. This would also of resolved the issue of combat not having enough content complaint because they got ns2. This would also hopefully of brought some players into ns2 growing the playerbase.
Then again, gimmic pointed out that this would be difficult because they are different developers.
The way I see it, the perception of NSC from the community is that they haven't really developed a sense of what NSC was trying to accomplish: NSC seems to be trying to live a contradictory existence: it's from NS2, uses so much from NS2, and yet not really supposed to be NS2, while it's kind of supposed to be by virtue of being so much like it.
Even the title itself is a bit misleading: is Natural Selection II: Combat more than what it sounds like, the combat mode you find in both Natural Selection games, or is it just what it is, a commercialized combat mode version? The answer is that it wants and tries to be, and to some extent is more than just combat mode, but at the same time the entire point of NSC was to just be combat mode. So for any NS2 player familiar with combat mode, especially that in NS2, it makes no sense to spend money on what they pretty much already have for free. Sure, LMG and better UI and different maps don't exist in the mod, but those aren't (and shouldn't) be the fundamental difference between these two games, and in any case they won't ever feel like so: I don't imagine an NS2 player looking at those differences and going "yep, it's a good call, take my money plox I wanna play".
To that in mind, I think what FLG should have done (and still can do) is to make NSC less imitating of NS2 and try to be more of its own game, because let's face it, with all that it uses out of NS2, it's not really set apart from the game it's trying to offshoot. NSC was supposedly designed to attack new players to the NS2 world, and yet the principle design philosophy of NSC (and NS2 actually) was catered towards the Natural Selection community in the first place. The problem with this philosophy is that it is a conservative (or preservative) one, rather than one that will attract outsiders in. The same went for Counterstrike 1.6 and CS:Source, those were different games, but barely, the latter was literally a port over; the only reason that was successful was because so many people play it and most didn't mind just a port over (yes it's a port over, the only real difference between them was the engine and subsequent (but irrelevant) physics capability of the latter). Obviously, Natural Selection didn't have that kind of fame.
All that to say, NSC needs to "grow up and mature" as a separate entity distinct from it's father NS2, to use a child-parent analogy. Part of the problem in other words is that NSC tries really hard to be just like NS2, yet is treated like it is not. However you look at that, it's a tough sell, not merely because it looks like, acts like therefore just like, but rather most of what makes NSC distinct is hard to wrap one's head around.
There are also fundamental issues (well I think they are) about NS2 in general that NSC, by association, carries over as baggage. For example the disproportionate learning curves of each side, which people such as Total Biscuit claims is no different in NSC from NS2. NS:Combat having a few niche things NS2 doesn't have? Fine, fair enough, that's good and more reason to shell $15. But it also carries over similar problems that NS2 had into the other title? It doesn't sound like a good sell anymore. So not only do you have NS2 players feeling like the community is being divided, but those that WANT a divided community might feel they will still experiences similar issues from the game they wished to depart from. Aliens being much harder to learn is an issue that exists in both games, and it exists in both games not because of coincidence, but because NSC copied it over from NS2. What I mean to say in all this is that, not only are there relatively few good distinctive things about NSC, but also that some of the problems people had with NS2 are being carried over into the latter title. And thus, eve more reason to perceive the two separate games as not being separate at all...and of course even less reason to spend money on.
Anyways there are my thoughts. I would like to leave to any readers a few questions I think are worth answering for the global audience sitting on the fence:
-What exactly does NS:Combat possess that you will not ever find in NS2? And conversely, what does NS:Combat specifically does not offer that may or may not be instead found in NS2? (An objective question more or less requiring an objective answer, NSC as a different game has some things in it that cannot be found in NS2 and perhaps vice versa)
-Do you think, based on the answers for the above question, that these differences are so large and significant as to warrant spending $15? (An obviously subjective question, not everyone will agree that a different UI is considered big enough difference)
There are actual problems present with this game, and if UWE and FLG try to brush that aside as just "people who are upset because they didn't get it for free" then all they are doing is ignoring the real problems with the title and passing the blame off unfairly.
Don't you think it's a possibility that there are both upset people that have caused harm (through effecting exposure) and issues with the way the game was sold?
So far I've only seen black and white claims being made in here..
Pretty sure 99.9% of the post on here were made based on how rektarded people are anyways cut bs short here's what i think nee has sure made a valid point.
Hey guy's BUY Natural Selection II: Combat <
awesome awesome sounds good but wait what am i missing if this is Natural Selection II: Combat what is Natural Selection II and why is combat under the title Natural Selection II: Combat when really it's COMBAT a standalone mod not a game it's a mod.
Natural Selection II <
IS THE GAME (*) COMBAT
> IS the MOD.
Anyways just piece of advice faultline games Don't quit your day jobs.
@nee shut up and take my $15.00 and spend it on something good.
The game sold 144,000 copies in its first week, earning over $1 million. As of February 26, 2013 the game has sold 300,000 copies. + That Reinforce Program which made $300.000 or something can't recall because i stopped supporting uwe and they Orange pants team.
An Indie company that's saying they spent over 2.5 million Dollars for what 3 major DLC and maybe 11 Stupid bug fixes on unfinished game. And now UWE saying that money is coming out of they pocket to keep ns2 alive @cory ROFL YOU MAKE ME LAUGH........ Can u do stand-up comedy.
One of the questions I'm frequently asked is: "How much should my company spend on marketing and advertising?" It's a conundrum that vexes many corporate leaders, from emerging entrepreneurs to seasoned CEOs. Unfortunately, instead of seeking a rational answer to the question, many of them just ignore it and hope it will go away.
As a rule, emerging companies focus most of their time and talents on meeting the needs of customers, as well they should. If they don't take care of the customers they already have, everything else will be academic. Strangely, however, many neglect the function of winning customers in the first place. Others naively assume that if they simply provide excellent products or services, their reputation will precede them. Call it the "build a better mousetrap" syndrome. But the world has too many other things to do with its time than beat a path to your door. That means you need to structure your profit-and-loss statement in such a way that you can profitably allocate a reasonable percentage of your revenue to marketing.
DC_DarklingJoin Date: 2003-07-10Member: 18068Members, Constellation, Squad Five Blue, Squad Five Silver
Hmm.. Lets do a quick check:
This site claims a average of around 80.000. per year. (since obviously they are not gona go personal and tell what everyone in uwe is making) http://www.averagesalarysurvey.com/article/average-salary-in-united-states/15200316.aspx
If I look at the teampage I count 9 people, excluding the folk working abroad. Thats 720.000 dollars in pay alone, per year.
Now include abroad people, and additional costs like electricity, and I am really not THAT surprised about the numbers uwe is spitting out in terms of costs.
There are actual problems present with this game, and if UWE and FLG try to brush that aside as just "people who are upset because they didn't get it for free" then all they are doing is ignoring the real problems with the title and passing the blame off unfairly.
Don't you think it's a possibility that there are both upset people that have caused harm (through effecting exposure) and issues with the way the game was sold?
So far I've only seen black and white claims being made in here..
Of course both sides exist, if you look at any of my previous posts on the topic you can see that I have said multiple times that it's unfair for people to give bad scores for a game they've barely played or haven't played just because they want it for free. So I'm not exactly sure why I'm being singled out for black-and-white thinking here.
My reasoning behind what I'm saying is that before MCMLXXXIV posted, I hadn't seen a single person involved with UWE, FLG, the CDT, whatever... say anything about any problems with the game. The poor sales were blamed on a small but vocal segment of the community - if you were to read Corey and GISP's posts they make it sound like they're nothing but victims, no problems with the game other than a couple of malcontents smearing its reputation. No mention of the steep learning curve, lack of tutorials, and all the other issues that can be found in TB's review (which, unlike those of upset NS2 players, has little to do with price and much more to do with actual gameplay issues).
My point is that it's a pretty poor business strategy to shift aside all blame for the poor launch instead of actually sitting back and asking yourself what could have been done, gameplay and marketing wise, to make the launch go over better. Do the negative reviews deserve some blame? Yes. Do they deserve all the blame? Of course not, UWE and FLG need to shoulder some as well. I wouldn't say that qualifies as "black-and-white" thinking.
Pretty sure 99.9% of the post on here were made based on how rektarded people are anyways cut bs short here's what i think nee has sure made a valid point.
Hey guy's BUY Natural Selection II: Combat <
awesome awesome sounds good but wait what am i missing if this is Natural Selection II: Combat what is Natural Selection II and why is combat under the title Natural Selection II: Combat when really it's COMBAT a standalone mod not a game it's a mod.
Natural Selection II <
IS THE GAME (*) COMBAT
> IS the MOD.
Anyways just piece of advice faultline games Don't quit your day jobs.
@nee shut up and take my $15.00 and spend it on something good.
The game sold 144,000 copies in its first week, earning over $1 million. As of February 26, 2013 the game has sold 300,000 copies. + That Reinforce Program which made $300.000 or something can't recall because i stopped supporting uwe and they Orange pants team.
An Indie company that's saying they spent over 2.5 million Dollars for what 3 major DLC and maybe 11 Stupid bug fixes on unfinished game. And now UWE saying that money is coming out of they pocket to keep ns2 alive @cory ROFL YOU MAKE ME LAUGH........ Can u do stand-up comedy.
One of the questions I'm frequently asked is: "How much should my company spend on marketing and advertising?" It's a conundrum that vexes many corporate leaders, from emerging entrepreneurs to seasoned CEOs. Unfortunately, instead of seeking a rational answer to the question, many of them just ignore it and hope it will go away.
As a rule, emerging companies focus most of their time and talents on meeting the needs of customers, as well they should. If they don't take care of the customers they already have, everything else will be academic. Strangely, however, many neglect the function of winning customers in the first place. Others naively assume that if they simply provide excellent products or services, their reputation will precede them. Call it the "build a better mousetrap" syndrome. But the world has too many other things to do with its time than beat a path to your door. That means you need to structure your profit-and-loss statement in such a way that you can profitably allocate a reasonable percentage of your revenue to marketing.
Dude... did you do a line before this post? Then suddenly sober up at the very end?
Am I the only person who bought both games and actually just enjoy playing them ? )
@MuckyMcFly I have both, and sort of enjoy both (haven't been on much lately). Don't mind a bit of Combat, but it crashes me... and also my frame rate is not very good.
Pretty sure 99.9% of the post on here were made based on how rektarded people are anyways cut bs short here's what i think nee has sure made a valid point.
Hey guy's BUY Natural Selection II: Combat <
awesome awesome sounds good but wait what am i missing if this is Natural Selection II: Combat what is Natural Selection II and why is combat under the title Natural Selection II: Combat when really it's COMBAT a standalone mod not a game it's a mod.
Natural Selection II <
IS THE GAME (*) COMBAT
> IS the MOD.
Anyways just piece of advice faultline games Don't quit your day jobs.
@nee shut up and take my $15.00 and spend it on something good.
The game sold 144,000 copies in its first week, earning over $1 million. As of February 26, 2013 the game has sold 300,000 copies. + That Reinforce Program which made $300.000 or something can't recall because i stopped supporting uwe and they Orange pants team.
An Indie company that's saying they spent over 2.5 million Dollars for what 3 major DLC and maybe 11 Stupid bug fixes on unfinished game. And now UWE saying that money is coming out of they pocket to keep ns2 alive @cory ROFL YOU MAKE ME LAUGH........ Can u do stand-up comedy.
One of the questions I'm frequently asked is: "How much should my company spend on marketing and advertising?" It's a conundrum that vexes many corporate leaders, from emerging entrepreneurs to seasoned CEOs. Unfortunately, instead of seeking a rational answer to the question, many of them just ignore it and hope it will go away.
As a rule, emerging companies focus most of their time and talents on meeting the needs of customers, as well they should. If they don't take care of the customers they already have, everything else will be academic. Strangely, however, many neglect the function of winning customers in the first place. Others naively assume that if they simply provide excellent products or services, their reputation will precede them. Call it the "build a better mousetrap" syndrome. But the world has too many other things to do with its time than beat a path to your door. That means you need to structure your profit-and-loss statement in such a way that you can profitably allocate a reasonable percentage of your revenue to marketing.
Dude... did you do a line before this post? Then suddenly sober up at the very end?
Pretty sure 99.9% of the post on here were made based on how rektarded people are anyways cut bs short here's what i think nee has sure made a valid point.
Hey guy's BUY Natural Selection II: Combat <
awesome awesome sounds good but wait what am i missing if this is Natural Selection II: Combat what is Natural Selection II and why is combat under the title Natural Selection II: Combat when really it's COMBAT a standalone mod not a game it's a mod.
Natural Selection II <
IS THE GAME (*) COMBAT
> IS the MOD.
Anyways just piece of advice faultline games Don't quit your day jobs.
@nee shut up and take my $15.00 and spend it on something good.
The game sold 144,000 copies in its first week, earning over $1 million. As of February 26, 2013 the game has sold 300,000 copies. + That Reinforce Program which made $300.000 or something can't recall because i stopped supporting uwe and they Orange pants team.
An Indie company that's saying they spent over 2.5 million Dollars for what 3 major DLC and maybe 11 Stupid bug fixes on unfinished game. And now UWE saying that money is coming out of they pocket to keep ns2 alive @cory ROFL YOU MAKE ME LAUGH........ Can u do stand-up comedy.
One of the questions I'm frequently asked is: "How much should my company spend on marketing and advertising?" It's a conundrum that vexes many corporate leaders, from emerging entrepreneurs to seasoned CEOs. Unfortunately, instead of seeking a rational answer to the question, many of them just ignore it and hope it will go away.
As a rule, emerging companies focus most of their time and talents on meeting the needs of customers, as well they should. If they don't take care of the customers they already have, everything else will be academic. Strangely, however, many neglect the function of winning customers in the first place. Others naively assume that if they simply provide excellent products or services, their reputation will precede them. Call it the "build a better mousetrap" syndrome. But the world has too many other things to do with its time than beat a path to your door. That means you need to structure your profit-and-loss statement in such a way that you can profitably allocate a reasonable percentage of your revenue to marketing.
Dude... did you do a line before this post? Then suddenly sober up at the very end?
Pretty sure 99.9% of the post on here were made based on how rektarded people are anyways cut bs short here's what i think nee has sure made a valid point.
Hey guy's BUY Natural Selection II: Combat <
awesome awesome sounds good but wait what am i missing if this is Natural Selection II: Combat what is Natural Selection II and why is combat under the title Natural Selection II: Combat when really it's COMBAT a standalone mod not a game it's a mod.
Natural Selection II <
IS THE GAME (*) COMBAT
> IS the MOD.
Anyways just piece of advice faultline games Don't quit your day jobs.
@nee shut up and take my $15.00 and spend it on something good.
The game sold 144,000 copies in its first week, earning over $1 million. As of February 26, 2013 the game has sold 300,000 copies. + That Reinforce Program which made $300.000 or something can't recall because i stopped supporting uwe and they Orange pants team.
An Indie company that's saying they spent over 2.5 million Dollars for what 3 major DLC and maybe 11 Stupid bug fixes on unfinished game. And now UWE saying that money is coming out of they pocket to keep ns2 alive @cory ROFL YOU MAKE ME LAUGH........ Can u do stand-up comedy.
One of the questions I'm frequently asked is: "How much should my company spend on marketing and advertising?" It's a conundrum that vexes many corporate leaders, from emerging entrepreneurs to seasoned CEOs. Unfortunately, instead of seeking a rational answer to the question, many of them just ignore it and hope it will go away.
As a rule, emerging companies focus most of their time and talents on meeting the needs of customers, as well they should. If they don't take care of the customers they already have, everything else will be academic. Strangely, however, many neglect the function of winning customers in the first place. Others naively assume that if they simply provide excellent products or services, their reputation will precede them. Call it the "build a better mousetrap" syndrome. But the world has too many other things to do with its time than beat a path to your door. That means you need to structure your profit-and-loss statement in such a way that you can profitably allocate a reasonable percentage of your revenue to marketing.
Dude... did you do a line before this post? Then suddenly sober up at the very end?
Plot twist: He actually wrote the article back in 2009, but got addicted to cocaine, lost his job, and now just posts around the internet high as fuck not really knowing who he is.
My reasoning behind what I'm saying is that before MCMLXXXIV posted, I hadn't seen a single person involved with UWE, FLG, the CDT, whatever... say anything about any problems with the game. The poor sales were blamed on a small but vocal segment of the community - if you were to read Corey and GISP's posts they make it sound like they're nothing but victims, no problems with the game other than a couple of malcontents smearing its reputation.
It's Cory - no "e" in it
And, for the record, I never said that ALL the lack of sales can be attributed to the "malcontents". I said it is very sad that there are members of the community who have gone out of their way to actively try to tear down the game for reasons that, in my opinion - my own, not speaking for all of UWE here - are far less reasonable then merely having not enjoyed playing the game. I said it wasn't a majority. And yes, that kind of vocal minority can in fact do harm, if they manage to get enough reviews and comments in enough places, when we are talking about a small indie game with no marketing budget, and a small number of reviews.
No mention of the steep learning curve, lack of tutorials, and all the other issues that can be found in TB's review (which, unlike those of upset NS2 players, has little to do with price and much more to do with actual gameplay issues).
Uh, aren't those all the same issues that people say NS2 has? Sure, they are problems, and no one was expecting Combat to become the next Call of Duty, but it seems to be getting judged much more harshly, and suffering a vastly reduced amount of sales, then NS2 had with those same problems.
Anyway, I'm really not trying to make this out to sound like "NS2 community sucks" , and that everything with Combat and the release of Combat was perfect, because I certainly don't believe that. From proper messaging, to proper promotion, to maybe underestimating how well Combat could separate from NS2 on its own - there's probably a lot of things which we could have done better, though that kind of thing is always easier to understand in hindsight. But I do stand by my previous statements that a small minority of people likely have done a disproportionate amount of damage, and for a group of members from the NS2 community to get together, form a company, and pour their heart and soul and a significant amount of their own money into what I believe many people would find to be a fun game if they gave it a chance...well, I just feel they deserve a little better.
Anyway, I'm sure this post is just going to fan the flames further so I should probably step out now.
And, for the record, I never said that ALL the lack of sales can be attributed to the "malcontents". I said it is very sad that there are members of the community who have gone out of their way to actively try to tear down the game for reasons that, in my opinion - my own, not speaking for all of UWE here - are far less reasonable then merely having not enjoyed playing the game. I said it wasn't a majority. And yes, that kind of vocal minority can in fact do harm, if they manage to get enough reviews and comments in enough places, when we are talking about a small indie game with no marketing budget, and a small number of reviews.
You are painting a much different picture of responsibility than what GISP described here: http://forums.unknownworlds.com/discussion/comment/2223254/#Comment_2223254
He also later says "My best gues is that atleast 90% of the negative reviews on the steam store, is from NS2 players that want the game for free, or as a 5$ DLC."
I think myself, @Blarney_Stone, and a few others were responding fairly directly to these comments made by GISP, who says he was brought on by FLG to do marketing and PR. Furthermore, when he makes claims like that, he really needs to back them up. 100 dissatisfied NS2 players making launch a nightmare for him?? 90% of bad reviews solely from NS2 players wanting the game for free??? Really?? I just did a quick scan of the Reviews link and its nothing of the sort. The fact that claims like this were made without the slightest acknowledgement of any other factor causing decreased sales was quite ridiculous to me.
But I do stand by my previous statements that a small minority of people likely have done a disproportionate amount of damage, and for a group of members from the NS2 community to get together, form a company, and pour their heart and soul and a significant amount of their own money into what I believe many people would find to be a fun game if they gave it a chance...well, I just feel they deserve a little better.
And on the other side of the spectrum, there have been even more members of the NS2 community who have gone out of their way to go above and beyond and promote Combat and FLG. To say they deserved better, I disagree with that. They got what was expected, which was brutal honesty from everyone in the middle. People like TotalBiscuit who was very diplomatic in his review, but never could actually recommend it.
It is this middle demographic that decides how well Combat does. I remember when NS2 originally released, I saw old Steam friends that I had met through other first person shooters buying and playing it. Being such a die hard NS1 fan, this was so exciting for me. "OMG they are trying my favorite franchise, and I didn't even ask them to. This is gonna be awesome". Sure they didn't stick around, but the hype was there for a bit. With NS2: Combat, it was like it never existed. I barely had a single person ask me about the Combat release. Blame it on the Halloween sale, blame it on mismanaged messaging and promotion, but please stop pulling out the "FLG got bullied by NS2ers" card and "they deserved better" comments.
My thoughts about this matter is I always had a problem with paid DLC's..
It causes the community to separate which only hurts everyone. I seen it many times with top AAA games. This game doesn't have the benefit of a huge user base like other AAA, so it hurts the community worse. imo
I don't see how a DLC can cost more than the game itself..NS2 coded the game engine, designed everything from top to bottom and cost less than the DLC it makes no sense. If this DLC coded there own game engine and rewrote the whole source code than I would understand.
imo DLC should only cost $5...at the most. Why pay more for DLC when all you have is combat mode..while NS2 has combat mode, siege, normal and so on.
But, I am not so worried. DLCs will always come and go it happens all the time. I am sticking with NS2..to be honest I was never a fan of non-comm combat NS. I always enjoy a comm especially if they have a military background..always good to hear real military strats.
My thoughts about this matter is I always had a problem with paid DLC's..
It causes the community to separate which only hurts everyone. I seen it many times with top AAA games. This game doesn't have the benefit of a huge user base like other AAA, so it hurts the community worse. imo
I don't see how a DLC can cost more than the game itself..NS2 coded the game engine, designed everything from top to bottom and cost less than the DLC it makes no sense. If this DLC coded there own game engine and rewrote the whole source code than I would understand.
imo DLC should only cost $5...at the most. Why pay more for DLC when all you have is combat mode..while NS2 has combat mode, siege, normal and so on.
But, I am not so worried. DLCs will always come and go it happens all the time. I am sticking with NS2..to be honest I was never a fan of non-comm combat NS. I always enjoy a comm especially if they have a military background..always good to hear real military strats.
whoooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooosh!
I think you might want to take a look at this thread again mate and read through your post - you will find combat isn't a DLC
My thoughts about this matter is I always had a problem with paid DLC's..
It causes the community to separate which only hurts everyone. I seen it many times with top AAA games. This game doesn't have the benefit of a huge user base like other AAA, so it hurts the community worse. imo
I don't see how a DLC can cost more than the game itself..NS2 coded the game engine, designed everything from top to bottom and cost less than the DLC it makes no sense. If this DLC coded there own game engine and rewrote the whole source code than I would understand.
imo DLC should only cost $5...at the most. Why pay more for DLC when all you have is combat mode..while NS2 has combat mode, siege, normal and so on.
But, I am not so worried. DLCs will always come and go it happens all the time. I am sticking with NS2..to be honest I was never a fan of non-comm combat NS. I always enjoy a comm especially if they have a military background..always good to hear real military strats.
whoooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooosh!
I think you might want to take a look at this thread again mate and read through your post - you will find combat isn't a DLC
It says stand alone, but it uses the same game engine the same source code and even the same models..it is a DLC no matter how you paint it. But, I give them credit for making a good combat mode. It does take a lot of time and effort. So, I just wish them the best.
Comments
You are no longer a unbiased opinion, you are a marketer.
Without any proof there is no point in discussing this. For all I know it could be serveral NS2 players, could be one NS2 player, could be part of the marketing to get attention.
Your messages have most likely been seen as advertisement, which it is.
Again there is no proof provided, care to share the information with us? Print screens, emails. If not your claim has no value in the discussion.
How do you know its from "NS2 players that had yet to even play the game"?
If they were threatened by association with the resent gamepress scandals, I'm assuming you mean the GamerGate one, you cannot possible blame NS2 players for.
Valid points. Have you given a serious answer to it other than "entitled" "muh indedevelopers".
The short and the long story of it all, is that around 100 dissatified NS2 players, have succesfully made the launch far worse than expected.
I am but 1 guy, and while i have worked a average of 15hours each day, all days including weekends, i had no chance in hell to "fight off" 100 angry people, that wanted the game for free. And have actively sabotaged almost all PR and marketing efforts made not only by me, but also reviewers, youtubers and streamers.
Seeing as you are part of the PR and marketing team you cannot possible suggest we read reviews picked by you.
I'd hate to repeat myself but I'll say it again, if my opinions on your product is "harming your indie studio" then you have no place on a commercial market.
None of us can speak on the behalf of an entire community, we're not a single entity. You cannot address us as a single entity.
I'd also like to thank any of the reviews that had the courage to speak their minds.
Giving a copy to a person and getting upset when they give their opinions.
Shame on you this isn't North Korea.
I did not get the impression from Gisp's comment that he was lumping everyone in the same catagory, he's speaking specifically to the wrong doers. And it's absolutely ridiculous to suggest that Gisp cannot link to a reviewer, that is simply asinine.
Nowhere did I say that he couldn't.
I said that it shouldn't be expected from us to read a review picked by someone on the PR team. I'd hate to make a sloppy comparison or be accused of doing a straw man argument but you wouldn't read a review from someone who is a part of creating the product.,
-Hey Ford i need a new car, what do you suggest?
Hey Ford what do you think of this Ford, made by Ford?
-We gave a Ford to a reviewer, he had the nerve to make his own opinion about it.
Reviewers are so entitled, you should listen to what Hank here has to say instead, he works at Ford.
@19:20 The most interesting quote about NS i can do.
Absolutely; despite his best efforts to be diplomatic and fair TB clearly has big issues with this game, and it has very little to do with its price point. There are actual problems present with this game, and if UWE and FLG try to brush that aside as just "people who are upset because they didn't get it for free" then all they are doing is ignoring the real problems with the title and passing the blame off unfairly. If UWE wants to live in a universe where they can do no wrong and everyone who complains about them is just a "hater," they can feel free - it might improve their morale as they tank financially. But it would make a lot more sense to actually listen to what negative reviews have to say and try to improve the game based on it
I want to point out that we have been listening to the feedback from TB and the community and we take it very seriously. Our next hotfix, due next week, will be addressing new player survivability and adding catch-up mechanisms to ease the frustration for new players. Further content updates are planned on the run up to Xmas.
That has been a curious point. From my discussions with FLG staff(and I had numerous ones when my review was blowing up) there were steam technical limitations to providing discounts to NS2 owners since they were a different developer than the original NS2. Other concerns were the fact that NS2 has been in bundle deals by now and may have been aquired for as little as $1.
They admittedly discussed how NS2:Combat is not meant to target existing NS2 players or community. The (UWE) theory is that it was meant to attract new players who may not have been willing to give the RTS components of NS2 a chance or to those who tried vanilla NS2 and didn't like it. Repeatedly I was told about how this was not a product being advertised to the existing NS2 playerbase, which I only hope can explain UWE's failure to promote it via NS2 based channels.
no such thing exists.
Then again, gimmic pointed out that this would be difficult because they are different developers.
Even the title itself is a bit misleading: is Natural Selection II: Combat more than what it sounds like, the combat mode you find in both Natural Selection games, or is it just what it is, a commercialized combat mode version? The answer is that it wants and tries to be, and to some extent is more than just combat mode, but at the same time the entire point of NSC was to just be combat mode. So for any NS2 player familiar with combat mode, especially that in NS2, it makes no sense to spend money on what they pretty much already have for free. Sure, LMG and better UI and different maps don't exist in the mod, but those aren't (and shouldn't) be the fundamental difference between these two games, and in any case they won't ever feel like so: I don't imagine an NS2 player looking at those differences and going "yep, it's a good call, take my money plox I wanna play".
To that in mind, I think what FLG should have done (and still can do) is to make NSC less imitating of NS2 and try to be more of its own game, because let's face it, with all that it uses out of NS2, it's not really set apart from the game it's trying to offshoot. NSC was supposedly designed to attack new players to the NS2 world, and yet the principle design philosophy of NSC (and NS2 actually) was catered towards the Natural Selection community in the first place. The problem with this philosophy is that it is a conservative (or preservative) one, rather than one that will attract outsiders in. The same went for Counterstrike 1.6 and CS:Source, those were different games, but barely, the latter was literally a port over; the only reason that was successful was because so many people play it and most didn't mind just a port over (yes it's a port over, the only real difference between them was the engine and subsequent (but irrelevant) physics capability of the latter). Obviously, Natural Selection didn't have that kind of fame.
All that to say, NSC needs to "grow up and mature" as a separate entity distinct from it's father NS2, to use a child-parent analogy. Part of the problem in other words is that NSC tries really hard to be just like NS2, yet is treated like it is not. However you look at that, it's a tough sell, not merely because it looks like, acts like therefore just like, but rather most of what makes NSC distinct is hard to wrap one's head around.
There are also fundamental issues (well I think they are) about NS2 in general that NSC, by association, carries over as baggage. For example the disproportionate learning curves of each side, which people such as Total Biscuit claims is no different in NSC from NS2. NS:Combat having a few niche things NS2 doesn't have? Fine, fair enough, that's good and more reason to shell $15. But it also carries over similar problems that NS2 had into the other title? It doesn't sound like a good sell anymore. So not only do you have NS2 players feeling like the community is being divided, but those that WANT a divided community might feel they will still experiences similar issues from the game they wished to depart from. Aliens being much harder to learn is an issue that exists in both games, and it exists in both games not because of coincidence, but because NSC copied it over from NS2. What I mean to say in all this is that, not only are there relatively few good distinctive things about NSC, but also that some of the problems people had with NS2 are being carried over into the latter title. And thus, eve more reason to perceive the two separate games as not being separate at all...and of course even less reason to spend money on.
Anyways there are my thoughts. I would like to leave to any readers a few questions I think are worth answering for the global audience sitting on the fence:
-What exactly does NS:Combat possess that you will not ever find in NS2? And conversely, what does NS:Combat specifically does not offer that may or may not be instead found in NS2? (An objective question more or less requiring an objective answer, NSC as a different game has some things in it that cannot be found in NS2 and perhaps vice versa)
-Do you think, based on the answers for the above question, that these differences are so large and significant as to warrant spending $15? (An obviously subjective question, not everyone will agree that a different UI is considered big enough difference)
So far I've only seen black and white claims being made in here..
Hey guy's BUY Natural Selection II: Combat <
awesome awesome sounds good but wait what am i missing if this is Natural Selection II: Combat what is Natural Selection II and why is combat under the title Natural Selection II: Combat when really it's COMBAT a standalone mod not a game it's a mod.
Natural Selection II <
IS THE GAME (*) COMBAT
> IS the MOD.
Anyways just piece of advice faultline games Don't quit your day jobs.
@nee shut up and take my $15.00 and spend it on something good.
The game sold 144,000 copies in its first week, earning over $1 million. As of February 26, 2013 the game has sold 300,000 copies. + That Reinforce Program which made $300.000 or something can't recall because i stopped supporting uwe and they Orange pants team.
An Indie company that's saying they spent over 2.5 million Dollars for what 3 major DLC and maybe 11 Stupid bug fixes on unfinished game. And now UWE saying that money is coming out of they pocket to keep ns2 alive @cory ROFL YOU MAKE ME LAUGH........ Can u do stand-up comedy.
@FLG
One of the questions I'm frequently asked is: "How much should my company spend on marketing and advertising?" It's a conundrum that vexes many corporate leaders, from emerging entrepreneurs to seasoned CEOs. Unfortunately, instead of seeking a rational answer to the question, many of them just ignore it and hope it will go away.
As a rule, emerging companies focus most of their time and talents on meeting the needs of customers, as well they should. If they don't take care of the customers they already have, everything else will be academic. Strangely, however, many neglect the function of winning customers in the first place. Others naively assume that if they simply provide excellent products or services, their reputation will precede them. Call it the "build a better mousetrap" syndrome. But the world has too many other things to do with its time than beat a path to your door. That means you need to structure your profit-and-loss statement in such a way that you can profitably allocate a reasonable percentage of your revenue to marketing.
This site claims a average of around 80.000. per year. (since obviously they are not gona go personal and tell what everyone in uwe is making)
http://www.averagesalarysurvey.com/article/average-salary-in-united-states/15200316.aspx
If I look at the teampage I count 9 people, excluding the folk working abroad. Thats 720.000 dollars in pay alone, per year.
Now include abroad people, and additional costs like electricity, and I am really not THAT surprised about the numbers uwe is spitting out in terms of costs.
Of course both sides exist, if you look at any of my previous posts on the topic you can see that I have said multiple times that it's unfair for people to give bad scores for a game they've barely played or haven't played just because they want it for free. So I'm not exactly sure why I'm being singled out for black-and-white thinking here.
My reasoning behind what I'm saying is that before MCMLXXXIV posted, I hadn't seen a single person involved with UWE, FLG, the CDT, whatever... say anything about any problems with the game. The poor sales were blamed on a small but vocal segment of the community - if you were to read Corey and GISP's posts they make it sound like they're nothing but victims, no problems with the game other than a couple of malcontents smearing its reputation. No mention of the steep learning curve, lack of tutorials, and all the other issues that can be found in TB's review (which, unlike those of upset NS2 players, has little to do with price and much more to do with actual gameplay issues).
My point is that it's a pretty poor business strategy to shift aside all blame for the poor launch instead of actually sitting back and asking yourself what could have been done, gameplay and marketing wise, to make the launch go over better. Do the negative reviews deserve some blame? Yes. Do they deserve all the blame? Of course not, UWE and FLG need to shoulder some as well. I wouldn't say that qualifies as "black-and-white" thinking.
@MuckyMcFly I have both, and sort of enjoy both (haven't been on much lately). Don't mind a bit of Combat, but it crashes me... and also my frame rate is not very good.
Nah he just copy pasted the bottom half from this article: http://www.businessweek.com/smallbiz/content/feb2009/sb20090210_165498.htm
Coulda fooled me.
Who creat this ? Anyone can tell me why server name say " UWE are scumbags . Buy NS2:combat only 15$ " ??
Server with 0/1 slot with advertising name >> great ^--^ i cant play and join either
Plot twist: He actually wrote the article back in 2009, but got addicted to cocaine, lost his job, and now just posts around the internet high as fuck not really knowing who he is.
And, for the record, I never said that ALL the lack of sales can be attributed to the "malcontents". I said it is very sad that there are members of the community who have gone out of their way to actively try to tear down the game for reasons that, in my opinion - my own, not speaking for all of UWE here - are far less reasonable then merely having not enjoyed playing the game. I said it wasn't a majority. And yes, that kind of vocal minority can in fact do harm, if they manage to get enough reviews and comments in enough places, when we are talking about a small indie game with no marketing budget, and a small number of reviews. Uh, aren't those all the same issues that people say NS2 has? Sure, they are problems, and no one was expecting Combat to become the next Call of Duty, but it seems to be getting judged much more harshly, and suffering a vastly reduced amount of sales, then NS2 had with those same problems.
Anyway, I'm really not trying to make this out to sound like "NS2 community sucks" , and that everything with Combat and the release of Combat was perfect, because I certainly don't believe that. From proper messaging, to proper promotion, to maybe underestimating how well Combat could separate from NS2 on its own - there's probably a lot of things which we could have done better, though that kind of thing is always easier to understand in hindsight. But I do stand by my previous statements that a small minority of people likely have done a disproportionate amount of damage, and for a group of members from the NS2 community to get together, form a company, and pour their heart and soul and a significant amount of their own money into what I believe many people would find to be a fun game if they gave it a chance...well, I just feel they deserve a little better.
Anyway, I'm sure this post is just going to fan the flames further so I should probably step out now.
Glad to hear it, I do try.
=D>
You are painting a much different picture of responsibility than what GISP described here: http://forums.unknownworlds.com/discussion/comment/2223254/#Comment_2223254
He also later says "My best gues is that atleast 90% of the negative reviews on the steam store, is from NS2 players that want the game for free, or as a 5$ DLC."
I think myself, @Blarney_Stone, and a few others were responding fairly directly to these comments made by GISP, who says he was brought on by FLG to do marketing and PR. Furthermore, when he makes claims like that, he really needs to back them up. 100 dissatisfied NS2 players making launch a nightmare for him?? 90% of bad reviews solely from NS2 players wanting the game for free??? Really?? I just did a quick scan of the Reviews link and its nothing of the sort. The fact that claims like this were made without the slightest acknowledgement of any other factor causing decreased sales was quite ridiculous to me.
And on the other side of the spectrum, there have been even more members of the NS2 community who have gone out of their way to go above and beyond and promote Combat and FLG. To say they deserved better, I disagree with that. They got what was expected, which was brutal honesty from everyone in the middle. People like TotalBiscuit who was very diplomatic in his review, but never could actually recommend it.
It is this middle demographic that decides how well Combat does. I remember when NS2 originally released, I saw old Steam friends that I had met through other first person shooters buying and playing it. Being such a die hard NS1 fan, this was so exciting for me. "OMG they are trying my favorite franchise, and I didn't even ask them to. This is gonna be awesome". Sure they didn't stick around, but the hype was there for a bit. With NS2: Combat, it was like it never existed. I barely had a single person ask me about the Combat release. Blame it on the Halloween sale, blame it on mismanaged messaging and promotion, but please stop pulling out the "FLG got bullied by NS2ers" card and "they deserved better" comments.
It causes the community to separate which only hurts everyone. I seen it many times with top AAA games. This game doesn't have the benefit of a huge user base like other AAA, so it hurts the community worse. imo
I don't see how a DLC can cost more than the game itself..NS2 coded the game engine, designed everything from top to bottom and cost less than the DLC it makes no sense. If this DLC coded there own game engine and rewrote the whole source code than I would understand.
imo DLC should only cost $5...at the most. Why pay more for DLC when all you have is combat mode..while NS2 has combat mode, siege, normal and so on.
But, I am not so worried. DLCs will always come and go it happens all the time. I am sticking with NS2..to be honest I was never a fan of non-comm combat NS. I always enjoy a comm especially if they have a military background..always good to hear real military strats.
whoooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooosh!
I think you might want to take a look at this thread again mate and read through your post - you will find combat isn't a DLC
It says stand alone, but it uses the same game engine the same source code and even the same models..it is a DLC no matter how you paint it. But, I give them credit for making a good combat mode. It does take a lot of time and effort. So, I just wish them the best.