Quote from: thestringpuller on June 13, 2013, 12:14:14 PM

Item malls are secondary revenue streams and have failed plenty of times due to this new developer mantra of "Fuck the user as long as we get paid." The reason games such as Team Fortress 2 have been successful in applying the mall-model is due to a previously developed user base surrounding a quality game. Sacrificing quality for revenue always leads to disaster, one may profit initially, however this always catches up to you (see NASDAQ:ZNGA).

I think you are perhaps reading a little more into one (vague) sentence than is warranted.

The comment referred to games already established. If we are acquiring an already published title which is built around an Item Mall model, S.MG will not force a change to that. This is just plain common sense, as it's not too likely for such changes to be economically feasible anyway, in most cases.

If we are developing de novo, the preferred model is RCE. I thought that was stated sufficiently clearly, but perhaps not.

All these considerations aside, the actual concrete solutions in actual concrete circumstances will bow to those circumstances as much as practicable, we're merely discussing generalities here, and perhaps a lot past the point where it's worth it.

Quote from: thestringpuller on June 13, 2013, 12:14:14 PM

If Mircea is trying to develop a game in house, why not start with a quality game first before moving onto revenue models?

I'm confused as to what you mean by that? Everything starts with the revenue model, this isn't fanfic.

Quote from: thestringpuller on June 13, 2013, 12:14:14 PM

Mircea has more than enough capital to compete with AAA titles.

If competing with AAA titles was a matter of capital only (and $1mn at that) Paris Hilton would be billed above Angelina Jolie and Coindesk would be a competitive Bitcoin company, with relevance and marketshare. Sure, people with ideas (ie, fanfic) often misrepresent their inability to compete within the business in terms of not having money, because they commonly don't. Money is not really the issue, however.

Quote from: thestringpuller on June 13, 2013, 12:14:14 PM

Most designers and developers worth hiring who have the potential to reach this capacity care most about their artistic vision and how those leading them affect the realized version of that vision.

Sure.

Quote from: thestringpuller on June 13, 2013, 12:14:14 PM

By not making this distinction you are again insulting the player, the one person you'd best not to insult. The player may never know or care about the distinction, but they will feel it in the game. This distinction allows the designer to create an experience that is fun, rather than depending on "brain hacks." It is subconscious by nature.

I think again you're probably going too far on the interpretative journey. My statement was simply a refusal to go into detail. You can't read into that some detail of your own choosing and then argue with it.

Quote from: thestringpuller on June 13, 2013, 12:14:14 PM

By ignoring the distinction or an effort to find a distinction, you are not doing your homework, and a disservice to the end user.

No, I am simply doing what PR does since time immemorial: refusing to answer questions when for whatever reasons my employer considers it pointless to entertain them.

Quote from: thestringpuller on June 13, 2013, 12:14:14 PM

Farmville's mechanics can be broken down into a very simple "click the cow" action, whereas a game like Dark Souls or Nethack require strategy, tactics, and skill.

While I can appreciate your own aesthetics and the fact that the brain exists principally to recognize patterns in the environment, be they actually there or not, at some point you'll have to notice that all you do at the computer as long you're not typing is move the mouse and click the mouse.

Quote from: thestringpuller on June 13, 2013, 12:14:14 PM

It's in Mr. Popescu's best interest to recruit the best developers/designers possible in regards to game development, and keep them close, perhaps loyal. Maintaining a good relationship with a team that always makes the playoffs is far easier than trying to reconstruct a new team every season.

There's no argument here, is there?

Quote from: thestringpuller on June 13, 2013, 12:14:14 PM

When I spoke with Mr. Popescu, I asked if a team brought him a game he believed in, would he manage them without compromising their artistic vision, and he said in fewer more concise words, "sure, as long as they have a product."

Seems there's no argument.

Quote from: thestringpuller on June 13, 2013, 12:14:14 PM

I hope S.MG takes a more traditional route, and helps to invest in delivering quality products to shelves, and a quality team, rather than trying to invest in profits to impress investors (the EA route).

As long as we agree that the definition of quality is "people are willing to part with their own labor in exchange for this" then absolutely.

Quote from: thestringpuller on June 13, 2013, 12:14:14 PM

Developers need management, they aren't managers, hence how could they manage themselves? Many designers and developers realize this, but no leadership team wants to be onboard a company funded by dreams.

Well depending on what your take is with BTC, S.MG is funded by almost 9k of such dreams. Either way really.

Quote from: thestringpuller on June 13, 2013, 12:14:14 PM

You seem to be focused on the revenue plan, and less on the question "will players become fans?"

Why do you suppose the revenue plan and the players becoming fans are divorced topics?

Quote from: nubbins on June 13, 2013, 12:35:36 PM

Quote from: EskimoBob on June 13, 2013, 11:29:22 AM

...his reporting "standard" (LOL!) is one big joke and has already blown up on investors face (see S.DICE saga https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=101902.1740)

one more giant lel behind that link. glad I dumped all my S.DICE shares and put them into AM; my BTC30 loss due to napkin accounting was more than recovered.

Probably worth pointing out that the OP is naturally confused. S.DICE was keeping its own accounting, by its own standards. Which, I guess, were indeed ill advised, in retrospect. Had they followed S.MPOE/MPEx standards closer they would perhaps find themselves closer to the position in which S.MPOE/MPEx finds itself, which is to say the only public company of that age in BTC.