Gaia's Decision on zOMG!

[Prue]

Sinivar

What I'm saying is there was a reason for that update and it was the money. It's not because zOMG was getting special attention. It's because they had the content and the idea. That's the bottom line of what I'm getting at there. I probably didn't explain myself clearly. I have a bad habit of rambling.

It's likely they weren't easy when they were first began. I'm simply saying that if you don't want to invest more time and resources into the game, but have a potential update already mostly set up and people willing to pay handsomely in the hopes that will show you their interest, it simply came down to 2 + 2 = math. The update was made, not as an extension to the MMO, but because it was there and the idea to cash in on it was there without any strings attached and it would take little to complete and add. I don't agree with it, but that's what the tidy little bundle is summed up into. Had there been no pre-existing project, it may have lain as un-updated as the mini-games.

And just for the record, I never spent a dime on zOMG. I actually rarely play. My cl is still somewhere around 8 I think. Stopped playing back before they released the integrity rings, I remember that much though I popped on to look at it.

All that matters to me is bad business tactics. I feel the direction they took their MMO and how they handled it has been shady and deceptive. And that is not the image I want of a company I am holding out money to for pixels. zOMG isn't what matters to me. Gaia's business ethic in regards to the upkeep of the main site is what matters to me.

Most of Gaia's updates are for money. I don't think this is that surprising, since they're a business. Not everything about the update was cash oriented, however, and I think that's worth noting as well before demonizing them xP

Here's the problem I have with your argument. You're mad because zOMG! got an update for DMS before being put on a hiatus, and it ended up netting them cash. I don't see this as a bad thing, nor do I see anything really disingenuous about it. As I pointed out before, if they released a new bundle in the cash shop for zOMG! right now, no one would feel ~deceived~ and people would undoubtedly still buy it.

I also don't see their business ethic with zOMG as being poor. They didn't exactly ignore the feature, and they did give it a fair chance where others have simply been kicked to the wayside.

You may feel angry / disgruntled about zOMG!, but I do not. I see it as a practical decision for the company to make if the product they're offering isn't netting them what it's supposed to.

[szkl7]

Chibi Halo

~Lady_Ebbie~

Actually, JK said that we might like the new fantasy game that he's working on and should give it a chance. I'm willing to.

I'm looking forward to it. I've screwed up so much in zOMG that it's just not worth it to go back and try to play again because I honestly would like to restart the whole thing without going to a mule to do so. There's no way to do that and I see this as the opportunity to try and do things right this time. However, I've been seeing people since last Saturday condemn the fantasy game before it even has previews. They don't want to give it a chance or even look at it because it's not zOMG. Right now I wonder if those feelings are being fueled by things coming from swarf and not JK. He pretty much pulled a maneuver similar to how I imagine parts of the GCD and SF feel when someone from the zOMG forum who's not married to that forum alone comes in and says they heard something in a weekly in game meetup. Usually the GCD and SF have some kind of sixth sense when it comes to staff realignments and adjustments and we were left high and dry about any of this other than when Qixter went to go work on EverQuest 2. Somebody wasn't happy with the dwindling numbers in the zOMG staff and started pitting the zOMG forum against the HQ.

I'm willing to give this game a chance. However, if progress in the game depends on me spending a**-loads of cash and spamming my friends for help, I'm wiping my hands clean of the whole thing.

[Prue]

Jayce Reinhardt

Madkool

Jayce Reinhardt

Madkool

They've expanded in some ways like expanding into the social network arena, while consolidating in others (like in cutting staff).

Expanding into an area that just lost a few million users last month alone (According to several news websites) still makes me a lil worried.

But that does seem a clearer.

That's interesting, did they account for a gross total? (Were there more users leaving than entering, or was it just stated that a total of around 1 million left?)

I've always been a bit iffy about the facebook / social network gaming thing, but Gaia seems to be awfully confident in it to split their company the way they have.

Here are a couple of links, maybe they are helpful.

http://www.seroundtable.com/facebook-marketshare-13554.html

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-13760244

Interesting, so it would be gross. It's possible there's simply an error with the feature that tracks this info though, since it's known as being somewhat unreliable.

"Webmasters and SEOs are discussing what is going on here. Supposedly, the data Inside Facebook uses to get this data is from Facebook's advertising tool. The tool may have reporting bugs leading to issues with these marketshare reports - so it is hard to be 100% positive that Facebook lost 6 million users in the US market." (BBC News report)

I'd also be curious to see if the overall loss in users has a large effect on the users that have become part of the social gaming scene, or if those users aren't the ones leaving.

[Chibi Halo]

~Lady_Ebbie~

I'm willing to give this game a chance. However, if progress in the game depends on me spending a**-loads of cash and spamming my friends for help, I'm wiping my hands clean of the whole thing.

So far with Summer Springs that they're distributing for Fever Studios the only thing you really need is to hook up with people who are playing the game because in order to not spend money on it you need a certain amount of friends who play so you can buy some things with the in game money and not Facebook supported cash. If they can make the new game something that doesn't require twenty-seven friends before you can buy it then I think a lot of people will play it.

[Jayce Reinhardt]

Madkool

Interesting, so it would be gross. It's possible there's simply an error with the feature that tracks this info though, since it's known as being somewhat unreliable.

"Webmasters and SEOs are discussing what is going on here. Supposedly, the data Inside Facebook uses to get this data is from Facebook's advertising tool. The tool may have reporting bugs leading to issues with these marketshare reports - so it is hard to be 100% positive that Facebook lost 6 million users in the US market." (BBC News report)

I'd also be curious to see if the overall loss in users has a large effect on the users that have become part of the social gaming scene, or if those users aren't the ones leaving.

We will see, not much else we can do but be users. *terrible answer but there you have it*

[szkl7]

Chibi Halo

~Lady_Ebbie~

I'm willing to give this game a chance. However, if progress in the game depends on me spending a**-loads of cash and spamming my friends for help, I'm wiping my hands clean of the whole thing.

So far with Summer Springs that they're distributing for Fever Studios the only thing you really need is to hook up with people who are playing the game because in order to not spend money on it you need a certain amount of friends who play so you can buy some things with the in game money and not Facebook supported cash. If they can make the new game something that doesn't require twenty-seven friends before you can buy it then I think a lot of people will play it.

We shall have to see then.

[Lucca the Inventor]

Madkool

Sinivar

What I'm saying is there was a reason for that update and it was the money. It's not because zOMG was getting special attention. It's because they had the content and the idea. That's the bottom line of what I'm getting at there. I probably didn't explain myself clearly. I have a bad habit of rambling.

It's likely they weren't easy when they were first began. I'm simply saying that if you don't want to invest more time and resources into the game, but have a potential update already mostly set up and people willing to pay handsomely in the hopes that will show you their interest, it simply came down to 2 + 2 = math. The update was made, not as an extension to the MMO, but because it was there and the idea to cash in on it was there without any strings attached and it would take little to complete and add. I don't agree with it, but that's what the tidy little bundle is summed up into. Had there been no pre-existing project, it may have lain as un-updated as the mini-games.

And just for the record, I never spent a dime on zOMG. I actually rarely play. My cl is still somewhere around 8 I think. Stopped playing back before they released the integrity rings, I remember that much though I popped on to look at it.

All that matters to me is bad business tactics. I feel the direction they took their MMO and how they handled it has been shady and deceptive. And that is not the image I want of a company I am holding out money to for pixels. zOMG isn't what matters to me. Gaia's business ethic in regards to the upkeep of the main site is what matters to me.

Most of Gaia's updates are for money. I don't think this is that surprising, since they're a business. Not everything about the update was cash oriented, however, and I think that's worth noting as well before demonizing them xP

Here's the problem I have with your argument. You're mad because zOMG! got an update for DMS before being put on a hiatus, and it ended up netting them cash. I don't see this as a bad thing, nor do I see anything really disingenuous about it. As I pointed out before, if they released a new bundle in the cash shop for zOMG! right now, no one would feel ~deceived~ and people would undoubtedly still buy it.

I also don't see their business ethic with zOMG as being poor. They didn't exactly ignore the feature, and they did give it a fair chance where others have simply been kicked to the wayside.

You may feel angry / disgruntled about zOMG!, but I do not. I see it as a practical decision for the company to make if the product they're offering isn't netting them what it's supposed to.

I'm not demonizing them. From a business angle it makes perfect sense. Unfortunately that angle isn't exactly harmonious all the time with the consumers perspective. And since that's the seat most of us are sitting in, that's how we have to look at it.

And no, I am saying the update occurred for the sake of the cash. Had the update not previously existed, there would have been no update at all most likely. Not even a cash oriented one. You made the point of the mini-games not receiving updates. I'm simply saying that zOMG received it's update for a very specific reason. If it sounds like it demonizes them than that's just how it comes out in text. If I were in their position I could see the merits of taking the same actions. But I do personally feel they were dishonest. Even if it was a dishonest simply through silence.

And the problem I have with your argument is that you are automatically assuming that the game was given the fair shake it deserved and thus since it never made the money they wanted, it will never make the money they wanted. I don't believe it was and could potentially net what they want and more but they are too busy with other projects to make the attempt but have said nothing conclusive to the zOMG community that constantly begged them for an honest answer and if their money would save the game. It was met with silence, and to me, that silence spoke volumes.

Anyway, seems we've gone on a wild ride. I only meant to tell that fellow the relevant information that had been presented by the other side as far as it's drain on Gaia. So if you don't mind, I think we'll need to agree to disagree on this one.

[Prue]

Sinivar

I'm not demonizing them. From a business angle it makes perfect sense. Unfortunately that angle isn't exactly harmonious all the time with the consumers perspective. And since that's the seat most of us are sitting in, that's how we have to look at it.

And no, I am saying the update occurred for the sake of the cash. Had the update not previously existed, there would have been no update at all most likely. Not even a cash oriented one. You made the point of the mini-games not receiving updates. I'm simply saying that zOMG received it's update for a very specific reason. If it sounds like it demonizes them than that's just how it comes out in text. If I were in their position I could see the merits of taking the same actions. But I do personally feel they were dishonest. Even if it was a dishonest simply through silence.

And the problem I have with your argument is that you are automatically assuming that the game was given the fair shake it deserved and thus since it never made the money they wanted, it will never make the money they wanted. I don't believe it was and could potentially net what they want and more but they are too busy with other projects to make the attempt but have said nothing conclusive to the zOMG community that constantly begged them for an honest answer and if their money would save the game. It was met with silence, and to me, that silence spoke volumes.

Anyway, seems we've gone on a wild ride. I only meant to tell that fellow the relevant information that had been presented by the other side as far as it's drain on Gaia. So if you don't mind, I think we'll need to agree to disagree on this one.

Well from the consumer's perspective, it seems to me that the developers of zOMG! lied to their userbase with false promises. Not the upper level admins. We should be pointing to /them/ asking questions rather than parading their responses around as if Gaia the company is being deceitful. That's how I see it as a customer.

We also don't know when Gaia decided to stop giving zOMG! major updates. But from Swarf's reply, it seems that it was rather recently the meeting occurred.

I understand you're frustrated as well as many others here (which explains why this topic is so heated), but I think this is misdirected anger.

[Pilfer von Durem]

Madkool

Well from the consumer's perspective, it seems to me that the developers of zOMG! lied to their userbase with false promises. Not the upper level admins. We should be pointing to /them/ asking questions rather than parading their responses around as if Gaia the company is being deceitful. That's how I see it as a customer.

We also don't know when Gaia decided to stop giving zOMG! major updates. But from Swarf's reply, it seems that it was rather recently the meeting occurred.

I understand you're frustrated as well as many others here (which explains why this topic is so heated), but I think this is misdirected anger.

The Developers were lied to. All they ever said was "we'll do the best we can". Lanzer, on the other hand, promised that Buccaneer Boardwalk would be completed or else we'd be refunded money. http://www.gaiaonline.com/forum/ask-the-admin-archives/ask-the-admin-01-31-2011/t.69224297_112/#112

Your arguments are broken.

[Catalyste]

From my perspective, nothing being said from any of the staff adds up.

It's all highly confusing for anyone to properly piece together. One part is saying this, another part is saying that, and in the middle the users are running around like headless chickens. Yet no matter what happens, users who love the game will go back to the game.

I'll believe it when a reputable third-party site releases public revenue information on Gaia. But since that has a snowball's chance of happening, I regret to say that at this point not a single thing swarf has said has brought me closer into believing zOMG is safe. After years of being told differently, it's not that I'm not accepting, it's that I've decided to be observant of what's gonna drop on us next. So for that, I'm not taking a side.

Who lied or why they decide to dance around so many holes reflects on the higher-ups and the old team. What they did is now the bain & responsibility of the current team as well as courting HQ politics.

Such an abusive relationship we have here.

[Pilotslover]

Mortok

zOmg is not being shut down. It is in maintenance mode, which is not the same thing. It's a minor point, but I feel it needs clarification. There is always the possibility of it receiving more attention at a later date, even if that possibility is looking extremely unlikely right now.

The mixed messages are indeed confusing. I don't want to accuse anyone of lying, but the fact is that we have one developer saying one thing, while several other developers in ATA and outside of it have been saying pretty much the complete opposite. And swarf's post reads, to me, like the typical bluster of a disgruntled employee. How do we know that he's not just speaking out of anger because his project got cut?

I'm not the least bit surprised that the zOmg fanbase (along with the usual suspects of SF) are allying themselves with the one and only developer who's saying exactly what they want to hear. But more rational individuals are going to realise that it's still just one voice against many.

Gaia has no reason to lie, and we know they've never abandoned profitable ventures before, even when the entirity of Site Feedback was bitching them out about it (every single RIG of 2010, comes to mind).

EDIT: Even if zOmg is making a profit, swarf did not state an amount, so we're still groping around in the dark here. He is being just as vague as all the other staff members are. Being "profitable" is not the same thing as being "an efficient use of resources". I find his assertion that "other companies" would keep a profitable game even if the profit margin was tiny to be extremely odd.

I also find it telling that he compares zOmg's performance to other flash spaces on Gaia. Its performance compared to other Gaia features isn't relevent. Gaia is not dropping zOmg to work on other internal features, it is dropping zOmg to work on games that will be hosted by a third-party social site (ie, Facebook), but swarf conveniently avoids any mention of their performance.

Mortok, I just want to say thank you for being the voice of reason throughout, I've been trying to think how to word things for myself but you've managed to get there before me!

[Aileeya]

Well, whilst exploring around reading up on posts and following links, I found this post of Narumi's from just a couple of months ago, and considering the current fiasco, I find it quite ironic.

Especially that last part: "The theme for 2012 from the new higher ups is the Gaia community. ...this next year will be about working on projects that we feel are right for Gaian's and far less about crazy new features created mostly for new users that do little to nothing for those of you still here."

[Pilfer von Durem]

Pilotslover

Mortok

zOmg is not being shut down. It is in maintenance mode, which is not the same thing. It's a minor point, but I feel it needs clarification. There is always the possibility of it receiving more attention at a later date, even if that possibility is looking extremely unlikely right now.

The mixed messages are indeed confusing. I don't want to accuse anyone of lying, but the fact is that we have one developer saying one thing, while several other developers in ATA and outside of it have been saying pretty much the complete opposite. And swarf's post reads, to me, like the typical bluster of a disgruntled employee. How do we know that he's not just speaking out of anger because his project got cut?

I'm not the least bit surprised that the zOmg fanbase (along with the usual suspects of SF) are allying themselves with the one and only developer who's saying exactly what they want to hear. But more rational individuals are going to realise that it's still just one voice against many.

Gaia has no reason to lie, and we know they've never abandoned profitable ventures before, even when the entirity of Site Feedback was bitching them out about it (every single RIG of 2010, comes to mind).

EDIT: Even if zOmg is making a profit, swarf did not state an amount, so we're still groping around in the dark here. He is being just as vague as all the other staff members are. Being "profitable" is not the same thing as being "an efficient use of resources". I find his assertion that "other companies" would keep a profitable game even if the profit margin was tiny to be extremely odd.

I also find it telling that he compares zOmg's performance to other flash spaces on Gaia. Its performance compared to other Gaia features isn't relevent. Gaia is not dropping zOmg to work on other internal features, it is dropping zOmg to work on games that will be hosted by a third-party social site (ie, Facebook), but swarf conveniently avoids any mention of their performance.

Mortok, I just want to say thank you for being the voice of reason throughout, I've been trying to think how to word things for myself but you've managed to get there before me!

Monster Galaxy was over 8 mil players. It is now barely over 1. It lost a huge portion of its base for the same reason zOMG! did.
SoulCrash has 1k likes (licensed...not even worth putting any money into).
SummerSprings - not looking, already argued this before Swarf.

For Mortok's supposed level headedness to work, Swarf has to have an ulterior motive.
If he didn't, then he'd be making life harder on himself for no apparent reason whatsoever.

I call bullshit on people calling bullshit.

[Pilotslover]

Pilfer von Durem

Monster Galaxy was over 8 mil players. It is now barely over 1. It lost a huge portion of its base for the same reason zOMG! did.
SoulCrash has 1k likes (licensed...not even worth putting any money into).
SummerSprings - not looking, already argued this before Swarf.

For Mortok's supposed level headedness to work, Swarf has to have an ulterior motive.
If he didn't, then he'd be making life harder on himself for no apparent reason whatsoever.

I call bullshit on people calling bullshit.

Swarf's job was about to change, his ulterior motive could well be that he didn't want things to change in the way that they were doing so.

Look, as someone who's job changed drastically (I went from a basic receptionist to coordinating something quite important within the company I work for), I can vouch for how scary the prospect can be and it has been pointed out to me many times along the way that some people baulk at new challenges.

I'm not saying swarf did, just offering an alternative perspective on what he did because to me ... it really does seem like his posts should be taken with a pinch of salt and until I see something a bit more definitive I'm going to reserve judgement on the whole thing.

It's just nice to see someone being a bit more level about the whole affair.

[Pilfer von Durem]

Pilotslover

Swarf's job was about to change, his ulterior motive could well be that he didn't want things to change in the way that they were doing so.

What was it changing to and from? [ JK ] had been the sole dev on zOMG! for awhile now.