Originally Posted by Zeouterlimits
The point is less about whether we will get a better game out of it but whether it will stand to them financially to be doing this.
Sure, but hindsight is always 20/20. If they're wrong and 2.0 doesn't catch on people will say "god they were so stupid they should never have done that in the first place". But they're not omniscient, and neither is anyone else.
I think given the state of the franchise and the risk involved with doing nothing and letting the game die, they are probably making the right decision. Given the complete shift in direction that they went from 1.0 to 2.0 it's clear that they've learned something.
Even if they end up being successful and executing this perfectly, the result will still be drastically worse than if they had just gotten it right the first time. But it's too late for that, so dramatically worse is the best they can hope for, with the alternative being catastrophic.
The thing is, IF (and obviously it's a big if) 2.0 succeeds this could be a big learning experience for SE which they otherwise would never have had. I mean I'm not talking like it goes on to save the company from ultimate disaster, but if it gets enough subscribers and players that are happy with it, and if the game receives an ultimately positive reception, it may serve as a wake up call to them that they've been doing it all wrong for the past few games, and now here you have an example of how to do it right.
It could serve as a turning point where they begin to start taking customers' feedback more seriously, interacting more, and indicate a shift in philosophy going for. That alone will be worth the price of all these so called "wasted" resources. But if they had just given up and never even tried to fix it with 2.0, that wouldn't happen.