Crowfail invests too much of their backed money into paying people to post on Reddit, and for advertorials on MassivelyOP to be a reliable game. They have pissed away too much of their money. This brings up the question... did backers know that a good portion of their money would go towards advertising rather than development? Is there too much or too little a backed project can advertise using the money they obtained?
By chance could you provide the accounting books so we can know what you do?
They raised and have continued to raise funding before and after the Kickstarter. It's their money to spend how they wish.
While I'm assuming some payment is made for press, think you are being a bit over the top as to how much and the source.
Considering the stretch goals keep getting funded and new fans are coming in, I'd assume that is money well spent on marketing.
Heck, even a recent "forum member" has been placing ads for crowfall here in the guise of crowfall vs camelot unchained (which is like comparing apples to oranges).
Where?
With that said, I feel the game is overly ambitious for their limited funds. I feel the game will launch and then disappear within 6-8 months. Its overly ambitious. They say they can spend less time developing because they have no PvE to worry about... that's all just hype to make feel people comfortable with the fact they are wasting so much cash.
I don't trust these guys. Hell, it may be childish, but even looking at the two designers Thomas Blair and Tully Ackland makes me distrust them further.
Could be totally right, but same could be said for every single game ever and the teams behind them. No faith, don't put any money in, pretty simple. Not everyone worries so much.
*edit - Just wanted to add. They have layaway for item purchases in case you don't have the money all up front. AHhahahahahah Now isnt that desperation?
Fans requested it...damn them for providing. Not sure if you've seen the prices for crowdfunded shop items (Star Citizen, SOTA, Revival, CF, but the prices get pretty crazy. Doesn't mean folks don't want a way to pay that fits their budget.
Here is an advertorial from MassivelyOP. Another guy posts about not trusting them either and gets several likes.
A short blurb about two linked dev videos, never seen that on a gaming site ever (looks at the main page of this site...).
But random forum poster said he didn't trust them, time to worry.
As a backer I'm biased, but this seems rather silly. Don't like the product or support how they are doing it? Oh well. Pretty much why we have so many smaller indie projects incoming. They aren't being designed with everyone in mind.
Bill, you are old... and not because you use words like "hogwash," but because you seem to be expecting history to repeat itself and ONE game to come along, knock everyone's socks off (yeah, I'm old too,) and influence the industry like WOW did.
Historically, that has happened with every genre - rpg, sim, fps, etc. - so there is both precedent and pattern.
And wishful thinking
"Historically" in computer gaming for me goes all the way back to the Atari 800 and 1980. Back then just about everything released was a never before done "game changer" and most of us played the same things because variety was limited.
Gaming now is mainstream, massive and diverse. Even the WOW subs are now coming down to earth to levels comparable to other MMORPGs. I think that's the way of the future: more players but more spread out over an increasing number of games.
But hey, I'm certainly not immune from wishful thinking. I would love for there to be one new MMORPG to rule them all. I just don't see it happening.
Not sure why you brought up the Atari 800 when you even acknowledge that it's irrelevant and it's a whole different ballgame right now. Glad you been gaming for a while. Now let's catch up to the present. In the past fifteen years, the pattern has been pretty consistent.
Do you have an example of a genre where it didn't happen?
There isn't a "right" or "wrong" way to play, if you want to use a screwdriver to put nails into wood, have at it, simply don't complain when the guy next to you with the hammer is doing it much better and easier. - Allein "Graphics are often supplied by Engines that (some) MMORPG's are built in" - Spuffyre
Bill, you are old... and not because you use words like "hogwash," but because you seem to be expecting history to repeat itself and ONE game to come along, knock everyone's socks off (yeah, I'm old too,) and influence the industry like WOW did.
Historically, that has happened with every genre - rpg, sim, fps, etc. - so there is both precedent and pattern.
And wishful thinking
"Historically" in computer gaming for me goes all the way back to the Atari 800 and 1980. Back then just about everything released was a never before done "game changer" and most of us played the same things because variety was limited.
Gaming now is mainstream, massive and diverse. Even the WOW subs are now coming down to earth to levels comparable to other MMORPGs. I think that's the way of the future: more players but more spread out over an increasing number of games.
But hey, I'm certainly not immune from wishful thinking. I would love for there to be one new MMORPG to rule them all. I just don't see it happening.
Does "genre changing" or "new era" have to mean the arrival of ONE game that captures 10 times as many players as all other games combined ?
If that's the requirement for a "new era", then we may never see a new era ever again in MMORPG's...
Bill, you are old... and not because you use words like "hogwash," but because you seem to be expecting history to repeat itself and ONE game to come along, knock everyone's socks off (yeah, I'm old too,) and influence the industry like WOW did.
Historically, that has happened with every genre - rpg, sim, fps, etc. - so there is both precedent and pattern.
And wishful thinking
"Historically" in computer gaming for me goes all the way back to the Atari 800 and 1980. Back then just about everything released was a never before done "game changer" and most of us played the same things because variety was limited.
Gaming now is mainstream, massive and diverse. Even the WOW subs are now coming down to earth to levels comparable to other MMORPGs. I think that's the way of the future: more players but more spread out over an increasing number of games.
But hey, I'm certainly not immune from wishful thinking. I would love for there to be one new MMORPG to rule them all. I just don't see it happening.
Not sure why you brought up the Atari 800 when you even acknowledge that it's irrelevant and it's a whole different ballgame right now. Glad you been gaming for a while. Now let's catch up to the present. In the past fifteen years, the pattern has been pretty consistent.
Do you have an example of a genre where it didn't happen?
Let's keep it simple. Why don't you give me an example of where it has happened in MMORPGs since 2004?
"Social media gives legions of idiots the right to speak when they once only spoke at a bar after a glass of wine, without harming the community ... but now they have the same right to speak as a Nobel Prize winner. It's the invasion of the idiots”
― Umberto Eco
“Microtransactions? In a single player role-playing game? Are you nuts?” ― CD PROJEKT RED
Bill, you are old... and not because you use words like "hogwash," but because you seem to be expecting history to repeat itself and ONE game to come along, knock everyone's socks off (yeah, I'm old too,) and influence the industry like WOW did.
Historically, that has happened with every genre - rpg, sim, fps, etc. - so there is both precedent and pattern.
And wishful thinking
"Historically" in computer gaming for me goes all the way back to the Atari 800 and 1980. Back then just about everything released was a never before done "game changer" and most of us played the same things because variety was limited.
Gaming now is mainstream, massive and diverse. Even the WOW subs are now coming down to earth to levels comparable to other MMORPGs. I think that's the way of the future: more players but more spread out over an increasing number of games.
But hey, I'm certainly not immune from wishful thinking. I would love for there to be one new MMORPG to rule them all. I just don't see it happening.
Does "genre changing" or "new era" have to mean the arrival of ONE game that captures 10 times as many players as all other games combined ?
If that's the requirement for a "new era", then we may never see a new era ever again in MMORPG's...
Exactly. One MMO to Rule Them All is a bizarre tangent at best and has nothing to do with Bill's question.
In 1999, EQ brought MMOs out of the darkness of nerd basements and into... well, lots of better lit basements. One could also say it made 3D a requirement for the NA/EU MMO audience.
In 2002, AC2 introduced quite a few elements that would become standard in MMOs from that point on
3D characters on the character selection screen
the iconic MMORPG UI
the removal of consumable spell/projectile components
In 2004, WOW turned the industry upside-down with a polished, accessible and feature complete MMO that created a new era of mandatory features for an MMO. We all kidded ourselves when we figured one of those features would be polished, feature-complete releases.
One would expect something to occur somewhere around 2006-2008 but those years sucked balls. And, yes, that comes from an Auto Assault, Dungeon Runner, and Exteel fan.
In 2009, LOTRO let devs know it's ok to experiment with that exotic F2P stuff. Whether people here want to believe it or not, shifting to F2P isn't always a desperation move. It's sometimes a planned (and excellent) business strategy. AAA publishers quickly adopted the model, making it almost standard practice inside of three years.
We're due for another new era. History has shown that a game doesn't have to be The One Game to change things up - it just has to bring in the right change at the right time.
There isn't a "right" or "wrong" way to play, if you want to use a screwdriver to put nails into wood, have at it, simply don't complain when the guy next to you with the hammer is doing it much better and easier. - Allein "Graphics are often supplied by Engines that (some) MMORPG's are built in" - Spuffyre
Does "genre changing" or "new era" have to mean the arrival of ONE game that captures 10 times as many players as all other games combined ?
If that's the requirement for a "new era", then we may never see a new era ever again in MMORPG's...
Pretty well. Since almost by definition it should attract the most if it truly is "genre changing" or ushers a "new era." Even Bill referred to the previous contender-in-development, EQN in the article. And I know you were here two years ago so I'm sure you remember all the hype. So now it's Crowfall?
A better article would "Can one single MMORPG bring about a new era?" And no, I don't think that's going to happen.
"Social media gives legions of idiots the right to speak when they once only spoke at a bar after a glass of wine, without harming the community ... but now they have the same right to speak as a Nobel Prize winner. It's the invasion of the idiots”
― Umberto Eco
“Microtransactions? In a single player role-playing game? Are you nuts?” ― CD PROJEKT RED
Bill, you are old... and not because you use words like "hogwash," but because you seem to be expecting history to repeat itself and ONE game to come along, knock everyone's socks off (yeah, I'm old too,) and influence the industry like WOW did.
Historically, that has happened with every genre - rpg, sim, fps, etc. - so there is both precedent and pattern.
And wishful thinking
"Historically" in computer gaming for me goes all the way back to the Atari 800 and 1980. Back then just about everything released was a never before done "game changer" and most of us played the same things because variety was limited.
Gaming now is mainstream, massive and diverse. Even the WOW subs are now coming down to earth to levels comparable to other MMORPGs. I think that's the way of the future: more players but more spread out over an increasing number of games.
But hey, I'm certainly not immune from wishful thinking. I would love for there to be one new MMORPG to rule them all. I just don't see it happening.
Does "genre changing" or "new era" have to mean the arrival of ONE game that captures 10 times as many players as all other games combined ?
If that's the requirement for a "new era", then we may never see a new era ever again in MMORPG's...
Exactly. One MMO to Rule Them All is a bizarre tangent at best and has nothing to do with Bill's question.
In 1999, EQ brought MMOs out of the darkness of nerd basements and into... well, lots of better lit basements. One could also say it made 3D a requirement for the NA/EU MMO audience.
In 2002, AC2 introduced quite a few elements that would become standard in MMOs from that point on
3D characters on the character selection screen
the iconic MMORPG UI
the removal of consumable spell/projectile components
In 2004, WOW turned the industry upside-down with a polished, accessible and feature complete MMO that created a new era of mandatory features for an MMO. We all kidded ourselves when we figured one of those features would be polished, feature-complete releases.
One would expect something to occur somewhere around 2006-2008 but those years sucked balls. And, yes, that comes from an Auto Assault, Dungeon Runner, and Exteel fan.
In 2009, LOTRO let devs know it's ok to experiment with that exotic F2P stuff. Whether people here want to believe it or not, shifting to F2P isn't always a desperation move. It's sometimes a planned (and excellent) business strategy. AAA publishers quickly adopted the model, making it almost standard practice inside of three years.
We're due for another new era. History has shown that a game doesn't have to be The One Game to change things up - it just has to bring in the right change at the right time.
What's this "history has shown" crap you keep going on about? In MMORPGs it has happened exactly twice: EQ and WOW... that's it. You can revise history all you want but all you're really detailing is the constant incremental changes that practically every single MMORPG ever created has contributed to.
And in my mind, slow incremental change is at the opposite end of the spectrum from one game doing it. This article is about whether Crowfall can do that so yeah, "one game to rule them all" is very much on topic... maybe you should go back and actually read Bill's article... just a thought.
"Social media gives legions of idiots the right to speak when they once only spoke at a bar after a glass of wine, without harming the community ... but now they have the same right to speak as a Nobel Prize winner. It's the invasion of the idiots”
― Umberto Eco
“Microtransactions? In a single player role-playing game? Are you nuts?” ― CD PROJEKT RED
Does "genre changing" or "new era" have to mean the arrival of ONE game that captures 10 times as many players as all other games combined ?
If that's the requirement for a "new era", then we may never see a new era ever again in MMORPG's...
Exactly. One MMO to Rule Them All is a bizarre tangent at best and has nothing to do with Bill's question.
In 1999, EQ brought MMOs out of the darkness of nerd basements and into... well, lots of better lit basements. One could also say it made 3D a requirement for the NA/EU MMO audience.
In 2002, AC2 introduced quite a few elements that would become standard in MMOs from that point on
3D characters on the character selection screen
the iconic MMORPG UI
the removal of consumable spell/projectile components
In 2004, WOW turned the industry upside-down with a polished, accessible and feature complete MMO that created a new era of mandatory features for an MMO. We all kidded ourselves when we figured one of those features would be polished, feature-complete releases.
One would expect something to occur somewhere around 2006-2008 but those years sucked balls. And, yes, that comes from an Auto Assault, Dungeon Runner, and Exteel fan.
In 2009, LOTRO let devs know it's ok to experiment with that exotic F2P stuff. Whether people here want to believe it or not, shifting to F2P isn't always a desperation move. It's sometimes a planned (and excellent) business strategy. AAA publishers quickly adopted the model, making it almost standard practice inside of three years.
We're due for another new era. History has shown that a game doesn't have to be The One Game to change things up - it just has to bring in the right change at the right time.
What's this "history has shown" crap you keep going on about? In MMORPGs it has happened exactly twice: EQ and WOW... that's it. You can revise history all you want but all you're really detailing is the constant incremental changes that practically every single MMORPG ever created has contributed to.
And in my mind, slow incremental change is at the opposite end of the spectrum from one game doing it. This article is about whether Crowfall can do that so yeah, "one game to rule them all" is very much on topic... maybe you should go back and actually read Bill's article... just a thought.
Dude, cop the attitude with someone else. If you don't want to accept that genre defining changes happened, that's fine, but don't talk that kind of crap to me to compensate for your relentless ignorance.
"This article is about whether Crowfall can do that so yeah, "one game to rule them all" is very much on topic... maybe you should go back and actually read Bill's article... just a thought."
"Can Crowfall bring about a new era?" - Bill
"Will one of these strongminded studios bring about a new MMO golden age?" - Bill
"But if there’s one game I think could potentially set new trends or become “the new hotness”, it’s probably Crowfall." - Bill
What Spotty and I both pointed out is that 'new era' and 'genre changing' don't necessarily mean, as YOU put it, one MMO to rule them all.
There isn't a "right" or "wrong" way to play, if you want to use a screwdriver to put nails into wood, have at it, simply don't complain when the guy next to you with the hammer is doing it much better and easier. - Allein "Graphics are often supplied by Engines that (some) MMORPG's are built in" - Spuffyre
Does "genre changing" or "new era" have to mean the arrival of ONE game that captures 10 times as many players as all other games combined ?
If that's the requirement for a "new era", then we may never see a new era ever again in MMORPG's...
Exactly. One MMO to Rule Them All is a bizarre tangent at best and has nothing to do with Bill's question.
In 1999, EQ brought MMOs out of the darkness of nerd basements and into... well, lots of better lit basements. One could also say it made 3D a requirement for the NA/EU MMO audience.
In 2002, AC2 introduced quite a few elements that would become standard in MMOs from that point on
3D characters on the character selection screen
the iconic MMORPG UI
the removal of consumable spell/projectile components
In 2004, WOW turned the industry upside-down with a polished, accessible and feature complete MMO that created a new era of mandatory features for an MMO. We all kidded ourselves when we figured one of those features would be polished, feature-complete releases.
One would expect something to occur somewhere around 2006-2008 but those years sucked balls. And, yes, that comes from an Auto Assault, Dungeon Runner, and Exteel fan.
In 2009, LOTRO let devs know it's ok to experiment with that exotic F2P stuff. Whether people here want to believe it or not, shifting to F2P isn't always a desperation move. It's sometimes a planned (and excellent) business strategy. AAA publishers quickly adopted the model, making it almost standard practice inside of three years.
We're due for another new era. History has shown that a game doesn't have to be The One Game to change things up - it just has to bring in the right change at the right time.
What's this "history has shown" crap you keep going on about? In MMORPGs it has happened exactly twice: EQ and WOW... that's it. You can revise history all you want but all you're really detailing is the constant incremental changes that practically every single MMORPG ever created has contributed to.
And in my mind, slow incremental change is at the opposite end of the spectrum from one game doing it. This article is about whether Crowfall can do that so yeah, "one game to rule them all" is very much on topic... maybe you should go back and actually read Bill's article... just a thought.
Dude, cop the attitude with someone else. If you don't want to accept that genre defining changes happened, that's fine, but don't talk that kind of crap to me to compensate for your relentless ignorance.
"This article is about whether Crowfall can do that so yeah, "one game to rule them all" is very much on topic... maybe you should go back and actually read Bill's article... just a thought."
"Can Crowfall bring about a new era?" - Bill
"Will one of these strongminded studios bring about a new MMO golden age?" - Bill
"But if there’s one game I think could potentially set new trends or become “the new hotness”, it’s probably Crowfall." - Bill
What Spotty and I both pointed out is that 'new era' and 'genre changing' don't necessarily mean, as YOU put it, one MMO to rule them all.
What you both seem to be missing is that when you talk about ONE game ushering in a new era you kind of are talking about a new one to rule them all.
I'll assume it's your combative nature and not just sheer ignorance that's keeping you from making that connection.
"Social media gives legions of idiots the right to speak when they once only spoke at a bar after a glass of wine, without harming the community ... but now they have the same right to speak as a Nobel Prize winner. It's the invasion of the idiots”
― Umberto Eco
“Microtransactions? In a single player role-playing game? Are you nuts?” ― CD PROJEKT RED
What Spotty and I both pointed out is that 'new era' and 'genre changing' don't necessarily mean, as YOU put it, one MMO to rule them all.
What you both seem to be missing is that when you talk about ONE game ushering in a new era you kind of are talking about a new one to rule them all.
I'll assume it's your combative nature and not just sheer ignorance that's keeping you from making that connection.
I guess we are at an impasse then. Beginning a new era or changing the genre does not mean that game has to 'rule' anything no matter how much you insist it does. Attempts to explain otherwise have proven fruitless. Giving examples where an MMO changed the genre but was never the 'ruler' didn't work either. Since history and fact don't sit well with you, we've hit a wall.
There isn't a "right" or "wrong" way to play, if you want to use a screwdriver to put nails into wood, have at it, simply don't complain when the guy next to you with the hammer is doing it much better and easier. - Allein "Graphics are often supplied by Engines that (some) MMORPG's are built in" - Spuffyre
What you both seem to be missing is that when you talk about ONE game ushering in a new era you kind of are talking about a new one to rule them all.
I'll assume it's your combative nature and not just sheer ignorance that's keeping you from making that connection.
It doesn't have to mean that at all.... It simply means it's a design people see possibilities in. EQ was really that game for this genre, it wasn't the historical one to rule them all post 04 now was it?
A game ushering in a new era could simply mean it has features and an overall design that works, and is different enough to carry on with, possibly leading to a massive hit down the road... when all cards are dealt right.
For every minute you are angry , you lose 60 seconds of happiness."-Emerson
The first to make a sandbox pve focused game with aaa graphics, building & survival, and rpg elements will define next the next gen. Pvp focused sandboxes only reach so many players, and to attract the huge pve segment for a longer period of time you need to give them a less hostile game environment.
EqNext has it right.. Or shall we say had? That project seem less and less likely to deliver on its concepts. Well, anyways maybe some other high profile game company that gets inspired by the many indie ish builder survival games in the works.
Personally I don't think Crowfall will be the one, it is just too pvp centric, but who knows ?
But there are no real challenges in a PVE focused MMO, and what you end up with is all forms of redundant grinding. Theme Park MMOs have a very limited shelf life when it comes to attracting enough players to make it feel truly massively. The content never lasts, and there is always someone who will burn through 60 hours of content in a week.
IMO, an MMO of the next generation needs to recognize that PVE is the supporting foundation of PVP. If you want to stick solely to PVE, you can, but you can only take that so far without risking more.
Game like EVE Online, Albion Online, and I believe Crowfall as well, do this by placing higher leveled (tiers) resources in progressively more open PVP zones. If you want access to higher end resources or content, you have to put yourself at greater risk.
Played: E&B, SWG, Eve, WoW, COH, WAR, POTBS, AOC, LOTRO, AUTO.A, AO, FE, TR, WWII, MWO, TSW, SWTOR, GW2, NWO, WoP, RUST, LIF, SOA, MORTAL, DFUW, AA, TF, PFO, ALBO, and many many others....
Until I see a playable version of all the pieces together, and I see how their cash shop ($800 castles ROTFL) works I'd really appreciate not seeing websites like MMORPG.com adding to the hype train momentum for this game.
This game (and other kickstarter or alpha buy-in games) is like a guy on date night trying to talk the panties off a gal. It all sounds good until the drawers have been pilfered and then no phone call the next day. Everything SOUNDS and looks lovely. What it IS, is a completely unfinished dream being sold.
I'd really like to see MMORPG interview these guys and really ask them hard questions (business models, pricing) and hold then accountable for those answers, if/when they do the switcheroo.
100% Agreed !! Best Post on this general issue, that counts for all the hyped games
A game doesn't even need to be successful to change a genre. It just needs to give the right people the right idea. What Crowfall has is the possibility to change the way PvP is handled in MMOs. By changing from an endless series of battles on an unchanging set of battlegrounds for static goals into a series of varied landscapes with varied victory conditions. Most MMOs have one or a very few PvP rulesets Crowfall will have many and they can be tailored to what different segments of the audience wants simultaneously. It's the logical extension of what games like Shadowbane and Eve have done but infinitely more flexible. As for the "toxic community" the Shadowbane and WoW boards were far worse. The Crowfall boards are weak tea indeed by comparison. I don't think people who have never enjoyed a game with a true free for all ruleset understand the aggressiveness of the people who will be playing on dregs. That's okay. Unlike Shadowbane or Darkfall you're not likely to play with them under those conditions as long as you stay out of those campaign worlds. The beauty is there will be milder PvP rulesets available as long as they prove popular. I can even see the future potential for purely PvE rulesets although I don't know if anything like that will ever be implemented.
The beauty of it is that Artcraft has said that, you can avoid the harshness of PVP, but you will be limited in what you can do or how far you can grow in power.
What needs to be seen is if Artcraft sticks to that or do they fold to the pressure of the PVE Only crowd, who will complain that they can not access everything in the game without taking risks.
Played: E&B, SWG, Eve, WoW, COH, WAR, POTBS, AOC, LOTRO, AUTO.A, AO, FE, TR, WWII, MWO, TSW, SWTOR, GW2, NWO, WoP, RUST, LIF, SOA, MORTAL, DFUW, AA, TF, PFO, ALBO, and many many others....
A game doesn't even need to be successful to change a genre. It just needs to give the right people the right idea. What Crowfall has is the possibility to change the way PvP is handled in MMOs. By changing from an endless series of battles on an unchanging set of battlegrounds for static goals into a series of varied landscapes with varied victory conditions. Most MMOs have one or a very few PvP rulesets Crowfall will have many and they can be tailored to what different segments of the audience wants simultaneously. It's the logical extension of what games like Shadowbane and Eve have done but infinitely more flexible. As for the "toxic community" the Shadowbane and WoW boards were far worse. The Crowfall boards are weak tea indeed by comparison. I don't think people who have never enjoyed a game with a true free for all ruleset understand the aggressiveness of the people who will be playing on dregs. That's okay. Unlike Shadowbane or Darkfall you're not likely to play with them under those conditions as long as you stay out of those campaign worlds. The beauty is there will be milder PvP rulesets available as long as they prove popular. I can even see the future potential for purely PvE rulesets although I don't know if anything like that will ever be implemented.
The beauty of it is that Artcraft has said that, you can avoid the harshness of PVP, but you will be limited in what you can do or how far you can grow in power.
What needs to be seen is if Artcraft sticks to that or do they fold to the pressure of the PVE Only crowd, who will complain that they can not access everything in the game without taking risks.
I imagine ArtCraft's dedication to their design principles will be as strong as the financial results produced by those principles.
If it looks like PVP'ers are not footing the bill, they'll be forced to start courting PVE'ers. Or close the game down.
The first to make a sandbox pve focused game with aaa graphics, building & survival, and rpg elements will define next the next gen. Pvp focused sandboxes only reach so many players, and to attract the huge pve segment for a longer period of time you need to give them a less hostile game environment.
EqNext has it right.. Or shall we say had? That project seem less and less likely to deliver on its concepts. Well, anyways maybe some other high profile game company that gets inspired by the many indie ish builder survival games in the works.
Personally I don't think Crowfall will be the one, it is just too pvp centric, but who knows ?
But there are no real challenges in a PVE focused MMO, and what you end up with is all forms of redundant grinding. Theme Park MMOs have a very limited shelf life when it comes to attracting enough players to make it feel truly massively. The content never lasts, and there is always someone who will burn through 60 hours of content in a week.
There are no real challenges for YOU. You're also making the mistake of assuming that there is no PVP then it's a Themepark. Although it does happen now and then, most people were able to enjoy Legos, an Etch-A-Sketch, or Lincoln Logs without beating their sibling with them. MMOs are no different.
There isn't a "right" or "wrong" way to play, if you want to use a screwdriver to put nails into wood, have at it, simply don't complain when the guy next to you with the hammer is doing it much better and easier. - Allein "Graphics are often supplied by Engines that (some) MMORPG's are built in" - Spuffyre
Ark:Survival Evolved (max 70 players per server) Rust and Dayz probably the same (or lower) dont know, never played those. However i would not call them massively multiplayer online (MMO)RPG games, just ORPG's.
I hope these are also not the next big thing to be classed as they are all survival games and most are utterly sh@t.
WoW yes 2nd gen big game, still yet to be toppled from the #1 spot after what 12-13yrs. Reason, other companies tried to copy what had already been done, why would people leave to a new game to start over and do something thats, well already out and been done with next to no change at all.
Players want to build their own towns/cities. Anywhere they would like (however build in wrong place could result in rest of server wiping them out) e.g blocking access to caves/dungeons/mins, towers, forts etc.
Player built dwellings = clan/tribe/guild etc only, start off small and build it up. Guilds are limited to 10 at start but gain more when guilds etc level up, achievements are done (guild etc) upto so many. guards can be hired and trained to a point, then training books need to be found to increase ones guards.
Players would like to enter dungeons/caves and it to be dark (aka you need a light source, torch's or spells of light), sounds that are creepy and scary, so one has to use their ears.
I liked some of the idea's in some games. Card games, arm wrestling. Crafting, this should be a proper thing were one has to work to make things rather than if i gather 100 of that 100 of that and 100 of that i can make 100 of this and go make a cuppa = BORING and dull.
What happened to the old EQ2 crafting (not the new shitty thing it has).
Player creation - should be Mage - you choose a type and stick with it. Healer - you choose a type and thats it, Tank well a rtank character is a tank chracter period, DPS same for dps.you choose your player type and thats it. Right now its i choose that but i will play my warrior as healer. i made a healer but rather play it for dps, i play dps and well i'll stick with it but it sucks compared to healers/tanks dps route being better.
Its all a crap load. One should make their choice at creation and thats it, done and dusted. Healers may need help, but they are required later on, same for tanks, they may be slower to kill but are required later on, without any of these a dps character is useless.
Actually, I think we're well into a "new era" and Crowfall is just part of it, along with SC, CU, and a dozen other titles.
Call it the "Kickstarter Era", or the "Age of the Indie" but with the exit of the big houses from the MMORPG space (all trying to claw a piece of the MOBA market), smaller devs get a chance to once again try to establish themselves and grow a player base, much like happened in the 1st era.
At the end of the day, I think this will be good for fans of the more classic MMORPG style, even if these new titles are more of a subset or sideways evolution off them.
Just trying to live long enough to play a new, released MMORPG, playing New Worlds atm
Fools find no pleasure in understanding but delight in airing their own opinions. Pvbs 18:2, NIV
Don't just play games, inhabit virtual worlds™
"This is the most intelligent, well qualified and articulate response to a post I have ever seen on these forums. It's a shame most people here won't have the attention span to read past the second line." - Anon
To be a huge hit of genre changing proportions, I feel the game would have to be a fresh concept, have strong marketing, fun gameplay, mass appeal, global availability, and run at least moderately well on commonly used PC hardware.
I expect it will happen. It happens in other industries all the time.
I don't know who is in the position to produce such a hit title.
Ken Fisher - Semi retired old fart Network Administrator, now working in Network Security. I don't Forum PVP. If you feel I've attacked you, it was probably by accident. When I don't understand, I ask. Such is not intended as criticism.
Comments
By chance could you provide the accounting books so we can know what you do?
They raised and have continued to raise funding before and after the Kickstarter. It's their money to spend how they wish.
While I'm assuming some payment is made for press, think you are being a bit over the top as to how much and the source.
Considering the stretch goals keep getting funded and new fans are coming in, I'd assume that is money well spent on marketing.
Where?
Could be totally right, but same could be said for every single game ever and the teams behind them. No faith, don't put any money in, pretty simple. Not everyone worries so much.
Fans requested it...damn them for providing. Not sure if you've seen the prices for crowdfunded shop items (Star Citizen, SOTA, Revival, CF, but the prices get pretty crazy. Doesn't mean folks don't want a way to pay that fits their budget.
A short blurb about two linked dev videos, never seen that on a gaming site ever (looks at the main page of this site...).
But random forum poster said he didn't trust them, time to worry.
As a backer I'm biased, but this seems rather silly. Don't like the product or support how they are doing it? Oh well. Pretty much why we have so many smaller indie projects incoming. They aren't being designed with everyone in mind.
Not sure why you brought up the Atari 800 when you even acknowledge that it's irrelevant and it's a whole different ballgame right now. Glad you been gaming for a while. Now let's catch up to the present. In the past fifteen years, the pattern has been pretty consistent.
Do you have an example of a genre where it didn't happen?
There isn't a "right" or "wrong" way to play, if you want to use a screwdriver to put nails into wood, have at it, simply don't complain when the guy next to you with the hammer is doing it much better and easier. - Allein
"Graphics are often supplied by Engines that (some) MMORPG's are built in" - Spuffyre
Does "genre changing" or "new era" have to mean the arrival of ONE game that captures 10 times as many players as all other games combined ?
If that's the requirement for a "new era", then we may never see a new era ever again in MMORPG's...
Let's keep it simple. Why don't you give me an example of where it has happened in MMORPGs since 2004?
“Microtransactions? In a single player role-playing game? Are you nuts?”
― CD PROJEKT RED
Exactly. One MMO to Rule Them All is a bizarre tangent at best and has nothing to do with Bill's question.
In 1999, EQ brought MMOs out of the darkness of nerd basements and into... well, lots of better lit basements. One could also say it made 3D a requirement for the NA/EU MMO audience.
In 2002, AC2 introduced quite a few elements that would become standard in MMOs from that point on
We're due for another new era. History has shown that a game doesn't have to be The One Game to change things up - it just has to bring in the right change at the right time.
There isn't a "right" or "wrong" way to play, if you want to use a screwdriver to put nails into wood, have at it, simply don't complain when the guy next to you with the hammer is doing it much better and easier. - Allein
"Graphics are often supplied by Engines that (some) MMORPG's are built in" - Spuffyre
Pretty well. Since almost by definition it should attract the most if it truly is "genre changing" or ushers a "new era." Even Bill referred to the previous contender-in-development, EQN in the article. And I know you were here two years ago so I'm sure you remember all the hype. So now it's Crowfall?
A better article would "Can one single MMORPG bring about a new era?" And no, I don't think that's going to happen.
“Microtransactions? In a single player role-playing game? Are you nuts?”
― CD PROJEKT RED
What's this "history has shown" crap you keep going on about? In MMORPGs it has happened exactly twice: EQ and WOW... that's it. You can revise history all you want but all you're really detailing is the constant incremental changes that practically every single MMORPG ever created has contributed to.
And in my mind, slow incremental change is at the opposite end of the spectrum from one game doing it. This article is about whether Crowfall can do that so yeah, "one game to rule them all" is very much on topic... maybe you should go back and actually read Bill's article... just a thought.
“Microtransactions? In a single player role-playing game? Are you nuts?”
― CD PROJEKT RED
Dude, cop the attitude with someone else. If you don't want to accept that genre defining changes happened, that's fine, but don't talk that kind of crap to me to compensate for your relentless ignorance.
"This article is about whether Crowfall can do that so yeah, "one game to rule them all" is very much on topic... maybe you should go back and actually read Bill's article... just a thought."
"Can Crowfall bring about a new era?" - Bill
"Will one of these strongminded studios bring about a new MMO golden age?" - Bill
"But if there’s one game I think could potentially set new trends or become “the new hotness”, it’s probably Crowfall." - Bill
What Spotty and I both pointed out is that 'new era' and 'genre changing' don't necessarily mean, as YOU put it, one MMO to rule them all.
There isn't a "right" or "wrong" way to play, if you want to use a screwdriver to put nails into wood, have at it, simply don't complain when the guy next to you with the hammer is doing it much better and easier. - Allein
"Graphics are often supplied by Engines that (some) MMORPG's are built in" - Spuffyre
What you both seem to be missing is that when you talk about ONE game ushering in a new era you kind of are talking about a new one to rule them all.
I'll assume it's your combative nature and not just sheer ignorance that's keeping you from making that connection.
“Microtransactions? In a single player role-playing game? Are you nuts?”
― CD PROJEKT RED
I guess we are at an impasse then. Beginning a new era or changing the genre does not mean that game has to 'rule' anything no matter how much you insist it does. Attempts to explain otherwise have proven fruitless. Giving examples where an MMO changed the genre but was never the 'ruler' didn't work either. Since history and fact don't sit well with you, we've hit a wall.
There isn't a "right" or "wrong" way to play, if you want to use a screwdriver to put nails into wood, have at it, simply don't complain when the guy next to you with the hammer is doing it much better and easier. - Allein
"Graphics are often supplied by Engines that (some) MMORPG's are built in" - Spuffyre
It doesn't have to mean that at all.... It simply means it's a design people see possibilities in. EQ was really that game for this genre, it wasn't the historical one to rule them all post 04 now was it?
A game ushering in a new era could simply mean it has features and an overall design that works, and is different enough to carry on with, possibly leading to a massive hit down the road... when all cards are dealt right.
For every minute you are angry , you lose 60 seconds of happiness."-Emerson
But there are no real challenges in a PVE focused MMO, and what you end up with is all forms of redundant grinding. Theme Park MMOs have a very limited shelf life when it comes to attracting enough players to make it feel truly massively. The content never lasts, and there is always someone who will burn through 60 hours of content in a week.
IMO, an MMO of the next generation needs to recognize that PVE is the supporting foundation of PVP. If you want to stick solely to PVE, you can, but you can only take that so far without risking more.
Game like EVE Online, Albion Online, and I believe Crowfall as well, do this by placing higher leveled (tiers) resources in progressively more open PVP zones. If you want access to higher end resources or content, you have to put yourself at greater risk.
Played: E&B, SWG, Eve, WoW, COH, WAR, POTBS, AOC, LOTRO, AUTO.A, AO, FE, TR, WWII, MWO, TSW, SWTOR, GW2, NWO, WoP, RUST, LIF, SOA, MORTAL, DFUW, AA, TF, PFO, ALBO, and many many others....
100% Agreed !! Best Post on this general issue, that counts for all the hyped games
The beauty of it is that Artcraft has said that, you can avoid the harshness of PVP, but you will be limited in what you can do or how far you can grow in power.
What needs to be seen is if Artcraft sticks to that or do they fold to the pressure of the PVE Only crowd, who will complain that they can not access everything in the game without taking risks.
Played: E&B, SWG, Eve, WoW, COH, WAR, POTBS, AOC, LOTRO, AUTO.A, AO, FE, TR, WWII, MWO, TSW, SWTOR, GW2, NWO, WoP, RUST, LIF, SOA, MORTAL, DFUW, AA, TF, PFO, ALBO, and many many others....
I imagine ArtCraft's dedication to their design principles will be as strong as the financial results produced by those principles.
If it looks like PVP'ers are not footing the bill, they'll be forced to start courting PVE'ers. Or close the game down.
I just want a good PvE sandbox.
Something that is fun to play, without all the bullshit.
I don't want to grind endlessly.
Buy to play would be nice.
Fun/active combat that isn't too spammy or twitchy.
Lots of depth.
Loads of customization and personalization.
Lots of social and communal aspects.
Cooperative focus.
Tons to explore.
I want a next generation UO - post Trammel/Felucca split.
I want it for console too.
*Sigh*
Guess I'll just be sticking with Destiny.
There are no real challenges for YOU. You're also making the mistake of assuming that there is no PVP then it's a Themepark. Although it does happen now and then, most people were able to enjoy Legos, an Etch-A-Sketch, or Lincoln Logs without beating their sibling with them. MMOs are no different.
There isn't a "right" or "wrong" way to play, if you want to use a screwdriver to put nails into wood, have at it, simply don't complain when the guy next to you with the hammer is doing it much better and easier. - Allein
"Graphics are often supplied by Engines that (some) MMORPG's are built in" - Spuffyre
Ark:Survival Evolved (max 70 players per server) Rust and Dayz probably the same (or lower) dont know, never played those. However i would not call them massively multiplayer online (MMO)RPG games, just ORPG's.
I hope these are also not the next big thing to be classed as they are all survival games and most are utterly sh@t.
WoW yes 2nd gen big game, still yet to be toppled from the #1 spot after what 12-13yrs. Reason, other companies tried to copy what had already been done, why would people leave to a new game to start over and do something thats, well already out and been done with next to no change at all.
Players want to build their own towns/cities. Anywhere they would like (however build in wrong place could result in rest of server wiping them out) e.g blocking access to caves/dungeons/mins, towers, forts etc.
Player built dwellings = clan/tribe/guild etc only, start off small and build it up. Guilds are limited to 10 at start but gain more when guilds etc level up, achievements are done (guild etc) upto so many. guards can be hired and trained to a point, then training books need to be found to increase ones guards.
Players would like to enter dungeons/caves and it to be dark (aka you need a light source, torch's or spells of light), sounds that are creepy and scary, so one has to use their ears.
I liked some of the idea's in some games. Card games, arm wrestling. Crafting, this should be a proper thing were one has to work to make things rather than if i gather 100 of that 100 of that and 100 of that i can make 100 of this and go make a cuppa = BORING and dull.
What happened to the old EQ2 crafting (not the new shitty thing it has).
Player creation - should be Mage - you choose a type and stick with it. Healer - you choose a type and thats it, Tank well a rtank character is a tank chracter period, DPS same for dps.you choose your player type and thats it. Right now its i choose that but i will play my warrior as healer. i made a healer but rather play it for dps, i play dps and well i'll stick with it but it sucks compared to healers/tanks dps route being better.
Its all a crap load. One should make their choice at creation and thats it, done and dusted. Healers may need help, but they are required later on, same for tanks, they may be slower to kill but are required later on, without any of these a dps character is useless.
Actually, I think we're well into a "new era" and Crowfall is just part of it, along with SC, CU, and a dozen other titles.
Call it the "Kickstarter Era", or the "Age of the Indie" but with the exit of the big houses from the MMORPG space (all trying to claw a piece of the MOBA market), smaller devs get a chance to once again try to establish themselves and grow a player base, much like happened in the 1st era.
At the end of the day, I think this will be good for fans of the more classic MMORPG style, even if these new titles are more of a subset or sideways evolution off them.
"True friends stab you in the front." | Oscar Wilde
"I need to finish" - Christian Wolff: The Accountant
Just trying to live long enough to play a new, released MMORPG, playing New Worlds atm
Fools find no pleasure in understanding but delight in airing their own opinions. Pvbs 18:2, NIV
Don't just play games, inhabit virtual worlds™
"This is the most intelligent, well qualified and articulate response to a post I have ever seen on these forums. It's a shame most people here won't have the attention span to read past the second line." - Anon
To be a huge hit of genre changing proportions, I feel the game would have to be a fresh concept, have strong marketing, fun gameplay, mass appeal, global availability, and run at least moderately well on commonly used PC hardware.
I expect it will happen. It happens in other industries all the time.
I don't know who is in the position to produce such a hit title.