Howdy, Stranger!
It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!
Quick Links
Fury: Editorial - What Happened to Auran?
Stradden
Managing EditorMember CommonPosts: 6,696
With today's announcement that Auran Developments, the company behind the PvP MMORPG Fury, would be closing their doors, the announcement didn't really take many by surprise. Managing Editor Jon Wood offers some thoughts on why Fury wasn't the kind of success that the company had hoped.
Earlier today, we learned that Auran Developments, the company behind the MMORPG Fury, announced that they would be closing their doors. Fury itself will continue on as a free-to-play, free-to-download title, but the developers behind the game have all been laid off, and the company has “called in a Voluntary Administrator” (What Auran describes as similar to Chapter 11 in the United States) leaving only what the official announcement to the public called “a small but committed team to continue developing FURY on an ongoing basis”.
The recently announced Age of the Chosen update, we are told, will still go ahead as scheduled on Friday the 14th, making some additions and fixes to the game. The official announcement expressed optimism, saying that, “I believe that once people hear about F:AotC and the new Free to Play business model, we’ll start building up the player numbers and revenues that will make the game successful.”
With the Fury Launch date a mere two months in the past, a number of questions are raised around how this could have happened. What did Auran Developments do that led to this end?
Personally, I think that there are a number of different answers to that question. First and foremost on my list though is the fact that Fury was built on a premise that, in my opinion, was shaky to begin with.
;)
Read the whole thing here.
Cheers,
Jon Wood
Managing Editor
MMORPG.com
Comments
Most important things you said -
"In order for Fury to be successful, there would have to be a fairly large number of players out there who feel that MMORPG-style PvP provides enough entertainment to justify the expense of creating an entire game. Unfortunately for Auran, this does not seem to have been the case.... "
"The problem is that while these hardcore players are numerous, there just aren't enough of them to support an all-PvP game."
Very, very true. I feel that no matter how much a MMORPG player loves PvP, they still need to have the PvE option available, as well as other "standard" MMO systems like crafting, trade, etc.
Also, I feel (from beta) that Fury was just a horribly made game. Even if it wasn't all PvP, I still think it was horrible. I know that is my personal opinion, but I played for an hour in Beta and deinstalled it.
So what happened to Auran?
They created a bad game on a bad premise and the market spoke. Plain and simple.
Very, very false. Unfortunately, I can't prove it because a well-made, PvP-only game has not been made.
Yet another failure in a very uninspired year for MMORPGs. 2007 certainly was a poor year for the genre, wasn't it? Let's hope developers were watching train wrecks like Vanguard, Auto Assault and the rest and LEARNING something.
The PvP vs PvE argument, however, can't really be applied to Fury because of statements like this:
Exactly. It didn't matter whether Fury was PvP-focused, PvE-focused or whatever. Auran made a lousy game that nobody wanted to play.
The difference is that now there is enough competition so games like Fury get completely cancelled rather than become niche markets for hardcore players like the first generation MMORPGs. Nowadays, bad games means failure for a company and they can't attempt to along while getting players to pay for beta-testing or improvements.
Very, very false. Unfortunately, I can't prove it because a well-made, PvP-only game has not been made.
In a little over 10 years of MMO gaming, have you ever wondered why a "well-made, PvP-only game has not been made?"
niche game + high system reqs = a bad idea.
that's what i think really killed the game. There are alot of people who love PVP and would like to play nothing else. But when most people aren't able to run the game (which is required to run smoothly since it's pvp) that really limits the playerbase.
------------------------------
Planetside?
And that is why...
Conservatives' pessimism is conducive to their happiness in three ways. First, they are rarely surprised -- they are right more often than not about the course of events. Second, when they are wrong they are happy to be so. Third, because pessimistic conservatives put not their faith in princes -- government -- they accept that happiness is a function of fending for oneself. They believe that happiness is an activity -- it is inseparable from the pursuit of happiness.
Planetside?
True, I guess Planetside would have to be considered a success... but it is a MMOFPS.
In my personal opinion, this is the final nail in the coffin of this concept: "There are a huge number of PvPers who demand full PvP at all times."
If the vast majority of gamers were both PvPers and desperate to play a PvP mmorpg I think Fury would have done better. Instead, two months later the company that made the game is down the drain.
Do I hate PvP? Nope. I enjoy Eve Online and some PvP in my mmorpgs.
Do I believe that there are enough PvPers to support a MMORPG that is full pvp, all the time? Not any more.
There are a very vocal minority of gamers who want full PvP in their online games. But those gamers certainly don't represent the rest of us.
Even having "some PvE" makes them not "PvP-only" games.
Fury tried to make a MMOFPS that was NOT massive, but instead a series of small group or FFA battles (like Halo/CS/BF etc)
and they didn't even make it a FPS they used more traditional (though sped up) MMORPG combat.
and failed horrible. If anyone thought of making a PvP only game, after this, they may change their minds.
There will be no "pure" PvP games released. Planetside / WW2O probably the only two and I'm not sure about those two even..
Even DF has mobs and quests and AI controlled NPCs etc. etc.
Personally speaking that fact isn't a lack for a 'pure pvp' playerbase out there is a bigger fact that the idea for 'fury' has already been done at least three times..
When I first looked at the game itself i said to myself 'this is basically' what WoW's offers in BG quitaly only only simplfied... Not only that IF anyone wanted a 'free-to-play' arena combat system players need look no further then Guild Wars as that also has a simural system, so why pay for the same system with Fury? and lets not forget
Thats the 'issue' with the situation, it's not the fact of a 'lack' of a pvp playerbase, it's just that there were better and some cheaper options out there
Bring on the WARRRRGGHH!
Ah ok, I see what you are getting at.
And that is why...
Conservatives' pessimism is conducive to their happiness in three ways. First, they are rarely surprised -- they are right more often than not about the course of events. Second, when they are wrong they are happy to be so. Third, because pessimistic conservatives put not their faith in princes -- government -- they accept that happiness is a function of fending for oneself. They believe that happiness is an activity -- it is inseparable from the pursuit of happiness.
Last I checked, this was MMORPG.com
Fury did have twitch RPG combat, not FPS combat.
But tried to play like a FPS game like Halo/CS/etc. Failed.
Would medevil FPS combat work (ala Dark Messiah) in a competititve FPS game environment like Halo/CS? Maybe.
You have to remember, CS was first a mod, and most every multiplayer FPS has a single player too.
Would Halo have worked w/o the story and single player? Hard to say.
CS wouldn't because w/o HL it would not have existed (being a mod and all)
I can offer my reasons for not playing Fury
1) I equated it as being similar to console arena style combat games which I've never enjoyed.
2) Early reviews said it was a bad game.
3) I'm not really interested in an all PVP game. Sure, i want my games to have it, but even on a FFA server I can get away and not fight other players.
4) Later reviews said it was a bad game.
5) It went F2P, always a no no in my book
Who the hell are you, and why should I care?
Congrats! You are a victim of Trollstar!
I must be in the minority, but during beta I really enjoyed Fury. Granted, the learning curve was steep, and the competition fierce, but after I got to a decent level, the game was really fun.
What I most disliked about the game was its ridiculous systems reqs. My computer was top of the line a year ago, and I barely pulled 30 FPS will Fury on low settings. The graphics weren't that great to begin with. If you want to build an all PVP game, you better make sure that it runs flawlessly. I think this is what turned a lot of people off from the game.
It took about 2-3 weeks of daily play to get used to the game and level up to be competitive, but after that I couldn't wait to get off work and play.
It wasn't worth it to me to buy the game and pay a monthly fee, but now that it's going F2P, I'll be playing!
Nice try Jon , sorry to to have to make it clear to your impressionable readers but Fury is going full steam ahead and now anyone can play it .
Oh and BTW , I can list several highly successful FTP games set in eastern theme , honestly do we really need any more orcs and dwarfs in our games , high fantasy lol ? Ever heard of sci fi . , early exploration and other "themes " Did you come up with the idea of fail based on lack of " high fantasy " all by yourself ? lol
Quote from the boss over at Fury "
Quite simply - no. Auran Developments (the company that employed roughly 70 people) had to go down to give the Trainz and FURY games a future. It was that or shut the doors completely.
From tomorrow, we are close to cashflow neutral. That means our revenues are close to our expenses. That means we can survive a long time and at the same time we can make the game better and better. So this is good news for FURY fans. "
Good news for me as well as I too will be playing Fury from now on , it`s very fun and addictive once you get past the learning curve which can be a little overwhelming for some people. FYI, I`m canning EQ 2 for this game , thats how good it is once you get into it. but yeah , if you want to go repeat the same 'go collect this and kill that " quests 50 million times then dont play Fury . your better off playing wow.
I love this game and I cant wait until its patched tomorrow
It's the setting.
People like PvP in a natural real world setting where you encounter others, plot and plan and strategize wether you should attack, and how best to gain an advantage given the circumstances.
PvP in an arena or instanced setting is BORING because it's staged. It gets old fast.
Um no dude , pvp in the Fury battle grounds is not staged , it`s fast and spontanious and quite extreme to be honest .
I mean yeah , you cant buy a house or make a wooden box to put in your house lol but you can pvp against other human minds in an extreme setting. Fury is more like an E Sport , its not about immersing yourself in a fantasy world . If your looking for a pixelated fantasy world to live in go over to Vanguard or EQ and you can pay SOE every month to escape reality .
umm, to the thing a while ago about this trying to be played by an mmofps, rember that fury used the unreal tournament 3 engine. so i can see why.. only using a popular fps engine on an mmo
And so you think Fury is not a pixelated fantasy world ? Did you think it was a real place where your actions actually have importance beyond personal fun? Do your PvP skills make you a legend in your own mind?
Planetside?
True, I guess Planetside would have to be considered a success... but it is a MMOFPS.
Your bar for measuring success is rather low.
Wasnt this the same A-Hole that was trash talking about Guild wars, (which has run for years successfully), saying that it was a failed game because Anet released Chapters and Expansion packs?
Oh, how the tables turn.
Planetside was fun... but like I keep saying: All PvP makes Game a dull boy.
Contention can be fun: I remember racing other guilds for the 7 day spawns in EQ1.... but it can get old quick: ****blocking other guilds on Emperor Snake in Ssra to stop them from being able to get into Vex Thal, something I feel is not cool at all to do.
WW2 Online is one PvP game I keep coming back to (not currently however), because death doesn't mean that much, and you know the other person isn't some pimple faced geek spawn camping for the psychopathic joy of it. Planetside I played for a while as well, and made the top player charts in various categories. But the battling over stations that really didn't mean that much got old fairly quick. It got older faster because my 'main' char wasn't on the most populous side and during prime time, we had no real hope of 'winning'.
What most PvP games that are RvR or open lack is balance. Balance is key to having a fun game that keeps people playing and paying. While there's always the lunatic fringe of hard core griefers who clamor for the 'good old days of UO and gank fests', there are not enough of these people to pay for a MMO's development anymore. They are also self destructive. They do not build good long lasting communities. Games that focus on working together have had more success than those that focus on tearing the community apart (wonder why?). Even Eve for all of its 'pvp' is mostly a pve game, and the focus is not on destroying your foes but keeping you and your corp alive.
Um ok dude, so like PvP in Fury is the shitzer according to you man, so like if my assessment is wrong dude, why don't you like tell me why Fury failed, dude.And so you think Fury is not a pixelated fantasy world ? Did you think it was a real place where your actions actually have importance beyond personal fun? Do your PvP skills make you a legend in your own mind?
Anyone , including the so called writer of this editorial that is making the claim that Fury has failed is not aware of the current situation , Fury has not failed , the company Auron is being restructured and the resources will be put into Fury and Trainz .
All games are pixelated fantasy worlds , the key difference is that some are designed with more of an intent to satisfy those who feel the need to immerse themselves in a fantasy world , buy houses , make things , ride horses , go fishing etc . Fury is not that kind of game and was not designed with immersion in mind , it was designed for people to compete against each other in player versus player games. The emphasis is put on the competition between players rather than the environment .