Everyone's talking about it who cares anything about MMORPG PVP all over teh intrawebs...
Just go ahead and launch the kickstarter already and lets get the show on the road.
I agree, let's do this experiment! Let's see how influential the PVP fanbase is.
My bet is that not only will it not make $2M, it will not make $1M. No PvE at all is a death sentence for any MMO and a pipe dream for a developer keen on reducing his development overheads.
MMO PvP was, is and always will be a trivial side diversion for most MMO players, in my experience.
It will be interesting to see the result either way.
Except in GW2 and DAoC where PvP is the main focus of the game.
Then you've got Darkfall, Eve and Mortal Online where PvP is largely forced upon you.
Even in WoW more people PvP than PvE, I read somewhere that only 6% of WoW's fanbase actually raid.
If you think about it really, I doubt anyone would actually play an MMO without PvP. So really, lack of PvP is the death sentance. Even Lotro has PvP, and thats largely considered a PvE game.
The only game I can think without PvP are the Final Fantasy MMO's, which did well.
Camelot Unchained is everywhere right now, you can't go on any MMO forum/website without hearing about it. If games with no names driving them can be funded so much on Kickstarter I think Camelot Unchained will fly through it's goals with it's large names carrying it.
Originally posted by timeraider I wonder how far it actually would go.. not too sure about it.
I highly doubt the KS would raise $2mil right now. Its got a tiny cult following. I say cult because those of us following it all excited like are a little bit insane for giving 10 blog posts this much thought and willing to throw money at it.
It's not just about the 10 blog posts . You're thinking on a single track.
It's about DAOCs rep. Its about the tiresome theme park treadmill that CU can derail. I can go on and on, no sir. It's not just about 10 blog posts.
If the kickstarter succeeds its because people will fork over money that are naive enough to believe that CU will make a difference in the status quo, without even thinking for a second that last year saw 2 major games (GW2, TSW) and one minor (TERA) that started to break away from the mold. We saw removal of the trinity, a modern city without levels, and a game focused around action combat. We saw one MMOFPS release and another company worrking on a MMOFPS and a MMORTS. We saw the genres signature franchise has announced their next game will be a sandbox.
But go ahead and believe that CU will make a difference. EvE sure made such a big difference after all, didnt it?
For some reason, I picture camelot unchained to be a pole dancer, and she hasn't quite started her routine yet, but there's a lot of eager drooling guys standing around with wads of money ready to throw it at her! LOL
But yeah, don't let your guard down folks. Don't expect there to be plenty of backers, so you don't feel like you have to contribute for this to happen. It's going to take each and every one of us supporters to make this happen. Besides, if they get more than expected, we may see more content at release rather than post release.
My POV is that I'd gladly throw $100 or more at this just for the CHANCE it turns out to be what I hope it will be. If not, at least I'll feel like I tried to help make it happen.
Of course I'll play TESO when it comes out, but that's <1 year away, whereas CU is likely 3+ years. Maybe we'll even learn some things from TESO that will make CU a better game.
Besides I've played multiple mmo's at the same time for years. Especially when I enjoy PVE more in one, but PVP/RVR more in another. I do think TESO will be cool, but I already see some writing on the wall of issues they'll face in their first year that other current mmo's have/are struggling with. I'll definitely play it, but I think from the FP's CU is already looking hard to address those issues directly that others just put band aids on.
MarkJacobsCEO City State EntertainmentMemberRarePosts: 649
Folks,
I really appreciate the optimism and confidence that many of you have expressed here but we are certainly not a “lock” to fund with our first Kickstarter. While we are indeed doing very well in terms of interest in our game, we still need people to keep spreading the word about Camelot Unchained. Our Kickstarter “ask” is not small and even though I am putting in $2M myself, many potential backers may/will have reservations about backing a MMORPG given the low success rate of such games, no matter what amount of backing that it has either individually or corporately such as EA/Sony/etc.
So, if you are interested in seeing this project fund, please continue to spread the word to our core demographic, players who are interested in an RvR-focused game. We are not there yet and until we reach that goal, those of us who want CU to fund need to do what we can to make that happen.
Originally posted by timeraider I wonder how far it actually would go.. not too sure about it.
I highly doubt the KS would raise $2mil right now. Its got a tiny cult following. I say cult because those of us following it all excited like are a little bit insane for giving 10 blog posts this much thought and willing to throw money at it.
It's not just about the 10 blog posts . You're thinking on a single track.
It's about DAOCs rep. Its about the tiresome theme park treadmill that CU can derail. I can go on and on, no sir. It's not just about 10 blog posts.
If the kickstarter succeeds its because people will fork over money that are naive enough to believe that CU will make a difference in the status quo, without even thinking for a second that last year saw 2 major games (GW2, TSW) and one minor (TERA) that started to break away from the mold. We saw removal of the trinity, a modern city without levels, and a game focused around action combat. We saw one MMOFPS release and another company worrking on a MMOFPS and a MMORTS. We saw the genres signature franchise has announced their next game will be a sandbox.
But go ahead and believe that CU will make a difference. EvE sure made such a big difference after all, didnt it?
What's wrong with believing it will? Why not? Will I be mortally wounded if CU doesn't turn out like anticipated? Nah, life will go on. I won't lose any sleep. I can afford to pledge for a CHANCE that a game will be released, that is encompassed in Mark's blogs. If you can't afford it, if you don't believe in it. Dirty harry isn't putting a .44 magnum to your dome, forcing you to do anything.
MMORPG is my choice genre of gaming and it's completely RUINED right now. Bring on Marks blogs. Bring on CU. Yeah I believe.
I really appreciate the optimism and confidence that many of you have expressed here but we are certainly not a “lock” to fund with our first Kickstarter. While we are indeed doing very well in terms of interest in our game, we still need people to keep spreading the word about Camelot Unchained. Our Kickstarter “ask” is not small and even though I am putting in $2M myself, many potential backers may/will have reservations about backing a MMORPG given the low success rate of such games, no matter what amount of backing that it has either individually or corporately such as EA/Sony/etc.
So, if you are interested in seeing this project fund, please continue to spread the word to our core demographic, players who are interested in an RvR-focused game. We are not there yet and until we reach that goal, those of us who want CU to fund need to do what we can to make that happen.
As always, thanks for the support.
Mark
The trick is to spread the word outside of "these four walls" as it were. Sure, people on this site, or who read gaming forums in general may have heard about CU, but we all know we're a small minority of the potential gaming market and reaching those who are outside of our world is the real challenge to get this properly funded.
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
Everyone's talking about it who cares anything about MMORPG PVP all over teh intrawebs...
Just go ahead and launch the kickstarter already and lets get the show on the road.
I agree, let's do this experiment! Let's see how influential the PVP fanbase is.
My bet is that not only will it not make $2M, it will not make $1M. No PvE at all is a death sentence for any MMO and a pipe dream for a developer keen on reducing his development overheads.
MMO PvP was, is and always will be a trivial side diversion for most MMO players, in my experience.
It will be interesting to see the result either way.
Except in GW2 and DAoC where PvP is the main focus of the game.
Then you've got Darkfall, Eve and Mortal Online where PvP is largely forced upon you.
Even in WoW more people PvP than PvE, I read somewhere that only 6% of WoW's fanbase actually raid.
If you think about it really, I doubt anyone would actually play an MMO without PvP. So really, lack of PvP is the death sentance. Even Lotro has PvP, and thats largely considered a PvE game.
The only game I can think without PvP are the Final Fantasy MMO's, which did well.
Camelot Unchained is everywhere right now, you can't go on any MMO forum/website without hearing about it. If games with no names driving them can be funded so much on Kickstarter I think Camelot Unchained will fly through it's goals with it's large names carrying it.
Hehe, I don't have the numbers for WoW, but in 8 years experience of literally hundreds of players/guildies ranging from very casual to very hardcore, almost none had a pvp focus, maybe a handful, and they ping-ponged their subs from boredom regularly. That's just my experience. Perhaps you are considering people sidelining BG's for purples or running alts through BG's as PvP mainstream? Or perhaps you are thinking of the days when PvE players ran PvP because the gear from PvP was better for PvE? I don't know, perhaps you have a link for the numbers? Always happy to know the facts.
14 years playing MMO's, 8 years playing WoW, EQ, Horizons (lol), SWTOR, Rift and GW2 all tell me that PvP is not the primary focus of those games.
I must be playing GW2 wrong. Have never sPvP'd on any character and only visited WvWvW a few times to pick up the POI's, WP's and SP's. The largescale PvP in GW2 is a terrible, laggy poorly rendered unbalanced mess in my experience. But once again your experience may be very different.
Are you really asserting that LOTRO players are there for the PvP? Hehe, well that definately flies in the face of my preconceptions and I am now imagining a horde of Tolkien nerds wearing mumble headsets and teabagging corpses. :-)
PvP exists in most MMO's because it's chump easy to implement and costs bugger all compared to PvE dev costs. Even EQ had PvP, but it was absolutely a niche side distraction.
We obviously have very different perceptions of the popularity and influence of PvP in MMO's, which is fine. :-)
So let's bring it on and actually test it out. Kickstart this Kickstarter and let's see what happens!
EDIT: removed WAR and DAoC from PvE played list since they were obviously PvP focused. :-)
Originally posted by XAleX360 I think they might want to wait some time, many gamers just funded Torment and may not be as likely to fund another game right away.
A fair point, though i think it also lends some credence to the CU KS plans since Torment 1) broke the record on fastest 1 million dollar raise and 2) the KS is sitting at 2 million dollars at 2 days. Illustrating that a game with a strong cult-following can raise 2 million dollars in 2 days with just some concept art and ideas. I thought it was also interesting that Fargo put in 200k at 2 million for Torment where as Jacobs has commited to 2million at that level. Single player and MMOs are a lot different and both guys have contributed immensley to the gaming commuinity, though it should at least give some credence to the seriousness that Mark is approaching CU with.
I want this game to fund, and will support it with atleast a $100 but there is no way this is a guarentee. 2 million starting is a lot for Kickstarter and there haven't been many games that raised over 2 million. Remember this is an MMO which is a niche within the gaming community and on top of that it is RvR based which is a niche within MMOs.
It is not a sure thing so keep spreading the word.
@Ellya. True fact. However, as an older game-UO is venerated in an even smaller circle these days. That being said, Lord British did go to space, so who knows?
Lord British fails with Tabula Rasa quite epic. I loved to play UO back then, but I will not back on a game which has an isometric map-view with action-scenes. Hello? Adventures of Link is outdated Well ok, the housing will be fun, but you will get it here also
MMO's played so far: UO,EQ,DAOC,EQ2,GW,ROM,WOW,WAR,AOC,LOTRO,RIFT,TSW,GW2,POE Looking forward to: Camelot Unchained, Star Citizen
I would like to join the voice of reason camp, solidify much more stuff, flesh out these 10 vague ideas into presentable examples.
Give examples, imaginative detailed examples with beautiful concept art giving sight to vision.
Tell stories from the perspective of players who log in to play the game. What they experience when they first log in, walk us through their experiences over time, how they are affected by the 10 principles, and go through exciting experiences.
Until you can narrate a story that gets you (the narrator) excited, then I think its way to early to ask the potential players if the game idea sounds exciting enough to fund.
Right now we have 10 blog posts. I don't mean to be negative nancy, but that would be pathetic amount of info to go looking for investment with. Thats like saying I want to make a shirt, its going to be purple, invest monies plz.
I was just chatting with a buddy of mine who works for a major game company, and we were jokingly saying how with a handful of writers and artists, you could come up with a compelling game kick starter with a slick website, screenshots and even gameplay all done for show without a real game existing.
Just cash out saying you didn't meet the funding goal.
This scenario is actually a lot easier to pull off than delivering an actual MMO.
I am not saying that CU is going this route, just want to point out that it is 100% trust based as you are just handing over cash for an idea.
If the game doesn't reach its goal on Kickstarter there's no money to cash out. Kickstarter is all-or-nothing. If they don't fully fund they don't get any money.
I never saw a successful Kickstarter campaign without a gameplay video, tbh
Double Fine's adventure
Project Eternity(highest kickstarter video game to date)
You can't have a gameplay video if you need the moeny to actually start production.
The main thing that's needed i sa good way to show your idea's, make it clear to the people what you want to do, have concoept arts, detailed info on the game and it's mechanics, etc.
I think it's pretty crazy to expect this to be a lock. How many games with no gameplay footage have even been funded on KS? All CU has is concept ideas, art, races possible, etc.
Originally posted by azzamasin And to think I thought we weren't allowed to Hype games on this site. Ohh unless we can only hype games that don't fit the themepark model. great.
Hehe is that supposed to be a forum rule? No hyping games?
I thought this entire website existed almost entirely for two reasons, hype and controversy.
I was a hardcore DAOC player and had an account full with 50s from all 3 realms. However after reading everything about Camelot Unchained I honestly cannot see myself contributing to the kickstarter campaign.
In DAOC I loved it for all elements of the game, RvR, crafting and PvE. Camelot has such a rich lore to pull from for PvE encounters and quests. Removing the PvE from the game really removes such a huge amount of content that I cannot understand why the kickstarter is going to require so much money, the majority of resources in an MMO goes into game resources such as scripts, quests (incl translations) and artwork. Yet CU is meant to launch with a tiered subscriber price when all it will offer is RvR and crafting? If I wanted this I would be playing Guild Wars 2 and I'd get my PvE fix too.
My memories of DAOC stem from every element, most notably teaming up with random people and grinding for hours in Avalon City and becoming friends with the people I played with, I see no way that this kind of socialising will happen with RvR only. It didn't even happen in DAOC, I RvRed a lot but made very few friends through it, I made my friends by exploring PvE content. DAOC was made brilliant because of the social elements including alliances, guilds and PvE encounters.
At the moment the Camelot Unchained information makes it sound like WvW in Guild Wars 2 without anything else. I hope when the Kickstarter launches that I'm proven wrong, but if the 'no PvE' remains there is almost no way I will help to kickstart it and after speaking with many friends from DAOC they also say they feel the same way.
I was a hardcore DAOC player and had an account full with 50s from all 3 realms. However after reading everything about Camelot Unchained I honestly cannot see myself contributing to the kickstarter campaign.
In DAOC I loved it for all elements of the game, RvR, crafting and PvE. Camelot has such a rich lore to pull from for PvE encounters and quests. Removing the PvE from the game really removes such a huge amount of content that I cannot understand why the kickstarter is going to require so much money, the majority of resources in an MMO goes into game resources such as scripts, quests (incl translations) and artwork. Yet CU is meant to launch with a tiered subscriber price when all it will offer is RvR and crafting? If I wanted this I would be playing Guild Wars 2 and I'd get my PvE fix too.
My memories of DAOC stem from every element, most notably teaming up with random people and grinding for hours in Avalon City and becoming friends with the people I played with, I see no way that this kind of socialising will happen with RvR only. It didn't even happen in DAOC, I RvRed a lot but made very few friends through it, I made my friends by exploring PvE content. DAOC was made brilliant because of the social elements including alliances, guilds and PvE encounters.
At the moment the Camelot Unchained information makes it sound like WvW in Guild Wars 2 without anything else. I hope when the Kickstarter launches that I'm proven wrong, but if the 'no PvE' remains there is almost no way I will help to kickstart it and after speaking with many friends from DAOC they also say they feel the same way.
This game isn't for you then. The reverse is true for me. If this was a game like TESO that has PvE and RvR then there would be no chance I would donate to the kickstarter. It's only because it won't be another PvE game with RvR tacked on as an afterthought that I'm willing to give money to it sight unseen. (GW 2 WvW sucks and doesn't handle a candle to DAOC RvR btw.)
14 years playing MMO's, 8 years playing WoW, EQ, Horizons (lol), SWTOR, Rift and GW2 all tell me that PvP is not the primary focus of those games.
I must be playing GW2 wrong. Have never sPvP'd on any character and only visited WvWvW a few times to pick up the POI's, WP's and SP's. The largescale PvP in GW2 is a terrible, laggy poorly rendered unbalanced mess in my experience. But once again your experience may be very different.
Are you really asserting that LOTRO players are there for the PvP? Hehe, well that definately flies in the face of my preconceptions and I am now imagining a horde of Tolkien nerds wearing mumble headsets and teabagging corpses. :-)
PvP exists in most MMO's because it's chump easy to implement and costs bugger all compared to PvE dev costs. Even EQ had PvP, but it was absolutely a niche side distraction.
I disagree 100%, PvP is just as important as PvE in MMOs especially MMOs that have mass appeal & longevity. Players might not "focus" on PvP but they probably partake in just as much PvP content as they do in PvE in most of these games. Developers have realized you will not be mass market unless you focus on both PvP and PvE. WoW nerfs and buffs for PvP almost every month, the biggest streamers in WoW are all PvPers, there is immense popularity as Raiding and dungeons can old as you can only do them so many times while people have doing WSG and AB thousands of times a day for 8 years.
If you want to be a mass market MMO you need to focus on both PvP and PvE.
About people concerned about CU being only PvP, I have concerns too. A game has to really good for it to have longevity. There are PvP only games that have done really well in the market recently, some examples are LoL, World of Tanks and PlanetSide 2 they have their crowd and they have millions of players. So it can work if it is done well.
The good news is that a lot of people are easy to please in terms of PvE.
I wish I had all of my old daoc screen shots from a decade ago, but when I was really bored and had nothing else to do I'd just go to a hill overlooking road that invaders would normally go through, and I'd just pull mobs. Thank god daoc didn't really have quests, so that just doing normal mob killing was never a waste of time. I'd be chatting while all of this is going on. Didn't have to think about a rotation, just nuke nuke nuke slam provoke provoke dead.
PvE doesn't need to be complicated. Its a wolf den. Pitch a tent nearby, invite some freinds, kill all the mobs, throw another shimp on the barby while they respawn. Fill up bags, go to vault.
I disagree 100%, PvP is just as important as PvE in MMOs especially MMOs that have mass appeal & longevity. Players might not "focus" on PvP but they probably partake in just as much PvP content as they do in PvE in most of these games. Developers have realized you will not be mass market unless you focus on both PvP and PvE. WoW nerfs and buffs for PvP almost every month, the biggest streamers in WoW are all PvPers, there is immense popularity as Raiding and dungeons can old as you can only do them so many times while people have doing WSG and AB thousands of times a day for 8 years.
If you want to be a mass market MMO you need to focus on both PvP and PvE.
About people concerned about CU being only PvP, I have concerns too. A game has to really good for it to have longevity. There are PvP only games that have done really well in the market recently, some examples are LoL, World of Tanks and PlanetSide 2 they have their crowd and they have millions of players. So it can work if it is done well.
Its good to have disagreement, it makes you evaluate why you hold your position in a debate. :-)
If I entirely removed PvP from WoW, EQ, EQ2, GW2 or Rift tomorrow I would still have a recognisable game, and in WoW's case at least still millions of subs.
If I entirely removed PvE from WoW, EQ, EQ2, GW2 or Rift tomorrow I would have ... a brundlefly ... an unrecognisable mess. I'd have no questing, minimal lore, no 5 mans, no 10 mans, no 25 mans, no LFR, no dailies, no rifts, no hearts, no events, no puzzles. The games would be unrecognisable.
That's kinda my point. PvP is secondary in those games. A tacked on afterthought used to fill in time, like daily quests and pet battles.
WoW devs frequently nerf/buff abilities due to PvP, I agree. Why? Because they were designed for PVE and do not work well in PvP. If pvp was impactful on their subscriber base they would work on getting PvP sorted properly, instead they seem to spend more effort on pet battles and daily quests, now why do you think that is? To my knowledge there have been very few "seasons" that have no been considered broken, with certain comps being viable and the rest not, with whole class specs left to wither, and in some cases whole classes left with no options to be competetive. It. Is. An. Afterthought.
Streamers have no relevance in this discussion, 99% of MMO players have probably never streamed, most have probably never even recorded a fraps. But since you bring up web interaction I would suggest far and away more web content originates from pve than ever will or does from pvp. MLG doesn't even include WoW 3v3 anymore does it?
Hehe yeah people have been doing those same BG's over and over for years, because they locust the pve content and still want to play the game and BG pvp is a readily available disposable source of no-brain content, or because they are completionists working on cheevos/mounts/reps waddeva.
I agree 100% with your comment about mass market MMO needing both PVE and PVP, that is basically a restatement of my entire arguement. Two things I seem to recall though, MJ has said he plans to be niche, not mass market, and he's not aiming for millions of subs.
You raise LoL, WoT and PS2. We're not talking MOBAs or MMOFPS here, but since you do, lets discuss. LOL is the most played PC game in the world. DOTA2 just recently beat Skyrim for the most concurrent players in Steam and is rising, and you have a swag of MOBA/wannabeMOBAs out there *cough* SMITE *cough* AND you have D3 introducing PvP and Path of Exile with PvP and Marvel Heroes coming. So you tell me why those millions of players currently playing F2P, B2P would want to play subbed CU when they already have a gluttons banquet of PvP titles crying out for their attention? I would suggest that PvE content would be the missing enticement, don't you think?
But I realise that times change, the gaming playerbase has changing tastes and I am more than willing to accept that my preconceptions may outdated, but nothing you have said has convinced me so far. I've played ALL the games you mentioned except PS2 (and yes back in the day I played PS1), before MMOs took over as my genre of choice I played DOOM/Duke IPX LAN, Quake, HL, and Wolf:ET. I am not anti-pvp by any stretch, but I feel I am aware of the very serious challenges faced by PvP only MMO titles.
Another fact about pvp/pve combo games is that PVEers, that don't really like pvp, generally suck at it.
So they were easy prey and were farmed. So the semi skilled pvpers seem a lot better than they really are.
Now when you have a pvp only game, the competiton is much more straight forward, all players obviously like pvp or they wouldn't be playing it. Wether or not they are any good still remains but a bad pvper that only pvps will still beat a pver who is clueless.
Point being, in a PVP only game. much less FREE, EZ, Kills.
It's like sending a bread maker against a battle hardened gladiator...whos gonna win.
I was a hardcore DAOC player and had an account full with 50s from all 3 realms. However after reading everything about Camelot Unchained I honestly cannot see myself contributing to the kickstarter campaign.
In DAOC I loved it for all elements of the game, RvR, crafting and PvE. Camelot has such a rich lore to pull from for PvE encounters and quests. Removing the PvE from the game really removes such a huge amount of content that I cannot understand why the kickstarter is going to require so much money, the majority of resources in an MMO goes into game resources such as scripts, quests (incl translations) and artwork. Yet CU is meant to launch with a tiered subscriber price when all it will offer is RvR and crafting? If I wanted this I would be playing Guild Wars 2 and I'd get my PvE fix too.
My memories of DAOC stem from every element, most notably teaming up with random people and grinding for hours in Avalon City and becoming friends with the people I played with, I see no way that this kind of socialising will happen with RvR only. It didn't even happen in DAOC, I RvRed a lot but made very few friends through it, I made my friends by exploring PvE content. DAOC was made brilliant because of the social elements including alliances, guilds and PvE encounters.
At the moment the Camelot Unchained information makes it sound like WvW in Guild Wars 2 without anything else. I hope when the Kickstarter launches that I'm proven wrong, but if the 'no PvE' remains there is almost no way I will help to kickstart it and after speaking with many friends from DAOC they also say they feel the same way.
This is an interesting post and something I hope is addressed clearly on the kickstarter page because my first impression was similar: Is this going to be just the frontiers with everyone getting the equivalent of insta 50s?
First blush, it sounds like a medieval fantasy frag fest in a few RvR zones with some scattered mobs. They want more interaction, forced grouping, etc, but haven't said what, besides RvR, you'll group to do. If RvR is the only time you'll group, well we all know that's not the time to learn how to play your character generally. If grouping will be necessary for crafting or gathering, how so? And why will the RvR'ers want to do that?
These may or may not be problems. Until we learn more about the design intention, it's all speculation. But I do think it bears noting how it comes across. A few serious, deal-breaker type questions popped into my head:
Well, first, the one above about the frontiers...
Second, they keep mentioning about levelling up in RvR, but what about when alts are made and there's nobody to fight at your level? How will you advance that character? I believe they've also said there will be no "level boosting' type mechanics to allow level 8 players to play against level 50 players in RvR. Could be wrong about that one, but thought I heard it. If so, what is there for lower level characters to do when they're alone?
Third, PvE gives the players something to do at all times. Whether they found the PvE terribly exciting or not in DAoC, it was there. It kept at least some people online, creating a player base for when things picked up in RvR areas. With no PvE, whats to keep people from logging on, seeing if theres any action, then logging off if it's dead? If crafting is supposed to fill that void, how? Will it be attractive for the players that like to RvR? or just for the crafter-types?
I've learned more about the idea now, so I know what they're shooting for and like what I hear, but a lot of people might not take the time to learn more, they might just stop by to take a glance at the project. If the impression people take away at first sight is, If you mainly like to RvR, and there's no action, there's not really anything for you to do, that could doom the KS campaign. If there's more to it than that, it would be really helpful to supply a little more detail.
Comments
Except in GW2 and DAoC where PvP is the main focus of the game.
Then you've got Darkfall, Eve and Mortal Online where PvP is largely forced upon you.
Even in WoW more people PvP than PvE, I read somewhere that only 6% of WoW's fanbase actually raid.
If you think about it really, I doubt anyone would actually play an MMO without PvP. So really, lack of PvP is the death sentance. Even Lotro has PvP, and thats largely considered a PvE game.
The only game I can think without PvP are the Final Fantasy MMO's, which did well.
Camelot Unchained is everywhere right now, you can't go on any MMO forum/website without hearing about it. If games with no names driving them can be funded so much on Kickstarter I think Camelot Unchained will fly through it's goals with it's large names carrying it.
If the kickstarter succeeds its because people will fork over money that are naive enough to believe that CU will make a difference in the status quo, without even thinking for a second that last year saw 2 major games (GW2, TSW) and one minor (TERA) that started to break away from the mold. We saw removal of the trinity, a modern city without levels, and a game focused around action combat. We saw one MMOFPS release and another company worrking on a MMOFPS and a MMORTS. We saw the genres signature franchise has announced their next game will be a sandbox.
But go ahead and believe that CU will make a difference. EvE sure made such a big difference after all, didnt it?
For some reason, I picture camelot unchained to be a pole dancer, and she hasn't quite started her routine yet, but there's a lot of eager drooling guys standing around with wads of money ready to throw it at her! LOL
But yeah, don't let your guard down folks. Don't expect there to be plenty of backers, so you don't feel like you have to contribute for this to happen. It's going to take each and every one of us supporters to make this happen. Besides, if they get more than expected, we may see more content at release rather than post release.
My POV is that I'd gladly throw $100 or more at this just for the CHANCE it turns out to be what I hope it will be. If not, at least I'll feel like I tried to help make it happen.
Of course I'll play TESO when it comes out, but that's <1 year away, whereas CU is likely 3+ years. Maybe we'll even learn some things from TESO that will make CU a better game.
Besides I've played multiple mmo's at the same time for years. Especially when I enjoy PVE more in one, but PVP/RVR more in another. I do think TESO will be cool, but I already see some writing on the wall of issues they'll face in their first year that other current mmo's have/are struggling with. I'll definitely play it, but I think from the FP's CU is already looking hard to address those issues directly that others just put band aids on.
MMO history - EVE GW2 SWTOR RIFT WAR COH/V EQ2 WOW DAOC
Tuktz - http://www.heretic.shivtr.com/
Folks,
I really appreciate the optimism and confidence that many of you have expressed here but we are certainly not a “lock” to fund with our first Kickstarter. While we are indeed doing very well in terms of interest in our game, we still need people to keep spreading the word about Camelot Unchained. Our Kickstarter “ask” is not small and even though I am putting in $2M myself, many potential backers may/will have reservations about backing a MMORPG given the low success rate of such games, no matter what amount of backing that it has either individually or corporately such as EA/Sony/etc.
So, if you are interested in seeing this project fund, please continue to spread the word to our core demographic, players who are interested in an RvR-focused game. We are not there yet and until we reach that goal, those of us who want CU to fund need to do what we can to make that happen.
As always, thanks for the support.
Mark
Mark Jacobs
CEO, City State Entertainment
What's wrong with believing it will? Why not? Will I be mortally wounded if CU doesn't turn out like anticipated? Nah, life will go on. I won't lose any sleep. I can afford to pledge for a CHANCE that a game will be released, that is encompassed in Mark's blogs. If you can't afford it, if you don't believe in it. Dirty harry isn't putting a .44 magnum to your dome, forcing you to do anything.
MMORPG is my choice genre of gaming and it's completely RUINED right now. Bring on Marks blogs. Bring on CU. Yeah I believe.
The trick is to spread the word outside of "these four walls" as it were. Sure, people on this site, or who read gaming forums in general may have heard about CU, but we all know we're a small minority of the potential gaming market and reaching those who are outside of our world is the real challenge to get this properly funded.
"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
Hehe, I don't have the numbers for WoW, but in 8 years experience of literally hundreds of players/guildies ranging from very casual to very hardcore, almost none had a pvp focus, maybe a handful, and they ping-ponged their subs from boredom regularly. That's just my experience. Perhaps you are considering people sidelining BG's for purples or running alts through BG's as PvP mainstream? Or perhaps you are thinking of the days when PvE players ran PvP because the gear from PvP was better for PvE? I don't know, perhaps you have a link for the numbers? Always happy to know the facts.
14 years playing MMO's, 8 years playing WoW, EQ, Horizons (lol), SWTOR, Rift and GW2 all tell me that PvP is not the primary focus of those games.
I must be playing GW2 wrong. Have never sPvP'd on any character and only visited WvWvW a few times to pick up the POI's, WP's and SP's. The largescale PvP in GW2 is a terrible, laggy poorly rendered unbalanced mess in my experience. But once again your experience may be very different.
Are you really asserting that LOTRO players are there for the PvP? Hehe, well that definately flies in the face of my preconceptions and I am now imagining a horde of Tolkien nerds wearing mumble headsets and teabagging corpses. :-)
PvP exists in most MMO's because it's chump easy to implement and costs bugger all compared to PvE dev costs. Even EQ had PvP, but it was absolutely a niche side distraction.
We obviously have very different perceptions of the popularity and influence of PvP in MMO's, which is fine. :-)
So let's bring it on and actually test it out. Kickstart this Kickstarter and let's see what happens!
EDIT: removed WAR and DAoC from PvE played list since they were obviously PvP focused. :-)
A fair point, though i think it also lends some credence to the CU KS plans since Torment 1) broke the record on fastest 1 million dollar raise and 2) the KS is sitting at 2 million dollars at 2 days. Illustrating that a game with a strong cult-following can raise 2 million dollars in 2 days with just some concept art and ideas. I thought it was also interesting that Fargo put in 200k at 2 million for Torment where as Jacobs has commited to 2million at that level. Single player and MMOs are a lot different and both guys have contributed immensley to the gaming commuinity, though it should at least give some credence to the seriousness that Mark is approaching CU with.
http://www.wired.com/gamelife/2013/03/torment-tides-of-numenera/
I want this game to fund, and will support it with atleast a $100 but there is no way this is a guarentee. 2 million starting is a lot for Kickstarter and there haven't been many games that raised over 2 million. Remember this is an MMO which is a niche within the gaming community and on top of that it is RvR based which is a niche within MMOs.
It is not a sure thing so keep spreading the word.
Uh-ohhh! Lord British has just stepped on the Kickstarter bandwagon.
Can we say same target audience??
:P
http://www.mmorpg.com/blogs/PerfArt
MMO's played so far:
UO,EQ,DAOC,EQ2,GW,ROM,WOW,WAR,AOC,LOTRO,RIFT,TSW,GW2,POE
Looking forward to: Camelot Unchained, Star Citizen
It has to fund! Just use this slogan, it isn't cheesy at all:
"Camelot Unchained: It's off the chain!!"
It'll fund like crazy!
If the game doesn't reach its goal on Kickstarter there's no money to cash out. Kickstarter is all-or-nothing. If they don't fully fund they don't get any money.
Sandbox means open world, non-linear gaming PERIOD!
Subscription Gaming, especially MMO gaming is a Cash grab bigger then the most P2W cash shop!
Bring Back Exploration and lengthy progression times. RPG's have always been about the Journey not the destination!!!
Double Fine's adventure
Project Eternity(highest kickstarter video game to date)
You can't have a gameplay video if you need the moeny to actually start production.
The main thing that's needed i sa good way to show your idea's, make it clear to the people what you want to do, have concoept arts, detailed info on the game and it's mechanics, etc.
I think it's pretty crazy to expect this to be a lock. How many games with no gameplay footage have even been funded on KS? All CU has is concept ideas, art, races possible, etc.
edit: I guess there has been nvm!
Hehe is that supposed to be a forum rule? No hyping games?
I thought this entire website existed almost entirely for two reasons, hype and controversy.
I was a hardcore DAOC player and had an account full with 50s from all 3 realms. However after reading everything about Camelot Unchained I honestly cannot see myself contributing to the kickstarter campaign.
In DAOC I loved it for all elements of the game, RvR, crafting and PvE. Camelot has such a rich lore to pull from for PvE encounters and quests. Removing the PvE from the game really removes such a huge amount of content that I cannot understand why the kickstarter is going to require so much money, the majority of resources in an MMO goes into game resources such as scripts, quests (incl translations) and artwork. Yet CU is meant to launch with a tiered subscriber price when all it will offer is RvR and crafting? If I wanted this I would be playing Guild Wars 2 and I'd get my PvE fix too.
My memories of DAOC stem from every element, most notably teaming up with random people and grinding for hours in Avalon City and becoming friends with the people I played with, I see no way that this kind of socialising will happen with RvR only. It didn't even happen in DAOC, I RvRed a lot but made very few friends through it, I made my friends by exploring PvE content. DAOC was made brilliant because of the social elements including alliances, guilds and PvE encounters.
At the moment the Camelot Unchained information makes it sound like WvW in Guild Wars 2 without anything else. I hope when the Kickstarter launches that I'm proven wrong, but if the 'no PvE' remains there is almost no way I will help to kickstart it and after speaking with many friends from DAOC they also say they feel the same way.
This game isn't for you then. The reverse is true for me. If this was a game like TESO that has PvE and RvR then there would be no chance I would donate to the kickstarter. It's only because it won't be another PvE game with RvR tacked on as an afterthought that I'm willing to give money to it sight unseen. (GW 2 WvW sucks and doesn't handle a candle to DAOC RvR btw.)
DAOC Live (inactive): R11 Cleric R11 Druid R11 Minstrel R9 Eldritch R6 Sorc R6 Scout R6 Healer
I disagree 100%, PvP is just as important as PvE in MMOs especially MMOs that have mass appeal & longevity. Players might not "focus" on PvP but they probably partake in just as much PvP content as they do in PvE in most of these games. Developers have realized you will not be mass market unless you focus on both PvP and PvE. WoW nerfs and buffs for PvP almost every month, the biggest streamers in WoW are all PvPers, there is immense popularity as Raiding and dungeons can old as you can only do them so many times while people have doing WSG and AB thousands of times a day for 8 years.
If you want to be a mass market MMO you need to focus on both PvP and PvE.
About people concerned about CU being only PvP, I have concerns too. A game has to really good for it to have longevity. There are PvP only games that have done really well in the market recently, some examples are LoL, World of Tanks and PlanetSide 2 they have their crowd and they have millions of players. So it can work if it is done well.
The good news is that a lot of people are easy to please in terms of PvE.
I wish I had all of my old daoc screen shots from a decade ago, but when I was really bored and had nothing else to do I'd just go to a hill overlooking road that invaders would normally go through, and I'd just pull mobs. Thank god daoc didn't really have quests, so that just doing normal mob killing was never a waste of time. I'd be chatting while all of this is going on. Didn't have to think about a rotation, just nuke nuke nuke slam provoke provoke dead.
PvE doesn't need to be complicated. Its a wolf den. Pitch a tent nearby, invite some freinds, kill all the mobs, throw another shimp on the barby while they respawn. Fill up bags, go to vault.
Its good to have disagreement, it makes you evaluate why you hold your position in a debate. :-)
If I entirely removed PvP from WoW, EQ, EQ2, GW2 or Rift tomorrow I would still have a recognisable game, and in WoW's case at least still millions of subs.
If I entirely removed PvE from WoW, EQ, EQ2, GW2 or Rift tomorrow I would have ... a brundlefly ... an unrecognisable mess. I'd have no questing, minimal lore, no 5 mans, no 10 mans, no 25 mans, no LFR, no dailies, no rifts, no hearts, no events, no puzzles. The games would be unrecognisable.
That's kinda my point. PvP is secondary in those games. A tacked on afterthought used to fill in time, like daily quests and pet battles.
WoW devs frequently nerf/buff abilities due to PvP, I agree. Why? Because they were designed for PVE and do not work well in PvP. If pvp was impactful on their subscriber base they would work on getting PvP sorted properly, instead they seem to spend more effort on pet battles and daily quests, now why do you think that is? To my knowledge there have been very few "seasons" that have no been considered broken, with certain comps being viable and the rest not, with whole class specs left to wither, and in some cases whole classes left with no options to be competetive. It. Is. An. Afterthought.
Streamers have no relevance in this discussion, 99% of MMO players have probably never streamed, most have probably never even recorded a fraps. But since you bring up web interaction I would suggest far and away more web content originates from pve than ever will or does from pvp. MLG doesn't even include WoW 3v3 anymore does it?
Hehe yeah people have been doing those same BG's over and over for years, because they locust the pve content and still want to play the game and BG pvp is a readily available disposable source of no-brain content, or because they are completionists working on cheevos/mounts/reps waddeva.
I agree 100% with your comment about mass market MMO needing both PVE and PVP, that is basically a restatement of my entire arguement. Two things I seem to recall though, MJ has said he plans to be niche, not mass market, and he's not aiming for millions of subs.
You raise LoL, WoT and PS2. We're not talking MOBAs or MMOFPS here, but since you do, lets discuss. LOL is the most played PC game in the world. DOTA2 just recently beat Skyrim for the most concurrent players in Steam and is rising, and you have a swag of MOBA/wannabeMOBAs out there *cough* SMITE *cough* AND you have D3 introducing PvP and Path of Exile with PvP and Marvel Heroes coming. So you tell me why those millions of players currently playing F2P, B2P would want to play subbed CU when they already have a gluttons banquet of PvP titles crying out for their attention? I would suggest that PvE content would be the missing enticement, don't you think?
But I realise that times change, the gaming playerbase has changing tastes and I am more than willing to accept that my preconceptions may outdated, but nothing you have said has convinced me so far. I've played ALL the games you mentioned except PS2 (and yes back in the day I played PS1), before MMOs took over as my genre of choice I played DOOM/Duke IPX LAN, Quake, HL, and Wolf:ET. I am not anti-pvp by any stretch, but I feel I am aware of the very serious challenges faced by PvP only MMO titles.
Another fact about pvp/pve combo games is that PVEers, that don't really like pvp, generally suck at it.
So they were easy prey and were farmed. So the semi skilled pvpers seem a lot better than they really are.
Now when you have a pvp only game, the competiton is much more straight forward, all players obviously like pvp or they wouldn't be playing it. Wether or not they are any good still remains but a bad pvper that only pvps will still beat a pver who is clueless.
Point being, in a PVP only game. much less FREE, EZ, Kills.
It's like sending a bread maker against a battle hardened gladiator...whos gonna win.
This is an interesting post and something I hope is addressed clearly on the kickstarter page because my first impression was similar: Is this going to be just the frontiers with everyone getting the equivalent of insta 50s?
First blush, it sounds like a medieval fantasy frag fest in a few RvR zones with some scattered mobs. They want more interaction, forced grouping, etc, but haven't said what, besides RvR, you'll group to do. If RvR is the only time you'll group, well we all know that's not the time to learn how to play your character generally. If grouping will be necessary for crafting or gathering, how so? And why will the RvR'ers want to do that?
These may or may not be problems. Until we learn more about the design intention, it's all speculation. But I do think it bears noting how it comes across. A few serious, deal-breaker type questions popped into my head: