One of Crowfall's main tenets is making an MMO that can be played seasonally, while CU is probably going more for the long-term traditional approach. That makes them pretty different.
In other words, RvR only, and DaoC 2.0.
The combat is also dramatically different if we're going down that route. So are the skill/progression systems, so is the crafting. Don't know what point you were trying to make.
Honesty is always the best policy, that way you don't have trip ups and slip ups. If it has taken them a fair bit longer to improve their engine, along with getting 1k+ clients in one area (that is an impressive enough feat in itself), then we all have to wait a bit longer.
Not a problem at all for me as the amount of games I have played in recent years that were clearly rushed and had severe technical issues on launch put paid to me buying anything until it has been out for at least a month (and only when the feedback is good).
I never played DAOC, so I hold no pre-conceptions of what CU is bringing to the table and I look forward to picking it up along with maybe Pantheon, as these are probably the only two titles that have given me any interest or excitement in recent times.
One of Crowfall's main tenets is making an MMO that can be played seasonally, while CU is probably going more for the long-term traditional approach. That makes them pretty different.
In other words, RvR only, and DaoC 2.0.
The combat is also dramatically different if we're going down that route. So are the skill/progression systems, so is the crafting. Don't know what point you were trying to make.
There is very little similarity between DAOC and CU. Take out that they are both RvR (which is something most games have they just call them factions instead of realms), and you have two completely different games. I'm curious why you keep calling it DAOC 2.0. Could you elaborate where these similarities are?
In terms of DAoC 2.0, not at all. We've been very clear that we can't be DAoC 2.0 simply because we don't have the PvE content that DAoC. Now, if you said we'd like to be the RvR 2.0 game, that would be quite accurate.
A 'real' DAoC 2.0 also has to tackle the PvE component of the predecessor, which CU doesn't; CU 'only' takes the RvR aspect and expands on that.
One of Crowfall's main tenets is making an MMO that can be played seasonally, while CU is probably going more for the long-term traditional approach. That makes them pretty different.
In other words, RvR only, and DaoC 2.0.
The combat is also dramatically different if we're going down that route. So are the skill/progression systems, so is the crafting. Don't know what point you were trying to make.
The point being you compared them against each other, but among PvP mmos, they are pretty different... like I stated.
One of Crowfall's main tenets is making an MMO that can be played seasonally, while CU is probably going more for the long-term traditional approach. That makes them pretty different.
In other words, RvR only, and DaoC 2.0.
The combat is also dramatically different if we're going down that route. So are the skill/progression systems, so is the crafting. Don't know what point you were trying to make.
The point being you compared them against each other, but among PvP mmos, they are pretty different... like I stated.
Right, and one looks way more compelling, which was what I stated. I still don't see how pointing out the differences accomplished anything as though I wasn't aware that they were not the same game.....but ok.
You know, I just took a look at your website again to see if there was anything new on there.
Because I have to admit, CU was the game I looked most forward to a year ago, before I realized it was pure PvP.
As I remember the old DaoC (And mind you, this was afterall 13-14 years ago or so, so Im sorry if my memory is poor), But I dont recall that we ever came across the enemy faction while lvling.
I do remember the big PvP area though, where we all gathered outside to get sorted in groups. And then we moved inside and all the groups wasnt working together so people got pissed off in each their groups, cause the other groups were not helping, which made me laugh like I had never laughed before.
So I actually do like PvP, but will CU be a "You can be killed everywhere kind of game?" Or are there designated areas for that?
And tbh, I think I will try out your game after all, cause your races and classes looks so mint. Except Vikings, those poor fellows wont be in high numbers I think and will be the puny pity faction. (Yes I imagine that, but I think so :P )
And also, I need to make a crafter, your creative races and your crafter idea, ok my houses will get burned to the ground, but designing them will be time well spent no matter what.
"I’ve leveled entire classes for no reason other than they could wield a pike or polearm, hopefully CSE can win my fandom."
Yes! Please include spears and polearms. Oblivion/Skyrim broke my heart when they completely removed any type of polearm from the game, like some kind of alternate fantasy reality where no one ever put a sharp point on a stick.
MarkJacobsCEO City State EntertainmentMemberRarePosts: 649
What's the reason to not release a 10-15 min video of the current 'massive client' test? I mean, there are already some screenshots of the latest engine-test on the main site ... the move to moving screenshots aka a short video shouldn't be that big, IMO.
We might release a video or allow a live streaming of one of our Backer and Bots test. The problem is that every time we do that, even when we're clear that this is an old school Alpha and acknowledge what we are missing, we get some negative feedback because we're missing the things we acknowledged we're missing. So, our current thinking is to wait till we have the new animation system in and the improved VFX system to reduce the volume of "HAH! This isn't a real test! It has no VFX, I bet the engine will crawl when that happens!!!"
That said, we might still do some live streaming. The key is that we haven't been focused on shiny videos because we aren't focused on raising additional money. The vast majority of our Backers are in Beta 1 and Alpha, so they can see the progress during our tests. And once we get through the next Beta 1 test, we might bring in all of our Backers for a "Break the build" test.
One of Crowfall's main tenets is making an MMO that can be played seasonally, while CU is probably going more for the long-term traditional approach. That makes them pretty different.
In other words, RvR only, and DaoC 2.0.
The combat is also dramatically different if we're going down that route. So are the skill/progression systems, so is the crafting. Don't know what point you were trying to make.
Yeah, I'm confused about that too. If we were trying to be Dark Age 2.0, we would have said so and gone down a different path.
In terms of DAoC 2.0, not at all. We've been very clear that we can't be DAoC 2.0 simply because we don't have the PvE content that DAoC. Now, if you said we'd like to be the RvR 2.0 game, that would be quite accurate.
A 'real' DAoC 2.0 also has to tackle the PvE component of the predecessor, which CU doesn't; CU 'only' takes the RvR aspect and expands on that.
Much respect for MJ and his team. They've built their own engine and taking the time to get things right. Can't wait!
Thanks for your patience and that of all our Backers. It's been a longer than expected wait, but as we showed our Alpha 1 Backer last weekend, and hopefully show our Beta 1 Backers this weekend, it has been worth it.
The problem is that every time we do that, even when we're clear that this is an old school Alpha and acknowledge what we are missing, we get some negative feedback because we're missing the things we acknowledged we're missing.
Really? Unbelievable. This is why we can't have nice things. Now I totally understand why CSE is keeping a low profile. Ty for your honest answer.
MarkJacobsCEO City State EntertainmentMemberRarePosts: 649
The problem is that every time we do that, even when we're clear that this is an old school Alpha and acknowledge what we are missing, we get some negative feedback because we're missing the things we acknowledged we're missing.
Really? Unbelievable. This is why we can't have nice things. Now I totally understand why CSE is keeping a low profile. Ty for your honest answer.
Yeah, it's frustrating, especially because the tests went so well at the end of the year/this past weekend. Like 3+ hours, no main server crashes (one of our mini-servers stopped taking connections, but the system recovered as it is designed to do), 1000+ Bots (which again are the same as player connections because they connect remotely and consume more CPU/network bandwidth) and great FPS on the targeted range of cards (Nvidia 7xx/AMD equivalent or better). If I had streamed off my desktop (it has a 970 in it), we would have had a wide range of reactions. Some of them would have been great, but others would have been, sadly, things like I mentioned above or worse. So, we've seen other games stream early and take unfair criticism too. Fair criticism is one thing, but some of the stuff I've seen leveled at other games in development just makes me sad panda.
So, we're going to wait a little longer, get some new stuff in and then show off the game. Considering that we're way late with Beta 1, a little extra time for live streaming/video isn't a big deal.
Thanks for your understanding and interest, whether you decide to donate or not, it is appreciated!
Mark Jacobs CEO, City State Entertainment
MarkJacobsCEO City State EntertainmentMemberRarePosts: 649
I think it's wise to wait until things are more polished, especially given the feedback described.
The problem probably reflects a broader issue, but I couldn't find a forum appropriate way to phrase it and don't want to derail the discussion. I do think other projects would be wise to take a more selective approach to demos and streams. Show your best work. Transparency doesn't mean let it all hang out.
Yeah, there is a broader issue that is a problem for all of us in gaming no matter what side of the equation you reside. It's not a new problem, it's ages old, it just seems worse at times.
And I agree, we are being more transparent with our Backers than most crowd-funded games and we can still do better. And in terms of letting it all hang out, well, our IT Backers get to see what state the game is in on a daily basis, but we can't show everybody that, it gets ugly at times, real ugly.
Backed the Kickstarter but haven't really paid much attention since the start, and honestly that's how I want to keep it. Just don't want to get too hyped yet. If I were a Hindu god however I'd give Mark and the team all 6 thumbs up however due to the transparency, Twitch-streams and Mark even taking his time communicating on mmorpg.com (how many other developers have done that?).
Keep up the good job, Mark. You have my trust and soon (once released) a bigger portion of my wallet!
Any chance they'll go the "early access" route or will they be sticking to the traditional alpha(s)-> beta(s) -> release cycle?
"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
Comments
The combat is also dramatically different if we're going down that route. So are the skill/progression systems, so is the crafting. Don't know what point you were trying to make.
Not a problem at all for me as the amount of games I have played in recent years that were clearly rushed and had severe technical issues on launch put paid to me buying anything until it has been out for at least a month (and only when the feedback is good).
I never played DAOC, so I hold no pre-conceptions of what CU is bringing to the table and I look forward to picking it up along with maybe Pantheon, as these are probably the only two titles that have given me any interest or excitement in recent times.
There is very little similarity between DAOC and CU. Take out that they are both RvR (which is something most games have they just call them factions instead of realms), and you have two completely different games. I'm curious why you keep calling it DAOC 2.0. Could you elaborate where these similarities are?
Haven't you read MJ answer a few posts above?
A 'real' DAoC 2.0 also has to tackle the PvE component of the predecessor, which CU doesn't; CU 'only' takes the RvR aspect and expands on that.
What happens when you log off your characters????.....
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GFQhfhnjYMk
Dark Age of Camelot
There will be some safe areas.
Yes! Please include spears and polearms. Oblivion/Skyrim broke my heart when they completely removed any type of polearm from the game, like some kind of alternate fantasy reality where no one ever put a sharp point on a stick.
We might release a video or allow a live streaming of one of our Backer and Bots test. The problem is that every time we do that, even when we're clear that this is an old school Alpha and acknowledge what we are missing, we get some negative feedback because we're missing the things we acknowledged we're missing.
That said, we might still do some live streaming. The key is that we haven't been focused on shiny videos because we aren't focused on raising additional money. The vast majority of our Backers are in Beta 1 and Alpha, so they can see the progress during our tests. And once we get through the next Beta 1 test, we might bring in all of our Backers for a "Break the build" test.
Yeah, I'm confused about that too. If we were trying to be Dark Age 2.0, we would have said so and gone down a different path.
Yep.
Thanks for your patience and that of all our Backers. It's been a longer than expected wait, but as we showed our Alpha 1 Backer last weekend, and hopefully show our Beta 1 Backers this weekend, it has been worth it.
Mark Jacobs
CEO, City State Entertainment
Really? Unbelievable. This is why we can't have nice things. Now I totally understand why CSE is keeping a low profile.
Ty for your honest answer.
So, we're going to wait a little longer, get some new stuff in and then show off the game. Considering that we're way late with Beta 1, a little extra time for live streaming/video isn't a big deal.
Thanks for your understanding and interest, whether you decide to donate or not, it is appreciated!
Mark Jacobs
CEO, City State Entertainment
And I agree, we are being more transparent with our Backers than most crowd-funded games and we can still do better. And in terms of letting it all hang out, well, our IT Backers get to see what state the game is in on a daily basis, but we can't show everybody that, it gets ugly at times, real ugly.
Mark Jacobs
CEO, City State Entertainment
Keep up the good job, Mark. You have my trust and soon (once released) a bigger portion of my wallet!
“Microtransactions? In a single player role-playing game? Are you nuts?”
― CD PROJEKT RED
It wont be free to play or buy to play..
why you say that?
Philosophy of MMO Game Design