Product Details:
Online multiplayer 3rd person squad-based tactical shooter with tanks in a persistent war. For the first time, join your favorite factions in the fiercest and most authentic Warhammer 40K battles ever realized in a shooting videogame. Select one of four factions of the 41st millennium and fight for control of a persistent world at war. As you fight your way across the planet, claim territory in massive battles and earn the right to customize and improve your characters in a deep progression system from Warhammer 40,000 lore.
Engage in massive battles - Take part in massive military campaigns between 4 factions for the conquest of a persistent continent. Dive into the shifting frontlines and crush your foes! Engage in melee, take to the air with a jump pack or fi re into the fray from one of the turrets of a fully armed Predator tank. Combat in Eternal Crusade ranges from a personal clashing of Chainswords to truly epic warfare.
Your faction is your family now - Victory is not a thing for a single warrior to claim. Whether you're in PVP or PVE, your squad must work together to overcome constant resistance in their quest for glory. Face death side-by-side with your brothers as you defend strongholds or delve into the Underworld to cooperatively combat alien hordes of Tyranids.
Choose your allegiances and background - Pick between twenty different sub-factions, and then earn hundreds of weapons and accessories drawn from 29 years of Warhammer 40,000 lore to craft your perfect warrior.
Looks interesting, whole they spent a bit more time on voice acting in the actual game.
Also, I am a little scared of how they would do Tyranids in the game. If I have to play a single hormagaunt and try to take out marines it is going to be rough dayat the office...
Also, I am a little scared of how they would do Tyranids in the game. If I have to play a single hormagaunt and try to take out marines it is going to be rough dayat the office...
Tyranids are not playable. It is Space Marines, Eldar, Orks, and Chaos Space Marines. Tyranids are environmental hazards.
Last I heard, this game was still in closed Alpha. The footage seemed to confirm that. There is no way they'd have anything near a complete product by now.
Zywus wrote: It this a "real" game or one of those glorified shovelware mobile ports with a bunch of DLC nickel and diming?
It's a "real" game, but apparently they looked at Warframe's business model and said "Hey that's a great idea!".
Warframe is a free-to-play game though right? Which makes it reasonable that they make their money from DLC.
This seems to be $60 for the base game.
Warframe is free, but...
To give you an example, Prime Access nets you the new Prime version of a Warframe.
That's $79.99 for a Warframe.
From what I can find about Eternal Crusade, you're limited to 4 character slots unless you buy more and they made a priority to set up an "in-game currency shop" that could also be used for real money.
Zywus wrote: It this a "real" game or one of those glorified shovelware mobile ports with a bunch of DLC nickel and diming?
It's a "real" game, but apparently they looked at Warframe's business model and said "Hey that's a great idea!".
Warframe is a free-to-play game though right? Which makes it reasonable that they make their money from DLC.
This seems to be $60 for the base game.
Warframe is free, but...
To give you an example, Prime Access nets you the new Prime version of a Warframe.
That's $79.99 for a Warframe.
From what I can find about Eternal Crusade, you're limited to 4 character slots unless you buy more and they made a priority to set up an "in-game currency shop" that could also be used for real money.
So the Crusade is only as Eternal as your wallet? Guess they took a page from the GW business plans book.
That's also the World of Tanks model (free to play but limited slots unless you buy more) and they're quite profitable. When I last looked at this game months ago, it looked like they just ported over the Xbox Space Marine game beta version and added mmo features on top. While I really enjoyed that console game, it wasn't impressive in 2012ish from a tech standpoint and its not going to fare better years later. I'll have to check it out again tonight.
Automatically Appended Next Post: Ah, this is now a console release from the links above which is new since I last checked in on it.
They have not fixed any of the issues that take the fine game concept and make it an utter disaster (low TTK, greedy business model, poor quality models and art, removal of the MMO selling point...) so I see no reason to be interested in this.
This has been up on early access with Steam for some time now...
It's rough...really rough. At the moment it feels like a high school project, and not really a very good one.
I'll just list the major gripes
1: Major performance issues, framerate is bad, random lag constantly
2: shallow gameplay made worse by a very short time to kill which makes you feel like anything but a space marine
3: No MMO component, this is a lobby shooter right now
4: LOOOONG way from implementation of major features such as orks and eldar
Just a heads up from someone who had high hopes for this. They have abandoned open world as "too hard and no fun". It's essentially battlefield 4 lobby shooter tier with more meelee at this point. Oh speaking of meelee I hope you like meelee guys sneaking up behind you and killing you, largely irrelivent shooting, and class imbalances with marines having such a large advantage with apothecaries over sorcerors and marines with stormshields making your shots you might have got off pointless it's a miracle chaos ever wins.
Also be in a guild or clan because solo play WILL be a lesson in frustration. The deck is stacked against you.
I've spent close to 18 hours playing the game so far, it's not bad. Repetitive, yes, and a lot of the game play still has some kinks but over all I have had fun playing it. Shooting is a viable option as Plasma shots quickly eat through shields and armor, same with melta (they used melta as represented in Space Marine, so think over glorified flamer). Lascannons are very useful against vehicles and using the bolter or scoped version helps when moving as a group (5 marines with bolters can take on almost any threat) Assault marines and raptors are tricky and their whole thing is to dance around the front lines and hit and run opponents from behind. Shield guys are kind of OP in that most weapons, if not all, cannot penetrate their shields (it is easy to dodge them by rolling, then taking them out when their shield is lowered), however I play a Chaos Chosen with power mace, and have found that I can usually end the game in the positive K/D realm. The game does take some getting used to, and it relies heavily on how well your team can cooperate and react to what the opposing side is doing.
As far as programming, I never had many problems until after the most recent update, and now on one of the maps my computer frequently freezes. So far that is my only complaint.
Eternal crusade has been in development for awhile, originally it was planned to be a third person shooty open world mmo. The problem was the the dev team at the time made alot of promises that weren't practical. Fast forward to today and leadership has changed hands. The games has been scaled back in size to single lobby maps so they can get people playing and testing.
Via the studio lead the plan is that they want to be a open world mmo of a massive scale befitting battle in the 41st millennium but the technology to do what they want on the scale they want isn't quite there yet, hence the scale back in scope. As for races, each faction is to have five sub factions wither their own special classes, word bearers get dark apostles, iron warriors maybe warpsmiths, Nightlords maybe sneaky raptors, most of the concern is getting main structure of the game going do details are scarce. Recently though the eldar as nearing playability, with the striking scorpions and dire avengers having made appearances in the teams frequent (either weekly or bi weekly I believe) live streamed updates to the community.
Along with the eldar updates I believe there was a announcment that in june of july there is a massive update to be scheduled that will bring in the first bits of progression and customization, both stat wise and appearance, along with quality of life improvements, and other new features.
On the topic of customization, yes there is a planned cash shop, and it has be stated many, many, MANY, time that items purchased from the cash shop will be "pay to look cool" not pay to win. This is so the game can ultimately thrive as the current by in is 40$ for game PERIOD which includes early access via steam a and 20k rogue trade point (cash shop) to buy yourself some nifty looking bits.
If you are expecting a finished product, this is not for you. If you are impatient, this is not for you. The devs have been brutally honest that they are taking their time to get stuff right and no amount of vitriol or crying will speed up the process. Its pretty obvious that they care about the game they are making and have done a pretty stellar job about keeping the community informed.
If you want to check it out for yourself there are numerous media sources with games footage, people's opinions, dev discussions, and feedback. As for me, I've thrown down money for it a am waiting patiently, occasion hopping on to try out new features and I feel like I've already gotten my 40$ worth.
BrotherVord wrote: Sorry i just don't buy that the technology isn't where it needs to be
I would like to introduce you to a little game called Planetside.
Oh and Planetside 2.
Planetside 2 if I remember the correctly featured server that hosted sbout 6000 people each, with about 2000 people per continent at max, I could be wrong though. The devs of EC wanted to pursue a open world single server hosting all players *not sure if NA and EU servers were discussed*. The only other game I could think of that hosts battles of that size and scope would be EVE and that is in instanced maps with relativly little to no terrain. Any veteran Eve player can tell you that even a games optimized for massive battles like that starts to get bogged down under the sheer numbers.
Kid_Kyoto wrote: Sorry but for those of us who stopped at the Atari 2600, what is a Lobby Shooter?
It means its hosted by either a player or a dedicated server computer and it hosts a small amount of people. Anywhere between 2-64 are typical. Beyond this server costs skyrocket and the worlds internet isn't fast enough to handle more people. At the same time as more people are displayed on the screen performance tanks as most people don't have computer that can handle it and consoles can only handle so much with fixed hardware.
Call of Duty and Battlefield series are the most prototypical lobby shooter.
Imagine the recent Star Wars Battlefront, only with less content, and even more almost redundant vehicles. That's this game.
Kanluwen wrote: From what I can find about Eternal Crusade, you're limited to 4 character slots unless you buy more and they made a priority to set up an "in-game currency shop" that could also be used for real money.
They had their in-game real-money store up and running before the game was playable, and any game that prioritises that over basic game functionality is not to be trusted.
warboss wrote: That's also the World of Tanks model (free to play but limited slots unless you buy more) and they're quite profitable.
But the key thing there is that those games are free. This game is not. This is paying for the opportunity to pay more. You are paying the price of a AAA new release game for an incomplete product. I almost want to call it fraud.
warboss wrote: That's also the World of Tanks model (free to play but limited slots unless you buy more) and they're quite profitable.
But the key thing there is that those games are free. This game is not. This is paying for the opportunity to pay more. You are paying the price of a AAA new release game for an incomplete product. I almost want to call it fraud.
Is that pay structure also confirmed for the console version? I can't imagine it working there. I'd suspect that all the classes might be included along with free slots (but possibly unlocked via gameplay) while the visual customization elements are charged for. I agree with you in principle though in that the game companies shouldnt have their cake and get to eat it too; it's why I've never tried an MMO. I'm fine with buying a game for a one time fee...I'm fine with "renting" a game for a monthly fee...but don't try to fleece me for both at the same time (the old WOW model). The same would apply here in buying the game vs trying to monetize every option. I'll likely wait till the reviews come in on this game post release before buying. I'm too old and jaded to fall for the preorder bonus crap.
H.B.M.C. wrote: Imagine the recent Star Wars Battlefront, only with less content, and even more almost redundant vehicles. That's this game.
Kanluwen wrote: From what I can find about Eternal Crusade, you're limited to 4 character slots unless you buy more and they made a priority to set up an "in-game currency shop" that could also be used for real money.
They had their in-game real-money store up and running before the game was playable, and any game that prioritises that over basic game functionality is not to be trusted.
warboss wrote: That's also the World of Tanks model (free to play but limited slots unless you buy more) and they're quite profitable.
But the key thing there is that those games are free. This game is not. This is paying for the opportunity to pay more. You are paying the price of a AAA new release game for an incomplete product. I almost want to call it fraud.
It appears you have at most biased or basic knowledge of the game. The game was started like a faux-Kickstarter, with various pledge levels earning you differing rewards based on how much you paid in (like a kickstarter.)
Only unlike a kickstarter, you were also gaining access to the alpha, which means a large amount of the testing done for the game is by players.
There was no immediate priority given to an "in-game item shop" that was anything beyond a small preview of what your pledge earned you. Most of the pledge levels came with an amount of in game currency used to buy cosmetic skins for weapons. The shop you refer to allowed you to get a glimpse of these weapons.
It's funny seeing so much hate from people who obviously don't know much about the history of the project or its current status. Not to mention many of these same people decry the particular business model they are using, but see no problem with pledgin money to kickstarters (which use an extremely similar business model.)
It isn't blind hate, microtransactions in paid games are crap and microtransactions for digital goods in paid games for which not even an alpha is available, meaning people can't make any reasonable kind of judgement about the quality and are going on hype alone, is extra crap. If they cared about making a game as much as they cared about selling imaginary power swords the project would be run vastly differently, and the "haters" are people who rightly read the cynicism for what it is. I've followed the whole thing closely and it's going to be a disaster. Honestly with some great 40k games recently like Battlefleet I'm sad that this one's going ahead, it's not going to do the IP any favours whatsoever.
Imaginary as opposed to something you can at least get access to. Not as opposed to real power swords, since they're fictional. I mean, I thought that was obvious. At the time they were hypothetical weapons for a game the substance of which was totally intangible.
And yeah, sure, boil it down to I don't like it. I definitely took the time to write that so that you could sum it up for me, so thanks. Helpful.
Lots of opinions from people tht have not played the game and are just posting what they have heard this seems like to me.
Im not a fan of the game, or the DLC, but DLC is part and parcel of online gaming now and has been for the past ten years or more and its only going to get worse.
Its not like you have to buy it, plenty of people have more money than sense and are willing to part with it on a whim, each to his own I say.
I do not like it as it promised to play like Planetside, four races fighting for the control of a planet and at the moment its just seperate matches like in battlefield, its not very enjoyable to me.
I am really not liking the third person perspective much anymore either.
It was never going to work as well as they said it would, the promised in game functions and mechanics all seemed pretty far fetched to me, a lot of the ideas like voting on a chapter heirarchy and organising massive assaults on huge well defended cites, were a bit hopefull to say the least.
Still for anyone interested, I think you should watch some of the dev streams here on twitch to see more about it.
If we were like, commenting on the gameplay not having played it then maybe that would be relevant but my criticism is with the business model and the obvious cynicism it displays - playing the game wouldn't do anything to change that. As it happens though you can get a good impression from videos and streams, and from watching a few of those it's looking very basic.
Yeah, I was an early supporter. You spend more time crawling around on the ground than actually fighting and the map design is terrible. Controls are clunky and playing as a Space Marine you do not feel like you're one of the elite super soldiers wearing amazing power armor with incredible stamina and strength. You run out of stamina super fast, melee is weak and drains you ridiculously fast. As for jump packs.. lol what a joke. Nah, if you like 40k, this has 40k stuff IN it. Sure. If you like video games though.. this is a solid miss.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
jreilly89 wrote: A) This trailer looks ROUGH. Like, worse than the old 40k Space Marine for PS3 game.
B) Even if it's rough, if it's fun, I'll probably still pick this up because I'm a sucker for a fun 3rd person shooter.
C) I'm still salty THQ went under. I enjoyed the feth out of Space Marine and wanted to see where the trilogy went.
This is nothing like Space Marine.. which I was deeply hoping for.
With surprisingly competent GW games coming out (total warhammer, battlefleet gothic, deathwing), I'd like to hold out hope that this game might be ok.
And I'm fine with them abandoning the MMO aspect, I'm not sure that would have ever worked. A battlefield/battlefront type game with 40k flavor could be fun.
That being said, the developer of this game's library largely consists of cheap shovelware franchise tie-ins that to do nothing more than lure in unsuspecting buyers - usually children's movie video games.
So, I generally expect there to be about the same level of quality in this game as there is in, say, "Phineas and ferb: quest for cool stuff" or "doritos crash course 2".
And those could be awesome games, I suppose.
But more likely, they put the put the absolute minimum possible into those games in order to have a mostly functional game to lure in as much money as possible from unsuspecting consumers familiar with the game's franchise but not with exploitative game developers. Because that appears to be their business model.
Kap'n Krump wrote:That being said, the developer of this game's library largely consists of cheap shovelware franchise tie-ins that to do nothing more than lure in unsuspecting buyers - usually children's movie video games.
So, I generally expect there to be about the same level of quality in this game as there is in, say, "Phineas and ferb: quest for cool stuff" or "doritos crash course 2".
And those could be awesome games, I suppose.
How dare you insult the maker of the Kimpossible video game series! In all seriousness, it's not very reassuring that most of their recent titles are on platforms infamous for swimming in 3rd party shovelware like the DS, Wii, and mobile. I will say though that the original Doritos Crash Course game was actually quite fun... very limited in scope but they did a good job with what they came out with. Hopefully the company will be able to break out of that apparent shovelware niche. Since I'm not interested enough to look up the metacritic scores on their dozens of games, I can't say for sure whether they were shovelware but the massive number of rapid fire licensed games on those particular platforms isn't encouraging.
aracersss wrote:such awe:
Week releases
New bases:
Spoiler:
Sector Imperialis: 32mm Round Bases (60) 26€
Sector Imperialis: Large Base Detail Kit 26€
Sector Imperialis: 25mm and 40mm Round Bases (40+20) 26€ (Including 32 skulls for basing)
Sector Imperialis: 60mm Round Bases and 75mm&90mm Oval Bases 26€
New paints: (We may have extreme limitations on these for the first order.)
Citadel Layer: Fulgurite Copper 4.50€
Citadel Layer: Skullcrusher Brass 4.50€
Citadel Layer: Stormhost Silver 4.50€
Citadel Shade: Agrax Earthshade Gloss (24ml) 6€
Citadel Shade: Nuln Oil Gloss (24ml) 6€
Citadel Shade: Reikland Fleshshade Gloss (24ml) 6€
Citadel Technical: Soulstone Blue 3.30€ (If painted over bright metallic colours, should create a gemstone-effect)
Citadel Technical: Spiritstone Red 3.30€
Citadel Technical: Waystone Green 3.30€
I think you may have the wrong thread here unless those bases and paint colors are paint DLC customization options for a 40k video game.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
jreilly89 wrote: A) This trailer looks ROUGH. Like, worse than the old 40k Space Marine for PS3 game.
B) Even if it's rough, if it's fun, I'll probably still pick this up because I'm a sucker for a fun 3rd person shooter.
C) I'm still salty THQ went under. I enjoyed the feth out of Space Marine and wanted to see where the trilogy went.
I wouldn't say much worse though. The particle effects are a bit weird especially when the Chaos Sorcerer is killed by the Lascannon. Also, just because he's a Space Vampire Blood Angel doesn't mean he has to be a Twilight Space Vampire! There is way too much sparkle on that Blood Angels forehead bling for my liking. None of that is reassuring though since being almost as nice looking as a LAST gen console title from four years earlier isn't exactly a bragging point. I'm also a huge fan of 3rd person shooters and put hundreds of hours into space marine (both due to that interest as well as the simple yet addictive multiplayer).
Eh, we'll see in the end. They can't release an "alpha" on consoles (although a broken beta is possible as a retail release though) so we'll see a hell of a lot more in the months to come (assuming it isn't delayed).
The devs do put in lots of work to develop and tweak the game, but IMO it hasn't really improved over time.
The game is cool, even fun at times, but it isn't very good. Just basically one huge cluster****. Dying constantly, clunky controls, getting stuck on environmental features, friendly fire or stunning your teammates in close combat, horrible performance issues (worse for some, fine for others, but even on lowest settings mine runs horribly ever since a certain patch).
I don't really know what they could do to turn this into a good game. Somehow improving performance in a meaningful way (I have no idea how this works, just saying) would go a long way toward being worthwhile. Melee is a mess. Maybe by the time it's ready they will have ironed it all out, but with the current state of the game I'd say there's at least a year of work before that happens.
I played a couple hours of it earlier this year. It was kinda fun and had some really entertaining bits (powerfisting tanks so hard they fly and run someone else over is hilarious) but it was nowhere near completion. It felt like it needed another year minimum. I think the devs overpromised and that half of the things they want to put in the game won't make it in at this rate.
The YouTube videos make it look very much like a carbon copy of the Space Marine multiplayer mode, which was kinda fun.
It's a shame that they haven't managed to do much except poorly copy SM so far, but I'm hoping they might deliver some expanded content later. No thumbs up / down at this point from me yet, but at the moment Deathwing certainly looks more promising.
prowla wrote: The YouTube videos make it look very much like a carbon copy of the Space Marine multiplayer mode, which was kinda fun.
It's a shame that they haven't managed to do much except poorly copy SM so far, but I'm hoping they might deliver some expanded content later. No thumbs up / down at this point from me yet, but at the moment Deathwing certainly looks more promising.
Space marine had a working melee system that was both rewarding and punishing. This system is just punishing. You feel good when you score a kill, but there's very little actual skill involved....it's more about praying that you don't get shot to death in the .2 seconds you have between when you land and when you can start attacking.
warboss wrote: That's also the World of Tanks model (free to play but limited slots unless you buy more) and they're quite profitable.
But the key thing there is that those games are free. This game is not. This is paying for the opportunity to pay more. You are paying the price of a AAA new release game for an incomplete product. I almost want to call it fraud.
This. 100% This.
Please note that Eternal Crusade is STILL in closed Alpha stages/Early Access via steam.
I've seen games crash and die even as late as open beta. In fact, another 40k related game did just that. And it was cleaner and more polished than this currently is.
Heck, iirc Eternal Crusade has died twice already and had 3 design shifts since it was first conceptualised and announced (like, all the way back in 2005-2006? I remember there being something in WD about it).
warboss wrote: That's also the World of Tanks model (free to play but limited slots unless you buy more) and they're quite profitable.
But the key thing there is that those games are free. This game is not. This is paying for the opportunity to pay more. You are paying the price of a AAA new release game for an incomplete product. I almost want to call it fraud.
This. 100% This.
Please note that Eternal Crusade is STILL in closed Alpha stages/Early Access via steam.
I've seen games crash and die even as late as open beta. In fact, another 40k related game did just that. And it was cleaner and more polished than this currently is.
Heck, iirc Eternal Crusade has died twice already and had 3 design shifts since it was first conceptualised and announced (like, all the way back in 2005-2006? I remember there being something in WD about it).
I have no faith in this.
Hey not okay. I was actually really looking forward to that game, and then it died. I'm still salty.
Whoah.. okay.. there's some bad info going on.
The game IMO is gak but it is going to release as F2P.
However, it will be freemium (from last I saw). The F2P will only include the Orks. Unlocking the others will be through micro transactions. Personal vehicles also appeared to be a paid feature as well as did some weapons and cosmetics.
warboss wrote: That's also the World of Tanks model (free to play but limited slots unless you buy more) and they're quite profitable.
But the key thing there is that those games are free. This game is not. This is paying for the opportunity to pay more. You are paying the price of a AAA new release game for an incomplete product. I almost want to call it fraud.
This. 100% This.
Please note that Eternal Crusade is STILL in closed Alpha stages/Early Access via steam.
I've seen games crash and die even as late as open beta. In fact, another 40k related game did just that. And it was cleaner and more polished than this currently is.
Heck, iirc Eternal Crusade has died twice already and had 3 design shifts since it was first conceptualised and announced (like, all the way back in 2005-2006? I remember there being something in WD about it).
I have no faith in this.
Those were different projects by different studios. Dark Millennium online was the last one. You don't have to have faith in this game (I don't have much left) but it's not the same as those other ones. This is having issues because it's an inexperienced developer without much budget.
I'm sorry to say this game looks like absolute gak on every single level that matters, and quite a few that don't. Huge pass for me, and not only that, I am likely to have a diminished opinion of anyone who admits to buying it. That's how gak it looks.
There sure are lots of white knights coming out to defend this junk. It will be lucky to break 60k people at launch. I have heard " you are just misinformed" as an argument. Well bud, that "misinformation" is the prevalent belief of how the game is and will be. And based off that opinion, be it good or bad, will make or break a game. Your devs better do something to patch that up in a big way or you are just going to get more and more people telling others to skip this one. Then it's DOA.
Orock wrote: There sure are lots of white knights coming out to defend this junk. It will be lucky to break 60k people at launch. I have heard " you are just misinformed" as an argument. Well bud, that "misinformation" is the prevalent belief of how the game is and will be. And based off that opinion, be it good or bad, will make or break a game. Your devs better do something to patch that up in a big way or you are just going to get more and more people telling others to skip this one. Then it's DOA.
Really ?
I dont see lots of people defending it all, there a few people that dont like people making stuff up about the game, but even most of the early access backers have backed out already lol
Those were different projects by different studios. Dark Millennium online was the last one. You don't have to have faith in this game (I don't have much left) but it's not the same as those other ones. This is having issues because it's an inexperienced developer without much budget.
This is the same project, rebranded, renamed and passed along developers like a hot potato. I wouldn't say this is new.
And you say it's having issues because it's an inexperienced developer without much budget. They're under the umbrella of Bandai Namco - i.e. the people who produce Dark Souls, Tekken, the DragonBall games and the Naruto games. They have funding. They're just not filtering it into this project.
Because this project is the Eternal Hand-Me-Down of projects.
Bandai Namco didn't produce Dark Souls, they were the publisher, but not the producer. From Software was the producer of the Souls series.
Publishers and producers/developers aren't the same thing.
Orock wrote: There sure are lots of white knights coming out to defend this junk. It will be lucky to break 60k people at launch. I have heard " you are just misinformed" as an argument. Well bud, that "misinformation" is the prevalent belief of how the game is and will be. And based off that opinion, be it good or bad, will make or break a game. Your devs better do something to patch that up in a big way or you are just going to get more and more people telling others to skip this one. Then it's DOA.
"I'm ignorant and it's okay. Don't try and inform me otherwise, it's the devs responsibility."
Automatically Appended Next Post:
MajorTom11 wrote: I'm sorry to say this game looks like absolute gak on every single level that matters, and quite a few that don't. Huge pass for me, and not only that, I am likely to have a diminished opinion of anyone who admits to buying it. That's how gak it looks.
Considering it's still in Alpha, yeah it does. Most games look like that in Alpha.
That being said, I'm not holding out hope for this one.
That's the first step on the road to disappointment.
Those were different projects by different studios. Dark Millennium online was the last one. You don't have to have faith in this game (I don't have much left) but it's not the same as those other ones. This is having issues because it's an inexperienced developer without much budget.
This is the same project, rebranded, renamed and passed along developers like a hot potato. I wouldn't say this is new.
And you say it's having issues because it's an inexperienced developer without much budget. They're under the umbrella of Bandai Namco - i.e. the people who produce Dark Souls, Tekken, the DragonBall games and the Naruto games. They have funding. They're just not filtering it into this project.
Because this project is the Eternal Hand-Me-Down of projects.
Nope, this is nothing to do with dark milienium, all the work on this was started from scratch.
The best approach is probably a wait and see attitude. Don't get suckered in by a preorder "free" shiny power sword bonus or exclusive new hat for your Malibu Stacy Marine for the first 40,000 customers. I'll give this game another fair shake again in 6 months to a year when it comes out hopefully. What I see now compared with what I saw last year isn't exactly encouraging though. *fingers crossed*
Orock wrote: There sure are lots of white knights coming out to defend this junk. It will be lucky to break 60k people at launch. I have heard " you are just misinformed" as an argument. Well bud, that "misinformation" is the prevalent belief of how the game is and will be. And based off that opinion, be it good or bad, will make or break a game. Your devs better do something to patch that up in a big way or you are just going to get more and more people telling others to skip this one. Then it's DOA.
Really ?
I dont see lots of people defending it all, there a few people that dont like people making stuff up about the game, but even most of the early access backers have backed out already lol
I was an early backer. I gave it a shot, had concerns and didn't like the direction, regardless of how much polish they put on it. I got a refund and haven't looked back other than to glance into this thread after a few months. I'll give the F2P mode a shot to see if my suspicions were correct.
I'm surprised they gave out refunds. Did you have to jump through hoops or initiate it unilaterally like with a credit card/paypal chargeback? Or did they have a policy that allowed refunds under certain circumstances?
Hey everybody, just wanted to pop in here and post some Info in response to everything you are saying here. Just registered to your forum. All info I am giving you is available publicly via the Live Streams on YouTube and Twitch, as well as on the Forums - http://Forum.EternalCrusade.Com
I am the GuildMaster of an Eldar guild in Eternal Crusade. I have no relation to the Developers at all, but I guess I am biased a bit because I like what has been going on so far. So feel free to take what I say with a grain of salt:
MMO - Yes, Eternal Crusade has been reduced to battles that are currently 16 v 16 and 32 v 32 instanced matches between LSM and Chaos on the live servers. Eldar are currently only on the Founder's server as they are not ready yet for live.
The plan is that at a later time multiple maps will be merged into sub-regional maps with multiple fortresses and 100 v 100 up to 500 v 500 battlegrounds. Eventually perhaps open world.
The original design was posted on the idea of using Picoservers to run the whole game Server Side for a truly phenomenal seamless experience. Sadly that architecture failed and other attempts to develop system with similar output has failed as well.
Many people mention PlanetSide 2, but people do not realize that it actually runs P2P rather than Server-Client and thus opens the doors to many Client side hacks and cheats like the Hitbox hack or others. The developers of EC made the choice before even starting to not use the same kind of architecture so that cheating would be much much more difficult, as all the data and calculations are sourced by the Servers while the clients (your computer) just render everything and take in your input, like a Thin-Client. Can this be changed to a P2P like PlanetSide 2? Sure it could... I hope it isn't though.
Monetary System - Not sure where $60 came from, cause it costs $40. All cash shop items are side-grades, pretty much like PlanetSide 2 weapons. Their overall damage output will be similar to weapons in the same class and point cost, but the exact mechanics may be special. (Like the Eldar Relic Catapault does bonus damage to light/no armor but loses some AP, same overall DPS)
When you buy the game you get access to all 4 Factions, and all basic classes with some default Wargear. There is planned a progression tree system that will unlock additional Wargear, weapons, Veterans, some Elites and some Heroes with in-game experience tokens. I believe some Elites and Heroes are to "owned" immediately when you create a character. Veterancy is definitely an unlock however.
Some game things are paid in the cash shop, such as unlocking additional character slots and unlocking special/unique Elites or Heroes with fixed gear sets.
Performance - Sometimes performance is not the best for sure. Particularly during peak times its laggy. This is due to two primary factors: They have not optimized the game engine completely yet and they have not fully activated the servers yet because it'd be a waste of money for the Alpha. I have a dozen non-monetized streams on YouTube under "ZedAvatar Streams" showing Raw gameplay that you guys can check out yourselves. I do not have a particularly powerful system, I am still using a Phenom 2 X2 CPU (unlocked to a Quad core using Asus magic unlocker of course).
Number of Players - The actual stats do not lie... See link below. Something in the range of 26,000 Founders paid over $100 during the initial buy into the Founder's Program, and there's about 60,000 people who currently own the game on Steam (-26,000 leaves 34,000 @ $40). Which means they got about $4 million so far in sales? I think they can make a fairly good game with that.
Those were different projects by different studios. Dark Millennium online was the last one. You don't have to have faith in this game (I don't have much left) but it's not the same as those other ones. This is having issues because it's an inexperienced developer without much budget.
This is the same project, rebranded, renamed and passed along developers like a hot potato. I wouldn't say this is new.
And you say it's having issues because it's an inexperienced developer without much budget. They're under the umbrella of Bandai Namco - i.e. the people who produce Dark Souls, Tekken, the DragonBall games and the Naruto games. They have funding. They're just not filtering it into this project.
Because this project is the Eternal Hand-Me-Down of projects.
Nope, this is nothing to do with dark milienium, all the work on this was started from scratch.
I just hope that as Sega have announced DoW3 they either do a Space Marine 2 or revive DMO. I don't think they got Vigil games though, which is shame. DMO took ages and wasn't even nearly done from what I recall, but it looked so much better than EC.
I would disagree that EC is a copy of Space Marine, as there does seem to be quite a bit more to it. But visually, it's a step backwards imo, which is disappointing considering we're G8 now.
Those were different projects by different studios. Dark Millennium online was the last one. You don't have to have faith in this game (I don't have much left) but it's not the same as those other ones. This is having issues because it's an inexperienced developer without much budget.
This is the same project, rebranded, renamed and passed along developers like a hot potato. I wouldn't say this is new.
And you say it's having issues because it's an inexperienced developer without much budget. They're under the umbrella of Bandai Namco - i.e. the people who produce Dark Souls, Tekken, the DragonBall games and the Naruto games. They have funding. They're just not filtering it into this project.
Because this project is the Eternal Hand-Me-Down of projects.
Nope, this is nothing to do with dark milienium, all the work on this was started from scratch.
I just hope that as Sega have announced DoW3 they either do a Space Marine 2 or revive DMO. I don't think they got Vigil games though, which is shame. DMO took ages and wasn't even nearly done from what I recall, but it looked so much better than EC.
I would disagree that EC is a copy of Space Marine, as there does seem to be quite a bit more to it. But visually, it's a step backwards imo, which is disappointing considering we're G8 now.
I agree that Space Marine and EC are not the same. Space Marine had a certain amount of polish to it and was actually fun. The Space Marine felt like a bad mofo vs a paper cutout that starts stumbling around looking for his contacts after a shot or two. Jump Packs in Space Marine felt like weapons of destruction.. and while a bit tricky they opened up an awesome and powerful set of optsions.. vs.. EC's mash the button and hope you get where you were going but probably not. Vehicles in Space Marine felt like they were resilient and able to really change the tide of battle. In EC, as someone pointed out you can PFist a Predator and send it flying like a Looney Tunes gag.
The guy 2 posts up says that buying things are side grades but really, if you're unlocking entirely new features, that's not a side-grade. That's P2W or Freemium. Either way, there is a free version that will be available and I highly encourage anyone thinking of spending their hard-earned money on this game to give the free mode a try first.
BTW: When I compared it to Planetside, it wasn't a compliment. It's too close to PS2 as is.. making it even closer would be absolutely the wrong move IMO.
I'm hoping DOW3 and Deathwing will be fun enough to fill the "almost" void left by this attempt at a 40k game.
I just hope that as Sega have announced DoW3 they either do a Space Marine 2 or revive DMO. I don't think they got Vigil games though, which is shame. DMO took ages and wasn't even nearly done from what I recall, but it looked so much better than EC.
I would disagree that EC is a copy of Space Marine, as there does seem to be quite a bit more to it. But visually, it's a step backwards imo, which is disappointing considering we're G8 now.
I agree that Space Marine and EC are not the same. Space Marine had a certain amount of polish to it and was actually fun. The Space Marine felt like a bad mofo vs a paper cutout that starts stumbling around looking for his contacts after a shot or two. Jump Packs in Space Marine felt like weapons of destruction.. and while a bit tricky they opened up an awesome and powerful set of optsions.. vs.. EC's mash the button and hope you get where you were going but probably not. Vehicles in Space Marine felt like they were resilient and able to really change the tide of battle. In EC, as someone pointed out you can PFist a Predator and send it flying like a Looney Tunes gag.
The guy 2 posts up says that buying things are side grades but really, if you're unlocking entirely new features, that's not a side-grade. That's P2W or Freemium. Either way, there is a free version that will be available and I highly encourage anyone thinking of spending their hard-earned money on this game to give the free mode a try first.
Space Marine was also a more or less finished game. Eternal Crusade is still in early alpha and a long, long way from being finished. It is currently not a full or complete game, just a test of some of the most basic features. Do you even have an idea of how games development works? And P2W means that the things you have to pay for are better than the things you can get for free. That is not the case here. Freemium refers to a model where only basic features are free and advanced features have to be unlocked with money. EC is planning to do this with their "free to WAAAGH" (where you can play as an Ork Boy for free) but so far it is not the case. Please get your terms straight. When something you pay for is not any better than something you can get for free it is a sidegrade. Even if it does some different things or unlocks new features, as long as those things are not any better than what you can get for free it is a sidegrade.
Also, there were no vehicles in Space Marine (unless you count those used as background objects). There only was a dreadnought in a dlc you had to pay for and that no one ever seems to play.
I do not understand why you say the graphics are so terrible. Can you elaborate? If you look at the streams they are very very similar to SM.
Btw I own Space Marine for both PS3 and PC and am level 41 in both.
@mlaw
I don't understand how you construed my statement as allowing entirely new features, unless you are referring to character slots? Everything you buy will have a similar in-game unlockable version that likely won't look as nice or unique. Including but not limited to Elite and Hero classes and Weapons. You can get them all through in game earned currency.
@iron_captain
Technically the Free to Waagh has be indefinitely suspended. As in it may not be included at Release.
Truly I believe it would be incredibly stupid for them to never implement such a system (it would be so easy to do so) so I do not think it will never happen. This is, of course, pure speculation.
I've played the game for a little while now, joined a Clan and played with some organised squads of other loyalist marines.
The core of the game is there, more fine tuning and balancing to be done before any polish is applied but this is pretty standard for an alpha, most of the complaints in this thread are moot, because it's an ALPHA, and this is all fairly standard stuff for an MMO alpha.
Unless an MMO runs on a subscription model, when you play a set amount each month to play, monetization will happen either by content barring, controlling rate of progression, or cosmetic upgrades, none of which stray into the territory of P2W(pay to win).
History shows that as soon as games start implementing actual P2W elements, PC gamers have none of it, they move onto other games and the population quickly dies (see warthunder). You don't sneak P2W into a game, it is literally commuting suicide for someone working on the PC platform, that gak may float in mobile land, but not on PC.
While mele in the game is somewhat unbalanced and problematic due to server and optimisation issues, there's certainly the groundwork for a solid system in the future.
Graphics could use a little polish and certainly optimisation needs work, but the graphics are stylised in a way to support the larger scale fights that will be available down the line, you can't expect crysis 3/Doom 4 graphics in this style of game.
As for shooting being weak, well I play as a Bolter armed TAC marine and usually come near the top in terms of score and K/D ratio, but them I am a very experienced gamer.
Eternal Crusade is something to keep an eye on, maybe don't dive in yet unless, playing Alpha/Beta and providing feedback to the devs to improve the game, is your cup of tea, but certainly a year from now it may be well worth taking another look.
The game has been in production since at least 2013. It has been in Alpha longer than a lot of games are in production. The game was originally supposed to launch mid-2016. So when people keep saying "oh but it's in alpha" I have a really really hard time taking that seriously. I have absolutely no problem with beta testing or even alpha testing. What I DO have a problem with, is a game that's stuck in perpetual alpha until it finally either is declared DOA or gets forced into launch as an unfinished beta like MWO.
MLaw wrote: The game has been in production since at least 2013. It has been in Alpha longer than a lot of games are in production. The game was originally supposed to launch mid-2016. So when people keep saying "oh but it's in alpha" I have a really really hard time taking that seriously. I have absolutely no problem with beta testing or even alpha testing. What I DO have a problem with, is a game that's stuck in perpetual alpha until it finally either is declared DOA or gets forced into launch as an unfinished beta like MWO.
If you put it that way, world of tanks has technically been in beta for 5 years and is still currently in that state, yet at the same time has managed to garner mass appeal, great commercial success and remain a fairly playable game.
As I said the foundations of a solid game are already in place with eternal crusade, those that are buying in now, such as myself are those that want to support and be involved in and shape the games development, it's pretty standard to be able to buy your way into an alpha or beta via early access these days.
So don't judge the game at this stage, come back to it later unless you like being an alpha/beta player, I honestly see no reason why this game can not be good and succeed, and I've been a part of a good few MMO betas, the level of dev/player interaction is a positive sign that things are on the right course.
Also the buy in point is fairly low at £31 on steam in the UK, I'm pretty sure I'll get my monies worth whatever the eventual path the game takes, I've already racked up a good few hours on fun, I was far more financially deeply invested in other games, such as Armored Warfare, which at this stage really is faltering with the NA server already dead in terms of PvP.
Lockark wrote: You get 4 slots, one for each race. I don't think you really need to worry about buying more slots....
Well each sub faction will have specialisations, so if you want to have different characters for each faction you'll need to buy slots, which is fair I think.
MLaw wrote: The game has been in production since at least 2013. It has been in Alpha longer than a lot of games are in production. The game was originally supposed to launch mid-2016. So when people keep saying "oh but it's in alpha" I have a really really hard time taking that seriously. I have absolutely no problem with beta testing or even alpha testing. What I DO have a problem with, is a game that's stuck in perpetual alpha until it finally either is declared DOA or gets forced into launch as an unfinished beta like MWO.
Oh come on, do everyone in this thread a favour and stop making such wild assumptions. 3 years is very little time to make a game, especially for ambitious projects like EC that have to be made completely from scratch by a relatively small and inexperienced studio. Release dates are never more than estimates (the reliability of which depends on how far development process is along) and release dates being moved back is extremely common. I have no idea where this project is going to end up, but we should at least give the devs a fair chance.
MLaw wrote: The game has been in production since at least 2013. It has been in Alpha longer than a lot of games are in production. The game was originally supposed to launch mid-2016. So when people keep saying "oh but it's in alpha" I have a really really hard time taking that seriously. I have absolutely no problem with beta testing or even alpha testing. What I DO have a problem with, is a game that's stuck in perpetual alpha until it finally either is declared DOA or gets forced into launch as an unfinished beta like MWO.
Oh come on, do everyone in this thread a favour and stop making such wild assumptions. 3 years is very little time to make a game, especially for ambitious projects like EC that have to be made completely from scratch by a relatively small and inexperienced studio. Release dates are never more than estimates (the reliability of which depends on how far development process is along) and release dates being moved back is extremely common. I have no idea where this project is going to end up, but we should at least give the devs a fair chance.
What exactly in my post was an assumption? The game started development (openly) in 2013. They set a release date of mid-2016. Neither of those things are an assumption. I'll only post up one example of FPS development. Not because it's the end all be all or any other things of that nature.. but because I have played the "alpha" of this and know first hand how bad it is and really don't care that much. Halo was made by a studio with little to no experience in the FPS genre. AFAIK, they created the game engine and all assets and went from announcement in 1999 to delivery in 2001.
I'm glad you are happy with what you're seeing. I have no intentions of playing it when there are so many better video games out there. There is nothing modern about this title at all.. alpha or not. It's entering a market with Star Wars Battlefront, Battlefield 1, Call of Duty Infinite Warfare, Overwatch, and so on and so forth. Warframe is F2P and someone said you need to buy prime access to get prime frames earlier in the thread but that's incorrect. Prime parts come from farming or buying them outright from the store. I say this because Warframe is a third person action sci-fi game. It's glitchy and the graphics can get weird and it's the best case scenario comparison for EC IF it ever gets anywhere.
Either way.. it's obvious this is a debate of opinions which has no outcome worth achieving and people will have to make up their own minds.
MLaw wrote: The game has been in production since at least 2013. It has been in Alpha longer than a lot of games are in production. The game was originally supposed to launch mid-2016. So when people keep saying "oh but it's in alpha" I have a really really hard time taking that seriously. I have absolutely no problem with beta testing or even alpha testing. What I DO have a problem with, is a game that's stuck in perpetual alpha until it finally either is declared DOA or gets forced into launch as an unfinished beta like MWO.
Oh come on, do everyone in this thread a favour and stop making such wild assumptions. 3 years is very little time to make a game, especially for ambitious projects like EC that have to be made completely from scratch by a relatively small and inexperienced studio. Release dates are never more than estimates (the reliability of which depends on how far development process is along) and release dates being moved back is extremely common. I have no idea where this project is going to end up, but we should at least give the devs a fair chance.
What exactly in my post was an assumption?
The game started development (openly) in 2013. They set a release date of mid-2016. Neither of those things are an assumption.
I'll only post up one example of FPS development. Not because it's the end all be all or any other things of that nature.. but because I have played the "alpha" of this and know first hand how bad it is and really don't care that much.
Halo was made by a studio with little to no experience in the FPS genre. AFAIK, they created the game engine and all assets and went from announcement in 1999 to delivery in 2001.
I'm glad you are happy with what you're seeing. I have no intentions of playing it when there are so many better video games out there. There is nothing modern about this title at all.. alpha or not. It's entering a market with Star Wars Battlefront, Battlefield 1, Call of Duty Infinite Warfare, Overwatch, and so on and so forth. Warframe is F2P and someone said you need to buy prime access to get prime frames earlier in the thread but that's incorrect. Prime parts come from farming or buying them outright from the store. I say this because Warframe is a third person action sci-fi game. It's glitchy and the graphics can get weird and it's the best case scenario comparison for EC IF it ever gets anywhere.
Either way.. it's obvious this is a debate of opinions which has no outcome worth achieving and people will have to make up their own minds.
I see absolutely no reason why this game will not release this year. They have not rescinded that scheduled design. There will be a massive update in about 2 weeks with all the Relic weapons and a great deal of content. (Watch the Live Stream from May 27/16) Eldar are playable on the Founder's Server, though still not working 100%.
As I previously mentioned they have built the game around these (edit: spelling) PIKKO servers that ultimately failed. They completely rebuilt the engine using Unreal Engine 4 between December of 2014 to March of 2015 when they announced all the big changes to the open world and everything else they had to take out. The first time they went live with any moderately serious engine to show off was July of 2014: https://youtu.be/tPIrx_iEJMo If it is true that they began developing some assets back in 2013, sure thats fine, but the time-frames aren't that crazy... Considering what they have has been rebuilt in about 16 months, its fairly decent. They are running full tilt to get this done which is why its unpolished. It doesn't make sense to build a car piece by piece and painting it after each piece is added, no you build the whole thing and make sure it runs before you paint it. Do you paint your minis before you glue them together?
The studio is a step above an Indie developer, but they aren't as large as AAA developers. Battlefield 4 cost $100 million to make and took about 3 years. EC has $4 million to make it so far, plus whatever funding they got from Razer and investors, but certainly not $100 million.
i think that's a lot of people's issue here. this is not a $100mil game, and until GW starts putting the license out to groups with that kind of budget, we're going to get...less than stellar results.
maybe warhammer:total war being a hit (at least from what i've heard, moving 500k units isn't anything to sneeze at) will get them to rethink their strategy.
for what it's worth, i've been following EC since the start and while there's a lot i do like, there's tons i don't also. i'm not interested in a lobby shooter. i'll be glad to change my tune if it turns into something better, but right now, it's nothing i'm throwing any money at.
Technically the Free to Waagh has be indefinitely suspended. As in it may not be included at Release.
Truly I believe it would be incredibly stupid for them to never implement such a system (it would be so easy to do so) so I do not think it will never happen. This is, of course, pure speculation.
Remember, when Warhammer Online was released we only had the Empire and Chaos factions' capital cities. We were promised that the others (High Elf, Dark Elf, Dwarf, Greenskin) would be released later on.
gigasnail wrote: i think that's a lot of people's issue here. this is not a $100mil game, and until GW starts putting the license out to groups with that kind of budget, we're going to get...less than stellar results.
maybe warhammer:total war being a hit (at least from what i've heard, moving 500k units isn't anything to sneeze at) will get them to rethink their strategy.
for what it's worth, i've been following EC since the start and while there's a lot i do like, there's tons i don't also. i'm not interested in a lobby shooter. i'll be glad to change my tune if it turns into something better, but right now, it's nothing i'm throwing any money at.
It's not that GW is not handing out licences to AAA studios, they'd be happy to take the cash
it's that those studios aren't interested in getting a Warhammer licence in the main (and whenever a larger studio has worked with such a licence the games haven't been a huge success with the exception of DoW which is going to confirm the studios view that Warhammer is not a big enough thing to bother making a licenced game for when they can make up their own IP)
I've yet to pull the trigger to enter testing, mostly because I've got Overwatch occupying me right now. Though from the footage I've seen so far (been following a lot of stuff on the Youtubes) the game is coming along.
it's not beautiful, mind you. Then again, I don't expect it to be. Not yet anyway. Heard some mechanics need fine tuning, but that's exactly what the alpha is FOR. I'm keeping one eye on this big time, because it looks to have some massive potential...and I want to play Orks SO bad. I want to be able to be a Meganob for once and hack people apart! Or be a screeching Stormboy or a maniacal Burna Boy...the fun that can be had here...it's intoxicating.
Technically the Free to Waagh has be indefinitely suspended. As in it may not be included at Release.
Truly I believe it would be incredibly stupid for them to never implement such a system (it would be so easy to do so) so I do not think it will never happen. This is, of course, pure speculation.
Remember, when Warhammer Online was released we only had the Empire and Chaos factions' capital cities. We were promised that the others (High Elf, Dark Elf, Dwarf, Greenskin) would be released later on.
When the game finally died a few years later...
Guess what?
We never did get to see those Capitals.
That is just one instance... How does it apply to EC? Completely different company and scenario. You can almost apply that rhetoric to any game.
Hey remember when Final Liberation was released and we could only play Imperials and Orks. We were promised we'd get to play Tyranids, Chaos, and Eldar in Multiplayer. When the game finally died, guess what? We never did get to play them in multiplayer.
Hey remember when PlanetSide 2 and PlanetSide 1 didn't exist and their precursor Infantry Online had a subscription model to ensure high quality game-play and servers. When that failed and the game went Free to Play we were promised by Sony Online Entertainment that the servers would stay up, guess what? They shut them down.
Do you realize that Warhammer Online had 800,000 subscribers at one point. Thats $10 million in income per Month. Mythic is a AAA developer. Their business plan is a completely different model. If they lose a bunch of Subscribers, the game is no longer profitable and thus dead, turn off the servers. EC (And Behavior) doesn't have any Subscribers, and has only gotten about $4 million in income total. They designed their business plan to not need subscriptions to operate, and operate for several years. They require a much more streamlined data structure for their servers to function at lower costs so the design of the game much be ultra streamlined as well, and maybe won't have as much fluff as a AAA title would. Once again they reduced the contents of their game because of server cost. They couldn't operate a full open world without having a $10 million a month income to run all the servers. They continue to attempt to develop/find a server architecture that will allow a smaller profit game to function in that capacity.
I seriously do not understand your doom and gloom stance. You have no idea of the big picture here. All games are not made the same. All developers do not have the same assets. If more people Founded the game maybe they'd have a $10 mil income. Maybe if they used a Subscription model they could make a better game, but clearly Warhammer Online used a Subscription model and died. Why would they want to follow those footsteps? Thus a different business model.
I'll say it again: After the PicoServers failed, they designed EC from the ground up to run for Years with reduced income.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
gigasnail wrote: i think that's a lot of people's issue here. this is not a $100mil game, and until GW starts putting the license out to groups with that kind of budget, we're going to get...less than stellar results.
maybe warhammer:total war being a hit (at least from what i've heard, moving 500k units isn't anything to sneeze at) will get them to rethink their strategy.
for what it's worth, i've been following EC since the start and while there's a lot i do like, there's tons i don't also. i'm not interested in a lobby shooter. i'll be glad to change my tune if it turns into something better, but right now, it's nothing i'm throwing any money at.
Yeah, Warhammer Online made way more money than that but still failed. See previous post ^^.
i have zero sympathy for mythic. i played the hell out of WAR and they did that mess to themselves. they over promised, were not able to deliver, and it bled subs from day 1.
they never made AAA games. DAoC (while it had a rabid fanbase) was not anywhere close to a AAA title.
I do not understand why you say the graphics are so terrible. Can you elaborate? If you look at the streams they are very very similar to SM.
Btw I own Space Marine for both PS3 and PC and am level 41 in both.
As do I, I also have it on X360.
My opinion is that it looks akin to the Ultramarine film rather than Space Marine. Space Marine is somewhat grittier and looks more 40k. EC looks more like a cartoon version of it. DMO looked more cartoony but Vigil pulled it off better as that is their style. The animations in Space Marine, to me, seem more fluid and how I believe a Space Marine would move. EC seems very awkward, one of the running animations particularly looks pretty odd.
At the end of the day if the game is good then I can get past these things. But after having seen what DMO looked to promise and what EC looks to have, EC is not making me excited any more. I was at the start and was impressed by bE and their attitude towards the game and their communications to the fans, which I still am. But the game is lacking to me. I will still be buying the game because it's 40k, but I am not expecting too much.
gigasnail wrote: i have zero sympathy for mythic. i played the hell out of WAR and they did that mess to themselves. they over promised, were not able to deliver, and it bled subs from day 1.
they never made AAA games. DAoC (while it had a rabid fanbase) was not anywhere close to a AAA title.
+$10 million / month Income is not AAA? As in $120 million per year? Even after they lost half their subs and were at $5 mil and $60 mil... What exactly is your definition of AAA then? AA then? Whatever you want to call it, it was significantly successful.
Truth be told, I never played the full game, just the intro Arena battle thing at the start, and only for a couple of weeks.
I do not understand why you say the graphics are so terrible. Can you elaborate? If you look at the streams they are very very similar to SM.
Btw I own Space Marine for both PS3 and PC and am level 41 in both.
As do I, I also have it on X360.
My opinion is that it looks akin to the Ultramarine film rather than Space Marine. Space Marine is somewhat grittier and looks more 40k. EC looks more like a cartoon version of it. DMO looked more cartoony but Vigil pulled it off better as that is their style. The animations in Space Marine, to me, seem more fluid and how I believe a Space Marine would move. EC seems very awkward, one of the running animations particularly looks pretty odd.
At the end of the day if the game is good then I can get past these things. But after having seen what DMO looked to promise and what EC looks to have, EC is not making me excited any more. I was at the start and was impressed by bE and their attitude towards the game and their communications to the fans, which I still am. But the game is lacking to me. I will still be buying the game because it's 40k, but I am not expecting too much.
Ok, so if you are talking about the Character models, currently all the ones in EC are "naked", as in, they do not have any of the Armor customization that will be added later. All the marks, skulls, purity seals, scrolls and battle damage decals will bring the characters to life.
The animations in DMO were horribly plastic looking. I still remember being super excited about that game though.
Automatically Appended Next Post: To be fair, I do not think EC is going to be a Magic Carpet ride to 40k euphoria and dead babies due to addiction. But I don't think its going to be a steamy pile of sh*t like some people in this thread are saying either.
While it is true that all that glitters in not gold, also it is true that all that is dark and misshapen is not sh*t.
I understand that the team is developing every part of the game at the same time, and I understand that everything has not been implemented yet. But it feels to me that the core gameplay remains flawed. (According to the Livestreams anyways)
Currently, it seems you have modeled the engine to closely match the Space Marine game, and the end goal design seems to be something similar to Planetside. I sincerely hope this is not the case. I seriously doubt that it will make the fans happy to have a Wahammer 40k skined Planetside...
I would like to see the main combat, especially close combat, to be so much more, something a mix of Dark Souls, Jedi Knight 2, and Tera. I still haven't played a game that has a perfect combat system, but elements of those three could coelesce into something magnificent.
I have high high hopes for this game. Please do not make it a forgettable waste.
did you miss the part about the games being expected to actually work? because WAR didn't actually work. the first kill of the chaos final boss was by a chaos player, because they made the damn thing able to be targeted by friendlies when it was just chilling in its throne room. dude dot/kited it to death. the endgame was completely non-functional for about 9 months after it was introduced. i actually played this game for more than an hour or two. it had a *lot* of mechanics problems.
also, their sales figures were inflated due to people pre-ordering for the mini it came with. they talked about it during one of the producer letters, and that it caused a huge over estimate in the number of players they were going to have.
tl;dr the game was bad, which was sad because it had a lot of potential. it was pretty far from a AAA title in quality, regardless of how many people pre-ordered it.
"A AAA game, or pronounced "triple-A game", is generally a title developed by a large studio, funded by a massive budget.
These games will have a marketing budget in the multiple-millions of dollars, and are planned to earn out in excess of one million titles sold. Investors/publishers expect a multiple-of-cost return on their investment. In order to recoup general development costs, publishers will generally produce the title for the major platforms (currently Xbox 360, PS3, and PC) to maximize profits, unless it is a console exclusive, in which case the console maker will pay for exclusivity to offset the loss of potential profit to the developer."
Nothing there mentions the games "being expected to work" or that it even has to be good. Purely that it is produced by a large studio and funded by a massive budget.
AAA games can be buggy as hell or in general terrible. Attacking the game for being flawed is pretty accurate, but not sure if you can remove a AAA tag for just being incomplete or not working as intended.
Gimme some evidence that the studio who created it was small or that it had a very small budget and that would easily change my mind that it isn't a AAA title like ou are arguing for.
Ok, so if you are talking about the Character models, currently all the ones in EC are "naked", as in, they do not have any of the Armor customization that will be added later. All the marks, skulls, purity seals, scrolls and battle damage decals will bring the characters to life.
The animations in DMO were horribly plastic looking. I still remember being super excited about that game though.
In some regards, yes. But from that video of yours EC has come a long way and improved from what I last saw. A lot of things look much better, others haven't changed much, but may do later on. It still doesn't grab me by the balls and say buy me though.
Maybe I am just afraid that it's going to turn out like the other games of its ilk and i'm not getting too much into it. If it is a bad game, I won't be so disappointed.
Vain wrote: "A AAA game, or pronounced "triple-A game", is generally a title developed by a large studio, funded by a massive budget.
These games will have a marketing budget in the multiple-millions of dollars, and are planned to earn out in excess of one million titles sold. Investors/publishers expect a multiple-of-cost return on their investment. In order to recoup general development costs, publishers will generally produce the title for the major platforms (currently Xbox 360, PS3, and PC) to maximize profits, unless it is a console exclusive, in which case the console maker will pay for exclusivity to offset the loss of potential profit to the developer."
Nothing there mentions the games "being expected to work" or that it even has to be good. Purely that it is produced by a large studio and funded by a massive budget.
AAA games can be buggy as hell or in general terrible. Attacking the game for being flawed is pretty accurate, but not sure if you can remove a AAA tag for just being incomplete or not working as intended.
Gimme some evidence that the studio who created it was small or that it had a very small budget and that would easily change my mind that it isn't a AAA title like ou are arguing for.
Exactly if that were the case EA, Ubisoft and Bethesda would never have made a AAA game
gigasnail wrote: did you miss the part about the games being expected to actually work? because WAR didn't actually work. the first kill of the chaos final boss was by a chaos player, because they made the damn thing able to be targeted by friendlies when it was just chilling in its throne room. dude dot/kited it to death. the endgame was completely non-functional for about 9 months after it was introduced. i actually played this game for more than an hour or two. it had a *lot* of mechanics problems.
also, their sales figures were inflated due to people pre-ordering for the mini it came with. they talked about it during one of the producer letters, and that it caused a huge over estimate in the number of players they were going to have.
tl;dr the game was bad, which was sad because it had a lot of potential. it was pretty far from a AAA title in quality, regardless of how many people pre-ordered it.
I invite you to look at the broken launches of: Tony Hawk Pro Skater 5, the newest Sim City, the original Final Fantasy 14, Dead Island, Assassin's Creed Unity, Diablo 3, Batman: Arkham Knight (for PC), Metal Gear Solid 5: The Phantom Pain, etc, etc, etc
Ok, so if you are talking about the Character models, currently all the ones in EC are "naked", as in, they do not have any of the Armor customization that will be added later. All the marks, skulls, purity seals, scrolls and battle damage decals will bring the characters to life.
The animations in DMO were horribly plastic looking. I still remember being super excited about that game though.
In some regards, yes. But from that video of yours EC has come a long way and improved from what I last saw. A lot of things look much better, others haven't changed much, but may do later on. It still doesn't grab me by the balls and say buy me though.
Maybe I am just afraid that it's going to turn out like the other games of its ilk and i'm not getting too much into it. If it is a bad game, I won't be so disappointed.
Sure sure. They are adding content to the founder's server almost every day now. Unfortunately I cannot show you all that, it is under NDA. They polish it up before shipping it to the Live Servers and everything is accelerating very quickly right now.
The developers still do Live Streams every Friday. This week they talked again about the Open World. As I said before, it may be a couple years down the road: https://youtu.be/-mLWj7c0r0s?t=1431
I understand that this is classified as a MMORPG of sorts - but aside from the multi-factional combat based on a level up system (that can be bypassed via a credit card apparently), where are the RPG aspects of this game again?
Also, to echo concerns voiced by a few others, it's telling that the first thing the company did after they released very, very early gameplay videos and dev vlogs was to setup pre-order options. Yes, I get it's their job to make money, they're not gaming philanthropists - but as a gamer having experienced this kind of design before, I gotta say, it doesn't instill a lot of confidence.
It also doesn't help that most of the design team just up and left during the initial phase of creation.
But hey, it could be that it turns out to be a pretty awesome game and prove every one of my fears to be baseless. I don't believe that will happen, but *shrug* I suppose I can't complain too much - seeing the universe I love so much get some digital exposure is a good thing, I guess.
Frankenberry wrote: I understand that this is classified as a MMORPG of sorts - but aside from the multi-factional combat based on a level up system (that can be bypassed via a credit card apparently), where are the RPG aspects of this game again?
Also, to echo concerns voiced by a few others, it's telling that the first thing the company did after they released very, very early gameplay videos and dev vlogs was to setup pre-order options. Yes, I get it's their job to make money, they're not gaming philanthropists - but as a gamer having experienced this kind of design before, I gotta say, it doesn't instill a lot of confidence.
It also doesn't help that most of the design team just up and left during the initial phase of creation.
But hey, it could be that it turns out to be a pretty awesome game and prove every one of my fears to be baseless. I don't believe that will happen, but *shrug* I suppose I can't complain too much - seeing the universe I love so much get some digital exposure is a good thing, I guess.
As far as I know, there is no way to bypass the level up system, however they are introducing this system to the live server next week, so we will see more info on that. I do not understand your statement, can you elaborate? As an FYI, when you buy the Rogue Trader items for real cash, you still need to unlock the base weapon/elite in game using the progression system. Buying items and stuff in the cash shop is primarily cosmetic and side grade effectively. As in my previous example, the Relic Shuriken Catapult is bestowed by Asuryan to have flame-laced projectiles, and thus deal more damage to lighter armored troops, but lose armor pen. It is a weapon that looks cool and has unique graphics, but its DPS power is similar to other weaponry in its class. There will also later be "drops" of weapons and wargear from playing matches (and later doing world-based objectives / war council efforts) and for killing PVE Tyranid Lair instances and Hive instances (Wave mode and Raid mode respectively)
RPG elements are relatively minor to the shooter aspects and include, but are not limited to:
- "Deep" progression system: Unlocks use of weapons and wargear, as well as elites and heroes. (Very similar to PlanetSide 2)
- Itemization and customization: Players will be created with basic versions of Weapons bases and Wargear, and will be rewarded additional Weapons bases, Wargear, Armor Visual Customizations (decal and model based), Weapon mods (actual stat mods) and other trinkets and mechanic based items. (Also similar to PlanetSide 2, but also reminiscent of Space Marine's full armor customization)
- Sub-faction specific classes, wargear, weapons, elites, heroes, etc. (example - A Blood Angel with "every item in the game" will have a different item list than a Dark Angel with "every item in the game")
- Team-based stat bonuses and rewards, as well as general game focus. The lone wolves don't fare the best unless they are particularly skilled.
- World map based objectives and node war, as well as Faction based player run War Councils. (I think the War Councils are still a thing, been a while since this has been talked about)
- PVE elements, including a type of Raid instance with bosses called Hives as well as quicker and easier wave-based instances called Lairs.
- If you REALLY want to Role-Play, there are RP guilds.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Frankenberry wrote: It also doesn't help that most of the design team just up and left during the initial phase of creation.
I believe this was because of the whole failed Pikko Server thing. All of their architecture was basically worthless at that point and they brought in virtually a whole new design team. See my two posts about this above. ^^
Frankenberry wrote: I understand that this is classified as a MMORPG of sorts - but aside from the multi-factional combat based on a level up system (that can be bypassed via a credit card apparently), where are the RPG aspects of this game again?
Also, to echo concerns voiced by a few others, it's telling that the first thing the company did after they released very, very early gameplay videos and dev vlogs was to setup pre-order options. Yes, I get it's their job to make money, they're not gaming philanthropists - but as a gamer having experienced this kind of design before, I gotta say, it doesn't instill a lot of confidence.
It also doesn't help that most of the design team just up and left during the initial phase of creation.
But hey, it could be that it turns out to be a pretty awesome game and prove every one of my fears to be baseless. I don't believe that will happen, but *shrug* I suppose I can't complain too much - seeing the universe I love so much get some digital exposure is a good thing, I guess.
As far as I know, there is no way to bypass the level up system, however they are introducing this system to the live server next week, so we will see more info on that. I do not understand your statement, can you elaborate? As an FYI, when you buy the Rogue Trader items for real cash, you still need to unlock the base weapon/elite in game using the progression system. Buying items and stuff in the cash shop is primarily cosmetic and side grade effectively. As in my previous example, the Relic Shuriken Catapult is bestowed by Asuryan to have flame-laced projectiles, and thus deal more damage to lighter armored troops, but lose armor pen. It is a weapon that looks cool and has unique graphics, but its DPS power is similar to other weaponry in its class. There will also later be "drops" of weapons and wargear from playing matches (and later doing world-based objectives / war council efforts) and for killing PVE Tyranid Lair instances and Hive instances (Wave mode and Raid mode respectively)
RPG elements are relatively minor to the shooter aspects and include, but are not limited to:
- "Deep" progression system: Unlocks use of weapons and wargear, as well as elites and heroes. (Very similar to PlanetSide 2)
- Itemization and customization: Players will be created with basic versions of Weapons bases and Wargear, and will be rewarded additional Weapons bases, Wargear, Armor Visual Customizations (decal and model based), Weapon mods (actual stat mods) and other trinkets and mechanic based items. (Also similar to PlanetSide 2, but also reminiscent of Space Marine's full armor customization)
- Sub-faction specific classes, wargear, weapons, elites, heroes, etc. (example - A Blood Angel with "every item in the game" will have a different item list than a Dark Angel with "every item in the game")
- Team-based stat bonuses and rewards, as well as general game focus. The lone wolves don't fare the best unless they are particularly skilled.
- World map based objectives and node war, as well as Faction based player run War Councils. (I think the War Councils are still a thing, been a while since this has been talked about)
- PVE elements, including a type of Raid instance with bosses called Hives as well as quicker and easier wave-based instances called Lairs.
- If you REALLY want to Role-Play, there are RP guilds.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Frankenberry wrote: It also doesn't help that most of the design team just up and left during the initial phase of creation.
I believe this was because of the whole failed Pikko Server thing. All of their architecture was basically worthless at that point and they brought in virtually a whole new design team. See my two posts about this above. ^^
I appreciate the reply to each of my points - it was illuminating (I genuinely mean that, I didn't realize there had been so many updates).
I guess, when I think about it, they never promised a 'RPG' of any kind - even the early, early stuff was very third-person action oriented with some story elements. Maybe I'd just looked at the whole thing WISHING it was more like an MMORPG instead of an action game /shrug.
Either way, I'm probably going to avoid it - doesn't seem like my cup of tea.
Frankenberry wrote: I understand that this is classified as a MMORPG of sorts - but aside from the multi-factional combat based on a level up system (that can be bypassed via a credit card apparently), where are the RPG aspects of this game again?
Also, to echo concerns voiced by a few others, it's telling that the first thing the company did after they released very, very early gameplay videos and dev vlogs was to setup pre-order options. Yes, I get it's their job to make money, they're not gaming philanthropists - but as a gamer having experienced this kind of design before, I gotta say, it doesn't instill a lot of confidence.
It also doesn't help that most of the design team just up and left during the initial phase of creation.
But hey, it could be that it turns out to be a pretty awesome game and prove every one of my fears to be baseless. I don't believe that will happen, but *shrug* I suppose I can't complain too much - seeing the universe I love so much get some digital exposure is a good thing, I guess.
As far as I know, there is no way to bypass the level up system, however they are introducing this system to the live server next week, so we will see more info on that. I do not understand your statement, can you elaborate? As an FYI, when you buy the Rogue Trader items for real cash, you still need to unlock the base weapon/elite in game using the progression system. Buying items and stuff in the cash shop is primarily cosmetic and side grade effectively. As in my previous example, the Relic Shuriken Catapult is bestowed by Asuryan to have flame-laced projectiles, and thus deal more damage to lighter armored troops, but lose armor pen. It is a weapon that looks cool and has unique graphics, but its DPS power is similar to other weaponry in its class. There will also later be "drops" of weapons and wargear from playing matches (and later doing world-based objectives / war council efforts) and for killing PVE Tyranid Lair instances and Hive instances (Wave mode and Raid mode respectively)
RPG elements are relatively minor to the shooter aspects and include, but are not limited to:
- "Deep" progression system: Unlocks use of weapons and wargear, as well as elites and heroes. (Very similar to PlanetSide 2)
- Itemization and customization: Players will be created with basic versions of Weapons bases and Wargear, and will be rewarded additional Weapons bases, Wargear, Armor Visual Customizations (decal and model based), Weapon mods (actual stat mods) and other trinkets and mechanic based items. (Also similar to PlanetSide 2, but also reminiscent of Space Marine's full armor customization)
- Sub-faction specific classes, wargear, weapons, elites, heroes, etc. (example - A Blood Angel with "every item in the game" will have a different item list than a Dark Angel with "every item in the game")
- Team-based stat bonuses and rewards, as well as general game focus. The lone wolves don't fare the best unless they are particularly skilled.
- World map based objectives and node war, as well as Faction based player run War Councils. (I think the War Councils are still a thing, been a while since this has been talked about)
- PVE elements, including a type of Raid instance with bosses called Hives as well as quicker and easier wave-based instances called Lairs.
- If you REALLY want to Role-Play, there are RP guilds.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Frankenberry wrote: It also doesn't help that most of the design team just up and left during the initial phase of creation.
I believe this was because of the whole failed Pikko Server thing. All of their architecture was basically worthless at that point and they brought in virtually a whole new design team. See my two posts about this above. ^^
I appreciate the reply to each of my points - it was illuminating (I genuinely mean that, I didn't realize there had been so many updates).
I guess, when I think about it, they never promised a 'RPG' of any kind - even the early, early stuff was very third-person action oriented with some story elements. Maybe I'd just looked at the whole thing WISHING it was more like an MMORPG instead of an action game /shrug.
Either way, I'm probably going to avoid it - doesn't seem like my cup of tea.
He has begun deleting my posts, blocked my ability to post to his review, refusing to discuss things, and along with Strajder accusing me of bullying and harassing, when I am simply trying to respond and discuss their points.
Certainly I don't always come across as sunshine and lollipops, but I am hardly browbeating here...
Why are these people trying to destroy the game? I know not... Perhaps its people making money? Perhaps they love another game and don't want EC stealing the thunder? Maybe they are hackers from Space Marine trying to stop people from switching over?
Automatically Appended Next Post: There is also this quick in-game engine trailer posted today: https://youtu.be/nitWhOp1pgE
Will it have special snowflake angsty teen civvies-turned-warriors coming of age , characters with weird hair/eye colors, and plenty of Japanese melodrama?
Will it have special snowflake angsty teen civvies-turned-warriors coming of age , characters with weird hair/eye colors, and plenty of Japanese melodrama?
Will it have special snowflake angsty teen civvies-turned-warriors coming of age , characters with weird hair/eye colors, and plenty of Japanese melodrama?
I believe it was mentioned in the thread that the tau won't be available at launch but are in the next round of races to be developed. Unless you were talking about Space Wolves instead...
Heads up for those interested, got the email yesterday that the Eldar are hitting servers as playable this week. Seems like it will be dire avengers, screaming banshee, and striking scorpions are visible in the gamplay footage trailer just google "Eternal crusade eldar trailer".
Ir0njack wrote: Heads up for those interested, got the email yesterday that the Eldar are hitting servers as playable this week. Seems like it will be dire avengers, screaming banshee, and striking scorpions are visible in the gamplay footage trailer just google "Eternal crusade eldar trailer".
Yep, Eldar playable on Live servers with 5 of their 7 proposed classes. Not 100% done, still needs a bit of work, but very promising. Also most of them only have one loadout choice, unlike the Loyalists and Chaos which have quite a bit of Wargear.
Can play as Warlock, Dire Avenger, Striking Scorpion, Dark Reaper, and Fire Dragon. To come are Howling Banshees and Swooping Hawks, as well as Exarchs and other Elites. No Guardians will be played. Rangers will be an Elite spawn (with a cooldown). Wraithguard are meant to be in the first free expansion probably round Christmas this year.
I played last night with members of two other Eldar guilds last night and recorded it. And before you ask, no i do not monetize my videos:
I guess I'm in the camp of it doesn't need to look super amazing to be a good/fun game. I've been doing my best to follow along with the updates and checking Youtube videos to see how things are coming along. My excitement will hit more once they announce work on the Orks, as they are the faction I'm most interested in at the moment.
Also, really hope they can sort out the balance between shooting and close combat...seems not even a video game can find a true balance between the mechanics :p
There is also an ingame eldar launch trailer up on ign's youtube feed this morning. I can't link atm but a simple search should find it. I'm not sure why the Derp Marines just continued to stand out in the open during the ambush.
My friends and I have been very interested in picking up this game. Our main conern is paying $40 for an alpha game, which is still having issues. Though I do admit that we've been playing Ark for months, which has been in beta for quite some time. I'm also concerned by the fact that there are alreasy micro transactions in an alpha game. I know some of you have mentioned that they are either cosmetic or negligible at the moment, but the fact that the micro transactions exist worries me that the game won't progress past alpha.
warboss wrote: There is also an ingame eldar launch trailer up on ign's youtube feed this morning. I can't link atm but a simple search should find it. I'm not sure why the Derp Marines just continued to stand out in the open during the ambush.
Its funny, I dunno what those models and weapon effects are or where they came from, they are nothing like whats in the game now.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
l0k1 wrote: My friends and I have been very interested in picking up this game. Our main conern is paying $40 for an alpha game, which is still having issues. Though I do admit that we've been playing Ark for months, which has been in beta for quite some time. I'm also concerned by the fact that there are alreasy micro transactions in an alpha game. I know some of you have mentioned that they are either cosmetic or negligible at the moment, but the fact that the micro transactions exist worries me that the game won't progress past alpha.
Could you be more specific on what issues you are speaking about?
Is it anything I addressed already in this Thread?:
FYI, the "Micro transactions" have been in the game since the very beginning. Founders received Rogue Trader points based on their purchase level and can use these to buy Relic weapons, Armor customization and Elites. Suspected additions to this list will be Weapon Mods and other Wargear.
Everything purchased is a "side-grade" to existing earn-able in-game equivalents. There is no pay to win. They call it "Pay to look cool".
One last edit:
I have already explained that they re-designed the game from the ground up December 2014 to meet the budget they had at that point to develop the game to release and through several expansion packs (which are included in that same $40 price tag, no additional cost). So... there is absolutely no fear it will die in Alpha. Unless you have any inside information that says otherwise? If so I'd like to know too.
The backer looks to be cramming a hard 2016 release date down the devs throats. From playing this it needs a year of polish if it has any chance of grabbing and keeping attention. If it launches this year it will be another publisher induced suicide.
Orock wrote: The backer looks to be cramming a hard 2016 release date down the devs throats. From playing this it needs a year of polish if it has any chance of grabbing and keeping attention. If it launches this year it will be another publisher induced suicide.
By "The backer" do you mean me? All of them? Someone else? The Devs have had a Summer 2016 release date since December of 2014. At that point they had re-designed their entire game to fit into the budget and technology available to them, plus going forward into several free expansions included in that $40 price tag for free. There is no conjecture or speculation here. It is as designed. Certainly it may run behind schedule, but no, it does not need "a year of polish". No game ever needs "a year of polish". Beta tests usually only last a few weeks to maybe a couple months. In/just before this period is when final optimizations, graphics finalization, and balance is achieved. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Video_game_development#Beta The game, as it is, is currently in Alpha/Pre-Alpha. There is often lots of different terminology and definitions describing these things, but it is generally agreed upon that final polishing is done after all the features and content have been added, and those certainly aren't all in.
I say to you, the same thing I say to everyone who thinks it is so far away from being done: They do not show us everything. It is self-evident. They had told us they sculpted the entire continent before the "shattering of dreams" when they cut back the game design because the Pikko servers failed. They had animated Ork models in the 2014 Trailer... Seriously... Everything has to pass QA (Quality Assurance) testing before we see it in game. Even us Founder's don't see everything in our NDA server. It has to pass several quality gates plus Games Workshop has to OK it before it goes public: https://youtu.be/CoChz8NGbmk?t=710
What I think your biggest problem is that you want it to be the game it will likely never be. I hold no illusions, there is not enough of a market share to make a WoW sized 40k game. Or even a PlanetSide sized 40k game. Or even a Warhammer Online: Age of Reckoning sized 40k game. They have to deal with a smaller budget, which means a smaller game. This however, is not a reflection on the company making the game. Behaviour has a reported yearly income of $50-$100 million a year. EC has only drawn roughly $4-$5 million. Warhammer Online: Age of Reckoning peaked at over $100 million monthly revenue from Subscriptions.
Is it going to stay an arena shooter? I highly doubt it. Once they do final passes on everything, and actually set up all the servers instead of the early access test server, they should be able to have much larger battles. This is conjecture of course. Even if it stays Lobby-based with larger battles, with all of the weapons and classes and VEHICLES available, its WAYYY better than THQ's Space Marine.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
OgreChubbs wrote: So is this on a real system or just the crapbox 1? Oh nvm found the ps4 version yay it is buyable
Orock wrote: The backer looks to be cramming a hard 2016 release date down the devs throats. From playing this it needs a year of polish if it has any chance of grabbing and keeping attention. If it launches this year it will be another publisher induced suicide.
By "The backer" do you mean me? All of them? Someone else? The Devs have had a Summer 2016 release date since December of 2014.
By "the backer", I believe he means the publisher (see the sentence later on). Publishers control the money and devs need to ask them for permission to delay projects if they don't want the money simply to stop rolling in before release. Sometimes devs simply say "you've had enough time/delays/cost overruns" and say the release date stands regardless of the quality of the finished product. I have no idea if this is the case with this game but it's a frequent occurence in the game industry.
JusticarGames wrote: Please scrap this pile of garbage and make a new Warhammer Online: Age of Reckoning.
If they used everything they develop for this and build WHO:AoR alongside, it could work both ways.
Except that they're apparently very tight on their budget and porting over to a different setting requires starting from scratch on literally every art asset and most gameplay mechanics on top of the added cost of licensing the other universe. You know... most of the work and a ton of added cost for a company that is scrambling to finish a scaled down small part of what it planned. It's naive to think that they can just port it over willy nilly like you're implying or that this game somehow creates a binary state excluding having a WO:AOR style game in the modern GW licensing scheme. This is what we have from this company. It's not realistic to expect a giant change of style, gameplay, or content for the better/more expensive this late in the development.
It will probably be a good third person shooter eventually, it looks decent and plays well for what it is, I was in on it from the start.
It was far too overambitious right from the beginning, some of the features that were suggested, combined with the massive seamless map a la planetside 2, were never realistic concepts in this day and age, with this budget.
I might be tempted to get involved if they ever do get past the lobby shooter game it currently is but I will not hold my breath.
Im sure plenty of people will enjoy it, I would have if I were twenty years younger !!
Not every game gets the "do over" year that Destiny got to turn from a very polished yet below average game to one that is better. In fact, almost none do. This dev doesn't have the rabid millions fanbase nor the millions of dollars it takes to tide them over in the meantime. I think it'll be released unfinished with a very limited scope and the mid sized playerbase that buys in simply due to the brand recognition will shrink rapidly to nothing sustainable. YMMV.
JusticarGames wrote: Please scrap this pile of garbage and make a new Warhammer Online: Age of Reckoning.
If they used everything they develop for this and build WHO:AoR alongside, it could work both ways.
Except that they're apparently very tight on their budget and porting over to a different setting requires starting from scratch on literally every art asset and most gameplay mechanics on top of the added cost of licensing the other universe. You know... most of the work and a ton of added cost for a company that is scrambling to finish a scaled down small part of what it planned. It's naive to think that they can just port it over willy nilly like you're implying or that this game somehow creates a binary state excluding having a WO:AOR style game in the modern GW licensing scheme. This is what we have from this company.
This isn't technically true. While some fully implemented assets like meshes, animations or materials may need to be re-done, raw models and such (since they are really just vertex data) are surely and fairly easily adaptable to the new engine. Gameplay mechanics... not at all. Everything is coded modular these days, and the graphics or netcode engines can be swapped out individually without needing to adjust anything else in the game's code. So far they swapped out both of these, the netcode they were going to use didn't work so (I think) they started developing their own, and the Graphics engine (I am unsure what the original one was) switched to Unreal Engine 4 (or possibly was always UE4).
It's not realistic to expect a giant change of style, gameplay, or content for the better/more expensive this late in the development.
Edit: Correct for the style and gameplay. They have already talked about a "content-splosion" coming. Soooo wrong there? We will see.
jreilly89 wrote:When's the release date on this? Fall?
This Summer. Maybe September (still technically summer... lol)
Very possibly delayed.
Rayvon wrote:It will probably be a good third person shooter eventually, it looks decent and plays well for what it is, I was in on it from the start.
It was far too overambitious right from the beginning, some of the features that were suggested, combined with the massive seamless map a la planetside 2, were never realistic concepts in this day and age, with this budget.
I might be tempted to get involved if they ever do get past the lobby shooter game it currently is but I will not hold my breath.
Im sure plenty of people will enjoy it, I would have if I were twenty years younger !!
PlanetSide 2 (and 1) did not require a massive budget, it works on a peer to peer model for server calculations rather than a heavier client to server architecture, but is flawed because of this. I explained this earlier in this thread. (Hacking and Latency issues)
They thought they could do it on a smaller budget but keep players safe from hackers and latency issues using the Pikko Servers design. This failed so they are using a new design. Making the Netcode this way is a conscious decision of the design team to make a better game, rather than a bigger game. It is certainly possible to stay as a "lobby shooter" but with those lobbies being a fortress, a refinery, and a power plant all together in a fairly large segment of the continent map, and each faction able to have 300+ troops active in the region at a time. But yes, it will still be a "lobby" because its not "open world". The actual achievable player counts and map sizes is conjectural, and we will see. (They already have two servers working in Tandem, in an attempt to avoid regional lockouts but keep latency to a minimum)
I fail to see how this is such a dealbreaker for you... Regardless, I understand this is a dealbreaker. Just trying to get the facts straight.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
warboss wrote: Not every game gets the "do over" year that Destiny got to turn from a very polished yet below average game to one that is better. In fact, almost none do. This dev doesn't have the rabid millions fanbase nor the millions of dollars it takes to tide them over in the meantime. I think it'll be released unfinished with a very limited scope and the mid sized playerbase that buys in simply due to the brand recognition will shrink rapidly to nothing sustainable. YMMV.
So, you think the Infographic that they just added a couple months ago (knowing full well everything that is planned to happen, including budgeting) is a complete lie? That is a bold statement.
This graphic says that at release the game will have: 4 Playable Factions (LSM, CSM, Eldar, Orks), Persistent World Map (Including Player driven Campaigns, territorial conquest, player objectives) [Basically nodes on a map that represent an instanced battle, but the size of the nodes still to be determined], PVP modes, PVE modes (against Tyranids), "1000's" of weapons [mostly skins with slightly different stats], character advancement (skill tree), "1000's" of Armour Augmentations [graphic customization] and Wargear [for minor HP/Armor/Stamina boosts], "100's" of Items [weapon mods like scopes and magazines], 3 vehicles per faction, spawnable Veterans, Heroes and Elites.
Right now LSM have Bolt and Plasma Pistols, Boltguns, Storm Bolters, Stalker Bolters, Plasma Guns, Melta Guns, Heavy Bolters, Lascannons, Plasma Cannons, Multi Melta, Chainswords, Power Swords, Power Mauls, Power Axes, Power Fists, Nartheciums, and Storm Shields. CSM have the same except swap Storm Shield and Narthecium for Autocannon, Force Sword, Force Axe and Chainaxe. These are just base weapon models and there will be other bases plus relics, and then they are moddable.
This is "very limited scope" to you? Or they won't build half that? You realize if they lie we can take legal action right? Not understanding your stance here. They are a big company. The only way they'd get out of making this would be to declare Chapter 11 and that'd feth over a LOT of people, not just take your $40.
Automatically Appended Next Post: I will continue to post updates to my YouTube channel with things as they are added. Check it out if you'd like.
Eh, I think its fun. I also think it'll have more of a draw when the loot system is implemented and everybody can bling up their guns and marines/elves/greenskins.
This is "very limited scope" to you? Or they won't build half that? You realize if they lie we can take legal action right? Not understanding your stance here. They are a big company. The only way they'd get out of making this would be to declare Chapter 11 and that'd feth over a LOT of people, not just take your $40.
I hope that they don't just pay lip service to those features and release a half assed buggy mess of "features" just to check boxes and shove out the door what should be classified as a beta instead as a paid product. Again, I don't have experience with *THIS* game personally but that is my experience with *OTHER* games that change scope/scale/budgets late in the development game and it's a common trend for troubled development games in the industry. You're obviously very passionate about it but frankly I'll wait for whatever final product comes out to make my determination instead of gambling money prior to that given the red flags. If the game ends up getting below average reviews, I'll be glad that I did. If it gets stellar reviews, I can always buy it and miss out on nothing more than an exclusive pretty hat for Astartes Stacy.
Sorry I wrote a big post and then it got deleted and I cant be bothered to write it again.
I was just looking forward to the added tactics that a large seamless, free to roam map brings to the game, it makes timing attacks and defences very important and transporting troops also becomes a large part of the game. It just makes it more realistic for me, i am finally getting a bit bored of the lobby jobs, I have been playing them since unreal !
I dont think too bad of this game, but the parts I was looking forward too are not there is all.
each to his own, I can see why some people would really like it.
jreilly89 wrote: Eh, it looks a little clunky. However, as long as it plays well, I'll be happy
Been playing in the beta, I find it quite fun. Plays alot like the Space Marine game, but with improvements and a more indepth multiplayer. Alot of the "clunky" is the fact like Space marine, is your not moving quite as fast as other shooters since they want you to feel like a 1 ton giant in power armour. Well the animations look good from the 3rd person camera, they can look quite stiff and odd from the world view.
jreilly89 wrote: Eh, it looks a little clunky. However, as long as it plays well, I'll be happy
Been playing in the beta, I find it quite fun. Plays alot like the Space Marine game, but with improvements and a more indepth multiplayer. Alot of the "clunky" is the fact like Space marine, is your not moving quite as fast as other shooters since they want you to feel like a 1 ton giant in power armour. Well the animations look good from the 3rd person camera, they can look quite stiff and odd from the world view.
I'm looking for a better version of the Space Marine game, at least in terms of finding matches lmao
jreilly89 wrote: Eh, it looks a little clunky. However, as long as it plays well, I'll be happy
Been playing in the beta, I find it quite fun. Plays alot like the Space Marine game, but with improvements and a more indepth multiplayer. Alot of the "clunky" is the fact like Space marine, is your not moving quite as fast as other shooters since they want you to feel like a 1 ton giant in power armour. Well the animations look good from the 3rd person camera, they can look quite stiff and odd from the world view.
I'm looking for a better version of the Space Marine game, at least in terms of finding matches lmao
Well your in luck in regards to Eternal Crusade. Larger Games with tanks realy sucked up alot of the old player base.
The patch has caused some player's system performance to decrease and others to increase. Added PVE to Live Server as well as a bunch of Wargear and Relic Weapons, most for Loyalist Space Marines and Chaos, but a tiny sliver for Eldar too. Orks still not ready for Live Server and only on Founder's Server.
I played against the 'Nids on the live server for a while, then fought Chaos for a bit: https://youtu.be/HOkO86gJKXk
Orock wrote: Latest dev interview confirmed killed anything that would change it from being a lobby shooter. Go home, all that is left is battlefield:40k edition.
Bummer, going to remove it from steam then in that case, I knew I should have trusted my instincts that it would never happen.
Orock wrote: Latest dev interview confirmed killed anything that would change it from being a lobby shooter. Go home, all that is left is battlefield:40k edition.
What do you mean? Are you saying that it will only be a lobby shooter and not the MMORPG style thing they were gunning for?
It looks like the foundation for a decent game is there but it lacks polish. Graphically it looks like something from the early-mid 2000s, the animations are clunky and the sound effects are okay but great. I hope they tighten up the animations and give it a graphics overhaul.
Reminds me a lot of BF 1942 in a good way. Graphics have been cleaned up quite a bit and if this can find it's way to Mac I would be delighted to buy.
I did like the feel of BF 1942, too.
I'm hoping this one will turn out to be sort of SpaceMarine++. Still feels like it's in early stages, but they seem to be making some progress - seems like it should be ready for official release by the end of the year. Even if they won't get more than 4 races + Nids going, there's already a ton of room for expansion with those.
The most disappointing thing about this game is it's not even remotely close to the multiplayer experience that Space Marine provided and that it has been reduced to little more than an Unreal Tournament mod.
They'd have been better off buying Space Marine from Sega/Relic and making larger maps.
Nvs wrote: The most disappointing thing about this game is it's not even remotely close to the multiplayer experience that Space Marine provided and that it has been reduced to little more than an Unreal Tournament mod.
They'd have been better off buying Space Marine from Sega/Relic and making larger maps.
How is this anything like a UT mod? It doesn't play a thing like Unreal anything. It plays like Space Marine, but with less responsive controls, more options, and bigger battlefields.
Nvs wrote: The most disappointing thing about this game is it's not even remotely close to the multiplayer experience that Space Marine provided and that it has been reduced to little more than an Unreal Tournament mod.
They'd have been better off buying Space Marine from Sega/Relic and making larger maps.
How is this anything like a UT mod? It doesn't play a thing like Unreal anything. It plays like Space Marine, but with less responsive controls, more options, and bigger battlefields.
Guess I wasn't clear enough. The game has been reduced to little more than a crappy UT mod.
Calling the controls less responsive is an understatement. The game is very clunky, unpolished, and the gameplay is dated. It's a $20 steam game, not a full price multi-platformer.
jreilly89 wrote: Looks fun. Definitely waiting for the review and I'll pick up a used copy
Just an FYI.. that doesn't actually help the developers of the game. I used to buy used games but only when they were generally quite old (1-2 years out) and generally not on the shelves new anymore. I too am waiting for reviews to come in but I'll buy it new if I decide to actually get it to help them out. They're obviously cash strapped and need it (and deserve it if they actually end up doing a good job). If they don't do a good job, no purchase/no income from me. YMMV.
jreilly89 wrote: Looks fun. Definitely waiting for the review and I'll pick up a used copy
Just an FYI.. that doesn't actually help the developers of the game. I used to buy used games but only when they were generally quite old (1-2 years out) and generally not on the shelves new anymore. I too am waiting for reviews to come in but I'll buy it new if I decide to actually get it to help them out. They're obviously cash strapped and need it (and deserve it if they actually end up doing a good job). If they don't do a good job, no purchase/no income from me. YMMV.
So? I know it doesn't actually help the developers, but guess what? I've also been burned on $60 shovelware. If they send out early reviews/have a good track record. I'll pre-order it. See XCOM 2 ON PS4.
Orock wrote: Latest dev interview confirmed killed anything that would change it from being a lobby shooter. Go home, all that is left is battlefield:40k edition.
What do you mean? Are you saying that it will only be a lobby shooter and not the MMORPG style thing they were gunning for?
The newest developer interview, where he leaked info they were obviously hiding and had no intention of releasing this early. Basically the last bit of the promised game that you could say makes it a semi quasi mmo game.
its a lobby shooter. thats all it is. and one without the in built fanbase of call of doody or battlefield.
character ranks: check
better weapons/gear on progression: check
set maps with countdown game clocks: check
and now the last thing, the thing that would have let you pick where you fight an interactive campaign map around the 5 minute mark on the video confirmed not ready for launch at BEST.
There is nothing that sets it apart from a lobby shooter now. Worse, a lobby shooter without a lot of players, and sub standard matchmakers, since they couldnt be bothered to make one, why would they, it was suposed to
be open world.
Orock wrote: There is nothing that sets it apart from a lobby shooter now. Worse, a lobby shooter without a lot of players, and sub standard matchmakers, since they couldn't be bothered to make one, why would they, it was supposed to be open world.
True on that last point.
But, how many open-world MMOFPS are there? I know of Planetside, and Sony had a shedload on money to make that with.
All the others that are anything like it seem to be more MMORPG with guns.
I think they aimed too high with this, and are now paying for it with early investors looking to back out.
I am looking at this as an MMO 40k game, of any kind. If it ends up open-world, all the better, but I'll settle for anything these days.
I don't know why people would even want an open world MMO.. Those are basically destined to fail horribly because they're too expensive to make and aim way too high in terms of content requirements.
If you want a game to stick around, it needs to be more tightly focused. Based on the gameplay vids.. I don't think this game is great either way tho.
jreilly89 wrote: So? I know it doesn't actually help the developers, but guess what? I've also been burned on $60 shovelware. If they send out early reviews/have a good track record. I'll pre-order it. See XCOM 2 ON PS4.
If you wait for reviews to buy, how do you get burned on $60 shovelware? That doesn't make any sense and has no relation on whether to buy used. You either preorder so you can get a shiny new hat bonus and buy it day one new before the reviews hit therefore taking the obvious risk.... or you wait and actually benefit from the utility of the reviews before deciding to buy. Deciding whether to cut out the developer from any profit at all on your purchase so you can save $5.00 is a completely separate decision.
In the end (and to bring the topic back on track), I wouldn't recommend preordering or buying this game prior to the reviews coming in. There are just too many changes in scope and focus along with the bumps along the way to throw that money down sight unseen.
jreilly89 wrote: Looks fun. Definitely waiting for the review and I'll pick up a used copy
Just an FYI.. that doesn't actually help the developers of the game. I used to buy used games but only when they were generally quite old (1-2 years out) and generally not on the shelves new anymore. I too am waiting for reviews to come in but I'll buy it new if I decide to actually get it to help them out. They're obviously cash strapped and need it (and deserve it if they actually end up doing a good job). If they don't do a good job, no purchase/no income from me. YMMV.
You mean.....a gamer who actually understands economics? You are a rare breed my friend. Computer gamers had no one to blame but themselves for almost killing off PC gaming at the turn of the century.
The recent steam reviews aren't exactly brimming with positives. Sounds like a wait and shoot for me. Plus, no Guard. Only minimally interested in Orks or Eldar and not particularly interested in marines for this.
Blacksails wrote: The recent steam reviews aren't exactly brimming with positives. Sounds like a wait and shoot for me. Plus, no Guard. Only minimally interested in Orks or Eldar and not particularly interested in marines for this.
Steam reviews can be misleading at times. They gripe about how the game doesn't run on their junk rig versus any actual critique on the game play. I understand a game not running being frustrating, but that is an inherent problem with computer gaming period: experiences will differ due to one's hardware. I prefer to check console reviews if available as the experience is consistent and if the game has performance issues, it's across the board not from person to person.
Blacksails wrote: The recent steam reviews aren't exactly brimming with positives. Sounds like a wait and shoot for me. Plus, no Guard. Only minimally interested in Orks or Eldar and not particularly interested in marines for this.
I want to say 'I think they could make that work in fluff terms, by making you play as a sentinel or something'.
But then, the game is already pretty butchered in fluff terms so you may as well have your lasgun guys running around matching bolters for DPS (ie, pretty much oneshot) for all I care.
Blacksails wrote: The recent steam reviews aren't exactly brimming with positives. Sounds like a wait and shoot for me. Plus, no Guard. Only minimally interested in Orks or Eldar and not particularly interested in marines for this.
Steam reviews can be misleading at times. They gripe about how the game doesn't run on their junk rig versus any actual critique on the game play. I understand a game not running being frustrating, but that is an inherent problem with computer gaming period: experiences will differ due to one's hardware. I prefer to check console reviews if available as the experience is consistent and if the game has performance issues, it's across the board not from person to person.
Yeah, the reviews I'm reading are not focused on the performance. That much I understand varies, but when the chief complaints are about gameplay and balance, I know it isn't in a good state regardless of the optimization.
Ashiraya wrote:
Blacksails wrote: The recent steam reviews aren't exactly brimming with positives. Sounds like a wait and shoot for me. Plus, no Guard. Only minimally interested in Orks or Eldar and not particularly interested in marines for this.
I want to say 'I think they could make that work in fluff terms, by making you play as a sentinel or something'.
But then, the game is already pretty butchered in fluff terms so you may as well have your lasgun guys running around matching bolters for DPS (ie, pretty much oneshot) for all I care.
Except I wasn't thinking there'd be ordinary Guardsmen running around, the same way the Eldar aren't ordinary Guardians. Nah, the Guard options would be Grenadiers/Stormtroopers. Give them access to the special weapons they have and they'd have equivalent armor/durability to the Eldar with similar firepower. Seeing as I haven't played the game, I can't speak to the specifics of the balancing that'd be required, but I'm positive its doable without butchering the fluff (any more than it allegedly has been).
jreilly89 wrote: So? I know it doesn't actually help the developers, but guess what? I've also been burned on $60 shovelware. If they send out early reviews/have a good track record. I'll pre-order it. See XCOM 2 ON PS4.
If you wait for reviews to buy, how do you get burned on $60 shovelware? That doesn't make any sense and has no relation on whether to buy used. You either preorder so you can get a shiny new hat bonus and buy it day one new before the reviews hit therefore taking the obvious risk.... or you wait and actually benefit from the utility of the reviews before deciding to buy. Deciding whether to cut out the developer from any profit at all on your purchase so you can save $5.00 is a completely separate decision.
In the end (and to bring the topic back on track), I wouldn't recommend preordering or buying this game prior to the reviews coming in. There are just too many changes in scope and focus along with the bumps along the way to throw that money down sight unseen.
Burned, i.e. past tense. Come on, man, keep up. I'm saying I'll either pre-order it if it looks great and I like the company (XCOM 2, Uncharted 4) or I'll wait until it's used and drops $20 in price.
I am not going to entertain discussion about how the pitiful multiplayer of the Space Marine game is good in any way.
A lot of the information on Steam reviews and discussion is lies and exaggerations, I addressed this before. Go to the real forums. Watch YouTube and Twitch streams of Gameplay (and not "is it worth it" streams/threads). Don't listen to what some [MOD EDIT - Language - Alpharius] on the internet says and believe its true, myself included. Think for yourself.
Addendum: Despite the setback, I still believe this is a worthwhile title.
I jumped in last night for the first time in a long time. The game looks WAY better than it did, and has a lot more visual polish. The gameplay itself is still kind of janky though. The time to kill is way too brief, the game doesn't do a good job of putting you near the action or encouraging teamwork, and melee is broken as hell right now. I also tried the PVE game mode where you fight against Tyranids. It was kind of fun (I found a single other player to do it with) but we killed all the Tyranids and it said mission failed so I don't know what's up.
I loved the multiplayer in Space Marine and while this gets some things better (the potential scale of battles, vehicles, and more voice clips during combat) the actual gameplay itself is sorely lacking compared to Space Marine.
I know a lot of people are bummed it's not a MMO anymore, but TBH, I have no idea how a 40k MMO would even work.
I think that a battlefront-type game with 40k characters could work reasonably well.
That being said, I have less than zero faith in behavior interactive (check out their Wikipedia page for a library of their past work and you'll see what I mean). And the more I hear and see of it, the less good it sounds.
I hate to hate on a game before it's even out, but let's just say I'm a whole lot more interested in DOWIII than EC.
Brother SRM wrote: I jumped in last night for the first time in a long time. The game looks WAY better than it did, and has a lot more visual polish. The gameplay itself is still kind of janky though. The time to kill is way too brief, the game doesn't do a good job of putting you near the action or encouraging teamwork, and melee is broken as hell right now. I also tried the PVE game mode where you fight against Tyranids. It was kind of fun (I found a single other player to do it with) but we killed all the Tyranids and it said mission failed so I don't know what's up.
I loved the multiplayer in Space Marine and while this gets some things better (the potential scale of battles, vehicles, and more voice clips during combat) the actual gameplay itself is sorely lacking compared to Space Marine.
The TTK is low right now as they are adding in all the Wargear and Squad Leader bonuses aren't applying properly with the new itemization. This will come back up.
The players who do not work with their team quickly die and do not score well. You get bonuses to your score when near squad mates. No marine can cover everything (melee, anti infantry, anti armor) so you instinctively need help against some opponents. What would you suggest to encourage more teamwork?
Each segment of PVE has a timer, sounds like you hit it.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Kap'n Krump wrote: I know a lot of people are bummed it's not a MMO anymore, but TBH, I have no idea how a 40k MMO would even work.
I think that a battlefront-type game with 40k characters could work reasonably well.
That being said, I have less than zero faith in behavior interactive (check out their Wikipedia page for a library of their past work and you'll see what I mean). And the more I hear and see of it, the less good it sounds.
I hate to hate on a game before it's even out, but let's just say I'm a whole lot more interested in DOWIII than EC.
Those are only the games they have produced themselves. Yes its not stellar, but they have worked on many larger games, go to www.bhvr.com to see a listing of the biggest projects they have contributed to.
Automatically Appended Next Post: Its an MMO after all. Yep. Just like they have been saying. Just not 100% at launch.
Space Marine 1.5 except shittier. Was marketed as an open world MMO. Then battletech style tile maps. Now 30x30 lobbies. Orks not released( on top of being axed for free to play,) Nids are broke as hell. Founders got screwed out of refunds.
No balance at all. Also, still marketted as an MMO even though last I checked a lobby shooter SM clone is not one.
Stay away till several updates post launch. I wish I could get a refund.
As a player of EC I am begging you to stay away, it's bad.
Joyboozer wrote:I'm not sure what your point is, it doesn't play like an MMO now, saying it will later doesn't make this any less disappointing.
It doesn't play like an MMO while in Alpha and that dissapoints you greatly. Got it.
See below
Stormwall wrote:Space Marine 1.5 except shittier. Was marketed as an open world MMO. Then battletech style tile maps. Now 30x30 lobbies. Orks not released( on top of being axed for free to play,) Nids are broke as hell. Founders got screwed out of refunds.
No balance at all. Also, still marketted as an MMO even though last I checked a lobby shooter SM clone is not one.
Stay away till several updates post launch. I wish I could get a refund.
As a player of EC I am begging you to stay away, it's bad.
reiner wrote:I've just finished a multiday argument to get a refund, no dice. I'd rather play Space Marine at this point.
Open World and MMO are not the same.
Take World of Warcraft as an Example. Dungeons, Raids, Battlegrounds and Arenas are all instanced. If you were to take out all the open world parts but keep the Capital Cities where you queue for the Instances, is it still an MMO? Why or why not? If in Eternal Crusade you login to the game in your Garrison (Capital City) and then queue for PVE (Dungeon) or PVE (Battleground) is it still an MMO? Why or why not?
These MMO elements aren't in yet tis true, but the game is in Alpha...
They announced the removal of Open World May 2015, they gave out refunds until September. You put in lots of money into an undeveloped game then did not follow the development, its your own damn fault.
You can always spot the true winners in discussions.
Reading those threads doesn't paint the development in a positive light, and further reading of recent steam reviews continue to say much the same thing. I'll check it out at launch again, but man, I'd never put money into this game before a finalized product is out.
Owned the game, played the game, mildly enjoyed the game.
Are you interested in a Warhammer 40K lobby shooter? The game might be for you in it's current state.
Is balance important to a shooter for you? If it's important the game currently isn't for you.
Do bugs bother you during the development process? The game isn't for you currently.
Is the development company of the game trustworthy and will the final outcome be good? Who knows. It's not going to be a MMO. It's going to be a shooter in the vein of Battlefront and Battlefield. The company consistently strips features and expectations for the final game. It was initially lauded as a 40K themed Planetside, but now that is nowhere near the case. The map campaign that they were going to include in it's place worked like Heroes and Generals.
The game is a lobby shooter, the game is going to be a lobby shooter. You can tack MMO onto the game type as much as you want. It's used for any online multiplayer game at this point, but there's nothing massive about 30vs30 game rounds in between you sitting at a lobby screen.
ZedAvatar wrote: You put in lots of money into an undeveloped game then did not follow the development, its your own damn fault.
I posted a lot of this on this thread on Page 3.
As far as the rest of Stormwalls comments: Orks are supposed to be on Live Servers next week, Free to Waagh was indefinately delayed in the big May 2015 cut, Nids will get fixed (its Alpha), and you are an idiot.
If he's an idiot for not following the tortuous and troubled development of a game he funded, what does that make you for not bothering to read the rules of the forum you joined that are unchanging and constant?
The TTK is low right now as they are adding in all the Wargear and Squad Leader bonuses aren't applying properly with the new itemization. This will come back up.
The players who do not work with their team quickly die and do not score well. You get bonuses to your score when near squad mates. No marine can cover everything (melee, anti infantry, anti armor) so you instinctively need help against some opponents. What would you suggest to encourage more teamwork?
Each segment of PVE has a timer, sounds like you hit it.
The thing is, the players I found scoring well were assault guys who can warp all over the friggin place that nobody can get a bead on, and they were just running around playing whack-a-mole while the rest of us shot at them and never hit due to hit detection wonkiness, user error, and just how fast and far the melee attacks take them. I went melee back at them and found myself bounding out of control until we eventually bounced into each other. As for encouraging teamwork, allowing Battlefield-style squad spawns helps, squad leaders being able to set objectives for the squad, and map design that funnels players towards common objectives like you see in Overwatch would help a lot.
As for the PVE thing, I didn't know that! I don't know if it just wasn't communicated to me on screen or I somehow missed it.
Joyboozer wrote:I'm not sure what your point is, it doesn't play like an MMO now, saying it will later doesn't make this any less disappointing.
It doesn't play like an MMO while in Alpha and that dissapoints you greatly. Got it.
See below
Stormwall wrote:Space Marine 1.5 except shittier. Was marketed as an open world MMO. Then battletech style tile maps. Now 30x30 lobbies. Orks not released( on top of being axed for free to play,) Nids are broke as hell. Founders got screwed out of refunds.
No balance at all. Also, still marketted as an MMO even though last I checked a lobby shooter SM clone is not one.
Stay away till several updates post launch. I wish I could get a refund.
As a player of EC I am begging you to stay away, it's bad.
reiner wrote:I've just finished a multiday argument to get a refund, no dice. I'd rather play Space Marine at this point.
Open World and MMO are not the same.
Take World of Warcraft as an Example. Dungeons, Raids, Battlegrounds and Arenas are all instanced. If you were to take out all the open world parts but keep the Capital Cities where you queue for the Instances, is it still an MMO? Why or why not? If in Eternal Crusade you login to the game in your Garrison (Capital City) and then queue for PVE (Dungeon) or PVE (Battleground) is it still an MMO? Why or why not?
These MMO elements aren't in yet tis true, but the game is in Alpha...
They announced the removal of Open World May 2015, they gave out refunds until September. You put in lots of money into an undeveloped game then did not follow the development, its your own damn fault.
I posted a lot of this on this thread on Page 3.
As far as the rest of Stormwalls comments: Orks are supposed to be on Live Servers next week, Free to Waagh was indefinately delayed in the big May 2015 cut, Nids will get fixed (its Alpha), and you are an idiot.
I've actually followed the bad development, the apologies, the entire changing of the development team. I've also sat and watched a game with great potential be wasted. I purchased it hoping for a good Warhammer 40k title, something that seems akin to a unicorn. So addressing the last bit there of your post. It's basically: "Post launch," and"Soon TM." IE: So to rephrase, you mean after their obligation is gone, and they can walk away. This from the company that has been continously breaking promises, you really trust them to continously develop after they launch? Free to waagh, indefinately? So, essentially "Soon TM," just like above. I apologize for my manner and harsh language concerning the game in my OP above but, this is a trainwreck still.
As medic said, it was lauded as a PS2 styled Warhammer game. Also, you really think it is an MMO? An MMO still has more than 30vs30 lobbies. Also "nice," comparision with the WoW bit, however I can fly anywhere I want in that game, it's still very open. Dungeons are the only instanced bit for the most part, so what you are saying is incorrect. Furthermore, if we are to compare it to PS2 instead, that has completely open continents that are entirely open world. This game has maps slightly bigger than the original SM game. It is not open world, and the developers apologized for this a few weeks ago. Yet, on the steam page it is still listed as an MMO. I guess they gotta catch those few unknowing customers still right?
The actual final nail of the "Oh we're not doing open world," was last month, not May like you said by the way, as they cut the entire open world bit in May with a statement but, followed it up by saying it would be on 16x16 "Manchester sized maps," which is huge. The also stated that you would be able to deploy on a grid styled map, anywhere of your choosing. Guess what? It got axed too, yippie!
Thus they essentially drug us along past said refund date. While the axed the actual open world bit, they still promised large maps and a different deployment style. Both of which are axed. Not to mention the way founders are treated (and some of their own mods on the forum by extension,) is absolutely abhorrent. I have a problem with the developers and the company of this game and the execution of its design. EC could be good if someone else developed it. By the way, "It's Alpha," doesn't work when the release is so close and the game is still broken to all hell.
I'd rather be called or thought an idiot and warn people on Dakka to take a second glance then have them suffer for a moment finacially. If that makes me one, then so be it. I payed 40$ on steam, at the end of the day that doesn't hurt me that bad. However, I know founders that raked in a few thousand dollars in referals for BE and I cannot imagine how ripped off they feel.
But, you can certainly go ahead and try to tell me it's raining down my back when it's actually pee. Also I'm yellow triangling myself and others to calm this post down, I feel I got a bit too heated with it.
You can always spot the true winners in discussions.
Reading those threads doesn't paint the development in a positive light, and further reading of recent steam reviews continue to say much the same thing. I'll check it out at launch again, but man, I'd never put money into this game before a finalized product is out.
Plus, I want my Guard.
You did not read them through to their conclusion then. Its pretty clear that the recent kneejerk reaction, is just that. People are still freaking out about something that was announced over a year ago. Why do they demand the game fail because of that? I know not. But it aggrivates the hell out of me. They also keep making these claims that features "keep getting cut" and its just not true. Everything announced in the May 2015 cut REMAINS IN THE GAME. See here.
medikant wrote:Owned the game, played the game, mildly enjoyed the game.
Are you interested in a Warhammer 40K lobby shooter? The game might be for you in it's current state.
Is balance important to a shooter for you? If it's important the game currently isn't for you.
Do bugs bother you during the development process? The game isn't for you currently.
Is the development company of the game trustworthy and will the final outcome be good? Who knows. It's not going to be a MMO. It's going to be a shooter in the vein of Battlefront and Battlefield. The company consistently strips features and expectations for the final game. It was initially lauded as a 40K themed Planetside, but now that is nowhere near the case. The map campaign that they were going to include in it's place worked like Heroes and Generals.
The game is a lobby shooter, the game is going to be a lobby shooter. You can tack MMO onto the game type as much as you want. It's used for any online multiplayer game at this point, but there's nothing massive about 30vs30 game rounds in between you sitting at a lobby screen.
"The company consistently strips features and expectations for the final game."
Not true.
Also they still plan to have 30v30v30v30vTyranids. That hasn't been cut.
warboss wrote:
ZedAvatar wrote: You put in lots of money into an undeveloped game then did not follow the development, its your own damn fault.
I posted a lot of this on this thread on Page 3.
As far as the rest of Stormwalls comments: Orks are supposed to be on Live Servers next week, Free to Waagh was indefinately delayed in the big May 2015 cut, Nids will get fixed (its Alpha), and you are an idiot.
If he's an idiot for not following the tortuous and troubled development of a game he funded, what does that make you for not bothering to read the rules of the forum you joined that are unchanging and constant?
Every Forum has the same rules. Violating them for effect is a tactical strategy.
The TTK is low right now as they are adding in all the Wargear and Squad Leader bonuses aren't applying properly with the new itemization. This will come back up.
The players who do not work with their team quickly die and do not score well. You get bonuses to your score when near squad mates. No marine can cover everything (melee, anti infantry, anti armor) so you instinctively need help against some opponents. What would you suggest to encourage more teamwork?
Each segment of PVE has a timer, sounds like you hit it.
The thing is, the players I found scoring well were assault guys who can warp all over the friggin place that nobody can get a bead on, and they were just running around playing whack-a-mole while the rest of us shot at them and never hit due to hit detection wonkiness, user error, and just how fast and far the melee attacks take them. I went melee back at them and found myself bounding out of control until we eventually bounced into each other. As for encouraging teamwork, allowing Battlefield-style squad spawns helps, squad leaders being able to set objectives for the squad, and map design that funnels players towards common objectives like you see in Overwatch would help a lot.
As for the PVE thing, I didn't know that! I don't know if it just wasn't communicated to me on screen or I somehow missed it.
Sounds like you are having Lag problems. This is being worked on, and I understand the pain. But its not killing everyone.
Squad Leaders CAN set objectives for squads. Hold Q.
The current Map design is quite porous to not allow bottlenecks, I like it that way. You can always flank. There are always HUD Icons lit up to show you the way to the Objectives.. you need a Map to lead you there too?
Joyboozer wrote:I'm not sure what your point is, it doesn't play like an MMO now, saying it will later doesn't make this any less disappointing.
It doesn't play like an MMO while in Alpha and that dissapoints you greatly. Got it.
See below
Stormwall wrote:Space Marine 1.5 except shittier. Was marketed as an open world MMO. Then battletech style tile maps. Now 30x30 lobbies. Orks not released( on top of being axed for free to play,) Nids are broke as hell. Founders got screwed out of refunds.
No balance at all. Also, still marketted as an MMO even though last I checked a lobby shooter SM clone is not one.
Stay away till several updates post launch. I wish I could get a refund.
As a player of EC I am begging you to stay away, it's bad.
reiner wrote:I've just finished a multiday argument to get a refund, no dice. I'd rather play Space Marine at this point.
Open World and MMO are not the same.
Take World of Warcraft as an Example. Dungeons, Raids, Battlegrounds and Arenas are all instanced. If you were to take out all the open world parts but keep the Capital Cities where you queue for the Instances, is it still an MMO? Why or why not? If in Eternal Crusade you login to the game in your Garrison (Capital City) and then queue for PVE (Dungeon) or PVE (Battleground) is it still an MMO? Why or why not?
These MMO elements aren't in yet tis true, but the game is in Alpha...
They announced the removal of Open World May 2015, they gave out refunds until September. You put in lots of money into an undeveloped game then did not follow the development, its your own damn fault.
I posted a lot of this on this thread on Page 3.
As far as the rest of Stormwalls comments: Orks are supposed to be on Live Servers next week, Free to Waagh was indefinately delayed in the big May 2015 cut, Nids will get fixed (its Alpha), and you are an idiot.
I've actually followed the bad development, the apologies, the entire changing of the development team. I've also sat and watched a game with great potential be wasted. I purchased it hoping for a good Warhammer 40k title, something that seems akin to a unicorn. So addressing the last bit there of your post. It's basically: "Post launch," and"Soon TM." IE: So to rephrase, you mean after their obligation is gone, and they can walk away. This from the company that has been continously breaking promises, you really trust them to continously develop after they launch? Free to waagh, indefinately? So, essentially "Soon TM," just like above. I apologize for my manner and harsh language concerning the game in my OP above but, this is a trainwreck still.
As medic said, it was lauded as a PS2 styled Warhammer game. Also, you really think it is an MMO? An MMO still has more than 30vs30 lobbies. Also "nice," comparision with the WoW bit, however I can fly anywhere I want in that game, it's still very open. Dungeons are the only instanced bit for the most part, so what you are saying is incorrect. Furthermore, if we are to compare it to PS2 instead, that has completely open continents that are entirely open world. This game has maps slightly bigger than the original SM game. It is not open world, and the developers apologized for this a few weeks ago. Yet, on the steam page it is still listed as an MMO. I guess they gotta catch those few unknowing customers still right?
The actual final nail of the "Oh we're not doing open world," was last month, not May like you said by the way, as they cut the entire open world bit in May with a statement but, followed it up by saying it would be on 16x16 "Manchester sized maps," which is huge. The also stated that you would be able to deploy on a grid styled map, anywhere of your choosing. Guess what? It got axed too, yippie!
Thus they essentially drug us along past said refund date. While the axed the actual open world bit, they still promised large maps and a different deployment style. Both of which are axed. Not to mention the way founders are treated (and some of their own mods on the forum by extension,) is absolutely abhorrent. I have a problem with the developers and the company of this game and the execution of its design. EC could be good if someone else developed it. By the way, "It's Alpha," doesn't work when the release is so close and the game is still broken to all hell.
I'd rather be called or thought an idiot and warn people on Dakka to take a second glance then have them suffer for a moment finacially. If that makes me one, then so be it. I payed 40$ on steam, at the end of the day that doesn't hurt me that bad. However, I know founders that raked in a few thousand dollars in referals for BE and I cannot imagine how ripped off they feel.
But, you can certainly go ahead and try to tell me it's raining down my back when it's actually pee. Also I'm yellow triangling myself and others to calm this post down, I feel I got a bit too heated with it.
But not when your Eldar team mates kill each other more than the enemy.
I watched the first 10 minutes of your dark reaper vid and noticed you avoided shooting vehicles with your missile launcher and went after marines instead (to very poor effect) what is the role of the reaper?
Are there plans to remove the friendly fire feature? Seriously, you and your Eldar team killed more Eldar than marines.
Joyboozer wrote: But not when your Eldar team mates kill each other more than the enemy.
I watched the first 10 minutes of your dark reaper vid and noticed you avoided shooting vehicles with your missile launcher and went after marines instead (to very poor effect) what is the role of the reaper?
Are there plans to remove the friendly fire feature? Seriously, you and your Eldar team killed more Eldar than marines.
That's the Reaper Launcher with starswarm missles, the ones that on tabletop deal S5 AP3. They are getting more weapons options but in general they provide heavy ranged firepower, though they kinda need to be balanced a bit more recently as they don't really deal a good, proper hit.
Also yeah sometimes the friendly fire can be a pain but I think it'd be kinda strange to not have it. I mean the game isn't exactly my game of the year but it's still fun.
"The company consistently strips features and expectations for the final game."
Not true.
Also they still plan to have 30v30v30v30vTyranids. That hasn't been cut.
They've cut a lot from the game. It has been consistent since the initial announcement. I don't feel like going back through 3 years of announcements and documents to highlight the large amount of content that was canceled for the game. It was pitched as Planetside 2 with RPG elements. It's now a lobby shooter and last I knew a crappy map system like Heroes and Generals was on the timeline. They cut the whole initial concept of the game albiet to make it more manageable, but it's not what they initially pitched and hyped.
30v30v30v30vTyranids may be the style of game some are looking to play, but that's far from what they sold this game as for a long while.
I'm interested to see if they can expand the tank warfare a bit. It would be fun to have a nice infantry + tanks type of stuff, but of course it's difficult to balance things out with units and map design, so there's a place for everything and nothing is too OP.
I think the scope is nice, though. You have multiple classes per faction and different vehicles, so I see no reason why they couldn't introduce terminator armour and dreadnoughts at some point.
I don't know why every company insists on putting transport tanks in map shooters, though. Fire support vehicles like Predator is what you'd see taking part in this kind of action, Rhinos are for long distance transportation.
prowla wrote: I'm interested to see if they can expand the tank warfare a bit. It would be fun to have a nice infantry + tanks type of stuff, but of course it's difficult to balance things out with units and map design, so there's a place for everything and nothing is too OP.
I think the scope is nice, though. You have multiple classes per faction and different vehicles, so I see no reason why they couldn't introduce terminator armour and dreadnoughts at some point.
I don't know why every company insists on putting transport tanks in map shooters, though. Fire support vehicles like Predator is what you'd see taking part in this kind of action, Rhinos are for long distance transportation.
Rhino's also provide cover fire and allow for units to get on point, which generally tends towards the purpose. Eventually (don't quote me on this) they'll be getting utility options like smoke launchers to help protect nearby infantry and the like.
Though the tank warfare seems to be settled between Transport, Tank, and Heavy Artillery with options for customization down the line (Rhino, Predator, Vindicator).
"The company consistently strips features and expectations for the final game."
Not true.
Also they still plan to have 30v30v30v30vTyranids. That hasn't been cut.
They've cut a lot from the game. It has been consistent since the initial announcement. I don't feel like going back through 3 years of announcements and documents to highlight the large amount of content that was canceled for the game. It was pitched as Planetside 2 with RPG elements. It's now a lobby shooter and last I knew a crappy map system like Heroes and Generals was on the timeline. They cut the whole initial concept of the game albiet to make it more manageable, but it's not what they initially pitched and hyped.
30v30v30v30vTyranids may be the style of game some are looking to play, but that's far from what they sold this game as for a long while.
No, they haven't "consistently cut features" from the game. This is BS. Yes the original plan was to have an Open World on a low budget, and like I said, they tech proved to not work, so they publicly said whoops and designed a new game May 2015. Offered refunds until September of that year too. Nothing has changed since May 2015.
The RPG elements are STILL IN.
The new map was implemented because the old one was limited, not because they cut anything. They told us this in the livestream I just linked. Seriously its just a .jpg under the nodes and other elements, and not having a nicer looking .jpg wrecks it for you???
No, they did not cut the "whole initial concept", just the Open World and Free to Waagh parts, along with, like I said before, the "wishlist" stuff that was not part of the design. Hasn't been changed since May 2015. Still going to have Elites and Heroes, moddable weapons and armor customization, Terminators 3 months after launch, node based map campaigns and PVE.
Whats been cut since then? If you can post one piece of evidence I will concede. That is the point. Many of your camp have made grand claims like this with no proof. Present some.
If having Open World is 100% the most important feature for you, why aren't you just playing PlanetSide 2 100% of the time???
Automatically Appended Next Post:
prowla wrote: I'm interested to see if they can expand the tank warfare a bit. It would be fun to have a nice infantry + tanks type of stuff, but of course it's difficult to balance things out with units and map design, so there's a place for everything and nothing is too OP.
I think the scope is nice, though. You have multiple classes per faction and different vehicles, so I see no reason why they couldn't introduce terminator armour and dreadnoughts at some point.
I don't know why every company insists on putting transport tanks in map shooters, though. Fire support vehicles like Predator is what you'd see taking part in this kind of action, Rhinos are for long distance transportation.
Termies and equivalents still slated for 3 months after launch. They told us in Livestream they are already being modelled.
The Rhinos and Wave Serpents act as Spawn points. They are also effective anti infantry fire support.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Joyboozer wrote: But not when your Eldar team mates kill each other more than the enemy.
I watched the first 10 minutes of your dark reaper vid and noticed you avoided shooting vehicles with your missile launcher and went after marines instead (to very poor effect) what is the role of the reaper?
Are there plans to remove the friendly fire feature? Seriously, you and your Eldar team killed more Eldar than marines.
Yeah they have recently nerfed the Reaper Launcher's Starswarm mode, and the way it fires is Janky. This is the third iteration of the weapon and it still needs work.
This is an example of it being in Alpha. Things are broken still.
Orks now on Live Servers for Steam Early Access players. Not 100% (as per usual) but working and competetive. So now 4 playable factions and 1 AI enemy.
Added 2 PVP maps.
Removed Advancement tree for new one coming.
More stuff.
If he's an idiot for not following the tortuous and troubled development of a game he funded, what does that make you for not bothering to read the rules of the forum you joined that are unchanging and constant?
Every Forum has the same rules. Violating them for effect is a tactical strategy.
Well keep it up, you'll enjoy a free vacation from Dakka.
So they added 30man warparties. It's what they've promised from day ones. If they implement guilds it might be okay but, doubtful. 30v30 isn't an MMO though. It's just Battlefield.
Played tonight, it got an optimization run on AMD so it works great on my computer.
30 man war parties are great, so it's essentially a larger Space Marine game. Perhaps there is hope yet. Orks were added for all your WAAAGH needs.
I am still disappointed in some of the cuts and I do not trust the developers of this game - that being said, this update was wonderful and superb. We shall see if it releases on time or if other things are axed, or if it turns out great.
Stormwall wrote: Played tonight, it got an optimization run on AMD so it works great on my computer.
30 man war parties are great, so it's essentially a larger Space Marine game. Perhaps there is hope yet. Orks were added for all your WAAAGH needs.
I am still disappointed in some of the cuts and I do not trust the developers of this game - that being said, this update was wonderful and superb. We shall see if it releases on time or if other things are axed, or if it turns out great.
It seems that the 30 vs 30 games are pretty nice, judging from videos. I like the large map concept, having a bit more range gives a bit more emphasis on different classes, like fast jump pack troops vs. heavy long-range support.
I don't mind it losing the MMO bits - I think the concept of a open-world military MMO, let alone MMORPG is a bit silly anyways. Imagine starting up as a Space Marine, and then your first quest is to kill 20 rats and collect 100 daffodils.. And I don't really like Planetside style running around, either. If they do the world map control stuff ok, that's MMO enough.
Ashiraya wrote: I still do not really like the art style, and they need to seriously boost the TTK before I take another look at it... But we will see.
Agreed. TTK needs to be improved, the art is at least bearable for me though.
As for the MMO comment above yours, I DO mind the MMO bits being cut. That is what the founders originally paid for years ago, so it's essentially a whitewash or a lie.
Eternal Crusade pre-menu screen wrote:Warhammer 40,000: Eternal Crusade is in a Closed Alpha state, is still in early development and will continuously evolve with very regular updates. It is a Massive Online Shooter and the Early Access focuses only on creating a great shooter experience, before becoming truly massive. The persistent world, meta-game, character progression and customization, PVE and other MMO aspects will gradually be added to the Early Access.
If he's an idiot for not following the tortuous and troubled development of a game he funded, what does that make you for not bothering to read the rules of the forum you joined that are unchanging and constant?
Every Forum has the same rules. Violating them for effect is a tactical strategy.
Well keep it up, you'll enjoy a free vacation from Dakka.
So they added 30man warparties. It's what they've promised from day ones. If they implement guilds it might be okay but, doubtful. 30v30 isn't an MMO though. It's just Battlefield.
Again, if you take World of Warcraft and remove the Open World portion of it, so you have the Capital Cities, Dungeons, Raids, Battlegrounds and Arenas you can queue for from the cities, is it still an MMO? Why or why not? If in EC you log into the Garrison (Capital City) then queue for PVE (Dungeon) or PVP (Battleground) is it still an MMO? Why or why not? What if, in EC, there is a World Map also that progresses along with the victories and defeats of your faction and gives rewards based on how well you do?
Stormwall wrote:Played tonight, it got an optimization run on AMD so it works great on my computer.
30 man war parties are great, so it's essentially a larger Space Marine game. Perhaps there is hope yet. Orks were added for all your WAAAGH needs.
I am still disappointed in some of the cuts and I do not trust the developers of this game - that being said, this update was wonderful and superb. We shall see if it releases on time or if other things are axed, or if it turns out great.
There has not been a single cut to a game mechanic since May of 2015. None. Zero. Zip. Nada.
If you can prove anything has been cut since then, present evidence.
Ashiraya wrote:Sure, if that comes, that will be good.
Whether it will remains to be seen.
What is there to doubt? They are a large multimillion dollar corporation. If they lie to sell a product it is called FRAUD. And they can be sued. You keep calling Snake Oil when at best its just Twinkies.
How is this so hard to understand...
I am not saying they are perfect. They haven't done everything right. But to think they'll drop the ball on such important aspects of a releatively flagship title is... asinine, especially considering the level of communication they have had with the Founders.
They clearly explained why they needed to remove Open World and publicly told us in E-Mail, Video and on the Forums. They offered refunds for almost 4 months. Open World simply wasn't possible on their budget without opening the door to other problems, the cheap tech they were going to use (PikkoServers) failed to deliver on its promises, so traditional Client-Server architecture in the fallback. And its expensive.
Literally nothing else has been cut. And even then, Open World was simply delayed until either: A tech is developed that is cheap or the game gets big enough to pay for big servers.
Get over it.
Regardless. I came here tonight to tell you all that Release is announced for Sept. 23. So you don't have long to wait until you get proven wrong or right.
I've actually followed the bad development, the apologies, the entire changing of the development team. I've also sat and watched a game with great potential be wasted. I purchased it hoping for a good Warhammer 40k title, something that seems akin to a unicorn. So addressing the last bit there of your post. It's basically: "Post launch," and"Soon TM." IE: So to rephrase, you mean after their obligation is gone, and they can walk away. This from the company that has been continously breaking promises, you really trust them to continously develop after they launch? Free to waagh, indefinately? So, essentially "Soon TM," just like above. I apologize for my manner and harsh language concerning the game in my OP above but, this is a trainwreck still.
The two apologies. Got it.
Four guys left. Its been a couple years. People change jobs all the time.
How is it wasted? You think EVERY FEATURE has been pushed back to post launch and that Open World makes the game. This is not the case. The game is still scheduled to have all the Weapon and Armor mods AT RELEASE. Heroes, Elites and Veterans AT RELEASE. Interactive map (of some kind, they just revised it to be better)AT RELEASE. Guilds, Warlords and Warlord Powers, PVE and PVP, Tyranid Lairs and Hives, Skill progression and specialization AT RELEASE
What was pushed to post launch? Open World and Bikes. Guess the whole game is dead now?????? There is tons of stuff coming into the game every day now.
"This from the company that has been continously breaking promises"
They haven't. What promises did they break? Where do you get this information?
As medic said, it was lauded as a PS2 styled Warhammer game. Also, you really think it is an MMO? An MMO still has more than 30vs30 lobbies. Also "nice," comparision with the WoW bit, however I can fly anywhere I want in that game, it's still very open. Dungeons are the only instanced bit for the most part, so what you are saying is incorrect. Furthermore, if we are to compare it to PS2 instead, that has completely open continents that are entirely open world. This game has maps slightly bigger than the original SM game. It is not open world, and the developers apologized for this a few weeks ago. Yet, on the steam page it is still listed as an MMO. I guess they gotta catch those few unknowing customers still right?
Open World is just one aspect of the game, not the entire defining feature. If thats all you care about, why are you even invested in this game? Go play PlanetSide 2 or Crossfire.
In my example I said to remove the Open World part. And you reply with "well its open world".
"It is not open world, and the developers apologized for this a few weeks ago."
They apologized that they were changing the World Map and noone knew about it until the Dev interview with Brent (where the Interviewer literally didn't ask a single question about it changing...). People flipped out because they didn't know what was going on. The Devs have since told us three times that it isn't cut.
"I guess they gotta catch those few unknowing customers still right?"
This would be Fraud.
The actual final nail of the "Oh we're not doing open world," was last month, not May like you said by the way, as they cut the entire open world bit in May with a statement but, followed it up by saying it would be on 16x16 "Manchester sized maps," which is huge. The also stated that you would be able to deploy on a grid styled map, anywhere of your choosing. Guess what? It got axed too, yippie!
I already pointed out and linked everything showing their documentation that Open World was gone May 2015. Three times in this thread now. Last month was the confusion of changing the World Map. They told us that the previous map was too limiting (max 24,000 players) and that the new style can be infinitely scaled.
They still have no problem having 16kmx16km maps, and have previously told us that they mapped the entire continent already, and that buildings can be dropped into locations for new maps. The problem is having higher player counts per instance taxes the servers more, not more space. What use is having a whole continent to roam with only a few enemies to fight?
Also as I previously mentioned, they still hope to push things to a higher player count, particularly in the larger maps like Harkus and Blackbolt. They also still want a 30v30v30v30vTyranids map. I would link these livestreams but I'm tired.
Thus they essentially drug us along past said refund date. While the axed the actual open world bit, they still promised large maps and a different deployment style. Both of which are axed. Not to mention the way founders are treated (and some of their own mods on the forum by extension,) is absolutely abhorrent. I have a problem with the developers and the company of this game and the execution of its design. EC could be good if someone else developed it. By the way, "It's Alpha," doesn't work when the release is so close and the game is still broken to all hell.
No. Public announcement of Open World gone. New game structure. 4 months of refunds. Game structure HASN'T CHANGED SINCE THIS DATE.
If you watch the video from May 2015 they say they will push towards larger maps in the near future, not for Launch of the game. It hasn't been axed, and they literally told us it will be a while before we have that.
What do you mean about different deployment style? Like dropships? They have always said those may be map features, but not common.
They treat myself and all of the founders quite well, other than the ones who are lying about things? I suspect that is what happened to you or a friend or a guild-mate? You clearly do have a problem with the developers, but that is your business and doesn't entitle you to say things that aren't true on a public forum.
Alpha. So many times I hear this argument. So many times by people who don't understand what it means. I blame Steam Early Access for this.
Alpha is a development phase of a game that lasts, by far, the longest. In the beginning there is Pre-Alpha, where basic plans are laid out and things are tested to see if they are feasable and sane. Alpha is when they put all the major features and elements into the game. Beta is when the game is optimized, polished and balanced. Then Release.
- Pre-Alpha can last an indeterminate amount of time, depending on how long it takes to conceptualize the vision and design of a game. Gotta try and test some things to ensure the design is feasable. Also major things can change during this time (like removing Open World).
- Alpha normally lasts 2-3 years. It is the time while the major game features are built and put into the game. They get better over time.
- Beta normally lasta a few weeks to a month. All the major features are in the game and it is getting polished, tweaked, balanced.
What state are we in now? Well all the major features are NOT in the game, so Alpha. Very very close to Beta now.
I'd rather be called or thought an idiot and warn people on Dakka to take a second glance then have them suffer for a moment finacially. If that makes me one, then so be it. I payed 40$ on steam, at the end of the day that doesn't hurt me that bad. However, I know founders that raked in a few thousand dollars in referals for BE and I cannot imagine how ripped off they feel.
You seek aggrandizement for your own purported mistreatment by a games development company and you now choose to smear their name on the web for pleasure.
But, you can certainly go ahead and try to tell me it's raining down my back when it's actually pee. Also I'm yellow triangling myself and others to calm this post down, I feel I got a bit too heated with it.
Except it's a full blown publisher release, for the price of it, and they are essentially promising to adding more post launch. /If/ they do that at all, and they're charging 40-50$ for this game, (where as other games are heavily discounted at launch of alpha or beta and have long development times,) not including the original more expensive founder packs. The last game I checked that did something like this was No Man's Sky, that didn't go over too well and it was backed by Sony and was supposedly a AAA game from an indie studio. On top of this, Warhammer 40k is a niche title instead of mainstream like NMS was, and the development company, IE: BE produces mostly really, really, bad games. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Behaviour_Interactive
So that's essentially Mercenaries 2, and Dante's Inferno being anywhere close to a normal styled game. We'll see if this game works or it will be dead on arrival. Right now, the peak player count is very low and it is almost entirely dead. As for the rest, you get too upset and it's not worth arguing with you. You are a white knight, plain and simple. I could go and get more citations, more articles but, a lot of it is still under NDA in the founder's section, and the rest isn't worth digging for on the forums to spite you.
Here is the player count for your precious little game. I had a little smidgen of hope, and then they announced the official release date is on September 23rd. This isn't like Minecraft where it had Alpha, then Beta, then official release at full price. They are releasing this unfinished and are going to add to it later, for the full price of a fully finished game essentially. They have thirty days to finish the game, when it has taken them a such long development cycle this far just to produce some results. We'll see if they save or kill this in the coming thirty days. If a game like Space Marine could die out so quickly, then I will not be surprised when this one does too.
I originally was going to pre-order this but i am glad i held off to see more before i did. Losing the open world part of the game killed it for me, because it is a huge game changer. Open world FPS have completely different gameplay to standard FPS. Right now this is just a more glorified Space Marine multiplayer. 30vs30 is small when other shooters can do 64vs64.
Really GW should have just hired the Planetside devs, i think we would be much closer to the original concept.
Ashiraya wrote: All time peak of 808? Bwahaha. Can't say I an surprised.
For a game where at least 60k accounts were sold. It sure is an MMO, with those 808 players! Don't worry though, if you look at the stat break down, we gained forty players this month.
Realistically, what could save this title was if they do make the orks free to play at this point like they had originally intended to do.
I stopped playing once the game became incredibly boring and samey but I don't regret buying it. I played it endlessly while I was enjoying it.
I think they'd have done better to hold their hands up, say they were never going to hit the lofty heights they set themselves, cut out the Eldar and Orks and Nids and just gone full Heresy on it.
It'd save on a lot of balance issues, it'd have meant the game could have launched a bit quicker and then they could have put more dev time in to the bits of the game they had running.
Missed opportunity in a short era of some very good GW themed games.
I couldn't believe it when I heard they're shooting for a release date next month. I think they just released orks like a week or two ago, and everything still looks at the very best at beta-level.
For them to iron everything and make a usable, quality game in 30 days I think is just about impossible, at this point.
I might be wrong, but honestly, this game has sounded like a train wreck for years. And I suspect they're done throwing money at it, so they're going to cut it loose and see what happens.
New gameplay trailer showed up on my youtube feed from the Gamescom convention held this past weekend in Europe. I can't say I'm particularly impressed by what is shown but at least I can finally say it looks a little better visually than the 5 year old last gen Space Marine game... yeah, faint praise but praise nonetheless.
Ashiraya wrote: It still does not look as good as Space Marine, sadly.
And that narrator didn't do the video any justice. She sounded so bored of it, lacking in enthusiasm, you know? I guess it just didn't fit the tone of the visuals.
Stormwall wrote: Except it's a full blown publisher release, for the price of it, and they are essentially promising to adding more post launch. /If/ they do that at all, and they're charging 40-50$ for this game, (where as other games are heavily discounted at launch of alpha or beta and have long development times,) not including the original more expensive founder packs. The last game I checked that did something like this was No Man's Sky, that didn't go over too well and it was backed by Sony and was supposedly a AAA game from an indie studio. On top of this, Warhammer 40k is a niche title instead of mainstream like NMS was, and the development company, IE: BE produces mostly really, really, bad games. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Behaviour_Interactive
So that's essentially Mercenaries 2, and Dante's Inferno being anywhere close to a normal styled game. We'll see if this game works or it will be dead on arrival. Right now, the peak player count is very low and it is almost entirely dead. As for the rest, you get too upset and it's not worth arguing with you. You are a white knight, plain and simple. I could go and get more citations, more articles but, a lot of it is still under NDA in the founder's section, and the rest isn't worth digging for on the forums to spite you.
Here is the player count for your precious little game. I had a little smidgen of hope, and then they announced the official release date is on September 23rd. This isn't like Minecraft where it had Alpha, then Beta, then official release at full price. They are releasing this unfinished and are going to add to it later, for the full price of a fully finished game essentially. They have thirty days to finish the game, when it has taken them a such long development cycle this far just to produce some results. We'll see if they save or kill this in the coming thirty days. If a game like Space Marine could die out so quickly, then I will not be surprised when this one does too.
Real Charts here. 15,000+ players log in every two weeks, but don't stay long. I have posted this info 4 times in this thread now. People are still just logging in to test things, until recently it has been in a very Alpha state. This is known. This doesn't bother me one bit, when the game is fixed up more those people will stay longer, and it is trending up, and concurrent players (what you linked) will increase. The game is not dead as it has not yet lived.
I am not saying the game is perfect, no. But it is far and above the quality you imply.
Http://www.bhvr.com - They worked on Dishonored, Shadow of Mordor and Far Cry 3, hardly shovelware.
Seeing as you're such a fan of facts and logic, surely you've done the research on what the company has done for those specific titles, right?
Well, their contribution for SoM was the port to the last gen consoles, which as I'm sure you can imagine, is not exactly top level development. As for the other two, neither have Behaviour listed as doing anything on their wiki, and Dishonored's extensive credits mention nothing of the studio or even their president. Far Cry 3 says much the same.
To further confirm that, Behaviour's Wikipedia lists neither of those games in its works.
So when people say they produce shovelware, its because they're right. The overwhelming majority of their works list is nothing but mobile shovelware or poorly received licensed products on portable gaming devices. Not exactly the credits that lend well to a supposed AAA PC MMO release.
Its great that you went to their website and picked a few titles that weren't shovelware, but further research shows they did very little or nothing at all (other sources can neither confirm nor deny this) for the games, and certainly not in the core development areas that they have to bear the brunt of for this release.
Plus, every video they release just looks like a lacklustre Space Marine style game with Eldar and Orks. Nothing to get overly excited about, or at least this weirdly defensive on the matter.
Oh, and denying yourself to be a white knight is exactly what a white knight would say. Right down to the logic and reason part.
I'm glad you're so passionate about this, but you're not doing the game any favours in your posting styles. If anything, your defensiveness and constant stream of trying to paint it better than it looks just comes across as desperation and puts me further off the game.
I'll be watching the development and eventual release, but it looks like a vanilla lobby shooter with dated graphics and animations. Hopefully they deliver on all their promises sooner than later. If the beta was free to test, then I'd be all over trying to help the game along. But paying $45 for the privilege of giving them feedback and dealing with the mess that is every beta ever, no thanks. Been there, done that.
I want to believe this game will succeed because I'd love for some high quality 40k video games, but nothing so far seems like its worth the money or any new territory not already covered by better 40k games.
Amount of people owning a game =/= amount of people playing it actively.
If you compare SM to this game, more people play that dead game than this one. Right now EC is barely over SM however, if you look at the previous months SM totally trashed EC, especially during the map cut announcement.
So... for a game that is coming out in a few days, there sure are alot of crickets chirping here. I had to take a peek to make sure it wasn't delayed. While the console release date seems still up in the air, the pc date is set to Sept 23rd in 9 days.
Yeah they are shoehorning in a lot of updates atm. For instance, so few people play the 30v30 system is useless unless you want a 40-60 minute wait between matches.
This past patch has completely broken the lobby system. You now go to garrison and then recent players to access the gents you wish to play with.
Guild system is put in but, still needs tweaking. For instance they only add guild banners if you are a huge guild, when really you should just be able to submit them to an email and someone reviews it for rule violations etc. (For instance, a guild I know is first to even join EC. Waaaaay back when it was first announced. They have 60 in the game registered making them the third largest, and yet they need to ask the developers if their banner can be "put in."
Tyranids are a great now, though some glitches persist. Cosmetics are to be purchased and some weapon imbalance and optimization remains.
If we are lucky, it will be a great lobby shooter. Not an open world MMO but, it's decent considering a few months ago the floodgates broke though. Also, really good considering just last week they only had 4 active developers working around the clock on the weekend, and it doesn't help a lot of gak has to go straight through GW first or they do something and then GW makes them change it. All in all, we'll see what happens. Still isn't what was promised and also, when you point out several breaches of contract on their forums they delete the entire thread.
So the best we can hope for is an open beta after launch in which the game is constantly improved.
Hulksmash wrote: Console previews have it set for December 31st. At least Target does.
Cool, thanks for the info. Whether or not it's a complete stinker, a smash hit, or something inbetween on PC should be well known by then so people can adjust their preorder status accordingly.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Stormwall wrote: Yeah they are shoehorning in a lot of updates atm.
*SNIP*
If we are lucky, it will be a great lobby shooter. Not an open world MMO but, it's decent considering a few months ago the floodgates broke though. Also, really good considering just last week they only had 4 active developers working around the clock on the weekend, and it doesn't help a lot of gak has to go straight through GW first or they do something and then GW makes them change it. All in all, we'll see what happens. Still isn't what was promised and also, when you point out several breaches of contract on their forums they delete the entire thread.
So the best we can hope for is an open beta after launch in which the game is constantly improved.
I haven't gamed on PC since before steam was a thing so I don't know if that whole launch it broken/we'll fix it later flies there but it doesn't on console usually. There are some colorful threads on the official forums when I went to check today so I'm guessing the removed ones are probably even more emotional.
Hulksmash wrote: Console previews have it set for December 31st. At least Target does.
Cool, thanks for the info. Whether or not it's a complete stinker, a smash hit, or something inbetween on PC should be well known by then so people can adjust their preorder status accordingly.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Stormwall wrote: Yeah they are shoehorning in a lot of updates atm.
*SNIP*
If we are lucky, it will be a great lobby shooter. Not an open world MMO but, it's decent considering a few months ago the floodgates broke though. Also, really good considering just last week they only had 4 active developers working around the clock on the weekend, and it doesn't help a lot of stuff has to go straight through GW first or they do something and then GW makes them change it. All in all, we'll see what happens. Still isn't what was promised and also, when you point out several breaches of contract on their forums they delete the entire thread.
So the best we can hope for is an open beta after launch in which the game is constantly improved.
I haven't gamed on PC since before steam was a thing so I don't know if that whole launch it broken/we'll fix it later flies there but it doesn't on console usually. There are some colorful threads on the official forums when I went to check today so I'm guessing the removed ones are probably even more emotional.
Agreed, and don't take my post for support of this game. It's mostly raw acceptance of a bad outcome. I am not happy, though I suppose my post seems a bit happier than I thought.
When I snip out a significant portion of a long post that I'm not actually addressing, I mark it in the quote with a "snip" instead of making it seem like it never existed. I wanted to include the first line as it segways well with the last part (but I wasn't responding to the stuff inbetween). I've seen silly internet arguments start when one person accused another of trying to edit a post purposely by cutting out portions to make it seem supposedly worse than it was. I suppose I could just do two separate quotes but that just looks weird and sounds like more effort.
I have no idea how accurate/up to date the info is but one guy on the official forums was complaining in a post from about a week ago that the nids PVE was just two gaunts types and a warrior... not the full range of AI nids that you'd expect in a horde/firefight type battle.
You've gotta select Tyranid Dungeon or something like that
I have no idea how accurate/up to date the info is but one guy on the official forums was complaining in a post from about a week ago that the nids PVE was just two gaunts types and a warrior... not the full range of AI nids that you'd expect in a horde/firefight type battle.
True enough, they've just been adding things overtime to each thing they've been working on, though it took me a while to realize that was a Warrior, apparently the planet has produced some BIG nids if the size of the gaunts/warrior is an indication.
For a game coming out in less than a week, it still seems pretty beta-y every time I look at it. I know that was the thing to do with indie games but this is really trying to be a AAA release and just looks... unfinished, despite a long process and community involvement.
Well, the company (and their supporters) won't have the multiyear alpha/beta/early access/still in development crutch to lean on in response to criticism in a few days. The state of the game on the 23rd is what the publisher and to a lesser extent the developer thought was good enough for full paid release. I'm interested in seeing what shakes out in order to gauge the likelihood of me getting it as a console game later on. I'm cautiously pessimistic though given what I read here and elsewhere over the past year.
warboss wrote: Well, the company (and their supporters) won't have the multiyear alpha/beta/early access/still in development crutch to lean on in response to criticism in a few days. The state of the game on the 23rd is what the publisher and to a lesser extent the developer thought was good enough for full paid release. I'm interested in seeing what shakes out in order to gauge the likelihood of me getting it as a console game later on. I'm cautiously pessimistic though given what I read here and elsewhere over the past year.
I wouldn't buy it honestly, it needs more time in the oven and I don't recommend it for the reasons we've beat to death in this thread.
Metacritic doesn't have enough critic reviews to generate an aggregate score and the user reviews both on steam and metacritic seem very polarizing with folks giving too many extreme reviews to likely counter opposite extreme reviews to take them seriously ("I'll give it a perfect 10 to counter that other horrible 1!").
I'll check it out latter on with the console release and see if some of the issues discussed above in the reviews are fixed. Hopefully they won't push out the same build for consoles out the door just to generate some quick cash to fund ongoing development.
TL;DR: Meh now but has potential; probably only worth it for the most dedicated 40k nerds right now. Needs more polish, feels unfinished and rushed. Obviously not what was originally promised (which was already known for those following the development).
I've been playing this game a lot and it's pretty crap.
It shows glimmers of good but..
As a piece of software, it uses up far too many system resources. There are memory leaks all over this thing. Further, unless you spend a lot of time messing with settings, it runs terribly, regardless of system strength. (Inb4 some guy says it runs perfect without adjustments, the large population on the forums says it takes a lot of time to tweak right. Your'e just lucky.)
As a game, it has a bit more promise. Right now nothing is balanced. Space Marines are dominating after the Eldar nerf, and the pointy ears are suffering. Plasma shots and Missile launchers are basically 1 shots, which is fine, except not everyone has access.
I do,.. and after each game I play as a Devastator or a Reaper, people are salty.
Melee is both a refreshingly important , but also toxic with the glitchy frame rates and jumpy animations. One shot melee purges happen often, and seemingly from nowhere. They have an intricate rock paper scissors melee system in place, but it's hardly usable.
The missions need a lot of work too. Right now defenders usually lose on conquest maps, and their cap flag system isn't good.
It does feel like a 40k game should feel, I suppose. So if that's the important part, have at.
I think the full release for PC was a little premature, the game still has a lot that could use some improvement. But I have had fun playing it and am willing to keep giving it a chance.
Yep, still feels there's a lot of stuff to improve, based on their video blog. It has a decent amount of potential, so if they manage to keep the upgrades running for a few months it might start looking a lot better. I'm not pulling the trigger quite yet, though.
I'm thinking it might have done better as a free-to-play. Wouldn't pay full retail for it any time soon.
Yeah, it is a bit clunky especially animation wise. They should have waiting a few more months IMO, because it may scare off players with it's current state.
I don't blindly hate on stuff, and I think there's room for this game to grow.
But seriously, does anyone remember when "release" meant that the game was in a playable state that didn't look like a dev build? Sure it runs and has no major bugs preventing play, but if you released this game 5 years ago people would have laughed in your face.
This whole "early access/open beta" thing that's been happening in the past several years is just like my least favorite development in gaming. It's cool for indie games but this is supposed to be a AAA title and it looks like a team of college fans threw it together in some spots.
Vash108 wrote: Yeah, it is a bit clunky especially animation wise. They should have waiting a few more months IMO, because it may scare off players with it's current state.
I don't think the developer had a choice. It's possible (and this is speculation) that the publisher who was paying their bills said enough is enough and wanted the game out the door regardless of the state it was in to recoup some of their investment.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Requizen wrote: I don't blindly hate on stuff, and I think there's room for this game to grow.
But seriously, does anyone remember when "release" meant that the game was in a playable state that didn't look like a dev build? Sure it runs and has no major bugs preventing play, but if you released this game 5 years ago people would have laughed in your face.
This whole "early access/open beta" thing that's been happening in the past several years is just like my least favorite development in gaming. It's cool for indie games but this is supposed to be a AAA title and it looks like a team of college fans threw it together in some spots.
I still hold games to that reasonable standard if they ask me to pay upfront (whether a purchase or subscription). If they're free to play, they can putz around half done for as long as they want on their own dime though.
The developer was pushed into release by the publisher. They say as much in their last State of the Crusade address on their website. They could only push back the console release. As it stands, however, the game is growing. Sometimes quickly, sometines not. Personally, I'm looking forward to the Terminator (equivalent) update. I can't wait to properly run as Deathwing or an Iyanden Wraithguard. That's supposed to be the first expansion and I'm stoked for it.
So yeah. I've enjoyed what I've played. I've encountered little trouble in-game. I look forward to seeing the game grow. Some people don't like the game, and thats fair, but I think its pretty great.
I took my weekly peek and saw metacritic finally had a score from five reviews in the mid 50's... but the caveat was that I hadn't ever heard of any of the outlets doing the reviews.
I was going to comment that none of the big names even apparently bothered to review this game but then IGN's review popped up on my recommended feed late tonight.
TL;DR: 5.3 Mediocre Has potential but buggy, incomplete, and unbalanced
Ymmv but I'll be waiting for the reviews for the console version before putting any money down on this game's port. No way I'll be preordering this.
It honestly sounds like the dev team is being rushed to put out a product. They seem to have a long term vision of where the game is going, and have been following that vision. But it does need a lot of work.
I am going to play it on and off for the near future. We'll see how quickly the game improves.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Stormwall wrote: Yeah, a refund at this point would save them more than the people bashing it as far as good will.
They've readily offered refunds for anybody who would like one. Not really something they would do if they weren't interested in the long haul imo.
Steam policy and there was a long legal explanation of how two days time screwed the founders out of a refund. Either way, I cannot get one. This game could be a good lobby shooter, after a year or two of work. I do not see it being a good MMO. Nathan right now is claiming the 40v40 is a "persistent world, and thus an MMO." Which is entirely untrue.
If you have any questions as to why, I can PM you guys privately what my friend who is a lawyer (who also plays and is a founder,) wrote up before they temp locked that entire section of the forum and purged his post that he wrote up concerning the refund policy and change.
I won't post it publicly, as it was done as an observation, rather than a full legal write up and I don't want the chance of libel to pop up or to damage the game any further than it already has damaged itself. I've already convinced a large sum of people to not get this game - so my work is done. I'll /try/ to enjoy my waste of funds with my friends, and leave it at that.
Browsed quickly through the latest podcast, and looks like they are still in the middle of development.
The graphics are starting to look decent now, and they are still in the middle of adding customization features, weapons etc., like the grav weapons for Marines. Apparently the next big upcoming thing they currently have in (early) pipeline is Terminators, Meganobs and Wraithguard, they showed some early 3d models for those.
So glad that I passed on this one. It was one of those games that just sounded too good to be true, so every time I was tempted to get in on their Founder deals, I eventually decided against it. The ever-persistent ugly rumors didn't help.
It sucks that they over-promised and under-delivered on what could have been a landmark property for the 40K license. I thought Space Marine did a pretty good job, even if it became repetitive and tiresome after a while. That game desperately needed some more variety in its enemies. A less epic campaign story, and instead a series of "missions" would have been much better, and allow the game to have featured more than just 8 hours of fighting Orks and an hour and a half of fighting Chaos.
Glad I got a refund when I could. Sorry you guys are stuck with it but I am pretty sure I tried to warn people in this thread a few pages back :(
I'm sure somewhere along the way someone will make another good 40k video game.. I'll wait for that
Veteran Sergeant wrote:So glad that I passed on this one. It was one of those games that just sounded too good to be true, so every time I was tempted to get in on their Founder deals, I eventually decided against it. The ever-persistent ugly rumors didn't help.
It sucks that they over-promised and under-delivered on what could have been a landmark property for the 40K license. I thought Space Marine did a pretty good job, even if it became repetitive and tiresome after a while. That game desperately needed some more variety in its enemies. A less epic campaign story, and instead a series of "missions" would have been much better, and allow the game to have featured more than just 8 hours of fighting Orks and an hour and a half of fighting Chaos.
If this game was a Space Marine 2, it'd be perfect honestly. But, they failed in all regards, not open world or a real MMO. It's not a good lobby shooter either.
MLaw wrote:Glad I got a refund when I could. Sorry you guys are stuck with it but I am pretty sure I tried to warn people in this thread a few pages back :(
I'm sure somewhere along the way someone will make another good 40k video game.. I'll wait for that
Veteran Sergeant wrote:So glad that I passed on this one. It was one of those games that just sounded too good to be true, so every time I was tempted to get in on their Founder deals, I eventually decided against it. The ever-persistent ugly rumors didn't help.
It sucks that they over-promised and under-delivered on what could have been a landmark property for the 40K license. I thought Space Marine did a pretty good job, even if it became repetitive and tiresome after a while. That game desperately needed some more variety in its enemies. A less epic campaign story, and instead a series of "missions" would have been much better, and allow the game to have featured more than just 8 hours of fighting Orks and an hour and a half of fighting Chaos.
If this game was a Space Marine 2, it'd be perfect honestly. But, they failed in all regards, not open world or a real MMO. It's not a good lobby shooter either.
MLaw wrote:Glad I got a refund when I could. Sorry you guys are stuck with it but I am pretty sure I tried to warn people in this thread a few pages back :(
I'm sure somewhere along the way someone will make another good 40k video game.. I'll wait for that
Holy gak, you and I agreeing on something?
10/10 would Dakka again.
I don't recall what we disagreed on but I'm sure it was something that would have a moderator remind us to stay on topic..
Veteran Sergeant wrote: So glad that I passed on this one. It was one of those games that just sounded too good to be true, so every time I was tempted to get in on their Founder deals, I eventually decided against it. The ever-persistent ugly rumors didn't help.
Yeah, you have to be careful with all kinds of founder/kickstarter things. They are very much work in progress, and sometimes even less than that!
Anyone can draw a few concept sketches and tell you it's going to be the best thing ever. But unless they can show material that's close to being a finished product, you need to think if they are able to deliver what they promise. This is also true for all kinds of physical products. If it seems too good to be true, it usually is.
It's bad. They have dreams of progressing it into a real game. Problem is there will be no funding. Would not be the least surprised if it went into maintenance mode after termie equivalents drop.
Orock wrote: It's bad. They have dreams of progressing it into a real game. Problem is there will be no funding. Would not be the least surprised if it went into maintenance mode after termie equivalents drop.
I'd be surprised given that the console version probably won't be out yet. Knowing that the development already had a fork in it would be the final nail in this otherwise almost completed coffin. They'd effecively be shooting themselves in the foot before 2/3 of the other platform versions are even out. It's possible but I wouldn't say probable.
krazynadechukr wrote: I honestly believe that GW has these games (pc/console/apps) made to be bad so it peaks interest into the miniatures side of the company.
They would have to be dumber than anyone gives them credit for then. Their most profitable time was around the original dawn of wars release. That and lord of the rings.
krazynadechukr wrote: I honestly believe that GW has these games (pc/console/apps) made to be bad so it peaks interest into the miniatures side of the company.
Im not sure about that, the initial ideas for this game, although unrealistic, were very appealing to plenty of people, had it actually gotten off the ground as the totally different game that was originally planned, It would have made plenty of money.
Some of the other big GW franchise based PC games that have been coming recently have also made them a nice chunk of cash.
I would not be surprised to see development stop soon so they can switch the workload to focus on the console release of the game instead.
krazynadechukr wrote: I honestly believe that GW has these games (pc/console/apps) made to be bad so it peaks interest into the miniatures side of the company.
That's probably the stupidest conspiracy theory I have heard.
I'm still thinking they perhaps should go 'Free to Play', which has worked for other shooter games. Would give them influx of cash and keep the updates running for a while. Give current customers a premium package of in-game credits or whatever.
prowla wrote: I'm still thinking they perhaps should go 'Free to Play', which has worked for other shooter games. Would give them influx of cash and keep the updates running for a while. Give current customers a premium package of in-game credits or whatever.
That's usually something that is done after an unsuccessful launch as a last ditch effort or planned waaaaay in advance. I don't see them doing it right away with the supposed console releases just around the corner in a month or two. If you saw the mediocre PC version of the game with a troubled development history that was released less than a month earlier go free to play, would you buy the console version for $60 in a month or two or just wait to try it out for free when it likely follows the same path instead? It might eventually become F2P/P2W in say 6 months but I'm guessing only after they cash in on first month or two full retail price sales on consoles.
I guess I was lucky that my friend described the game to me as a 40k lobby shooter and that's what I got when I bought it a few weeks ago. Been having a blast ever since. It isn't the most polished or the prettiest or the most balanced, but it's a very fun game for what it is. If people are still looking at it as what it could have been or what the original plan was then yeah I can see why they'd be upset. I'm just having fun killing SM with my power axe, my mark of khorne blazing on my shoulder.
That was another part of the original plan that got scrapped !!
I do know a few people that are playing it a lot and really liking it, I guess it depends what you are looking for in a game, as a lobby shooter it seems pretty decent.
It does not quite compare with BF1 though !
That was another part of the original plan that got scrapped !!
I do know a few people that are playing it a lot and really liking it, I guess it depends what you are looking for in a game, as a lobby shooter it seems pretty decent.
It does not quite compare with BF1 though !
Doesn't Free to Play mean it has no subscription fee? I don't see mention of a sub. Buy the game, and play for nothing.
As opposed to free game, Pay to Play afterwards.
I'm just hoping to get the terms the right way around.
That was another part of the original plan that got scrapped !!
I do know a few people that are playing it a lot and really liking it, I guess it depends what you are looking for in a game, as a lobby shooter it seems pretty decent.
It does not quite compare with BF1 though !
Doesn't Free to Play mean it has no subscription fee? I don't see mention of a sub. Buy the game, and play for nothing.
As opposed to free game, Pay to Play afterwards.
I'm just hoping to get the terms the right way around.
With respect to PC games, free to play means literally that, you dont have to buy anything, just download and play !
They make the money by people paying monthly to level up at a slightly faster rate or by selling add-ons like weapons and aesthetics like outfits, weapon skins, logos etc
That was the initial plan for this as well, it was suppose to be pay to play early, the alpha / Beta, then free to play with the non subscribers playing the Orks !
In all seriousness, it's not very reassuring that most of their recent titles are on platforms infamous for swimming in 3rd party shovelware like the 
not okay. I was actually really looking forward to that game, and then it died. I'm still salty.
