Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

It's not gonna be an FPS though. It says third person persistent online action ...
We'll see

 Ctan_Overlord wrote:
Strange that it hasn't been featured on any news site, even a Google search turns up nothing on this game.

Sounds like a GW campaign

So, what's his verdict? Should we get excited?

 Palindrome wrote:

 Minx wrote:
So, what's his verdict? Should we get excited?

If you really want to. Their previous games don;t look too impressive though http://www.bhvr.com/en/games/

Doesn't look too promising. I like your rogue trader idea though.

There are no imperial male characters either. Just space marines :(

 Melissia wrote:

 Minx wrote:
There are no imperial male characters either. Just space marines :(

Space Marines are male in effect, as are Orks (even if they are not male in the most literal sense of the term)-- for the same reasons that Asari are female.

Their body types are based off of male body types; their voice actors will be male voice actors; they will walk in a manly manner, they will talk in a manly manner, they will posture in a manly manner. And that's cool and all, but that doesn't mean that I want to roleplay as one of them for several hours at a time over hundreds of hours.

You are right, they are not really androgynous visually or aurally. But fear not, i suspect there won't be any need for roleplaying as it will just end in a hack'n'slay console game style perhaps with added chatbox to flame your teammates.

 Melissia wrote:
I'd rather just keep playing Blacklight: Retribution

Thanks for bringing that game to my attention. Doesn't look too bad.

Eternal Crusade will follow a free-to-play model, but non-paying players are restricted in faction and progression. “They can only be Orkboyz! It takes five Orkboyz in the tabletop game to take down one Space Marine!” Miguel's excitement grew with every breath. Free players cannot progress in military rank beyond officer.

Have they not learned from good free-to-play examples like League of Legends, etc? There are no game related restrictions for the free players and still they make enough money, grow their player-base and keep interest.

I cannot imagine any free players staying long playing as an orkboy just being cannon fodder for the paying customers. It all sounds way too much like a demo version attached to a pay-to-play game. And from the sound of it they need a huge player-base to create interesting battles and struggles for planetary control.
They should really try to get more (initially) non paying players to play the whole game and entice them here and there to spend some money on non game play related perks instead of these hard restrictions.

"I don't care about game balance at launch" he said. "War is not balanced. Why should a game about war be balanced?"

It's supposed to be a game and a game should be all about having fun, so why would they not care about some semblance of balance?
I assume there will be a huge imbalance in player numbers for the different factions with Space Marines being the go to faction. So to have fun and not end up as cannon fodder (even as a paying orkboy commander) one should play as a Space Marine :(
So, why even bother with four factions?

It's all shaping up to be a wonderful game. The popular franchise probably will even make up for the horrid game design money wise for the devs...

What's wrong with frequent tweaks to keep the game interesting?

 unmercifulconker wrote:
the game itself is free.

Unfortunately only a tiny slice of the game seems to be free. And that part, being cannon fodder for the paying space marines, will get old pretty fast. I doubt they'll manage to get enough ork boyz to die play for them.

BrotherVord wrote:

 Melissia wrote:
Only players who pay will be able to play nobz. F2P players will be stuck as Boyz.

Are you saying you have a problem with that?

I'm personally of the opinion that it's a smart way to get people into the game and then subsequently paying for the game, which is kind of the point is it not?

It's not smart to entice people to pay for your game if all you can show them is the absolute worst part of it, i.e. being cannon fodder, no advancement possible and therefore no incentive to follow orders from the paying customers above you (it won't be fun being an ork nob either for that reason alone; unless there is friendly fire) and being stuck with all the new players who have no clue but need to work together to down one of the mighty space marine gods. Yeah, that sounds like real fun.

BrotherVord wrote:
It sounds fine to me, to be honest. I don't mind players having to put something into a game financially in order to get the full experience. We have come to this place where we as gamers feel like we are entitled to a free experience somehow. The developers and publishers need to make money, they can't do that if every free ork toon is just as good as every space marine...if that were the case then nobody would have incentive to pay to be anything more than one of the boyz. This system gives incentive to try the game, see the systems in place, and choose to buy in if you want. I like that system.

How about selling them a complete product for a change or follow the successful free-to-play-model, that really deserves that name, of League of Legends. Everything game related can be unlocked and tested just by playing. If you want to customize your character visually or show the devs your support you can pay for skins. There are also ways to pay for a shortcut to unlocking stuff.
And if they don't follow one of those routes why are they using the misleading term free-to-play if it's really pay-to-play or at the very least pay-to-win.

 unmercifulconker wrote:
Free to play models are never truly free, it just means the base game itself is accesible, but if you want to make money after spending your own to make the game, of course you are going to have charge for something.

League of Legends is free to play and not just some demo version or base game. Everything is free. All they sell are unlock shortcuts (and those are not needed, if you are having fun playing the game) and visual customization. It seems to work for them since they've managed to produce a fun game (although not very innovative) with a large player base.
They should just release a quick demo version and otherwise sell the 40k MMO as a full price game. That would be transparent and honest.

 unmercifulconker wrote:
Yes but in LOL you have to pay if you want to play a certain costume or unlock a character , which many many people buy so its not truly free 2 play.

No, that's partially wrong. You can unlock any character you want to play just by playing. There's also a changing selection of free characters to start the game. You only pay for costumes and shortcuts in the unlocking process. Those shortcuts are not needed; it's not a terrible and overly long grind.

JWhex wrote:
If this thing is going to succeed longterm they are going to have to put in more PVE than hinted at in the interview.

Another major wild card is the idea that players will essentially be getting "quests" from other players rather than NPC's. I can forsee some real problems with that model of business.

I hope they are successful and have no problem with a subscription fee if it means a stable and continuos development of the game. If you dont like the fee idea, then just dont sign up. The "free" aspect is just to get people hooked.

The Ork nerd rage is kind of funny, please continue to contribute more.

At it's core it's going to be a PVP game, "There is only war" should be enough of a hint.

Their current design decisions don't really seem suited to getting people hooked.

The only draw is the franchise (like in most other games of this publisher).

BrotherVord wrote:
It's annoying, however, to see so many people demanding that the game be totally free except for cosmetic changes to a toon...do you guys realize how expensive it is to make an mmo? Do you really think it's possible to recoup that cost by having people pay only for little trophies, dyes, and doodads for their toons? I don't.

So perhaps the free-to-play-model is the wrong one for a game like this then? Full price game or subscriptions might work better. Otherwise they won't make enough money to keep this game going with their hidden pay-to-play scheme.

nomotog wrote:
Games make the most money by attracting the most players. Players are attracted to games with fair pricing models that don't punish player for being free. It's the you will get m ore flys with honey thing. The more free players you get the better. Even if a free player doesn't pay a dime, they still add value to a game like a mmo. Times that by 10 if it's a game focused all around PvP.

This is worth repeating. And someone tell the devs.

 BryllCream wrote:
If you're going to assume that the game won't be fun then you may as well assume that the devs are all holocaust deniers. Actually there are some in this thread who probably do think that

We were talking about a silly video game and you bring up holocaust denying scum? wtf

 Sigvatr wrote:
I expect a very poor spinoff and low quality with an unfair pay system. Mark my words.

That mirrors my expectations :(
In other words we've got to wait another two to four years until we might hear about a great 40k game. Yay!

 Melissia wrote:
I think we'll hear about a successor to DoW2 or Space Marine before then at least.

Yes, you are right. In my despair i forgot about those.

Edit: Thankfully Behaviour Interactive only got the MMO licence, didn't they?

A lot of the complaints are based on the BS design decisions they made early on as mentioned in between "there is only war!" in the first interviews.
.

Screaming Exec and Devs:

Please brainstorm some more about your F2P model. I am not sure if confining the (initially) free loading players to the roll of cannon fodder as lowly orkboyz will entice them to stick around for the actual game after they've paid for it. Allow them to see more of the game, especially as it changes quite dramatically with the player based order system. As a free player without any chance to advance there's really no incentive to follow orders at all (and that makes it also quite pointless to play as a paying ork "officer").

Two less important wishes:
Please include friendly fire and please no endless click one button melee combat (try Drakan 1 on the PC to see how it should be done).

 Troike wrote:

 Melissia wrote:
Yes. They're okay with new players who are just trying the game out being slaughtered endlessly by overpowered paying players and thus saying "this game sucks and it's pay to win" and leaving.

It's not a F2P model I can agree with.

They would probably adapt it if didn't work in practice.

Better to adjust it now as there won't be a game or player base left after they notice it didn't work out.

 DemetriDominov wrote:
what happens when you're actually executed?

You buy a new character?

Would female (chaos) space marines solve that problem or is that too much of a retcon / deviation from the current background?

 Melissia wrote:

 Minx wrote:
Would female (chaos) space marines solve that problem or is that too much of a retcon / deviation from the current background?

We've already had people spaz out over the idea in this thread. Probably would cause too many aneurysms and too much nerdrage if it was implemented.

They could pretend those are just Sisters of Battle while the Devs only implement different models without any special different rules.
Having no female characters for most factions will be hard to sell to the non-initiated.