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.

 Souleater wrote:

 Ahtman wrote:
$35 for a looted Bolter?!?! That is insane. I thought about the $40 pre-order founders pack, but that makes me think that may be a bad idea.

That price is exactly the same as for the gold skinned guns available in Planetside 2.

Because someone else did something silly doesn't make it not silly. I suppose it isn't so bad that really you are just buying $35 worth of RT points and getting the skin for free, but the way it is presented makes it look more like it is that price just for a digital weapon.

To even think about putting actual cash into a product that is clearly unfinished is nucking futs, frankly..

$35, the retail cost of a full game btw, for a limited edition re-skin of a weapon you can't use for 18 months?

There are not enough facepalms in the world.....

I'm looking forward to this, of course. But calm down people! If some of you guys throw $70 or more at this, and it turns out to be complete and utter horse gak, what then?

 sarpedons-right-hand wrote:
$35, the retail cost of a full game btw

That doesn't sound right.

Why not? Are you trying to tell me that there are not games in the US that are finished, in a working state, and are available for $35 or less

 sarpedons-right-hand wrote:
Why not?

Because I believe the devs had said the PC version will be closer to $50 for the full retail.

 sarpedons-right-hand wrote:
Are you trying to tell me that there are not games in the US that are finished, in a working state, and are available for $35 or less

How you got from "I don't think the game will be $35 when it comes out" to "there are no games that are $35 or less" is a mystery.

Hahaha. Those guys are beyond insanity. Really. That's the most ridiculous P2W I have EVER seen.

Ahhh, good old crossed wires again. What I said was 'a' retail game. Not the game in question. Of course, if you will just look at a post and not actually read it...

Sometimes, your logic is a mystery....

 Sigvatr wrote:
Hahaha. Those guys are beyond insanity. Really. That's the most ridiculous P2W I have EVER seen.

There is this game called WolfTeam...

 Psychopski wrote:

The Founder's weapons and gear are not just vanity items or skins as far as my understanding.

There is a really good acid test to see if a F2P game is worth buying. Do bought items have an ingame advantage? If yes the devs have certainly got their priorities wrong and the game will probably be gak. If no then its possible that the game will be decent.

'Sidegrades' do not bode well. Aside from the fact that the videos portray a game that is far from finished yet there is already a cash shop? Never mind that this game has a retail release.

Spider senses tingling.

It also looks very similar to War of The Roses in a gameplay sense and that is also not something that makes me want to play this game. Looking into my crystal ball I would say that this game will quickly be forgotten.

 Palindrome wrote:

 Psychopski wrote:

The Founder's weapons and gear are not just vanity items or skins as far as my understanding.

There is a really good acid test to see if a F2P game is worth buying. Do bought items have an ingame advantage? If yes the devs have certainly got their priorities wrong and the game will probably be gak. If no then its possible that the game will be decent.

'Sidegrades' do not bode well. Aside from the fact that the videos portray a game that is far from finished yet there is already a cash shop? Never mind that this game has a retail release.

Spider senses tingling.

It also looks very similar to War of The Roses in a gameplay sense and that is also not something that makes me want to play this game. Looking into my crystal ball I would say that this game will quickly be forgotten.

Seriously, the community had asked for this. This was not a spur of the moment "HEY LETS OPEN A CASH SHOP" but "Oh hey the fans want to support us, and have suggested this sort of pre-game founders pack shop to do things with, we shall draw it up and show it to them later."

 ZebioLizard2 wrote:

Seriously, the community had asked for this.

I really don't care. If the devs are happy to pander to the community with a cash shop at a stage when their promotional videos still have grey boxes and look like the game has 10 year old graphics then there are some serious issues with the community, the devs or both. The very fact that time was spent creating the cash shop, and more importantly designing the items, at this early stage of development is really not a good sign.

yourself.

 Palindrome wrote:

 ZebioLizard2 wrote:

Seriously, the community had asked for this.

I really don't care. If the devs are happy to pander to the community with a cash shop at a stage when their promotional videos still have grey boxes and look like the game has 10 year old graphics then there are some serious issues with the community, the devs or both. The very fact that time was spent creating the cash shop, and more importantly designing the items, at this early stage of development is really not a good sign.

yourself.

Of course they could have just made it like most founders packs, where they get pre-set X instead of stuff, this way they allow for them to pick and choose what they desire up till the release date.

Not to mention creating such a cash shop and creating things within it would be easy enough for an artist, while the others are working on the main game itself, it's not as if they don't have teams working various aspects of the game after-all.

Those video's aren't their promotional, they just desire to constantly keep the community in check with what they are doing during the Pre-alpha, they want the fans to know where they are every step of the way.

Palindrome wrote:If the devs are happy to pander to the community with a cash shop at a stage when their promotional videos still have grey boxes and look like the game has 10 year old graphics then there are some serious issues with the community, the devs or both.

Please. You are talking about 40k fans - one of the most expensive hobbies aimed at kids I could think of.

Try looking at it this way:
The devs just did what the community asked for. This is both "listening to the playerbase" as well as following the capitalist principle of supply and demand, something you could hardly fault any company for.
And as for the community, aside from some people really wanting this game very badly, you could think of it as people cautiously probing the developers' philosophy when it comes to their F2P model, wishing to see examples of their cash shop before deciding on whether or not to invest into ongoing development of the game.

And no, I'm neither a dev nor do I have any interest buying anything from them yet - I'm just saying that there's always more than one way to see things.

Those animation assets look like they are lifted directly from Space Marine. Was there some contractual thing with GW that is letting them repurpose stuff from there?

Either way, looks really early and pretty janky still. I saw instant getting in and out of vehicles, which I never like.

I wonder what kind of engine they are building this in?

 Lynata wrote:

And no, I'm neither a dev nor do I have any interest buying anything from them yet - I'm just saying that there's always more than one way to see things.

Yes there is although given that currently the shop is selling virtual weapons for around $30 even though the game is still very much in an alpha phase of development my skepticism is far from misplaced. At least Star citizen and the like have the excuse of being a crowd funded game.

Everything that I have seen about this game points to it being a turd.

Of course these are promotional videos, they were released by the devs with the express intention of generating interest in the game.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 daedalus-templarius wrote:

I wonder what kind of engine they are building this in?

Unity apparently.

Unity. Oh god.

 Palindrome wrote:

There is a really good acid test to see if a F2P game is worth buying.

Only the Orks are F2P, and even then only part of the faction.

I feel that they are trying to cater to everybody right now. They have partial F2P, microtransactions if you just want one faction, a full-game-in-a-box option plus subs that just give you more points in the cash shop. It ends up feeling messy.

I agree that stuff available in a cash shop should not give an in game advantage unless it can also be earned through XP in game.

The Devs have said they are going to re-evaluate the prices.

I really hope they pull this game off but at the moment they seem a little hazy.

 Souleater wrote:

Only the Orks are F2P, and even then only part of the faction.

Its still F2P and the fact that there is a retail version of the game makes the possibility of unbalanced micro transactions even worse.

Palindrome wrote:Yes there is although given that currently the shop is selling virtual weapons for around $30 even though the game is still very much in an alpha phase of development my skepticism is far from misplaced. At least Star citizen and the like have the excuse of being a crowd funded game.

Isn't the gun just a bonus to the shop currency you buy? I admit I've kind of lost track of this game ever since I've accepted the prospect of no SoB, but I believe someone pointed this out on the previous page.
In my opinion, what really matters in these cases is less the price that is being asked for, but what the relevant item actually does in the game - specifically, whether it provides an (unfair) advantage, and/or whether or not you can acquire or unlock that item via normal game progression too.
(for this reason I am far more sceptical towards SC and its classification into "civilian" and "military" ships, depending on how many hundreds of dollars you are willing to spend)

Palindrome wrote:Unity apparently.

Huh, interesting.

I actually think Unity is severely underrated in common perception; you can do a crazy amount of stuff with it (I've recently tested the alpha of Shadowrun Online, and it uses Unity too).
Though the sort of battles they want to depict with it is still a pretty ambitious goal.

Unity is really an excellent platform, however I'm not sure how it will work in this mmo setting.

Regardless of it being unity or not, it looks janky as all get out so far. Like a really weird, messy version of Space Marine (which I happened to quite like the multiplayer in).

https://forum.eternalcrusade.com/threads/we-listen-to-you-founders-launch-post-mortem-decisions-regarding-your-feedback-on-issues-and-faq.21281/

Discussing the issues afterwords.

 Palindrome wrote:

 Psychopski wrote:

The Founder's weapons and gear are not just vanity items or skins as far as my understanding.

There is a really good acid test to see if a F2P game is worth buying. Do bought items have an ingame advantage? If yes the devs have certainly got their priorities wrong and the game will probably be gak. If no then its possible that the game will be decent.

'Sidegrades' do not bode well. Aside from the fact that the videos portray a game that is far from finished yet there is already a cash shop? Never mind that this game has a retail release.

Spider senses tingling.

It also looks very similar to War of The Roses in a gameplay sense and that is also not something that makes me want to play this game. Looking into my crystal ball I would say that this game will quickly be forgotten.

They have already hired individuals to create an in game store, so if they put them to work a bit earlier than expected, or go "live" with the store earlier than expected, I dont see how that can be bad for the community. Especially if you consider it was the FANS that were asking for it. There's also the added advantage of having their store up and running a full year and some change before the game goes live, so you would think that the store should be rock solid for launch. But that would shed things in a positive light, and it's clear you only want to see the negative.


You're not hot on the game, I can respect that. However, if you're going to quote me, at least post what I said about the weapons, instead of only using the lines that reinforce your false assumptions. And don't start with the fanboy comments please. I'm very critical of the developers often over in the EC forums, and dont want to see Pay to Win, or any other gimmicks or lore breaking elements that aren't worthy of the 40K Trademark.

The Founder's weapons and gear are not just vanity items or skins as far as my understanding. They're limited edition items for the Founders. The devs have stated multiple times any in store gear will be similar to their counterparts in game, with slight stat variations. They call them "side grades" versus upgrades. As an example, just grabbing numbers off the top of my head to make a point, a standard bolter will fire a say 500 rounds a minute and do 50 damage a hit, the Founders Bolter in the store will fire 400 rounds a minute and do 60 damage per hit. Or... it might fire 600 rounds a minute at 40 damage per hit.

If you read the FAQ or anything about the future of the in game store, it would be more than apparent the fan base NOR the developers want "Pay to Win" to exist in any form in Eternal Crusade.



...

 Psychopski wrote:

However, if you're going to quote me, at least post what I said about the weapons, instead of only using the lines that reinforce your false assumptions.

I reduced the quote for the sake of brevity and I specifically mention sidegrades within the text of the post.The very fact that these bought items have differing in game abilities, which is what the devs themselves have stated, is what I find suspicious and frankly it does not bode well.

When did I even mention fanboys?

 Palindrome wrote:

 Psychopski wrote:

However, if you're going to quote me, at least post what I said about the weapons, instead of only using the lines that reinforce your false assumptions.

I reduced the quote for the sake of brevity and I specifically mention sidegrades within the text of the post.The very fact that these bought items have differing in game abilities, which is what the devs themselves have stated, is what I find suspicious and frankly it does not bode well.

When did I even mention fanboys?

You didn't, much as I checked through them.

Though I don't mind sidegrades, but I'm not one to care for exclusive things, I just wanted to show my support and buy cool things really.

 Psychopski wrote:

They have already hired individuals to create an in game store, so if they put them to work a bit earlier than expected, or go "live" with the store earlier than expected, I dont see how that can be bad for the community. Especially if you consider it was the FANS that were asking for it. There's also the added advantage of having their store up and running a full year and some change before the game goes live, so you would think that the store should be rock solid for launch. But that would shed things in a positive light, and it's clear you only want to see the negative.

To be blunt, the company shouldn't have hired those individuals until the game is past alpha/prealpha stage. Whether the store is "rock solid for launch" or not, it should be low on their priorities considering the pedigree(or lack thereof) of the developers.

If you read the FAQ or anything about the future of the in game store, it would be more than apparent the fan base NOR the developers want "Pay to Win" to exist in any form in Eternal Crusade.

And yet...you have to pay to play any race beyond Orks, correct?

...and the free race is considerably weaker than SM

 Kanluwen wrote:

If you read the FAQ or anything about the future of the in game store, it would be more than apparent the fan base NOR the developers want "Pay to Win" to exist in any form in Eternal Crusade.

And yet...you have to pay to play any race beyond Orks, correct?

It's play to play with a 'free' ork boyz option.

If you are about to equate that to Pay to Win...

 ZebioLizard2 wrote:

 Kanluwen wrote:

If you read the FAQ or anything about the future of the in game store, it would be more than apparent the fan base NOR the developers want "Pay to Win" to exist in any form in Eternal Crusade.

And yet...you have to pay to play any race beyond Orks, correct?

It's play to play with a 'free' ork boyz option.

If you are about to equate that to Pay to Win...

You already have the option of a "paid item store" where likely NOTHING will have level requirements.

So yeah, it's going to be Pay to Win.

That remains to be seen. None of these signs are promising, true. As long as they maintain a free currency alongside the real money store, they'll be no more pay to win than Mechwarrior Online or League of Legends. If you can grind for a month and unlock a Space Marine, then I have no problem with the model.

Imagine LoL where every Quintessence was 20$. The fun.