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.

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.


Steam data: http://steamspy.com/app/375230
Hitbox hack (3 years and running): http://massivelyop.com/2016/04/13/planetside-2-hitbox-hack-gets-called-out-hotfixed-by-daybreak/
Hitbox hack 2: https://www.reddit.com/r/Planetside/comments/4egqh1/after_seeing_the_hitbox_exploit_thread_dont_feel/
YouTube EC and Raw Gameplay by me: https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLVQKkx8lVTHCOeF3u_z8Wuj6vRvmiA0YP
YouTube Live Streams from Devs: https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLFImKHmdT4qLSz9W0cw3vfrG2EdPvsGg8

 Rayvon wrote:

 DarkStarSabre wrote:

 Brother SRM wrote:

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.

 Pilau Rice wrote:

 Rayvon wrote:

 DarkStarSabre wrote:

 Brother SRM wrote:

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.

 MLaw wrote:

 Pilau Rice wrote:


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.

@pilau rice

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.

You get 4 slots, one for each race. I don't think you really need to worry about buying more slots....

 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.

 Iron_Captain wrote:

 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:

 Iron_Captain wrote:

 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.

 ZedAvatar wrote:

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.

 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.

 DarkStarSabre wrote:

 ZedAvatar wrote:

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.

 ZedAvatar wrote:
@pilau rice

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.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Pilau Rice wrote:

 ZedAvatar wrote:
@pilau rice

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.

But you think this: https://youtu.be/bZ0EJdhR43Q
Looks better than this?: https://youtu.be/RQIZ8R9doLY


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.

http://forum.eternalcrusade.com/threads/ive-been-waiting-for-this-since-1998.6628/

http://forum.eternalcrusade.com/threads/some-concerns-about-gameplay.45790/
(In case this last link does not work, here is my OP - June 4, 2015)
"Hello, I do not often engage in forum posts, just some things I would like to mention/discuss at this point in development.

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.

Thank you. "

http://gameindustry.about.com/od/glossary/g/Aaa-Game.htm

 gigasnail wrote:
http://gameindustry.about.com/od/glossary/g/Aaa-Game.htm

"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."

"As of September 30, 2008, WAR had sold 1.2 million copies and had 800,000 registered users."

Checkmate?


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Probably my last post here, unless you guys ask me specific questions.

Just some final info about the new design:

http://forum.eternalcrusade.com/threads/about-pikko-server-technology.1783/

The backlash after cancellation: http://forum.eternalcrusade.com/threads/so-there-is-no-more-1-server-for-all.45211/
There is a lot of knee-jerk reaction in the first few pages, and by pages 8 and 9 Nathan explains exactly what the plan is. Also Pikko servers were removed from the FAQ.

https://youtu.be/T6vXfTEvDVM?t=475

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.

 ZedAvatar wrote:


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.

But you think this: https://youtu.be/bZ0EJdhR43Q
Looks better than this?: https://youtu.be/RQIZ8R9doLY

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

https://www.google.ca/?gws_rd=ssl#q=aaa+games+launch+fails


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Pilau Rice wrote:

 ZedAvatar wrote:


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.

But you think this: https://youtu.be/bZ0EJdhR43Q
Looks better than this?: https://youtu.be/RQIZ8R9doLY

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

They also showed off some new cool stuff.

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)

The game was marketed more as a MMOTPS - Massively Multiplayer Online Third Person Shooter. https://bhvrmtl.zendesk.com/hc/en-us/articles/208057693-What-kind-of-game-is-this-

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. ^^