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.

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.

https://www.eternalcrusade.com/news/641-WARHAMMER-40-000-ETERNAL-CRUSADE-Confirmed-To-Begin-On-PC-September-23rd

So I guess we'll start seeing reviews in about 10 days then so we'll finally know who was correct in this thread.

Console previews have it set for December 31st. At least Target does.

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.

 warboss wrote:

 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.

What's the snip for?

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.

Eh, I've gotten my enjoyment from the game, so long as it survives I'll be pretty happy with it .

"Tyranids are a great now, though some glitches persist. Cosmetics are to be purchased and some weapon imbalance and optimization remains."

where do you see Nids? I am on the Steam early release and it's still the 4 factions of SM/CSM/Ork/Eldar...

Tyranids are PVE content

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.

 ZebioLizard2 wrote:
Tyranids are PVE content

huh...haven't been able to do that yet...

tpryan01 wrote:

 ZebioLizard2 wrote:
Tyranids are PVE content

huh...haven't been able to do that yet...

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.

It's fun but not really a complete game. 40k fans will like it. Non 40k fans will probably stop playing after a few weeks.

 Rezyn wrote:
It's fun but not really a complete game. 40k fans will like it. Non 40k fans will probably stop playing after a few weeks.

So what you're saying is that it has a better chance then battleborn?

 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.

I'm going to wait for it to pop up on the next Steam sale for quite a bit off myself.

The measured reviews I've found online so far spoilered below....



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).

 BrookM wrote:
I'm going to wait for it to pop up on the next Steam sale for quite a bit off myself.

This game could be free and I still wouldn't touch it.

 Kanluwen wrote:

 BrookM wrote:
I'm going to wait for it to pop up on the next Steam sale for quite a bit off myself.

This game could be free and I still wouldn't touch it.

I'll put you down for one of those 0/10 reviews then.

No longer coming out on XO/PS4? I can only find listings for PC

Triszin wrote:
No longer coming out on XO/PS4? I can only find listings for PC

It's been delayed/staggered release for consoles with a post a page or two back stating around December iirc.

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.

It's farther than I thought it would be and not far enough for what it is.

That's all I have to say anymore.