Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!

Fuzzy Avatars Solved! Please re-upload your avatar if it was fuzzy!

Does CU really stand a chance?

ReklawReklaw Am.Posts: 6,478Member Uncommon

Really this is a honost question I am wondering about.

If we look at upcomming MMO's. Look at the amount of people able to play together (Black Desert start at 6.00m) which is just one example. I am sure we will see more and more games handling allot of people together in one place.

We see a shift from the Themepark MMO's going to be more hybrid or sandbox(ish)

I really like to know what most of CU's follower feel at this time about a succeeding chance of CU in about 3 years, even though I still believe 5 or more years might deliver the game as promised.

«13

Comments

  • belatucadrosbelatucadros Toronto, ONPosts: 263Member
    I have no idea what any of this means. But I have a feeling like whatever it was you were trying to say is wrong.

    Eldritch, Nightshade, Warden, Druid, Mauler, Mentalist
    Sorcerer, Necromancer, Theurgist, Armsman, Cleric
    Healer, Warrior, Skald

  • DMKanoDMKano Gamercentral, AKPosts: 8,565Member Uncommon

    It is impossible to know, if somebody releases a new type of MMO that totally revolutionizes gameplay in way that we have never seen before it would make traditional MMORPGs seem archaic and a lot less desirable.

    CU is based on the current MMORPG systems, classes, combat involving HP/mana pools etc..

    Can you imagine a MMORPG where combat didn't revolve around a concept of having a defined HP pool, and empty HP pool = dead player, every single game uses this old "math" system.

    Yeah that would be a revolutionary system, eliminating pre-defined health and energy pools.

     

    Bottom line it stands a chance unless something done much better comes out before CU launches.

  • meddyckmeddyck Athens, GAPosts: 1,140Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by Reklaw

    Really this is a honost question I am wondering about.

    If we look at upcomming MMO's. Look at the amount of people able to play together (Black Desert start at 6.00m) which is just one example. I am sure we will see more and more games handling allot of people together in one place.

    We see a shift from the Themepark MMO's going to be more hybrid or sandbox(ish)

    I really like to know what most of CU's follower feel at this time about a succeeding chance of CU in about 3 years, even though I still believe 5 or more years might deliver the game as promised.

    CU is a very specific type of game, one that largely is about fantasy-themed RvR combat. I don't see much good going on in that niche before CU launches. There is TESO of course, but there are plenty of reasons to doubt it will be the game RvRers have been dreaming of for years. GW 2 WvW has been very disappointing to many. Perhaps they will improve on it over the next few years. I am not sure how open people who didn't like WvW in its original form will be to giving it another try. I probably wouldn't bother unless the changes were very dramatic. In short even in 2-3 years, CU will have a large part of the RvR niche to itself. It still has to execute well to realize that opportunity of course. It's way too soon in the development process for anybody to make any meaningful judgments on whether the game will be what it needs to be.

    Camelot Unchained Backer
    DAOC [retired]: R11 Cleric R11 Druid R11 Minstrel R9 Eldritch R6 Sorc R6 Scout R5 Healer

  • BetaguyBetaguy Halifax, NSPosts: 2,590Member
    Originally posted by DMKano

    It is impossible to know, if somebody releases a new type of MMO that totally revolutionizes gameplay in way that we have never seen before it would make traditional MMORPGs seem archaic and a lot less desirable.

    CU is based on the current MMORPG systems, classes, combat involving HP/mana pools etc..

    Can you imagine a MMORPG where combat didn't revolve around a concept of having a defined HP pool, and empty HP pool = dead player, every single game uses this old "math" system.

    Yeah that would be a revolutionary system, eliminating pre-defined health and energy pools.

     

    Bottom line it stands a chance unless something done much better comes out before CU launches.

    Very good chance that will happen in the next 3-5 years.

    image

  • CaldrinCaldrin CwmbranPosts: 4,533Member Uncommon

    CU is a niche game at the end of the day, the devs know this and are building the game around that..

    I am looking forward to CU as it will be a different type of game to any of the upcoming MMORPGs even the sandbox ones.

  • jtcgsjtcgs New Port Richey, ILPosts: 1,777Member

    Depends on what you mean by stand a chance.

    If you mean stand a chance at becoming popular with the MMO community? The answer is no.

    If you mean stand a chance to win over its target small audience? The answer is maybe.

    And its maybe because it couldn't even win over half the DaoC crowd which was split between it and TESO...then again, TESO lost quite a bit of support over the last 6 months so...better chance of doing it now, not because CU improved, but because TESO got worse.

    “I hope we shall crush...in its birth the aristocracy of our moneyed corporations, which dare already to challenge our government to a trial of strength and bid defiance to the laws of our country." ~Thomes Jefferson

  • zagemoggazagemogga BanburyPosts: 2Member

    I hope it does, the most importent feature for me is realm-pride and a goal where everyone in your realm works towards to. Either you are crafter, warrior, mage or thief, they all do something useful.

    Guilds are fine but whole realms working together are better.

    This might be not the opinion of most players, since I never really liked WoW for example (this makes me probably a weird player of some sort).

  • AlthewiseguyAlthewiseguy DumfriesPosts: 108Member
    I hope so. Some decent Realm V Realm pvp gameplay would be great. If it's pay to play, player driven crafting economy included I'll definitely go for it. 
  • ReklawReklaw Am.Posts: 6,478Member Uncommon

    Thanks for the replies.

    And yes I do mean stand a chance towards the niche crowd

    I also hope CU does succeed. But my stance since the beginning of Kickstarter has not really changed much as I still feel 3 years will not be enough time to create what is promised or what everyone hopes for CU will be.

     

  • StilerStiler Athens, TNPosts: 599Member

    I think it depends on how the game turns out, it's way to early to know now. We don't know exactly how combat is going to play or anything yet.

     

  • ArzhurArzhur Natick, MAPosts: 3Member

    I remember when this was the topic of discussion for DOAC on the VN boards.

    Small upstart game company couldn’t compete with EQ, AC or the upcoming WOW.

    Well he did then and he will again, two words Mark Jacobs.

    Yes this will be an old school, hard core game with limited appeal but enough appeal to make a profit and give us ol’e schoolers one hell of a ride.

  • Dornin34Dornin34 timbuktoo, KYPosts: 14Member
    Originally posted by Arzhur

    I remember when this was the topic of discussion for DOAC on the VN boards.

    Small upstart game company couldn’t compete with EQ, AC or the upcoming WOW.

    Well he did then and he will again, two words Mark Jacobs.

    Yes this will be an old school, hard core game with limited appeal but enough appeal to make a profit and give us ol’e schoolers one hell of a ride.

    I have one word for you "Warhammer"

     

  • FlyinDutchman87FlyinDutchman87 London MIlls, ILPosts: 247Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by Dornin34

    I have one word for you "Warhammer"

     

    1. I acutally really liked warhammer. It had Issues but the RvR was really fun.

     

    2. EA needed to hold off about 6 months on the Launch of WAR. I'm going to give Mark J the benifit of the doubt and act under the assumption that EA kills everything they touch. Third times a charm right?

  • Marcus-Marcus- Posts: 970Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by Dornin34

    I have one word for you "Warhammer"

     

    I didn't mind Warhammer, and I would probably still be playing it today if I thought it had any chance for a future. Once the development ceased I gave up. Was it perfect? Not by a long shot. I was pretty disappointed with what I was given compared to what I was expecting.

     

    There's a lot of reasons why the game 'failed', and I really don't need to get into that aspect, as its been beaten to death.

     

    I really enjoy RvR, I really enjoy "sandbox" aspects to my MMOs, and I really enjoyed reading his (Jacobs) foundation principles regarding the game. Do expect every aspect of those principles to ring true when the game ships? Probably not, but I certainly like his direction. I also like that he doesn't need to go for the 1 million subs or bust at launch to succeed, he doesn't need ( nor intend to) please the masses.

     

    I also am really curious to see what he can deliver, his back is against the wall. After the Warhammer debacle, this is prolly his last chance at it.

     

    Personally, I got lucky, as this is the exact niche' type game I am looking for, (almost) everything I would want in my MMO if you gave me a checklist, so I helped fund it. I never funded a Kickstarter before, and I don't really see myself doing it again.

     

    I hope he can deliver.

  • NidwinNidwin LuxembourgPosts: 94Member

    It has more than a chance and it hopefully will. Fingers crossed.

    2 to 3 Years is more than enough to be ready to kick it off if they succeed to have their engine working properly in time. The entire success and readiness of the game depends on the engine they are building.

    Don't forget the nature of this game. RvR focussed with an elaborated crafting system and that's it. They don't have to worry about story lines, dungeons, big bosses and raids, instanced battlegrounds, hundreds of quests, bad ass looking graphics to compete with the AAAAAAAAAAAAAAA mmo's. They don't have to worry about splitting up zones for different kind of gamers. PVE zones, RvR lakes neither. And so on and so on.

     

    Also, none expects, to have everything already mentioned by MJ and his teams immediately at launch. What we, core RvRers, want is something playable that doesn't look like 20 years old graphics, hand made for us.

     

    1. Races to play in a holy trinity, RPS setup.

    2. RvR lake, big enough, where we can fight it out between the 3 races. MJ knows what needs to be done here.

    3. A "capital" for each race for the usual stuff you put in a capital.

    4. Couple of zones, probably, for crafting resources, drops or whatever.

    5. Large scale fights without lag/culling/skill lag or having to play 4fps in Aion/GW2 mode.

     

    Above that if they can

    1. Seasons and day/night times. Would be awesome, my dear.

    2. More races and more classes and more toons. We can wait for future patches or expansion packs for these ones.

    3. Bug free. We'll help them debug the stuff on our journey together as long as there isn't anything RvR breaking.

    4. Surprises for RvR or crafting stuff

    But we can wait for all this of course

     

    Just keep your word and don't try to attract peeps to this game that won't belong in it and everything should be fine.

  • FlyinDutchman87FlyinDutchman87 London MIlls, ILPosts: 247Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by Nidwin

    Just keep your word and don't try to attract peeps to this game that won't belong in it and everything should be fine.

    QFT.

    It's should be apparently to all the MMO makersby now that you can't please everyone. If your making a game for the hardcore RVR's and crafters of the world don't water our game down with PVE raiding crap. Leave the PVEer's of the world in WoW. We'll be better off without them.

    I think MJ's got the right of it. He said he'd be happy with 100k happy subscribers and would consider 200k a great victory. That's a good goal. Leave the masses to their grindfests and give us some old school PVP action with a crafting based economy.

     

     

  • ZinzanZinzan NorthPosts: 1,351Member
    Originally posted by Reklaw

    Thanks for the replies.

    And yes I do mean stand a chance towards the niche crowd

    I also hope CU does succeed. But my stance since the beginning of Kickstarter has not really changed much as I still feel 3 years will not be enough time to create what is promised or what everyone hopes for CU will be.

     

    There is no such thing as a niche crowd.

    I think you mean a specific niche, PvP crowd maybe?

    Expresso gave me a Hearthstone beta key.....I'm so happy :)

  • YizleYizle Atlanta, GAPosts: 517Member
    Originally posted by Dutchman87
    Originally posted by Dornin34

    I have one word for you "Warhammer"

     

    1. I acutally really liked warhammer. It had Issues but the RvR was really fun.

     

    2. EA needed to hold off about 6 months on the Launch of WAR. I'm going to give Mark J the benifit of the doubt and act under the assumption that EA kills everything they touch. Third times a charm right?

    These are my thoughts also.

  • FlyinDutchman87FlyinDutchman87 London MIlls, ILPosts: 247Member Uncommon

    I've made about 3 replies to this thread and I JUST figgured out what it's acutally about.

     

    I think a three year time line is quite enough time. I don't think it will take CSE more than 6 months to get a decent engine up and running.....(They already have a prototype that runs 600 players at 250 FPS and that only took 3 months) The majority of the work will be nailing combat and crafting mechanics. As well as balancing the HUGE amount of classes MJ is working on(At least 12-15 at launch I would guess)

    Without PVE they can have their art team(all 2 of them) building a large and interesting world. While their animator works at smashing out combat animations, and their programing team works on expanding the building system and getting it integrated into the over-all game world.

    I have a feeling the game will be a Quasi-playable state by the holidays THIS YEAR. With Internal testing kicking off early next year. By then most of the tools should be inplace so they can start building the various systems required for a MMO.  Then start  hammering out the major bugs and working on adding content. That's where the real time sync is, trying to troubleshoot a huge open world to make sure when a player jumps on a rock between a mountain they don't fall through the world or Crash to Desktop.  Six months in Alpha, Six more In Beta 1, Three in Beta 2 then the marketing frenzy begins, and launch by the holidays 2015.

     

     

    YOU HEARD IT HEAR FIRST!

    CU launch Nov 2015!

     

    When 2016 rolls around with no CU in sight I give you all the right to say I told you so.....

     

  • ReklawReklaw Am.Posts: 6,478Member Uncommon

    FlyinDutchman87: I am not one of those people who might  say "I told you so" in 2016.

    I actually hope I can say I was wrong in 2016

    As said I truly hope the game will deliver towards the specific niche (Thanks Zinzan) Just personaly have my doubts.

     

  • tom_goretom_gore TamperePosts: 1,796Member Uncommon

    I hope CU will succeed. We don't have too many PvP focused games that aren't full loot (which tends to lead into a very degenerate player base). TESO will have "RvR" as a side dish, much like GW2 does, but the game and its development will forever revolve around the masses of PvE players, just like GW2 does.

    I am very interested in trying CU myself, but I fear it will have an archaic combat system with tab targeting and hotkey spam. I just can't stand those any more, after being spoiled by TERA's and GW2's active combat systems (followed probably by EQNext and TESO next year).

     

  • PhryPhry HampshirePosts: 6,296Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by tom_gore

    I hope CU will succeed. We don't have too many PvP focused games that aren't full loot (which tends to lead into a very degenerate player base). TESO will have "RvR" as a side dish, much like GW2 does, but the game and its development will forever revolve around the masses of PvE players, just like GW2 does.

    I am very interested in trying CU myself, but I fear it will have an archaic combat system with tab targeting and hotkey spam. I just can't stand those any more, after being spoiled by TERA's and GW2's active combat systems (followed probably by EQNext and TESO next year).

     

    That actually raises a very good point, because the games focus is combat, it is a PVP focused game after all, then the combat system will be the main part of the game. I agree that tab targeting in this case will not be acceptable. It does raise the hit detection factor but if it can be done in games like Planetside2 with huge amounts of players present then there isnt really any reason that they can't do it in a fantasy game, where ranges are usually much much closer image

    Having said that, what i don't want to see in a R v R game is ridiculously low player numbers on the battlefield, 8v8 16 v 16 or even 32 v 32 might be okay for arena pvp but its not even close for true R v R combat, i want to see battle lines, i want to see hundreds of players vying for tactical advantage in a grand melee.. image

  • TheLizardbonesTheLizardbones Arkham, VAPosts: 10,910Member

    Of course the game has a chance. Their biggest hurdle was getting enough money through Kickstarter to build. Their next biggest hurdle will be getting a game out the door. If they can get the game out the door in a playable state, they'll be set. I can't imagine there not being enough people to play the game, especially when four million dollars of the development money isn't coming from investors, but from Kickstarer and that Jacobs guy.

    I can not remember winning or losing a single debate on the internet.

  • KyleranKyleran Tampa, FLPosts: 20,008Member Uncommon

    Funny thing about PVP/RVR games, on one hand you have a group who want them to have "massive" battles, able to pit 1000 vs 1000.

    Yet on the other hand, people complain when the combat becomes too zergy, and I imagine if you ever were in a huge fight like 400 vs 400, it would be absolute chaos on the battlefield.   (I've been in them in EVE, and they are very controlled affairs and still a challenge to fully comprehend and coordinate)

    In following the GW2 forums, people make suggestions for the developers to make the RVR world bigger and break the content down so there are smaller objectives to break up the zerg.  Contrast that then with requests to not make the RVR world too large, because it spreads the player base too thin and makes fights hard to come by.

    Seems like a tall order for any developer to try and deliver, and it will interesting to see how CU decides to present itself, because I don't believe it's possible to design in a manner to solve all of the above, something has to suffer.

    For me what really matters isn't the size of the fight, but what types of rewards I'll get, for participating, for winning, for losing.  Will I gain experience (obviously yes, only way to do so), special abilities a la DAOC that I can chose in addition to core class skills, (I assume we will), some sort of ranking system/names (again, a la DAOC) and of course......loot.

    Oh well, I'm in for one of the earlier tiers so I should get a pretty good idea  how it shapes up.

     

     

     

     

    In my day MMORPG's were so hard we fought our way through dungeons in the snow, uphill both ways.
    "I don't have one life, I have many lives" - Grunty
    Still currently "subscribed" to EVE, and only EVE!!!
    "This is the most intelligent, well qualified and articulate response to a post I have ever seen on these forums. It's a shame most people here won't have the attention span to read past the second line." - Anon

  • tom_goretom_gore TamperePosts: 1,796Member Uncommon

    Kyleran, it obviously depends on how the developer wants the game to be.

    Do they want it to be about strategy? Then they need to have incentive to spread your forces in several groups, defend key points and make the areas big enough / troops slow enough that there will be time to react to enemy troop movements and a need for scouts. This all obviously comes at a cost of sometimes having to take some time to find a fight.

    Or, do they want it to be about fighting? Then they just need to give the players an ability to get into and back into a fight as fast as possible, usually at the cost of any real strategic elements. Victory or loss will be trivial and the point is to have some fun with hack&slash.

     

    By what we know about CU today, it seems they will try to steer towards a more strategic approach. Which is good, as we do already have games that offer that "fifteen minutes of fun" without consequences.

     

«13
Sign In or Register to comment.