Really quiet here, is this game stalled?

245

Comments

  • bcbullybcbully Westland, MIMember RarePosts: 9,109
    CF looks cool, but you know what see you has going for it? Lore, dark gritty three faction unmirroed lore. 
  • francis_baudfrancis_baud Member RarePosts: 208
    edited June 4
    ste2000 said:

    I am happy you now understand that CUBE is just fluff and not necessary in a PvP game, but I believe that wasting resources on it cost you a good head start over Crowfall which is now almost ready for release


    CUBE is the system that will allow players to build and destroy houses, fortified structures and walls in Camelot Unchained. It's a cornerstone of the PvP, economy/crafting activities and territorial conquest.

    If I'm correct what Mark said is that they haven't put much energy on CUBE in the last year and it may just mean that CSE was already satisfied with its state in regards to the launch of Beta 1.
    Post edited by francis_baud on
    JamesGoblinMarcus-pantaroNightblazed
  • ste2000ste2000 londonMember EpicPosts: 6,194
    edited June 4
    ste2000 said:

    I am happy you now understand that CUBE is just fluff and not necessary in a PvP game, but I believe that wasting resources on it cost you a good head start over Crowfall which is now almost ready for release


    CUBE is the system that will allow players to build and destroy houses, fortified structures and walls in Camelot Unchained. It's a cornerstone of the PvP, economy/crafting activities and territorial conquest in CU.

    Cornerstone?

    CUBE is not necessary to sustain crafting or the economy, not it is necessary for the territorial conquest system, as all of this can be achieved with destructible structures built and created by the developers like it's the case for similar games (for example Darkfall).
    CUBE is a way to give more creative power to the players, basically it is fluff, not really necessary.

    Post edited by ste2000 on

  • lukezlukez springfield, DCMember UncommonPosts: 25
    i'm actually quite happy that there isn't a big hype about CU
    in recent years atleast for me all games that had a huge hype attached to them prior to release were a major let down.
    It's not as easy as that but i believe they should spend a majority of their resources on actually developing the game rather than presenting something to show for while they're doing it.
    francis_baud
  • francis_baudfrancis_baud Member RarePosts: 208
    edited June 4
    ste2000 said:
    ste2000 said:

    I am happy you now understand that CUBE is just fluff and not necessary in a PvP game, but I believe that wasting resources on it cost you a good head start over Crowfall which is now almost ready for release


    CUBE is the system that will allow players to build and destroy houses, fortified structures and walls in Camelot Unchained. It's a cornerstone of the PvP, economy/crafting activities and territorial conquest in CU.

    Cornerstone?

    CUBE is not necessary to sustain crafting or the economy, not it is necessary for the territorial conquest system, as all of this can be achieved with destructible structures built and created by the developers like it's the case for similar games (for example Darkfall).
    CUBE is a way to give more creative power to the players, basically it is fluff, not really necessary.

    Realistic structure destruction is difficult to achieve in MMORPGs (performances).
    Hundreds of structures on a seamless map with server-side physics and long draw distance is very difficult to achieve (performances).
    Creating a large number of structures that look good takes a lot of dev resources: design, model, textures, gameplay, etc.

    CUBE seems to solve at least partially all of those issues, plus it enriches the game in many ways with customization (free form building), crafting & economy (blueprints, building materials), more depth in the gameplay for the territory control (defensive structures designed by the players and erected where gameplay dictates), physics-based limitations for immersion and realism...

    "[O]ne persistent, massive, open-world sandbox environment, with towns and cities built almost entirely by the players." "Looking for a game where you can build your own unique home, fort, or castle, rather than just buying one? Well, you've come to the right place. Using our simple but powerful building system, you are only limited by physics, your own imagination, and your enemies' torches!"
    Post edited by francis_baud on
    YashaXJamesGoblinMarcus-Nightblazed
  • CopperfieldCopperfield RotterdamMember UncommonPosts: 555
    yes im still intrested in CU.. they are doing/trying something new with this cube system

    Altho i have doubts about server performance and such..

    only mmo that i know of that do such thing is minecraft..
  • ste2000ste2000 londonMember EpicPosts: 6,194
    ste2000 said:


    CUBE seems to solve at least partially all of those issues, plus it enriches the game in many ways with customization (free form building), crafting & economy (blueprints, building materials), more depth in the gameplay for the territory control (defensive structures designed by the players and erected where gameplay dictates), physics-based limitations for immersion and realism...

    Having structures that looks out of place do everything except enrich a game.
    Yes, they said that player made structures would have to be approved before being implemented in the game, yet I doubt that would guarantee the required lore consistency a Fantasy game needs in order to avoid breaking the immersion.
    A Fantasy game requires  the world to be believable and unique, bundling buildings together which look at odds with each other and don't blend with the environment, hardly helps.
    The saving times argument is also debatable as it is taking lots of time to develop CUBE, time they could have used to create thousands of Art Assets.

    CUBE might solve few problems but creates even more in my opinion, Art Style and Lore consistency, engine performance, world might feel fake rather than unique.

    Anyway as I said CUBE would be nice to have as an added feature later on, it is not necessary at all, get the game done, then add the fluff.

    Similar games like Darkfall where territory conquest is the main focus of the game already showed how it is done.
    The destructible structures are created by the developers and requires Materials and Blueprints to build them, so as you can see you don't require CUBE to have an healthy crafting/economy either.

  • francis_baudfrancis_baud Member RarePosts: 208
    edited June 4
    Darkfall has been in development for 12 years, with about 25 artists / world building developers credited for the game. I'm not aware that Darkfall had particularly great construction features, nor structure destruction or noteworthy building quality.

    Pretty sure that the resources CSE spent on developing the building tools of CU are minimal compared to creating all the structures themselves.

    Using blocks allows players to experience a gameplay and realism that come close to voxelized structures, but without the heavy impact on performances.

    Thanks to CUBE, CU will support extremely large battles with realistic destruction, lot of customization, a landscape filled with builders' creations - houses, castles, walls, towers - across the RvR map, while maintaining incomparable performances.

    If CSE believes that the world will look inharmonious with constructions that feel out of place, they can always create pre-fab pieces, rather than allowing free-form building with blocks in CU. Or any other solution that makes sense.
    Post edited by francis_baud on
    holdenhamletYashaXRealizerJamesGoblinMarcus-Nightblazed
  • waynejr2waynejr2 West Toluca Lake, CAMember EpicPosts: 7,615
    ste2000 said:
    ste2000 said:


    CUBE seems to solve at least partially all of those issues, plus it enriches the game in many ways with customization (free form building), crafting & economy (blueprints, building materials), more depth in the gameplay for the territory control (defensive structures designed by the players and erected where gameplay dictates), physics-based limitations for immersion and realism...

    Having structures that looks out of place do everything except enrich a game.
    Yes, they said that player made structures would have to be approved before being implemented in the game, yet I doubt that would guarantee the required lore consistency a Fantasy game needs in order to avoid breaking the immersion.
    A Fantasy game requires  the world to be believable and unique, bundling buildings together which look at odds with each other and don't blend with the environment, hardly helps.
    The saving times argument is also debatable as it is taking lots of time to develop CUBE, time they could have used to create thousands of Art Assets.

    CUBE might solve few problems but creates even more in my opinion, Art Style and Lore consistency, engine performance, world might feel fake rather than unique.

    Anyway as I said CUBE would be nice to have as an added feature later on, it is not necessary at all, get the game done, then add the fluff.

    Similar games like Darkfall where territory conquest is the main focus of the game already showed how it is done.
    The destructible structures are created by the developers and requires Materials and Blueprints to build them, so as you can see you don't require CUBE to have an healthy crafting/economy either.


    Have you ever seen structures on Earth that are out of place?
    http://www.youhaventlived.com/qblog/2010/QBlog190810A.html  

    Epic Music:   https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vAigCvelkhQ&list=PLo9FRw1AkDuQLEz7Gvvaz3ideB2NpFtT1

    https://archive.org/details/softwarelibrary_msdos?&sort=-downloads&page=1

    Kyleran:  "Now there's the real trick, learning to accept and enjoy a game for what it offers rather than pass on what might be a great playing experience because it lacks a few features you prefer."

    John Henry Newman: "A man would do nothing if he waited until he could do it so well that no one could find fault."

    FreddyNoNose:  "A good game needs no defense; a bad game has no defense." "Easily digested content is just as easily forgotten."

    LacedOpium: "So the question that begs to be asked is, if you are not interested in the game mechanics that define the MMORPG genre, then why are you playing an MMORPG?"




  • learislearis Aventura, FLMember UncommonPosts: 12
    I'm most excited for this game out of all of them. So much creativity in the races and classes! But equally I'm worried. Their system of combining different core elements to create unique skills is the most novel one I've seen, but it also seems like it can be the most complicated in terms of properly implementing. I hope everything works out for them!
  • YashaXYashaX Baldurs GateMember RarePosts: 1,946
    Twisted77 said:
    Camelot Unchained is definitely a game I might want to give a significant amount of precious game time. 

    However, almost all the games in alpha/beta on MMORPG.com have a lot of hype and forum activity... this one rarely has a post every few days.

    Are people not excited for this game?
    I'm excited for the game, but what's to talk about? The lack of forum activity is because there hasn't been any drama surrounding CU, like the p2w and somewhat shady monetization issues that have plagued some other upcoming kickstarter/crowdfunded mmos. 
    Realizerfrancis_baudGaendriclaserit
    ....
  • francis_baudfrancis_baud Member RarePosts: 208
    edited June 4
    YashaX said:
    Twisted77 said:
    Camelot Unchained is definitely a game I might want to give a significant amount of precious game time. 

    However, almost all the games in alpha/beta on MMORPG.com have a lot of hype and forum activity... this one rarely has a post every few days.

    Are people not excited for this game?
    I'm excited for the game, but what's to talk about? The lack of forum activity is because there hasn't been any drama surrounding CU, like the p2w and somewhat shady monetization issues that have plagued some other upcoming kickstarter/crowdfunded mmos. 
    That, and also because the studio revealed most of the pertinent information about the game during the Kickstarter and hasn't really added to or changed the original design since then, so almost all of the information we've got since 4 years is about the progress and the reaffirmation of what was said during KS (except for a few things, like the change to the class system, i.e. more classes rather than more paths per classes). And because the game isn't yet in a playable state and all the testing is still under NDA. 
    Post edited by francis_baud on
    KyleranYashaXJamesGoblin
  • cameltosiscameltosis ipswichMember EpicPosts: 1,562
    This is currently the only game on the horizon that I'm interested in. I also firmly believe that CU will out-perform Crowfall in the long run, but that Crowfall will have better initial numbers. My reasoning:

    1) Tech

    Both are PvP games. Both are MMOs. That means you need to be able to support large scale battles (minimum 200+ players). History has not been kind on this front with hardly any MMOs ever being able to properly support this amount of players. Crowfall, using Unity5, almost certainly won't be able to support large scale battles. Their engine is not designed for MMOs. So, whilst the game may look pretty now, and they have been able to focus on content much more than CU, ultimately the core experience is likely to be laggy and frustrating. CU, by building their own engine from scratch, will be able to handle very large battles. It is a huge risk, but CU will be pretty much the first MMO to actually be massively-multiplayer. 


    2) Depth

    Crowfall has been designed from the start to offer you a shallow experience. It's using action combat, so pretty easy to learn, just takes time to master. The campaigns are instanced and short lived. The eternal kingdoms are just glorified housing instances. Everything about Crowfall is designed to get you into the game and give you a short-but-fun experience. Nothing about the game says that it will be engaging long term. 

    CU is different. The world is persistent. The combat depth is much greater. The meta game (ability builders) is much deeper. Players can actually leave their mark on the world by building great structures. CU is designed for the long term. 


    3) MMO Design

    To get players working together, especially in a PvP game, you need to ensure there are as few barriers between players as possible. This means removing power gaps so that you can aim for balance and just generally making it easier to group and play together. CU is employing horizontal progression, possibly the first MMO to do so right from the start. This mean you can join the game and actually contribute from day 1, rather than getting slaughtered for months before you have enough power. 

    Crowfall is sticking with vertical progression, so after a few months new players are gonna have a worse time. CU is also doing a lot of increase your attachment to the game. The CUBE system is central to this: we will actually be able to design and build our own villages, towns and cities in game. We can setup our own homes and shops and make the world ours. Everything we use in game will be crafted. It will actually be a virtual world, rather than gimmicky campaigns and generic housing. 



    Now, all that said, I believe both games have a place and it will come down to what sort of playstyle you prefer. If you want shorter, shallower, more instant gratification then CF is the place for you. It sounds like the perfect game for the casual pvper. If you want an actual MMO experience, if you want to live in a virtual world with some depth and relevance, then CU is the place to be. 
    YashaXKanwulfpantaroNightblazed
  • KitsunamiKitsunami LondonMember UncommonPosts: 52
    edited June 6
    I really want to back this, I really do. I need to see tangible evidence though. I love the design and I want to back the Arthurians. 

    Crowfall wont take this niche. Why? Two different designs. 

    Crowfall has PvP but it has no single persistent PvP realm (The eternal kingdoms do not count, they are player sandboxes that can be pvp or not depending on the owner of the kingdom) Each world dies in a cycle, it has a end and a beginning, and that in itself is what makes crowfall exciting. It also has a lot more PvE potential than Camelot (A mistake i think camelot may feel, depending on players) 

    Crowfall has longevity for drop in and out gameplay. You fight in a campaign, you get your rewards, you take it back to your kingdom. While the Eternal Kingdoms will have functionality (You can if you want, create a entire land full of rival player factions who will then do battle/siege over the kingdom) but that system is ENTIRELY player dependent)

    Crowfalls strength is that It has a good balance between PvP and PvE it also has a massive PvE focus at the end-game with PvP and thats where it will vary. Camelot, the endgame is clearly going to be Realm V Realm battles and war and sieges etc, player made content. 

    Crowfalls end-game is all about surviving for as long as possible in the last dieng breaths of the world, getting all your loot out into the spirit banks, and killing the enemy player factions so you can reap all the rewards for your own. 

    Camelot is going for a single persistent world with 3 factions fighting for power over the land/resources. It has immense potential to fill the gap in the market as currently there simply isn't a good solid PvP focused fantasy mmorpg out there. (Not counting eve of course) 

    I really do love the design of Camelot though. I have Crowfall, I am waiting for good things from Camelot. Realm V Realm (or faction v faction) focused games tend to have a very good longetivity and a strong playerbase. 

    Planetside 1 carried on for years while other attempts at a MMOFPS failed and dropped. Its successor is of course, Planetside 2. Camelot will need to have clear goals and interesting mechanics/fights to keep players busy though!

    Planetside 2 saw a significant loss of players when they failed to implement any goals. Players began to realise it was all pointless, there was no 'victory' there was no point in taking bases over etc.

    They now have resources to fight over, the guilds who take bases get guild flags flying proudly on the bases. Players can construct their own bases and defend them (Which has led to a tonne of strategic gameplay) and of course there are now logistics involved with mining resources.

    Camelot will need that kind of thing to keep it going. Fighting over castles etc is fun but at the end of the day, eventually It will get  boring for some players if we dont see tangible risk/reward/pull. 

    I for one hope to see battles over mines, trade caravans being escorted to different towns for resources and money, skirmishes over rare resources, and of course... battles to capture and own bigger cities/towns to add them to your kingdoms wealth. 
    Post edited by Kitsunami on
  • ste2000ste2000 londonMember EpicPosts: 6,194
    waynejr2 said:
    ste2000 said:


    Have you ever seen structures on Earth that are out of place?
    Yes.
    And what is your point?

    KyleranGyva02

  • ste2000ste2000 londonMember EpicPosts: 6,194
    edited June 6
    Darkfall has been in development for 12 years, with about 25 artists / world building developers credited for the game. I'm not aware that Darkfall had particularly great construction features, nor structure destruction or noteworthy building quality.

    The Structures in Darkfall weren't state of the art but they did their job and fit perfectly the aesthetic theme of the game.
    I doubt Aventurine spent too long developing the destructible buildings and the original Darkfall was the same size as the CU team, which I believe is far more experienced than Aventurine was at that time.


    If CSE believes that the world will look inharmonious with constructions that feel out of place, they can always create pre-fab pieces, rather than allowing free-form building with blocks in CU. Or any other solution that makes sense.
    So you think that the world filled with this kind of abstract architecture is good? (and this is actually one of the best looking ones)

    httpcamelotunchainedcomv3wp-contentgallerycubecube_001_lrgjpg


    And what about this Minecraft looking Building?

    httpcdnmmohutscomwp-contentgallerycamelot-unchained-keepsCamelotUnchainedCUBEContest4jpg

    And what about the discrepancy between Building number 1 and Building Number 2 and the fact that they look from completely different games, not only in style but in quality?
    Doesn't that bother you?

    If it doesn't then you are good to go, people have different priorities, so if that's not your priority I respect that.

    Personally though that bothers me a lot.

    Post edited by ste2000 on
    Realizer

  • KyleranKyleran Paradise City, FLMember LegendaryPosts: 26,281
    ste2000 said:
    Darkfall has been in development for 12 years, with about 25 artists / world building developers credited for the game. I'm not aware that Darkfall had particularly great construction features, nor structure destruction or noteworthy building quality.

    The Structures in Darkfall weren't state of the art but they did their job and fit perfectly the aesthetic theme of the game.
    I doubt Aventurine spent too long developing the destructible buildings and the original Darkfall was the same size as the CU team, which I believe is far more experienced than Aventurine was at that time.


    If CSE believes that the world will look inharmonious with constructions that feel out of place, they can always create pre-fab pieces, rather than allowing free-form building with blocks in CU. Or any other solution that makes sense.
    So you think that the world filled with this kind of abstract architecture is good? (and this is actually one of the best looking ones)

    httpcamelotunchainedcomv3wp-contentgallerycubecube_001_lrgjpg


    And what about this Minecraft looking Building?

    httpcdnmmohutscomwp-contentgallerycamelot-unchained-keepsCamelotUnchainedCUBEContest4jpg

    And what about the discrepancy between Building number 1 and Building Number 2 and the fact that they look from completely different games, not only in style but in quality?
    Doesn't that bother you?

    If it doesn't then you are good to go, people have different priorities, so if that's not your priority I respect that.

    Personally though that bothers me a lot.

    As long as the world isn't full of phallic symbols I'm happy.
    Realizer

    On hiatus from EVE Online since Dec 2016 - Screw off-grid PVE boosting changes

    In my day MMORPG's were so hard we fought our way through dungeons in the snow, uphill both ways.

    Don't just play games, inhabit virtual worlds™
    "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


  • YashaXYashaX Baldurs GateMember RarePosts: 1,946



    3) MMO Design

    To get players working together, especially in a PvP game, you need to ensure there are as few barriers between players as possible. This means removing power gaps so that you can aim for balance and just generally making it easier to group and play together. CU is employing horizontal progression, possibly the first MMO to do so right from the start. This mean you can join the game and actually contribute from day 1, rather than getting slaughtered for months before you have enough power. 

    Crowfall is sticking with vertical progression, so after a few months new players are gonna have a worse time. 


    If this is true, I will almost certainly be playing CU over CF (unless there is something really wrong with CU's combat/systems). However, I had the impression that both games were semi-horizontal progression, with both not overly concerned about class balance but at the same time wanting to limit gear-gaps compared to other mmos. 
    ....
  • francis_baudfrancis_baud Member RarePosts: 208
    edited June 6
    ste2000 said:

    So you think that the world filled with this kind of abstract architecture is good? (and this is actually one of the best looking ones)
    [...]
    And what about this Minecraft looking Building?
    [...]
    And what about the discrepancy between Building number 1 and Building Number 2 and the fact that they look from completely different games, not only in style but in quality?
    Doesn't that bother you?

    If it doesn't then you are good to go, people have different priorities, so if that's not your priority I respect that.

    Personally though that bothers me a lot.

    I also want the world to look as good, harmonious and immersive as possible, and I think for this to happen, there must be a kind of cohesion between the appearance of the structures, and that the structures look realistic (not minecrafty) so it fits with the art direction for the characters and the environment.

    I'm encouraged however with what I've seen so far, and I think it would take only reasonable effort to achieve that. For example reducing the size of the block so they look less blocky, adding round shapes, decorations, etc. Limiting construction to pre-fab pieces that CSE would authorize, instead of the current free-form building in CUBE, could also be an alternative. The physics limitations when building structures in the real game (as opposed to the current lack of limitations in CUBE) will prevent things that are structurally infeasible, thanks mostly to the physics-based stability, like very high towers and fancy stuff. Buildings will also require players to spend lot of resources and time, and can get destroyed by other players, so we will possibly see more practical types of structures (bunkers, walls, small fortified castles) than extravagant cathedrals or domes.

    I believe CUBE has the potential to add depth to the gameplay and to open the door to some very interesting possibilities (e.g. unique habitations, wall destruction during sieges, emergent gameplay, additional crafting activities, etc.). They still have a lot of time to improve the building system so we'll see how it looks like closer to launch.






     
    Post edited by francis_baud on
    JamesGoblin
  • cameltosiscameltosis ipswichMember EpicPosts: 1,562
    YashaX said:



    3) MMO Design

    To get players working together, especially in a PvP game, you need to ensure there are as few barriers between players as possible. This means removing power gaps so that you can aim for balance and just generally making it easier to group and play together. CU is employing horizontal progression, possibly the first MMO to do so right from the start. This mean you can join the game and actually contribute from day 1, rather than getting slaughtered for months before you have enough power. 

    Crowfall is sticking with vertical progression, so after a few months new players are gonna have a worse time. 


    If this is true, I will almost certainly be playing CU over CF (unless there is something really wrong with CU's combat/systems). However, I had the impression that both games were semi-horizontal progression, with both not overly concerned about class balance but at the same time wanting to limit gear-gaps compared to other mmos. 
    CSE have said they are looking for as close to horizontal as possible. There will be stat inflation over time (Mark said no upper limit), but at the same time they want to limit the power difference between a day 1 newbie and a 5 year vet to something like 5-10%. Once you take into account the usual RNG for crits and stuff, 10% power difference is nothing, so player skill is the name of the game. 

    The Crowfall team have been more cagey. They do talk about keeping power gaps down and semi-horizontal progression, but then they keep talking about tiers of gear, getting good loot and drops etc. The articles I've seen about progression also make me think it has a more traditional vertical progression path when it comes to leveling, so it may end up more flat at endgame but it sounds like they've designed the game to be a stomping ground for newbies. 


    Both games are still a way off though, so they have time to change! If Crowfall wasn't using action combat, I'd probably end up playing that as well, but I can't stand action combat, far too boring!
    YashaX
  • meddyckmeddyck USAMember UncommonPosts: 1,217
    edited June 6
    Actually CSE has repeatedly declined to give out exact numbers for the amount of vertical progression in CU. We don't know whether it is 5%, 15%, 25%, 50%, or more at this point. They have only said that there will be much, much less vertical progression than what you see in a typical theme park MMO with 50 PvE levels and that new characters won't be 1 shot by veterans and should be able to contribute in RvR right away.
    Post edited by meddyck on
    YashaX

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

  • TimEisenTimEisen Columnist Member RarePosts: 2,972
    I just did a CU column, looks like it got lost in the black hole that is the internet. Will have to check on that. It was a good one too, rife with wild internet speculation and reading into things in search of information. :)
    Kyleran
    I used to role-play a Warrior Priest now I role-play a writer.
    "Basically if a Ninja Turtle used it, or close to it, I like it."
  • KyleranKyleran Paradise City, FLMember LegendaryPosts: 26,281
    TimEisen said:
    I just did a CU column, looks like it got lost in the black hole that is the internet. Will have to check on that. It was a good one too, rife with wild internet speculation and reading into things in search of information. :)
    Clearly the Crowfall fans intercepted your article full of "fake news".

    It's just what fans of PVP games do. ;)
    TimEisenwaynejr2blueturtle13YashaX

    On hiatus from EVE Online since Dec 2016 - Screw off-grid PVE boosting changes

    In my day MMORPG's were so hard we fought our way through dungeons in the snow, uphill both ways.

    Don't just play games, inhabit virtual worlds™
    "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


  • TimEisenTimEisen Columnist Member RarePosts: 2,972
    francis_baud
    I used to role-play a Warrior Priest now I role-play a writer.
    "Basically if a Ninja Turtle used it, or close to it, I like it."
  • Slapshot1188Slapshot1188 Boca Raton, FLMember EpicPosts: 7,198
    TimEisen said:
    I just did a CU column, looks like it got lost in the black hole that is the internet. Will have to check on that. It was a good one too, rife with wild internet speculation and reading into things in search of information. :)
    Hmm.. hurry and find that one.  Looks like someone just inserted a fluff piece instead of your article...


    I KID!   Glad to see you back around.

    cameltosisTimEisen

    "I should point out that no other company has shipped out a beta on a disc before this." - Official Mortal Online Lead Community Moderator

    Starvault's reponse to criticism related to having a handful of players as the official "test" team for a supposed MMO: "We've just have another 10ish folk kind enough to voulenteer added tot the test team" (SIC) This explains much about the state of the game :-)

Sign In or Register to comment.