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!

Camelot Unchained: Mark Jacobs Announces Camelot Unchained

24

Comments

  • AeonbladesAeonblades Home, GAPosts: 2,083Member
    Originally posted by Wighty

    Mark Jacobs said it best re: F2P vs Subscription! I really wish ALL game developers thought this way!

    What business model (i.e., free-to-play, buy to play, subscription) are you looking at for this game?

    Multi-tiered subscription with no free-to-play option but with (maybe) some cosmetic items for housing. I think F2P and buy-to-play have their places, but we are trying to create a very niche-oriented MMORPG that won't benefit from using those models. I'd rather have 30K people paying and playing monthly than hundreds of thousands playing for free and hope to convert 5%. This game is geared to doing one thing spectacularly, and that one thing is RvR. I believe there is a core group of players who have been waiting for this type of game, and our Kickstarter campaign will either prove or disprove this notion.

    Source:

    http://massively.joystiq.com/2013/02/05/rvr-unchained-mark-jacobs-returns-to-camelot/

    Finally, someone who gets subscription models. I don't care for Mark, but he is right on the money with this.

    Currently Playing: ESO and FFXIV
    Have played: You name it
    If you mention rose tinted glasses, you better be referring to Mitch Hedberg.

  • Ice-QueenIce-Queen USA, GAPosts: 2,451Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by Wighty

    Mark Jacobs said it best re: F2P vs Subscription! I really wish ALL game developers thought this way!

    What business model (i.e., free-to-play, buy to play, subscription) are you looking at for this game?

    Multi-tiered subscription with
    no free-to-play option but with (maybe) some cosmetic items for housing. I think F2P and buy-to-play have their places, but we are trying to create a very niche-oriented MMORPG that won't benefit from using those models. I'd rather have 30K people paying and playing monthly than hundreds of thousands playing for free and hope to convert 5%. This game is geared to doing one thing spectacularly, and that one thing is RvR. I believe there is a core group of players who have been waiting for this type of game, and our Kickstarter campaign will either prove or disprove this notion.

    Source:

    http://massively.joystiq.com/2013/02/05/rvr-unchained-mark-jacobs-returns-to-camelot/

    No Free to play option, Now I'm totally interested.

    image

    What happens when you log off your characters????.....
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GFQhfhnjYMk
    Dark Age of Camelot

  • Ice-QueenIce-Queen USA, GAPosts: 2,451Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by Aeonblades
    Originally posted by Wighty

    Mark Jacobs said it best re: F2P vs Subscription! I really wish ALL game developers thought this way!

    What business model (i.e., free-to-play, buy to play, subscription) are you looking at for this game?

    Multi-tiered subscription with no free-to-play option but with (maybe) some cosmetic items for housing. I think F2P and buy-to-play have their places, but we are trying to create a very niche-oriented MMORPG that won't benefit from using those models. I'd rather have 30K people paying and playing monthly than hundreds of thousands playing for free and hope to convert 5%. This game is geared to doing one thing spectacularly, and that one thing is RvR. I believe there is a core group of players who have been waiting for this type of game, and our Kickstarter campaign will either prove or disprove this notion.

    Source:

    http://massively.joystiq.com/2013/02/05/rvr-unchained-mark-jacobs-returns-to-camelot/

    Finally, someone who gets subscription models. I don't care for Mark, but he is right on the money with this.

    Yes, Finally!

    That statement alone gives me hope. I feel exactly the same as he does when it comes to subscription over free to play.

    image

    What happens when you log off your characters????.....
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GFQhfhnjYMk
    Dark Age of Camelot

  • VorthanionVorthanion Laguna Vista, TXPosts: 2,117Member Uncommon
    I completely agree with the sentiments towards the F2P model of designing content.  Subscriptions force the developer to make the best content possible to retain players, while F2P uses cheap tactics that usually make the gameplay worse in order to boost the costly shortcuts and services in the shop just to make the game more playable.

    image
  • FearumFearum Cinnaminson, NJPosts: 1,166Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by Vorthanion
    I completely agree with the sentiments towards the F2P model of designing content.  Subscriptions force the developer to make the best content possible to retain players, while F2P uses cheap tactics that usually make the gameplay worse in order to boost the costly shortcuts and services in the shop just to make the game more playable.

     Amen, I don't support F2P games with even the bandwith it takes to DL them. I think its the worst thing to happen to this genre.

     

     

    Excited to see how they implement housing here, its usually thrown into games as an after thought so I never really get involved with it. I'am also curious to see how they will implement the no PvE into the game. Deticated crafters also peak my interest here, always love crafting. Not to mention, 3 faction warfare. Ahh I love faction warfare.

  • VesaviusVesavius BristolPosts: 7,636Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by Aeonblades
    Originally posted by Wighty

    Mark Jacobs said it best re: F2P vs Subscription! I really wish ALL game developers thought this way!

    What business model (i.e., free-to-play, buy to play, subscription) are you looking at for this game?

    Multi-tiered subscription with no free-to-play option but with (maybe) some cosmetic items for housing. I think F2P and buy-to-play have their places, but we are trying to create a very niche-oriented MMORPG that won't benefit from using those models. I'd rather have 30K people paying and playing monthly than hundreds of thousands playing for free and hope to convert 5%. This game is geared to doing one thing spectacularly, and that one thing is RvR. I believe there is a core group of players who have been waiting for this type of game, and our Kickstarter campaign will either prove or disprove this notion.

    Source:

    http://massively.joystiq.com/2013/02/05/rvr-unchained-mark-jacobs-returns-to-camelot/

    Finally, someone who gets subscription models. I don't care for Mark, but he is right on the money with this.

     

    Yes, agreed. And I think this is a mindset we will see becoming ever more prevailent amongst developers here in the West.

     

    Indicators suggest that the cash shop bubble might indeed have peaked and a new faith in subs is here as a reliable more ethical model.

     

    I am not a big PvPer but I would support this just to throw my money behind a sub game.

  • xArsonistxxArsonistx deustland, ARPosts: 31Member

    damn my heads going to explode this guy sounds like me if I were to make a video game. I like this guy he is all about his pvp.

     

    eso

     

    archeage

     

    now this I can't keep spending money like this I need one of these games to be it to take my attention for longer then 2 months.

     
  • QuicksandQuicksand Aurora, COPosts: 604Member Uncommon

    Man..... Now I have a new "My most eagerly awaited release" And its only heading in to a "Kickstarter" stage... *sigh*

     

    But, I have been waiting for DAoC2 for so long, Atleast now there is something to actually wait for.

    www.90and9.net
    www.prophecymma.com

  • QSatuQSatu WarsawPosts: 1,733Member Uncommon
    I don't believe kickstarter can generate enough money to make modern mmo. Then I guess they acknowledge it will be a niche game mostly for 3 faction pvp and nothing else so maybe it will work.
  • LeucentLeucent Penticton, BCPosts: 2,371Member
    Well damn, this is some great news. DAOC best game ever, now lets hope this isn t f d up.
  • WightyWighty Westbury, NYPosts: 662Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by Vesavius
    Originally posted by Aeonblades
    Originally posted by Wighty
    ...

    Finally, someone who gets subscription models. I don't care for Mark, but he is right on the money with this.

     

    Yes, agreed. And I think this is a mindset we will see becoming ever more prevailent amongst developers here in the West.

     

    Indicators suggest that the cash shop bubble might indeed have peaked and a new faith in subs is here as a reliable more ethical model.

     

    I am not a big PvPer but I would support this just to throw my money behind a sub game.

    I think this will be the mindset of the INDY developers... AAA titles and major publishers still demand those huge numbers as a barometer to see how they place in comparison with other titles.

    The indy developer who knows and targets their audience will have far more retention becasue they know their niche and are developing the game around that niche. The minute you start trying to spread yourself too thin is when you fall into issues...

    Scrabble is a niche game, so is Monopoly... but Scrabopoly would just be a hot mess...

    What are your other Hobbies?

    Gaming is Dirt Cheap compared to this...

  • QuicksandQuicksand Aurora, COPosts: 604Member Uncommon

    After reading the interview, I think my only concern is his comment about their being almost no PvE. I am not saying that is a bad thing or not, but those of us that beta tested and played DAoC at lauch can tell you, that was the way DAoC started out, it had what was an obvious lack of focus on PvE (everything was geared toward getting you into the RvR)

     

    But after awhile they realised their player base wanted something to do now and then that wasn't in the frountier. Not sure if that was because they were trying for 100's of thousands in subs back then or not. If that was it, then obviously his comment about being cool with 30k will keep them from that prob.

    www.90and9.net
    www.prophecymma.com

  • Effin_RabbitEffin_Rabbit Pittsburgh, PAPosts: 772Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by Vorthanion
    I completely agree with the sentiments towards the F2P model of designing content.  Subscriptions force the developer to make the best content possible to retain players, while F2P uses cheap tactics that usually make the gameplay worse in order to boost the costly shortcuts and services in the shop just to make the game more playable.

    Subscription base forces no such thing from devs but it does force you to pay for the same thing repeatedly. Would you buy a book where you had to pay for each additional page after the first chapter? They both use cheap tactics and with sub based mmos/f2p/b2p youre still buying the expansions so what are we even paying for with the sub? I'll stick with GW2 and/or Defiance over just about any sub-based game as they do everything a sub-based game does but better in my opinion.

  • WightyWighty Westbury, NYPosts: 662Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by Darth-Batman
    Originally posted by Vorthanion
    I completely agree with the sentiments towards the F2P model of designing content.  Subscriptions force the developer to make the best content possible to retain players, while F2P uses cheap tactics that usually make the gameplay worse in order to boost the costly shortcuts and services in the shop just to make the game more playable.

    Subscription base forces no such thing from devs but it does force you to pay for the same thing repeatedly. Would you buy a book where you had to pay for each additional page after the first chapter? They both use cheap tactics and with sub based mmos/f2p/b2p youre still buying the expansions so what are we even paying for with the sub? I'll stick with GW2 and/or Defiance over just about any sub-based game as they do everything a sub-based game does but better in my opinion.

     

    You are the exact target audience he is NOT trying to capture... have fun in GW2 and Defiance

    What are your other Hobbies?

    Gaming is Dirt Cheap compared to this...

  • VhalnVhaln Chicago, ILPosts: 3,159Member
    Originally posted by Quicksand

    After reading the interview, I think my only concern is his comment about their being almost no PvE. I am not saying that is a bad thing or not, but those of us that beta tested and played DAoC at lauch can tell you, that was the way DAoC started out, it had what was an obvious lack of focus on PvE (everything was geared toward getting you into the RvR)

     

    But after awhile they realised their player base wanted something to do now and then that wasn't in the frountier. Not sure if that was because they were trying for 100's of thousands in subs back then or not. If that was it, then obviously his comment about being cool with 30k will keep them from that prob.

     

    I enjoyed the PvE in DAOC a lot, and think it was probably even critical to the success of RvR, not to mention crafting.  I think it worked as well as it did, because it was all tied together so well, these different elements that were all integral to one another.  None of this modern game design where you keep it all seperate and irrelevant, because some people might like one aspect of the game, but not another.

     

    In the early days, the frontiers were deserted for quite a while, and there weren't even battlegrounds, yet.  It was ALL PvE that got the ball rolling, and even two years later, I remember how many people spent way more time leveling alts to 50, than RvRing with them, even though they did so for RvR.  It gave the PvE a greater sense of purpose. 

     

    People remember DAOC for the RvR, but without the massive foundation of PvE, I don't think DAOC would be remembered for much of anything.

    When I want a single-player story, I'll play a single-player game. When I play an MMO, I want a massively multiplayer world.

  • AeonbladesAeonblades Home, GAPosts: 2,083Member
    Originally posted by Vhaln
    Originally posted by Quicksand

    After reading the interview, I think my only concern is his comment about their being almost no PvE. I am not saying that is a bad thing or not, but those of us that beta tested and played DAoC at lauch can tell you, that was the way DAoC started out, it had what was an obvious lack of focus on PvE (everything was geared toward getting you into the RvR)

     

    But after awhile they realised their player base wanted something to do now and then that wasn't in the frountier. Not sure if that was because they were trying for 100's of thousands in subs back then or not. If that was it, then obviously his comment about being cool with 30k will keep them from that prob.

     

    I enjoyed the PvE in DAOC a lot, and think it was probably even critical to the success of RvR, not to mention crafting.  I think it worked as well as it did, because it was all tied together so well, these different elements that were all integral to one another.  None of this modern game design where you keep it all seperate and irrelevant, because some people might like one aspect of the game, but not another.

     

    In the early days, the frontiers were deserted for quite a while, and there weren't even battlegrounds, yet.  It was ALL PvE that got the ball rolling, and even two years later, I remember how many people spent way more time leveling alts to 50, than RvRing with them, even though they did so for RvR.  It gave the PvE a greater sense of purpose. 

     

    People remember DAOC for the RvR, but without the massive foundation of PvE, I don't think DAOC would be remembered for much of anything.

    Agreed. I miss tanking with my Armsman in Lyon or Barrows from time to time :)

    Currently Playing: ESO and FFXIV
    Have played: You name it
    If you mention rose tinted glasses, you better be referring to Mitch Hedberg.

  • HarafnirHarafnir VikingvillePosts: 1,324Member Uncommon
    Nowadays DaoC is full PvP with a few PvE monsters runnig around to annoy you... and it is hilarious fun, a lot better than the PvE monster grind and one quest every 5 levels. if they create that again, it will be flipping amazing for the old DaoC players and a living hell for the normal MMO crowd

    "This is not a game to be tossed aside lightly.
    It should be thrown with great force"

  • CaldrinCaldrin CwmbranPosts: 4,533Member Uncommon

    WOW people have been asknig for a DAOC 2 for ages..

     

    I never really had the chance to get into the origional so looking forward to giving this one a go..

  • adam_noxadam_nox hays, KSPosts: 2,073Member Uncommon
    wait, someone said browser based.  what?
  • tom_goretom_gore TamperePosts: 1,796Member Uncommon
    Not investing in any more pre-determined factions PvP game. Give us player factions of GTFO.
  • QuicksandQuicksand Aurora, COPosts: 604Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by Vhaln
    Originally posted by Quicksand

    After reading the interview, I think my only concern is his comment about their being almost no PvE. I am not saying that is a bad thing or not, but those of us that beta tested and played DAoC at lauch can tell you, that was the way DAoC started out, it had what was an obvious lack of focus on PvE (everything was geared toward getting you into the RvR)

     

    But after awhile they realised their player base wanted something to do now and then that wasn't in the frountier. Not sure if that was because they were trying for 100's of thousands in subs back then or not. If that was it, then obviously his comment about being cool with 30k will keep them from that prob.

     

    I enjoyed the PvE in DAOC a lot, and think it was probably even critical to the success of RvR, not to mention crafting.  I think it worked as well as it did, because it was all tied together so well, these different elements that were all integral to one another.  None of this modern game design where you keep it all seperate and irrelevant, because some people might like one aspect of the game, but not another.

     

    In the early days, the frontiers were deserted for quite a while, and there weren't even battlegrounds, yet.  It was ALL PvE that got the ball rolling, and even two years later, I remember how many people spent way more time leveling alts to 50, than RvRing with them, even though they did so for RvR.  It gave the PvE a greater sense of purpose. 

     

    People remember DAOC for the RvR, but without the massive foundation of PvE, I don't think DAOC would be remembered for much of anything.

    I think you MAY have missunderstood my post. I enjoyed the PvE when DAoC started without a doubt, but it was very evident that there was very little effort by Mythic put into the PvE side of DAoC in terms of trying to keep any players focused on it. The focus for Mythic (clearler stated by them when the game launched) was RvR. And that was clear when you played (if you played back then)

     

    As far as the Frountier being empty, thats an insane claim (I'm not talking about the first month before there were very many lvl 50's yet).

     

    However, I did enjoy PvE in DAoC, And the release of Darkness falls (making the RvR fight directly over a  PvE was awesome In my opinion)

    www.90and9.net
    www.prophecymma.com

  • GravargGravarg Harker Heights, TXPosts: 3,332Member Uncommon

    enough said :)

  • Marcus-Marcus- chepachet, RIPosts: 969Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by Darth-Batman
    Originally posted by Vorthanion
    I completely agree with the sentiments towards the F2P model of designing content.  Subscriptions force the developer to make the best content possible to retain players, while F2P uses cheap tactics that usually make the gameplay worse in order to boost the costly shortcuts and services in the shop just to make the game more playable.

    Subscription base forces no such thing from devs but it does force you to pay for the same thing repeatedly. Would you buy a book where you had to pay for each additional page after the first chapter? They both use cheap tactics and with sub based mmos/f2p/b2p youre still buying the expansions so what are we even paying for with the sub? I'll stick with GW2 and/or Defiance over just about any sub-based game as they do everything a sub-based game does but better in my opinion.

    You'd be surprised what people would pay for if its fun and enjoyable...

     

    I play GW2, and its pretty decent. If Jacobs puts out a better game that is worth $20 a month, hell, I'll pay it, I'll pay $30 a month, if its good enough. Problem is, these days, developers seem to be having difficulty making games worth $15 a month.The onus is on him to make it worth it.

     

    I hope he does.

  • Chief021Chief021 Fairmont, WVPosts: 107Member
    I highly doubt we'll see this game in 2013... 2016 - 2017 is more likely?  But yeah pretty stoked..

    image

    A PS4 ESO guild accepting applications at http://lowlyknights.enjin.com

  • ZekiahZekiah Aurora, COPosts: 2,499Member

    Founder of Mythic.

    /interested

    "Censorship is never over for those who have experienced it. It is a brand on the imagination that affects the individual who has suffered it, forever." - Noam Chomsky

Sign In or Register to comment.