Howdy, Stranger!

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

Servers Closing October 25th

ShelassaShelassa MMORPG.COM Staff UncommonPosts: 616
edited August 2016 in News & Features Discussion

imageServers Closing October 25th

The Mighty Quest for Epic Loot News - Ubisoft has announced that The Mighty Quest for Epic Loot will be closing effective October 25th 2016. Developers who had been working on this project have been moved to other Ubisoft titles. As of now, current players will not be able to buy any more virtual currency for the game and will need to spend any they have right now prior to the closure.

Read the full story here


«1

Comments

  • ForgrimmForgrimm Member EpicPosts: 2,981
    That's a shame. I've only heard good things about this game.
  • RemyVorenderRemyVorender Member RarePosts: 3,825
    When your name is the coolest part of your game, it will end in shame.

    Played: AA, AC1, AC2, Aion, AO, AoC, BDO, CO, CoX, DAoC, DCUO, EVE, EQ1, EQ2,
    ESO, Fallen Earth, FFXI, FFXIV, GW1, GW2, Istaria, L2, LoTRO, MxO, Neverwinter, Rift, RoE,
    Ryzom, Shadowbane, SWG, SWTOR, TERA, TSW, WAR, WoW, WURM...and a bunch of others not worth mentioning.


    Joined - July 2004

  • PhryPhry Member LegendaryPosts: 11,004
    Forgrimm said:
    That's a shame. I've only heard good things about this game.
    Its not a horribly bad game, but its a few years old, and relies on microtransactions, by now i doubt there is any profit in the game, so, server closing.
    Its not a failure for the game, it has after all lasted a few years, job done. ;)
  • BruhzaBruhza Member UncommonPosts: 391
    Played this game for a decent amount of time, never spent a cent on it. Game was quite p2w considering you could buy traps that normally would take months to create. I enjoyed trying to raid the castles where people spent 100's of dollars on it. It was pretty fun.
  • TheocritusTheocritus Member EpicPosts: 7,191
    No doubt one of the coolest names for a MMO ever
  • Arcane4176Arcane4176 Member UncommonPosts: 61
    edited August 2016
    Another micro transaction game bites the dust. Developers will never learn f2p is no longer the way to go. Everyone has been there done that and consumers are sick of it. Enough is enough sell the game like they used to do back in the day , make expansions and profit off your sells not in game.
  • SwampDragonsSwampDragons Member UncommonPosts: 350
    So weird, when I saw the first release, I really liked the concept of the game and I could really see this game go far. Seems only yesterday it was released. pitty, wonder what they did wrong.
  • Tiamat64Tiamat64 Member RarePosts: 1,528
    edited August 2016
    They stuck too closely to their concept of the game, resulting in a Diablo ARPG game that you couldn't play with other players (you only ever raid other players' castles solo).  The fact that the game was heavily Player vs Player-Castle focused meant they had to put severe restrictions on what players could do with their castle defenses for the sake of balance (resulting in all castles being the same as well as being boring and repetitive to beat) and severe restrictions on what player characters could do so they couldn't beat other players' castles too easily (resulting in player characters being rather boring to play and not feeling any oomph)

    So... basically the game's concept and sticking strictly to it led to a PvP game with all of the restrictions that PvP places on development (the need for extremely strict balance) without any of the PvP perks of actual player interaction (and all the indirect perks that come from that, like how no two PvP matches are the same whereas a player-vs-playercastle match is the exact opposite and ALWAYS the same), as well as no co-op mode.
  • Panther2103Panther2103 Member EpicPosts: 5,399
    I never understood why they never let you play with any other players. That was the massive downside to this game. It's aesthetics were super nice, it's gameplay was polished, but it just had no interaction other than the castle raids. It just got so boring after like a week.
  • DMKanoDMKano Member LegendaryPosts: 21,955
    edited August 2016
    The highlight of this were thr promo videos - those were awesome.

    The gameplay however was nowhere near what the marketing videos described.

    I played it for about a few days and realized that it's just not worth my time.
  • kosackosac Member UncommonPosts: 203
    f2p ubisoft lol.. trust is with them.. :)
  • H0urg1assH0urg1ass Member EpicPosts: 2,335
    It's very weird when the first and next time you hear about a game is when it launches and when it closes. I don't even know anything about it, but it's always sad when a game closes, because you know that there's at least a handful of people who love it and will be gameless for a while.
  • MisterZebubMisterZebub Member LegendaryPosts: 3,584
    DMKano said:
    The highlight of this were thr promo videos - those were awesome.

    The gameplay however was nowhere near what the marketing videos described.

    I played it for about a few days and realized that it's just not worth my time.
    Wow a game even you didn't find worth plonking down cash for? It REALLY must have sucked rocks. :p B) :p

    Never even heard of this game, but it looks like yet another over-monetized, under-delivered shit factory. Ding Dong the Witch is Dead seems appropriate.

    "You have kept me at your beck and call for fifteen years. I shall never again do what you demand of me. By every rule of single combat, from this moment your life belongs to me. Is that not correct? Then I shall simply declare you dead. In all of your dealings with me, you'll do me the courtesy to conduct yourself as a dead man. I have submitted to your notions of honor long enough. You will now submit to mine."

  • PhryPhry Member LegendaryPosts: 11,004
    DMKano said:
    The highlight of this were thr promo videos - those were awesome.

    The gameplay however was nowhere near what the marketing videos described.

    I played it for about a few days and realized that it's just not worth my time.
    Wow a game even you didn't find worth plonking down cash for? It REALLY must have sucked rocks. :p B) :p

    Never even heard of this game, but it looks like yet another over-monetized, under-delivered shit factory. Ding Dong the Witch is Dead seems appropriate.
    http://www.gamespot.com/articles/ubisoft-created-a-fart-smelling-device-to-promote-/1100-6442598/

    Bringing a whole new meaning to the 'if it smells like a Turd it must be ubisoft'... i guess they have had a lot of practice :p
  • SovrathSovrath Member LegendaryPosts: 27,659
    Another micro transaction game bites the dust. Developers will never learn f2p is no longer the way to go. Everyone has been there done that and consumers are sick of it. Enough is enough sell the game like they used to do back in the day , make expansions and profit off your sells not in game.
    Except, in the east, closing down the game once it has made its money is part of the "life cycle" for the game.

    It's expected.

    The question is, whether developers in the west will just create games with the assumption that they will eventually close, only to move on to the next.

    Hope not.



  • MikePaladinMikePaladin Member UncommonPosts: 592
    edited August 2016
    Don't get me wrong to me seems good news. I wish to hear same news about all so called F2P games on daily basis xD. It's party time .
  • NasaNasa Member UncommonPosts: 696
    Just because one F2P game is closing dosn't mean F2P itself is a failure.
    Lots of F2P titles are successful. If it is bad or too niche it will not be successful whatever the business model.
  • PhryPhry Member LegendaryPosts: 11,004
    Nasa said:
    Just because one F2P game is closing dosn't mean F2P itself is a failure.
    Lots of F2P titles are successful. If it is bad or too niche it will not be successful whatever the business model.
    Not sure why you equate the game closing with failure, its not often that F2P games are designed with any kind of longevity, the game undoubtedly made money, so it did what it was designed to do, the game has been around a few years now, and its run its course.
  • linadragonlinadragon Member RarePosts: 584


    Another micro transaction game bites the dust. Developers will never learn f2p is no longer the way to go. Everyone has been there done that and consumers are sick of it. Enough is enough sell the game like they used to do back in the day , make expansions and profit off your sells not in game.



    F2P works just fine and makes developers quite a bit of money. The thing that it comes down to is whether or not a game continually develops or not if it retains players. As this game is a few years old, hasn't updated that regularly all that much with newer content and it's baser core mechanic is basically base building and invading other people's bases it really didn't have longevity in the long run even if it had been a b2p game or a p2p game (and no one would play the type of game it was for a sub fee)

    And stop this "enough is enough go back to the old days of how they did it bull shit" old days is like WoW with a sub fee, expansion costs etc. Except you know we didn't have constant releases and more money poured into the genre at the time. Basically it is wholly unrealistic for a game company to pretty much ever go back to that model being the prominent one unless they bring down game costs to consumers quite a bit and cut sub fees to like 5 dollars instead of 14.99...

    Basically the suggestion would lead to a desolate wasteland of fully abandoned games and only a few surviving ultimately with literally no one new wanting to invest in the genre. The publishers and the like would need to realize just how niche the MMORPG market is with the realistic player cap that might move around being 1.5 - 1.7 mill as a WHOLE. (i don't include WoW's numbers as a natural growth pattern curve in the least).

    To add to this it has been found that in large part that F2P mmorpgs account for the largest sector of money made from PC gaming in general, so the model most definitely works... Ubisoft just doesn't want to continue working on these titles as they have other multiplayer titles that are AAA games and aren't years old coming.
  • strmcstrmc Member CommonPosts: 8
    Game had a lot of potential. The idea by itself was quite good, but the changes they implemented after a what I'd call a pretty smooth launch were slowly killing the game (aka making microtransactions kind of necessary in order to stay competitive).
  • linadragonlinadragon Member RarePosts: 584

    Phry said:


    Nasa said:

    Just because one F2P game is closing dosn't mean F2P itself is a failure.

    Lots of F2P titles are successful. If it is bad or too niche it will not be successful whatever the business model.



    Not sure why you equate the game closing with failure, its not often that F2P games are designed with any kind of longevity, the game undoubtedly made money, so it did what it was designed to do, the game has been around a few years now, and its run its course.



    Many are designed for longevity. I wouldn't really classify either game Ubisoft is shutting down as MMORPGs even. One is a shooter and the other is basically a pvp build dungeon raid dungeon type of game that had a very limited appeal. Most games in general aren't really designed for longevity particularly multiplayer games anymore in the era where we have gotten rid of dedicated servers we are fully reliant on game companies keeping their servers going to be able to do jack shit.

    And in large part their statement has to do with the fact that there are people equating it as a sign that f2p doesn't work and they want to see them all shut down. So they are saying that just because one f2p game shut down doesn't mean the business model is a failure to those people which is a fully accurate statement. F2P mmorpgs alone bring in a huge chunk of money.
  • waynejr2waynejr2 Member EpicPosts: 7,768
    Phry said:
    Nasa said:
    Just because one F2P game is closing dosn't mean F2P itself is a failure.
    Lots of F2P titles are successful. If it is bad or too niche it will not be successful whatever the business model.
    Not sure why you equate the game closing with failure, its not often that F2P games are designed with any kind of longevity, the game undoubtedly made money, so it did what it was designed to do, the game has been around a few years now, and its run its course.

    It is like dating and ending a relationship.  Then again, some people never move on...Looking at disgruntled swg players......laughing....
    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?"




  • FrodoFraginsFrodoFragins Member RarePosts: 4,303
    It looked like torchlight to me. There are polished ARPGs out there so this one wasn't appealing at all.
  • gervaise1gervaise1 Member EpicPosts: 6,778
    Another micro transaction game bites the dust. Developers will never learn f2p is no longer the way to go. Everyone has been there done that and consumers are sick of it. Enough is enough sell the game like they used to do back in the day , make expansions and profit off your sells not in game.
    Lot of interviews with game execs about how they would like players to pay money. Interviews with game engine execs as well about how they would like devs to pay more for engine software. The problem is that given a choice players (and devs) will pay less rather than more.

    Now a company could launch as b2p or b2p + sub but unless all other games on the market abandon the f2p model they will struggle. Now a "more expensive" "better quality" "heavily marketed" game should sell more copies the extra expense may far exceed the extra revenue.

    Clearly all models can work. A game like LoL demonstrates the f2p is alive and well; a game like Eve shows that subs can work; a game like Destiny that a b2p strategy can also work. Success is probably down to a combination of factors - design, marketing, when they launched - and not simply about the revenue model.

    And at the end of the day all games grow old. And as they age it becomes harder to a) retain subscribers b) sell DLC / expansions c) sell cash shop items. Or any combination of a), b) or c). Decay that developers can slow by creating new content, running advertising campaigns and so forth. They can't stop death however. All games die.

    Now whether f2p - the result of players preferring to spend less rather than more - leads to poorer or shorter lived games is another question. 


  • LokeroLokero Member RarePosts: 1,514
    edited August 2016
    I played it for a while.  It's another example of just how often we see a ton of wasted potential in the games market.

    The game concept was a pretty neat combination of Dungeon Keeper and Diablo(loosely speaking).  The base game was pretty fun.
    The design and effort put into the game were laughable, at best, though.  They got it to a beta phase then basically just abandoned development and tried to milk the cash shop.

    As someone mentioned, it's an Ubisoft game, so that definitely held things back.  They don't seem to have the greatest of care when it comes to depth.
Sign In or Register to comment.