Looking forward to see if any of them actually becomes real in 2018. Most of them are delayed and should have been here in 2017, so it is not impressive...
It takes at least 3 years to make an mmorpg and actually it seems it falls more in the 4 or 5 year area. They still have some time.
Based on these approximate starting dates for each of these I'd say they are rapidly coming due.
Shards Online - Oct 2013. CU - April 2013 SC -Oct 2012 Pathfinder - Nov 2012. Crowfall - mid 2014
Shards online (Legends of Aria)- they're about to go into closed beta I think, but never followed the game, but seems they may be ahead of the others for releasing. CU - figured 2018,2019, they had that year delay and it is slated for 2019 so seems on course. SC - with the funding they had, should have released already. Pathfinder - I didn't expect anything from that game. Crowfall - they seem to be on schedule. I figured a 2019 release date, but not quite sure when it is suppose to go live.
I usually expect around 5 years for releases, especially if they're indy. Probably can even add a year or 2 for them if they're new, small or poorly funded.
I kind of hate hearing about a new game when it is just an idea. Before, use to hear about a game and it came out a few years later, but a lot of work was already done. Hearing about something without any groundwork just makes the wait awful.
Take CU for example. I was really looking forward to it. I even knew it would be at least 5 years and we're still a year+ away and I pretty much don't care at all about it. Hopefully when it gets closer to release, I'll get excited again.
For the most part these days, I don't look heavily into anything until it is close to release, then hope I find a gem.
While Shards / LOA is trying to go live it appears that action may be premature, but they are ahead of some others.
Crowfall has made the best progess, at least on the surface, but we'll see when it launches.
SC and CU are the two greatest disappointments in my book. When their Kickstarters launched both promised to deliver "something" in 2 years, which I well knew was bullshi.....er marketing but I figured add 2 years and all good.
Both are coming up on or at 5 plus years with multiple delays due to "reasons" which is fine I guess, at least many of their fans appear willing to wait near indefinitely, and in one case continue funding which just boggles, but such is HOPE, and Faith, gamers are so desperate for what these two are promising.
Last but not least, especially for a PM like me is their refusal to confirm the MVP scope and provide a target date for final delivery.
We shouldn't have to speculate after all this time, and to those who love to answer with "when its ready" my reply is simply, "and when do they think that will be?"
Just trying to live long enough to play a new, released MMORPG, playing New Worlds atm
Fools find no pleasure in understanding but delight in airing their own opinions. Pvbs 18:2, NIV
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
Looking forward to see if any of them actually becomes real in 2018. Most of them are delayed and should have been here in 2017, so it is not impressive...
It takes at least 3 years to make an mmorpg and actually it seems it falls more in the 4 or 5 year area. They still have some time.
Based on these approximate starting dates for each of these I'd say they are rapidly coming due.
Shards Online - Oct 2013. CU - April 2013 SC -Oct 2012 Pathfinder - Nov 2012. Crowfall - mid 2014
Shards online (Legends of Aria)- they're about to go into closed beta I think, but never followed the game, but seems they may be ahead of the others for releasing. CU - figured 2018,2019, they had that year delay and it is slated for 2019 so seems on course. SC - with the funding they had, should have released already. Pathfinder - I didn't expect anything from that game. Crowfall - they seem to be on schedule. I figured a 2019 release date, but not quite sure when it is suppose to go live.
I usually expect around 5 years for releases, especially if they're indy. Probably can even add a year or 2 for them if they're new, small or poorly funded.
I kind of hate hearing about a new game when it is just an idea. Before, use to hear about a game and it came out a few years later, but a lot of work was already done. Hearing about something without any groundwork just makes the wait awful.
Take CU for example. I was really looking forward to it. I even knew it would be at least 5 years and we're still a year+ away and I pretty much don't care at all about it. Hopefully when it gets closer to release, I'll get excited again.
For the most part these days, I don't look heavily into anything until it is close to release, then hope I find a gem.
While Shards / LOA is trying to go live it appears that action may be premature, but they are ahead of some others.
Crowfall has made the best progess, at least on the surface, but we'll see when it launches.
SC and CU are the two greatest disappointments in my book. When their Kickstarters launched both promised to deliver "something" in 2 years, which I well knew was bullshi.....er marketing but I figured add 2 years and all good.
Both are coming up on or at 5 plus years with multiple delays due to "reasons" which is fine I guess, at least many of their fans appear willing to wait near indefinitely, and in one case continue funding which just boggles, but such is HOPE, and Faith, gamers are so desperate for what these two are promising.
Last but not least, especially for a PM like me is their refusal to confirm the MVP scope and provide a target date for final delivery.
We shouldn't have to speculate after all this time, and to those who love to answer with "when its ready" my reply is simply, "and when do they think that will be?"
I agree on Shards and Crowfall. Shards ALMOST had me buying the $250 for my own shard, but they were only asking like $50k, so that was a big risk for me at the time, so I just dropped the $20 or whatever it was to get in.
I think that Crowfall has probably seen some of the greatest progress, except maybe for Ashes of Creation, in the shortest period of time.
I would agree with you with regards to the SC and CU timelines. I'm in the same boat that I figured 5 years would be sufficient. That was, of course, until the SC scope blew up. All things considered, though, they have delivered an alpha that even journalists agree is one of the most beautiful games ever released. Would they have benefited from some level of focus? Ummmmm..... fuck yes! That being said, I'm willing to wait and see what comes of it, too.
As far as CU, we're approaching 2 years since they first hinted at a beta. This reeks of massive tech problems. Should those items now be clear, which some closer to the project have indicated, that should mean we should expect more from them sooner rather than later. I don't think that CU would have made the 2 years, but certainly if they didn't have a 2 year delay, they should have made the 4 year mark.
In the normal scheme of things, though, as a PM, you would have killed these projects. Plain and simple. Right? We already saw it once with Freelancer. Also, there's no publisher I know of that would allow someone to struggle with engine issues for 2 years. So I guess this is a bit of a double-edged sword. On one hand, people are well aware of how long the projects have been going on and there is nobody watching over their shoulder waiting to kill the project. On the other hand, it creates a greater sense of accountability to deliver something because you're not playing with the money of billionaires, you're playing with real people's money. So I guess the takeaway is that those who want CU, will likely get something, rather than the nothing that would have been delivered under a publisher.
So people are more worried about progress than quality...sigh.
NONE of these games offer much and definitely not longevity.NOTHING of quality and nothing of longevity.
LOL/Dota/HS those games survive not on game merit but on people making money from Esports and sponsors and subs on twitch. ALL the games i played for MANY years and continue to play were never about anything other than THE GAME.
Example i play UT99 from time to time,some of us still have fun unless we see cheats then yeah.There is no esport or money tied to the game anymore,we don't play for rankings or ladder,we play for FUN. To prove how shallow gamer's are now,go into a Hearthstone twitch and room and mention you play for fun,you will be met by children saying you say fun because your crap and can't win and your rank 25 or whatever else their puny minds can think of. Simple really,gamer's now a days ,not all but a LOT of them have no concept of FUN. On the point of these 5 games,do i think there is any FUN value there,no that is why i am not interested in any of those 5 and if there was any fun value,their cash shops and business models turn me right off.
Never forget 3 mile Island and never trust a government official or company spokesman.
Comments
Crowfall has made the best progess, at least on the surface, but we'll see when it launches.
SC and CU are the two greatest disappointments in my book. When their Kickstarters launched both promised to deliver "something" in 2 years, which I well knew was bullshi.....er marketing but I figured add 2 years and all good.
Both are coming up on or at 5 plus years with multiple delays due to "reasons" which is fine I guess, at least many of their fans appear willing to wait near indefinitely, and in one case continue funding which just boggles, but such is HOPE, and Faith, gamers are so desperate for what these two are promising.
Last but not least, especially for a PM like me is their refusal to confirm the MVP scope and provide a target date for final delivery.
We shouldn't have to speculate after all this time, and to those who love to answer with "when its ready" my reply is simply, "and when do they think that will be?"
"True friends stab you in the front." | Oscar Wilde
"I need to finish" - Christian Wolff: The Accountant
Just trying to live long enough to play a new, released MMORPG, playing New Worlds atm
Fools find no pleasure in understanding but delight in airing their own opinions. Pvbs 18:2, NIV
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
Crazkanuk
----------------
Azarelos - 90 Hunter - Emerald
Durnzig - 90 Paladin - Emerald
Demonicron - 90 Death Knight - Emerald Dream - US
Tankinpain - 90 Monk - Azjol-Nerub - US
Brindell - 90 Warrior - Emerald Dream - US
----------------
NONE of these games offer much and definitely not longevity.NOTHING of quality and nothing of longevity.
LOL/Dota/HS those games survive not on game merit but on people making money from Esports and sponsors and subs on twitch.
ALL the games i played for MANY years and continue to play were never about anything other than THE GAME.
Example i play UT99 from time to time,some of us still have fun unless we see cheats then yeah.There is no esport or money tied to the game anymore,we don't play for rankings or ladder,we play for FUN.
To prove how shallow gamer's are now,go into a Hearthstone twitch and room and mention you play for fun,you will be met by children saying you say fun because your crap and can't win and your rank 25 or whatever else their puny minds can think of.
Simple really,gamer's now a days ,not all but a LOT of them have no concept of FUN.
On the point of these 5 games,do i think there is any FUN value there,no that is why i am not interested in any of those 5 and if there was any fun value,their cash shops and business models turn me right off.
Never forget 3 mile Island and never trust a government official or company spokesman.
So cute.
You stay sassy!
That there is a lot of swampland in Florida you haven't purchased yet.
~~ postlarval ~~