It got kicked back to the next next patch, but it was from the mouth of Brent himself who answered my forum question on Twitch. Dire Avenger Elites would be able to wield power swords, axes, and mauls. This doesn't mean Scorpions can't wield higher tier weapons, there will be higher tier versions of Scorpion Chainsabres and all Eldar will have the ability to modify their melee weapons stats, at the cost of more layout points of course.
The only thing I can think of are some "creative" new interpretations of witchblades (with moderately different stats), the same thing but the chainswords, and maybe scorpions claw. I really wish they would reconsider there launch. It was such a stupid deadline to set.
Based on what Nathan said a few streams back, it is the only reasonable course of action to take. Nathan said a few streams back they had been dipping into their operating capital for some time and that their monthly overhead was approximately $1.5 million a month. They also have contractual obligations to meet with different partners, who knows what those entail. At $60 a copy, they would need to sell 25,000 copies per month just to meet overhead. Actually they need to sell far more than that. One copy of the game retails for $60, Steam takes ~30% which knocks it down to $40. So they need to sell 37,500 copies per month just to break even. While not exactly "elegant" it's better to release a game unfinished, start generating revenue and buzz, and continue to improve the game rather than dig a financial hole so deep the whole thing becomes a zero sum game at best. Contrary to conventional wisdom and reason, a game can actually recover and thrive after a rough launch.
I'm not happy the game is being launched so soon, I really wish they had a true beta phase to polish and balance things, but the whole Pikko fiasco cost them what, like 6-9 months? I feel like they're making the most of a bad situation.
I can't speak to the economics, but this game just isn't done. They are really close to being content "complete", at least enough for a full game, but they are really far from balanced. I guess as long as space marines are fun, then the game will slog on until the rest of the races are finished.
I did strongly suspect monetary issues were behind the sudden launch. However: does anyone have reasonable, comparable data of other game launches; for example: how many copies did "Space Marine" sell in the first 6 months etc? EDIT: I've looked up "Space Marine"; globally, on PC, it is listed at 0.20 million sales; interestingly 0.24 from EU, vs 0.13 US. Xbox360 0..57million, PS3 0.46 million But, that is over the entire run, i.e. from 2011 till now (well. until 6th of August 2016. Close enough). On PC: released septemer 2011 (so similar period of the year..) Sold 32.374 copies in September. 12.897 in October; less than half of September, despite comparing 3 vs 5 weeks. Anyway: 77.831 sales in 2011, 43.201 sales in 2012 (again, comparing 4 months to an entire year) http://www.vgchartz.com/game/46409/warhammer-40000-space-marine/Global/ Of course, I "presume" these stats are correct, or "close enough". If you're/they're hoping to break even by going live on PC, well, that is just.. optimistic at best. Realistically: no, they're not gonna get 37.500 copies/month sold. Not even close probably. Let's compare to Overwatch, PC: listed at 0.39 million sales. And you know what? First week was 198.000. Second week 68.000. Game released in may, and that is already 50% of the sales; the first 2 weeks. 10th week, 30th of July 2016, is listed at 6.800. Not enough to "break even" for eternal crusade. Star wars battlefront: in 2016, PC: listed at 65.568 sales. So barely enough volume to keep "EC" running for 2 months. I mean.. maybe, they are also close to release with Xbox and Playstation versions; those are technically a bigger market/fishing pond, but how high are sales there gonna be after the PC reviews? And sure, some people might buy some coins after the game goes live, so some extra income, huzzah, but realistically, prepare yourself for a downsizing of the EC active development/balancing etc staff. Based on the very quick sales dips, just after the first 2 weeks of launch: sure games can recover after a poor launch. However, is that statistically likely? I would argue the odds of it are worse than even. Closing FYI: http://steamspy.com/search.php?s=eternal+crusade 63.000 owners currently. Presumeably all folks "into 40k". Searching that for Battlefleet Gothic armada gives 171.000 owners; from May till now. A niche game, for sure, but that had a pretty unique feeling, and felt overall more polished. We'll consider that the "best case scenario". Btw: the peak amount of players is below 500 the past few weeks. (now spiking; but they released the Tau into beta..)
I highly doubt a overhead of 1,5 million per month If I remember correctly, he said you could get a very expensive car with it. I would have assumed around 150k per month based on that.
150k/month sounds.. much more reasonable for "relatively small developer" Any idea of how many people are currently working on Eternal Crusade? And still, 3.750 sales/month: I don't know currently. Maybe this year, but afterwards..
