I understand it's alpha, but I meant the current plan is to launch the game without the mmo feature and then add it later, and as I wrote first it seems like the probability for it to be added after launch seems a bit low. That's why I created this thread and I wanted to hear what the rest of you think about that.
I too dont think its gonna happen to be honest, I mean heck look at the mission statement changes on main website. Looks like were gonna have to settle for a match based shooter. for better or for worse. Personally I just want a full break down on the "whys" I know Nathan mentioned a thing or two ages ago. I have a bit of a hard time understanding him. the whole thousand players thing really could have happened. they "were" partnered with muchdifferent. Got to see first hand during the world record event. View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JNN_J0g5fmQ
Well, my 0,2 $ -> I founded around 15 games. Every single one of them had more features and options available to player ON PAPER/Advert's and kickstarter video then after the actual release. Most of them are in early access limbo atm. And this game wont be any different. Lobby shooter with good matchmaking, 40k theme and feeling, loads of maps/modes, good balance and customisation of classes, active playerbase is all I want from this game tbh. MMO battlefield game is a myth no one actually made so far, planetside 2 is the closest thing we got.
they have explained that the problem was exactly pikko server: don't work. they have to find or build a tecnology capable of doing that.
Yea, I came in to this not really expecting the result to be anywhere near what was planned. Things go wrong, and we had the founder's program when the game was effectively a concept and some assets. I think their dedication to continually updating the game will help it stay interesting though. One day, they might just get an MMO version out.
What will make EC to a MMO? Eterernal Crusade is advertised as a massively online third person shooter (let the other "m" for multiplayer beside), but what qualifies it to be called "massively"? A lobby shooter with 64-player maps isn't what I would call "massively" (which is EC right now, a lobby shooter, nothing more). BHVR said and posted in the Road to Open World or State of the Crusade IV what they want EC to be. While an open world isn't a "must have" for a MMO, queing up for a "battlefield" or "scenario" or any other term you want to use for a specific area of a map which you can't leave, isn't great either or qualifies it as a MMO. Most MMO-games have this kind of gameplay as a different option to play within their main game! Where are the social hubs like guildships or strongholdes where you can test your weapons, walk around and role-play (if you want; I don't)? Why not let my wander around and fight a skirmish within a huge area? Eternal Crusade won't be MMO-RPG (like Warhammer: Age of Reckoning), it will be a MMOTPS, but if EC ends up as a LOBBY-SHOOTER ...
True but most MMOs have PvP/RvR caps enabled on their instanced servers/zones. Even something like GW2 or W:AR that are/were sold on the notion of massed combat (and do fairly well) have caps on server and instance capacity. They almost universally don't discuss numbers. There are very few MMOs that don't maintain strict caps and run-off servers on zones. Obviously you want to take that to 1K players but that comes with lag like fuck and doesn't lend itself to twitch gameplay. ESO and W:AR both reduced their larger PvP zone caps specifically because they were becoming slide shows full of lag deaths. I've heard Nathan say they identify with Destiny hubs which in turn indentifies itself as being built with MMO elements in mind. Actually I've read Nathan and others saying they'd like to go much further than that but they believe core gameplay and perfecting the parts of the world that facilitate the best gameplay opportunities are priority. I want a ship and social areas (confirmed as a target) but I agree totally with Combat>All. It's boring as hell to stand in a social hub because the gameplay or world is "massive" but hollow. The specific terms and content people judge "MMO" by is spawning so much hybrid content that blurs the lines that you have to be gaming in the mid-2000s to have a confident explanation. Some of the trademark MMO standards make for the most boring and development-hungry systems while the engaging content suffers. I'll tag @Oveur and @NoahWard in case they want to call me a lying swine (or expand) They've just started expanding the RPG system into Alpha which will help with player persistence and Nathan has hinted we'll hear more about the persistent world very soon. Also this: Btw, I'm skeptical. Skepticism is healthy with any project that's aspirational and yet to deliver. Just have to be comfortable in your skepticism (and be willing to embrace success) otherwise it's a case of suffering through it. Screw that, I've got too much real stuff to sweat
I agree. Never assume the devs will deliver everything exactly as they say, but we also need to trust that they are trying to do the best possible job and will succeed in many things. Gotta take the good with the bad. Also, can they call you a lying swine but not disagree with that post itself?
