Jump to content
Search In
  • More options...
Find results that contain...
Find results in...

sangz

Testers
  • Posts

    18
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Male

sangz's Achievements

Newbie

Newbie (1/14)

25

Reputation

  1. I have friends who like the idea of Crowfall but are very much turned off to the game because of passive skill training. Their reasoning is slightly different: Passive skill training is less rewarding for hardcore players. If I'm a hardcore player who wants to play 6 hours a day, there is little to no reward to progress your character for playing a lot.
  2. I was there during Wildstar's earliest testing phases all the way through release and you are absolutely right they did have too many people telling them everything was fine, but they also failed to listen and make changes based on actual gameplay. That's the thing - anyone can say anything, whether they like a game or hate game, but what they actually do is 1000x more important. I could go into several examples of failure from wildstar, but I'm actually not sure whether or not my NDA is still valid so I'll refrain. Long story short, there were people telling them everything was fine, but there were also clear examples and feedback on certain issues that Carbine failed to act on. I'm fairly certain a lot of it had to do with pressure to release before ESO (which they failed to do) and ArchAge.
  3. Like others in this thread, I firmly dislike the idea of soft launch for all the reasons mentioned: it can leave players with a bad taste in their mouth you will never recover from and forces anyone who wants to hardcore to get started early. That being, I think a lot depends on how "soft" of a launch are you expecting. ACE could hypothetically soft launch a game with only (1) Eternal kingdoms (2) one maybe two campaign worlds and (3) Crafting/player economy. Would that be enough? I don't know. Personally, I value quality over quantity and I'd rather see less high-quality stuff than more of the total game in a poorly made state
  4. I'm actually really looking forward to this. I think we're going to be able to provide a lot more feedback than we have before with some of the the big picture stuff in place.
  5. That is terrible reasoning to make design decisions. An mmo is a product, a very complicated one, but a product nonetheless. All decisions, such as combat, should be made to meet the needs, goals, and expectations of your customers. If your customers primary desire is fast, responsive combat, you build it. Period. Do you think people play WoW because the combat is the best looking, the highest skill level or offers the most customization? No, absolutely not. The reason why people still play is because despite WoW's combat not topping any single category, its combat is of extremely high quality across the board and it is unmatched in providing ways for players to experience it's combat (content).
  6. I am personally very excited to see the product Amazon comes up with. Just because there are multiple survival sandbox mmos in development doesn't necessarily mean its a bad idea to develop one. None of them have really captured market share. Furthermore, let's not rush to judgement of a game when all we've seen of it is concept art and our our description of the game is from a 1 minute trailer, a paragraph of text and 5 bullet points on a website. That is exactly my problem with pretty much every crowdfunded MMO in development today, including Crowfall. All these games constantly increase scope with stretch goals for new features, cosmetics or fancy trinkets to try to get more money from backers. All this does is waste time and money trying to build crazy stupid stuff instead of actually delivering a high quality core product which was advertised. Today, the entire mmo market is completely ass backwards from the rest of the software industry where delivering a minimum viable product as quickly as possible that meets the needs of your primary users is paramount. Star Citizen may be crazy ambitious but that doesn't mean it's going to be any good, its development thus far has been less than ideal. (Read this article for more insight into the troubled development of Star Citizen). I backed Crowfall based for three primary features (1) eternal heroes + dying worlds (2) eternal kingdoms and (3) player driven economy. That's what I paid for. Take a look at the original Kickstarter page, not one of those stretch goals mean anything to getting those three things delivered to me. VR support, combat-enabled pets, and cosmetic trinkets? Please. Crowfall's minimum viable product should be to develop ONE campaign with good combat + eternal kingdoms + player driven economy. Make all that really good and I will be satisfied. I don't even need siege units and destructible environments right away. All of that stuff with more campaigns etc can be added into the game afterwards. So to get back to the point, does New World sound amazingly original? Not quite. And yes, there are a lot of players in the market. But ultimately we don't know enough about the game yet to rush to judgement. Finally, the inability of crowdfunded games to deliver a minimum viable product is why I will consistently be optimistic about any mmo development efforts from a triple-a studio with adequate resources until they give me a reason think otherwise.
  7. This. The weekday afternoon tests exclude a lot of North American players with jobs so you are mostly left with an EU playerbase. My guess is that group is somewhat large as its more likely working adults have extra cash on-hand to back a video game that is in development than say your average college or even high-school gamer. Also as mentioned, when you have 3-5 tests a week it just becomes too repetitive to play during every testing window. There just isn't enough of the game built yet to where I would have fun playing 5+ hours in a given week. That's not a knock against ACE, that's just the reality of the current state of the game. As more content gets added, the number of testers in game will increase, it always does.
  8. I think this is the right call. I would really shy away from calling it a soft launch or any other time of launch. Just call it what it is...Open Beta or just Beta.
  9. I like this idea. Perhaps the proposed minimap idea could only show major objectives (Banewood Trees/Tree of Life), scouted locals (keeps, quarries, etc.) and current party members, but not all allied or enemy players.
  10. I spent $60 for the KS Backer reward a while ago, but now I'm looking to increase my Pledge. According the FAQ, I should be able to login, go over to the pledge page and see any available upgrades with price differences. The problem I have is that the pledge page is not showing any available upgrade price differences. My question is whether or not this correct — that even though I've already spent $60 on the game when it was in KS, I don't get a discount on additional 2016 pledges? Context: I'm potentially looking to upgrade to Bronze or Gold bundles from KS Backer
  11. Changes to archetypes are extremely common in most MMOs at this point in development so I’m not too concerned right now. That being said, I do like your line of thinking that Rangers should have a balanced utilization of melee and ranged capabilities. Most MMO class design is very binary in terms of how it should be played — either I want to be at range or in melee — and it gets boring after a while. In my opinion, what would be very appealing from the Ranger is something akin to Guild Wars 2, which highly encourages players to swap between weapon sets to chain different abilities and react to varying combat situations.
×
×
  • Create New...