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


ACE Development Partners
  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by Absolem

  1. I understand what you're saying, but it seems like the more important advancements our characters can make should involve some effort. I can remember when I had to go through the quest line to get my paladin's epic mount in WoW. It was really hard at the time, but it's one of the best memories I have from any MMO because it took me some time to get. Blizzard later changed it because people were frustrated by having to go through the quest line and now you just gain the thing from a trainer. In my opinion something cool was lost when they made that update. I certainly agree that other players should not have the ability to completely prevent you from advancing to the next stage of character development, but I really don't see anything wrong with having to overcome other players to advance in a PvP game.
  2. I agree with many of the other commentators. This is a great idea. Advancing to a new class should definitely involve some sort of in-game activities that make the promotion more meaningful. I've seen something like this in several other games and those quests were some of the most memorable for me.
  3. I understand how you feel, but keep in mind that if you were a KS backer you had a lot of extra time to upgrade to another KS package. They kept that option open for much longer than they really needed to.
  4. Did you read the concerns on the first page? It is very easy to understand how it SHOULD work. I certainly understand that when upgrading to Emerald 2015 from KS Ruby I keep all of the KS Ruby perks that I already had, and I gain the perks from the Emerald 2015 package that I did not already have. It is not easy to understand why the upgrade page makes it seem like I will end up with more rewards if I upgrade from KS Ruby to 2015 Emerald than if I had just pledged for KS Emerald to begin with. snowmizer has a valid question and the fact that several users have presented the situation in several different ways indicates that this is, in fact, "hard to understand."
  5. Yeah F2P in an online shooter can be pretty good as it ensures a steady stream of fodder for the vets. As long as the business model doesn't allow for P2W and hackers are not able to constantly create new accounts once they are banned then F2P could work out pretty well.
  6. I've backed both as well. I have not gotten to the point where I want to support one more than the other yet. They both offer some pretty exciting features.
  7. *sigh* If only that were true... At least tomorrow really is Friday!
  8. Hmmm this is an interesting prescription! ROFL
  9. It's not a new term. I've seen it used in literature for decades.
  10. They indicated that the pet was due to the archetype equipping a discipline:
  11. I don't think this answers your entire question, but it does say what your guild members can do if you quit. This was in the EK KS update:
  12. Thanks, I'm looking forward to the process PS Sorry about your allergies. I would say that you should eat some local raw honey, but I don't think that actually helps.
  13. Yeah, I may decide on another class after I actually get to see an ability list and a better description of their intended role.
  14. I will most likely be playing a Ranger.
  15. I've really enjoyed reading through this thread. Submitted an app. I know recruitment may still be temporarily closed. I am ok with that. I can wait.
  16. False. You responded to me with that post that he was responding to and I never once said it was a must-have feature. I said it was a feature that I was interested in and I offered a perspective that had not been mentioned yet in the thread. I thought I made it clear that I understood it was possible that some people may suggest such a thing: "While I'm sure someone somewhere wants what you are describing, I believe you are misrepresenting what several of us have suggested." I should have not used the phrase "No one" in my next sentence as it invited you to take me out of context. Doc was answering someone that was responding to Gilgamer's explanation of FFXIV ARR's system. By doing so, he was effectively saying that Gilgamer was one of the posters who "want to build in controllers form the beginning, thus modifying the Game to fit a controller scheme...". This is a misrepresentation of what he said and I was responding to point that out. "No one" in this case, refers to the parties involved in the recent discussion about using FFXIV's system to describe how one could implement a gamepad system into Crowfall. I understand that I could have made that more clear, but you picking bits and pieces out of my comments is starting to get annoying.
  17. While I'm sure someone somewhere wants what you are describing, I believe you are misrepresenting what several of us have suggested. No one has said the actual mechanics of the game should be changed in order to accommodate gamepad usage. We want Crowfall devs to develop an interface that allows us to easily map actions to controller functions via a UI and to develop support for movement using analog sticks so we don't have to attempt to map those sticks to WASD.
  18. FFXIV ARR has controller support and a user can use "4 actions bars with 8 actions each". It most certainly can adapt to 30+ abilities. I agree that eventually you would hit a brick wall, but supporting 32 abilities on the controller would be more than enough. Anyone who wants access to more than that would just have to use M+KB.
  19. My opinion is that they do not work great. You are more than welcome to have a different one. Please do not assume that I am ignorant or incapable of doing basic configurations because my interpretation of the experience differs from your own.
  20. I'm aware of what my friend can do to get around the problem. I've used such programs before and found they are a pain to work with.
  21. I think that when trying to understand how this feature should work, we need to think about the player that is completely new to the game, not the person who got bonuses for supporting the KS campaign. I feel that the Eternal Kingdom should initially be used to introduce the new player to the game. In your EK you should be able to learn the basics for combat and crafting, as well as anything else that is essential for you to get started in Crowfall. During that process a player could be introduced to the idea of EK management and the relationship between advancing the EK by going on Campaigns. During that introduction you may get to start the process for developing your first parcel, but I do not feel that development should be completed until you actually finish your first campaign. While the campaign is ongoing you can come back to your EK, but at this point it is little better than a small plot of land with a structure being built on it and access to whatever basic services the devs feel are needed that early in a character's development. Once you complete your first campaign you finally have some materials to work with and you can potentially start to develop your next parcel. I feel like this is a pretty organic way to introduce the player to the EK feature and it should not cause an issue with most new players because they should be able to understand that the EK is something they will be developing over time and using more and more as they progress in campaigns. Unfortunately KS backers, and anyone else who buys in early, don't count as a normal player who just bought the game and logged in for the first time. The perks given to us for donating money will muddy up the on-boarding process much like studying a game months and years before its release make the in-game tutorial seem useless. I understand why some players want the headstart coming their way to be functional from day one, but I honestly can't think of a good reason to force the early game to function a certain way to accommodate that desire. I think we just need to understand that we're getting some bonuses that we will eventually be able to make use of when the game catches up to them and leave it at that.
  22. Not necessarily. I think it's foolish to leave anything til the last minute if you know you'll eventually want to include it. I agree that features should absolutely not be scrapped due to the decision to include controller support, but tacking the support on instead of actually spending a little time implementing it is pointless. Another point that I am sure you don't care about is there is a whole new generation of gamers who grew up using gamepads. I know you do not want to appeal to the masses (neither do I), but there are members of that generation that like the same kinds as games as us, they would just be more comfortable on a gamepad. While we don't want to change the vision for this title to accommodate a larger audience, we do want to make sure we can do whatever we can to ensure that people who would share our vision will want to play with us. Good gamepad support would help in this area. Personally I would like to have someone give us a good estimate of how much development time/money it would take to add the support as well as a clear analysis of any potential consequences. If someone with industry knowledge wants to share a REALISTIC analysis of the pros and cons, I would very much like to read it. (Note - Playing video games does not qualify you as having industry knowledge. Please do not attempt to provide the requested analysis unless you honestly feel you are qualified. I'll give you the benefit of the doubt either way, but I wanted to provide a disclaimer. )
  • Create New...