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

"ACE Q&A Livestream March 2nd" discussion


Recommended Posts

4 hours ago, Wrain said:

Oh boy...

I'll try to be positive, short, and constructive on this one.

1. Hunger dome why?  Time, resources, population...all being wasted in something that will NOT, CANNOT, and will NEVER compete with a real MOBA/FPS that was DESIGNED from the ground up/start as that type of game.  Why are you wanting to FURTHER split the population and character attachment in a MMORPG?

2. You mentioned bio's...Jungle and swamp?  We already have trees everywhere and you have snow build up.  Wouldn't it be 10x easier to just make a "snow" region and then have your artist sand/desert" for now?  That 3 drastically different bios for EACH faction done QUICKLY and effectively making your 3 realms feel "unique".

3. I heard the word "Shadowbane" eeked out...PLEASE, just accept that game should be your blue-print.  You want cash flow and you want hype/#'s returning...Keep your changes coming in THAT direction and your money/players WILL come back!

4. The discipline/rune changes, skins, freedom to build, and optimization ARE WHATS GOING TO SAVE YOUR GAME.  Those topics you hit on are what players WANTED from the start on this backing.  Please just focus on bringing back CHARACTER ATTACHMENT/DEVELOPMENT.  Stop messing with crafting, farming, pvp "spin-offs" and bring it back to a ONE-WORLD fully functioning MMO.  Pull us players into ONE constant war environment and then sell "tradeable" in store skins/mounts flashy items ect (with NO game stat advantages ) and you will have your positive cash flow.

I REALLY appreciated the upcoming layout, but hunger games kinda just made me shake my head....Why???  

Wrain

Point #4 really resonated with me.  The desire to keep tweaking and building characters in SB was what made the game so much fun for me.  The PvP by all accounts was not great, but the atmosphere surrounding the reason to PvP was amazing.

lUvvzPy.png

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 79
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

Bringing Hunger Dome back pretty much saves Crowfall for me.  It is where I will spend the vast majority of my playtime, because small group PvP is where Crowfall shines, and hunger dome back in the d

The reward for being online, and exposing yourself to risk, should be generating value. A fundamental problem in the game is that gold is just not valuable enough. There is no economy, there is not a

You know one thing that scares me about this hunger dome is will it provide content or remove content. your removing players from the open world and putting them in instances so there even less things

13 hours ago, mystafyi said:

 BDO did this a few years ago and had to rip it out of the game. This will end the same way, failure.

Hey they got the dieing world part down it seem for there campaign cause there a good chance they swiftly kill there game here :P

Veeshan Midst of UXA

Link to post
Share on other sites
17 hours ago, APE said:

Albion Online is also one of these freaks. Looking at the numbers of EVE and Albion, there should be enough players to support more games like them.

Originally ACE was using Crowfall's uniqueness as a marketing tool, not just go for the most customers and do what everyone else does. Fact that are are more options for non "hardcore" players should make any half way decent game catering to them to be popular.

No they won't be #1, but when there are countless games and more on the way, trying to be #1 is pointless.

Why did you back the game then? 

Maybe for MMOs, but not other genres. Player looting games come in many flavors and are very popular. Crowfall trying to blend strengths of different genres was part of the vision. Instead it ends up being a mediocre MMO with what looks like a poor BR mode.

Why would it only cater to "hardcore" players? Campaign rulesets allow different rules. They've already removed gear looting as it was too harsh for the softcore community here.

You keep citing Albion and Eve as the gauge by which we should judge the number of players this game could attract saying that "player looting" games are very popular. Some genre's they are, BR specifically. However, over all they are not as wildly popular as you seem to think, especially when you speak to the MMO genre.

One of the most popular games right now is Roblox. I grabbed these numbers: https://playercounter.com/roblox/ about Roblox

Then I grabbed these for Albion since it has been on Steam, I realize that Albion is available on other platforms and those numbers are not accounted for here, but even if they were doubled they are a drop in the bucket. https://steamcharts.com/app/761890#All

And for Eve https://eve-offline.net/?server=tranquility 

So Roblox, a very low risk PvP game had 1,812,241 players yesterday, while Eve in it's entire history had at the most around 60k players, and Albion (again, just the steam charts) was rocking around 13K at it's best, and seems to be maintaining around 10K recently. Again, feel free to double those numbers to account for other platforms and they still will not even come close to scratching the surface of Roblox. A very simple, very low risk, easy to play game that does have full loot in certain modes however, getting your stuff back is dead simple.

I am speaking to MMO's here. Obviously people attracted to BR games are comfortable with high risk/high reward however, what do you really lose? In a BR game you do not have to spend countless hours grinding materials to take to a crafter to get a weapon made. Fortnite had over 6 million players as I am writing this, which would indicate it is a pretty popular game. Far more so than Eve or Albion. 

The point being, a majority of people do not like full loot pvp with a lot of risk/work attached, however people do enjoy high risk pvp when it's simple to replace your kit. As much as I personally do not like BR games, if this thing starts turning those eyes towards this game and that results in a healthier player base then it can't be a bad thing, hoping they stay true to the vision I believe most of us backed and that is making a Throne War MMO with different campaign types.

On a side note, I think the servers would catch on fire if 10k people tried to log into Crowfall right now.

Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, Ajokoira said:

So Roblox, a very low risk PvP game had 1,812,241 players yesterday

No. You are attempting to use numbers for a game platform as an individual game. You do realize roblox is not just one game right? Why do you insist on using data that is not comparable? Nintendo Wii to arcade games to mobile games to game publisher platform usage.... Whats next? 

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 3/2/2021 at 7:48 PM, McTan said:

Tomorrow, within an hour, multiple alliances will have nearly fully built out cities. All because we farmed in extreme safety and can import that into the danger. We do not need to do anything in dangerous dregs. Incomprehensible to me to cripple your own game loop with imports. People will likely be like "different campaigns for different folks," but those who play import will not understand nor experience the potential of a slower, no import, SB style world.

Self QFT. Within one day, I am bored with Dregs. My city doesn't need me. Running pigs is boring AF. Forts are poorly made dergsty zergfest. Conquest points are last-minute flag flips. I have no connection to the world, no connection to my alliance. My guild cannot do anything as a group of ten that is interesting, so we just merged into a bigger guild. At this point, I'm out of new words to describe how badly the game needs loops that make it into a game.

Edit: I took a half-day at work. When I signed-in, my alliance had claimed our main keep, walls were up, respawn was up. Within a few hours bank was up, everything is up. All I did was donate some gold I got passively while bumming around infected. I couldn't get my guild to play this game even if I bribed them.

If MWH did choose to take a keep, it would be zerged down first window for free. WTF is this? Stop tinkering with little class and disc powers and fix the actual game part. The characters we build are not an end in themselves. They are only as interesting as the encounters we get to have with them. Right now it's all really boring.

I have nothing but respect for all the players who are sticking it out and running around killing and dying for no reason other than we like PvP. Imagine if we had a game that actually drew out competition and PvP, instead of having to manufacture it out of thin air.

Edited by McTan
Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, mystafyi said:

No. You are attempting to use numbers for a game platform as an individual game. You do realize roblox is not just one game right? Why do you insist on using data that is not comparable? Nintendo Wii to arcade games to mobile games to game publisher platform usage.... Whats next? 

I am not sure why you cannot seem to understand, it is comparable first of all. It has free for all PvP with full loot, the only real difference is and the point I am making is it is very easy to get your gear back, just like in Apex legends, Fornite, etc. Losing has no real long term consequence and most MMO players prefer that to a long grind to re-acquire your equipment. How else do I need to explain so you can wrap your head around it?

Ape brought all these titles up and continues to hold them up as "evidence" that they are 1) similar to crowfall (prior the BR announcement) and 2 very popular, they aren't. Or weren't, but I explained my position on that pretty clearly, I hope that does not need further explanation.

Yes, short term games like apex, fortnite, Battlefield, Black Ops, Roblox, etc. Yeah you lose but the very next match you get to start again with more or less the same loadout (games like Valorant you may not have the money to buy a full load out). Long term games where you have to grind materials, get them crafted, use them and then lose them if things do not go your way are far less popular. That is the distinction I am trying to make. 

There, that is two different explanations, lets hope it sinks in this time.

Link to post
Share on other sites
13 hours ago, Ajokoira said:

You keep citing Albion and Eve as the gauge by which we should judge the number of players this game could attract saying that "player looting" games are very popular. Some genre's they are, BR specifically. However, over all they are not as wildly popular as you seem to think, especially when you speak to the MMO genre.

The point being, a majority of people do not like full loot pvp with a lot of risk/work attached, however people do enjoy high risk pvp when it's simple to replace your kit. 

I'm not claiming MMOs that share similarities with Crowfall are wildly popular, however they aren't exactly on the brink of turning off the servers either.

As I mentioned in an earlier comment, numbers depend on where you are looking.

Albion Online posted numbers Sept 2020 of having 125k daily users. MMO-population.com shows 199k daily users and 2.62 Million total. Not sure where MMO-pop gets their numbers, but I going to assume Sandbox wasn't pulling those numbers out of the air. They also sold the company/game for ~$122 million a few months ago so clearly someone believes a full loot MMO isn't the worst idea.

Using Steam isn't going to give accurate numbers for games with their own launchers.

https://albiononline.com/en/news/population-update-september-2020

https://mmo-population.com/r/albiononline

MMO-population.com: Daily ranking: EVE #12, Roblox #14, Albion #22 for 2021 based on whatever data they are working with.

EVE (CCP) was bought by Pearl Abyss (Black Desert) for $425 million in 2018. That is a good chunk of money for a relatively old, very niche product by a company that is known for different games.

AO/EVE are as close as it gets to running games (MMOs) like Crowfall. Other MMOs and genres might share similarities but I agree it is apples to oranges.

If the goal was to make yet another MMO with XYZ features in hopes to getting a piece of the larger MMO pie, maybe someone should have told ACE. From the start they went with a design that was obviously not going to be overly popular, was aimed directly at fans of games like EVE, AO, Shadowbane, Darkfall, DAoC, etc. Not WoW, Roblox, Candy Crush, or Pacman. Not that someone can't enjoy all those games.

As I've commented many times in other discussions, I don't believe the current game/gear loop can support gear looting well. I also don't believe the current loop supports the supposed player driven economy either, hence why there isn't one.

Grinding for days for a pair of boots to lose them in one fight isn't going to be enjoyed. As you mentioned, FPS/BR/Survival and such games that do have player looting and permadeath are successful because it is relatively easy come easy go. This is tricky for MMOs because players want a sense of progression over time.

Using EVE/AO as comparable examples, MMOs can manage to balance the two out. Having a core economic loop of easy come easy go with more highly prized items/ships/whatever. Which feeds into a risk/reward model that allows players to choose how much they want to risk or not. In some way like gambling or playing the stock market. There are safe bets and there are pull your hair out risky ones. It's up to the player to decide.

Crowfall is supposed to stand out with different campaign types. Kickstarter gave an example of player gear looting so the idea has been around since the start and part of the same design that people backed for non looting campaigns. Crowfall is supposed to offer options. Not that all will be enjoyed, but ACE said they'd at least try some to find out.

IMO ACE hasn't delivered on a product that will allow a lot of variation and the core game loop isn't accessible. Too much is out of the players hands, too much focus on grindy mechanics, typical stat stacking advantage, hard to get hard to lose gearing, lack of risk/reward options, non viable economy tools, etc. This isn't good for full loot or no loot. It isn't good for new, solo, small teams. Many point to joining a guild but really it seems to be join a "zerg" guild or have a suboptimal experience. All of this could be improved upon (including full loot) by changing the gear loop to easy come and go with higher power/prized items holding value and worth risking if one chooses.

-----

The source you linked (playercounter.com) currently shows WoW 160-205k, Overwatch 605-777k, Roblox steady 1.8 million, Apex 800k-1 million, Fortnite 5.6 million to 6.2 million. The ranges are from hitting Update Player Counter every few seconds. Not sure how they are tracking all of this and why is varies so greatly second to second. Due to being on different platforms, crossplay, different titles under the same umbrella, not sure how accurate any of it is.

Quote

On a side note, I think the servers would catch on fire if 10k people tried to log into Crowfall right now.

I agree. Good thing 99.9% of backers that own the game or have received beta invites don't bother.

2 hours ago, Ajokoira said:

Ape brought all these titles up and continues to hold them up as "evidence" that they are 1) similar to crowfall (prior the BR announcement) and 2 very popular, they aren't.

  1. AO/EVE share a decent amount with Crowfall be it direct comparable features or broader concepts. IMO Crowfall lacks a good deal in comparison, but at the basic level they are similar and attract similar players. Also, ACE themselves reference AO and more so EVE, so if I'm incorrect then I guess they are as well.
  2. Not sure I claimed they were "very popular." Feel free to quote me if I did. They have enough players to be online which is a success to me. Compared to WoW or Pacman, no they haven't sold as many copies or made as much money. If the goal is to measure up to such titles, Crowfall will fail like the vast majority of products for what I hope are obvious reasons.
  3. I did comment that other games/genres are popular because they pull in as many if not a good deal more then even the top MMOs including WoW. While also having more "harsh" features, regardless of how easy it might be to replace items or start a new match. Again, these types of things can attract players to Crowfall if it share similar qualities. Which is kind of the point of blending features from different games/genres....to pull from different games/genres, not just one very specific pool of players. Ex: I'm not a "moba player" or a "themepark mmo player," I'm a gamer and like different things and if a title can combine a bunch of things I like into one product, good chance I'll like it.

Overall my point is Crowfall isn't or shouldn't be just for X players that like Y features presented in Z manner. It is supposed to offer options but the core model makes options hard to implement well. Which has resulted in a mediocre game experience that looking at the numbers, few enjoy despite the plan to launch this year. Albion had quite a few more playing a year or two before launch from what I remember, but it also resembled a more thought out product as well despite still being full of issues that took years to improve/fix.

ACE on the home stretch is deciding to toss in a Battle Royale and present a roadmap of features that were supposed to be at launch that will not be months/years post launch. Full loot or not on a single campaign is far from this game's issue. Can't manage to do very basic features like guild tools in-game or custom UI options, but have time to do Art, UI, Hunger Dome mechanics/maps, and whatever else they are pumping into the BR. Interesting use of limited resources and time before launch.

Edited by APE

 


 

Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, APE said:

Can't manage to do very basic features like guild tools in-game or custom UI options, but have time to do Art, UI, Hunger Dome mechanics/maps, and whatever else they are pumping into the BR. Interesting use of limited resources and time before launch.

Basic options are all that are needed for their Artisan engine. As I have said, crowfall has turned into a proof of concept for that project. Since Battle Royale mode was so long ago, they had to take the time to work it into artisan engine, need to be able to support more moba and survival type games.

Link to post
Share on other sites
12 hours ago, APE said:

I'm not claiming MMOs that share similarities with Crowfall are wildly popular, however they aren't exactly on the brink of turning off the servers either.

As I mentioned in an earlier comment, numbers depend on where you are looking.

Albion Online posted numbers Sept 2020 of having 125k daily users. MMO-population.com shows 199k daily users and 2.62 Million total. Not sure where MMO-pop gets their numbers, but I going to assume Sandbox wasn't pulling those numbers out of the air. They also sold the company/game for ~$122 million a few months ago so clearly someone believes a full loot MMO isn't the worst idea.

Using Steam isn't going to give accurate numbers for games with their own launchers.

https://albiononline.com/en/news/population-update-september-2020

https://mmo-population.com/r/albiononline

MMO-population.com: Daily ranking: EVE #12, Roblox #14, Albion #22 for 2021 based on whatever data they are working with.

EVE (CCP) was bought by Pearl Abyss (Black Desert) for $425 million in 2018. That is a good chunk of money for a relatively old, very niche product by a company that is known for different games.

AO/EVE are as close as it gets to running games (MMOs) like Crowfall. Other MMOs and genres might share similarities but I agree it is apples to oranges.

If the goal was to make yet another MMO with XYZ features in hopes to getting a piece of the larger MMO pie, maybe someone should have told ACE. From the start they went with a design that was obviously not going to be overly popular, was aimed directly at fans of games like EVE, AO, Shadowbane, Darkfall, DAoC, etc. Not WoW, Roblox, Candy Crush, or Pacman. Not that someone can't enjoy all those games.

As I've commented many times in other discussions, I don't believe the current game/gear loop can support gear looting well. I also don't believe the current loop supports the supposed player driven economy either, hence why there isn't one.

Grinding for days for a pair of boots to lose them in one fight isn't going to be enjoyed. As you mentioned, FPS/BR/Survival and such games that do have player looting and permadeath are successful because it is relatively easy come easy go. This is tricky for MMOs because players want a sense of progression over time.

Using EVE/AO as comparable examples, MMOs can manage to balance the two out. Having a core economic loop of easy come easy go with more highly prized items/ships/whatever. Which feeds into a risk/reward model that allows players to choose how much they want to risk or not. In some way like gambling or playing the stock market. There are safe bets and there are pull your hair out risky ones. It's up to the player to decide.

Crowfall is supposed to stand out with different campaign types. Kickstarter gave an example of player gear looting so the idea has been around since the start and part of the same design that people backed for non looting campaigns. Crowfall is supposed to offer options. Not that all will be enjoyed, but ACE said they'd at least try some to find out.

IMO ACE hasn't delivered on a product that will allow a lot of variation and the core game loop isn't accessible. Too much is out of the players hands, too much focus on grindy mechanics, typical stat stacking advantage, hard to get hard to lose gearing, lack of risk/reward options, non viable economy tools, etc. This isn't good for full loot or no loot. It isn't good for new, solo, small teams. Many point to joining a guild but really it seems to be join a "zerg" guild or have a suboptimal experience. All of this could be improved upon (including full loot) by changing the gear loop to easy come and go with higher power/prized items holding value and worth risking if one chooses.

-----

The source you linked (playercounter.com) currently shows WoW 160-205k, Overwatch 605-777k, Roblox steady 1.8 million, Apex 800k-1 million, Fortnite 5.6 million to 6.2 million. The ranges are from hitting Update Player Counter every few seconds. Not sure how they are tracking all of this and why is varies so greatly second to second. Due to being on different platforms, crossplay, different titles under the same umbrella, not sure how accurate any of it is.

I agree. Good thing 99.9% of backers that own the game or have received beta invites don't bother.

  1. AO/EVE share a decent amount with Crowfall be it direct comparable features or broader concepts. IMO Crowfall lacks a good deal in comparison, but at the basic level they are similar and attract similar players. Also, ACE themselves reference AO and more so EVE, so if I'm incorrect then I guess they are as well.
  2. Not sure I claimed they were "very popular." Feel free to quote me if I did. They have enough players to be online which is a success to me. Compared to WoW or Pacman, no they haven't sold as many copies or made as much money. If the goal is to measure up to such titles, Crowfall will fail like the vast majority of products for what I hope are obvious reasons.
  3. I did comment that other games/genres are popular because they pull in as many if not a good deal more then even the top MMOs including WoW. While also having more "harsh" features, regardless of how easy it might be to replace items or start a new match. Again, these types of things can attract players to Crowfall if it share similar qualities. Which is kind of the point of blending features from different games/genres....to pull from different games/genres, not just one very specific pool of players. Ex: I'm not a "moba player" or a "themepark mmo player," I'm a gamer and like different things and if a title can combine a bunch of things I like into one product, good chance I'll like it.

Overall my point is Crowfall isn't or shouldn't be just for X players that like Y features presented in Z manner. It is supposed to offer options but the core model makes options hard to implement well. Which has resulted in a mediocre game experience that looking at the numbers, few enjoy despite the plan to launch this year. Albion had quite a few more playing a year or two before launch from what I remember, but it also resembled a more thought out product as well despite still being full of issues that took years to improve/fix.

ACE on the home stretch is deciding to toss in a Battle Royale and present a roadmap of features that were supposed to be at launch that will not be months/years post launch. Full loot or not on a single campaign is far from this game's issue. Can't manage to do very basic features like guild tools in-game or custom UI options, but have time to do Art, UI, Hunger Dome mechanics/maps, and whatever else they are pumping into the BR. Interesting use of limited resources and time before launch.

I am going to trust your numbers, reading more on Steam, it is not nearly as popular as it once was, so them putting up les than 1/10th the numbers that the actual game dev's does make sense.

I went to MMOpopulation, that even supports what I am saying. In the gaming world MMO's are a drop in the bucket, and PvP MMO's are behind that. At any rate the rest of what you are saying I think we agree on. The reason I am not throwing my hands in the air is Hungerdome can't make it any worse than it is.

I also agree there should be different campaign modes to allow for a more diverse audience. Maybe not months before launch, as you point out.

Link to post
Share on other sites

It's going to be interesting (I expect chaotic), if Crowfall releases as intended, and tens of thousands of players flood in, or attempt to play the game. How will ACE respond? How will the maps handle large numbers of players? Just how much stress have their servers experienced, and is the current build optimized for potentially large numbers? Do they intend to migrate players, guilds, ISP Locations/Regions if the available servers start bogging down?

Maybe none of these issues will manifest. Maybe they all will. ACE will get one shot for their maiden voyage, is it the Titanic?

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Meram said:

It's going to be interesting (I expect chaotic), if Crowfall releases as intended, and tens of thousands of players flood in, or attempt to play the game. How will ACE respond? How will the maps handle large numbers of players? Just how much stress have their servers experienced, and is the current build optimized for potentially large numbers? Do they intend to migrate players, guilds, ISP Locations/Regions if the available servers start bogging down?

They don't have to migrate players as players can migrate themselves. Presumably there will be a total player cap on each campaign and people will funnel into campaigns. ArtCraft can spin up new campaigns as population demands. They will have campaigns in the East and West Coast US, EU, and maybe more. 

Single maps seem to start performing poorly at around 200 players. They are constantly working to improve performance, but given that simpler games on the same engine can't handle more than ~600, it's safe to say that there are major, unresolved problems here with launch. There will inevitably be performance issues as people flock to castles and keeps, and people will absolutely zone lock to defend them.

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Ajokoira said:

I went to MMOpopulation, that even supports what I am saying. In the gaming world MMO's are a drop in the bucket, and PvP MMO's are behind that.

You seem to be failing to understand that ArtCraft did not set out to create the largest MMO. They are trying to build a niche PvP MMO. They're very cognizant of the fact that it will never appeal to everyone. The goal, then, is probably to build a sustainable company and a game they're proud of. 

Crowfall has marginal support for carebears. The consequences of dying in Infected are pretty minimal, and you can't be PK'd in God's Reach. However, the game is not yet very rewarding for this play style as the rewards are much higher where there is more risk.

BR will definitely help for this play style. ArtCraft might continue to improve the experience after launch, but if you're looking for equal footing as a carebear versus people who play in Dregs, that will probably never happen, it just doesn't make sense for the genre.

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Meram said:

It's going to be interesting (I expect chaotic), if Crowfall releases as intended, and tens of thousands of players flood in, or attempt to play the game. How will ACE respond? How will the maps handle large numbers of players? Just how much stress have their servers experienced, and is the current build optimized for potentially large numbers? Do they intend to migrate players, guilds, ISP Locations/Regions if the available servers start bogging down?

Maybe none of these issues will manifest. Maybe they all will. ACE will get one shot for their maiden voyage, is it the Titanic?

How will the zones handle getting pop capped... The game is in a desperate need of an OPEN BETA.

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Alot said:

You seem to be failing to understand that ArtCraft did not set out to create the largest MMO.

Let me stop you right there, I do understand that. Glad we cleared that up.

Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, Ajokoira said:

Let me stop you right there, I do understand that. Glad we cleared that up.

Okay, so your point is that ArtCraft should fundamentally change their game design and goals because... you want them to? 

The data you shared was flawed and definitely doesn't support that the game will fail if there are consequences for PvP. On the contrary, there have been two massive acquisitions in this genre recently.

Link to post
Share on other sites
15 hours ago, Alot said:

They don't have to migrate players as players can migrate themselves. Presumably there will be a total player cap on each campaign and people will funnel into campaigns. ArtCraft can spin up new campaigns as population demands. They will have campaigns in the East and West Coast US, EU, and maybe more. 

Single maps seem to start performing poorly at around 200 players. They are constantly working to improve performance, but given that simpler games on the same engine can't handle more than ~600, it's safe to say that there are major, unresolved problems here with launch. There will inevitably be performance issues as people flock to castles and keeps, and people will absolutely zone lock to defend them.

Fair point. I did say ACE would force migrate players, but players will self migrate. If a Campaign can only handle 1,000 players, and maybe 200-500 on a map, lets pretend Goon Squad, or a similar guild with several thousand members, floods a campaign, and Winterblades can only get 100 of their people in, they will migrate to another campaign after a couple hours (or even days), and that campaign gets totally dominated by Goon. So, as I have pointed out previously with Rend and why it failed, everyone collectively discovers that the "Goon" campaign is un-beatable? Goon runs around awhile, gets bored and quits that campaign.
 
Meanwhile, ACE, in response, has started another campaign because players demand it and can't get in-game on the server their friends/guild are on. I don't really care if the game has gotten massively better, and I bet it has because it was terrible before, but they still haven't stressed this game with 10, 000+ players and I have not seen any indication they have considered population limits and the player response to full servers.

 

Edited by Meram
Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.


×
×
  • Create New...