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

Progression? Camelot Unchained & Crowfall Comparison

Recommended Posts

Would it be accurate to say, the games end goal progression is making your own private kingdom super cool? So essentially you play in campaigns to win, and by winning you can take that "booty" we'll say, and take it back to your home. So essentially you're taking materials from a short lived campaign to build your "land" or your home out. Right? Doesn't that sound a little weak to you? Or for lack of a better word, a little SIMS, Carebear like, considering one of the developers worked on the SIMS, i'm not surprised.

 

With your EK you can decide who comes and goes in your kingdom, so let's say someone is being a hooligan... You ban them, you win ?

 

Game over? What else? Where is the risk vs reward?    

 

As someone who is a backer of both Camelot Unchained (You can build structures/housing etc... that can be destroyed by the other 2 factions, there is no safe area, only your "faction" is safe. There is no world resets, the only protection seems to be that you can rebuild it with a plan after you have built it, be regaining the materials.But again it can be knocked down again. The players build the structures in the world and control the economy. 

 

So again, i am comparing the two, why is crowfall considered so hardcore? But yet not hardcore enough where you can lose your home? 

 

Am i missing something? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I must be missing something too.  I think 3 predetermined factions that don't allow you to do any intra-faction fighting is carebear.

But gathering materials to build your home in your instanced homeland isn't?

 

And CU will have a FFA server if enough players request it (creator has confirmed this)

Edited by willwill

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I must be missing something too.  I think 3 predetermined factions that don't allow you to do any intra-faction fighting is carebear.

 

Same. The more I read about EK's and campaigns the more this turns out to be seem like a carebear fantasy of call of duty. I'm extremely concerned. Additionally, since everyone can have their own kingdom (and campaigns?), there is nothing forcing anyone to swear fealty to the few who are so hard core their life is the game - because you know their guild kingdoms will rock.

 

Not to mention it will fragment the player base to ridiculous levels. Some people see worlds and campaigns with thousands, I see thousands of worlds and campaigns with hundreds... If that.

Edited by Funpire

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

But gathering materials to build your home in your instanced homeland isn't?

 

And CU will have a FFA server if enough players request it (creator has confirmed this)

 

I'm never going to be in the instance homeland.  Only killing people.


"Food for the crows..."    Nobuo Xa'el

cdinUTh.png

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Considering the core module will only consist of FFA PvP and players will be spending most of their time in the campaign rather than their EK this is sounding far better than some Faction v Faction nonsense.


You are so incredibly helpful, CYT. I don't know how I ever managed to do anything before we met. I was just bumbling my way through life, all lost-like. Thank you. My blessing cup runneth over.

SWrkfdj.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

But gathering materials to build your home in your instanced homeland isn't?

 

And CU will have a FFA server if enough players request it (creator has confirmed this)

 

It's pretty simple.  If you don't like EK then you don't have to do anything with it.  Resetting and changing rule set campaigns is the draw here.  CF is vastly superior on paper IMO.  

 

We'll see how this all plays out eventually.  

Edited by Chersk

1A9QOTM.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Would it be accurate to say, the games end goal progression is making your own private kingdom super cool? So essentially you play in campaigns to win, and by winning you can take that "booty" we'll say, and take it back to your home. So essentially you're taking materials from a short lived campaign to build your "land" or your home out. Right? Doesn't that sound a little weak to you? Or for lack of a better word, a little SIMS, Carebear like, considering one of the developers worked on the SIMS, i'm not surprised.

 

With your EK you can decide who comes and goes in your kingdom, so let's say someone is being a hooligan... You ban them, you win ?

 

Game over? What else? Where is the risk vs reward?    

 

As someone who is a backer of both Camelot Unchained (You can build structures/housing etc... that can be destroyed by the other 2 factions, there is no safe area, only your "faction" is safe. There is no world resets, the only protection seems to be that you can rebuild it with a plan after you have built it, be regaining the materials.But again it can be knocked down again. The players build the structures in the world and control the economy. 

 

So again, i am comparing the two, why is crowfall considered so hardcore? But yet not hardcore enough where you can lose your home? 

 

Am i missing something? 

 

Your kingdom is supposed to be a place or respite, so sorry if that isn't hardcore. I read on the FAQ that you don't even need to use that though. Also from my understanding thus far, Eternal Kingdoms still suffer seasons and will need to be protected from other monsters and creatures in your realm. If that's not the case I believe it should be...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Would it be accurate to say, the games end goal progression is making your own private kingdom super cool? So essentially you play in campaigns to win, and by winning you can take that "booty" we'll say, and take it back to your home. So essentially you're taking materials from a short lived campaign to build your "land" or your home out. Right? Doesn't that sound a little weak to you? Or for lack of a better word, a little SIMS, Carebear like, considering one of the developers worked on the SIMS, i'm not surprised.

 

With your EK you can decide who comes and goes in your kingdom, so let's say someone is being a hooligan... You ban them, you win ?

 

Game over? What else? Where is the risk vs reward?    

 

As someone who is a backer of both Camelot Unchained (You can build structures/housing etc... that can be destroyed by the other 2 factions, there is no safe area, only your "faction" is safe. There is no world resets, the only protection seems to be that you can rebuild it with a plan after you have built it, be regaining the materials.But again it can be knocked down again. The players build the structures in the world and control the economy. 

 

So again, i am comparing the two, why is crowfall considered so hardcore? But yet not hardcore enough where you can lose your home? 

 

Am i missing something? 

I agree with you. Instanced housing is the worst carebear thing ever, I can understand this feature in WoW but they dont call themselves "hardcore". Also the build a kingdom on the sever where others are playing and risk to lose it, but while you hold it you gain benefits - this is risk vs reward in my understanding.

 

The current system sounds like a session based survival game. H1Z1. Build a base, drop a loot there and either the server is wiped or it is stolen while you were in bed. So you can play on another server and not even think about what you lost. 

 

So it makes me thinking that the loot won't be that "Epic" another way it is pointless to have a "hard to obrain" items be destroyed by the world's death

Edited by bassa

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I find "hardcore" to be a silly term to apply to video games. I'd hope we are all playing to have fun, whatever that means to us individually.

 

While not a backer of CU, I am a fan of what they are doing and of the previous games. However, CU and CF seem to be fundamentally different types of games.

 

CU is basically a "sandbox" version of Andred/Mordred from DAOC with a lot more player involvement. Still falls victim to the problem that has plagued PVP mmos since UO or even MUDs. How do you sustain a game that allows individuals or groups to "win" and keep on "winning." As fun as try, try again sounds, at some point, it gets to be too tedious for both sides. How many times do I build up a Keep to have it knocked down or how many times to I stomp others because they aren't as good? Some might be able to do this forever, but looking at past games with a similar design, it doesn't last at a respectable level.

 

CF's victory condition approach sounds a lot more sustainable. For some reason, people love this type of design. From PVP to PVE to RVR, the numbers all say the same thing. Having clear winners/losers and the attempt to reverse that has kept players coming back across many games and sub-genres.

 

CF and CU are not apples to apples, maybe apples to bananas. Neither is better or worse, more hardcore or not. They are different products with different designs.

 

If someone claims EKs are "hardcore" hey that's their deal. Maybe I think Hello Kitty is harcore, who's to tell me otherwise. We get what we want out of games.

 

You and others call CF a lobby game, which is fine. Lobby games are entertaining and doing much better then any "hardcore" PVP game I've seen. If someone needs to permanently dominate others to feel accomplished or hardcore, fine with me. I'll be happy with attempting to play more of a short term strategy challenge. Much like Chess. If someone took out my king and then stomped on it every time I tried to put the pieces back to start a new game, I'd most likely walk away. To me this is what CU will become, unless there is something I'm missing. However if it attracts enough of a core audience that is down with that design, it will do just fine.

 

Games don't all have to be the same or be better than one another. We don't need WoW killers or clones of whatever game. Just fun and entertainment in all shapes and sizes.

 

Although many claim they are "hardcore" or want that experience, history says otherwise. Everyone can't be a winner in CU and losing forever can't be that enjoyable, unless your into pain or something  :ph34r:

 

Unless I'm missing it, there is no end goal or end game. EK can be used for that if someone wants, but it isn't necessary. Just as there is no end goal of CU. Unless it is to drive everyone out of the game or something? It escapes me, but I don't even know how one "wins" in CU with the 3 realm setup. BSC walls of text all blended together I guess.

 

 

Edited by Allein

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ugh, more people who can't read basic conceptual ideas. Kinda over this whole EK thing... no one understands them... they aren't the point of the game anyway... may as well just toss 'em!

 

So the point of the game is.....? Session based survival game? Then what is the difference compared to H1Z1, DayZ, Rust etc? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I find "hardcore" to be a silly term to apply to video games. I'd hope we are all playing to have fun, whatever that means to us individually.

 

While not a backer of CU, I am a fan of what they are doing and of the previous games. However, CU and CF seem to be fundamentally different types of games.

 

CU is basically a "sandbox" version of Andred/Mordred from DAOC with a lot more player involvement. Still falls victim to the problem that has plagued PVP mmos since UO or even MUDs. How do you sustain a game that allows individuals or groups to "win" and keep on "winning." As fun as try, try again sounds, at some point, it gets to be too tedious for both sides. How many times do I build up a Keep to have it knocked down or how many times to I stomp others because they aren't as good? Some might be able to do this forever, but looking at past games with a similar design, it doesn't last at a respectable level.

 

CF's victory condition approach sounds a lot more sustainable. For some reason, people love this type of design. From PVP to PVE to RVR, the numbers all say the same thing. Having clear winners/losers and the attempt to reverse that has kept players coming back across many games and sub-genres.

 

CF and CU are not apples to apples, maybe apples to bananas. Neither is better or worse, more hardcore or not. They are different products with different designs.

 

If someone claims EKs are "hardcore" hey that's their deal. Maybe I think Hello Kitty is harcore, who's to tell me otherwise. We get what we want out of games.

 

You and others call CF a lobby game, which is fine. Lobby games are entertaining and doing much better then any "hardcore" PVP game I've seen. If someone needs to permanently dominate others to feel accomplished or hardcore, fine with me. I'll be happy with attempting to play more of a short term strategy challenge. Much like Chess. If someone took out my king and then stomped on it every time I tried to put the pieces back to start a new game, I'd most likely walk away. To me this is what CU will become, unless there is something I'm missing. However if it attracts enough of a core audience that is down with that design, it will do just fine.

 

Games don't all have to be the same or be better than one another. We don't need WoW killers or clones of whatever game. Just fun and entertainment in all shapes and sizes.

 

Although many claim they are "hardcore" or want that experience, history says otherwise. Everyone can't be a winner in CU and losing forever can't be that enjoyable, unless your into pain or something  :ph34r:

 

Justin Bieber is doing the way better than Andrea Bocelli. So does it mean that he is better musician? Same to games, seems you love Bieber but I do love Bocelli's music. I want this game to be more like "hardcore" for the certain community with the solid player base such UO did, and you want it to be sold with the amount of 10 million and die in a year like TSW

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The main appeal of Crowfall is the in-Campaign gameplay, not the Eternal Kingdoms personal player housing (That's delicious vanilla icing on the cake).

 

Crowfall is a game of PvP strategy and conquest, a game that can only exist with a server reset mechanic (Campaigns), that's what differences Crowfall from other MMORPGs.

 

If that's not your thing then you will probably be disappointed in what Crowfall has to offer.


How Can Mounts Add to the Crowfall Experience?  Caravans, Hunting Boars, and more.

 

How Complex can Mining be in Crowfall?  Mining difficulty, fatigue, infrastructure.

Share this post


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...