Président,Ecuyer / Ecuyère
City State Entertainment
I finally participate fairly little in the forums JOL and CU however I am of ready the news of CU and I run the forums daily. I take advantage of this thread to address the team of CU my encouragement.
The "game design" is splendid far from that of the "mangas" which does not really correpond to me and yet we can sometimes find here and there some subtle influences, gameplay, skill system, ect ... in short everything goes to me.
We are very excited to test all this in beta 1, to make our contribution to the finalization of this game which gathers all the hopes of a community in evil of a good big game rvr
. We are orphans since DAOC and WAR.
Continue, but faster, look forward to the release
Thanks for the kind words and support, they are appreciate!
We hope to continue to improve our pace as we have done for the last few months as the Seattle team gets even more comfortable with our code base. As our User Stories also show, while we are still make lots of tech improvements, our gameplay related improvements have increased in volume and frequency.
First of all, thank you for coming here
As a player, I tend to believe that the genre of mmorpg went down since the past decade because of 1 main reason; the absence of discovery. The same universes, the same mechanics, the same daily and repetitive tasks, again and again....
But, 1 thing that is also contributing to the 'absence of discovery' is the way developers communicate to the players, or the business models they use for their games. Here I'm talking about the early access system, the multiple betas, the weekly or monthly reports during the development that explain what all has been done by the team and how the game is evolving.
Most of the time, the players know 80% of the game before it even gets released. And when they finally get to play it, it's not about 'discovering a game', it's all about consuming a content they already know.
I put lot of hope in CU, I'm not worrying about the content of the game, because I'm pretty sure that you will do a great job.
But dont you think that communicating too much (and publicly) about this content would actually kill this feeling of discovery that we all want to have when the game will finally be released ? Why not having the game under NDA ?
Thank you, it's good to be here! In terms of releasing too much info, it is always a concern. OTOH, who's to say that some things, such as The Depths
, won't be revealed before the game's release.
One thing to keep in mind as well is that we have a limited lift of the NDA during Beta *if* we need to. I'm not a big fan of NDA until launch since that can be used to hide the product's true quality (or lack thereof), but I also think allowing livestreaming of the game too soon can also be a problem. It's a fine line to work and one that is a problem for all of us (developers and players) in the very different world that we all live in now.
le système de loock de capitale sur war était très mal fait pour trois raisons, la première, beaucoup de défenseurs perdaient exprès pour accéder à la bataille de la capitale, la deuxième, le défenseur pouvait changer autant de fois d'instances
qu'il le voulait, pour ne plus avoir de grosse guilde en face, la troisième est qu'il avait les mêmes loots que les attaquants car toutes les instances étaient indépendantes du fait d'avoir perdu la capitale.
ma question : perdre récompensera aussi le joueur ou seules les victoires donneront des avantages ? ( ce qui me parait normal).
Winning and losing both have to have consequences, we have said this from the beginning. "Keep Trading" has been a problem in many games and we have to have a better system in place for this game or the game will not be as much fun and successful as it could be. Losing has to hurt, and losing when your Realm/side has a numerical advantage on the server should hurt even more.
Oh, hi Mark
Since Warhammer online, some PVP MMOs have designed their mass pvp model with hard caps on aoe abilities, I would like your personal opinion on the subject : what is your state of mind about aoe caps, is it a good thing or bad thing and any plan to incorporate them to CU ?
thanks for your kind consideration
Hi Gaffeur! This is an easy one, as we have said that hard AOE caps can work to the disadvantage of fighting against the zerg. While it is important to make sure that AOE caps also aren't abused by the zerg, I think we have some good ideas of ensuring the small(er) group play vs. larger groups is not forgotten and also a perfectly acceptable way to play the game.
I can't miss the occasion to ask you directly.
Do you happen to have any blog, forum post, public place... where I could read some of your thoughts and reflections on virtual world design and the current state of the MMO industry?
The question may sound weird, but it's been a hot topic of interest to me lately. As a younger that wasn't around in the era of MUDs during the 90s, I've been actively browsing through the Internet, digging up old archives... The fact is, it's quite easy to read from good folks such as Raph Koster, Brad McQuaid, Dr Richard Bartle (I've been amazed with his old book Designing Virtual Worlds, seeing how relevant it has remained after all these years, even though it was written at a time World of Warcraft did not even exist!). I just can have a look at their own blogs, and their devblogs. And as you've been in the virtual worlds scene for longer than most of us even lived, I've been wanting to read some of your personal thoughts on these topics for a while as well. It has proven to be much harder actually. Perhaps I haven't explored the CU forums enough yet!
Heck, I wish there was some kind of modern, equivalent take on MUD-Dev. The community, the debates, the reads I dig up there are a special kind of gold, and all of this value is being lost to younger generations of players and designers. I believe this is a key point in many problems that we have with MMOs nowadays.
My old blog (Online Games are a Niche Market) is still online. One of these days I have to update it - https://onlinegamesareanichemarket.wordpress.com/
I agree with you on the MUD-Dev thing, I still miss MUDs, even today.
Do you think that the delay CU will not be fatal in the current commercial context of the mmo industry?
Example if a person invested in this game will have a guarantee to be able to benefit before the end of 2018?
If you take the time to answer my questions I thank you in advance
You're welcome, thanks for taking the time to ask me the questions!
As to your questions:
1) Do I think our delay will be fatal for us? - Nope, WoW was delayed more than a few years and it didn't hurt them. The key is not the delay, but whether the game is worth the delay. If it isn't, yes, it would hurt us. Fortunately, I know our delay has already helped our Beta 1 progress as our Backers will be getting a better Beta 1 game than they would have otherwise.
2) Do I think people who bought a tier will be able to see some benefit before 2018? Yes. We know we are late and we are sorry for it. However, unlike most other Kickstarter-backed developers, we have planned to do things to make up for that delay. Some of which I have already talked about, and others that I/we will be talking about over the next two months as we move through the Thirty Day document (Part 2 is being released today).
Nice to see that you have kinds considerations for your french community Mark
I hope we'll see you some time or another around there, keep going on the great work !
Thanks! I'll be here for a while. As I've always said, once I was asked to drop by, I said yes. I'm so easy!
Hello Mark, huge fan of DAoC and War.
I could have ask everything on CSE forums but since you are here i will do now.
My first concern is about classes
. From what i understand we won't have "mirror" classes between realms like your previous games but i'm afraid we will have too much similarities like the first version of DAoC had and some classes on War. I mean some type of spells were just moved from a class to an other without real others distinctions so they were different classes but with the same mechanics at the end and the same specialization to follow a metagame.
I'm hoping for more subtlety, more identity and original gameplay like we had with Minstrel
, Theurgist and all classes from the catacombs expansion (Warlock wasn't super balanced but i still find this chamber system and primary/secondary spells genious). Can you tell us if some classes will truly have this gameplay identity ?
We've been very clear that we will not have mirrored classes and that each class must fit into our "Rock, paper, scissors" style of design. Since you've looked at our classes, I hope you agree that we laid the groundwork for making them non-mirrored, unique and interesting. Now it's up to us to bring that about. I hope you like what you see from us over the course of Beta 1.
My second question is about the economy and crafting system. Will we have to craft everything or we'll have some sort of loot in the world ? If everything is crafted how will you manage the system to be still attractive in late game, I mean when everyone gets his gear, the market is flooded, price goes down and you just connect once a month to craft some gear and consommables. Will we have a system like diarrhea to destroy our underwear so we have to replace it ?
At the moment i'm playing Albion Online (poor game but some interesting ideas) and there is some mechanics i find interesting for the economy like their "Black Market" where the game is placing buy orders for crafted gear so we sometimes have random loots from this market instead of silver. I don't know if you had time to take a look at their game.
We've said that the vast majority of gear will be made by crafters but that in times of need/scarcity, the game could supply items to an undermanned Realm. We have also said that crafters can progress by selling things to their King based on their need which can then be put up for sale by the Realm or given to new players. So, I think the answer to your questions is yes, we will have some interesting mechanics as well.
Finally, how will you manage end game progression
? I liked the idea of DAoC to have different type of levels : basic level, realm abilities level, champion levels. Will we have something similar ?
Since our whole game is based on horizontal progression with no PvE leveling (but there is PvE content), we don't need that type of system, as it is already built into the game.
Thank you very much for taking the time to answer our question here.
In my case I have just one : when can we have more detailed information on the horizontal progression system ?
. As lot's of player here, I played DAOC when I was a student but I am now married with three daughters and less time to play.
I enjoyed DAOC for the RvR
and not for loosing my time to improve my armor/weapons/shield...
So I hope the progression system will be really horizontal and there will be no time sink to have the better loots (by getting the best ores in the future very deep mines
). I would love a system like in the beginning of Ultime Online when crafters could produce all the weapons and armor but the rare ores only gave armor will different colors/better durability but not with more DPS.
Our system is similar but even more in-depths than UO's system. The key to making a horizontal system work is to make sure that items, abilities, rewards, etc. have more things to work with than in most games. On other games, a sword may only have a few stats that matter, this makes it hard to make it fit in a horizontal system. On the other hand, if the sword has a dozen or more things that matter, then it can fit really nicely within a horizontal system. The same is true for armor, your home, abilities, etc.
Thanks all! Back to work I go, have a lot to do today since it's a Friday!