Navigation

    Fractured Forum

    • Login
    • Search
    • Recent
    • Tags
    • Users
    • Groups
    1. Home
    2. Basileus
    3. Posts
    • Profile
    • Following
    • Followers
    • Topics
    • Posts
    • Best
    • Groups

    Posts made by Basileus

    • RE: Unity has blocked SpatialOS - What's up and what it means for us

      To be honest, it looks like Improbable is on the wrong here from my perspective, if they really have been copying and stealing tech from Unity as they claim(and I wouldn't be surprised if this happened; unicorns are not known for respecting boundaries).

      Probably in this case, Improbable will have to stop playing the victim card and settle this either in negotiations or in court. Let's see how this works out.

      The reason why I suspect Improbable is that their first reaction, on having things go sideways, is to go to the press rather than negotiate in private. Leveraging public emotions and using general statements like "games that people love will cease development because of this sudden and unexpected change!!" are a clear appeal to the masses. It's a classic populist move. If both parties were mature, they would have settled this in private and if differences could not be reconciled, parted in good terms.

      Another thing is that Improbable instantly put together a 25 million dollar deal immediately after this 'surprising' change? You can see the lies unravel here IMO. These deals don't magically appear in under the span of a week, they're negotiated over a very long time. And as anyone knows, Epic Games is owned by Tencent, who has a history of cornering marketshare in China.

      Random speculation here, but anyone bet that Tencent is trying to expand to earn more for their shareholders and possibly advance their own private interests in gathering more tech? It is after all, only useful to the central party if it can provide something, else it becomes a threat to the establishment over in China (The Chinese Govt recently moved against Tencent via Video Game bans, so I imagine Tencent is in a rush to show why this would be a bad idea (as the Communist Party also wants to catch up on any and all tech)). Or they could just be trying to make more money, either way works.

      posted in News & Announcements
      Basileus
      Basileus
    • RE: Weapon upgrading

      Do remember that the game is full loot, so the goal of the game would probably be to build up your settlements and gain influence rather that getting the perfectly grinded 3 star OP weapon that you will lose the moment you die to a player.

      posted in Questions & Answers
      Basileus
      Basileus
    • RE: Going Worldwide - Regional Servers & Localization

      RIP the idea of a single shard. EVE Online does it perfectly and it stops people from 'hiding' away on empty servers. Dividing the small player base of an indie game from the start is just going to lead to a lot of dead servers (not to mention the costs of running multiple servers at once). After all, what's the point of fighting over territory when if you lose, you could just switch servers? I would rather have 220 ping to one server where everyone plays than 10 ping to an empty one.

      I'm personally not going to be following the project very closely after this info, will just see if it makes it to launch or not.

      EDIT: Bottom line, I feel like that this is a very short term decision point made to appeal to players who imagine playing the game now, rather than how it would actually play out in the future. Low latency sounds great until people realize how this pretty much breaks the entire sandbox apart by tearing apart an already small player-base. You don't plan a game to be big from the start, you always plan for it to be small, and grow it from there (unless you're someone with hundreds of millions of funding and have the backing of a big publisher with their marketing machine, which this game obviously is not).

      posted in News & Announcements
      Basileus
      Basileus
    • RE: Bit worried where the Kickstarter is

      Given current trends, it's still possible that we don't make it barring a last minute push on the last day. We're getting about €150 to €3200 a day or so. If we exclude the first day spike and the most recent spike, and it would only take a few sub 2k days for the campaign to require another big spike that bucks trends to finish. So atm by no means is it a done deal.

      I think one of the major issues during the campaign was a lack of social media presence. I recall that Kickstarter successes were always strongly related to Facebook presence (love it or hate it), and having a high number of Facebook friends was extremely coorelated to success. It's to do with the deep chaining nature of Facebook I believe, like how one person liking a post can lead to someone who was completely unaware of the project to take a look at it as well, and if they liked it, it starts off the next chain (much like a pyramid scheme).

      EDIT: Link to daily data: https://www.kicktraq.com/projects/dymstudios/fractured-the-dynamic-mmo/#chart-daily

      posted in Discussions & Feedback
      Basileus
      Basileus
    • RE: Bit worried where the Kickstarter is

      I hope they make it, but barring a massive last day push, it won't quite get there. Let's see if the devs can make that happen!

      posted in Discussions & Feedback
      Basileus
      Basileus
    • RE: Now think Clearly Here

      There's no reason why new players would choose Beastmen; in pretty much all games humans are the most common faction since people don't really read before choosing. I would probably guess that the popularity would go Human, Demon, and Beastmen (due to cultural associations of demons being cool and furries being the opposite).

      Bottom line, it's highly likely that the average Demon will be more skilled at PvP than any other race, simply due to more exposure to it.

      posted in Discussions & Feedback
      Basileus
      Basileus
    • RE: Bit worried where the Kickstarter is

      If it does fail, it'll be close. Day 1 was about 30k, and each day after that was about 2k or so. So we're on track to hitting about 89k Euros if things stay the same (which they probably will barring a major marketing push). Hopefully the devs don't spend too much time worrying about getting an extra 100k of funding from your future players, and have a strong Plan B of looking for private investors or a publisher. Again, I will reiterate that it's pretty impossible to finish this game without at least a few millions in funding, and that's in a good case where nothing goes wrong and they don't have to redo parts of the code base.

      From my experience, once you have an actual game out there, even if it's in a buggy Beta state, (and as long as the gameplay is fun and engaging) people will put in a lot of money on founders packs at that time. Asking people to put up money even before we know if the game is good or not was always going to be a long shot, especially with an indie company that has no past association with big names in the industry.

      posted in Discussions & Feedback
      Basileus
      Basileus
    • RE: What if you had to choose one announced feature to drop?

      I would count a feature as something that takes development time, so I would agree with either Vicious' suggestion (games often try to spread themselves too thin). Another thing I would be fine with cutting are quests in general (aside from a tutorial that shows you how to travel, equip things, fight etc). They take time to make, get consumed at an extremely rapid rate, are generally stale and bland (unless you do a SWTOR and spend 200 million+ USD on quests, then it's fun to run through them once, before moving on).

      posted in Discussions & Feedback
      Basileus
      Basileus
    • RE: Two Words On Reporting, Leaderboards & Pre-Alpha. I'm tired.

      @loxreaten The whole point is that being in top 100 on the leaderboards shouldn't mean anything, especially with alts running around. The best way would be just to reset anyone who used alts to farm points to level 0. However, currently the top 100 on that leaderboard hardly represents the best contributors to the game so far, and is causing more harm than good (cheating before the game has started really sets the tone). If that is the case, then the logical solution is to just retire the concept of granting them alpha keys, and that should just make it a solo affair where you're just trying to get points for personal goodies when the game comes out.

      posted in Discussions & Feedback
      Basileus
      Basileus
    • RE: Two Words On Reporting, Leaderboards & Pre-Alpha. I'm tired.

      @muker Plans can change, and it's clear that the current system is open to mass abuse. Those in the top 100 are unlikely to be the best choice for testing, as they are all from the same demographic (heavily invested into the game, likely hardcore players). In general statistics, it's a good idea to try to get a sample of the general population, rather than picking specifically from one group. The best way to do this is a random selection of players, plus select a few extras from discord who fully understand that they are testing what will likely be a buggy mess. Expect the pre Alpha to have no features, crash often, and feel more like a freshly compiled program rather than an actual game.

      P.S Using Google Translate to answer messages often leads to massive misunderstanding, and sometimes it can feel like the other party is talking to a wall (such as asking questions and receiving a generic link that does not actually relate to said question).

      posted in Discussions & Feedback
      Basileus
      Basileus
    • RE: Two Words On Reporting, Leaderboards & Pre-Alpha. I'm tired.

      I'll just throw in my two cents, but I think it's important for communities to treat accusations of cheating more seriously than the accusation of toxicity. The former leads to the latter, so treating the former is a good fix for the actual problem, rather than simply treating the symptom. A good way to do this (especially if and when the game comes out) would be to put out a ban list, plus the reason for banning. People should be free to appeal, and they could always just create a new account anyway (for now at least).

      As for the leaderboard, I personally believe that it is hardly going to lead to a good choice for the top 100 people to alpha test, and encourages cheating and mass alt creation (thus also inflating the numbers of potential 'players' the devs see in their community, and potentially messing with calculations). The best way to handle it would be to remove the leaderboard, as well as removing the incentive for being top 100. Rather, the foundation rewards should be incentive enough; pre alpha should have an application form, as well as selecting community members most active on the forums/discord in a productive manner.

      EDIT: I would also like to say that some of the most successful MMOs in history, like EVE and others, were known for their freewheeling attitude to things considered unsavory by many. Spying on enemy organizations, scamming other players, etc were all freely permitted, so long as things did not escalate out of game and into the real world. A truly free environment with no heavy hand-holding by devs is the best form of sandbox, and I hope this game is going to go in that direction, else you might as well build a theme-park (which is hardly possible on this budget).

      posted in Discussions & Feedback
      Basileus
      Basileus
    • RE: Bit worried where the Kickstarter is

      @rekoor Everyone always says they have everything planned out, but in game development (or business in general) it's almost a guarantee that something goes horribly wrong, or at least something gets massively delayed. Camelot Unchained for instance is nearly 3 years overdue (but is going into Beta 1 in a few days), due to the need to refactor their entire codebase regarding abilities. The lead developer actually had to put out an extra $2 million USD from his own pocket, and get another $7.5 million from private investors who were his friends from back when he published DAoC so that they could push out the Beta this year (and hopefully release in 2020).

      I have great confidence in Camelot Unchained now however, as they have a game engine (one they built from scratch) that supports 1000 vs 1000 players on screen on a mid tier computer without dropping below 25 FPS. At the very least they have an asset (their custom game engine) that is at least worth as much as the amount of money they have put into development, and if they need more money they can license that out to further fund development.

      posted in Discussions & Feedback
      Basileus
      Basileus
    • RE: Curiosity on the Publishers interested in Fractured

      @jetah Certain publishers do change mechanics in games, especially if they owned the title from the start. Tencent however, has a history of just letting games devs do their things since they're not a publisher, just an investor. I played LoL back when Tencent bought Riot Games, and a lot of people were nervous. However they never touched the game mechanics, and had a press release saying that they're only interested in handling the finances, and were content with letting the devs do their thing, since it was Riot Games that made the game so popular in the first place. I think a similar thing happened with PoE as well, and as far as I have heard, the game is still going strong, has good mechanics and a consumer friendly payment model, all the while increasing its market share at the same time.

      posted in Questions & Answers
      Basileus
      Basileus
    • RE: Bit worried where the Kickstarter is

      They'll likely meet their minimum goal of 100,000 Euros, but unlikely to hit their 250k desired goal (believe that was posted on a press release plus on this forum a while back). Given that they're getting about 3k Euros a day after day 1, and there's 27 days left to go, then if current trends continue they'll end up at 36K (current amount) + 3K * 27 days, which is equal to €117K. This is also ignoring how pledges usually spike towards the end of a campaign on the last day as well.

      I'm personally more worried about how they're going to get the rest of the money for the game. €117,000 is a tiny amount for developing a simple indie single player game (unless you're doing something like Papers Please, which is essentially just one guy's salary for a year), never mind an MMO. Hopefully they can get either a lot of private investors to back them, or a big publisher to help them push the game through to the finish line. If they can get this finished with €5,000,000, and have a successful launch + constant updates afterwards to grow the game, they'll go in the books as geniuses for doing something that has never been done before in the history of making MMO games.

      posted in Discussions & Feedback
      Basileus
      Basileus
    • RE: Are you a PVP or PVE player?

      @greenfox PvPers always look for the strongest competition. Practically any game with a dedicated PvP base is all about 1 vs X if it is possible in any way. I hope Fractured will keep this in mind; a high skill cap and low skill floor game makes for a great long lasting game. A low skill cap game with a high skill floor pretty much only appeals to casuals and requires a constant influx of new players while the old ones get bored and leave.

      posted in Discussions & Feedback
      Basileus
      Basileus
    • RE: Stretch Goals

      If they drip feed (and they directly said that they are) spotlights and clarify certain game mechanics during the kickstarter, I'm all for it. But revealing stretch goals before the first one is met might not really have the effect they're hoping for. I think they were hoping to raise around 250k Euros from this right? They have a long way to go to reach their goal, so I hope their marketing strategy works.

      posted in Discussions & Feedback
      Basileus
      Basileus
    • RE: Stretch Goals

      If the stretch goals are simply cosmetics, then I'm all for them. If they start feature creeping, then it's bad. Generally 'exciting' stretch goals are all pretty bad for the game's chances of coming out and being good in the long term, so I personally hope they stick to their core vision (which is already super ambitious).

      posted in Discussions & Feedback
      Basileus
      Basileus
    • RE: Curiosity on the Publishers interested in Fractured

      @jetah Every single large corporation from every nation in the world (and every decently wealthy person) has their hands in as many pots as possible. it's just good sense to diversify your portfolio so that your assets will always have value, and are not subject to specific market shifts. As long as the economy grows (and it pretty much always grows so long as human civilization isn't going downhill, like during the fall of the Western Roman Empire or the Black Death), you'll make a profit in the end so long as you have a very wide ranging portfolio.

      As for EA publishing it, I'm sorry to hear that you would refund the game, but the fact is that EA, and other publishers like Activision do indeed put out successful games. There are far more failed indie developers than there are successful ones, and most extreme P2W models often come from indie developers trying desperately to recoup costs before their game sinks. If we talk about something like Crowfall, we still have no idea how that is going to turn out, or even something like Camelot Unchained (I personally backed it, it has around 15 to 20 million USD in funding and has a team of 30 people, some of which have worked on famous MMOs like DAoC; it may still flop soon after launch, we won't know till we get there). With big companies, the risk is put onto the investors and stakeholders; with indies, we are the stakeholders, and players generally don't keep the company responsible, both fiscally and time wise.

      The fact that the devs working on Fractured seem to have their heads in the right place (looking for publishers, sticking to deadlines, going for the minimum viable product style of development instead of having feature creep up to your ears etc) greatly boosts my confidence in the chances of the project succeeding, but it is still up in the air whether this makes it or not. This is why I would personally welcome it if a big publisher backs the project; it means a bunch of experts, who's jobs are to analyse products and services, said: "yes, we will spend at least tens of million of dollars on this project, and we will expect a very high possibility of a good a return on our investment".

      posted in Questions & Answers
      Basileus
      Basileus
    • RE: Payment Model info and post release strategy

      @target For your first point, here's a direct quote. "Jump right into the fray from day one. Defeat your enemies through your own skill and cleverness, not equipment or level." Also check out the Kickstarter video where they repeat pretty much the same thing. As for the post you linked, I see nowhere where it states that the iron armor is better than the default starting gear. What is likely is that it has good resist vs arrows, it slows you down immensely, and you still have zero resistance to a day 1 newbie who has a lightning spell (and therefore couldn't care less about iron armor; in fact, they would get a damage boost vs you probably since iron can conduct electricity). So say the top tier heavy armor in game is steel, and the whale buys a full set of top quality, top rolled steel armor on day ten. A day one F2P newbie happens to be a mage, and shoots out electricity at the whale. The whale, being slow and their armor having zero resist vs lightning, is kited, cannot run away as they are slow, and therefore dies; you loot their paid gear. Sure it sucks if you're an F2Per who runs a bow, but I guarantee you that the starting armor is likely light (or you could be naked), and you can just run away. I will also acknowledge that I believed the world was procedural generated many times, and am only partially right due to it applying to asteroids only. However, end game will likely be heavily centered around asteroids, and many dungeons will likely be procedurally generated as well. (Any new content will also be newly proceedurally generated, so my point on that stands regarding development time for constant updates.)

      Second point is simple, people use the 5 vs 500 example because it always applies whenever you bring in whales. We all know that whales aren't exactly too popular with the F2P masses, and that whales often only comprise of 1% or less of a game's population. If an 'even' fight happens between two guilds, and one has a whale and the other does not, what will always happen (in EvE and IRL, see Italian city state conflicts in the 1400s) is that the poorer party will call upon a ton of allies who happen to covet what the whale has; the richer you are, the better target you make for looting! As for hiring the mercenary guilds, then it makes for good gameplay, and this is called cash burn because unless the whale constantly pays to buy the time of a whole bunch of F2Pers, they will eventually run out of cash and then lose (just see what happens in war when you run out of cash to pay for mercs, happens in EVE often and is hilarious. Usually the mercs go work for their enemy instead after. Happened IRL to the Romans and many others too.) If someone constantly pays the devs to sustain their non-sustainable guild, that is great for the dev's income and will fund content for everyone (and us F2Pers get to fight other F2Pers like the mercs).

      I invite you to play EVE Online for a bit, as it is essentially Fractured in space. There is a High Security zone (Arboureus), Low Sec (Syndesia), and Null Sec (Tartaros). Different zones produce different resources (Null Sec resources worth the most naturally due to increased risk, and is where most PvP takes place). No one is 100% safe in any zone, but you will generally never lose more than you gain in High Sec so long as you play smart, and aren't using a whale ship (i.e a super expensive ship with rare mods, using ISK bought with IRL). In EVE, all the veteran players use standard, proven, best cost for efficiency ships that are easily replaced when destroyed; whales often do not adhere to this principle. If you haven't played it, it is extremely difficult to explain how the system is 100% non pay to win, but yet allows whales to spend insane amounts of IRL money, get nowhere in game, while still doing it and thus supporting the devs. Spending an extra $50 early in EVE to get a seed startup fund for trading isn't a bad idea, but spending $1000 for a spaceship in EVE to try to "P2W" is 100% always a bad idea. Just know that EVE launched in 2003, and is still going strong in 2018; if Fractured can imitate half its success, it will be a huge hit.

      Third point, I will acknowledged that credits and mats cannot be traded (but I mentioned this directly in my post). You use credits as tax for trades, and to buy certain blueprints on the market. Warframe's model does expect everyone to have platinum at some point, and yet the system is such that nobody needs to buy platinum ever! In a system where you can trade platinum for in game items (not directly to the devs via an artificial market as in P2W games, though people can do that if they wish; usually it is a bad deal), but to other players. This is the crucial point where we can analyse Warframe's system and go: here is why the system is consumer friendly and not P2W. The same pattern is repeated on EVE Online; the richest players in EVE don't spend a dime. They have income streams (from playing the game efficiently). Whereas whales do not, they have cash injections, and cash injections run out (the game is funded by these whales constantly buying new, badly outfitted, ships and then dying again).

      Last point, it's very simple, tying an in game currency to something like PLEX combats inflation in multiple ways. Firstly, is that you create a constant exchange of extremely large amounts of in game cash that is taxed by the market, thus directly taking out in game money from the system (and remember that PLEX is a consumed good that is gone forever, taking premium currency out of the market and into the pockets of the devs). Secondly, it ensures that you always have something to buy with in game cash, thus creating supply and demand for an artificial currency (somewhat related to Forex supply and demand principles, but unique to games as games generally do not have imports/exports). Lastly, it relates to human psychology. People who have received large windfalls of cash generally do not spend it wisely, both in games and IRL, since the money came so easily to them. Buying low demand items simulates the economy and creates constant transfer of currency, increasing the health of an economy by encouraging more in game activity (i.e farming for something rare and not super useful will still have some value). Basically it's all just supply and demand.

      Using EVE as an example, whales will happily buy up things that are not necessarily needed or efficient (random rare blueprints for junk items, cosmetics, ship mods that are 5% better but 5000% more expensive), unlike a player who spent hours playing to gain that currency. The same happens IRL: People will use lotto money to first pay off all their debts and mortgages, then will usually do things like buy a new car, go on holiday and etc rather than investing (there are exceptions, but this is a general trend). Same for low level criminals (thieves and common scammers), they receive constant windfalls of cash, and then spend it all, thus making it necessary for them to commit more crimes to fuel their habit until they are eventually caught.

      How does this translate to Fractured? A whale could buy up gear, blueprints for gear, materials, pets and etc from free players, and the free players could trade directly for premium currency, or indirectly via buying the VIP sub with in game cash. Some of the items that whales would buy are cosmetics (i.e cool looking in game blueprint for a building), others are all non-permanent game items! Someone with top level gear is going to eventually lose that top level gear (and it isn't even better in the traditional sense, as stated by the devs numerous times). Just like in EVE, gear does not last forever; it is highly likely that we have destructible gear too (say if you die, not every piece of gear you had on you is looted, because some pieces were destroyed in combat). This means the whale is paying for something that will eventually be destroyed (as the game is full loot). Again, I will re-emphasis this point, this makes the game not pay to win. In traditional P2W games, you cannot lose what you buy! Take one of those Asian MMOs with their +10000 epic sword of awesome that one hits every other player in the game. Those items remain in game forever, you cannot lose it, and thus it is P2W. If some whale in Fractured buys a VIP sub ticket, sells it for in game cash, buys the Fractured equivalent of top end gear (which as the devs stated, is horizontal progression rather than vertical), they will eventually lose that gear. Not immediately, but eventually they will die (unless they are beastmen staying permanently in the safe zone, in which case you shouldn't care at all how well they survive vs NPCs) and be looted. These whales will then have to buy their gear again with IRL cash, thus creating revenue for the devs while not being P2W.

      @Finland The devs have said that all items are lootable everywhere, including Arboreus. Just that demons receive massive debuffs there, and are unlikely to defeat a single beastman without extremely careful planning. There are safe zones where demons can never reach, so in that case, you will be unlootable there. Also, PvEers have no reason to hate anyone who pays directly for gear that they use to kill NPCs alongside the F2Pers and therefore indirectly helps them; this is exactly like the Warframe model.

      posted in Questions & Answers
      Basileus
      Basileus
    • RE: Curiosity on the Publishers interested in Fractured

      TBH, if EA or Tencent did back it, I would have huge confidence in the project's viability personally. People might hate EA, but they do put out finished games, unlike something like Star Citizen (and due to Belgium recently banning lootboxes, I doubt they'll try a monetization strategy like that in the near future). As for Tencent (same also applies to EA), they only invest in ideas they believe will be successful and profitable, like PoE, LoL, and others. Therefore if they did back it, it would mean we would definitely get a game at the very least, and the devs will have enough money to fund a fully fledged team (which is 100% required for any active live MMO) for at least a few years.

      posted in Questions & Answers
      Basileus
      Basileus
    • 1
    • 2
    • 3
    • 4
    • 5
    • 3 / 5