f13.net

Same game new title, old thread- Warhammer 40k MMO by Vigil/THQ (http://forums.f13.net/index.php?topic=9504.0)

Vigil Games's Photos - Dark Millennium Online - E3 2010 (http://www.facebook.com/album.php?aid=17791&id=129007387123006&ref=mf)

(http://imgur.com/nS1r2l.jpg) (http://imgur.com/nS1r2.jpg) (http://imgur.com/M5A7nl.jpg) (http://imgur.com/M5A7n.jpg)

(http://imgur.com/PT69sl.jpg) (http://imgur.com/PT69s.jpg) (http://imgur.com/kmqbGl.jpg) (http://imgur.com/kmqbG.jpg)

(http://imgur.com/N4E1Cl.jpg) (http://imgur.com/N4E1C.jpg)

2010 E3 trailer for Dark Millennium Online (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hHu4Na0lsd0&feature=player_embedded)

Sexy engine.

EDIT: Shooter, or faux shooter?

http://www.marketwatch.com/story/thq-announces-blockbuster-line-up-for-e3-2010-2010-06-15?reflink=MW_news_stmp


Very little info as yet.

What's this walker thing?

(http://imgur.com/kmqbGl.jpg)

If its JUST a boss, I'm going to be upset.

It's a scout titan isn't it?  It's been a while.

Adeptus Titanicus (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vySW-X673CI)

Warhound Titan i think.

Looks really cool.  My money is on it being utter ass, though. 

Ah well, maybe someday, someone will make a Necromunda/Mordheim based game.

Mmmmm... Grimdark.

Please don't suck, please don't suck.

The trailer... has... arrived:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hHu4Na0lsd0


Made COMPLETELY with in-game assets.  Yes... I just shat myself.  Can it be the Planetside/WW2O design we asked for??  Maybe... just maybe.  Oh god please.
Someone dig up a design doc.

I know this may mean less coming from me, but you just bloodworthed.  :grin:

Giv.

Seriously, this is going to suck, I know it. But I still really really want it.

I feel like dumping some money on overpriced GW minis... then spending 40hrs painting them.
But, I digress:  I did see an aiming reticule and some strafing.  Perhaps TR style combat?  Also, there does seem to be the standard rpg toolbar and health/mana bars.

Okay, back to bloodworthing:
FUCK you can drive all that shit!  ATTACK BIKES!  eeeeeeeeeeee!

Dreads make this the only game I'd support pvp permadeath in.

Because nothing says minor death penalty like unlocking a dread.  :awesome_for_real:

As for combat, I saw melee that looked DIKU (no UI displayed, but it seemed like swing at air, giant monster reacts to being hit), and another segment of aiming and firing a bolter while running around in a third person shooter.

I have no idea what to expect. But the IP has so much potential for fun. Pleeease inquisitions as a form of battleground type pvp? <3

Seconded.


I'd say it makes it worse. It's like if you got all dressed up and looking all sharp, then some ugly mofo comes up and says "you know, I'm ugly, but fucking hell you are one nasty bitch."  :why_so_serious:

Hay thanks pal!

The odds are against mmo's.

The next couple of years are going to be pretty interesting for 40k in general (these aren't related to the MMO).

Ultramarines Movie Teaser (pretty chessy) (http://www.youtube.com/watch#!v=QhiGXKmRY4w)

Ultramarines movie - Vox casting (A lot more interesting, considering the cast involved) (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zuH9kNc-MNs)

There's also a new console game in development, Warhammer 40,000 Space Marine. (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZnfniAbzYX8)

Admittedly it did come out worse then I thought it would, but I still like it. Yes my standards for analogies are low, so what!


Yeah, which is why I am worried to get my hopes up when something has this much potential to be amazing just to have them destroyed by crappy implementations surrounded by buzzwords. And assholes. And even bigger assholes in crappy sunglasses.

I really really want this to not be bad BUT.... (http://forums.f13.net/index.php?topic=11876.0)

Must like Star Wars, I can forgive a little bit of suck for Warhammer 40K

Whut!?  NO SQUATS ZOMG.   :why_so_serious:

Looks like Vajuras worked on Darksiders (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Darksiders), so maybe Dark Millennium hasn't been blessed by his gentle touch.

http://www.cyberkreations.com/kreationsedge/?p=502

You all know this will fuck your faces like a face-hugger, right?

If Tyanids need to shit in this game you'll have your squats.

Damn. Now I feel dirty for liking Darksiders.

Likely, but until then I can dream glorious dreams of playing a Blood Angel.

looked very WoW.  We will see.  No sunglasses so far.

(http://imgur.com/Nvtv4l.jpg) (http://imgur.com/Nvtv4.jpg)

I will sing the song that ends the earth.

:awesome_for_real:

I'd be really into seeing something like this if there was a worthwhile story behind it, especially with the actors involved.  I just don't get why GW has such a hardon for the Ultramarines.  Same with the Space Wolves.  I don't really hang out with many 40k players these days, but I'd think the Blood Angels, or even the Dark Angels, would be more popular as far as the basis for a movie/book/whatever. 

THQ has said they've set a modest budget to develop this title, while some senior people left Vigil just in the months before E3. A Darksiders sequel has been greenlit, despite Darksiders not having fantastic sales (although obviously enough to get a sequel).

If you set your expectations low now, there is a chance you won't be disappointed.

Truth be told, I don't even know what my expectations are.  In my opinion Warhammer doesn't particularly lend itself to an RPG format, 40k even less so than fantasy, and we know how that turned out.  A diku 40k is totally uninteresting to me, while some sort of shooter/pvp thing sounds fun or alternatively some sort of thing where you control a small squad rather than a single unit would be neat, but both seem incredibly unlikely.

Until there is some actual information about what the game mechanics are going to be I really can't say what my expectation is, but I think the default expectation for any MMO at this point basically has to just be 0.

#1. I am beyond sick of choirs in trailers. "Ooohaaaaahah OOOOHHH EEEEEHHH OOHHHHH AAAAAAHHHH!" Cut that fucking shit out.

#2. Where's my weaboo Tau?

If they leave out Tau and Necrons, thats like +5 in my book.

http://www.darkmillenniumonline.com/  Website with news signup.

So RvR with the wrong number of realms... order v destruction... this is sounding familiar.

If they do everything WAR did, we at least get the enjoyment of watching the resulting train derailment.

From back in May. THQ: Warhammer 40K MMO Doesn't Need A Million Subscribers (http://www.gamasutra.com/view/news/28417/THQ_Warhammer_40K_MMO_Doesnt_Need_A_Million_Subscribers.php)


The WAR engine couldn't handle what the players wanted to do, I think that's part of the reason there were hundreds of bland pve quests at launch, they didn't know what else to churn out.  But from the Dark Millennium video gui glimpse (assuming it's accurate), it's not a good sign that there's at least 30 levels, I'd be a lot happier with 4, gained quickly, maybe reset back to 1 on death.

I liked that trailer actually, and approaching it from the angle of "No good 40k games aside from DoW1/2 in ages", with low expectations, I'm looking forward to see more from the game. Character models were well done! Just wish it wouldn't look that much like a mod for WoW  :grin:

A game that "doesn't suck" and keeps me a few months would be great.

Squats got written out a while back when they revamped 40k (2 edition ago IIRC), they just 'count as' Guard now (same rules different models), offhand I think the only abhuman loyalist unit left is the Ogyrn (perhaps the ratling too, I dont have the latest Guard codex yet)

I too want it not to suck, but I suspect it'll be more WAR than Planetside :-(

That walker is indeed a Warhound scout titan and is only a baby titan :-) (and probably the biggest thing they can stick in game without HUGE balancing issues if they are PC controlled, but it's supposed to need a crew of 3, driver & 2 gunners anyway)

Was kind of ignoring this one but after that trailer this is now in my top 5 interested-in-list

No worries. I got a giggle.

I'm glad to see that it sticks t the source material very closely in that all these spacefaring cultures with laser weapons, titans, and orbital bombardment think that the most effective way of defeating your enemy is for the both of you to run at each other in large groups and hit each other with chainsaws and axes. 40k is the best matchlock era combat game out there.

(http://imgur.com/rnmAXl.jpg) (http://imgur.com/rnmAX.png)

Ditto.

They are first time MMO company using a license that needs revolutionizes MMOs to be done correctly. Let's just say the odds are against them.

Hope is the first step on the road to disappointment.

Um, about that.

E3 2010: W40k MMO to 'shake up Blizzard' at E3 - THQ (http://www.computerandvideogames.com/article.php?id=252063)


Because this clearly went well last time.

Do any of their devs have a suspiciously douchey number of sunglasses on them?  :drill:

Sadly, whenever I read of an MMO that first thought that comes to mind is:

Is he trying to say that in WoW you cant run away from large sized mobs, have a flying mount, or engage in auto-attack combat?

I like the "some are wondering did we show too much" bit

Seriously? Who is wondering that? Did you show a feature you're likely going to cut? No? Then you probably didn't show too much unless you showed snape's corpse in the trailer.

I want to live in your land of make-believe. While I think the chances are exceedingly slim, how completely amazing would that be? Planetside style open world combat with those graphics and that lore? /drool

Vanu flashlights would be in theme, too.

Seriously.  I didn't see anything in that video that is new.  I rolled my eyes in the trailer part where it said "Next Generation MMO".  Yeah ok.

Watching that video, I'm a bit disappointed by the lack of grit and bite in their art direction. They made 40K look like a PG-13 setting, which is pretty far from how I perceive it – though I'm by no means an expert.

The screenshots look nice enough, but then again, if you can't manage nice screenies, your game is in trouble. Wait and see I suppose.

Is there a projected release date for this thing? Or is it a being of hype and vapor, fit only for display on the summer convention tour?

Calling out Blizzard seems dumb. Maybe if there hadn't been WAR and/or AoC, (or if either of those games had delivered on their promises), there might be some WoW players who'd still fall for that trick.

The trailer was verrrry pretty. They did that part right.

Found an interview with Danny Bilson from THQ (http://www.gamesindustry.biz/articles/thqs-danny-bilson-interview) from a couple of days ago.  Not quoting the whole thing.


Personally I don't think he should be bragging about Titans, unless players get to control one in some form, WAR had a giant in one of the first PQ's and nobody cared 5 minutes after seeing it the first time.


THQ E3 news page (http://www.thq.com/uk/features/show/10992) in the UK, has a pre-order link to a UK store called "game" here (http://www.game.co.uk/Warhammer-40000-Dark-Millennium-Online/~r349795/?s=dark+millennium).  Which lists release as 02/2011, but I'd have thought 2012 was a lot more likely.

Oh my God. The amount of "setting oneself up to fail" in that little bit you quoted is staggering, especially combined with "We're going to show WoW how it's done!"

No, no one's ever said all that only for it to turn into a bowl of complete cow shit before they retire in infamy. Mark Jacobs would like a word with him.

Yeah, it's funny considering we know sod all about the game so far.

Found a release schedule, which if accurate, puts Dark Millennium down for a mid 2012 release.

(http://imgur.com/OZZ41l.jpg) (http://imgur.com/OZZ41.jpg)

To be fair, that giant is one of like 3 positive memories I have of WAR.

won the thread.

E3 2010 THQ Investor Meeting (Replay) (http://phx.corporate-ir.net/phoenix.zhtml?p=irol-eventDetails&c=96376&eventID=3155322)

At about 38.40 in the webcast, the below is from Danny Bilson, reordered slightly, not exact for every single word, :effort:, but content should reflect what he said, bold parts are exact or damm near.


He didn't say, but from the video, I guess races are :-

Space Marines & Imperial Guard vs Orcs & Chaos?

FTFY

To be fair, a 43 Million budget will buy you a starter space marine kit and an extra rhino.

Or about half of Warhammer Online.

Hahahahaha. Too easy.   :lol:

There is more information in this release than you first realise.

1) We know gameplay is modelled on WoW/WAR.
2) We know the ip has been thrown down the toilet to account for (1) and to accomodate a bullshit 2 realm design.
3) We know the game will suck.
4) We know it'll be ready just about the time WAR will finally pull the plug.

I'm looking forward to this even less than SWTOR right now.

Did they announce this somewhere?  I've been looking for info about the game but not really seeing any.

I've said this before and I'll say it again: this is how GW does its global tabletop campaigns (in most cases)

I.e. there's nothing that violates the IP by having only two sides as this is what GW itself does in the tabletop game in certain situations.

Yes on a small scale the game IP is designed so that any army can fight any other army (even the same army fighting itself). However on a larger scale like, say, a battle over the Eye of Terror sector(s) all the armies get put in one of two buckets (usually).

Edit: usually

I'd only add further that nobody can really do a better job taking a dump on their IP than GW does periodically. It's meant to be malleable for the same reasons WoW's lore is.

I'm beginning to suspect that MMOs are being developed simply to pull in a huge box sale and then ride the rabid fanbase for as much as they can.  No one really wants to challenge WoW anymore.  That's hard.  But if you can pump up the hype and claim all kinds of wow-killer shit, people will flock to it because they're fucking stupid and desperate.  Then they'll realize they were duped and either leave or be die hard fanboys because if they weren't they'd have to admit they were stupid and duped.

2 factions is retarted, but what's the alternative? A full PvE experience for every army in 40K?

I believe F13 decided that 3 factions is the magic number that leads to MMO success and happiness forever. 

It's actually like, the easiest expansion fodder ever. Add two armies per expansion, don't bother increasing the level cap. Watch people go apeshit over the IP.

But really, the reason 3 is a good number is there's no fear of diluted playerbases from say, 12 factions, and there is a spoiler group in open pvp.

If you're going to just go battleground style instanced pvp, two factions is fine.

Until you end up with battlegrounds where one side outnumbers the other by 10:1 and they simply camp their respawn point...

Well theoretically, battleground style pvp should always be balanced teams, since it's instanced. Crappy matchmaking code aside, of course.

The three side thing is more for DAOC's style pvp (or WAR's, in an ideal world), because in theory, the third team acts as a spoiler to keep the winning team from overextending and keeping momentum(*).

(*): In reality, the third team takes Mid forts at odd hours of the night, because people like easy targets or something.

Battlegrounds would be fun with 3 factions as well.  It would add more spice to the BG's in wow if you randomly get paired to fight against 1 of 2 other factions every time, not knowing what it is until the game starts.

Increasing the number of factions does nothing to fix that though.

Could this guy be more vague?

Warhammer 40K Dark Millennium Online Interview - John Mueller (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gDonWqlpDEU&)

On the number of factions thing, at this stage, I don't think you can draw any conclusions.  

With WAR 3 factions would have been a good idea because the world was mostly PVE and the instances were PVP, anything to add more unpredictability to the small Open PVP areas of the world would have been a good thing.

With Dark Millennium, if most of their content is PVE based, as with WAR, then I think they are screwed no matter how many factions there are.  PVE is predictable, if any IP calls out for massive player versus player battles, this is it.  I can't come up with a good reason for all the secrecy, either they haven't decided what type of game it's going to be or they are scared of the reaction they will get when news gets out.  I don't buy the "we don't want anyone stealing our ideas" excuse, WoW will be 8 years old when this comes out, even if Blizzard is quietly working on World of Starcraft, they aren't liable to be heavily influenced by the choices made in an unreleased/untested game.

E3 2010: Warhammer 40,000: Dark Millennium Online Update (http://uk.pc.ign.com/articles/109/1099584p1.html)


News just in.  Grindy with Quests.  Awesome.

Err fuck and no. Rolf so you think I'll play an mmo because you added aiming? Did the industry learned anything from TR, AoC, Chronicles of Spellborn? Oh wait this the mmorpg industry where people beg for ultima online pre-trammel and everquest dick punching...nvm.

So like WoW but improved? And you're not afraid to say that? OK, I'm interested.

I'm in if they add in the Emperor on his golden throne that needs to gank a thousand psyker players every day.

No rounding up NPC psykers to stuff into the black ark will be a quest!

Dailies!

That's part of the lore I've never gotten.  Where are they getting this endless stream of psykers?  Even with huge populations across the galaxy it seems like even just transporting these thousand psykers per day might get a little screwed up in the logistics department and what happens if the shipment is late and...

Sorry.  That actually seemed more interesting to me than the game, at this point, since all I can muster for that at the moment is a 'shrug' since it's pretty much 'we'll see in three years'.

It's originally from the Rogue Trader book, where I suspect they just came up with stuff randomly and printed it. 

This man may not make a 40k game. What do they do off the battlefield? Space Marines are fucking monks off the battlefield! They pray, and they fight.

What are their interactions like with other races? They kill them. They're xenophobic monks.

If I catch a space marine doing a quest line for an Eldar, the devs just don't get the IP they decided to use.

But if IG are playable: Please let us play a squad of them, and have our HP be based on the number of them still alive <3

The disturbing trend of making Spaess Mahrinns friendly is also present at GW, so grinding quests for Eldar may well be canon in 2012. The end times are truly upon us.

Make Inquisitor a class, and let them shoot anyone caught dealing with xenos, imo.

Sure you can quest for that Eldar, but I can shoot you in the back of the head and burn the world to ash from orbit if I see you doing it. Or even think you might have debated doing it at some point.

I don't think that is what that graph actually shows.  I'm pretty sure that should be read as DMO has enough work left to make a release far enough out that we can't set a reliable date at the moment but definitely after mid-2012.

I think the days of more than two factions are gone, content is at too much of a premium to split it three or more ways.  All we are going to get is two factions or shadowbane style free for all.

Instance the fucking pve per realm.

Why can't every faction get access to a copy of every dungeon?

You'd probably have to rewrite a few text boxes, but that's all.

Just like WAR! MOOOOOOOHHHHHHAAAAAAHHHAAAAAAA!

WAR's quests were fine.  Good even.  It was their PvE combat which sucked all kinds of bad.

I assume he's talking about the amount of effort required to have unique progression content for 3 factions. He's probably right when we've had a game that on launch couldn't even include content for two factions (STO) and many others that have fairly sparse content even for a single faction.

I didn't see any sign of Eldar in the video, are they in? I could easily imagine them being reserved as an expansion race. The Imperium versus chaos is just so much more obvious as the base story for a PvP game. Though the Eldar backstory would serve quite well as third faction.

Anyway, I'd like to explore the 40K world as something other than a frantic RTS (where is my copy of Chaos gate anyway I wonder) so I'll add to the "please don't suck" prayer.

(http://i.somethingawful.com/u/elpintogrande/october09/roguetrader/roguetrader_24.jpg)

Rogue Trader.  Fuck me that takes me back.  We might as well talk about Traveller.

Interesting that THQ and Vigil are going to try to get out Darksiders 2 and W40KDM in the same year.

So yah, I just cockstabbed myself with a lukewarm, salty, rusted spoon with vinegar on it, upon reading that this foamy diarrhea game will be PvE-oriented diku quest shit crap garbage BP oilspill dabocle.
Why is it these "people" REFUSE to do the completely fucking obvious (and design a true PvP masterpiece)?  This design is shit.

WAR, but 40k??  Seriously??   :uhrr:

Don't ever change.  :grin:

I knew that would raise someone's response.   :heart:

Seriously though, I'm getting quite sick of these studios turning WARhammer into Questhammer.  It's the most successful tabletop wargaming IP ever developed (even though I hated it mostly, cept 40k), and yet for some reason they cant figure out how to turn it into a proper MMO.  This design looks to be yet another overdeveloped POS, taking more from WFRP (warhammer fantasy roleplay) than anything else.  Yet no one even plays that shit... which is btw an equally overdeveloped system.

Oh Lordy, I'm just psychologically drained.  Ultramarines going on quests?  :facepalm:   I tell ya what, these quests better involve mowing through endless spawns of Genestealers done in a significantly darkly manner.  And said Genestealers better rape face and not be closet bunnies.

But still, cant a Man just get his Horus Heresy Online wherein you mow through endless hordes in a galactic civil war and/or godly dominion over all?  Then repeat?  It'd be like multiple orgasm, really.  Does no one else see this?  (no one else == people with enough money to dev. an MMO)  Such a simple concept turned to dust. 

The Salamanders chapter nominate one of their marines to be a Forgefather, who goes on a quest to retrieve the lost artifacts of the chapter.

Now we have our precident to go collect 10 grot eyes!  :awesome_for_real:

New interview, only real piece of new info is about the release.

E3 2010: Interview with Warhammer 40K's Mark Downie (http://www.massively.com/2010/06/17/e3-2010-interview-with-warhammer-40ks-mark-downie/)

They said 4 races. I'd be amazed if it isn't space-human space-elf space-orc and space-chaos.

With human/eldar and chaos/ork as BFFs for no reason at all.

 What do you mean by progression content? I can't see any good reason that all content can't be copied into all the realms. That is, if you really must have a pointless generic EQ levelling game in there at all.

I'm with eldaec on this one, instancing the PVE content from the world would allow easy reuse for other factions, it also removes pointless grey mobs.

Remember this? (http://forums.f13.net/index.php?topic=9504.msg775512#msg775512)


Playable tanks are apparently in for release, but just assume for a moment that the rest is mostly correct.  29 zones, 29, WAR has 39 (http://warhammeronline.wikia.com/wiki/Zone), such a waste.

There's the problem of what to replace the PVE content with, but if you accept that travel is just a pointless time sink (after the first journey to any location) and that the mobs you encounter will also be annoying/pointless after you out-level them.  Then why not try something different, if content in low level zones is not directly linked to character level via mob levels, then maybe zones can stay useful long term.

Fewer zones is not necessarily a bad thing.  One of the more annoying aspects of war was that there were too many zones and it was difficult to obtain a critical mass for world PvP.  i would prefer fewer well designed zones than more craptastic ones.

Having said that I am not cautiously optimistic, I am expecting utter crap.

I phrased that badly, I wasn't saying 29 zones is bad as a number.  Taking the 39 of WAR, 18 of them are T1 - T3, I think part of the reason Mythic resisted reducing the grind in WAR in the early weeks was that so much of their content was in those 18 zones.  

As Dark Millennium will likely be built along "standard" mmorpg, two faction lines, it's very possible that almost 50% of the zones there will also be completely pointless after your first month of play, that's the waste I was talking about.

If only someone could come up with PvE content that is not tied to a zone. For a WH40k MMO, a huge war going back and forth would work, but then again I'd like a pony too.

In a game with space ships and warp storms, they could tie space ports to zones, tie space ports to openings in the local warp storm and tie the openings in the warp to instanced pve & rvr on remote planets.  Instancing on the remote planet allows you to set the resulting instance to certain level/character progression ranges.  Make mine a chesnut pony.

Tanks had better be playable, or IG should just be an NPC faction <3

That or pull from Allods and do that whole "your character is actually like, 5 dudes" thing.

Analogous to BattleTech+CityTech+BattleSpace MMO (i.e. complete 40k experience), complete with APB-like "minis painting" customization == push-me-pull-you pony evidently.  Even though one would think it'd be the easier game to develop.  There is no stupid questline, scripting, junk mobs, etc...  only death.

This entire thread sounds like it's in another language to me lol.

Man, why make a 40K MMO that's not PvP? If you want quests and storyline make a fucking single player RPG based off Inquisitor that involves you gathering a party and actually doing an interesting storyline with room for being a ruthless, bloodthirsty zealot or a more open-minded strategic type. Throw in a little reference to factions in the Inquisition that can help or hinder depending on your play style and you'd be on your way to an awesome game. Plus the grounds pretty much open for an expansion/DLC that lets you play as a Space Marine instead that just sees you kicking in doors and shooting people that get in your way/forget to say their prayers. If you're going to make me play with other people let me kill them and don't just throw in a load of grindy quests that force me to side with some filthy Xenos in order to kill 10 undercity mutants for the local hygiene officer.

Recurring subscription revenue and licensing fees?  :why_so_serious:

You hit the issue without hitting the issue. The problem is not that they aren't making a proper mmo, the problem IS that they are making a proper mmo. I would happily play a game set in the 40k universe that borrows from tf2 and cod, you couldn't make me play the beta of anything everquest and daoc inspired.

Why do you even post in the MMO section of this board if that's your opinion?

because guild wars 2 is coming out. also i am of the opinion that the mmo industry could be better if it shed most of its bullshit, but since it won't anytime this decade....

But you seem to want it to shed the RPG part of MMORPG, and just do MMOFPS.

While I think 40k needs a radical departure from basic DIKU, I don't think MMOFPS will do it justice either (legitimately, almost every weapon should be insta-kill in 40k. I mean a bolter is pretty much hitting you in the face with a missile, and no badass in the IP wears a freaking helmet)

I actually liked pre pants-leveling DAOC, though. It had issues (casters were overpowered and balanced by the worst interrupt mechanic EVER DESIGNED), but at it's core it was fun.

Well they are planning on doing both poorly so if I were to make them chose, mmofps all the way with a big emphasis on fps. I mean honestly if they had the balls to insta-gib infantry than I would play, its not like the universe doesn't support  tanks and other armored vehicles so why not? I rather not "live the life of a space marine" i mean err what is that suppose to mean besides utter bullshit that makes for shitty roleplaying anyway. Ok maybe my understanding of rpg, ff6 and golden sun, creates a bias toward other understanding of the word rpg, but for fucks sake its 40k, why shouldn't there be none stop explosions and blood splatter for the sake of explosions and blood splatter?

I did nothing but roleplay in COD2 online, the role I was playing just happened to involve killing people.  It's bad enough that these games are all turning into clones of EQ+, there's no need to redefine "roleplaying" as well.

Considering that Space Marines are basically religious warrior monks accurately role playing their religious zealotry and extreme xenophobia would probably get your account banned or be amazingly boring as you contemplated the scriptures and histories for days on end between combat deployments.

RPG and "roleplaying" aren't the same term, and the discussion in this thread seems to me to be talking about the former, not the latter. Roleplaying can happen in all kinds of contexts, but stringing R P and G together in a computer gaming context comes with a lot more tropes and assumptions than just 'playing in character'.

Firstly, what do you mean 'if', how is it in any way difficult to give access to encounters by some means other than fixed geography?

Second, the description of the zones as variously claimable or invadable might at least mean they are trying for flexible rolling battlefronts rather than predefined home regions. I'm not holding my breath mind you. Not least as it makes much less sense with only 2 realms.

Also consider that said Space Marines dont actually have any free will yes?  They're psychically controlled by the Emperor.  Who in tabletop terms is the player.

Back to the ol' RPG debate.  Just because something's RPG, doesnt mean it has to be DIKU or some D&D derivative.  All it means is playing a role, which usually requires character depth and persistence.  Most FPS's dont offer this simply because they're designed to be level playing fields where every player is the same, and once the match is over - it's a clean wipe.  A Warhammer game can easily offer this depth and persistence (fuckin loads of it actually), without having to use the D20 model of gameplay.

Ashamanchill first of all says he doesn't understand the conversation, nothing wrong with that.  Then he tells someone else he's not describing a proper mmo and asks why is he in this forum.  You are now trying to explain the different between roleplaying in a game and a RPG to me.

Let me ask you a question, levels in a 40k mmo/mmorpg, bad idea or good idea?

No they aren't. They are super-idealistic warrior monks who undergo extreme psychological conditioning from a very young age.

So what you're saying is BF:BC2 is a classic RPG.

I'm going to have to differ there and say that RPG as a genre has specific meanings. While it can be crossed with another genre, RPG by itself pretty much means stats determine things, and there's a lot of number crunching under the hood. Less twitch, more here is a list of your abilities and your character build.

As for levels in a 40k MMO, they're actually kinda understandable. Just not in the level 1 through 80 sense. But there is a distinct in the lore, fluff, and table rules a massive difference bestowed by veteran status. Hell, GW's small skirmish rules all have experience systems built into them to denote this as your merry band progresses.

Just as Roleplaying doesn't mean "Playing D&D", leveling does not mean "OH GOD FUCKING DIKU GOD DAMN THIS HAS NO PLACE IN ANYTHING"

Leveling makes perfect freaking sense in 40k. What doesn't make sense is any of the sides teaming up for more than a quick fight.

I never said "classic" RPG.  I just said RPG.  If you want to go THERE, I can point you to a million neauveau RPGs that are absolutely nothing like what most people think an RPG is.
Also, BF2142 and the like arent RPGs to me even though they offer persistence character-wise, you've got no persistence to the gamespace and no real control over said character aside from gear progression.

Also, you can "RPG" most ANY wargame with the right ruleset.  Like BattleTech or even Warmachine.  Hell, these days most popular P&P RPGs are quasi-wargame anyways (cough 4th ed.).  So yah, there's nothing inherently non-RPG about 40k.  It's just most of dorkdom would prefer an MMO Wargame rather than an MMO version of WFRP (which is what this game is lookin like).   The latter is also much more intimate and less epic in scale obviously.


The Emperor exists only as a psychic entity, exerting his will across the Empire... this includes communication and orders with lesser Lords, who then they themselves psychically command  their forces (if they've got the ability, which since info. travels faster telepathically, is pretty much a requirement).  Ultramarines included.  Of course, the whole religious zealot thing makes them even more succeptible to a lack of free will to begin with...  if the Emperor psychically empowers an ultramarine squad (who look upon him as a God), you can pretty much guarantee they're gonna do what he says assuming he doesnt just take over their minds.

Speaking of which, I had this whole demented view of some grand command structure for a Warhammer MMO ala PS or WW2O,  wherein you'd start getting into all this Psyker stuff and spend less time in the field and more time fucking with the warzones and issuing commands psychically.  Woulda been cool in an open-strat. PvP game.  In a WAR/WoW clone it's not necessary... so you basically lose that entire element of the IP to some questgiving NPC.

Levels probably wouldn't be the direction I'd go with it, but for it to be an RPG it does need to have some kind of character-based advancement, yes. Levels, skills, the WFRP spend-xp-on-one-thing-at-a-time system, whatever. They're setting out to make an RPG set in 40k's setting. I'm not sure why that bothers people greatly, if they execute well I'm sure it will be fun, if they don't it will be WAR part 2. 40k isn't just a tabletop wargame setting, after all: http://www.fantasyflightgames.com/edge_minisite.asp?eidm=50

I doubt this completely rules out the possibility of a shooter for the people for whom that is more to their taste, given that GW seems to be pushing their way slowly into the modern world license-wise. There's plenty of space left to wring cash out of the license in various video games and at this point I'm sure they realize it.

 40k rpg != 40k mmo.

While it's been many moons since I played 40k, I thought they had "levels" of a sort.  I don't recall if you just paid more points to make a squad vets, for an increase in WS/BS/hits/whatever, or if they would gain some for of XP over time, and become Vet units, albeit at a higher pt value.

Even if they didn't, it wouldn't be hard to implement something similar.  Various objectives give you victory points, which can be used to unlock/buy upgraded weapons, purity seals, terminator armor, whatever.  Similar deal for other races.

That'd be too easy, and make too much sense, so they'll probably make "classes", and so Space Marine becomes a "race", and you can be a grunt, and then spec into tactical, or assault marine. The Adeptus Mechanicus is for crafters, or whatever.

That's really not what the Emperor does or how the Imperium works. We can get into this in another thread if you like but you are pretty much wrong on all counts here.

They have levels in the sense that you buy (in the newer books) things like vets or command entities.

As for classes, you should probably have at most two space marine classes (marine and medic), but otherwise the space marines as a singular class/race choice make for perfect MMO leveling fodder:

You start as a scout squad, and get blooded into an actual space marine, and then advance into a branching class path of assault, devastator, whatnot, and finally make it to first company and become your path's terminator. Then instance the high end pve by clearing space hulks, and add pvp to taste purging the xenos.

Really, 40k's IP is setup perfectly for a diku, we just don't want to admit it because it's more fun to think of it as either a wargame or as woo FPS. Because it would also make an interesting FPS if you ignore Firewarrior or whatever, where a lone shitty tau infantryman manages to take out an entire strike cruiser of space marines :P

One only has to peep at all the Marine chapters that fall to chaos to see this.

Ok I must be bias against diku's but the last thing I want to see is for the diku genre to neuter 40k IP.  

Yeah, I don't want a diku either, but for Marines, Eldar, and Orcs, it's easy enough to see how they could create a progression path from grunt to whatever.  I'm sure the other races have a similar progression, though it'd take some mental acrobatics to buy it.

Me, I just want Sisters of Battle.  I've no really idea why, but the idea is intriguing to me.  Probably something to do with bewbs.

Barring that, I'd be kosher with being able to play as either Slaanesh, or Nurgle, on the Chaos side.  That was probably the most disappointing thing about Chaos in WAR.  Despite the Tzeentch tattoo, being limited to that faction only was a major bummer.

Were they not "compelled" by the chaos gods to fall as such?  Yet another mind control deal.
I'm not a 40k guru so I'm probably wrong, but I assume the roleplay versions tend to get a bit rambunctious as I just did.  Twist the rules at ye' leisure.

Also, why NOT "get into this" in this thread?  This is a damned 40k thread aint it?  Every other IP thread we've got is a million pages long with superfluous lore debates.

They worship the emperor, and he's a very major psychic, but he doesn't control anyone. Some of the chapters are practically fallen to chaos as is. But the deal is the Emperor for all intents and purposes is a giant Jesus allegory, and Chaos tempts people into it's service. Or in the case of the eldar, they become such sex addicts that they spawn a chaos god. No, seriously. It's one of the reasons you can't really ruin the 40k IP: they've pretty much openly mocked themselves from the start.

I read that Eldar have to DIE to produce a chaos god.  You sure "fucking" is their M.O.?
If so, I foresee a few million boxes to be sold if there is such a game mechanic.   :awesome_for_real:

Not really compelled. The chaos gods certainly corrupted what was already there, which was strife between the marines.

And for all we know, the Emperor may be dead and gone, and the Golden Throne is the thing broadcasting the Astronomicon. The fluff is intenionally vague on the Emperor's status, besides being a dessicated corpse thing.

Bleh, not liking what I see so far.  Guess I'll have to hold out for the Brighthammer MMO.

Dat's why da orks iz da bestest. 'Oo cares if sum humie iz ded or not on 'is golden crappa, it's time for a punchup! Waaaaagh!  :hulk_rock:

Slaanesh was created long ago by fucking and torturing people all day long. Basically a bunch of eldar didn't like that, left on ships that became the craftworlds. People who stayed spawned a chaos god, and also formed the eye of terror.

There's more lore that when the last eldar dies, there will be a new eldar god created to kill Slaanesh.

edit: really, you can read all eldar lore and stories picturing some elf lover jacking off furiously and have the basics of it right.

Mechanic:  Eldar character cybers another Eldar right on the battlefield in front of everyone to spawn some giant endgame superweapon.  Enemy responds by trying to kill them before load is spewed.  Orgies lower the casting time.
2nd Mechanic:  Eldar captures an enemy player and proceeds to torture him/her right on the battlefield (no rape mechanic), to produce a similar effect.
3rd Mechanic:  uber-Eldar does both to spawn the weapon quicker.

That concept is pretty much the Dark Eldar, who are the army representing what's left of the decadent Eldar. The Craftworld Eldar have a system of living that keeps them from going batshit.

As for the Emperor and the Space Marines, he's most definitely not controlling them.  The Imperium, from what I have read, is really nothing like what he wanted to create, and he'd be kind of pissed at what people have done.  For example he was abolishing religion, and then people took and made him into a religion and force everyone to be super-ultra-religious.  If he was aware and had any means to act, such as directly controlling the space marines, he'd probably be making a lot of changes.

Eldar:

Descended into epic levels of depravity and hedonism. The psychic nature of the Eldar resonated with the debauchery and effectively created a feedback loop within the Warp that gave birth to Slaanesh the god of excess and depravity. When this happened, the Eldar homeworlds were ripped into a vast pocket of unreality that overlapped the material universe. This is the Eye of Terror and the original Crone Worlds that were the centre of the Eldar empire are now daemon worlds that flicker in and out of the Warp. Any Eldar left on those planets when Slaanesh was born died pretty much instantly and their souls fuelled his early growth. The birth of Slaanesh also cleared the Warp storms that had sundered the previous Imperium of Mankind and forced each human world into isolation. As the warp storms lifted, the Emperor led the Great Crusade to reunite the human worlds and this is basically the backdrop and prelude to the Horus Heresy.

Some didn't like the way that Eldar society was going and advocated a return to a simpler lifestyle - these wandered off to the Maiden Worlds (terraformed planets being prepared for eventual colonisation) and became the Exodites. In WFB terms these guys are basically Wood Elves.

Some didn't like the way that Eldar society was going and left on giant ark ships. These are the Craftworld Eldar. They control the baser impulses that led to the Fall by means of an enormously restrictive and ritualised lifestyle phases called The Path. This allows them to externalise a single aspect of the Eldar psyche at a time in a controlled manner.

Some decided that things were just funky and kept on at it. These are mostly dead now. Some of the ones who stayed around fled into the Webway at the last minute and are the Dark Eldar.

Eldar souls are Slaanesh's favourite thing and when Eldar die, Slaanesh claims their souls. Craftworld Eldar avoid this by the use of Soulstones that capture the Eldar's soul on death, these are then implanted in the psychically active Wraithbone core of the Craftworld where they rest in perpetuity. They can also be implanted into the wraith construct fighting machines of the Eldar but this is seen as a last resort because the soul will be lost forever if the Soulstone is destroyed. Harlequins avoid losing their souls to Slaanesh by having the Laughing God steal their soul before Slaanesh can get it. The Dark Eldar get around it by hiding in the Webway and sustaining their lives for as long as possible with the life essence of captured victims.

The Emperor is functionally dead and the Imperium is ruled in his name by the High Lords of Terra - who are normal humans in charge of the major organisations of the Imperium such as the Administratum, the Officio Assassinorum, the Inquisition and the Ecclesiarchy. There is some rivalry between these and they are not always entirely aligned with the Imperium as a whole. The Emperor is worshipped as a god and is believed to be powering the Astronomicon, the enormously powerful psychic beacon that allows navigation in the Warp. To keep this going thousands of psykers are brought to the throne room every day from all over the Imperium and drained of their vitality by the Golden Throne. Suppression of psykers is the most important duty of the Inquisition because psychic talents tap into the Warp and an uncontrolled psyker can become a conduit to Chaos. Of all the psykers rounded up and brought to Terra on the Black Ships, only a vanishingly small proportion are judged strong enough to be allowed to develop their gift and to use it in service to the Imperium. The rest are sacrificed to the Golden Throne. Most of the surviving psykers become Astropaths - messengers capable of projecting important communication between worlds instantaneously, only a tiny fraction of that small percentage who survive will become battle-psykers, Inquisitors or other, more valuable citizens of the Imperium.

Wait, the C'Tan Laughing God takes their souls? I hadn't read that before.

No, the Laughing God of the Harlequins (Cegorach) does. He's the only surviving Eldar god to be roaming free and is nothing to do with the C'Tan (probably). The only Harlequin he can't protect is the Solitaire who takes the role of Slaanesh in their performances and who's soul is forfeit.

It does have some interesting reading, but times it shows how they went from Warhammer in space to it's own version, like how they changed Orks from being humanoids who reproduce by sexual relations into fungus life forms that reproduce by releasing spores.  Since they killed off the Squats, the Orks have been my favorite.  I wonder if they will develop the story of how the Orks & Eldar were made to fight the Necrons.  This was supposed to be way freaking ancient history, but I wonder why the Eldar don't remember it (Orks are Orkie  ;D ).

I'm more keen on the "whatever" than levels too.  It's been said many times that levels aren't good for pvp, WAR even had to put a special mechanism in place for pvp just to get round the level problem (it was one of the few things that worked correctly).  What's not been said that often is that levels are a bad idea for roleplaying, but that's true as well.  It's accepted practice now that pure crafting characters have to level up through PVE combat, it's accepted that the players are separated by level ranges.  Levels are not right for this, it's not even sensible for an IP like 40k, do they really think most people want to play this for PVE?

Hey Iain, can you explain the Necrons and Tau to me. I always follow Warhammer before these and felt they didnt fit with the lore very well and where only there to sell more armies.

Sisters of Battle are required if there's any chance of getting my wife to play this.  She demands to be pretty, and does not agree with me when I tell her that the Dreadnaught in the trailer is beautiful.

What's wrong with the Elves I mean Eldar?

If the Eldar have the synthesized voices of the RTS games, that will definitely be the race I pick should I play.

Necrons are basically Daleks. Their backstory goes right back to the very earliest part of the timeline. Originally there were two very powerful prime species; the C'Tan and the Old Ones. The Old Ones were a very powerful and incredibly advanced race that bio-engineered most of the current races for various tasks. The C'Tan were energy beings that attached themselves to stars to feed. The Necrontyr were a biological race that lived short and unpleasant lives on a heavily irradiated world. Eventually they achieved space-flight and encountered the Old Ones who they immediately hated for reasons that aren't very clear. The war between these two was one-sided and led to the Necrontyr being isolated in a remote corner of the galaxy where their hatred for the Old Ones festered into a burning resentment of all life.

Eventually the Necrontyr discovered the C'Tan and managed to communicate with one. They built a material body for it to inhabit out of living metal and worshipped it as a god. More C'Tan quickly appeared and, clad in their new physical bodies, developed an interest in the material world that had been invisible to them previously. They enslaved the Necrontyr and rekindled the war with the Old Ones. The Necrontyr were reborn by the C'Tan into new immortal bodies for this war and they became the Necrons.

The Old Ones built the Eldar as a psychic race to battle the C'Tan as the Necrons and their masters had no connection to the Warp. Orks were designed as rapidly renewing troops with imprinted and instinctive understanding of battlefield technology. Mekboyz don't learn how to build Orky vehicles and weapons, they just know and they can't teach it to others. Likewise for other Ork specialists like Painboyz and Weirdboyz.

The Old Ones were finally defeated by a plague of psychic parasites and the four remaining C'Tan put themselves into stasis. One of these four is reputed to be the Star Dragon on Mars that forms the centre of the Cult Mechanicus.

The Tau are a newly encountered race from the Eastern fringe of the galaxy. They were first discovered as a primitive but tool-using race about 6000 years before the current 40k setting but were isolated by violent warpstorms preventing further Imperial contact. They were rediscovered recently and it was found that they had developed significant technologies in the intervening period. They had also developed a strong and unified social structure. It's common to describe them as Space Communists but it's more accurate to call them Space Hindus. They have a rigid caste system and a strong sense of social obligation. Their backstory isn't nearly as interesting as the Necrons and doesn't really tie into any other part of the larger 40k timeline.

Apart from the bit where the entire Tau Empire is a Xanatos Gambit by the Eldar to do...something, you mean?

People keep trying to tie the Tau into the existing lore. My personal opinion is that they're a new thing that doesn't have anything to do with the previous races. My fanboy idea is that the Ethereals are from the future of the 40k universe, that came back in time to guide their race. GW will probably keep the Tau backstory vague on that point, since even if they're engineered by another race, it could take millenia for anything to come of it.

The cool thing about the Tau is that they ask questions that everyone else already has answers to. "Why hasn't anyone tried to communicate with the Tyranids?"  :grin: 

is there a wiki or other someone could recommend to intro me to the backstory?

http://warhammer40k.wikia.com/wiki/Warhammer_40k_Wiki

http://wh40k.lexicanum.com/wiki/Main_Page

Wow i've bee rereading up on 40k fluff lore and watching some dow2 replays, holy shit they have to be fucking retards to fuck this up. I mean how stupid can you be before someone shoots you in the back of the head for wasting money AND IP....

Eldar would work too - I just didn't see any in the trailer. 

Are Eldar "pretty"?  I don't think I've ever seen an Eldar model that actually showed their face.

From the very few Eldar faces I've seen, they tend to lean towards "severe" and "aristocratic" but not so much "pretty."

Because of the forehead thing I think they probably look like Jane Curtin and Dan Aykroyd.

DoW2 Farseer:

(http://www.counterfeitculture.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/01/heroeld3.jpg)

Depends on who is drawing/modeling them and there are models that show their bare heads. Given the "dark" nature of both Warhammer and Warhammer 40K GW's character artwork tends to be less "pretty" than some of the other IPs out there. My comment/question, however, was also about the fact that females are a regular part of the Eldar army (Farseers and Banshees in particular).

That's just their helmets. Their heads are regular Elf heads (as Ingmar's above pic demonstrates).

I'm just glad someone got the joke.  :awesome_for_real:

The tau are the absolute coolest thing about Warhammer because they have absolutely no place there whatsoever.

Ah, yeah, definitely pretty space elves then.  I mean, I always knew from the lore that the Eldar were Space Elves, but I only ever saw the models that made them look like freaky bug things with gigantic foreheads.  Wasn't sure if they were actually suppose to look anything like elves.
I wonder if they can find a way to introduce the tau into Warhammer Fantasy.   :awesome_for_real:

In the grim darkness of the far future things sure look pastel coloured and cartoonishly styled.

Where have I seen that before?

It's 3 years from release.  The games may bore me but the players never do, Vigil, welcome to mmo market, please try not to be scared (http://forums.somethingawful.com/showthread.php?threadid=3307304&pagenumber=22&perpage=40#post378603297).

Planetside wasn't 100% war, it was 100% a war not happening than a 100% a war happening followed by long stretches of a war not happening. Though I have to agree with"If I'm not in a fight within the first 5 minutes of logging in your game fails".

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lizardmen_(Warhammer)

I'm not seeing any comparison between the two except for a caste system of sorts.

Should be moving battlefields. You have 45 minutes to take an objective before it's nuked from orbit. Regardless of if you took it or not, we're just purging it to be sure. So, you know, get your fancy guns from the armory you just stormed fast.  :heart:

They both hate undead, favour magic and ranged tech, both are lizard hippies.

Lore for both is taken from native cultures of the americas.

They are as well linked as necron/undead or chaos/chaos or eldar/elf, though neither has been explored in as much detail as some other races.

I'm going to see if I can use, "That's NOT grimdark!" in the future.

The universe is grimdark if your a human or eldar.

Well, Orks do seem to see grimdark as we would see sunshine and rainbows...

It's written by a Goon to be, uh, deliberately goonie.

I thought it was awesome, and summed up my feelings.

If this thing isn't a shooter, or at least a Faux shooter, its stupid. Bear farming and doing quests for "the people" is bullshit for this IP, standard quest/loot/level is the wrong path for this.

This sounds like just another case of some dev./investor having some "vision" and that vision has to be realized no matter how fuckin retarded it is and no matter what the cost.   Also, a D&Dhammer game generates more income for staff et. al. simply do to the length of development time and size.  Art, scripting, animation, quests, playtesting, cust. serv., etc.

So what I'm saying is even though ultimately the design may fail, initially it generates more income for the studio (even regardless of box sales, because the staff must be paid).  The staff can then just take their walk of shame holding a bag of money over their shoulders.  Then onto the next project, while the studio is bloated in value due to overspeculative investment spending.  Or, they can just sell...  blah blah (we've been down this path before.)  If they cover their box sales, gtfo and strip the live team to minimum.  Rinse, wash, repeat.

So yeah, perhaps the sensible design doc. was just "too small" (development-wise) to make it to the final cut.  This design doc. being the most obvious, which is a persistent FPS in the vein of PS or WW2O and everyone and their fucking mother, grandmother, and mother from another brother knows is the proper design path.

I linked the SA post.

Edit to add

E3 THQ Dark Millennium Interview (http://www.belloflostsouls.net/2010/06/e3-thq-dark-millennium-interview.html)

 :facepalm:

As a fan of wow I would like to formerly apologize for ruining online games.  From this point on, every shitty developer is going to try and copy their pattern instead of doing something new or inventive.  I personally would play a pvp centric WH40K, hell I even played WAR for a bit but I already played wow, I'd like something different now please.

In the grim darkness of the far future, there is only queueing for battlegrounds.

precisely

I don't play wow, so my only understanding of instance combat in a mmo is guild wars...someone explain battle grounds.

Battleground style combat doesn't need to be WoW exactly.

I was fond of the Thid system in DAOC for just random fun. Realistic and in theme with the world? No. Amusing as hell? Yes.

That really is grimdark.

(http://imgur.com/Jh3CI.jpg) (http://imgur.com/Jh3CI.jpg)

They should use the Warhammer points system for any battlegrounds.

You can bring 20 SPACE MARINES, but they can bring 300 Orks.

You have a special place in hell awaiting you.

Was about to say the same thing.

Nice job, buddy.

[/quote]

"A battleground is in there, it's working, and it's going to be fucking boring after the 5th time, let alone the 500th"

Not depicted in this representation is the Space Marine Apothecary who doesn't even have any heals on his quickbar ("I'm basically a DPS class..."), the Ork Weirdboy who spends the whole scenario alternately screaming that he's not being healed or raging about the shitty healer in all caps in the general chat tab and the fifty billion assault marines who have no idea what the scenario objective is and don't care that the Orks are winning as long as they end up top of the 'damage dealt' table.

I can haz titan mount?

Orks was the most awesome army when I played.

I could do ANYTHING as Orks.

The best one was where I put out more models than a Tyranid army. Those gretchin were absolutely evil.

My Adeptus Mechanicus character is really a C'Tan in disguise, and therefore can compel all his party members to do anything.

MMORPG.com Interviews Joe Mad and Mark Downie (http://vigilgames.com/videos/joe-mad-mark-downie)

(http://imgur.com/hF16Cl.jpg) (http://imgur.com/hF16C.jpg) (http://imgur.com/pOQUrl.jpg) (http://imgur.com/pOQUr.jpg)

Maybe it's just me but I look at images like the above and instantly think, what does the inside of a Space Marine's room look like, where do they sleep?

They don't have rooms.  Where do they sleep?  Inside their armor, in a tiny little hutch, next to a bunch of other tiny little hutches, on a ship which is traveling at assrape speed to the next fucking battle so they can eat your spleen.  That's where they sleep!

There's a canon answer to all this!

http://wh40k.lexicanum.com/wiki/Daily_rituals_of_a_Space_Marine

Warhammer 40,000: Dark Millennium (http://www.atomicmpc.com.au/News/217562,homefront-intrigues-red-faction-attracts-and-dark-millennium-underwhelms.aspx/2)

Love the GW IP, play lots of WoW... I've heard this almost verbatim somewhere else. Someone help me out here? It was like Boreslammer: Rage of Beckoning or something like that.

There's a feeling here that given the release date (a fucklong time from now) Vigil may keep their mouths shut so they can at least probe the populace on which design direction they should go before they come out and start chipping away at the NDA.  If this is the case, then for once I like the NDA.  NDAs to me are just for pussies who have a weak design, which in this case is probably the main reason.  Otherwise they're useless.

Even with the vanilla diku they've got goin on now, they could conceivably shift it to a much more combat/pvp/galactic-landrush/genocide oriented game, rather than the current drivel.  They do read the internets dont they?  Dont they?  :oh_i_see:
'Cause if they do they'll find a shitstorm of hate on their game so far.  At least from those who can read between the lines.

In the grim future of the year 40,000, there is only nerdrage.

I believe if you put on some shitty sunglasses, throw up the satan's horns gesture, and stick your tongue out with your mouth open while running around screaming "I'm a fucking douche bag. Everyone look at me because what I'm promoting is EVERYWHERE WAAAAAGH!" it will come back to you.  :why_so_serious:

Classic, what is Paul up to these days anyhow?

I hope this game doesnt suck, but... with how bad Warhammer Age of Reckoning was I am not keeping my hopes up.

Well GW let Climax waste a ton of money on the original Warhammer Online, iroinically I think I preferred the original incarnation than the Mythic one.

I got to play a very early version of the Climax game at games day years ago and and aging rig barely runs WAR in a playable fashion (so the experiences were similar) but then I was always under the impression that the Fantasy MMO was modeled after Fantasy role play that Fantasy battle. Maybe Vigil would probably be better off doing an Inquisitor based game than a 40k game at this rate.......

Its fair to say I too am prepping myself for huge disappointment.

Well, look... most of the people here who played WAR enjoyed the fuck out of it for the first 15-20 levels. I will always maintain, forever, that the first 15 levels or so were the greatest levels I've ever spent in any MMO. The problem was that it fell apart in a haze of grind and poor implementation. If they can make WAR, with the 40k IP, and do it right then I don't have any complaints. I just don't think they will because autoattack plus guns is ALWAYS fucking retarded.

The first 15 levels are cool because of the new, not because of the game.  The game has to suck hard to keep the first 15 levels of your first character from being enjoyable.

Also, "and do it right" is the magic bullet.

I suspect you're overestimating the prevalence of ranged weaponry in DM.

They are going to limit the power and range of guns 'to balance it with melee' and then discover that with EQ derived mechanics battles are going to last long enough that most of the time, most of the mobs are at melee range when they die. This isn't all that different from an actual 40k game with only a few very powerful units on each side - they end up in melee most of the time.

Your group is going to be a mix of tank (assault marine), healer (apothecary), control (librarian), and ranged dps (devastator).

Only one of those archetypes is going to concentrate on shooting guns.

No idea if any of this is true but I found it interesting (http://companyofthewolf.org/?p=388).

If the game really does end up like this I will cry myself to sleep for months.

Yeah, I'm sure it will be Ranged DPS class. For whatever reason, though, it looks way, way dumber to have people sit still plinking gunshots at each other instead of trading fireballs. I theoretically know what a gunfight looks like in real life. I don't know what a magic duel looks like.

Still maintaining that WAR's fun goodness in the early game was a cut above any other MMO experience for me. It wasn't just the newness.

Get the sleeping pills in now...

I love this one. It's just so ambrosial.

They're quaking in their money boots.  So much so, it takes an extra second to fall asleep on their pile of cash covered snuggly in their money quilt padded with money.

The words "structure" and 40k dont really combine well imo.
The Chaos Lords will not be pleased.

Wait, wait. They're even cribbing Order versus Destruction?  :uhrr:

Ok, I don't know if I said it on these boards or not, but I said elsewhere that it was too soon to judge if this would be just another WoW Ripoff, but I take it back now, utter shit incoming, if anyone needs me I'll be playing Dawn of War.

Amirite?

"you know, what fixed Oblivion's issues was basically not making it a melee game. I wonder if setting WAR in the future with guns will fix all of it's issues, too!"

I eagerly await the news that this entire team was in a coma for WAR's release, or only played it for 10 levels before xeroxing it's design docs and starting to give pet names to their bank accounts.

I think some of you are looking at this the wrong way, WAR was wonderfully entertaining, the game was crap (post T2) but things like the starfucking thread were awesome.

Yeah. I'm just... didn't their marketing team step in and say "Dudes, there's this failure of a game set in the same general IP as the game we're making. Let's not use ANY game terms they use, k?"

Order vs Destructiion is a GW thing. They've been using those terms (or variants) for a long time now. E.g. the Eye of Terror Summer campaign in 2003 was "Order vs. Disorder".

Did they? Wait, people can remember more than a year ago?


(I played about 30 games for that campaign and I actually don't remember that)

I'm not really sure when GW decided that the races should start getting along. Relic has pretty much the best take on it so far. Even though IG and Space Marines are on the same theoretical side, they're STILL prone to space marines deciding they're not same team ENOUGH and going all nuke them from orbit on them.

Having the Imperium all be on the same side makes perfect sense. The conceit for us at the tabletop was always that the Guard army was secretly in cahoots with Chaos or rebellious or whatever and not really Imperium at all. It's the grand alliance of Orks, Chaos and Dark Eldar which crops up over and over again which doesn't make much sense.

Yeah, pretty much.  They just lump "Evil humans, evil elves and orks" together cause anyone who doesn't care about 40k lore will just be like "ok, this looks like it makes sense" and then never give it another thought.  The main problem I have is REALLY with two faction games.  Hell, if 2 faction PvP was proven to be just plain awesome, i'd say, well they had to squeeze it in to work.  However, 2 faction PvP is played out, boring, and quite frankly doesn't work very well outside of battlegrounds anyway. 40k is the perfect IP to break the 2 faction mold, and thats the real pisser more than anything.  The fact that they can look at WAR and think what they are doing is a good idea is absolutely beyond any reason.

2 faction pvp could work if it models itself on sports/chess rather than traditional MMOs. Football works with 2 sides because you balance the sides. If there are 7 of you playing football in a park you generally have the best 3 vs the other 4 because anything else is rather pointless.

So to make it work you need to close rolling new characters for winning factions. Until the influx of new people causes the tables to turn then recruitment shuts down as the former losers start to dominate. Other things that are desirable to make this system balanced are smaller character improvements (so a veteran can't massacre 20 newbies with one hand tied behind his back).

You also need to challenge the honour farming paradigm where what matters to an individual player is his own progress rather than his faction's progress. You need a game that isn't designed to have its players develop special little snowflakes whose value is decided by being better than their team-mates. Possibly dispense entirely with individual loot.

It's not impossible to design a game for two sides that is enjoyable but they would need to limit players in ways that most modern MMO players would feel are unacceptable. (E.g. no alts, no loot, faction progression not personal progression, no server transfers, no joining the winning faction, etc).

But if the aim of the game is to dress your doll up in the most gorgeous spiky armour then 2 faction doesn't work as the best way to pursue the aim is to join the winning side.

It's possible of course that they view Warhammer Online as a success. Over a million boxes sold and it looks like they'll be able to turn off the servers within 3 years of launch and not have to worry about it any more. That may be the business model they're after with 40K Online.

No they're bloody not.

Also, you guys keep missing things like Space Wolves. Who like to partay.  :awesome_for_real:

Space Wolves might party, but not the sort of party that consists of 6 marines, with at least 1 of each class from the holy trinity, and is out on the hunt for 10 giant rats who automagically appear every 3 minutes in a 50 ft x 50 ft area of the spooky woods.

It's worse than that, if they just wanted vaguely good vs vaguely evil then the sides would be...

Space Marines
Imperial Guard
Ork
Eldar
Chaos
Dark Eldar
Necrons
Tyrannids

vs

Tau on an especially sunny day.
Squats maybe?





But this is completely right ofc.

Neither Orks nor Tyranids are evil per se.  :oh_i_see:

Castronova argued pretty compellingly that if a game race is based on the tropes of fantasy evil it is still evil even if the (half-arsed) back story says they aren't.

http://terranova.blogs.com/terra_nova/2005/12/the_horde_is_ev.html

Arguing that Orcs (or Orks) aren't evil because GW says so is like saying vampires aren't evil if Stephanie Meyer says they're hot.

:ye_gods: :why_so_serious:

Also


Ok, so the guy is just a complete whack job.

That blog post is one of the most navel gazing pieces of smug shit I've read in a long time.

Yeeeeea... try not to make the mistake of taking anything posted on Terra Nova too seriously. Most of the people who post there (how to put this politely?), are, well... the word "academic" is a little generous. Especially when the quoted article starts throwing around terms like 'ethics' as means of backing visibly vapid claims.

This is true.

If the 'not evil' side was Tau, Orks, Nids, I'd be willing to forgive the 2 realm bullshit.

Wow. That guy is a terrible writer.

See, I read that article and came to the conclusion that the author is a fucking dickhead. He's also incorrect about several of his assertations. But mostly, a dickhead.

The thought that the Orks and Nyds, who's entire premise as a civilization is to destroy and kill absolutely everything in the galaxy, don't fall on the side of evil is hilarious.  Just because they aren't following chaos doesn't change things.  I know the whole universe is Grimdark, and the empire commits all sorts of atrocities in their crusades, but you can say they are actually at least doing something to keep the galaxy safe since they are just about the only ones dedicated to fighting Chaos, and are the main thing that are holding Chaos forces back from consuming the galaxy.  The Eldar fit into this as well, though have less of an impact because their numbers are much smaller.  Orks and Nyds are hellbent on destroying everything.

Tau are probably the race you could say is most 'good', since they are tolerant and blah blah blah (though they re still dicks about other things).

Orks don't want to destroy everything. If they did there would be nothing left to fight.

What Tyranids do I compare to, say, a locust swarm that eats all the vegetation in its path. It's not like the locust are being malevolent or anything, that's just what they do.

Doesn't some sort of Overmind control the Tyranids?  Don't they even have infiltrating spies that can disguise as human and talk and think?  If they were truly mindless, then yes they aren't evil.

It's not about order and chaos when splitting up the sides in 40K. The Tau won't work with the Orks because the Orks are pretty much the opposite of the Greater Good. The Tyranids and Necrons won't work with anybody else, they just don't care. The Eldar may work with other races, and they may screw them over, It's all the same to them. Humanity despite it's blustering might work with some of the more reasonable races if it means they get something out of it. Dark Eldar may work with the other races, but don't turn your back on them. (Sound advice in 40k generally, but especially the DE) Chaos... whothefuck knows? Probably a bad idea to ally yourself to Chaos, but they might offer your side kewl powars and legions. Just keep checking yourself in the mirror in case you start growing a third arm.

And not to mention all the factions fight amongst themselves too.

AFAIK, the Tyranids are not intelligent as we understand it. The hive mind is just as much instinct as intellect.

Genestealers can become human like, via... you guessed it, genestealing. Even pass as humans for a few generations. But eventually the swarm comes, and they rejoin the hive fleet. The hybrids will eventually have pure genestealer children. They are not (again AFAIK) a stable population.

The argument is really pointless because the concept of evil is vague to begin with and then trying to apply it to (fictional) races and cultured that are completely alien is absurd.  All it really boils down to is we identify with the human (esque) characters because we are human.  Anything non-human that is hostile to humans and tries to murder-death-kill the human characters are evil.  Of course the logic only works one way because when humans try to murder-death-kill others we are not automatically evil.

Imagine the Tyranids are sentient.  And they're entire race depends on devouring all that is before it to continue.  But these pink fleshy fuckers are out there killing us, using up the resources we need to survive, and if they're not using it they're polluting and despoiling it.  They are a threat to our existence and are obviously evil.

Except if the tryanids do that they will starve, which is what the 40k universe never actually addresses. in fact considering that much the tryanids are pretty fail. at least the necrons have a much better plan than that. as far as humans using up all their resources, the tryanids eat people (anything that doesn't talk or has red meat is a bonus), and come from another galaxy where they ate everything.....

How Ratman would do it. Or. My armchair is very comfortable, thanks.

Side A is the Imperium. All of it. SOB, IG, SM, etc.

Side B is the filthy Xenos. Eldar and Tau. Teamed up for some bizzare reason.

Side C is monster play. Orks, Tyranids, Necrons, Dark Eldar. They can monster play and participate in PvP. These Side C factions are not aligned with each other.

Where's Chaos SM?

Here's my plan, thanks for asking.

Side A:  You
Side B: Everyone Else

Which race will you play?  ::Ork
Currently there are 5 planets that Ork armies are fighting.  Pick One.
WAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAGGGGHHH!

I give you a 100 million make this happen.

Put them in monster play. I don't want to see Khorne berserkers collecting rat tails.

50% chance of rat tails for the rat tail god!

This.

I didn't even read the article and still figured it out.

Castronova's basic premise - that X isn't evil or not evil just because the game devs say so - is unquestionably valid. People have to think for themselves about moral issues, not just take someone else's word for it.

As for whether evil is a useful concept I would argue that it is. Almost every society has taboos against the unjustified taking of human life.

And that's where Warhammer 40K enters the realm of moral absurdity. Everyone solves every problem by warlike means. Out of cigarettes? Find someone who has a pack and shoot him. Everyone is evil, the society is actually absurd and could not possibly survive. It's a universe populated by Darwin's Law failures. Sci fi Assyrians. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Military_history_of_the_Neo-Assyrian_Empire

Now for tabletop wargaming you need that. It would be a royal pain in the arse to set out rank after rank of infantry minatures only to have your opponent plonk a diplomat down and say he's come to negotiate a trade treaty.

Everyone in 40K is evil, not only do they always seek warlike solutions but they are endowed with almost-parodic evil tropes. The Emperor bathing in the blood of 10,000 psionic virgins every day? Of course that's evil, it's directly drawn from the legends of Elizabeth Bathory. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Elizabeth_B%C3%A1thory

I disagree.  In a fictional universe you can have fictional morality.  You can talk about whether or not such a thing would be moral IN REALITY, but it isn't reality, and I think its important to make the distinction.  

Case in point, it got out of hand for me when he was talking about his 3 year old being scared of his undead character.  Thats because his 3 year old doesn't understand the concept of a MMO, a video game, fiction, and so forth.  The 3 year old might have some vague concept, but the real issue there is that you maybe you shouldn't let your 3 year old watch you play a game that he isn't old enough to understand.  You may as well argue an actor shouldn't play a character in a movie that his toddler would be scared of.

But you don't share it.

Listen, suppose there's a universe where wearing blue is evil. That's fine and perfectly valid as a fictional idea. But YOU don't put the book down and go away believing wearing blue is evil.

I'm not saying everyone in 40K is evil by their standards. I'm saying everyone in 40K is evil by our standards.

Ok, fine, but this discussions started with a discussion of factions in the game, and while Order v. Destruction is probably a shit breakdown for 40k, if indeed it WAS relevant, whether or not they were all evil by our standards would make not a bit of difference for how they should structure the game, the FICTIONAL morality is what would matter.  Perhaps more importantly no one should feel particularly bad if they did something in the game that would be evil to do in real life, especially if its in character.

Stabs, I'd say a large part of the reason that 40K seems to have a military solution to everything is because it's a wargame, the focus is entirely on the military side of things with the rest being, maybe, addressed in the fluff. There's plenty of stuff out there referencing human colonies, governors, even inquisitors doing deals with the Eldar or other Xenos. The Tau like to win human colonies over to their side rather than nuke the planet from orbit (which is pretty much what qualifies them as good guys) but it doesn't really get anything more than a mention. The Empire being essentially a giant society doomed to failure? Yeah that's what it is, it's meant to be Assyria and in the game setting we're seeing it at the start of decline, the old strong leaders (Emperor followed by the Primarchs) have gone and it's settled into bureaucracy with fewer periods of genuine success and expansion. The whole thing is doomed it's simple become a matter or fighting constant holding actions against Orks, Chaos, Tyranids and whoever else is out there.

As for Orks and Tyranids being evil, from our point of view they are but at the same time they've got a biological imperative they have no real control over. Orks live to fight and Tyranids live to consume and incorporate and in one sense calling them evil because of that would be like environmentalists arguing humans are evil because we keep having babies and threaten to overpopulate the planet. I guess it seems odd to declare a fundamental aspect of a living thing as evil, especially in the Orks' case since they were engineered as bio-weapons. Really the scale of what's being discussed is on an utterly different level from the sort of individual acts or mutable characters of societies that we'd normally be discussing when bringing up morality.

As far as factions go, really the limitation should be which factions would be willing to work together. Humans, Eldar and Tau on one side works simply because they're all (relatively) rational actors. Orks and Chaos work simply because Orks want a fight and Chaos are more than happy to give them a war against the good guys and promise them a hell of a war afterwards as well. Nekrons and Tyranids don't fit with anyone, they want to destroy and ravage unless you wrote something involving a Daemon Prince managing to possess a Hive Tyrant and some sort of Chaos controlled Hive Fleet.

Sorry this post has nothing to do with the game but there doesn't seem to be anything to say at the moment other than if I wanted to play WoW in space I'd probably hang around of SC On-Line.

Ey, wotsit?

I'm pretty sure that his two basic arguments are:


 "In the Terranova backchannel, an ugly debate (I've been creating most of the ugliness) has erupted over the significance of avatar choice. I've advanced two controversial positions: that avatar choice is not a neutral thing from the standpoint of personal integrity, and that the Horde, in World of Warcraft, is evil. Nobody agrees, but it's been suggested that the community could chew on this a bit."

So for the second premise - he doesn't actually prove that they (Horde) are. But, he uses the:


quoted bit to try and convince the reader that pre-formed linguistic constructions are sufficient reason to support his claim. Mind you, this isn't even his main argument for that quote. He goes on to claim "cultural values" prime support, get's the whole thing wrong, and declares the argument complete. This is hardly what one would call an unquestionably valid argument.

As far as the first point he makes about avatar choice, sure, one could argue that this makes sense - but once again, he does not support this in any way beyond the "horde is evil ergo anyone choosing Horde is evil also".

As many people have said, the whole thing is retarded.

He must have missed my thesis about how anyone 'declaring people evil based on what they play in a fucking video game' is evil. ergo ipsofacto qed chef boyardee Castronova is his own uncle.

The point I was trying to make was a simple one and was a response to a comment that Tyrannids and Orks are not evil per se. Tyrannids are based on Aliens, the bad guys of the James Cameron films. Orcs are the bad guys of Lord of the Rings. You can't put these in your game and say these aren't evil because they are established in popular culture as evil tropes.

(An exception in popular culture is Stan Nicholls' Orcs series but that kind of trope subversion is something we haven't seen much of in video games and certainly wouldn't be suitable in 40K unless intended to be farcical, ie poor widdle misunderstood face-hugging alien).

The reason I quoted Castronova is his argument that tropes cannot be inverted by designer fiat, not his argument that people who play orcs are evil.

:uhrr:

It's the same reason you can't play a good guy with a german accent.

The things you like are bad and wrong. This is an objectively horrible article written by a gasbag who never left the dorm room.

That's fucking stupid.  Period.  The creator of the work of fiction decides good and evil, as trite as those concepts are.  Just because some jackass brays about "cause Tolkein said so!" doesn't change this.

Yeah this is obviously just wrong. I mean, you can't have a movie with good vampires or a Star Trek show with friendly Klingons either, right, since those are already established as evil tropes in pop culture!

This thread is getting pretty  :awesome_for_real:

No wait, I meant  :facepalm:

You have a german accent, don't you?   :oh_i_see:

Plus everyone knows that the Alliance are the real Bad Guys in WoW anyway. Just ask WUA.  :oh_i_see:

Tyranids are actually good in that, a) they ate the squats and b) they ate some space marine chapters thereby decreasing the amount of space marine players. Theres probably a c) there somewhere. Plus they look cool.

:mob:

Sure authors can do that but it's extremely hard to pull off without the result being crap. Vampires generally don't work as good characters although they may be sympthetic. Only Blade springs to mind as a good vampire that's at all credible. The Anne Rice vampire were fascinating but not good. The Twilight ones seem ludicrous, basically cute boys with a bad boy habit the heroine can't tell her mum about. And vampires as non-villains were only really made possible by a huge body of fiction exploring the moral boundaries of the affliction.

Star Trek made Klingons work after laying a lot of background plot down first. The Federation is peace-loving and employs multiple species - it's not a stretch that a Klingon might be accepted into the Navy.

Warhammer 40K has done none of the prep. If they want to make H R Giger aliens into peacenik touchy feely hippies who like knitting baby clothes it will just be stupid. It's not the prerogative of an author to determine good and evil when writing genre fiction within the constraints of a 25 year old IP. Good-aligned tyrannids or orks would just be terrible retconning and would absolutely destroy the game.

I think we are just having two totally different conversations at this point.

Stabs, it's one thing to say that you cannot change a faction's morality while working within a given IP, and another to say that you can't because POP CULTURE SAYS SO ZOMG!!!

Relying on tropes to define a character means it's shit writing.

Nein!

Now I want a figure for a water caste envoy.  :drill:

Ah, I see.  He can't disassociate.  Also, when people leave his line of sight, they completely cease to exist.

Fess up. You wrote that terrible article and you want our validation.

(http://imgur.com/rL9Gf.jpg) (http://imgur.com/rL9Gf.jpg)

The Force is strong with this one

Image from Video EATV: E3 Live Stage (http://www.ea.com/videos/06d6c6b893e79210VgnVCM2000001165140aRCRD)

 :ye_gods:

Fuck do I hate that guy! Argh!

Still wearing the sunglasses I see.  WTF is he still employed?

He fills an important niche.  Who else could do what he does?

3 laws of the universe

1. Douche bags wear sunglasses when there is no sunlight.
2. Douche bags are always employed.
3. When a douche bag fucks up at the job he makes more money not less.

Every dude from the Jersey Shore

Haha! I *knew* that fucker was going to be front and center at Bioware eventually! Oh SWTOR, I expect great things from you.

To be completely fair to the douchebag, there wasn't actually much wrong with the creative direction of WAR, which was theoretically his area.

The problems were on the Mythic side, not the GW (or even EA) side.

He only makes one argument, the former is predicated on the latter.

In the meantime, I posit that you are not allowed to write a good or sympathetic Jewish character: established culture demands otherwise.

I felt a great disturbance in the Force, as if a million fans cried out "WTF?  This guy is still employed?"

Darth Douchebag.

PeeBee visited the Giant Bomb live podcast at E3: http://www.giantbomb.com/news/giant-bomb-live-from-los-angeles-day-three/2208/

Yes, he wears sunglasses even there.

You really do have to respect the quality of his douchebaggery.  Most folks couldn't be that big of an asshole even if they put in with lots of training and hard work. 

PB still kicking around is one of nature's miracles.  For him.

I think I begin to see something here. A pattern has emerged. I truly believe that this cockmouthed douchenozzle not only counts himself lucky to be in a job, I think he's genuinely surprised that ANYONE, much less one of the largest video game publishers on the fucking planet employs him. And he's even more surprised that not only do they employ him, they pay to send him to places where he has to talk to the actual real people.

Like a modern court jester?

WAR40K courts 1 million users, WoW players (http://www.computerandvideogames.com/article.php?id=254087)

I begin to worry about this game  :ye_gods:

Does anyone know WAR's max sub count? If it broke a million I'd be surprised and even it it did, it wasn't for long. I mean honestly even if they are two totally different companies do you really think the 40k version isn't going to suffer from a LOT of bad memories from WAR?

No it won't. Its a setting about pew pew and more pew pew.

From memory it was about a quarter million. There are threads somewhere here discussing it.

Its like they've been reading f13 and consciously decided to do the exact opposite of everything we say. :awesome_for_real:

They said 800k accounts shortly after release, first quarter sub numbers were 300k then 300k next quarter, not said since.

Remember this WAR interview? (http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/warhammer-onlines-paul-barnett-interview?page=1)


Paul is wasted on mmo's in my opinion, he should be anchored in a flagship somewhere exotic, surrounded by the disciples of his new Religion.

This shit is great. This is all EXACTLY THE SAME as WAR. Exactly. The tone of the press releases, the WoW Done Right spiel, the art style, the movies, the sub predictions. I wasn't expecting much but I am quite literally agape at this because it's like these people live in a world where WAR never existed.

None of those things are why WAR was bad, though. WAR was bad because they fell down on the actual execution. 3 star talent etc etc etc.

Nothing about what they're saying about the 40k game tells us that it will be good or bad, really. We can't say they're 'repeating the mistakes that Mythic did' until we see them actually repeat them in the product. All that shit in WAR's marketing would look fine today if the game had been any good.

Yeah, this time its gonna be TOTALLY different. :why_so_serious:

I think the point is that while they may be repeating the same marketing mistakes, that doesn't really mean anything game-wise. That doesn't mean the game will be awesome, it's just that the game mistakes are going to be entirely independent of their marketing ones.  :why_so_serious:

Yeah I'm certainly not saying the game is probably going to be good, or even has much of a chance of being good. Most MMOs aren't. But there's really no reason to get all doom and gloom over a bunch of marketing talk, which is always 90% bullshit for any game anyway.

I'm completely aware of the distinction. Remember, I'm on record as saying that early WAR was the best MMO I ever played... for a two weeks. If 40K ends up being WAR except not fundamentally broken I'll be first in line. The quality of the game is completely separate from the presentation and silly rhetoric.

I actually think that the WAR beta was better than launch by a wide margin for a single reason: Nothing "mattered."   War really was everywhere, because noone cared to farm for levels, or loot, or anything else.  It was simply fighting for the sake of fighting, basically what warhammer is supposed to be.  The change from beta to release was absolutely gigantic. Suddenly just doing what was fun didn't matter. First leveling had to be done as efficiently as possible, then you had to start grinding out your rune gear so you could fight effectively, and so forth.   WAR was really the final straw for me having any MMORPG PvP for that reason.  I think PvP MMOs going forward are going to have to be shooter or maybe RTS oriented (if End of Nations can pan out), or in generally have less emphasis on character progression.

I think individual character progression is a mistake for PvP, especially in 40K.  I would think that unlocking different units of various race armies would be more interesting.  I mean, you could start out as a grunt, but after a while you earn the points to enter the battlefield as a mekboy or whatever.  Get enough points to unlock the battlewagon and a few more points to make it red cause red is fastah!  Probably have a point system for the battlefield controlling respawn rate and higher rated units would take longer to respawn but grunts are like locusts.  Just a thought.

One of the better ideas for a 40k mmo that i've read, did away with the idea of a single avatar entirely. Every player controlled squads of characters ala-DoW2 and leveling involved upgrading the whole team with wargear, perks, custom skins, etc... Balance would have to have been resolved through point cost/power ratio; marines would have fewer units in a squad and be a bit more powerful 1-for-1 but an ork player would have a dozen more orks under his command. Multiplayer pvp would then go by points-oriented battleground. So for example, people could opt to pile into a 1000 point battle. You'd potentially then have a smaller number of players controlling a large number of troops (tyranids, orks) versus a larger number controlling a smaller number of units (sm, chaos).

Of course, this is nothing like WoW.

See, at that point, I'd rather they chucked the whole thing and emulated the table top game.

Who's to say (trick question) we can't have the best of both worlds? Persistent leveling and customization on the 40k platform, with battles for territory on different planets - everybody wins. But, it's not going to happen.

You need four hours per session and other people will argue with you about which units actually got hit in real time?  :grin:

Did they release anything on Raids yet?  I wonder if they will support both 10 mans and 25 mans for each dungeon?

I'd play way more if [my] games only took 4 hours instead of an entire day!

Would be something like this :-) http://cgi.ebay.co.uk/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?VISuperSize&item=330446750809

Why is everyone here spelling "orcs" wrong?  :oh_i_see:

Because in 40k they spell it Ork?

DM:O is going to be a masterpiece (http://www.computerandvideogames.com/article.php?id=254087)

I hope he isnt serious.  Although have to give him cred for not saying they are makign a wowkiller but rather a WOWtaketheirsubsiller

(http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4095/4756540364_f8364edd54_b.jpg)

its not unreasonable? where else is 3 million players going to come from? Are there even 3 million pvp'ers between all the none wow games put together? Its not impossible for a game to cannibalism a little from WoW, aoc and war did it at launch. And there is no real new market for the game they are trying to make. The people who bought 1 million boxes when aoc launched are the same people who bought 1 million boxes when war launched and was the same people who purchased boxes when aion launch. If they expecting to grow, they going to thinking in terms of taking chunks out of wow. The only way i see them getting past that obstacle is to appeal to the tf2/cod crowd, but we should all know they aren't making that type of game so.... i mean the fact that this is subscription narrows you down to the eve,aoc,war folks and wow.

The issue isn't that they won't be able to cannibalize players from WoW, it's will they be able to keep them for more than 30 days.

Magic 8 Ball says not fucking likely.

Than it will go into war and aoc hell. There ARE no other players to draw from especially for the numbers they expecting. The kids these days, you know the ones that sane companies really want to target, are growing up with f2p. You are making subscription. You want to make pvp roar roar and pve meow. When the majority of the mmo playerbase is pve carebears who want to roar roar but in the context of pve. Is a wow friendly game going to attract tf2 and cod players? Err no. So after you raped and pillaged the sub bases of every other pvp non-wow game, where will this grow?

WAR and AoC were shitty games after about 30 days of play, there was just no depth to keep people from going back to things like wow. 

Now if 40k could make a good, rated M game that catered to adults and was of wow quality or close, I would play in a heartbeat. Right no im looking for alternatives, not straight clones.

I think the point still stands, Aoc and War didn't attract 2 million new players to the genre according to what their initial sales would have you to believe. Fact is the 1 million that bought Aoc also bought War and in doing so leaving AoC. The market is small, even if those two games weren't pile of turd if you go by "very few mmo'ers hold subscriptions to 2 different game" theory than at best both games could have hoped for is 500k users(that's assuming no sudden gains prior launch of course). Much better than they have now, but once you add in aion than the numbers get even more wonky. the market is crowded with the only breathing room being wow players.

M rated game?  So what, it has more blood and boobs?  If the game play sucks who gives a shit what rating it is.

The market is huge and it is constantly expanding.  AoC and War were both essentially mom and pop shops trying to compete next door to wal-mart.  They can survive and be slightly profitable just off the people who refuse to go to wal-mart because wal-mart is a conformist corporation pig dog.  But they both just boil down to diku fantasy subscription-based MMOs and WoW already provides those services and more, plus it has a floating, smiley-faced mascot.  AoC and War either relied on suckering enough people into trying it for a short while to become profitable, or they tried to bite off more than they could chew.  Either way their lack of blockbuster success is not indicative as to the size of the MMO market out there, they just failed to create something that appeals to that market.  As technology becomes cheaper and more wide-spread, more and more children will be entering that market while many in the existing market won't "grow out" of gaming.  The average age of gamers is becoming older and older.   

Remember when about 500K was all the market could sustain during EQ?  The argument is still not valid.  Problem is, either you make a game that is so outstanding it makes WoW look like a mom-and-pop shop, or you look at alternative ways to tap the market.  All people are doing right now is trying to copy WoW with maybe a few twists. 

The market is huge if your make an mmo that takes one genuine albeit relatively small step toward gamers and less toward the mud re-visioned crowd. Its small otherwise. Again its not like AoC and War were going to attract 2 million new players to genre if they succeeded. 40k being made in the exact same vein won't do any better besides take from the existing audience hungry for that game type done right. Even WoW cannibalized heavily from  the existing mmo's, only attracting the significantly larger playerbase because it was more gamy than its predecessors and thus appealed to the "EQ but without most of the asshat" that mmo's pre WoW didn't manage to do.

At this point the next big thing is probably going to be the next "pve done right" game. I have a sneaking suspicion that WoW hasn't truly capitalized on the pve market much like EQ didn't. The number of people interested in a pvp game has been pretty consistent since UO. The only way i see 40k changing that is if they attract the tf2/cod players but again the past would probably repeat itself considering the Unreal/CounterStrike weren't interested in planetside or ww2o.

I suspect PvP in MMO's are going to remain relatively niche for a while.  The ever-present diku leveling scheme coupled with subscriptions is not an incentive to the tf2/cod crowd.  I'm biased, but I always held that the pvp crowd in MMOs were the type that couldn't hack it in shooters and needed a playground where they could grief others with advantages like level and gear.  People who pvp for the sake of pvp already have their games.  (This is a generalization.)

I think you are correct about the pve landscape.  WoW did a good job but it's like they took one step forward and kinda stopped.  There's probably a whole lot more that can be explored in that area, but there's a question of incentive at the moment.

This.  Especially the last sentence.  Wow actually took several steps forward at once, none of them minor.  Almost all quests in the game working at launch.  Enough quests to level from 1 to max solely by questing (remember when grind meant repetitively killing mobs to level because you had run out of quests?). Ability to solo from 1 to max. Enough content completed and debugged to go from 1 to max AT LAUNCH.  Sufficiently complete and cohesive sets of classes, races, sides, skills, statistics, abilities and everything else that goes into an MMORPG, all relatively well balanced. Was it perfect?  No.  But in every part it was far better than barely good enough, and it did a good job of filling in most weak spots over the next couple of years.  Nobody else has shipped an MMO with more than a month or so of content AND without gaping holes in any of the basic game systems at launch, before or since WoW (Aion cheated by making it take a year to consume their month's worth of content).  Everybody wants to emulate WoW's success, but nobody wants to emulate the WORK it took to get there.  And thus nobody comes close to replicating WoW's success. 

PvE is about content.  And not just content in the traditional sense of quests and zones and npcs and loot, but also in terms of all the systems (classes, combat, looting, bank, broker, travel, etc) that need to work reliably individually and as an interrelated whole in order for the traditional content to be consumed.  Content that doesn't work (broken quests, missing loot tables, incomplete quests or story lines, incomplete classes, broken core systems, etc) not only doesn't count but negates some of the benefit of ALL other content in the game as it both creates a bad experience itself and leads to doubt and distrust in every subsequent encounter with new content.  Content, whether a quest or a class design, which is incomplete is like shipping a game of chess, but only with pawns, Kings and Queens, all else to be implemented later.  And then charging a subscription to play it while they finish it.   :awesome_for_real:

Content is expensive, but content is everything. 

Sadly, in spite of their claims, most developers use PvP as a crutch to make up for not providing enough content of sufficient quality to start with, i.e. they can't be bothered to actually ship a complete game so they toss in PvP in the hopes it will distract folks long enough for them to finish their game after launch.  Which MMO history, now that there is some, demonstrates is a stupid plan for a multitude of reasons, including minor things like PvP being harder to do right than PvE, player resentment at bait-and-switch tactics of having to PvE in order to PvP (or, being left with nothing but PvP after getting hooked on PvE), the mismatch in play styles and cultural norms between PvP and PvE players, tuning a game's PvP often breaks its PvE and vice-versa, etc, etc, etc.

As far as incentive being lacking, you'd think WoW's success would be incentive enough.  But everybody just whines about how they can't afford to do it right, so they do it half-assed and fail instead.  Surprise, surprise.  I think Blizzard is the only ones really lacking incentive, since they've already got their money hats!

Well generally speaking I think its those systems you mention that matter the most.  I look at a game like Darkfall (a game that lots of people love to hate) and think they at the very least have the right idea about content.  Rather than putting in loads of quests they simply have a ton of systems in place that the players then use to do stuff.    In fact quitting Darkfall for me had more to do with the fact that there was TOO MUCH to do and keep track of and I didn't have the time to play it the way I really wanted to, not that there wasn't enough. 

People might say there is "too much grind" in Darkfall, but to me having an NPC tell me to kill 10 whatsits is actually a worse scenario than "Hmm, I'd like to level up alchemy, I should go kill some whatsits because they drop some ingrediants" and then I also skill (level) up by killing them.

I know spawn camping an monster spawn for 10 hours like in EQ isn't a good solution either, by the way, but I'd much prefer to "create my own" quests because the game just has "stuff to do" and not be an errand boy from 1-max.

Or even looking at a game like World War 2 Online (the MMO I'm currently playing).  Its 100% PvP (0 quests, a very small number of AI in every town, but thats a bit different, they are token defense to make sure you don't just waltz into town, the smallest amount of paying attention lets you avoid or kill them easily), the game world hasn't changed appreciably in the better part of a decade, but there is never a lack of stuff to do because the game systems in place make it so. 

I guess my point is, to me PvE content, moving in a positive direction would mean LESS reliance on the game telling you where to go and what to kill, and just having a world thats worth doing stuff in.

While Malakili is busy talking about games no one plays, come to think of it 5 years from now subscription gaming will probably be between WoW and various niche hellzones fiefdoms that house 40 year old wargamers with neck beards and "i suck at most forms of comeptitive gaming but i pwnz them noobs" thirteen year olds who think f2p gaming and wow pvp servers are for pussies....

Anyway back on topic, its not that an mmo company isn't willing to put in the work (unless talking about cryptic), the diku model they are trying to emulate just burns all their cash. the conventional wisdom that no one can compete with wow deep pockets is true but this isn't really a matter of tossing money bags at a game till it works, its about finding cheap solutions to complex problems and most of these companies don't even bother, instead trying to find cheap solutions to expensive problems (the chess board with nothing but pawns, king, and queen because the other pieces are too expensive). Mythic had a "cheap solution to complex problem" type idea with the public quest but they were to busy shoehorning in the diku model to realize what they've done.

I think making robust game mechanics that allow for tons of content is a lot more cost effective than trying to pump out more and more quests and the art/text/etc that goes along with that.  But then again, no one likes the games I like.

That is certainly more cost effective to build, but in no way effective to market.

See: EVE Online.

I suppose so, but it doesn't NECESSARILY have to have the parts of EVE/Darkfall that make it unpopular (steep learning curve, full loot PvP, etc).   I've always assumed that was the real reason those games are held back.

I think its a matter of, you interact with the world and the world looks at you. Like building a sandcastle in a sand box the sand castle doesn't do anything until someone runs up and kicks it over. The only meaningful interaction with the world is with other players but that ultimately doesn't provide much despite what it sounds like in theory. For example in most of those games your individual progress is nonexistent, you must pony your balls to organization or a group in order to accomplish anything collectively and have that accomplishment felt. Its only fun when playing in a group is not a good thing to say about an mmo made in 2010. The only way to get your "importance" is to play the economy game, but even than you can't really do anything with the earnings besides spend on fluff or more eco (for example its not like you can raise a private army if your really good at being donald trump). Guess how many people really play a game because the crafting eco shit is good?

A system that can gain popularity is a system where the sand castle does something independent of you. You interact with the world and the world (not some kid kicking your sandbox) interacts back, sure that ultimately wouldn't give more significance than the former but at least it gives you an illusion that that you are important and hence will be more appealing.

I'm sure you're right, I just can't quite wrap my head around it.  I mean, I guess history has shown that people are willing to a million guys as long as an NPC is telling them to, but as soon as they have to do it of their own accord the game "has nothing to do but grind."  I guess I just don't share the way of thinking about games that leads to that conclusion.

Speaking personally, I vastly prefer questing to grinding. In EQ2 at launch (when I was admittedly quite the catass), quest XP was nonexistent and the best XP to be had was in Permafrost, so that's where we went; 6 of us ran circles around the upper level of this dungeon for hours and hours just to gain a single level. It was INCREDIBLY boring, but it was the best xp so that's where we stayed, because we all wanted to be the first to 50. When I finally hit 50, I quit within a month because I was so burnt out from that grind.

Comparing that to WoW's (or even present day EQ2) quest-to-max, you see a lot more diversity and as a result the journey feels a lot less tedious to me.

Well, the thing is, just don't grind.  Nothing forces you to grind 1 thing until max other than your own desire to max out first.  This is probably why I prefer a game without levels as well, or at least with an advancement system that isn't levels.  If you are only viable once "maxed" then getting maxed has to be your first order of business, regardless of anything else.  Like I mentioned before in Darkfall, if my goals for Darkfall were "Get better at using swords, and get some reagents" I could just find out where some good reagant dropping monsters are, and go fight them, and then if I got bored, go do something else.  I guess thats "grinding" but I could just as easily say to myself "Collect 20 reagents, then return to town and put it in the bank" and then when I get back say "Ok, time to go collect some backup leather gear, I'll go kill goblins until I have 2 backup sets"  Those are "quests" and you don't have to go around just doing what you're told like a robot.   

Thats my biggest issue with the "quest grind" actually, I feel like a total errand boy, I can't even play single player RPGs most of the time anymore because of this.  Even ones with choice in dialog I always end up thinking...shit I hate all these choices.  Though games like the Bethesda RPGs are right up my alley because I can ignore the quest lines and just go for whatever playstyle I want.

I think the difference between that and EQ grinding is the grind in EQ was almost always with one goal in mind 'More XP' and really you needed to do it in order to do anything else. The grind wears you out because every time you ding and level all you actually have to look forward to once the thrill of new shiney zone, spells or skills wears off is more and more and more of the same. In UO I'd do that sort of crap but never really felt like I was doing it because I had no other choice, like Malakii's example there was a feeling that I had some immediate goal in sight and skill gaining was a means to an end in that regard, as was killing mobs for loot or crafting or whatever. It never felt quite as forced grinding as EQ or FFXI. The quest system in WoW does a good job of throwing in some other goal than levelling for its own sake, yes you're really trying to get to 70 but at any individual point you've got a clear goal to accomplish that you're within reach of.

Of course this doesn't mean much when the design philosophy of a 40K MMO should be aimed at finding better and better ways to kill enemies. I guess it could work with a PvE element if levelling gives you access to more and more options for PvP, somewhat like Planetside, and levels themselves don't matter hugely when you're squaring up against other players.

Which is why I mentioned in one of my previous posts something along the lines of "I realize the EQ grind isn't good either"

Now talking from my bias. I found league of legends grindy. Sure I eventually reached level 30 and has several rune pages but i've known people who i've played with for 3 weeks now, who when i met them was level 13 and now they are level 20.... My grind senses are pretty high, with the difference between EQ and UO to me being the "oh you don't have to grind har har" excuse. I mean if that's your statement than i might as well say "i don't have to play either har har". I think the problem I have with sandbox is no personal attachments to any element that allows me to ignore the grind. For example league of legends is grindy not just by levels but by runes as well. I don't even play jax because i don't have any dodge runes for him (which at my level actually matters). If i was cocked blocked for every champ i would have uninstalled easy. Instead I worked with the game despite the faults I knew exist because the competitive element (the only reason i get online to play a video game) fit my needs and wants (though i still yearn for a 15 minute game type). I remember spending hours in single player rpg just running around in circles trying to level up. Dedicate entire play sessions towards simply leveling up. I mean wtf, but I didn't mind, fuck if i cared, I HAD to know what happened next. I had to see my characters evolve and grow and say something else and see what the villains will do next or how bad shit getting. Was there a plot twist around the corner? Wouldn't know i'm only level 14, fuck i'll play till i'm 20.

 What does darkfall has to offer me? +1 alchemy? Or having to find a non asshat guild so i have to spend more time in game, most of which doing what exactly? Does the game even know, if the game doesn't know why should i care? I mean that's the problem with the sandbox games, or simply a problem i have with sandbox game. I'm sure df is fun with 10 people willing to drop 50 but errr, is that a reason for me to play by myself? Honestly if LoL was only fun with others i would have quit playing it, i bought global agenda out of group think since 3 other guys were buying it and was bored to tears. The game was ass to me, sure marginally fun with someone laughing it up on vent but what is my reason to play if he isn't online? I didn't pay full price for a game just to play it on someone else schedule.

No, its not.  If you don't want to play a game with other people, its not a game for you.  In fact, any MMO concept I can think of that I would like relies on other people.  Otherwise I don't see the point of the MMO in the first place.  I mean, thats the beginning and end of the discussion if it gets to that point with me.  If I want to play a single player game, I'm not going to play an MMO, period.  I think this is where me and a lot of people here are going to be at odds though.

Well for me, the difference between me liking a game and not raging on the first retarded thing I find is whether I can play this on my own. Fact is buying a game for me is not a group think decision. I don't go "all my friends are buying this so i have to" sounds strange considering the data says the opposite (so me being a minority in this case). But again I didn't plunk $50 on a game so I can play on other peoples schedule, a lot of people who do purchase a game out of group think do play a good portion of the game solo. Other wise we would still be in the "no group no nothing" stage of mmo game design. If the game is compelling enough for me to enjoy the solo play than I look to "up" my game by playing with others. My theory is that if I'm enjoying the game and reaching my peak than the game should be equally as fun and most likely more fun with other non-asshats people laughing our asses off on vent while pwning some noobs/pve. That's the only reason why I would stomach going out and looking for the "guild" to call home. Though now a days I play with people who have been playing games with me for a while so the need to find "that" guild becomes less neccessary, I simply don't play games which aren't fun when my friends aren't online. The problem with mmo's and especially sandboxy ones is that they don't see or treat players as individuals. You are a disposable memeber of a "tag" that represents your guild, and all the incentives and actual decision making is in expecting that tag to do something like it is an individual player. I think a game like WAR big fault is seeing its player base as HORDE DESTRUCTION and ALLIANCE ORDER and never giving incentives past that level. Kinda like treating a corporation like a single person (not bring politics into this).  

I generally don't play games with my real life friends.   If a game looks interesting enough I seek out a guild for it before I even buy it to see if I can find a community to play with.  If I can't find a good group of people who play around the times I'll be playing, I just don't play the game in the first place.   


Anyway, I don't even remember how this conversation started anyway, or what it had to do with 40k.

Oblivion can afford to have long respawns, few mobs, and very gentle progression.  MMO's can't - they'll quickly have every mob harvested resulting in a tragedy of the commons scenario, and players need something big and explodey to go along with their ding, otherwise they'll tire of the tools they have available with the amount of time investment expected of them.

Quests keep people cycling through the content at a brisk pace: player's don't skullfuck their own and other people's fun by grinding zones to depletion, the scenery changes, the encounters change, the objectives change, and the random distribution of players keeps the world saner (Quel'Danas was a perfect example of what overpopulation does).

I didn't find this at all. In fact I didn't even realise I had a character which was gaining levels until about level 5, I thought you just picked a random hero and off you went.

I think it's good not to analyse past the point of fun. I don't mean don't analyse. I mean only analyse if it will improve your enjoyment.

What I hope for in WH40KO is to be able to get on Vent and make puns in an Orkish accent while shooting some people. If I start to stress about getting more crit rating or whatever I'll try and make myself switch off my analytical side and get back in touch with my inner hooligan.

I think i'm just sensitive. I hit cock blocks fast and hard and very little can convince me not to uninstall at that point.

Darkfall is held back because it is shit.

EVE doesn't have full loot pvp in the sense most mean it - it would be more like a fantasy game were gear was almost always easily replaceable, but gets destroyed when you die.

And the steep learning curve isn't really that steep if you just want to hang around empire doing the equivalent of what you would do in EQ/WoW. It is held back because it doing that shit in an environment where all the developer effort is put into other things (creating robust rules for players to become content for each other) is boring as hell.

Where it does have a learning curve is when you play against other players (be it in combat, or the economy, or wherever). But there the problem is that you are trying to beat someone who got here 3 years ago, and that problem is inherent to games that rely on 'robust rules for player interaction', especially if they have enough depth to keep people playing that long. All the game can really do is find ways to encourage vets to accept new players into corps.

WoW changed things dramatically, so much so, that terms we use for this became outdated.  PVP is mainstream now, what's niche and always will be, is a harsh death penalty.

I shouldn't need to back the above up, as even PVE WoW servers have battlegrounds but I wanted to see what has changed since 2006 (http://forums.f13.net/index.php?topic=6738.msg181314#msg181314).

In April 2006, 53% of US WoW servers are PVP, 61% in Europe.

Today from here (http://www.worldofwarcraft.com/realmstatus/compat.html) and here (http://www.wow-europe.com/realmstatus/index.html?locale=en_gb), 46% of US WoW servers are PVP, 55% in Europe.

The above could be down to many things, I just thought it was interesting.

Where's that jump to khanclusions mat when you need it.

Malakili - I agree with you that core systems are critical.  But we do seem to disagree on the need for content.  I'll grant that quests are often poor placeholders for meaningful content.  But good quests can provide all sorts of things that an otherwise empty/open world can't, including stories, lore, a sense of place, and reasons for doing the things we do in the game.  

The backstory doesn't usually have the any grand alliance as far as I know. It's always more like Orks are attacking this imperial planet, Chaos shows up to mess with the Imperium and try to get an ancient artifact, Dark Eldar pop in to raid some imperial formations while they're busy, and Necrons wake up and head for the artifact which happens to be where the Imperium is. There's only limited if any cooperation between the forces, they just happen to be fighting the same people for their own reasons.

For tabletop 'blue on blue' you can always just say it's a training exercise if you want to make it simple, but there are really a ton of reasons for imperials to fight each other even if both think they're legitimate. Some factions have secrets they'll fight another force to protect, especially marine chapters. Marines don't follow the standard Imperial Cult so can raise the ire of orthodox groups like the sisters, or can anger other marine chapters by being too different. Inquisitors have wildly different philosophies some of which are heretical to other Inquisitors. Local nobles or rogue traders might try to settle a dispute with forces under their control.

Danny Bilson Eurogamer interview (http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/2010-08-17-thq-on-everything-interview?page=1)


WOW this, WOW that, so much for the promised more info at gamescon.


How messed up is it that from a mmo point of view, Dawn of War III sounds more interesting than DMO?

I wholeheartedly wish this thing will get canned now, for the sake of everybody.

Goddamn. I can't think of another game that just comes out and says, "Nope, we're pretty much just like WoW." That's a pretty weird strategy.

I wonder if the guy was wearing sunglasses during the interview.

barf....

So warhammer online in space?

Now Dawn of War III DOES sound interesting, sounds like they are talking about a re-make of Shattered Galaxy which was a pretty fun game.

Frankly it's a refreshing change from all the MMOs that come out loud and proud stating "we're not just another WoW clone" and then turn out to be exactly that, only done a lot worse.

Lum notes the parallel between this boneheaded idea and another game. (http://brokentoys.org/2010/08/20/wh40k-you-didnt-really-want-to-be-a-space-marine/) A game that came out so long ago that you'd think the lesson would be common knowledge in the games industry.

I was wondering if he was wearing any pants.

And if you 'know the universe' you'd know that Space Marines are born, not developed as a class.

Jesus Fucking Christ. World of Space Marines, only you'll probably have to develop a level 50 scout or Imperial Guard grunt to become a goddamn Death Knight Space Marine. I cannot think of a worse set of epic fail statements - except for everything that came of out of Barnett's mouth, ever.

DOW3 does sound much more interesting.

Warhammer 40,000 Dark Millennium online - Gamescom Trailer (http://www.thq.com/uk/thqtv/index?movieId=4220)  First race announcement video, race not totally unexpected.

Four new screenshots.

(http://imgur.com/YVg0Ll.jpg) (http://imgur.com/YVg0L.jpg) (http://imgur.com/xplf9l.jpg) (http://imgur.com/xplf9.jpg)

(http://imgur.com/i08xwl.jpg) (http://imgur.com/i08xw.jpg) (http://imgur.com/1sWvPl.jpg) (http://imgur.com/1sWvP.jpg)

Well, that trailer certainly looked better than the first one they showed, but still get this feeling of "Stand there and shoot at each other from 20 paces."

It's two years away and I've already given up hope, I'm just going to enjoy the crash.

(http://imgur.com/EmfyRl.jpg) (http://imgur.com/EmfyR.jpg)
First one, I actually like.^
(http://imgur.com/j5xtrl.jpg) (http://imgur.com/j5xtr.jpg)

(http://imgur.com/uS3BQl.jpg) (http://imgur.com/uS3BQ.jpg) (http://imgur.com/CrrpZl.jpg) (http://imgur.com/CrrpZ.jpg)

I would've preferred a Darksiders-esque action rpg. The video looks way too much like "press hotkey, watch pre-canned animation, numbers fly over enemy's head."

Shit, just make it a straight first or third person shooter MMO. 

They need to stop with the fucking bait and switch of showing Space Marines.  All they're doing is setting themselves up for an epic shitstorm on the day of release when you're average 40K player picks this shit up and is in for a rude awakening.

Sorry man, we have no Spaes Mahrins, but here's a religious cyborg in a dress.

Warhammer 40.000: Dark Millenium Online Interview (http://www.strategyinformer.com/pc/warhammer40000darkmilleniumonline/interviews.html)


I'm sure the lead designer for a game and company he's openly indifferent about, said almost exactly the same as "there's an equivalent amount of PvE vs PvP content. We wanted, as a player, to feel like you had a choice on how you wanted to play the game, if you want to be a hardcore PvPer, great, if you want to do the more exploratory elements of the 40K universe, we've got content for that too. We're going to have an avenue for both types of player."

Statements like this leave me feeling like "We're trying to be everything to everyone and as a result, we'll be yet another mediocre MMO experience."

I've lost hope in this being anything but a game that has 1 million box sales and disappears in 6 months.

My blog comments have gotten  :awesome_for_real:

I can't figure out where my entry got linked but it was somewhere VERY HARD CORE

oh, hi, it was 4chan: http://boards.4chan.org/tg/res/11755655

:drillf:

This is actually what I thought the most hilarious part of that rant was.

I posted a little bit about this (http://www.antipwn.com/blog/2010/08/20/in-the-grim-darkness-of-the-far-future-there-is-only-dkp/). I mentioned the Space Marine thing in passing but really I was more baffled that the THQ guy seems to spend most of his face time with the press talking up WoW.

I like how the game looks visually at least, looks just like the miniatures. Very cool.

Really the only thing I care about or want to know is, can I wear a commissar hat, yes/no?

YES! Exactly! Even ignoring the weirdness that a guy is making his main selling point "just like WoW" there's nothing about HIS game, just how boss WoW is.

Well if his game is actually as good as WoW is right now (or will be come Cata), but in the 40k setting, that honestly would be enough to really take off.


Now if his game IS actually as good as WoW, is the big question of course.




Ingmar, you just want to execute group members for raid buffs.

Are you suggesting you don't?

Most SM's are recruited, and then genetically modified. But really, no one who wants to play a SM wants to grind up to level 50 barbarian and then get recruited. They wanna grab a bolter and chainsword and get busy.

The sheer volume of accidental comedy coming from these guys is quite astounding.

This is my favourite:


You don't really know anything about the IP at all, do you Mr Adams? Nor astronomy for that matter. Did they see D Adams on his cv and think they were getting Douglas?

I really don't think he meant world as in planet but world as in IP universe.

The only thing I care about is, can I play a scantily-clad babe?

Oh, and crafting.

My impression is the Sisters wore a lot of armor, too.  My question is: can play a Sister of Battle?

GC 2010: Die Entwickler im Interview (http://www.gamona.de/gamonatv/warhammer-40.000-space-marine,interview:video,1800589.html)

Rating probably Mature, you can level up through pvp, one of the few good things to come out of WAR.  PVP levelling (and presumably some random drops) is now totally acceptable and passes by in the interview without so much as a ripple.  The main (only?) Space Marine Chapter is the Black Templars (http://wh40k.lexicanum.com/wiki/Black_Templars).


MMO's: the difference between inspiration and recycling (http://www.gamasutra.com/blogs/ColmMcAndrews/20100821/5773/MMOs_the_difference_between_inspiration_and_recycling.php)


Given the complete failure of anyone to really learn from WoW, I think the most telling comment about DMO so far has been "we have all the basic systems of the game figured out."  I'll bet the initial reaction from the beta players is going to shatter some cosy illusions on having everything figured out.

On the other issue of not being able to instantly play a Space Marine, that could be good or bad, it makes sense that you don't want players who can't aim & move properly to play super soldiers right out the of the dropship.  On the other hand, the game-wise players of today won't be keen to grind through less enjoyable play-styles, just because some ex-WoW playing dev thinks they need to earn their stripes.  Imperial Guard or whatever had better be actual fun to play, WoW level of fun even.

Well part of the problem is that Space Marines have to be on a par with the other classes in the end-game. Which is contrary to the IP.

Sure, you might have to unlock them like WoW players had to unlock Death Knights but they can't be better than regular grunts in a WoW-style class-based game.

Or else you get that phenomenon that anyone who has played through 60-65 in WoW during Wrath has experienced: everyone playing DKs and DKs being better than the other classes at those levels.

I'm pretty sure they'll get this wrong. If I try this I'll try to unlock a Space Marine/Chaos Marine as fast as possible and mass murder other classes until they nerf the class. And so will every other power gamer.

Safe bet, all we can hope for is that the beta testers tell them their PVE sucks loudly and often.  WAR tried to appeal to both sides and have now shifted to focusing the majority of their efforts on improving RVR.  Balance I never see as much of a problem, they have Vehicles & Titans and Warhammer has always worked on a points system.  They clearly aren't going for world pvp, so the best we can hope for is that the scenarios change depending on who is winning or losing, as such they just need more intentionally unbalanced scenarios to help with over powered/populated sides, extra assets on the underpowered sides.  If they try to balance exact numbers & classes against each other, they will just end up with WAR's uneven population problems anyway.  I'll laugh if they do end up adding +20% exp to one faction on some servers though.

Humans have plenty of other classes that are at least equivalent to one space marine, so do all the other races.

Off the top of my head, Space Marines are approximately equivalent to Ork Nobs, Human Inquisitors, Eldar Exarchs/Warlocks, Sisters of Battle, Tau Shas'El. All of those have a fairly logical progression path from grunt to righteous kicker of arse that nicely mirrors the well established Space Marine progression from Novice to Scout to Battle Brother.

Rather than quibble about stuff like this, which really only bothers me a little, I'm much more inclined to just be upset about comparing a 40k game to WoW.  What, is my Space Marine/Scout/Novice/whoevencaresexactlywhatunit really going to have to do 40 levels of bullshit errand running?  If so, the game can go to hell full stop.  If there is one thing WAR taught me, its that Warhammer doesn't translate well into an MMORPG, fantasy or 40k isn't even the point.  This thing should've been a shooter from the beginning, or it should've worked around some sort of squad mechanic like you DoW2, except each player controls one squad or something.  Its just going to end up being a run of the mill MMORPG with a 40k skin, thats the problem here, the rest is just idle grumpiness about lore.  If all signs pointed to absolutely fantastic gameplay, you'd barely hear a peep about whether or not there was a clear progression for a Space Marine, or Warlock, or anything else. 

Its not so much the progression in and of itself that has people up in arms, its the assumption that in order to go from Novice to Space Marine, you are going to have to do the 40k equivalent of delivering X to NPC Y, killing 20 tyranids (or collcting 20 tyranid adrenal glands!), to get there.

How do you imagine playing as a Novice will be different to playing as a space marine?

It won't be different at all, this is just how they are planning to express levels.

And if you don't want levels shitting up your MMOG then man up and play EVE.

FIFY, also saved myself a lenghty post.

ITT: people posting in an MMO forum who hate MMOs.

Well, for instance, scouts and space marines have different armor and weapon loadouts available to them according to lore.  I think people are going to want their iconic space marine armor from the get go, and not have to go through 1/2 the game wearing "mail" before they can upgrade to "plate"

Is anyone actually looking forward to the PVE in DMO?

I'd play WoW in space. I'd even play WAR in Space if it didn't have an awful leveling grind.

Try Allods?

As for Arthur's question about PvE surely just about all fighting in the genre is against other soldiers (using the term very loosely). So basically it's like shooting ork players except they're AI-controlled and weak. No, not especially looking forward to that but I'll probably have fun testing new weapons.

If we have to shoot rats* and bears I'm not playing.

*Except Skaven. Skaven are awesome.

I think that levelling in WoW just serves to give players enough time to adjust to their newly earned class abilities, while they enjoy the good bit of the game (pre cap).  Levelling in pretty much every other game is just a grind to get to the supposed good bits, a major problem of which is that if someone is happy to let new players be bored, then just how good is their judgement really going to be on what is later "fun".

I'm taking that to mean, "We're two plus years out and I've got nothing to say about W40K:DM because everything might change, but management thinks we should be doing press now. Hmm, what do I talk about?".

While this may be true, it still isn't helping their cause very much.

If we take WAR and AOC and Alganon and Allods and RoM to be ample proof that borrowing heavily from WoW then implementing it with more bugs, lower budget and a handful of mildly innovative features is a recipe for disappointing players then what he said is probably the worse possible PR line he could have come up with. Compare and contrast with the publicity for Heroes of Telara or Guild Wars 2.

It's not just 40K but SWTOR as well has devs saying our game will be rather like WoW. It astounds me. Even if it is like WoW emphasise the differences to make it sound innovative exciting and interesting for god's sake. "Hi, I have a new MMO. It's going to be like the game you're all bored of but with more bugs". Do these guys listen to themselves speak?

Ummm, as much as I hate DMO's design, was there anyone else here besides me who was pissed that Blizzard chose Warcraft (essentially ancient Warhammer) instead of 40k as their IP for WoW?
I remember that moment distinctly whilst playing E&B... guildie told me about this awesome new game called "World of Warcraft."  I was all like, "wtf kinda dumbass uses Warcraft instead of 40k?"

So, realizing this today, I'm now having an ethical dilemma.  Yah, I shat on this design but the reality is they're pretty much trying to give me what I originally wanted some 10 yrs. ago.
Now that we've had our collective fill of this design though, no one cares for it anymore.

In the end, they either should've released this game 5+ years ago or should've made the design some sort of lightweight PS or WW2O shooter or squad-based game like G&H... which was essentially DoW: Online, only using mythological fantasy.

I agree - they are launching their marketing too early. They really need to start up marketing at the earliest 12 months ahead of time when they've actually got something to say. Now Vigil have to fill 2+ years with updates about their progress or look like the game is vapourware.

Hope is the first step on the road to disappointment.

Or hop on the SWGemu.  :drill:

I wish they'd do something like a DotA clone, maybe with third person view and heroes from all armies.  A mmo really just seems dumb, they'll cut out all the fun to make the game balanced just to throw in extraneous MMO nonsense.

I think those people occupy a fairly narrow band on the spectrum between "I wun 2 play spehs mareen" and "placing terminators in the same bracket as nobs is clearly stupid, as page 83 of the SM codex indicates blah blah blah" (i.e. people who won't know/care vs people who will bitch regardless). Hell, I played a fair amount of Dawn of War and I don't even know what "iconic space marine armor" a scout wouldn't have (those helmets with the funny mouthpiece things?). Most people, just give 'em a bolter and a chainsword and they'll be happy.

Awful lot of bitching in here about a game that has released no details except "it's an MMO."

This, most people would probably not even recognize immediately as 40k.

This, people say SPACE MARINE:


If people are expecting the second one, and get the first one, (or only get the second one after playing 40 levels or whatever) you can imagine it not going extremely well.

1)2) Or, they could get
3) None of this is relevant anyway because it has no bearing on whether the game is fun, which is what people will judge it by - not whether their giant boots and shoulderpads are giant enough.

Well that and that it's also "just like WoW."  I think its that detail they let slip that has people in a tizzy.

Maybe that's enough info to bitch about  :why_so_serious:

Inquisition: Dark Millenium Online Interview (http://www.rockpapershotgun.com/2010/08/23/inquisition-dark-millenium-online-interview/)


Pretty decent interview, nice change from mentioning WoW all the time.

*Bangs head on desk* WHY DO YOU SAY THINGS THAT WILL MAKE ME CRY.


That sounds like weasel-speak for "no."

I am somewhat heartened by the "we're not like other MMOs" bits (the bit about WAR where he talks about how the actual stuff you do in the game isn't that interesting a lot of the time) but "more action oriented" could mean a lot of things, not all of them interesting.

I can't think of an MMO in the last 3-4 years that DIDN'T say they were going to really move the genre forward by making it more action oriented.  Its effectively meaningless if you ask me.

You have it all wrong.  The player takes the action of clicking his mouse and the game responds by rolling some dice and taking the appropriate action.

It's action packed!

I find it hard to be when all the other PR has been "we're just like other MMOs". Apparently an MMO vet will find the interface familiar and not familiar, simultaneously.

I do like that he manages to give almost an entire interview without mentioning WoW but then implicitly compares the game to Diablo at the end.

The most interesting thing to me is that he appears to be saying that there won't be an aggro mechanic. He specifically mentions that tanks don't make sense with ranged combat.

My guess is that in a few months they'll give up and stick one in anyway but call it something else and just make it so the mob doesn't charge up to you but he pretty much exclusively shoots at your character while the other characters kill him.

What he means by diablo is that unlike wow where you target and let auto attack shoot for you, or devil may cry where you actually need to aim and mash buttons it will be like diablo....in that you get to target the mob and get carpal tunnel by clicking your "shoot big gun" button until it dies.

Unless you are in a tank, in which case you click to drive closer so you can hit it it with your sword.

This is the most ridiculous project I've come across since swg.

Erm when he said tanks with guns are ridiculous I think he meant diku trinity tanks who taunt a lot and prevent the party from being hit. Not armoured fighting vehicles.

You realize that when he said, "tank", he meant, "meatshield" not "armored assault vehicle", right?

I'm pretty sure eldaec meant this.

(http://dl.dropbox.com/u/7351206/Close%20Combat.jpg)

What is this "armored assault vehicle" of which you speak?  Surely such a conveyance must not exist in WH40k, or if it does, surely it would require a Space Marine in REALLY BIG shoulderpads to block attacks for it, for otherwise we would have some kind of ludicrous object with both a gun and a lot of armor!  Why, the very concept... purest nonsense!  Our minds could not even begin to understand the concept!  It's a good thing this game is completely thinking outside the box and not at all like Warcraft, otherwise I might worry that someone who can't wrap his mind around the idea of a "tank" not automatically corresponding to a guy with a huge broadsword might produce a game that fails to innovate at all!

My take is that he simply meant that there wouldn't be a character with an ability called "taunt" and that NPCs would be choosing targets of opportunity based upon proximity and (possibly) perceived threat.  That is how I'm reading his statement, "The first thing we realised is that if you try to do traditional MMO combat with guns, it doesn’t work." Traditional MMO combat is a tank, a healer, and dps.  They don't think a tank makes sense in their game.  As I'm already too fucking tired of the holy trinity I'm happy to hear a developer say that they are looking to try something different.

In the article he comes right out and says that there are vehicles, and players do get in and out of them.  My take is that these vehicles would be both heavily armed and armored.

As far as it being new, well to tell the truth I can't think offhand of another MMO that doesn't have a character class who's function is to draw enemy fire (but I didn't play Planetside).  Sounds new enough to me.

I really don't understand why his statement caused shorts to bunch up.

It's not really genuine rage from me, personally, I just find it hilarious that the guy developing a WH40k MMO actually said that the idea of tanks with guns was ridiculous.  I mean, how can you not find that at least a little bit funny?

I think we're coming from the same place, neither of us wants to see WoW retread number six-million-and-one.  I don't really want a Leman Russ with "Taunt" on it's hotbar.  I just don't see it coming from a dev whose brain is so enmeshed in the WoW mindset that he can't even concieve of something like ranged tank, like the idea is just unmanageable and alien because it wouldn't work in Icecrown Citadel.

The Original big three, UO, AC & EQ

Now I understand, I was taking your all these posts too seriously.  I feel pretty silly. sheepish  :grin:

In Darkfall the mobs have no agro mechanics and it works pretty well. Mobs act semi-randomly (to prevent them from being  predictable) and do react to proximity and threat level. If their current target takes out his shield while another player runs up behind him and starts whacking him in the back the mob will turn around and face the bigger threat. Even on a super mob if you have 3-4 players box him in and start meleeing while 1-2 guys heal, the mob will start spinning and hitting one guy a few times then switch randomly, keeps the healers on their toes.

Overall Darkfall has a fairly primitive PvE game but I find this kind of mob behavior helps a lot to make PvE more engaging than  more predictable agro management would. Of course, the game needs to have interesting combat in the first place or all of this will be moot, Darkfall does since it is 100% twitch and has a deep physics engine, this guy seems to be hinting that WH40K is going to be auto-aiming and shallow physics. This game is going to have to be damn engaging in other ways (content & balance?) to make up for the shallow basic gameplay & physics engine. WoW managed to do this, other recent MMORPGs have failed miserably (WAR, STO). From the interview with all the ACTION talk and even the Diablo mention, that they're aiming for that sort of Diablo style PvE, will it work? I dunno, Diablo was fun when I was 15 but got tedious and will be even morsoe in MMORPG format, maybe it will be a twist for the WoW crowd but it's still going to come down to execution on content and balance.

Eve
SWG
Planetside
Puzzle pirates
A tale in the desert
Diablo2 (fuck the haters, yes it is a mmog)
Hellgate
Second life

...all just called to say hi.

Hellgate had a tank class (Guardian) IIRC. They used a shield, taunted enemies, etc.

Although I'm pretty new I believe there is "tanking" ships in EVE for when doing missions. They dont have taunt, but they have high armor and go in first to take the hits.

I don't think I ever saw one tanking with a gun though.

It happened from time to time, but was more a result of people just looking for interesting builds to play.  There were some guns designed specifically for that class that were pretty awesome though, and could be used one handed with a shield.

The "tanks" being referenced here are specifically aggro controlling tanks; "tanking" as a function of being able to generate threat on an AI mob rather than absorb damage.  Otherwise we get into really nebulous cases where character X is a "tank" because he can take more damage than character Y, and I'm pretty sure you could generate examples of that in just about every game ever made, including WH40k Online.

 :roll: A tale in the desert?  Puzzle Pirates?  You could also have included every half-assed Facebook game and still fit in "MMO".  Hell, you could have included Online Hearts.  Throw me a bone and apply a little context.  Please.

Guild Wars didn't have traditional aggro either (mobs went after whoever was closest usually, and if you kited a mob it usually lost interest in you after a while).

Catching up a little in this thread, reading the wowowowowow interviews...

I think a large part of why I haven't subbed to any mmo except EQ2 since EQ2 launched is pretty understandable...I didn't care for WoW. And everything wants to be like that. So the question is: how many more years will I have to wait to get a AAA mmo outside a niche (eve) that's not trying to be wow? (but we're really not, we're all just guys who play and love wow and we know everyone else does but honestly we're different but we love wow!)

For fuck's sake.

Ex EA Mythic games producer, Josh Drescher (http://twitter.com/JoshDrescher/status/21942774536)


Now maybe the above is just blame shifting for WAR.  But given how expensive it is to create an "AAA" mmo, I don't think we will see the current situation changing until somebody figures out that they don't have to present their game client, server backend and art assets as part of a single game vision.  

AC2, LOTRO & DDO are different games but formed from the same core platform (http://www.turbine.com/technology.html).  Ultimately I think it's going to come down to somebody experimenting with different server rulesets for the same game and stumbling on something by accident.  To cut the expensive of doing that investment is needed in the implementation tools, not just for creating scripted PVE encounters but for actually being able to tinker with core systems such as if combat is skill based or class based.  People used to like flavour of the month character builds in skill based games, if the aim is to keep subscribers interested, being able to have flavour of the month server types (that WoW zombie event springs to mind) would be a major advantage.

There seem to be a few heading in Champions Online direction - problem with that game was execution rather than the concept, so you never know.

Though at this point it isn't just the producers who can't concieve of a product not based around Alterac Valley - it's six years since the last meaningful developments in the genre (CoH/EQ2/PS) and seven since EVE, in that time the endless EQ/WoW clones have dropped expectations of the playerbase so dramatically that even they positively recoil at the idea of anything new.

The real innovation since WoW came out has been in the business side, not design. How the fuck do we compete with a 300-pound gorilla in the MMOG market? The F2P trend that has taken over is the result of that. Now that DDO has shown success with it, and hopefully both EQ2 and LotRO succeed in some way as well, maybe we can get some innovation in the design side.

the game design for WAR was poor, and the art design was handed to Drescher by GW.  Or is he trying to make another point?

Drescher was game design on WAR.

I assume his point was either that 'the vision' couldn't be delivered because of shitty tools, or something unrelated to WAR.

Personally I blame Lum.

I think there has been innovation on the design side since 2006, but the players generally don't follow. Or expect new systems to work flawlessly.

The other issue with innovation is that devs don't really know what to expect - PQs are a great example. Great idea, implementation was a bit ordinary at times, but the devs failed to account for players not hanging around each PQ (especially as people outlevelled them) meaning that PQs got emptier and emptier unless they were quick to do.

If you want to see a full re-write of all traditional MMO systems, that's another thing, but devs have been trying some new things. Ultimately players return to the safety of WoW. It's also hard to believe the cries of "We want innovation!" while seeing all the excitement for sequels and IP-based titles.

Yeah, I think PQs are a great example, and their potential really hasn't been tapped yet.  I think in order to be done frequently they should be 1) close to wear players idle (towns, quest hubs, whatever), rewards should be given out after each step, and should not be tied to performance aside from maybe some sort of minimal amount of "the person was actually there doing stuff and no AFK in a given area."  Giving people quick consistent rewards, with perhaps a chance at that reward being especially good, having little cooldown between run throughs of it, having it be VERY easy to access for players, etc.   Basically, players don't want to be jolted out of their solo questing rhythm for these things, so I think you need to capitalize on players coming back from being AFK, wanting to a few quick "runs" before logging off, etc. 

In WAR the PQs went like this: Everyone did the very first one they came across like 10 times in a row.....and then they maybe did some other ones a few time as they leveled, with a few of them being particularly easy to farm so sometimes people would camp them, and 90% of them were totally neglected.  Still, the IDEA is clearly one players like, and definitely a step forward in the DIKU model at least.  Of course, its fairly small in the big picture.

I don't know about you, but I happen to think that both of those games are outstanding pvp MMO's.  Granted, their pvp is a bit unconventional. 

Haven't played them and I wasn't rolling my eyes at them.  I was rolling my eyes at saying that a non-combat game not having a tank meant anything.  My understanding is that a tale in desert is a crafting game and puzzle pirates is a puzzle game - i.e. non-combat.  DMO is a combat-based MMO, that is the context that I was assuming.

I understand that there is PvP competition in puzzle pirates and ATITD, can we please just agree to not call it combat?

No one said anything about combat. They were mentioned in rebuttal of

Sure, if you read only that one fucking sentence, I could see how you'd be confused.

Let that be a lesson to you for leaving off the RPG part I guess? Mmmmmm semantics.

David Adams interview (http://games.on.net/article/10018/Video_Interview_Warhammer_40000_Dark_Millennium_Online), from E3, hadn't seen it before, mostly about the engine.

One big seemless world, big giant battlefields, a lot of pvp plans, pvp definitely a big part of the game.  Guns instead of swords means the combat has to change, not mmo standard combat, interviewer actually uses the twitch word and gets a semi positive response.

I doubt they even know at this point how they will make it different from WoW and everquest, or how they will deal with the revolutionary new ground they are breaking by having guns in a computer game.

Not sure that is a big problem or surprise this far from launch. But it seems bizarre that the team would talk as if Everquest/WoW is the only model ever, and as if other devs haven't previously addressed exactly the same problem (with mixed results).

I guess this is the new version of the 'never learn from previous games' problem developers used to suffer from.

Italian Website (http://multiplayer.it/articoli/81068-warhammer-40000-dark-millennium-online-per-limperatore.html)


There's more on the link but that's the main points I picked out of it.

I have a bad feeling for this game ..... in fact, pretty bad.

My ItalianBabbleFishEnglish to English is weak.  I'm reading that as:

- 2-faction-PvP-centric
- large but not massive (32 to 64 player skirmishes) - which implies instanced battles versus open world
- aimed versus targeted with cover(!)
- tanks and mechs and bikes oh my!
- "skill based growth" - can't figure out if they are talking about a Planetside based system or not.  "skill-based growth and to the equipment in perfect style MMORPG" seems to say not Planetside, but a more typical MMORPG levels-from-skills and grinding for gear.

did I get it right?

Y'know what I cant really understand is why many developers, 'specially Vigil's bunch, seem just totally oblivious to the h8terade their press generates.  Is there some kind of legal obligation for them to just go ahead with whatever capitalized design they originally came up with?  'Cause really it just seems like they're flipping off the informed-masses and just going ahead with their PoS design, rather than recognizing they need to tweak their vision quite a bit.  Is it egos?  Is it a non-flexible engine?  I just dont understand it.  I shall chalk it up to nerdragey stubborness.

Actually, this is easily the best information so far I've heard about this game but sadly I don't see it making too much of a difference, especially because if its all instanced, i just immediately don't care.

What was unexpected or bad in that info? Its mostly what I thought it would be. I am glad its a shooter, cover is also cool, I like tanks, match sizes and instances are expected. Only thing that gives me pause is RPG gear in a shooter, but there is like, zero info about that yet.

If its just Global Agenda + Warhammer, they aren't really going anywhere useful.  I wish people would get off this fucking gear + grind train and just solid games again.

I'm just happy if I finally get something in Serbian for my PvP experience.

I seriously do not think it will have anywhere near the pace of GA.

Anyway, I know some here really do not believe going beyond the typical player counts in shooter, or that there is a huge difference between traditional asynchronous games (DIKU) and synchronous shooters, or that any game breaking this limit is not impressive. (Great article in a recent Game Developer mag about this)

But I never expected that if this game was a shooter, for them to even attempt a solution, if it had any shooter in it, I knew it would hit the 64 player limit.  Its an important IP, that has a not so successful older brother. The IP owner would not take such a risk.

Fuck all the rest of that noise.

Is it balanced for lean?

What the frag are you talkin about??  64 player limit?  That's not some magic babyjeebus number all devs must live by.  Matter of fact,  100-man Joint-Ops servers were common even in 2004 and WW2O was doin the 100-man cap in 2001 (the 100-limit is now gone btw).  All this with dated tech.

The trick to high users in shooters is avoiding chokepoint situations.  Very often in RPGs though, 'chokepoints' are common (small rooms, dungeons, forest glades and shit).  Warhammer though has the ability to avoid this problem via vast battlescapes on land, in vehicles, in the air, and in space.  If they'd embrace this ideal they'd have no problem wtfpwning the arbitrary player limits.  And even then, if they got capped they could always limit views to what's absolutely necessary... i.e. if I'm in the air I dont really need to see every infantry.  If I'm in a tank I dont need to see anything really besides what's on my scope or viewfinder, etc.

And DIKU by all rights should have an easier time of chunking more than 100-users yes (with today's tech)?  40k is asynchronous.

As for the IP itself, as has been flamed in many a forum already,  GamesWorkshop is all about hordes of units... if they turn it into squad-level stuff they should've went Space Hulk instead.  Or better yet, chosen a better IP and went Iron Kingdoms - Warmachine. :drill:

64 seems kinda low ball. I'd like to have battlefields that expand or contract as more players log in or out.

I'm wondering the same thing, for all the points you brought up and this - I'm really pleased they are defining a scope that seems achievable.  I really hope they budget enough time to iterate out the crap and refine the fun. 

If they focus on making the maps/game types fun, don't make the difference between top gear and scrub gear more than 10-15% and don't make getting the next-to-highest gear take too much effort I'll likely enjoy the game.

And, as you say (later post), to expect innovative gameplay from an expensive-to-license IP seems unreasonable.

Joint ops servers are 64, with exception of the multi-server-farm run by the makers, where each node holds 64. Like I said, there is a great tech article about this in one of the recent game dev mags. WW2O is in the same boat, though the net architecture for that title is closer to asynchronous. Planetside deferred most calculations client side, WW2O does to an extent (but the subset of actions is small for each player, IE lack of physics, collision, or deployables ETC..), M.A.G also deferred to client side, but avoids a good portion of hacking issues by virtue of it being on a closed system.

The limit is not arbitrary at all. Anyway point still stands, any of the viable solutions are risky at best, and costly to develop. SEE: Every game that has attempted.


EDIT: found it, Game Developer, September 2010, "Big Wars" By Lin Luo 

Seems like they are trying to re-do WAR but better. Basically a WoW style game with more emphasis on PvP.

Im sure kind of confused is there full weapon aiming or no?

...lots of direct control and direction of sight on the weapon, like a shooter person...[/i]

Is not very clear, especially when they've dodged this question in previous interviews.

So basically WoW style game everyone is familiar with, except you level in battlegrounds like WAR. We don't know how much more actiony it will be than WAR but they seem to want to emphasize that but how far into FPS/shooter land will they venture? They want to go mass market and if player twitch skill becomes too much of a factor then they'll lose a lot of the WoW crowd who can't play action games due to lack of skill.

If they execute this well they could be quite successful with the WoW PVP crowd (WAR was poised for success but execution failed them), but the whole 64 limit + 2 faction thing doesn't inspire much confidence this will be anything more than a WoW in space (with more battlegrounds, less dungeons), not a groundbreaking MMO that a lot of people were hoping for (still waiting for that planetside meets shattered galaxy MMO).

Its a question I have as well.

Chokepoints or high traffic areas are inevitable unless you are artificially segregating your players (instances etc). Players will go where the action is rather than spread themselves out through some idealised Brownian motion. If there's a fight going on then players will gravitate towards it. The more players that get involved, the longer it will last and the more players will get sucked into it until you have a snowball effect. DAoC as an example had huge frontier areas but at any given time most of the RvR population was crammed into a quarter of one zone because that's where the fights were happening.

Well battlefields are basically FPS maps not open frontiers, pretty easy to spread around high action areas. Plenty of examples in FPS land of 64+ player maps which don't become huge clusterfucks of everyone trying to get through a single hallway because objectives & chokes are spread around and thoughtfully layed out.

The issue though, I think, is elbow room, you have, No, MUST, be able to handle it when those incentives fail.  Because they will.

The reason you can avoid it in a game like WW2O is the the "chokes" are still HUGE.  Sure there are only a few battles happening at any time in the game, but I don't think you realize just how vast and open they battlefields really are. 


Well, to be fair, they have added some physics (ragdoll), and deployables are going into their next patch.  My point just being that, WW2O is actually a great example of how to do an MMO Shooter (in my opinion), and they are actually continuing development on it.

If people just want to make a team based shooter, just make one.  And please avoid adding gear farming, stats, and everything else that ruins otherwise perfectly good shooters. (I was really close to buying Global Agenda during that discount sale, but as soon as I read about Tokens for buying gear I immediately said screw it).  

The ragdoll is client replication, its not the same across clients. I was speaking of networked physics. I did read about the deployables recently, though I didn't read about anything other than needing placement location IE: Not automated turrets, or the drones from GA/PS/ETC... I have always been impressed with WW2O scale, and management of all this stuff, but we can't really say its the most responsive game compared to more traditional shooters, there are some heavy sacrifices here. I would love to see them ditch all the ballistics calculation on the sever, and just go a hit box route, then revamp up the capacity and features, i think its holding them back TBH, but I know its how they want the design.



Let me pose this: Would you, as an IP holder, invest in a Reskinned WW2O to Warhmmer 40k, with no changes in features, or limitations in 2010? Would it be an appropriate treatment?

I think its pretty appropriate in every respect except pacing.  Huge battles raging across a continent, air, armor, infantry, cities being fought over, etc.

If you kept out the Titans (average 6-8km engagement range according to my last Dan Ablett novel) and aircraft, you can easily do WW2OL:40K in a much smaller area than WW2OL does.

Unfortunately they won't and are clearly going for a 64man-32 a side(!) console crap is not. Just think- you could field HALF a Imperial Guard Infantry platoon vs 3 squads of Space Marines! Epic battles, indeed.

You also thought APB was amazing.  At first. ;D

I actually thought that was the most interesting comment, so I didn't attempt to fix it.  All these games promise unicorns and rainbows, we hear the same shit all the time, if I was marketing a new game I swear I'd just made stupid phrases up.  WoW killed the word "Battlegrounds", WAR came along and defiled the corpse, Serbian PVP sounds fucking awesome and I really don't care that's it's a Babel fish invention.

I found it highly enjoyable, and the tech impressive, I thought perhaps it was the best compromise for this very topic (between player numbers and features, and the use of instances) I was highly disappointed when the postmortem was canceled at the conference.

Anyway I never expected for this title to test boundaries.

What part of the "WH40K look-n-feel and ruleset + Planetside = Awesome" is so hard to understand? Three factions, real-time twitch combat, massive battles. The tech was good enough to retain interest beyond the neckbeardy ww2ol folks, at least until the incompetent devs torpedoed the game (PS).

DAOC called their small "training-wheels" RvR instanced-zones "Battlegrounds" before WoW even existed.  So technically DOAC is the murderer, WoW is the corpse fucker and... well, yeah.  Carry on!

I didn't mind the DAoC ones.

I'd buy that for a dollar!

Maybe even 60, just on principle.

Seriously? 40 Albs PK camping 10 Hibs while 5 Mids would occasionally try to pick off some stragglers was better than maps with real objectives and forced team size balance?

I don't understand nostalgia sometimes.

I don't understand the hate for battlegrounds either, to me if you are not fighting equal opposition who's ready to fight back you aren't pvping.

Eh, there's only 3 letters in pvp so I'm not sure which letter stands for Fair Symmetrical Fights, but who am I to say what is pvp'ing and what isn't?

To me, battlegrounds were always about leveling the entire pvp experience. Which was nice for the people who found themselves on the losing side of world PVP. Take out the lows, but also the highs.

The main problem with PvP in 40k is exactly that, PvP... as in PLAYER vs PLAYER.  There's a severe lack of overarching tactics, teamplay, and strategic choice when you talk about making a simple pvp-centric game.  What the masses want is war; bloody, complex, war.  Not a skirmish-grind.

Back to the chokepoint/64-cap/ww2o discussion.  If you design your game with the proper balance and features, you'll rarely come up against the cap.  And even when you do, it wouldnt alter the game noticeably.  Stretch a galactic battlefront across 2-3 factions (wherein each 'zone' is in fact a capturable planet with space lanes between), inject Space Hulk warfare, space battles, air battles, infantry, spec-ops, engineering, armour, guns, mechs, HQ level strat., and on and on... then inject an RDP, supply line, and modified 'ticket' system along with overarching HQ and I GUARANTEE you you'll rarely run up against a noticeable network problem.

Also, I disagree with the statement 'players go where the action is.'  This is in some ways true, but a properly designed game gives the player at least the option of doing what matters most to WIN rather than simply going where there's lots of people.  Especially when there are elements of control involved such as a rank structure, etc.
And lots of people != fun many times.

Bottom line, in a competitive PvP came, I agree with you.  In an MMO that is hypothetically a more living/dynamic/whatever world, I want it to be far more open ended.  Planetside and WW2O are good examples of this in my opinion.  I like Starcraft, Quake 1v1, TF2 6v6, whatever, but to me thats an entirely different experience than I want out of an MMO, otherwise, why make a big game in the first place?  Just set up a normal team based shooter and release it.

Euro playing on US servers, so barely anyone in them.  Besides in context of time, they were brought in because people were complaining they had to max level before going rvr, limited to that objective they worked well enough to be later copied by other games.

Fuck, how did this WAR development thread get here?

Another stab at the 2-sided PvP heavy MMO sorta-RPG sorta-FPS? Good luck with that.

THQ spending about US$50m on developing W40K:DM (http://massively.joystiq.com/2011/03/10/thq-spending-approximately-50-million-on-war40k-mmo/)

It's a sad state for the industry that the $50m - $60m price range is about the median cost of getting a AAA MMO developed. That's way too much for most titles to 1) attract enough players in such a competitive space and 2) do anything but go into maintenance mode if it isn't an immediate hit.

It's all about taking the lessons learned by other developers and iterations, and learning from it!   :awesome_for_real:

And yet, it's less than half of what current reports are for AAA non-MMO titiles.  Things like Assassins Creed 2 are reported to have 100 million (200 million according to some places) plus budgets.

This tells me that if you're thinking you can get a budget MMO out the door for 50-60 million you are pretty much just cranking out dross, last generations tech, little to no innovation and etc...

Minecrafts "tech" is like, 4 gens ago. Just saying. Most MMOs do not use bleeding edge what so ever.

Links at 10 paces, then?

Assassin's Creed 2 cost US$24m to develop. (http://vgsales.wikia.com/wiki/Most_expensive_video_games)

Average game development cost is around US$28m (http://www.develop-online.net/news/33625/Study-Average-dev-cost-as-high-as-28m) although it may have risen a bit since the start of 2010.

Assassin's Creed 2 was also a franchise title in exactly the same vein as its predecessor and launched on numerous platforms, which helps make its budget more reasonable. W40K:DM is based on a franchise, but is an entirely new type of game for that franchise and (to my knowledge) is only launching on one platform, the PC.

DCUO cost over US$50m for its development (http://herocomplex.latimes.com/2011/01/11/dc-universe-online-50-million-gamble-aims-for-audience-that-world-of-warcraft-cant-touch/) and appears to have sold (about two months post launch) something like 700k copies over the PC and PS3 platforms. Retention rates aren't expected to be great, plus then there is the issue of continuing development costs to keep the content rolling out.

If MMO studios actually need $50m - $60m just to roll out a decent MMO, then the entire industry is fucked. WoW cost that much during development (and was an extreme outlier then) but Blizzard realised they'd need to get something like 1m players subscribing for a year to earn that money back. Most titles today struggle to hold onto sub numbers less than a fifth of that.

Not sure comparing a single player game to one that needs a huge back end is viable.

Okay, so you can't compare single and multiplayer game development budgets and World of Warcraft doesn't exist.  Got it.

At the very least, art budgets have increased do to the increased complexity of modem rendering features, and no, the "massive" part puts a great deal of extra resources to use in infrastructure and all that goes with it. Its quite more complicated that simple server hosting for multiplayer.

If you are talking profitability they are.

Why spend more money to make and support a game that sells fewer boxes and whose subs cannot make back the initial investment?  Long term profits versus short term is an acceptable decision to make, but turning a profit is key.

I think this is false.  Art budgets have DECREASED and AC1&2 are testaments to that.  It's all in the tools, which is why Assassin's Creed was pumped out so fast at such a high quality (they used the best, quickest tools to get the job done).

These days if your art budget is bloated that typically means your design doc includes parameters to give your staff "job security."  You do a lot of shit completely by hand (from concept to rendering), dont buy external assets, no mocap, etc.  The same can be said of the engines underlying the game. 

Decreased relative to what? Compared to the previous hardware gen art budgets have skyrocketed.

Bloodworth, compare the geometry on the low poly and the high poly model (left and right).

Normal maps: dynamic LOD via mipmapping since 2003.  Also, the art department legitimately not giving a fuck what that playtesters say about performance since 2003.

Man hours to create are higher. Not to mention the increase in number of textures ETC.

I have absolutely no idea what this post means. Is it informative? An agreement? A rebuttal?

An artist can make that high poly model Bloodworth posted, hit an export option in whatever modeling software they happen to be using, futz with some settings, and in seconds they'll have the figure to the right.  Additionally, if you look, you'll notice that the wireframe for left and right are identical, much of the detail is in a normal map.

Then, that one normal map can be mipmapped into any number of lower resolution maps, which allows you to scale detail with very little artifacting.  Which lets you have a shitton of model quality options for very little work, and lets you dynamically scale model quality with distance.  Prior to normal mapping it required the artist to generate a new model for every reduction in detail they wanted, so "model quality" settings generally had fewer options and games tended to just not show things at very far distances.

Ok, sure, AC2 was a bad example then but I do recall having read something about an enormous budget for it.  But examples I have found still put many games at or near the 60 million mark.

http://vgsales.wikia.com/wiki/Most_expensive_games

Grand Theft Auto IV - $100 million [1]
Shenmue - $70 million [2]
Too Human - $80-100 million
Tom Clancy - $50 million [3]
Halo 3 - over $30M, about $60M including promotional costs
Killzone 2 - ~$40-$60M [4][5][6]
APB MMO - $50 million budget [7]
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 2 - $40-50 million [8]

To reiterate: if it costs 40-60 million to make an AAA single player title with 20-30 hours of content an MMO with it's greater demands of infrastructure and content MUST be much more to even be competitive.  For example APB at 50 million.  So, yeah, my point stands. 

Do they factor in the costs of CS, and all the back end stuff needed for that, in the cost of the game for MMOs, or is that shuffled off under something else?

The launch budget usually refers only to the cost of development up to that point, which usually won't include CS costs. It might include server costs, but it depends on the company / whoever is announcing.


You realise you picked a list of Most Expensive Games EVAH, right?

And even those costs were stupid. $80 - $100 million on Too Human? The economy wasn't there for a lot of those games either.

The "average" cost of a AAA title is somewhere in the US$20m - $30m range. That's expensive, particularly since publishers / developers only get back about 50% of the physical box price (and something like 70% of the digital download price). It means a title likely won't be profitable until it cracks the 1 million units sold mark (assuming 1m sales at $50 - $60 a pop, which isn't guaranteed either). Only about 1 in 5 titles that appear on the shelf make a profit, with the mega-hits sponsoring development of the also rans.

MMOs are doubling these costs on the grounds that they last a lot longer, so there is a higher chance of paying back the investment (in theory). Plus they are more technically complex projects. And yet despite having these kind of budgets, MMOs end up flopping hard (e.g. APB's budget was probably closer to US$80m, Tabula Rasa was allegedly US$100m plus, WAR was allegedly up around US$100m). In part they collapse under the weight of their development debt - get a rocky start and suddenly a studio is looking at a decade of being in the red before they've even started working on new content (which means staff reductions, which slows down content development, which sees players leave and it's a vicious spiral into the ground).

And then there is the issue of MMO development actually choking off development of other titles as studios spend years working on only their MMO, so it really is a gamble that makes or breaks a studio.

If your point is that MMOs are only going to succeed when they have incredibly huge budgets because they need them to succeed, you just might be on EA's Board of Directors. :grin:

THQ is working on the assumption that the game will be profitable "anywhere near" a million subscribers (http://www.joystiq.com/2010/05/05/thq-warhammer-40k-mmo-will-profit-with-near-1-million-subs/), which is true, but good luck in finding those 500k+ subscribers in a market where 200k+ is considered a huge sub base for anyone who isn't WoW. 

TL;DR version: too much money kills as surely as too little.

Well, games like Age of Conan, WAR both sold over a million copies on launch. They flamed out because they were terrible past the beginning areas. The market is there but it seems nobody is competent enough to retain & attract customers post-launch besides WoW & Eve.

A few points.

1: High poly models cost a shitload.

2. Relying on mipmapping of textures to give you different "model quality options" means that every level of detail is going to have the same bone and vert count. And mipmapped textures take up more memory than non-mipmapped textures and take longer to draw as well. The point of using LODs is to save memory, drawing time and animation time when objects are far away. Mipmapping accomplishes only the memory saving aspect of those, and only if you do something clever like only load the lower mip levels in the chain when the model is far away. (Which most games don't do) The main purpose of mipmapping is better image quality.

3. Currently you have to model a high poly and a low poly model. Before you had to model just a low poly version, and if you want an LOD maybe another version or two. A super high poly model and a normal model is a lot more expensive that what was "normal" 5 years ago and something lower than that.

The idea that art budgets are getting smaller thanks to tools is insane. The premise is flawed - budgets aren't getting smaller. Maybe they have dropped slightly in the past couple years or so, if so that's almost certainly due to outsourcing. But generation to generation it's a continuously upward curve, and most publishers are doubling down on a strategy of fewer, more expensive games.

Thanks, to add, normal and defuse are not the only textures needing to be created.  Newer models have 3-5 Texture layers, as opposed to the Wow model example of one.

(http://imgur.com/M5A7nl.jpg)

NVM, wrong game.

Dark Millennium Online to be Playable at E3 2012 (http://www.darkmillennium.org/2011/09/dark-millennium-online-to-be-playable-at-e3-2012/)

THQ on everything - Interview (http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/2010-08-17-thq-on-everything-interview?page=2)

Looks like all the being different stuff is off the table and they are just shooting for a WoW clone now.

/sadf  :facepalm:

While I'd still prefer a massive shooter set in the 40k universe, that doesn't automatically mean WoW clone. I mean, it PROBABLY does, but there also seems to be a recognition between the lines that they need to offer a few doodads to impress people.

I will say that my interest is higher than the previous Zero after playing Space Marine. Different teams, I know, but there seems to be a general understanding of what makes 40K work over there that carries over across games and genres.

So TOR is WOW with lightsabers, this will be WOW with guns.  We have WOW with rifts, Algawow, Everwow2...

They dumped "Serbian PVP" for "like WoW but better", they chickened out just like nearly everyone does.  Every design meeting is now going to involve second guessing choices Blizzard made for an entirely different game.  It's as exciting as a new soft drink that has to be black and fizzy.

 :roflcopter:

Copter, indeed. "this would need to be done in a way that would not utterly alienate seasoned MMORPGers." Way to insult your 'seasoned' fans.

Not saying it's some highly anticipated, must buy on my part. I'm just saying... I figured Space Marine might be utter dogshit. It's not. It's fucking good. The guys at THQ at least get the atmosphere, visuals and scope of the setting. That may not be enough to carry it to good game status but it's not on my immediate dustbin list, either.

Scroll back through this thread, though. I'm still on board with calling them idiots if they think they're going to be able to bank on 1mil subs.

On the fence until I'm told if I can play a commissar. If I can, I'll probably still buy the game even if it sucks.

Especially if I can execute my group mates when they are playing like shit.

Yes that has been in my mental design doc for a 40k MMO for a long time. Really, it's pretty much the first thing that came to mind.

If you can't, there is no point whatsoever to have a Commisar playable character.

That would totally work in an MMO.  Its shocking we haven't seen this yet.

If they'd came back and said they're making an action-MMO rather than a WoW Clone your philosophy might've held up
. 
In any case, I'll have to be brutally honest myself, if they simply made WoW in 40k (which was my first question upon entering the world of Azeroth so many years ago: "why the fuck isnt this a 40k game?") I'd probably have to play it.  But, the development of this game is in no way on the scope WoW is, therefore the most "WoW" it'll probably be is just having "!" over quest NPCs.   :oh_i_see:   It's like saying 'Allods' is a perfect WoW clone.   :awesome_for_real:

Anyways, if you think back in the thread the original design doc was always pretty vanilla.   I suppose they could action-up the DIKU, but just like Space Marine it'll get old towards the end regardless.  Tab-target, 'Press 1 for wild bolter swings.'  'Press 1 for wild bolter swings.'.....

It'll be interesting to see the numbers PS2 generates as opposed to DMO.

Play EVE.

It's all very vague, but it would be funny if in their desperation to copy Blizzard's last success, they may have just blown a chance to actually compete with Blizzard's potential next success if "Project Titan" turns out to be some kind of shooty sci-fi MMOFPS type deal, something they would be well poised to do with a license screaming for that kind of game. Talk about fighting the last war.

Absolutely.

Wonder how Vigil has faired given THQ's recent cost cutting? Or how they'll go if Darksiders II doesn't get a bigger audience than the first one.

Some rumors cropped up from an 'unconfirmed source', so take 'em with a grain of salt, some news sites picked up on it, source here (http://www.warseer.com/forums/showthread.php?p=5839558#post5839558)

Pasted below:

Blah, hate the order/disorder thing a lot more in 40k than in WH Fantasy. Otherwise it doesn't sound unpromising.

This game will live or die based on whether you die in 2 seconds or 40 minutes.

I'm going to play a Horde Disorder Ork Warrior!

For the Horde Disorder!

Don't do that.

That list of rumors sounds like a mixture of old design docs and pie in the sky bullshit.

It does, but I sure hope a lot of it is true. They really should just make Space Marine into a full fledged MMOG, leaving combat as is. Hell, right now, multiplayer is 8v8. Not really a far cry from what existing MMOGs do with "scenarios" and "battlegrounds" and "warfronts" and "insert synonym for PvP instance here". All they need to do is tack on a persistent world and a bunch of timesink quests. Voila!

But seriously, Space Marine is a fun damn game. I certainly hope the W40K MMOG gets action, "FPS" combat and not pre-defined skill button press combat.

If they put in dedicated servers and spent some time adding in other RPG type features and different classes to turn Space Marine into an MMO I would play the fuck out of it for a good while.

Rise! Rise from your grave!

...and immediately get staked in the heart, because the latest scuttlebutt is that Dark Millennium has been canceled:

http://www.neogaf.com/forum/showthread.php?t=459014

Is there something going on with THQ? Why does everybody instantly believe this Kevin Dent person is telling the truth?

THQ's been on the skids for years. You can only release so many AAA-budgeted titles to middling sales before they catch up with you.

2011 in particular was pretty rough; Saint's Row 3 was the only THQ game that really did all that well. Red Faction Armageddon came out and was promptly forgotten, Homefront came and went (that its sequel is being done by a different team is telling), Space Marine's launch was a disaster on every platform except the 360, where it launched mere weeks before Gears of War 3.

I can't imagine THQ's perennial Spongebob and WWE titles are enough to really keep them going.

It sounds right because the mid-tier publishers are getting squeezed hard, on top of which 2011 was a year full of great games which makes it hard for any one of their titles to really stand out.

I wonder who's on the short list for potential buyers.

I remember hearing something.... fuck, four months ago? Five? About THQ being dead in the water due to not having a mobile division or something. It was an industry rag reporting out of a big conference but it's hazy now. I remember being really confused because I've always thought of THQ as pretty healthy.

Winner. (http://www.vg247.com/2012/01/15/rumour-thq-cancels-2014-slate-and-offers-self-for-sale/)

Move along, nothing to see.

Depends on if Dent's source is better informed than THQ's Australian PR department.

After all, if they are trying to sell to an external party it would devalue the company to say they had just killed their 2014 plans.

That would be fraud.

Layoffs At THQ's uDraw Division (http://www.gamasutra.com/view/news/39070/Layoffs_At_THQs_uDraw_Division.php)

I bought the udraw tablet for the Wii for my daughter for Christmas, if I'd researched it first and noticed the lack of games I wouldn't.  I think it's a pretty good product for very young kids on the Wii but seems like a terrible decision to expect it to be popular on the xbox and playstation.

Hope DMO is eventually cancelled, it was going to be shit anyway.  Releasing the license means it will let someone else try it.

I would love to see it as a FPS/RTS MMO hybrid, something new. Just another low budget WAR/WoW in space will fail.

This review is pretty amusing in context...

http://www.smh.com.au/digital-life/games/udraw-the-worst-gaming-peripheral-ever-20110526-1f50f.html

How so?

Reputedly it sold poorly. Reviews of it were okay, but 2011 was a fantastic year for games so "okay" didn't cut it.

Multiplayer, mainly. The PC version had a bunch of problems with it and the PS3 version's didn't work, period. "Disaster" may have been a bit of hyperbole, but the game did not do well at retail at all.

At any rate, even if THQ isn't (publicly) aligning themselves for a buyout, they still haven't been doing as well, financially, as they make themselves seem.

Yeah, I have it on PC and it does indeed have serious issues - particularly with Multiplayer. Didn't know that about PS3. Definitely a disappointment overall. I looked for sales figures awhile back but couldn't find anything at all.

THQ may have let go another 14 people from the Australian office and may be shuttering the Japan studio.  (http://au.gamespot.com/news/thq-trimming-down-aussie-office-6349387)

They have an shareholder conference call on Feb 2 where apparently they'll elaborate what is going on.

"What is going on" is apparently the laying off of 240 employees and the CEO getting a massive pay cut (http://www.gamespot.com/news/6349587.html). Their Japanese studio is also being shuttered, and they're ending their children's game product line. So no more Spongebob shovelware dollars.

I'm kind of surprised that the CEO was making under $1m a year, but what's less surprising is that THQ's on the verge of being delisted on NASDAQ.

I wonder if THQ's Australian PR guys who denied the rumours still have their jobs?  :awesome_for_real:

EDIT: THQ looking for help to fund W40K: DM. (http://au.gamespot.com/news/6349698.html) I'm sure the line of suitors for a struggling MMO that's years out from completion from a struggling publisher is long and varied.  :why_so_serious:

That sounds like just the sort of thing SOE specializes in.  :awesome_for_real:

Well, I guess this is no longer an MMO now:


So basically the questing portion of the game is now the single-player component and we'll probably be getting some kind of coop, Horde Mode, or deathmatch to replace the "MMO" part.

poop.

Huh. I'm actually MORE interested in the game now that it's not an MMO.

This.  Now if they'd just make it more like Blood Bowl.

Not I.  There are plenty of 40K games out, wanted to see what a new Space Battle MMO could do.

I'd guess if they are cost cutting they might now have a slightly different/cheaper license deal with GW.  If so somebody else can pick this up once Blizzard release world of starcraft, so we'll get a WOS clone instead of a WoW clone.  Lot of if's but better than killing the online license dead for 10 years like Mythic did with WAR.

They realized their original dev. plan was borked from the start (because they went diku-questy instead of wargamey action FPS) so now they're backpeddling.  Smart move actually.

There was no way vajuras was going to pull off a MMO.   :awesome_for_real:

ooo, a new dawn of war game

Wonder if this change is a set back or a set forward for release. 

No, this is THQ cutting costs as rapidly as possible and trying to get something out ASAP. They're firing 100 staff and the remainder are there to get the game to a place that it can ship.