Curious_Tongue
Larpfest
Petroglyph were open to making a spiritual successor to Dune and C&C.
Does that company even exist? I mean in a non-mobile/indie-trash-capacity form?
It apparently has some old Westwood talent on staff :shrug:
Petroglyph were open to making a spiritual successor to Dune and C&C.
Does that company even exist? I mean in a non-mobile/indie-trash-capacity form?
http://www.joystiq.com/2013/10/29/command-and-conquer-canceled-victory-studios-closed/
Serves you right motherfuckers.
There's nothing wrong with F2P, it's retarded developers who can't do shit blame F2P to excuse their incompetence. DOTA2 had no problems with F2P and EA bitches have, what a surprise!
DOTA2 started to earn money since early beta. And there were no problem with getting access way earlier before "official" release, people were swimming in invitations.I'm not sure DOTA2 broke even for Valve yet. They dumped a lot of money into development and the invitational prize pools, the game has been publicly available for just a few months now. Valve has the cash to burn until DOTA2 starts making them a profit.
Well that's the fucking point. People don't need 1000 maps, 1000 heroes and cinematics - they want DOTA. With optimised UI, handy tools and nice grapchics. And that's why EA and other faggots failed - they started to mess with the game. Turn Tiberium Twilight into a pinnacle of retardation. Scrap all that made C&C - C&C. We goddamn don't need overhauled game - we need game we liked. But no, they go and try to fix what is not broken and then ask with surprised looks on their degenerade faces - how could we fail?At the same time the game has one proper map, a tutorial ones and most of the content are heroes and cosmetics. No AI to program, not that many art assets to make and only heroes to balance. Also they already had a gameplay template they merely ported over to a new engine, they didn't have to design all those heroes from scratch or the mechanics. Upkeep overall should be fairly low so living off cosmetics is possible. A proper RTS would be more costly and with few ways to earn money, even blizzard had trouble monetizing it.
Because all recent RTS made shitty work with balance. To be correct- they made no work at all. "Let's pile up X units for Y sides and release it" Players ask us to fix this shit? Fuck it! Move all team to another project, release a patch a year after.The other problem is RTS lack mass appeal, MOBAs despite what their communities like to claim are fairly easy to get into, despite all the nuances of the mechanics, teamwork and metagame. Sure you'll suck but mostly due to your poor decision making (not knowing what to build, when to fight and how to fight), not because playing the game is mechanically hard and complicated. Managing one hero and four abilities is piss easy compared to basic micro and macro in say Starcraft 2.
There's nothing wrong with F2P, it's retarded developers who can't do shit blame F2P to excuse their incompetence. DOTA2 had no problems with F2P and EA bitches have, what a surprise!
There's nothing wrong with F2P, it's retarded developers who can't do shit blame F2P to excuse their incompetence. DOTA2 had no problems with F2P and EA bitches have, what a surprise!
Still, back in the day, multiplayer in games like Red Alert was very much F2P
Still, back in the day, multiplayer in games like Red Alert was very much F2P before that term was even invented. Somehow those games were profitable...
Still, back in the day, multiplayer in games like Red Alert was very much F2P before that term was even invented. Somehow those games were profitable...
I think what he meant is that back in the day, gamers bought the game in order to play multiplayer and it didn't require a monthly subscription.Still, back in the day, multiplayer in games like Red Alert was very much F2P
what
but you had to buy the game
That's not what F2P means.
I think what he meant is that back in the day, gamers bought the game in order to play multiplayer and it didn't require a monthly subscription.Still, back in the day, multiplayer in games like Red Alert was very much F2P
what
but you had to buy the game
That's not what F2P means.
There is still a vibrant Red Alert 2 community at http://xwis.net/forums/. It became the official RA2/Tiberian Sun site after EA stopped supporting internet play for the games.
Also, after playing the same game for few years, the cost/per hour of gameplay approaches zero (not to mention the money you're saving not paying for C&C 3 and 4).
Yes, that's why I said "gamers bought the game in order to play multiplayer and it didn't require a monthly subscription". I didn't leave out RTS and FPS. For the record, I've never paid a subscription for an online game.You are aware that the entire RTS and FPS genre had the same "free" multiplayer, after your purchased the game. The only thing that required a sub were mmorpg's.
I should have added "pay-to-win" after "monthly subscription", that would have made it clear I was talking about the fact that games only required an initial investment, not a constant stream of cash.
We may be over-thinking this. I was only trying to explain my interpretation of Storyfag's post.
http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/2...be-resurrected-after-its-untimely-cancelation
They are not gonna let it rest in pieces...
Published Tuesday, 19 November 2013
Published Tuesday, 19 November 2013