Arcen Games

Games => The Last Federation => Topic started by: Castruccio on February 18, 2014, 05:14:39 PM

Title: On the New Release Date: March 24th (EDIT: Now in April, FYI)
Post by: Castruccio on February 18, 2014, 05:14:39 PM
In case you didn't know Chris, I just wanted to say that the expansion for Diablo 3 comes out March 25th, as does the final DLC for Bioshock Infinite (after which Irrational Games is closing down).  I have seen you say that the sales for Valley 1 were hurt because it came out just before  Diablo 3 launched, and I don't want it to happen again.  I realize that TLF may not appeal to the same crowd as D3, but I would think most small companies would need to be wary of launching anything around the time that Blizzard does. 

Title: Re: On the New Release Date: March 24th
Post by: Aklyon on February 18, 2014, 05:20:13 PM
Well thats rather annoying, I'd expect.

I'd heard Irrational is not quite (http://www.rockpapershotgun.com/2014/02/18/ken-levine-winding-down-irrational-games-lays-off-staff/) closing down, however.
Title: Re: On the New Release Date: March 24th
Post by: Castruccio on February 18, 2014, 05:26:43 PM
Well, Irrational Games as we know it will apparently no longer exist.  Levine will go on to make games at Take Two, presumably under a new studio name. If 2k makes another Bioshock game, my suspicion is that the studio name won't be "Irrational Games."
Title: Re: On the New Release Date: March 24th
Post by: orzelek on February 18, 2014, 06:18:16 PM
On a small offtopic - are those bioshock infinite DLC's worth it?
I have the base but none of the dlc's.
Title: Re: On the New Release Date: March 24th
Post by: x4000 on February 18, 2014, 06:26:12 PM
Grah. Thanks for the heads up on that. We've been more concerned about Titanfall than anything else, but this is also definitely concerning. I doubt that an expansion pack for Diablo 3 could do what Diablo 3 itself did, but I guess with Blizzard one never knows.
Title: Re: On the New Release Date: March 24th
Post by: Castruccio on February 18, 2014, 06:52:18 PM
They did report that Diablo 3 had sold 15 million copies in the latest Activision conference call, so who the heck knows.  They put the designer of the original game on another project and brought on a new lead for the expansion, so people are looking forward to seeing what he can do.  The beta phase, especially in recent weeks, has been received very positively after a rocky start.  Apparently the expansion is something of a return to the spirit of the series.

Either way, that's a big week with Titanfall and Diablo. 
Title: Re: On the New Release Date: March 24th
Post by: Riabi on February 18, 2014, 07:10:02 PM
They did report that Diablo 3 had sold 15 million copies in the latest Activision conference call, so who the heck knows.  They put the designer of the original game on another project and brought on a new lead for the expansion, so people are looking forward to seeing what he can do.  The beta phase, especially in recent weeks, has been received very positively after a rocky start.  Apparently the expansion is something of a return to the spirit of the series.

Either way, that's a big week with Titanfall and Diablo.

Also, that X-pack is actually going to FIX some of the serious issues that game had, so it might do better than expected.
Title: Re: On the New Release Date: March 24th
Post by: junker154 on February 18, 2014, 08:12:49 PM
In case you didn't know Chris, I just wanted to say that the expansion for Diablo 3 comes out March 25th, as does the final DLC for Bioshock Infinite (after which Irrational Games is closing down).  I have seen you say that the sales for Valley 1 were hurt because it came out just before  Diablo 3 launched, and I don't want it to happen again.  I realize that TLF may not appeal to the same crowd as D3, but I would think most small companies would need to be wary of launching anything around the time that Blizzard does.

Arcen games develops pretty niche games with a specific audience, I don't think that everyone that played Diablo or Bioshock didn't buy the game because of that. They're pretty different in terms of genre and gameplay, they appeal more towards a smaller audience.

I like to play Diablo 3 but I still need my Arcen fix from time to time.
Title: Re: On the New Release Date: March 24th
Post by: x4000 on February 18, 2014, 08:18:36 PM
As a bit of history, when we released Valley 1 it was doing very well on launch.  Diablo 3 then came out something like a month later, and our sales just absolutely tanked that exact day, and then never recovered.  Lots of other developers, even developers not on PC (!!), reported sales drops as well.  Diablo 3 was kind of an unprecedented event for a lot of us, in terms of the business reverberations it created.

The other thing is how much press attention we're able to get at any given time; it's kind of a roll of the dice when major stuff is going on.
Title: Re: On the New Release Date: March 24th
Post by: junker154 on February 18, 2014, 08:31:27 PM
As a bit of history, when we released Valley 1 it was doing very well on launch.  Diablo 3 then came out something like a month later, and our sales just absolutely tanked that exact day, and then never recovered.  Lots of other developers, even developers not on PC (!!), reported sales drops as well.  Diablo 3 was kind of an unprecedented event for a lot of us, in terms of the business reverberations it created.

The other thing is how much press attention we're able to get at any given time; it's kind of a roll of the dice when major stuff is going on.

Well, that's expected but I didn't know that it was that devastating. I guess Diablo 3 really affects a lot of people. Although to be honest Valley 1 didn't look like a great game to begin with. A lot of people look at the steam page and dismiss it as a typical indie flash game that isn't worth your time or money. I bought the game because I was really intruiged by it and it got me into your games. I liked Valley 1 for it's unique gameplay but I seldom replay it because it's just not that great of a game.

So if your initial marketing doesn't work all that well, you might never really recover.

Title: Re: On the New Release Date: March 24th
Post by: Aklyon on February 18, 2014, 08:32:20 PM
Quote
The other thing is how much press attention we're able to get at any given time; it's kind of a roll of the dice when major stuff is going on.
Well theres a heck of a lot of excitement related to Titanfall, definitely something to watch out for. (theres also grumbling about the titanfall devs not liking battletech, but I doubt that would have a sales effect)
Title: Re: On the New Release Date: March 24th
Post by: mrhanman on February 18, 2014, 08:52:19 PM
titanfall devs not liking battletech,

I've been leery of all the praise and hype constantly heaped upon Titanfall, but that right there just killed it for me.
Title: Re: On the New Release Date: March 24th
Post by: Aklyon on February 18, 2014, 08:56:46 PM
I don't remember the exact quote, but it went something like "Those mechs are really slow and like tanks, slow is boring. We want to still have agility."
Title: Re: On the New Release Date: March 24th
Post by: x4000 on February 18, 2014, 08:59:01 PM
@junker154: What I'm saying is that Valley 1 was selling exceedingly well, and then the day that Diablo 3 came out, we saw like a 10x drop in sales immediately.  And then it never recovered.  So say what you will about our marketing, the game itself, the graphics, or whatever other factors, that's what happened empirically.  Why the game didn't recover after Diablo 3's launch is indeed a matter for speculation of that sort, but the effect of the launch itself was devastating to us and other devs in terms of how much attention it redirected even from games that were otherwise already doing very well.
Title: Re: On the New Release Date: March 24th
Post by: Misery on February 18, 2014, 09:00:24 PM
I don't remember the exact quote, but it went something like "Those mechs are really slow and like tanks, slow is boring. We want to still have agility."

That.... just....


After seeing some of Titanfall, the "mechs" they have in that game seriously arent even mechs to me.  They're the normal, average FPS soldiers, except bigger and made of robot.  They even have to manually reload their guns and all.  Because, you know, it's totally logical to give a giant mech fully articulated hands JUST so that it can reload it's amazingly impractical bus-sized gun.   As opposed to, you know, having guns for arms like most proper mechs do.

But yeah, that was the impression I got.  That the whole thing was VERY gimmicky, and the robot combat seriously does look to me like inflated normal soldier combat, except that you're able to step on players that arent yet inflated.

Looks terrible to me.   If I want mech combat, I'll play MWO, which is great.   If I want FAST mech combat, I'll play Hawken, which is good but I'm horrible at.  But Titanfall.... just.... no.
Title: Re: On the New Release Date: March 24th
Post by: Misery on February 18, 2014, 09:03:02 PM
@junker154: What I'm saying is that Valley 1 was selling exceedingly well, and then the day that Diablo 3 came out, we saw like a 10x drop in sales immediately.  And then it never recovered.  So say what you will about our marketing, the game itself, the graphics, or whatever other factors, that's what happened empirically.  Why the game didn't recover after Diablo 3's launch is indeed a matter for speculation of that sort, but the effect of the launch itself was devastating to us and other devs in terms of how much attention it redirected even from games that were otherwise already doing very well.

It's good that you guys think about this one..... too many devs would just try to crash up against the larger releases without changing their dates.   Always baffles me.

As for why the game didn't recover after that, mighta been because Diablo was pretty pricey upon release, at full retail.  Not to mention everyone then obsessing over it.   Only to start an endless litany of complaints over it later, hah.   Or at least that's my logic, anyway, which may or may not actually be logical.
Title: Re: On the New Release Date: March 24th
Post by: junker154 on February 18, 2014, 09:04:42 PM
@junker154: What I'm saying is that Valley 1 was selling exceedingly well, and then the day that Diablo 3 came out, we saw like a 10x drop in sales immediately.  And then it never recovered.  So say what you will about our marketing, the game itself, the graphics, or whatever other factors, that's what happened empirically.  Why the game didn't recover after Diablo 3's launch is indeed a matter for speculation of that sort, but the effect of the launch itself was devastating to us and other devs in terms of how much attention it redirected even from games that were otherwise already doing very well.

Oh, that's completely different then. I thought the game didn't sell all that well compared to other arcen titles and I went to several forums and saw a lot of negative feedback. But this is only from my limited personal view without any knowledge behind the scenes and what was going on.

The launch of Diablo 3 was catastrophic and the game overall was heavily critisized so it got a lot of media coverage for a long while by many sites and magazines, I guess that Valley didn't make it through all the media fuzz.
Title: Re: On the New Release Date: March 24th
Post by: Mick on February 18, 2014, 09:26:28 PM
Titanfall being EA makes it no buy for me. I can put up with a little bit of evil, but EA is too evil.

Origin exclusive doesn't help either.
Title: Re: On the New Release Date: March 24th
Post by: PokerChen on February 19, 2014, 04:12:53 AM
 Whatever its lack of merits, D3 was still a product of the giant called Blizzard, and it's still a time-sink game. Chris and I bought the game after auction-house shutdown announcement, and there's a lot of things they are doing in D3X to try to promote casual play at all stages of leveling.
 Still going to make an impact on everyone else around the date, IMO, despite reduced hype. Smaller then D3, but still - most players aren't exclusive to their chosen genres.

 The buying public appears to have a relatively short memory span so I would normally think going after their launch date by ~ 2 weeks would be better. (The time that I estimated it would take for a casual player to explore new content with the Crusader and indulge their addiction for a while, then open Steam to look for something else.)

 However, you're the one with the grips on actual numbers and how TLF is developing. I'm fairly confident that the nature of TLF, unlike Valley 1, decreases the impact of D3X.

As for why the game didn't recover after that, mighta been because Diablo was pretty pricey upon release, at full retail.  Not to mention everyone then obsessing over it.   Only to start an endless litany of complaints over it later, hah.   Or at least that's my logic, anyway, which may or may not actually be logical.

To me, it's the lure of being powerful, set in a time-sink game. The lowest common tactic to increase playtime is to increase the desirability of some goal you think you can reach, but hide the fact that it takes an unknown X-hours to get yourself there. Resolving the RNG hammer was a good argument for the AH's temporary existence, but RMAH kinda trashed it. The people who complain and also the people who really want to play, but get pwn'ed by the harsh justice of RNG. Hence tailored loot in D3X, instead of AH as a solution.
 BTW, partially tailored loot is the norm in D&D-based adventures. Hence lack of complaints in itemisation against Baldurs Gate, etc. You will always get that scroll of Fireball for your wizard some time before or after you need it. You will get a worthwhile item for slaying some great villain, because he's wearing them. A good GM will never taunt you forever.

 Whenever your playing this time-sink, you're not going to play anything else. Also, these games have a same rebound effect after you realise the sheer waste of time that was and stop for a while. After that, there's plenty of new games on offer...
Title: Re: On the New Release Date: March 24th
Post by: Tridus on February 19, 2014, 06:24:19 AM
Grah. Thanks for the heads up on that. We've been more concerned about Titanfall than anything else, but this is also definitely concerning. I doubt that an expansion pack for Diablo 3 could do what Diablo 3 itself did, but I guess with Blizzard one never knows.

I wouldn't count on that. This expansion has a lot of buzz due to all the stuff it's fixing in Diablo 3. It's likely going to be a big deal.

Maybe not Diablo 3 itself big, but big.
Title: Re: On the New Release Date: March 24th
Post by: Misery on February 19, 2014, 07:03:23 AM
Whatever its lack of merits, D3 was still a product of the giant called Blizzard, and it's still a time-sink game. Chris and I bought the game after auction-house shutdown announcement, and there's a lot of things they are doing in D3X to try to promote casual play at all stages of leveling.
 Still going to make an impact on everyone else around the date, IMO, despite reduced hype. Smaller then D3, but still - most players aren't exclusive to their chosen genres.

 The buying public appears to have a relatively short memory span so I would normally think going after their launch date by ~ 2 weeks would be better. (The time that I estimated it would take for a casual player to explore new content with the Crusader and indulge their addiction for a while, then open Steam to look for something else.)

 However, you're the one with the grips on actual numbers and how TLF is developing. I'm fairly confident that the nature of TLF, unlike Valley 1, decreases the impact of D3X.

As for why the game didn't recover after that, mighta been because Diablo was pretty pricey upon release, at full retail.  Not to mention everyone then obsessing over it.   Only to start an endless litany of complaints over it later, hah.   Or at least that's my logic, anyway, which may or may not actually be logical.

To me, it's the lure of being powerful, set in a time-sink game. The lowest common tactic to increase playtime is to increase the desirability of some goal you think you can reach, but hide the fact that it takes an unknown X-hours to get yourself there. Resolving the RNG hammer was a good argument for the AH's temporary existence, but RMAH kinda trashed it. The people who complain and also the people who really want to play, but get pwn'ed by the harsh justice of RNG. Hence tailored loot in D3X, instead of AH as a solution.
 BTW, partially tailored loot is the norm in D&D-based adventures. Hence lack of complaints in itemisation against Baldurs Gate, etc. You will always get that scroll of Fireball for your wizard some time before or after you need it. You will get a worthwhile item for slaying some great villain, because he's wearing them. A good GM will never taunt you forever.

 Whenever your playing this time-sink, you're not going to play anything else. Also, these games have a same rebound effect after you realise the sheer waste of time that was and stop for a while. After that, there's plenty of new games on offer...

I always wonder why people manage to get so absurdly addicted to one of those that it really DOES become a time-sink, causing them to inevitably burn out of it totally.  MMOs do this too.  Doesnt really happen with me, since I cant focus on just one thing at a time very well; if I played JUST that over and over for even just a few days it'd drive me crazy.

It seems a good game to me, from what little I got to play of it.... when it came out originally I still couldnt use the damn mouse well because of my arm, which lowered how much I could mess with it.... I'd actually put together an extremely complicated setup of side-programs to make it playable with a controller instead, which worked well.... but then my account got eaten.   Blizzard, ahhh... they make good games, but their security on their servers is AWFUL.   I havent gotten another copy of that game yet, though I plan to.

Still, from what I've seen of the expansion, it's looking to become pretty good, and for all of the whining and such, which was at least somewhat exaggerated, there's still a bloody huge community for the game.   Spacing the release of TLF out from it is definitely a good idea.
Title: Re: On the New Release Date: March 24th
Post by: Mick on February 19, 2014, 09:29:29 AM
As much as I want to see TFL released because it sounds unique and fun, I'm forced to agree that Diablo is not something you want to toy with. Even thought it should have *less* of an impact being an expansion, it still is at a whole other level than everything else.

It's too bad it couldn't hit the old date, because I think the time before such releases is actually a prime time to grab impulse buyer I know when I'm waiting for huge releases, I tend to buy more other stuff leading up to it because I'm looking for *anything* to help the time pass faster - whereas afterwards.. not so much.
Title: Re: On the New Release Date: March 24th
Post by: Billick on February 19, 2014, 09:44:31 AM
I'm glad I'm not the only one who thinks Titanfall looks terrible.  Of course it will sell a bajillion copies because graffix + marketing = sales.

I'm not sure you can really worry too much about other things coming out, because there's always going to be something big coming around the corner.

Somewhat related, Drox Operative just got released on Steam.
Title: Re: On the New Release Date: March 24th
Post by: x4000 on February 19, 2014, 10:16:11 AM
We are also toying with the idea of the 17th or the 19th of March.

In all honesty, it would be great to push back the release of TLF until April, purely from a "look at the other games that are going to bother us" standpoint, but to do that we'd have to come up with another $45k in gross sales between now and the end of March.  That's something that... might be possible... but we just cashed in a ton of our cards doing a lot of steam sales and so forth recently, and our total take from that was in the ballpark of what we'd need to repeat, even with the smaller staff.

I do still have some personal funds that I could dip into if a March release just looked absolutely catastrophic, but doing so would essentially be removing yet another safety net that I and Arcen personally have.  In some respects that is what safety nets are for, but it then puts even more burden on TLF to earn well, and greatly reduces our security if it only does moderately.  It's a very scary prospect.

So right now I'm not really sure what to do.
Title: Re: On the New Release Date: March 24th
Post by: echo2361 on February 19, 2014, 11:17:19 AM
March 17th or 19th sounds like a good idea to me. That puts you between the releases of Titanfall and the D3 expansion with no real competition on PC's that I can see.

Personally I've been playing the Titanfall beta on my xbox and I've enjoyed it quite a bit, but I'm the kind of gamer who looks for different things in my purchases. When it comes to my PC games I like strategy games of the 4x or RTS variety. However, when I only have ten minutes to play something instead of an hour or two I like to have a fast-paced shooter/adventure game to play on my xbox so Titanfall fits me perfectly. Don't get me wrong, I am an old school BattleTech fan and when I think of mechs I will also look back lovingly at my monstrously slow Atlas in the Mechwarrior games, but there is something to be said about having fast, agile mechs like in Titanfall that can add a lot to a game's pace and style.

Getting back on track with the topic of this thread I imagine for most people picking up Titanfall and TLF wouldn't be mutually exclusive, especially since some people like myself will be picking up the former on the xbox instead of the PC. Also, with Titanfall being more about fast matches and quick action, as opposed to the time sink that D3's expansion will be, it makes more sense to launch after Titanfall because people won't be as invested in grinding away for hours into it like they will be in D3's expansion. I'm still on the fence about picking up the D3 expansion myself, but I know if I do it will be dominating my PC time for days/weeks after I do so it would be best to see TLF launch before then.
Title: Re: On the New Release Date: March 24th
Post by: Tridus on February 19, 2014, 12:22:54 PM
I'm glad I'm not the only one who thinks Titanfall looks terrible.  Of course it will sell a bajillion copies because graffix + marketing = sales.

I know a few people playing the beta, and they're having a lot of fun. So clearly some people think it's more than graphics and marketing.
Title: Re: On the New Release Date: March 24th
Post by: Tridus on February 19, 2014, 12:27:53 PM
We are also toying with the idea of the 17th or the 19th of March.

In all honesty, it would be great to push back the release of TLF until April, purely from a "look at the other games that are going to bother us" standpoint, but to do that we'd have to come up with another $45k in gross sales between now and the end of March.  That's something that... might be possible... but we just cashed in a ton of our cards doing a lot of steam sales and so forth recently, and our total take from that was in the ballpark of what we'd need to repeat, even with the smaller staff.

I do still have some personal funds that I could dip into if a March release just looked absolutely catastrophic, but doing so would essentially be removing yet another safety net that I and Arcen personally have.  In some respects that is what safety nets are for, but it then puts even more burden on TLF to earn well, and greatly reduces our security if it only does moderately.  It's a very scary prospect.

So right now I'm not really sure what to do.

Anecdotally, it might be worth trying to find a time with a clear window of a couple of weeks. I mean, I'm in the target market for TLF and want to play it, but if it comes out at the same time as Reaper of Souls? I've got two friends ready to play that with me, so there's no chance. Then also stack up Titanfall, inFamous: Second Son, and some less big games like a Blazblue sequel and it's just not a great time at all.

Now, I'll just pick TLF up later, but I'm a fan. Someone less interested who gets their first look and then immediately goes to play Diablo or Titanfall likely won't come back. Those are some real heavyweights that cast a long shadow.
Title: Re: On the New Release Date: March 24th
Post by: PokerChen on February 19, 2014, 02:07:26 PM
 On the 17/19th date... yes, it would be grand if you can reach a launchable product before D3X. No pressure or anything. :P

 Don't try to hit it by skimping over major QA though, don't forget that. In my opinion, the impact of fun-crushing bugs on release is a bigger influence long term than any other concurrent games. Affects reviews - which stay on the internet forever, poor Stardrive, - gamer impressions, etc. For instance, my first experience with Airland Battle involved restarting a campaign multiple times after winning a mission or two. Never went back, even though I like the game and played its predecessor semi-regularly in MP. The issue is in the player's head: you might have their money, but you hurt your existing reputation for future games.

 So, just keep working your magic and see how things work out.

 EDIT: I seem to remember saying the same not skimping QA thing before..
Title: Re: On the New Release Date: March 24th
Post by: Misery on February 19, 2014, 07:59:52 PM
Quote
I'm not sure you can really worry too much about other things coming out, because there's always going to be something big coming around the corner.


While that's true to a point, games like Diablo and Titanfall are pretty rare.   Few games recieve THAT level of attention, and having them coming out kinda close to one another isnt going to help the situation with TLF one bit.

It's a nasty problem, really.  I think it seriously could cause another situation like what happened with Valley 1.  Sure the game here is very different from what that one was and the art is better according to most, but when it's considered in the presence of those behemoths, this fact is likely to not matter much.   Bloody obnoxious as that is.

Feh.  Damn stupid situation, really. 


I'm glad I'm not the only one who thinks Titanfall looks terrible.  Of course it will sell a bajillion copies because graffix + marketing = sales.

Sadly, yes, that's likely to be true.  And then it'll spawn endless dull sequels, with the same "these really are mechs, honest, we totally didn't just enlarge the soldiers and make them look like robots" gameplay.  Ugh.  I'm just going to pretend it doesnt exist from this point on. 
Title: Re: On the New Release Date: March 24th
Post by: Aklyon on February 19, 2014, 08:55:29 PM
Enlarged robotic soldiers are called exoskeletons, I'm pretty sure. Either way, Titanfall looks interesting to watch someone else play. Not quite interesting enough to buy for me however.
Title: Re: On the New Release Date: March 24th
Post by: chemical_art on February 20, 2014, 04:04:19 PM
Do not underestimate the power of the d3 expansion. its the only expansion i know of that has computer hardware companies offering deals to get ready for it. it is going to take a very large akoi.t of gaming bandwidth
Title: Re: On the New Release Date: March 24th
Post by: x4000 on February 20, 2014, 04:14:09 PM
Thanks guys -- that is all excellent perspective.  I am going to be... seriously considering various alternatives to being stuck in the middle of all that.  None of that is going to risk any further staffing changes or anything, but it may push release into April.  Possibly we'd do a public on-our-site-only release of a public beta in March instead of a full launch, not sure.  Or we may chance it (from a wider market perspective) and go for mid-March after all.  Just really not sure yet, but I'm taking this really seriously.
Title: Re: On the New Release Date: March 24th
Post by: Penumbra on February 20, 2014, 04:44:31 PM
Could you open pre-orders early? You would get the money from all the people who are going to buy TLF no matter what sooner.
Title: Re: On the New Release Date: March 24th
Post by: x4000 on February 20, 2014, 04:58:27 PM
Could you open pre-orders early? You would get the money from all the people who are going to buy TLF no matter what sooner.

We could, although in past experience that's something that is unlikely to bridge the gap unless there was visibility on the Steam storefront.  We could easily raise a few thousand dollars taking your suggestion there, but we need closer to $40k gross.  Because of... math complexities... if I pull the money out of my back pocket it's more like $20k that we need, if even that, to bridge a month.

But either way, that would be very unrealistic expectations on preorder performance based on past preorders; we'd have to see something like 5x higher sales than we've ever seen before during a preorder period.  Which is certainly something that could happen -- I mean, anything is possible, really, when you're talking about loads of people like this -- but the likelihood of that being a full solution is pretty low.

But it certainly might be part of a larger set of steps that get us to a full solution, and that's what I was referring to with an open beta -- the sort of open beta where anyone who preorders it gets into the beta, basically, like we did with almost all our games prior to I believe Skyward Collapse.
Title: Re: On the New Release Date: March 24th
Post by: Cyprene on February 20, 2014, 10:56:58 PM
Is it gonna be playable and fun in beta?  It sounds immensely complex, and like it would need a ton of fine tuning to get right.  I'm sure if you can get it right, it'll be great, but I know I'd be worried about purchasing it before launch. 
Title: Re: On the New Release Date: March 24th
Post by: Misery on February 21, 2014, 12:32:09 AM
Is it gonna be playable and fun in beta?  It sounds immensely complex, and like it would need a ton of fine tuning to get right.  I'm sure if you can get it right, it'll be great, but I know I'd be worried about purchasing it before launch.

Honestly, I'm sure it will be.  I've yet to be disappointed in anything they've made, and with this game I'm sure they'll be doing their best to make sure it's good and that it's balanced.  And us testers will be doing our best to remain useful by giving proper feedback and suggestions.   

One way or another there's bound to be LOTS of tweaking, as always, to make sure it comes out right.  They're good at that :D
Title: Re: On the New Release Date: March 24th
Post by: Vyndicu on February 21, 2014, 03:10:09 AM
Amid all this talk of diablo 3/titanfall, I am surprise nobody has mention this tiny bit. But then again this is unconfirmed and may not come to pass.

There is a rumor that Diablo 3 may deploy the long awaited 2.0 patch (implement major changes to items and leveling) just two weeks from now, as in March 4th. If that happens it will likely hog up all of the media coverage until March 25th.

Edit: Apparently the patch is actually "Soon™" accord to tweets.

http://www.diablofans.com/forums/diablo-iii-general-forums/diablo-iii-general-discussion/80882-2-0-will-be-live-in-two-weeks-wings-of-valor-for

I am sad to hear that you are running into irl issues. I hope you find a way to sort a decent launch date.
Title: Re: On the New Release Date: March 24th
Post by: x4000 on February 21, 2014, 12:11:23 PM
Honestly I think the game is fun NOW, but there are some obvious snags and un-fun bits that need to be shaved off in the next couple of weeks in particular.  As Misery noted, that sort of thing is a big part of the focus of our company.


So... here's an idea.  What do people think of us doing a Kickstarter for something like $30k to push the release date back into April and basically add in an expansion's worth of new content while we're at it?  Basically adding things like ground combat or similar as the basic stuff, and then having stretch goals that add even more.  We could add some incentives around ship design and so forth, potentially.

This would let us do three things:
1. Get a beta started in March, as noted.  With a public demo of the beta at the time.
2. Get financing for the project delay.
3. Make it worth our while to actually do lots more fulltime development on the project during the delay period.
4. Give players basically a "free" expansion wrapped into the main game if the kickstarter is funded.  Obviously that is not free, since money is involved via the kickstarter itself.
5. Oh, and this would help to get yet more press for the game in a variety of ways, I'm sure.  Although that could backfire if the project is NOT funded.
Title: Re: On the New Release Date: March 24th
Post by: Mick on February 21, 2014, 12:36:43 PM
It sounds like an interesting idea, but how realistic are those funding expectations?
Title: Re: On the New Release Date: March 24th
Post by: x4000 on February 21, 2014, 12:59:12 PM
Not sure.  And internally, the more that we've talked about it, the more we cumulatively dislike the idea.  We're looking at better alternatives than crowdfunding.

The irony is that, with a good release, the game should realistically earn 5x that in its first month.  And a middling-poor release would earn 2x that.  But when you put that number in front of people in a crowdfunding sense, suddenly it seems very large.  And it is, in that context in particular.
Title: Re: On the New Release Date: March 24th
Post by: Billick on February 21, 2014, 01:15:57 PM
Have you guys considered doing Early Access?
Title: Re: On the New Release Date: March 24th
Post by: x4000 on February 21, 2014, 01:19:21 PM
Have you guys considered doing Early Access?

I... am not sure what is public knowledge and what is covered by NDA.  So what I will say is that that's not an option for us for both internal and external reasons, and even if it were, the wisdom of that would be questionable for... various external reasons.  I am sorry to be so vague on that.  :-\

That said, doing a public for-pay beta is something that is possible without it being Early Access, so it is highly likely we will do that in mid or late March if we're pushing back the timetable here.
Title: Re: On the New Release Date: March 24th
Post by: nas1m on February 21, 2014, 02:00:48 PM
It sounds like an interesting idea, but how realistic are those funding expectations?
This would be my main concern here as well :-\.

Don't get me wrong, I guess it's pretty sure that you would get backed by the majority of us faithful Arcenites in no time, but I am unsure as to whether we would be able to give you a good enough start for your campaign that actually gets enough fresh people onto the train that think "Yeah, this one will surely make it so let's back it".

Just my two cents, though.
Title: Re: On the New Release Date: March 24th
Post by: Professor Paul1290 on February 21, 2014, 02:34:21 PM
I'm strongly against the Kickstarter idea, I think Kickstarter involves making promises to people who have a strong tendency to blow those promises out of proportion and fault you for not meeting those later.

Maybe I'm looking this a bit too negatively, but from what I've seen Kickstarter projects that aren't exceedingly awesome from the get-go get more negative word-of-mouth reputation for their faults than other games of similar quality.

Title: Re: On the New Release Date: March 24th
Post by: Castruccio on February 21, 2014, 02:36:54 PM
30k for the Kickstarter could be risking it.  If you did 15k on KS and you put up 15 from your security fund, then you wouldn't be in nearly as much danger of tarnishing your reputation with KS and anything over 15 would be icing on the cake.  In other words, if you do KS I'd start with something more modest than 30, just in case  (then if you hit 30 you could tell everyone that you DOUBLED your KS goal!).  But I don't think you necessarily need to rule out completely the idea of KS.

Title: Re: On the New Release Date: March 24th
Post by: Tridus on February 21, 2014, 03:03:47 PM
30k on Kickstarter is not a huge amount of money for an established developer, if you can get the game covered in some places.
Title: Re: On the New Release Date: March 24th
Post by: Professor Paul1290 on February 21, 2014, 03:05:49 PM
Perhaps spouting a but much from the negative camp, I think Kickstarter is very much in the part of gaming culture (the majority unfortunately) where having a "poorly received game" is worse than having "no games at all".

As awful as it might be to say, I think the fact that Valley 1+2 and Shattered Haven are out there in the wild and have the reception they have might make Kickstarter success unlikely, regardless of how much I personally enjoyed both.
Title: Re: On the New Release Date: March 24th
Post by: Castruccio on February 21, 2014, 04:31:18 PM
30k on Kickstarter is not a huge amount of money for an established developer, if you can get the game covered in some places.


I think the best strategy is to go for a modest amount and really try to blow everyone away if you exceed it.  See this very succesful example:  https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/64409699/ftl-faster-than-light
Title: Re: On the New Release Date: March 24th
Post by: x4000 on February 21, 2014, 04:43:04 PM
Just to be clear, we've taken kickstarter considerations off the table.  :)
Title: Re: On the New Release Date: March 24th
Post by: junker154 on February 21, 2014, 07:25:16 PM
Just to be clear, we've taken kickstarter considerations off the table.  :)

Early access could be a decent idea, it usually boosts the media coverage by a long shot. There are tons of popular youtube channels and various gaming journalism sites that usually cover the game that's currently being released in early access. This could be vital for marketing and getting the name out. Although early access is usually considered somewhat bad by a large majority of people in the gaming community, due to all the various games that end up there half finished. I also like that you guys actually never put something in early access, that deserves some respect.

As for the kickstarter campaign, I think that was a better move to just drop it. Fully justifying a kickstarter campaign due to the release of the diablo expansion, the "free" expansion and all the other various reasons is kind of hard to pull off. People will perhaps consider this is a cash grab of some sorts.
Title: Re: On the New Release Date: March 24th
Post by: Histidine on February 21, 2014, 09:49:50 PM
I'd suggest taking a loan, but I have horrible visions of TLF not making as much money as it should and Arcen Games getting repossessed as a result.
Title: Re: On the New Release Date: March 24th
Post by: x4000 on February 21, 2014, 09:57:13 PM
With internal money stuff of that sort, don't sweat it. I'm very conservative when it comes to core finances. I would never take a loan I could not cover. The worst that would happen would be the collapse of more staff -- very bad indeed, but still.
Title: Re: On the New Release Date: March 24th
Post by: Cyborg on February 21, 2014, 10:50:02 PM
I would never take a loan I could not cover.


Also known as pulling a Curt Schilling.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/38_Studios
Title: Re: On the New Release Date: March 24th
Post by: x4000 on February 22, 2014, 08:30:29 AM
Yeah, whew, that was a real mess.  Say what you will about me, but I actually do have more sense than that. ;)
Title: Re: On the New Release Date: March 24th
Post by: Wingflier on February 22, 2014, 09:23:47 AM
It's a tough call.

I don't think the D3 expansion is going to have the same effect as the base game did, but there's no doubt that it'll have an impact on the other games out there.

Then again, is waiting until April really going to increase the sales significantly enough, even a month later, to merit the time and money lost by waiting?

Honestly this game would have been perfect to release in early February. I know things didn't turn out that way, but you guys just have bad luck with releasing your indie games around Blizzard titles :P
Title: Re: On the New Release Date: March 24th
Post by: x4000 on February 22, 2014, 09:45:23 AM
Well, we won't just sit on our hands when it comes to the extra month.  I'll be working on polish and whatnot with TLF during that period, but most likely the rest of the staff will be focused on either an AI War or a Bionic Dues expansion, very quietly, for release in May.  Gives us a chance to get ahead on things.  Also will give me a chance to get ahead on the design for our next full title, too.  So there are some benefits there.

We also would wind up with more advance press and more launch reviews, which typically is a good thing if the game is good.  And April has been very good to us in past years, actually.  April and May both have been very prime times for us to release titles that sold extremely well.  October has been historically as well, but that obviously did not work out last year with Bionic, so either that was something specific to that game, or just bad luck in general.

I'm pretty certain we are pushing the date back at this point.  It lessens the risk considerably in terms of getting stomped by AAA titles, and it won't increase the cost of the TLF project correspondingly since the vast bulk of our resources will be focused on further projects that will generate money starting in May, anyhow.
Title: Re: On the New Release Date: March 24th
Post by: MooN on February 22, 2014, 09:56:48 AM
Kickstarter wouldnt have been a good idea good call on that, but how about pre-orders on the website, maybe to get access to the current versions or different. Of course this does mostly attract people who would have bought the game anyway and are aware of it. But this might help to get some initial sales (obviously those people will lower the launch day sales but well) maybe some of us will do a little (p)review on the game (after getting the hang of it) to attract some awareness for the game. Since the major issue to me is not diablo 3 or whatever... people will buy these games if they want to anyway and the people who are willing to buy d3 for example and the last federation will do so regardless. The important thing in that matter is the money, if u can only afford one well then u will decide on one no matter what launch day they have (meaning same day or one after another) and buy just that, if u can afford more well it really is a no brainer you just buy what u want i guess ^^. Since this is a niche genre for the most part awareness is key not the date. People need to be aware that this game is gonna come and why they should look forward to it, or even that they can jump in right now to see what its like... maybe through some commented gameplay vids or lets plays (seems to be everyones favourite) In my opinion some initial (p)reviews and stuff are the key to hook people interest and maybe early access is the way to go in that regard. I just wanted to throw this out and maybe fuel this conversation again (dont hesitate to bash^^) since Iam really looking forward to the game and want it do well so we all can enjoy more awesome games from you guys :)) Oh and i forgot to mention if u decide to push the release to a later date this might help you through these days :)


have a nice weekend everyone :))
Title: Re: On the New Release Date: March 24th
Post by: x4000 on February 22, 2014, 10:12:24 AM
We will definitely be doing early orders with beta access through our site starting in March, too.  Mid-march, most likely.  There again, it lets us build awareness by having many batches of press about the game, rather than just one or two.  Hopefully that winds up working well in the end. :)
Title: Re: On the New Release Date: March 24th
Post by: MooN on February 22, 2014, 10:19:55 AM
I wish u guys best of luck :) and look forward to my early order :)
Title: Re: On the New Release Date: March 24th
Post by: x4000 on February 22, 2014, 10:32:04 AM
Thank you very much! :)
Title: Re: On the New Release Date: March 24th
Post by: Pepisolo on February 22, 2014, 02:33:49 PM
Here's a crazy idea that I haven't thought through at all, and thus is probably silly, but... you could focus on the BD expansion for release during late March, which would get some more money in, and then try to get The Last Federation out some time in April. Just an idea.

Oh, another thing. If April is going to be the date for The Last Federation, then what's the thinking about the gaming landscape around that time? I had a quick look at a few schedules and early April seemed pretty dead to me apart from The Elder Scrolls Online. Any other potential AAA titles due that could impact on The Last Federation's launch?
Title: Re: On the New Release Date: March 24th
Post by: x4000 on February 22, 2014, 04:46:32 PM
This far April is looking good.

In terms of an actual release of a BD expansion in March, we could do it but not without losing all momentum on TLF. We'd also fall into the same press blackout period, which would very much raise the likelihood of that being the last BD expansion, as happened with Nihon when we released that in an I opportune time of year (August).
Title: Re: On the New Release Date: March 24th
Post by: chemical_art on February 22, 2014, 07:39:24 PM
as happened with Nihon when we released that in an I opportune time of year (August).

I've been meaning to say something, but I would consider SC an annomaly of sorts.

Not the best place to say this, but I've been meaning to say it for a while. SC suffered from a weakness, at least for me. Once a game has been played once, there isn't enough, fundamentally, to warrant another playthrough. Similarly with BD. There just isn't enough different things to hold my difference. For that reason, expansions seem to hold of short interest, and since I already lost interest, I didn't bother reading anything about the expansion whatsoever. I played a total of four games of SC. Two were beta games. One was a full game, and I delightfully played told on the beta thread the game was together. I played once more, barely for 20 turns. Then interest fell off completely. Even knowing there was an expansion, it wasn't enough to even read what the expansion was about, that was how bored I was with the game. Each game had some shallow things to seem interesting, but the core game was too similar from game to game, leading to the [in]correct assumption an expansion was not going to fix this. BD was even worst, use X tactic against Y target, rinse and repeat. Boring.

Anyway, it seems THF has enough depth to prevent this, but fundamental and not shallow variance in game-play for the casual player at casual settings is what going to make it not be a flash in the pan game, I think. To put it a different way, if at casual difficulties it is not necessary to change your tactics you may avoid the problem of a game being too hard, but find it also be too boring. It is essential to thread the needle between the two. Combat will also have to address this: If the mode is too same-y (for lack of a better word) interest will fall off fast (at least for me).
Title: Re: On the New Release Date: March 24th
Post by: x4000 on February 22, 2014, 07:43:47 PM
Yep, I understand.
Title: Re: On the New Release Date: March 24th
Post by: P3X-639 on February 22, 2014, 08:58:15 PM

We also would wind up with more advance press and more launch reviews, which typically is a good thing if the game is good.  And April has been very good to us in past years, actually.  April and May both have been very prime times for us to release titles that sold extremely well.  October has been historically as well, but that obviously did not work out last year with Bionic, so either that was something specific to that game, or just bad luck in general.

Long time fan, first time poster. Just wanted to weigh in on this one.

From my memory, there was a lot of stuff going on during October. Quite a few big name games I think, Ass Creed 4, Battlefield 4, the whole Console Holy Wars thing was still going with the PS4 to release next month. I remember hearing very little about the game from the game newsy sources I frequent. Rock Paper Shotgun is all I can really think of. And even that was buried pretty quickly iirc. What surprised me was very little YouTube coverage. I remember TB even mentioned your game briefly during his PAX coverage as something he was really looking forward to, but a video never materialized. My memory sucks, so I'm a bit weak on specifics, but I really do clearly remember that I heard very little about the game. Which was a shame because I thought it was amazing.

Hopefully everything works out. I'm pulling for you guys :)

Just a few scattered last thoughts: I like the idea of just an on site early Beta. Personally though, I'd be leery of making the beta hype too big. I think having most of the hype happen during actual release would be better. I sort of judge this off of past beta experiences; it seems like it's hard to get word out for the full release if there's a big deal about "beta right now!"  I'm thinking of games like Neverwinter and Mechwarrior Online, where the news of "official official release" doesn't seem to get much attention since a lot of attention happened during early release. Admittedly, this sounds like it'll be much shorter than most so the comparison could be way off. Plus if it's released during the media blitz of D3x and Titanfall, this whole thought processes might be moot.

Apologies if this seems weirdly worded. Trying to squeeze this in before dinner while the thoughts are fresh . ;)
Title: Re: On the New Release Date: March 24th
Post by: Misery on February 22, 2014, 09:47:43 PM
as happened with Nihon when we released that in an I opportune time of year (August).

I've been meaning to say something, but I would consider SC an annomaly of sorts.

Not the best place to say this, but I've been meaning to say it for a while. SC suffered from a weakness, at least for me. Once a game has been played once, there isn't enough, fundamentally, to warrant another playthrough. Similarly with BD. There just isn't enough different things to hold my difference. For that reason, expansions seem to hold of short interest, and since I already lost interest, I didn't bother reading anything about the expansion whatsoever. I played a total of four games of SC. Two were beta games. One was a full game, and I delightfully played told on the beta thread the game was together. I played once more, barely for 20 turns. Then interest fell off completely. Even knowing there was an expansion, it wasn't enough to even read what the expansion was about, that was how bored I was with the game. Each game had some shallow things to seem interesting, but the core game was too similar from game to game, leading to the [in]correct assumption an expansion was not going to fix this. BD was even worst, use X tactic against Y target, rinse and repeat. Boring.

Anyway, it seems THF has enough depth to prevent this, but fundamental and not shallow variance in game-play for the casual player at casual settings is what going to make it not be a flash in the pan game, I think. To put it a different way, if at casual difficulties it is not necessary to change your tactics you may avoid the problem of a game being too hard, but find it also be too boring. It is essential to thread the needle between the two. Combat will also have to address this: If the mode is too same-y (for lack of a better word) interest will fall off fast (at least for me).


This brings up a good point....

I do think that the default difficulty should have been a bit higher with BD, because that's correct, you dont need to really think too much with that one when it's played with the difficulty set really low like the default is.  All of the strategic/tactical stuff for the most part tends to only show up at higher ones; you just dont need any of it.  The same was true with SC to a lesser extent.   It had nothing to do with a lack of variety or anything like that.... I've played both all the way through a bunch of times now, and my necessary tactics and such can be very dramatically different each time..... but then, I'm playing on the highest difficulties.  The lower ones would have put me to sleep, honestly.

It might be something worth keeping in mind for this one.  This very same thing that chemical_art mentions here is a complaint that I heard from a few others as well with BD, the whole "but this is too simple, I just shoot everything once and I win, real easy" which gives them the wrong impression of the game as a whole.  That they could simply turn up the difficulty never seems to occur to them (ever) until I point it out.  That bit baffles me a tad (okay, baffles me a lot), but....  yeah.   My point is, keeping the default challenge level higher for this one than in the previous couple of games might be a good thing to do.

Title: Re: On the New Release Date: March 24th
Post by: Cyprene on February 23, 2014, 01:12:29 AM
Well, I'm not so sure. 

I'm not a hardcore gamer, and I've never even beat AI War on a difficulty higher than 6.  I have the grand strategic instincts of a weasel.  I send my big ball o' dudes around, and look for places with neat things to find.  I play with all ship types enabled, even though I have no idea how to effectively use over half of them.  I love finding an Advanced Research Station and seeing what weird ships I get.  I love the wormholes and the little mini-quests within them, and I love my flagship that can level up and transform.  I love the lore and world-building, and how the game manages to do so much with so little.  My typical endgame is building up a fleet of 2000 or so ships, along with my awesome flagship, and just dramatically hammering at the AI homeworld.  I always imagine myself on the bridge of a command ship, steadily battering down the shields of the enemy fortress as each of its cannon blasts wipes out dozens of my ships.  When I win I always feel like the reincarnation of Napoleon and Alexander the Great combined.  And I can do this without having to feel like an idiot by placing the difficulty on level 1,  because the game is easy to pick up and has a very clear relationship between action and result.  I.E. You died because you didn't put enough turrets around your base.  You died because you provoked the AI when you shouldn't have.  You died because you triggered the Spire Quest and you weren't ready for it.  Each failure gives you immediate information that you can use in your next game, and as long you avoid a bare minimum of stupidity, you can have a good time and not get immediately wiped. 


Recent Arcen games seem to be trending towards a different direction..  I beta test'd Skyward Collapse, and I gamely tried to play it, but games mostly ended with somebody (Usually the Norse, I think?) getting blown up and me not being entirely sure where I screwed up.  I had more or less the same experience with Bionic Dues: I'll do just fine on the first level, and then on the second I'll get blown up by some enemy with rockets with no idea of what I should be doing that I'm not.   I've more or less put the both of them away, and don't know if I'll be going back to them any time soon.   I'm sure that with repeated playthroughs I could go back and figure it out, but it would be a lot of blind fumbling before I started having fun.  Both of these games seemed to have the same "Play it and fail, play it and fail, and maybe by the 15th game you'll stop failing" attitude towards difficulty.  It feels like playing Go against a veteran player: there's a lot of depth, but none of it is clear to you at the start, and you're going to lose over and over until that depth becomes apparent to you. 

I've got similar hopes for Last Federation.  It sounds like the world is fun and well fleshed-out, and I love the concept of running around in my small, elite ship and doing cool things as part of a master plan.  I've read in the promotional materials that you get to put rockets on a moon and slam it into a planet.  I'm not sure why you would want to do this, but I can't wait to try it.  I've held off on signing up for the alpha, even though I did for two of Arcen's last three games, because I'm worried about the difficulty and the level of time and frustration needed to understand the game properly. 

Now, some people love this kinda thing.  Witness the popularity of Dark Souls, or I wanna by the Guy, or any of those sorts of ultra-difficult games.  And if that's the target market that Arcen is aiming for, then more power to them.  They're certainly under no obligation to make games specifically tailored to me.  But a forum like this is naturally going to attract a more hardcore crowd, so I thought I would throw my opinion in as it may be underrepresented here: I don't want a high base difficulty.  I want to have fun with it out of the box, and I don't want to have to turn it down to "So easy a goat can beat it" to do so. 
Title: Re: On the New Release Date: March 24th
Post by: Misery on February 23, 2014, 01:26:11 AM
Well, I'm not so sure. 

I'm not a hardcore gamer, and I've never even beat AI War on a difficulty higher than 6.  I have the grand strategic instincts of a weasel.  I send my big ball o' dudes around, and look for places with neat things to find.  I play with all ship types enabled, even though I have no idea how to effectively use over half of them.  I love finding an Advanced Research Station and seeing what weird ships I get.  I love the wormholes and the little mini-quests within them, and I love my flagship that can level up and transform.  I love the lore and world-building, and how the game manages to do so much with so little.  My typical endgame is building up a fleet of 2000 or so ships, along with my awesome flagship, and just dramatically hammering at the AI homeworld.  I always imagine myself on the bridge of a command ship, steadily battering down the shields of the enemy fortress as each of its cannon blasts wipes out dozens of my ships.  When I win I always feel like the reincarnation of Napoleon and Alexander the Great combined.  And I can do this without having to feel like an idiot by placing the difficulty on level 1,  because the game is easy to pick up and has a very clear relationship between action and result.  I.E. You died because you didn't put enough turrets around your base.  You died because you provoked the AI when you shouldn't have.  You died because you triggered the Spire Quest and you weren't ready for it.  Each failure gives you immediate information that you can use in your next game, and as long you avoid a bare minimum of stupidity, you can have a good time and not get immediately wiped. 


Recent Arcen games seem to be trending towards a different direction..  I beta test'd Skyward Collapse, and I gamely tried to play it, but games mostly ended with somebody (Usually the Norse, I think?) getting blown up and me not being entirely sure where I screwed up.  I had more or less the same experience with Bionic Dues: I'll do just fine on the first level, and then on the second I'll get blown up by some enemy with rockets with no idea of what I should be doing that I'm not.   I've more or less put the both of them away, and don't know if I'll be going back to them any time soon.   I'm sure that with repeated playthroughs I could go back and figure it out, but it would be a lot of blind fumbling before I started having fun.  Both of these games seemed to have the same "Play it and fail, play it and fail, and maybe by the 15th game you'll stop failing" attitude towards difficulty.  It feels like playing Go against a veteran player: there's a lot of depth, but none of it is clear to you at the start, and you're going to lose over and over until that depth becomes apparent to you. 

I've got similar hopes for Last Federation.  It sounds like the world is fun and well fleshed-out, and I love the concept of running around in my small, elite ship and doing cool things as part of a master plan.  I've read in the promotional materials that you get to put rockets on a moon and slam it into a planet.  I'm not sure why you would want to do this, but I can't wait to try it.  I've held off on signing up for the alpha, even though I did for two of Arcen's last three games, because I'm worried about the difficulty and the level of time and frustration needed to understand the game properly. 

Now, some people love this kinda thing.  Witness the popularity of Dark Souls, or I wanna by the Guy, or any of those sorts of ultra-difficult games.  And if that's the target market that Arcen is aiming for, then more power to them.  They're certainly under no obligation to make games specifically tailored to me.  But a forum like this is naturally going to attract a more hardcore crowd, so I thought I would throw my opinion in as it may be underrepresented here: I don't want a high base difficulty.  I want to have fun with it out of the box, and I don't want to have to turn it down to "So easy a goat can beat it" to do so.

Oh, I dont disagree with any of that.

The main point though is that if the game isnt REQUIRING that the player use real strategy, and requiring them to adapt to ever-changing situations, the player will never do so, because why do they need to?  The enemy is putting up no fight.  And thus, they continue along, getting more and more thoughts of "Hmph.  I thought this game was supposed to be STRATEGIC and DEEP.  But all I have to do is shoot everything with the same weapon exactly once!  This game doesnt at all match up to what it's said to be.  This developer isnt very good."

AI War, to me, isnt a very good example.  That game in particular has a mean learning curve.... just getting the very BASICS down is very hard for many players.  How can you formulate strategies at all, even exceedingly simple ones, when you're having trouble learning the mechanics at all?  A game like BD isnt like this.  That game explains itself very easily.  Players can easily understand the fundamentals, and from there they are in good position to really start learning what they can DO with those fundamentals.  If the game is challenging them with a very real possibility of defeat, they're pushed to EXPAND upon these ideas, which brings more and more of the game's depth to them.  If they ARENT being pushed towards that, the depth simply remains out of sight, as they're not getting any closer to it. From there, they start believing the depth does not exist.

I'm not saying that a game like that should be defaulting to "YOU DIE NOW" or something like Risk of Rain's aptly named "HAHAHAHA" difficulty level.   But for a game like the sort Arcen makes, there needs to be default challenge, enough to make average players push themselves to learn in order to succeed, for the depth of the game to make itself apparent.  BD in particular defaulted WAY too low, and thus often gives out incorrect impressions of itself.
Title: Re: On the New Release Date: March 24th
Post by: Lancefighter on February 23, 2014, 04:51:14 AM
Hi friends. Just wanted to say Hi. Read that other thing you guys had to do and was really sad. This month does indeed seem to suck.. and I hate to pile on more random things, but theres a Path of Exile expansion happening early march, and everyone should try PoE :D Its like diable, BUT FREE! (and better).

Oh yeah the other bit. I dunno, I am looking forward to the game and will probably buy it on release,but I've never been particularly good at getting others to do the same. Honestly I've just kinda been squatting in irc telling the occasional person to show up that theres nobody who actually plays aiwar there :(

Mostly wanted to say hi! :D we are all actually pretty looking forward to TLF in the chat. And by all I mean all like three of us that actually talk regularly.
Title: Re: On the New Release Date: March 24th
Post by: Cyborg on February 23, 2014, 10:27:59 AM
I've read in the promotional materials that you get to put rockets on a moon and slam it into a planet.  I'm not sure why you would want to do this, but I can't wait to try it.


 :D


As to your other point, I think what the gist of it is, if games are like tic-tac-toe, nobody wants to play them because the game is already played before you play it.
Title: Re: On the New Release Date: March 24th
Post by: Pepisolo on February 23, 2014, 04:39:06 PM
Quote
In terms of an actual release of a BD expansion in March, we could do it but not without losing all momentum on TLF. We'd also fall into the same press blackout period, which would very much raise the likelihood of that being the last BD expansion, as happened with Nihon when we released that in an I opportune time of year (August).

Yeah, might as well get TLF and all expansions released at the absolute most optimum time if you can afford to wait.
Title: Re: On the New Release Date: March 24th
Post by: x4000 on February 24, 2014, 10:29:11 AM
@P3X-639: Welcome to the forums!  And thanks for the thoughts, that all makes a lot of sense.

Lots of good comments from everyone here.

A few brief points from my end:

1. Yep, we're moving to April.
2. We'll worry about the finances end of it, without Kickstarter.
3. I totally get the whole thing with Skyward and with Bionic about them being either "there's no strategy" or "wow this is hard," with no real middle ground.
4. With AI War, I think that the game was robust enough that even at a low level where it was not overwhelmingly hard, there was a sense of real strategy.
5. I think that with TLF, it's going to fit more into the mold of AI War.  It's just more that sort of game in general.
Title: Re: On the New Release Date: March 24th
Post by: junker154 on February 24, 2014, 09:35:35 PM
I thought that AI War was easy to learn and hard to master, which is generally the type of game that I enjoy a lot. Furthermore the customizable options let's you play around with the different variables that influence the difficulty of the game.

For instance you can simply disable all the more advanced ship types, which makes it far easier to get into. The AI is extremely customizable and allows for experimentation, the galaxy can be greatly adjusted. Overall it's far more welcoming to new players. Afterwards you can play with more advanced features. Also the game does a great job at explaining things.

Skyward Collapse felt more frustrating than difficult, at least for me. I do hope that the new game will be a major success for you guys!
Title: Re: On the New Release Date: March 24th
Post by: fishy on February 24, 2014, 11:40:01 PM

5. I think that with TLF, it's going to fit more into the mold of AI War.  It's just more that sort of game in general.


I think that is fantastic, and its a great way to market the game as well.
Title: Re: On the New Release Date: March 24th
Post by: Vyndicu on February 25, 2014, 01:54:38 PM
Look like I was right about the diablo 3 "2.0 loot/paragon" coming out early!

@x4000

I want to make sure you were fully aware that if you tried an early March (4th to 18th) launch date then it was likely that you would be competing with diablo 3 for media coverage. Not that diablo 3 wasn't fun or anything.

P.S. Put that diablo 3 game down and out of sight!
Title: Re: On the New Release Date: March 24th
Post by: x4000 on February 25, 2014, 04:13:27 PM
Nice that that came out already!  That gets it further away from our own stuff in early April, then.  I actually don't have Diablo 3 or any interest in it, so no worries there. :)
Title: Re: On the New Release Date: March 24th
Post by: ScrObot on February 25, 2014, 10:38:51 PM
The 2.0.1 patch came out today, but the expansion is still coming out next month.
Title: Re: On the New Release Date: March 24th
Post by: x4000 on February 26, 2014, 08:28:38 AM
Right, I know -- but having a double-whammy next month would have been worse.  Having people to some extent "get it out of their system" partly now, and then the rest of it next month, is better than one giant Christmas of a huge Diablo 3 dump all at once. ;)

Better for other devs, I mean. ;)
Title: Re: On the New Release Date: March 24th
Post by: Tridus on February 26, 2014, 03:48:33 PM
Glad to hear it's moving to April. Age of Wonders 3 is also coming out in March. I'm super excited for that!

There is a lot going on that month.

(And also the Galactic Civilizations 3 alpha, but at this stage that's not really something to worry much about.)
Title: Re: On the New Release Date: March 24th
Post by: jerith on February 27, 2014, 01:56:03 AM
(And also the Galactic Civilizations 3 alpha, but at this stage that's not really something to worry much about.)

I'm always surprised when I see games of this nature only running on Windows, although I suppose it kind of makes sense in this case given the amount of non-game Windows-specific software Stardock writes.

Chris, do you have any OS usage stats for your games that you're willing and/or able to share? (Don't go to any trouble on my account if you don't have anything handy -- I'm just curious.)
Title: Re: On the New Release Date: March 24th
Post by: keith.lamothe on February 27, 2014, 10:17:56 AM
Chris, do you have any OS usage stats for your games that you're willing and/or able to share? (Don't go to any trouble on my account if you don't have anything handy -- I'm just curious.)
Without being too specific about how or where the info comes from, I'm seeing that Bionic (as our only currently for-sale windows/mac/linux game) has about 6% of its total gross from mac and a little over 4% of its total gross from linux.

Not bad, but still definitely in the "targets of opportunity" range for the moment.  But with the events of the past couple years I fully expect to see linux become much more of a thing for game sales.  How much more, we'll see.
Title: Re: On the New Release Date: March 24th
Post by: chemical_art on February 27, 2014, 03:30:14 PM
Until a viable out of the box retail product uses linux, I don't see it really taking hold. I've recently built a new computer, and dint have a second thought dropping 90 dollars for it after my miserable dozen hours trying to operate a second"user friendly" build. Unless things have changed, i still view it the realm of computer enthusastists, but programmers as well. A niche audience. A retail product that uses it though could work though
Title: Re: On the New Release Date: March 24th
Post by: Teal_Blue on February 27, 2014, 06:33:15 PM
I understand valve is coming out with a 'steam' product that uses linux, that could be very big, especially if people can still play their windows games on the box.

Title: Re: On the New Release Date: March 24th
Post by: chemical_art on February 27, 2014, 08:14:45 PM
Yeah that was what was referring to as a retail Linux platform. It will be interesting to see how it turns put. Especially if down the road it turns into it being there both a steam Linus and non steam Linus, and the two.are not.fully.comparable.
Title: Re: On the New Release Date: March 24th
Post by: Cyborg on February 27, 2014, 10:45:56 PM
The paying Linux customer base just hasn't materialized…for anybody.
Title: Re: On the New Release Date: March 24th
Post by: Pepisolo on February 28, 2014, 08:50:09 AM
http://www.gamingonlinux.com/articles/linux-game-sales-statistics-from-multiple-developers.2963

Here's an interesting post about other developers' Linux sales figures. It seems like Arcen's figures are much in line with other developers. Linux sales seem to come a bit under Mac sales although some games are closer than others. I fully expect Linux to overtake Mac in the future, though.
Title: Re: On the New Release Date: March 24th
Post by: PokerChen on March 01, 2014, 03:35:07 AM
 Also, a lot of computer-bound geeks with gaming tendencies have a little conundrum when we only have one machine. I'm doing the popular solution of 1 base OS + 1 virtual machine OS, because this is a lot less hassle than dual-booting like solutions. There's no real competition then between gaming on a Windows VM versus doing work on a Linux VM. Not so easy to find occupations that require peak performance out of your machine. At home. When you have hundreds of CPUs backing you up at work.

 NVIDIA, Steam, etc. are honestly pretty good with Linux, but it is true that a stable customer base isn't there. Indie bundle stats in my experience always show Linux players paying more per person, but a smaller total fraction than Mac & Windows. Given that several well-maintained distros also work on a philanthropic company or organisation backed model, I don't ever see linux fractions becoming a major replacement (on current projections). There is currently no noblesse oblige in free-market economies, to mitigate the comparative guarantee that company tech support provides for the masses on paid-OSes, as compared to free-OSes.
Title: Re: On the New Release Date: March 24th
Post by: mrhanman on March 01, 2014, 05:04:04 PM
My "gaming rig" runs Windows, but is no longer my primary PC.  It sits off to the side of my desk and I have a second, less graphically powerful desktop running Archlinux that I use for everything except playing games that have no native Linux version.  Thanks to Steam In-Home Streaming, I almost never have to touch Windows anymore.  That makes me happy.   :D
Title: Re: On the New Release Date: March 24th
Post by: Pepisolo on March 02, 2014, 09:23:14 AM
Quote
Thanks to Steam In-Home Streaming, I almost never have to touch Windows anymore.  That makes me happy.

Wow. I didn't realise In-Home Streaming was out already. Actually, looks like it's in invite only BETA, but still a very interesting development. I'll be glad to test this feature once it's made public.
Title: Re: On the New Release Date: March 24th
Post by: keith.lamothe on March 02, 2014, 09:37:18 AM
The In-house streaming features have been showing up for me for a while (maybe a week or two, wasn't paying close attention) and I didn't opt in for it.  Of course, maybe they throw strange things at the folks in the dev group just to be cheeky ;)
Title: Re: On the New Release Date: March 24th
Post by: Pepisolo on March 02, 2014, 10:06:57 PM
The In-house streaming features have been showing up for me for a while (maybe a week or two, wasn't paying close attention) and I didn't opt in for it.  Of course, maybe they throw strange things at the folks in the dev group just to be cheeky ;)

Yeah, maybe Valve fancy they'll get some better quality bug reports from developers than from us common folk ... probably a good idea, actually! A little free expertise.
Title: Re: On the New Release Date: March 24th
Post by: Aklyon on March 03, 2014, 10:22:22 AM
The paying Linux customer base just hasn't materialized…for anybody.
I heard its materialized pretty well for server hosting services and similar not-gaming things.
Title: Re: On the New Release Date: March 24th
Post by: keith.lamothe on March 03, 2014, 10:26:04 AM
I heard its materialized pretty well for server hosting services and similar not-gaming things.
N-not... gaming?
Title: Re: On the New Release Date: March 24th
Post by: chemical_art on March 03, 2014, 11:15:11 AM
I heard its materialized pretty well for server hosting services and similar not-gaming things.
N-not... gaming?


That does remind me though. With my new gpu on windows i receive software updates that improve how effective it runs programs on windows. However, does it help other OS to the same degre?
Title: Re: On the New Release Date: March 24th
Post by: keith.lamothe on March 03, 2014, 11:18:09 AM
I heard its materialized pretty well for server hosting services and similar not-gaming things.
N-not... gaming?


That does remind me though. With my new gpu on windows i receive software updates that improve how effective it runs programs on windows. However, does it help other OS to the same degre?
Do you mean it also downloads updates when running in a non-windows OS?  If not it should have no impact, as presumably those software updates (drivers, I assume) are quite windows-specific and the other OS's wouldn't touch them with a ten foot pole.
Title: Re: On the New Release Date: March 24th
Post by: chemical_art on March 04, 2014, 09:36:20 AM
I heard its materialized pretty well for server hosting services and similar not-gaming things.
N-not... gaming?


That does remind me though. With my new gpu on windows i receive software updates that improve how effective it runs programs on windows. However, does it help other OS to the same degre?
Do you mean it also downloads updates when running in a non-windows OS?  If not it should have no impact, as presumably those software updates (drivers, I assume) are quite windows-specific and the other OS's wouldn't touch them with a ten foot pole.



Glancing at the patch notes, for my GPU, while for windows the gpu updates are making it more efficient, the linux updates are focused on making it work at all! For this reason, I wonder on high end computers which is more efficient for gaming, the barebones linux or the highly optimized windows. If the later, that would explain why it hasn't taken off for gaming for that audience.
Title: Re: On the New Release Date: March 24th
Post by: mrhanman on March 04, 2014, 04:18:48 PM
In my experience, native linux ports almost always perform better than their windows counterparts.  The reason it hasn't taken off more with gamers is simply because developers, especially triple-A's, tend to only release on windows.  And the reason developers release on windows is because it has ~90% of the market.
Title: Re: On the New Release Date: March 24th
Post by: PokerChen on March 04, 2014, 05:29:38 PM
 Yeah... the day groups like Square Enix makes a game that runs on Linux... I will eat my bacon with wings.
Title: Re: On the New Release Date: March 24th
Post by: Cyborg on March 04, 2014, 07:45:06 PM
Yeah... the day groups like Square Enix makes a game that runs on Linux... I will eat my bacon with wings.


I used to idolize square. Every release was just mind blowing Final Fantasy fun, and then something happened. They started diluting their IP with crappy games, forgot how to innovate, forgot how to write a story, and succumbed to what I consider the biggest issue with Japanese gaming, and that's interminable grinding in their games.


I no longer feel compelled to get the latest Final Fantasy, and that makes me sad.
Title: Re: On the New Release Date: March 24th
Post by: x4000 on March 04, 2014, 07:49:30 PM
Yeah... the day groups like Square Enix makes a game that runs on Linux... I will eat my bacon with wings.


I used to idolize square. Every release was just mind blowing Final Fantasy fun, and then something happened. They started diluting their IP with crappy games, forgot how to innovate, forgot how to write a story, and succumbed to what I consider the biggest issue with Japanese gaming, and that's interminable grinding in their games.


I no longer feel compelled to get the latest Final Fantasy, and that makes me sad.

I could have written this myself, it echoes my feelings exactly.  I'm really sad about that, too.  Back in the early 90s, on NES and SNES, Squaresoft just could do no wrong.  I never was a fan of the Enix stuff, honestly.  Then we hit the Playstation era and they basically lost me.  There were some bits I liked, and some things that I liked quite a lot (FFX in particular, also FFXII to a much lesser degree), and then a lot of meh.  I never could really connect with FF7 fully.  FF1, FF4, FF6, Chrono Trigger, and Secret of Mana will always be the pinnacle of their work, for me.  FFT and FFTA were also really darn good.
Title: Re: On the New Release Date: March 24th
Post by: keith.lamothe on March 04, 2014, 07:52:59 PM
Yea, pretty much my exact feelings on Square, too.  The FF games were literally formative for me, but I haven't even tried to keep up with the series for the past few years.
Title: Re: On the New Release Date: March 24th
Post by: Misery on March 04, 2014, 08:40:00 PM
Yeah... the day groups like Square Enix makes a game that runs on Linux... I will eat my bacon with wings.


I used to idolize square. Every release was just mind blowing Final Fantasy fun, and then something happened. They started diluting their IP with crappy games, forgot how to innovate, forgot how to write a story, and succumbed to what I consider the biggest issue with Japanese gaming, and that's interminable grinding in their games.


I no longer feel compelled to get the latest Final Fantasy, and that makes me sad.


Uuuugh, yeah, I agree with this.  It's not possible for me to agree with this any harder than I already do, not without exploding.

They used to do such awesome stuff, way back when.  FFIV still remains my favorite, though they had all sorts of cool non-FF stuff too.

And then..... it was just gone.  I think for me it was right around when FF10 released (which I hated) 7 and 8 had been okay at least, sorta..... not all that good, but okay.... but 10 was a cutscene-riddled ball of.... cutscenes.  The storyline, which was already a concept Square was starting to have trouble with at that point, was braindead, and the design overall was just awful.  I remember overall that game felt way more linear than any of the others ever had.  And too many things in it were just too idiotic.  Or at least that was my views on it, anyway.

Though, in reality, it doesnt matter too much as to which of those I percieved as the start of the stupidity, because they all led to the same end result, which is Square the way they are now.  Ugh.  FF 13, I think, speaks alot for just how far they've fallen, and of course it's not JUST the FF series, it's pretty much every single possible thing they make.  And even worse, alot of the other developers of such things.... okay, pretty much all of them actually.... have this obnoxious tendancy to somewhat copy Square's everything, so as Square's RPGs started getting more and more dumb, so did those of others.

Eventually I gave up on the JRPG genre for good, and I'd never been THAT into it to begin with.  Havent for a moment felt a bit of desire to go back to it.  As it is, Square is pretty much entirely responsible for driving me towards my absolute loathing of story elements or cutscenes in gaming.  Normally I'd say "And now I dont buy their stuff anymore", but I dont really buy ANY console-related anything anymore, so that only counts for so much. 


.....also, yes, the GRINDING. I'm never, ever, EVER going to understand the appeal of this.   Quite frankly, I dont WANT to understand.  Like Disgaea, uuuuugh.  Every time that developer comes out with a new game, a certain friend of mine enters the "NEVER SHUTS THE HELL UP" state of mind in relation to it.  He'll then proceed to reach a certain point in the game.... usually not all that far in.... find one specific map, and then start doing it over.... and over.... and over.... and over.... and over.... and..... well, repeat "and over" about  60473857 more times, and you've got it nearly right.  Because apparently that's what you do in a "strategy RPG", bah.  I really, really dont get how that's supposed to be fun or interesting or challenging.  And moreso, I dont get how anyone could even DO it for the bazillions of hours that they do.  I can understand putting alot of hours into a game.  But the thing is, in most games, STUFF HAPPENS.... you dont just jump and stomp on the same 3 Goombas over and over again until the heat death of the universe.
Title: Re: On the New Release Date: March 24th
Post by: ScrObot on March 04, 2014, 10:53:05 PM
100% agree, those NES-SNES-GBA era Square games in particular are epic and will always hold a special place in RPG history.

On a tangent, last year a bunch of musicians and artists put together a 3 disc tribute to Secret of Mana called Spectrum of Mana, along with a bunch of amazing art. It's free and great: http://spectrumofmana.com/

Don't get me started on video game-related bands, but you would be remiss not to check out Armcannon (http://www.armcannon.com/), The OneUps (http://www.theoneups.com/), LONELYROLLINGSTARS (http://lonelyrollingstars.bandcamp.com/), Viking Guitar (http://vikingguitar.bandcamp.com/), The Protomen (http://www.protomen.com/), The Megas (http://www.themegas.com/), Metroid Metal (http://www.metroidmetal.com/)... Basically the lineup of any given MAGFest. ;)
Title: Re: On the New Release Date: March 24th
Post by: Coppermantis on March 04, 2014, 11:17:01 PM
100% agree, those NES-SNES-GBA era Square games in particular are epic and will always hold a special place in RPG history.

On a tangent, last year a bunch of musicians and artists put together a 3 disc tribute to Secret of Mana called Spectrum of Mana, along with a bunch of amazing art. It's free and great: http://spectrumofmana.com/

Don't get me started on video game-related bands, but you would be remiss not to check out Armcannon (http://www.armcannon.com/), The OneUps (http://www.theoneups.com/), LONELYROLLINGSTARS (http://lonelyrollingstars.bandcamp.com/), Viking Guitar (http://vikingguitar.bandcamp.com/), The Protomen (http://www.protomen.com/), The Megas (http://www.themegas.com/), Metroid Metal (http://www.metroidmetal.com/)... Basically the lineup of any given MAGFest. ;)

I absolutely love The Megas, they're a great band.
Title: Re: On the New Release Date: March 24th
Post by: Pepisolo on March 05, 2014, 10:09:19 AM
I knew Squaresoft were finished after playing FF8. I never bought their games after that. My favourite Square game is probably FF6, although Secret of Mana and Chrono Trigger are close seconds. I think Secret of Evermore is underrated as well -- that's probably just me, though.  So, yeah, I'm in complete agreement -- Square used to be phenomenal, now they're absolutely terrible. Incidentally, this is also how I feel about The Simpsons, but that's going even further off-topic.
Title: Re: On the New Release Date: March 24th
Post by: Misery on March 05, 2014, 11:35:00 AM
I knew Squaresoft were finished after playing FF8. I never bought their games after that. My favourite Square game is probably FF6, although Secret of Mana and Chrono Trigger are close seconds. I think Secret of Evermore is underrated as well -- that's probably just me, though.  So, yeah, I'm in complete agreement -- Square used to be phenomenal, now they're absolutely terrible. Incidentally, this is also how I feel about The Simpsons, but that's going even further off-topic.

I liked Evermore alot myself as well.  It's too bad that one never got more recognition.


As for being on topic.... well, wouldnt quite be the same forums if we all did THAT.   ....besides, there's only so much to talk about that's related to the game right now, while we all wait for the Epic Patch of Earth-Shattering Doom to come out.  Which is the magnitude I must assume, when there's an Arcen game patch that takes more than a day to come out :D   .....seriously, how you guys work as fast as you do, I'll never know.  I'd get like 20 minutes in and then have to take a break.  Another 20 and then the keyboard is broken because of bugs or something.
Title: Re: On the New Release Date: March 24th
Post by: Tridus on March 05, 2014, 12:01:20 PM
Square made some of my favorrite games of all time. Then they seemingly forgot what they were doing and got caught up in cutscenes and shiny over gameplay. FF X was so boring at the start that it put me off the PS2 as a system for years. I mean you do nothing but watch the game play itself.

XIII is the world's best corridor simulation, and the first version of XIV was so bad that they had to basically rewrite it.

How the same people who produced so many timeless classics could come to this is a mystery, and it's sad.
Title: Re: On the New Release Date: March 24th
Post by: estyles on March 05, 2014, 02:01:11 PM
In case you didn't know Chris, I just wanted to say that the expansion for Diablo 3 comes out March 25th, as does the final DLC for Bioshock Infinite (after which Irrational Games is closing down).  I have seen you say that the sales for Valley 1 were hurt because it came out just before  Diablo 3 launched, and I don't want it to happen again.  I realize that TLF may not appeal to the same crowd as D3, but I would think most small companies would need to be wary of launching anything around the time that Blizzard does.

What I just read is: I won't be buying the Diablo 3 Expansion during the week of launch.  Sucks to be Blizzard.  ;)

I mean, really, I'm kidding myself - I don't buy games during launch week anyway.  I've got more great games than time to play them, so I always wait for sales.  I can count on one hand the number of launch-week purchases I've made in the last 5 years.  Skyward Collapse is one of them.  Bionic Dues would have been if I'd known about it.  Same for the SC expansion.  I'm thinking I might make another exception for TLF...
Title: Re: On the New Release Date: March 24th
Post by: PokerChen on March 05, 2014, 06:36:05 PM
I think I launched a lot of memories there. :P They're still AAA, in the sense that Hollywood spends the most amount of effort for the same result. Don't practically all AAA developers, bands, etc follow the same trajectory? Make good stuff, get famous, decay.

As for the hope; a porcine blimp would do, if not a fixed wing Porco Rosso... I'll miss Miyazaki senior.
Title: Re: On the New Release Date: March 24th
Post by: Misery on March 10, 2014, 11:20:59 AM
So, wait, is the 24th here still the release date?

I ended up re-buying Diablo 3 myself (my previous account had been annihilated by derpage awhile back) after hearing about all of the changes/improvements, and.... yeah.  They got a good thing going here.  The game's popularity is rising waaaayyyyyy faster than I thought it would.   I'd indeed say there's a definite chance of another "Diablo blasts your sales" sort of situation here.

I know I'll be getting that expansion, though in my case it wont affect the purchases of anything else.
Title: Re: On the New Release Date: March 24th
Post by: x4000 on March 10, 2014, 11:38:04 AM
Nope, we've shifted to April, no worries. :)