Cookies Disclaimer

I agree Our site saves small pieces of text information (cookies) on your device in order to authenticate logins, deliver better content and provide statistical analysis. You can adjust your browser settings to prevent our site from using cookies, but doing so will prevent some aspects of the site from functioning properly.

MMORPG.com has started their review!

Tink says Stab
That is great to hear, but it is also something that I have heard from a lot of other companies during development. The majority of the time, it hasn't actually evolved past that; being told that we are being listened to while development continues on same old, same old. I don't mean to insinuate that you aren't really listening, and that our voice isn't being heard, because I believe that it is. But from the perspective of your everyday customer, I don't think that it is incredibly visual right now. We don't hear you talking about the feedback that you get from us, we don't hear those quotes and anecdotes.

From the outside, development right now looks like it might in a fairly large number of games, especially indie games. You really have to actively follow the developers, what they say in posts, how they talk on Mumble, to get a feeling for how much influence the player base really has. There aren't that many examples I can point to and say to friends "Look, have you ever seen a developer do that?". New elf faces? Not really all that amazing. Balance changes? Old hat.

I'll start boasting to friends when the game population starts decided things like the next role that gets implemented, or which race gets brought in first. Not because the other changes are less important, but because they are far more visual.
Tink quivers in sheer euphoria as the dank memes course through his fedora
Wylder
Ambitious would be the word for this game given the available resources and the development timeline. Plus, "minimum viable play" I find is very subjective.

On the technical side I'm curious on how a modified Unity 4 engine (assuming it's 4) impacts the game down the road. Ease of use and cost seem to be it's advantages, but if you were in need of upgrading a few years from now it sounds like significant rework. How carefully did they consider this?

I know, having to deal with such a problem a few years from now means the game is successful. But the parable of building your house on sand comes to mind.
Ryan Dancey
We replaced the animation system. We wrote our own netcode layer. We use our own tool chain for graphics. Unity for us now is a wrapper for a rendering engine and a framework that manages game states.
Kitsune
Ryan Dancey
We replaced the animation system. We wrote our own netcode layer. We use our own tool chain for graphics. Unity for us now is a wrapper for a rendering engine and a framework that manages game states.

Curious, is the ultimate goal to remove Unity from the puzzle altogether, and have everything built "from the ground up"? Or will it simply remain as a tool in a series of other hodge-podged pieces (I say this in a positive way, I swear!) to build the game?

Either way has its merits, I suppose.
Ryan Dancey
The business plan assumed we used Unity without changing anything. The reality turned out to be different. smile
 
You must be logged into an enrolled account to post