I’m More Confused About What Crowfall Is Now That Their Kickstarter Launched

The Kickstarter for Crowfall, an MMO in development, just started yesterday. Taking a look at the Kickstarter advertising for the game, though, has left me more confused about what this game is trying to be. From news articles like those found on the new MassivelyOP.net, voxels, destructive environments, and strategy will be the general focus of the game, but the fundraising pitch makes it sound like it’s including a lot more than that. “It’s like Game of Thrones meets Eve Online” reads a tagline on the fundraising page. I’m reminded, though, of a lot of other games when you start going through the feature list.

One of the game’s shining mechanics seems to be that game locations will periodically reset. It appears that there will be two main areas for players to run around in, the “Eternal Kingdoms” and the “Campaign Worlds”. The “Eternal Kingdoms” seems to be where players will set up their main bases of permanent operation. Guilds will presumably be able to build castles and fortresses, and these estates will be around indefinitely. I’m thinking similar to Landmark here. Landmark with possible PvP focus, too, not just a building simulator.

The “Campaign Worlds”, on the other hand, will be the real battlegrounds of the game and will only be around for limited periods of time, until the resources are gathered and your side comes out victorious or not, at which point you return back to the Eternal Kingdoms. So these are like matches then, matches that take a while to complete but that do have a set “win” condition. Win conditions like A Tale in the Desert but more violence? You would be able to collect your spoils and bring them back to the Eternal Kingdoms to improve your character and holdings, though, so maybe not like ATiTD. Kind of feeling like it’s approaching Guild Wars 2 style World vs World a bit, but with actual win conditions instead of just time. In fact, the action combat appears to be very GW2-esque as well.

So maybe the tagline should be “Guild Wars 2’s WvW meets A Tale in the Desert meets Landmark”? I mean, that’s not as badass sounding as “Game of Thrones meets Eve Online” (both very “hardcore” IPs), but it does help me visualize it better. But then they throw this in there

“The beginning of each Campaign is like the first round of Civilization: players are dropped into a harsh environment, surrounded by Fog-of-War. The Worlds are filled with deadly monsters, haunted ruins, abandoned quarries… and the most dangerous predator of all, other players.

Craft weapons, scavenge armor, secure a stronghold, forge alliances and conquer the World.”

So… like H1Z1? Are the Campaign Worlds more survival-focused, maybe? This makes it sound like they’ll have a scavenger, band of survivors feel to them, where you battle not just the environment, but also other players to achieve the win conditions. No zombies, though. Well, maybe. These Campaign Worlds are slowly falling, entropy having it’s way with them, and the “Hunger” seems to be a driving factor in that. The Hunger seems to be the game’s main antagonist, a relentless, singularly focused enemy without remorse or empathy. Like the Borg, or… zombies. A rose by any other name.

But then they say they’re throwing in a heavy focus of strategy as well when they say “A seamless blend of an MMO with a large-scale Strategy game!” When mixed with PvP, “strategy” gaming is very reminiscent of MOBAs. Seeing as how MOBAs are wildly successful at the moment, I could see where they would also attempt this avenue for development as well.

So, then “Guild Wars 2 WvW meets A Tale in the Desert meets Landmark meets MOBAs meets H1Z1!” It certainly doesn’t roll off the tongue, does it? This is why I don’t work in advertising.

At it’s base, though, it sounds like the most important aspects will be Guilds, Territory, Crafting, and PvP. Doesn’t sound like it’d be up my alley, only because my jump-in-jump-out playstyle doesn’t mesh well with territory holdings and PvP focus, which is the realm of more dedicated players.

So although maybe it’s right now not sounding like it’d be for me, it does sound like it’s something fresh and really pushing the boundaries. So I give it a lot of respect, it’s trying new avenues of gameplay with systems that are relatively familiar, and combining them to create this new species of MMO. That is awesome.

Tons of time left to go, and it looks like hitting their $800,000 goal really won’t be a problem. So if Crowfall sounds like it would be a nice addition to the stable of games you’re already playing, go check it out.


– So what do you think? Does it remind you of any other games as well? Is this the pattern we should expect for the evolution of the MMO genre, combining traits of games already played to make something new? Do you think I’m wrong and “Shut up, Ocho, it’s Eve Online meets Game of Thrones like they said! Jeez! It’s not that confusing, ya noob!”

– All images used in this post are linked from the Crowfall Kickstarter page and are not my own screenshots.


MOBAs out the A

The wheel of online Player vs Player gaming started turning when dedicated online connections started to become mainstream. Instead of huddling around your friends old basement CRT, eyes focused on your quarter of Goldeneye’s screen, you could finally start competing against random strangers without leaving your house or making sure you had enough Cheetos and Jolt to share.

Player vs Player has quickly evolved since then. Starting with quarter-screen, then to LAN connected tournaments, to college shooter-game networks, to full internet shooters. Shooter titles like the Call of Duty and Halo franchises became synonymous with Multiplayer PvP. I’m sure those games have a storyline in them somewhere… but who the heck cares about it?

I read an article not long ago (I’m sorry it’s not linked. I can’t find it again. If I do, I’ll re-link.) all about how shooters in the past were competitive because everyone started on the exact same footing. You could find weapons on the map levels, but everyone already knew those map levels, and so even the weapon spawns were all about resource control. Through this, you could know and track your enemy. And then shooters changed.

Now, I’m not a fan of playing shooters against others, with the headset and smacktalk and what-have-you, so take what I say with a grain of salt, but I hear it’s not like that anymore. Now there’s character progression. Random weapon spawns. Starting on an equal footing wasn’t rewarding to those who played more than others. They wanted tangible rewards and a system to progress through. I don’t blame them, as that’s what I go for, that sense of permanence in the games that I play, but I don’t play player vs player titles. However, if making a true competitive game is your focus, starting players at different power levels ruins the entire effect.

The wheel of online Player vs Player has stopped turning and has landed on the iteration that, I believe, will become the true standard of competitive team online player vs player: The MOBA. The popularity of League of Legends initially blew me away. How could a game, that was essentially a copy of the gameplay of Warcraft’s RTS games, become this wildly successful?

Strategy and equal footing.

Online shooters are losing these traits to the monetization of the genre, but that leaves a whole subset of gamers without a home, and MOBAs have picked up the slack. A MOBA is a “Massively Online Battle Arena”, a real-time strategy game with competitive elements, designed specifically for player vs player gaming. Just to solidify the fact that the MOBA is here to stay, two more have entered the fray today: Magicka: Wizard Wars by Paradox and Infinite Crisis by, of all companies, Turbine.

Personally, I love Magicka. It’s an action title using the top-down approach already found in MOBAs, but also uses an ingenious magic system. Spells in the game are cast using rapid-succession typing. For example: Thunderbolt: QFASA ; Tornado: DQFQQF ; Conflagrate: FQFFQFFQ ; Thunderstorm: QFQFASA where Q, F, A, S, and D all represent different elements with the spells a mixture of those elements. Magicka as a MOBA is a no-brainer and I’m glad to see Paradox make the move.

Turbine making Infinite Crisis is a little more confusing. Yes, Turbine is a subsidiary of Warner Bros and Warner owns the rights to the DC Universe. Having superheroes fight each other is also pretty standard and yet… I wonder what new things they might bring to the table. It feels like they’re jumping in while the water is still profitable, but the pool is getting really crowded.

You probably won’t be seeing me try either title anytime soon. Beating on other gamers and getting beat myself is just not how I roll. However, competitive strategy on equal footing is very respectable and I can appreciate gamers who are into that.

The smacktalk I can still do without, though.

// Ocho