Planet Descent
Community => Mess Hall => Topic started by: Sapphirus on March 10, 2015, 11:36:56 AM
-
http://descendentstudios.com/ (http://descendentstudios.com/)
Kickstarter:
http://descendentstudios.com/ks (http://descendentstudios.com/ks)
-
For years we've been saying "Take my money, please" for a new Descent game. Now finally somebody listened.
http://youtu.be/6tgoGxBbHvU (http://youtu.be/6tgoGxBbHvU)
-
But unless they're already working with Interplay, I doubt they'll last long. And if they are, Interplay's track record is... spotty. I'm just saying I'm not getting my hopes up until they've actually released something. For now I'm still more interested in Sublevel Zero.
Whyyy generic orchestral soundtrack music? Who thought it was a good idea to make this trailer sound like every other trailer? Grabbing peoples' attention is also a thing.
-
But unless they're already working with Interplay...
They are: http://www.interplay.com/about/article.php?id=81 (http://www.interplay.com/about/article.php?id=81)
But you're right, Interplay is not very reliable.
Although I do like to see that there's a new Descent game in the making, I still feel that I will like Sol Contingency much more.
I can't wait to see Proving Grounds released!
-
For years we've been saying "Take my money, please" for a new Descent game. Now finally somebody listened.
Looks like they're serious about taking my money, I saw the word "subscription" mentioned discretely in the KickStarter page.
-
But as Eric (the project leader) said on FB, the suscription won't be in-game:
"That is for the forums and access to live broadcasted design meetings....everything can be earned in the game FYI"
You can check his reply at the SolC FB page: https://www.facebook.com/preparefordescent?fref=ts (https://www.facebook.com/preparefordescent?fref=ts)
(yeah, he posted on there as he needed to clear some things regarding SolC ::) )
-
First off, it is my personal opinion that Interplay lost the right to have any say over Descent in light of their recent treatment of the franchise, but as they're the ones with the lawyers, there's not much I can do about it.
Two, I suspect this is the real reason why Interplay shut down Sol Contingency, because they had already signed off of this...thing. And obviously they can't have two reboots going on at the same time. Sol Contingency just lucked out; perhaps it's timing was just off and they got beaten to the punch.
Third, with all of that said, I'm already not liking this supposed "reboot."
In fact, I wouldn't even call it a reboot. I would call it a cheap MMO-driven Miner Wars knock-off meant to earn Interplay some quick bucks with the Descent name slapped on it as something of an afterthought to try and take advantage of the franchise's former fame.
It doesn't even have anything iconic to Descent in it. No familiar enemies, no familiar weapons, and there is no Pyro. Instead, we've got these...other ships with helicopter tails with funky physics and no...charm.
If it really was a matter that Interplay picked this game over Sol Contingency...quite frankly I think Interplay picked the wrong one. Sol Contingency was and still is most of everything I'm looking for in a Descent game. This does not.
While I'm certainly not against seeing another 6DOF game hit the market, I feel this game currently has no business claiming to be Descent. Something else that is Descent-inspired, certainly, but not actual Descent. Worse still is that, unless this game does something serious to sweeten the deal and soon, I don't see it gaining any real lasting success because it doesn't offer anything that isn't already being done or has been done by somebody else. At best, it'll get just a very brief moment of high interest upon release that would just as quickly vanish again once it stops being "new." Assuming it even gets that far, which I also have doubts about because Interplay's apparently involved, and when was the last time they successfully pulled something off? Too blippin' long!
Sorry about this being so scathing, but this is truly my two bits on the matter.
-
As a Star Citizen backer, I have full faith in Wingman's capability to deliver a decent Descent game. When I heard about his project, I got so giddy! An official Descent release! I'm not actually all that excited for the game itself; gameplay sounds kind of generic to me but that's just my personal opinion. The lack of singleplayer to start sort of spoiled it more for me. I'm still planning on backing the game and following it....because it's Descent. And Wingman is totally cool.
Anyways, I heard about his project the other day and decided to pop in here and see who's still around. So, hello PD!
-
According to the developers, there will be Single-Player on future releases, after the MP is done. I wrote this at D2X-XL and SolC forums to clear things up:
As a side note and as I noticed that there are a lot of misunderstandings everywhere regarding this new project:
For now it will be a Multiplayer MOBA game only, but on the future they will be adding a Single-Player campaign (or so that's what they said to me) that will tell the events before Descent 1, and you will see the Pyro-GX at later stages of the game, as well as some robots.
Also, there will be a suscription but only for special access to their forums and developer stuff, not for stuff in-game (although they may include DLC :roll:, but I don't know for sure ).
The developers have said both on their forums (and also on a reply of a message I sent to them) that there will be a Single-Player campaign, but that it will be made after publishing the Multiplayer or earlier if they get enough funds. They also told me that the campaign will tell the story before Descent 1 began, and that you will see the Pyro at later stages of the game.
And yeah, that there will be robots. Check this thread from his forums:
http://descendentstudios.com/community/topic/824-i-hope-this-changes/ (http://descendentstudios.com/community/topic/824-i-hope-this-changes/)
-
Yeah, I saw they're planning on doing SP, but not till later. I want it now though :(
-
Their Alpha release is at least a year out, it's going to seem like a long wait.
-
According to the developers, there will be Single-Player on future releases, after the MP is done. I wrote this at D2X-XL and SolC forums to clear things up:
As a side note and as I noticed that there are a lot of misunderstandings everywhere regarding this new project:
For now it will be a Multiplayer MOBA game only, but on the future they will be adding a Single-Player campaign (or so that's what they said to me) that will tell the events before Descent 1, and you will see the Pyro-GX at later stages of the game, as well as some robots.
Also, there will be a suscription but only for special access to their forums and developer stuff, not for stuff in-game (although they may include DLC :roll:, but I don't know for sure ).
The developers have said both on their forums (and also on a reply of a message I sent to them) that there will be a Single-Player campaign, but that it will be made after publishing the Multiplayer or earlier if they get enough funds. They also told me that the campaign will tell the story before Descent 1 began, and that you will see the Pyro at later stages of the game.
And yeah, that there will be robots. Check this thread from his forums:
[url]http://descendentstudios.com/community/topic/824-i-hope-this-changes/[/url] ([url]http://descendentstudios.com/community/topic/824-i-hope-this-changes/[/url])
That does help clear a few things up, and I'm heartened somewhat by the fact that there is plans for single-player (eventually, but I'll get back to that), a Pyro-GX, and the establishment that it's more prequel than anything (which I had already deduced would be the best way their approach was going to work before seeing that).
But I'm still...not that enthused...even though I want to. The truth of the matter is that it all seems too...lackluster. Like it's still missing something. Something very important.
And I question the approach still, anyway. They're banking entirely on the multiplayer being the thing that'll get the game going...I'm not convinced it will. Otherwise, why haven't all of these other 6DOF games (all who took the same approach) we've been seeing lately not been getting more attention than they have? As such I fear the game would never get far enough to even get that single-player campaign. That makes that promise still feels like an empty one.
And I have quibbles about the physics. I've re-watched that trailer a couple of times now (which really is a poorly presented trailer, and that doesn't help), and I'm convinced there's something very amiss with the physics...I can't read too much into that of course, it being pre-alpha and everything...but then there's the fact that both Sol Contingency and Miner Wars, games that use the same mechanics and physics, didn't have the same problem at that stage in their own development. So, not off to a good start in that area, basically.
And I'd still sooner liken it to Miner Wars than Descent. It doesn't have enough of that Descent feel yet.
In the end, it all seems too much like an afterthought, and again, like the only reason Interplay okayed it is for some quick bucks. Which is totally their thing, these days. And worse still, it feels generic. Not to be hard on this Wingman fellow, who truly seems like a good enough, well-meaning, guy, but I'm still not convinced he really gets Descent as much as he says. Most of the games these developers list having previous involvement in only would loosely relate to Descent in gameplay, too, the only real common theme being they all are space-sims...and I know Descent's more than that. It's big schtick is that it was a space-sim...that didn't actually take place in space, but on planets (or moons, asteroids, what have you). You wouldn't think that's that big of a deal, but it's something I've thought long and hard about and I've realized that's what Descent has that everything else hasn't; and Underground seems to be a step in the right direction...but still a far cry from hitting it.
I will still keep eyes on this and follow it's development history, of course, in hopes that this will all be addressed if not more in due time, and the game will ultimately surprise me. I hope it does, because I certainly don't want to be right about this...actually rather uncharacteristic lack of optimism I've feeling about this.
But my initial impressions still remain the same; it's too generic, too dissimilar, utterly lacks a real "hook," too much of an afterthought, and that I feel Sol Contingency still would've been the better project for Interplay to back in the end. At least I could know Sol Contingency gets it, and, in all honesty? I will probably sooner pay real money for Sol Contingency, even with it taking that "new direction," than I will Underground.
Heck, I'm even more interested in that Sublevel Zero game than this, which tells you just how bad my skepticism for Underground is, because I'm not that optimistic about Sublevel Zero either. :o
I guess at this point all I have to say at this point is to present a challenge for Descendent Studios; prove me wrong, guys, prove me very wrong. ;)
-
Well I guess it's time to finally get back to work on my projects. :o
-
You should check this out:
A post from Drakona (as we as a mail by Lothar) got featured, sticky'ed and earned a badge at the Descendent Studios forums: http://descendentstudios.com/news (http://descendentstudios.com/news)
If the developers are paying attention to the community and even featuring an important post that covers the basic stuff that we love from the Descent games there may be light at the end of the tunnel.
I recommend Descent users from here to make a notable presence on Descendent Studios forums and show our strenght as community.
We as fans of the original games deserve to be listened to, so make our voices heard!
Let's show all those fans that are just there supporting the project just because they are Star Citizen fans and don't know a word about Descent that we are also a great community, and that we are a big force if gathered, YEAH! :D :o 8)
-
I've emailed some old clan mates about this - Seemed like a good idea to spread the word :)
-
How does one get excited for this when it doesn't even look like Descent? It's like that "Red Faction" bit that happened.
-
The assets you are seeing are just showcasing what they've got so far. I think it's been mentioned that these guys were originally working on a 6DOF game before being approached by Interplay to make it 'Descent'? I'm not sure of the details. It's early days yet, and these developers seem very open to taking on ideas suggested by the community (just take a look at Drakonas threadnought for some thoughts).
-
Been poking around their forums, trying to get more details on the intentions of the game. Found this thread (http://descendentstudios.com/community/topic/100-official-ask-a-dev-about-the-game-thread/) to be particularly helpful. It's a thread where we, the users, can ask the devs questions about the game, and already they've racked up a good number that they have answered.
You can ask anything, though of course the devs reserve the right to choose not to answer a question at any given time, either because they haven't gotten that far in the game's development to have an answer, or it's a detail they aren't ready to reveal yet.
I just posted a number of questions, some just me being curious, others are actually quite pressing that the answer will likely determine my stance on this game.
-
Hi,
Been stalking these forums for a while and feel compelled to have my say based on what I've seen so far.
This looks like a 6dof game with some interesting elements, like the deformable voxel terrain, but I can't help but feel that the Descent name is being used merely as a publicity grab here. I think it's going to backfire when people see that this game isn't like Descent at all (mining resources?). The ships designs revealed so far don't look like they were designed in the same universe as descent and it's going to look really out of place to ever see a pyro next to them.
I'm also sceptical about spending time on customizing the ships. It's really hard to get the balance right here, Descent 3's ships weren't that well balanced (in my opinion) and there weren't any customization options on them. Also Descent for me has always been a bit of an arcade game, spending time customizing the ship instead of blowing stuff up isn't very descent like.
This is feeling like Mechwarrior Online all over again (another game franchise I used to like), I have little interest in MOBA style games and will be backing SolC instead.
-
You and I are of like concern, then, Ionized, as I have many of the same fears.
However, my digging around the forums has turned up at least one detail, and that's the developers do have plans to introduce Descent elements, and promise they will be present. The reason they aren't immediately apparent is that the game's set to take place sometime prior to D1 (don't know how far prior just yet) and thus they're trying to shoot for a look that predates Descent, with the idea of eventually showing how the scene begins to be set for the Descent we know better.
But other Descent fans have made mention that they seem to have missed the mark with that intent a couple times over, and each time the devs seem to have taken note, so I'm going to be keeping an eye on things, in hopes that changes will be soon following to bring it a bit closer to the Descent "look" we all seem to agree is missing.
In the meantime, I, too, am more interested in Sol Contingency, because at least I know with confidence they're doing it right. Though I can see they've got good intentions and seem to genuinely want to try and get it right, I'm still on the fence about Descendant Studios. I worry they've already started off on the wrong track, and it's going to be hard for them to shift direction now. I guess we'll see.
-
It's interesting that some of the background story (or suggested timeline) bears a striking resemblance to the timeline I created for my Hyperspace series. :P
-
I can't help but feel that the Descent name is being used merely as a publicity grab here.
Kind of how I feel.
Maybe I'm wrong though. Maybe we'll see more of a "Descent" game farther down the road. Time will tell.
-
It's interesting that some of the background story (or suggested timeline) bears a striking resemblance to the timeline I created for my Hyperspace series. :P
Well it is a very logical place for the setting to go, you have to admit.
I just posted a number of questions, some just me being curious, others are actually quite pressing that the answer will likely determine my stance on this game.
Heh... I know that technique.
-
Well to be perfectly blunt, if I'm going to show any support for it, I want to know it'll be justified and not wasted.
-
Well, I think that for getting more info the best would be to dig into their forums and check out all the questions and answers available:
http://descent-underground.com/community/ (http://descent-underground.com/community/)
And also check all the videos they streamed where they make clear lots of points being asked by the community:
http://www.twitch.tv/descendentstudios (http://www.twitch.tv/descendentstudios)
That way you can make your decision better.
-
Third, with all of that said, I'm already not liking this supposed "reboot."
In fact, I wouldn't even call it a reboot. I would call it a cheap MMO-driven Miner Wars knock-off meant to earn Interplay some quick bucks with the Descent name slapped on it as something of an afterthought to try and take advantage of the franchise's former fame.
It doesn't even have anything iconic to Descent in it. No familiar enemies, no familiar weapons, and there is no Pyro. Instead, we've got these...other ships with helicopter tails with funky physics and no...charm.
If it really was a matter that Interplay picked this game over Sol Contingency...quite frankly I think Interplay picked the wrong one. Sol Contingency was and still is most of everything I'm looking for in a Descent game. This does not.
I agree with this, and I'd also go a step further and say this whole thing smells like it's really Interplay pulling the strings for the whole project.
According to the kickstarter page, Interplay offered the IP to them. Meaning they probably saw the success of Star Citizen and approached Eric with an offer (possibly involving some of the cash they recently got from the Steam rereleases) to make a game for them. Then boom! "Descendent Studios Inc." is created, a brand new company with no previous game history, with the apparent goal of "developing fun and engaging PC video games." Yeah right, that's why their first (and most likely only) game is strongly tied to their brand name and is relying on kickstarter to get off the ground.
The game itself sounds suspiciously like a free-to-play/pay-to-win model (which is exactly the kind of bullshit Interplay would pull if they saw the chance) and afaik this has not been denied.
-
Descendant Studios insist that they entered the picture only after Sol Contingency was shut down, and that they therefore had nothing to do with that, and from their perspective, they could very well be right. From Interplay's perspective, though, the timing is just too good. I am convinced the idea for Descent Underground was hobbled together by them real quick in direct response to Sol Contingency...perhaps to curtail any other fan attempts of beating them to the punch of releasing the next Descent game.
Whatever the case, though, I already have been digging through the forums as Pumo suggested (and would likewise urge everybody else to do the same, it really does help give you a better idea of where the game stands at the moment) and save Interplay giving Descendant Studios permission to use the IP...that seems to be the full extent of their involvement for the moment. Descendant acts like they've been given pretty free reign on the project, so I wonder if Interplay's turned it over to them and then are sitting back and waiting for the profits to roll in while Descendant does all the work.
That sounds bad, but actually it might be a good thing, because if this is true (and I've already been probing for confirmation or denial of this, so we'll see) then it means Descendant is going to be in a flexible enough position to make changes as deemed fit in response to fan input. Indeed, Descendant's already stated that's how they want to approach this. So it could work in our favor in the end.
But I admit, this is more speculation on my part than fact. Some observations that, for the moment, happens to fit the facts.
Either way, something that should still be kept in mind is that while Underground's initial reveal proved to be...lackluster...for some of us, it should still be noted that the game is still very, very early in development and is not set in stone yet. I fully expect Descendant is going to be going in and making changes, especially seeing that we really aren't the only ones to voice discontent with what they've presented thus far. So while I remain skeptical, I'm still going to keep tabs on the project, in hopes they'll turn things around...preferably sooner rather than later. To be perfectly fair, though, their idea of a prequel is one with some good potential...I just worry they might not exploit it.
The game itself sounds suspiciously like a free-to-play/pay-to-win model (which is exactly the kind of bullshit Interplay would pull if they saw the chance) and afaik this has not been denied.
I've already made inquires into it along these lines. Still waiting for answers, and I hope they'll deny it being the case, but if this IS the direction they're heading, I'm going to voice strong disapproval to it.
For the moment, though, I really can't tell how they plan to operate this pitch. They've been either inconsistent, deliberately vague (which I can understand, keeping in mind spoilers and all of that), and more often just confessing that they haven't gotten all the details quite ironed out and thus don't have an answer they can safely give (as it's not necessarily final).
In short, I'm waiting for more details before making a "ruling" on that aspect. I would urge others to do the same for now.
-
But other Descent fans have made mention that they seem to have missed the mark with that intent a couple times over, and each time the devs seem to have taken note, so I'm going to be keeping an eye on things, in hopes that changes will be soon following to bring it a bit closer to the Descent "look" we all seem to agree is missing.
The comparison to Sol Contingency is is that Sol C is being made by people who are Descenters first. They are making the game because they wan to play the game they are making. Descendant Studios doesn't seem to have that passion, that kind of drive. There's no real focus, no guiding vision, so to speak. That's my impression. They are making the game because they think it will sell. Evidence of this is abundant in the response to Drakona's post on what the game should be. The didn't respond right away, saying either yes that's what we are doing, or no, that's not the direction we are heading, they waited for the for the approval of the forum before they endorsed Drakona's vision. They discussed it amongst themselves, and finally after it was obvious Drakona had hit the sweet spot with the posters in the forum, they gave her and Lothar some kind of an award.
Now, if Darkona had posted that to the SolC forum, it probably would not have aroused so much response, because to the Descent fanatics making SolC, Drakona's post is obvious, in fact SolC has many times stated it's goal, it's vision, is to re-create the original Descent experience in a modern game engine. But I think a response on the SolC forum would have been an immediate and unequivocal confirmation that that's what they are doing. There would have been no discussion amongst the developers needed, as they all know exactly what the game should be.
When I first saw the trailer for Descent Underground my first thought was 'Miner Wars'. Nothing like Descent.
-
And even Miner Wars, I feel, did it better, at least in comparison to what was shown in that trailer.
That being said, judging from where they seem to be in development, I'm starting to suspect that trailer was largely staged, and doesn't reflect actual gameplay too accurately. Interpret that how you will.
-
I think this quick message from the developers deserves a read: http://descendentstudios.com/community/topic/957-urgent-kickstarter-backer-reach-out-brainstorming/?p=8752 (http://descendentstudios.com/community/topic/957-urgent-kickstarter-backer-reach-out-brainstorming/?p=8752)
;)
I think it would be a good idea to support this project.
Maybe not as much as SolC (as to me it seems to be the clear winner), but still it looks like a great effort that deserves to be supported by us Descent fans!
EDIT: Also, it seems that their KS campaign page has been updated with a better video and better info about the project.
http://www.kickstarter.com/projects/descendentstudios/descent-underground (http://www.kickstarter.com/projects/descendentstudios/descent-underground)
-
If none of them are being paid what do they need $600,000 for? Artists and infrastructure don't cost nearly that much...
-
Maybe I'm lost, but where does it says they are not being paid? :o
-
I would rather donate to SolC than back DU, I think their vision is good, DU is building a MMO or MOBA.
-
Maybe I'm lost, but where does it says they are not being paid? :o
In the post you linked?
we are also a passion project, none of us are being paid, we are doing this for free because we, like you want to see this IP come back
-
So in-game currency and microtransactions have been confirmed in the kickstarter comments.
Game Over.
-
Oh yeah, my bad lol! :P
I was thinking on the KS page.
-
I would rather donate to SolC than back DU, I think their vision is good, DU is building a MMO or MOBA.
Actually, I got an answer back to one of my "inquires" today, and was told, with emphasis, that DU is NOT an MMO, and more like a "regular multiplayer game with unlocks" which is still vague, but it tells me they are at least shooting for something akin to Descent-style multiplayer.
I've also been told that the game is to WELL predate D1 by at least tens of years, if not more. For example, the PTMC does not exist yet, and seeing that the PTMC is very well established by D1's time, that alone gives you an idea just how far back Descendant's thinking of taking this. Which I'm not against, but I do worry they've left themselves a bit too open for...messing up.
Some things that worry me still though is that I inquired if we'd see "retro" versions of things from other Descent games (like something akin to an energy center) and more importantly, whether or not there would be items like shield orbs and energy blobs to pick up on the fly like in every other Descent game. The answer is, and I quote, "no idea."
...
...guys, the answer to that should be "yes, obviously!" Because what Descent game wouldn't have those things?
So in-game currency and microtransactions have been confirmed in the kickstarter comments.
Game Over.
I inquired about that too, and how they plan to make that work. Their answer was almost frustratingly vague, but they did state "Gather stuff during the match and after winning/loosing it, upgrade ship between the matches" and as long as they keep that "upgrade time" down to a quick and easy minimum, I could roll with that.
Actually, one of my bigger concerns at this point is not so much the multiplayer but the singleplayer, which I worry will end up as more of an afterthought and most of the emphasis getting put into the multiplayer. And I just can't see a multiplayer-driven game such as this being that successful or long lasting.
Anyway, still very on the fence about DU overall, as it can still go either way, and the fact of the matter is that it's still way too early in development to have any clear idea on which one it'll take as of yet.
-
Actually, one of my bigger concerns at this point is not so much the multiplayer but the singleplayer, which I worry will end up as more of an afterthought and most of the emphasis getting put into the multiplayer. And I just can't see a multiplayer-driven game such as this being that successful or long lasting.
It seems like they haven't really thought about singleplayer at all, it's just being hand-waved away as being too expensive and will be looked at once they start making money from the multiplayer version. Which for me raises two concerns:
- They already said this was a labour of love and they weren't getting paid. So why is singleplayer more expensive than multi when it has no server infrastructure requirements?
- They expect to make a lot of money from this - more than the $600K they're already asking for on KS, since that's apparently not enough to include singleplayer. I can't see that happening based on game sales alone and even if it did, I doubt they would hand over the newly produced singleplayer campaign to all existing game owners for free after spending so much of "their" profit on it.
-
Ofcourse it's not going to be handed over for free. These people are self-employed, or as good as! You can't expect a single player campaign for nothing. No one is giving these people paychecks every month which is why the KS exists in the first place. Interplay aren't going to fund a Descent title themselves. And I doubt Interplay will EVER sell the rights to Descent, because no one is going to buy at the price requested. This is probably the last best hope for a big-budget Descent title. SC might be end up being the better game with regards to mechanics, but SC isn't going to raise any interest in the series like this one can and doesn't have the potential to expand beyond it's niche.
The way I see it, this is a win-win situation for Descent fans. It's been clearly stated this game is not a MOBA nor an MMO, and any ingame currency will be purely for cosmetic alterations (all of which can be obtained ingame). I think people are being unfair and too harsh on these guys who are not only Descent fans, but understand the current market and are willing to make a Descent title - something that nearly ALL triple-A developers have ignored for years. Yeah I can't imagine these 'Press A to climb up' developers have even played Descent. This is what Descenters having been waiting for for nearly two decades and this team are probably the closest we'll ever get to the RIGHT kind of team. They aren't perfect, but do you really want a 'Press A to open door' type Descent title in 5 years time? Because that's what you might end up getting. Reject this project at great risk, guys. Just chill and give it a chance.
-
Are you talking about quick-time events or tutorial prompts?
Cuz I'm ok with button prompts in tutorial levels -- you can press A to climb if that's what A does all the time. Quick-time events on the other fork of the tail...
-
Kewl, the D:U campaign finally reached $200,000! ;D
Let's support this project as it may be the last oportunity we have to get a game with the Descent brand!
As already specified by the developers (on their forums, on the KS comments and even corrected on their main KS page):
Yeah, it will include Single-Player and Co-op.
Yeah, it will feature D1/2 flight mechanics.
Yeah, it will have a Descent-style ship (the Torch KS, precursor of the Pyro)
Yeah, it will narrate how the PTMC and Robots came to be.
Yeah, every ship can be earned in-game without paying a cent (even if there may be an option to accelerate the acquiring by buying the ship earlier).
Nope, it won't be needed any subscription to play.
Nope, it won't be a MOBA.
Nope, it won't be pay-to-win.
Nope, micro-transactions won't be needed for crucial ship upgrades, just for small cosmetic stuff that won't alter gameplay.
Also, there will be mod support and maybe even an internal market-place for us to sell community mods (although this is just a preliminar idea).
And I would also recommend to check out their new and better video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_okozNpxTOE (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_okozNpxTOE)
-
Yeah, Sol Contingency may be better and we may like it more, but whether we like it or not, it won't have the Descent brand nor assets on it, so it won't be an official Descent title, period.
So there's no better oportunity to get an official Descent game than this one, don't let their KS campaign fail, I would really LOVE to see a new Descent game on the Steam store!! 8)
-
Hunter may be right.
I know most are looking for that "Descent" feel, but maybe a change is good. If it fails at giving us a "Descent" feel, maybe it's still going to be a fun game. Unless it's for Linux, I have no chance of playing it.
-
It will feature a Linux version (as the game will be based on Unreal engine 4 which supports Windows, Linux & Mac). :)
That's also specified on their KS page.
-
The way I see it, this is a win-win situation for Descent fans. It's been clearly stated this game is not a MOBA nor an MMO, and any ingame currency will be purely for cosmetic alterations (all of which can be obtained ingame). I think people are being unfair and too harsh on these guys who are not only Descent fans, but understand the current market and are willing to make a Descent title - something that nearly ALL triple-A developers have ignored for years. Yeah I can't imagine these 'Press A to climb up' developers have even played Descent. This is what Descenters having been waiting for for nearly two decades and this team are probably the closest we'll ever get to the RIGHT kind of team. They aren't perfect, but do you really want a 'Press A to open door' type Descent title in 5 years time? Because that's what you might end up getting. Reject this project at great risk, guys. Just chill and give it a chance.
http://steamcommunity.com/sharedfiles/filedetails/?id=251821609 (http://steamcommunity.com/sharedfiles/filedetails/?id=251821609)
Playable test builds available right now (for Windows and Linux).
-
It will feature a Linux version (as the game will be based on Unreal engine 4 which supports Windows, Linux & Mac). :)
That's also specified on their KS page.
Nice to see support for Linux :)
-
[url]http://steamcommunity.com/sharedfiles/filedetails/?id=251821609[/url] ([url]http://steamcommunity.com/sharedfiles/filedetails/?id=251821609[/url])
Playable test builds available right now (for Windows and Linux).
DU deserve just as much support and love from the community as both Geocore and SC. After many lengthly discussions and observations of the dev team, I don't see any reason why you wouldn't want to support it.
-
After many lengthly discussions and observations of the dev team, I don't see any reason why you wouldn't want to support it.
That's exactly why I don't want to support them - they keep constantly changing their plans as each day goes by.
First there wasn't going to be singleplayer, now there is (except it's a "mini-campaign", the full compaign sounds like it will be DLC).
Microtransactions weren't mentioned from the start. Then they were claimed to be "cosmetic only". Then when it was pointed out that purchasing whole new ships is not a cosmetic change, they responded by saying that those purchases are not considered to be microtransactions because they would be around $30 (!). Regardless it can be practically guaranteed that real money will somehow be tied to the in-game currency, either with direct purchases or by purchasing ships and selling them off; or do they not plan to have a fully working economy that allows assets to be traded? Otherwise the idea of having in-game currency seems a bit pointless.
They claim they're not getting paid for this, but want $600,000 to get it off the ground. Sure sounds like they expect to get paid.
Basically they say they're big Descent fans, but their actions look like they're just in it for the money. Every time the crowd volume reaches a certain point about a particular feature, they backtrack. And while it's all well and good to say "we're listening to what the players want and adjusting our plans based on that", that's just a PR spin on "we got caught trying to do something sneaky." If they're really going to let the fans have free reign and decide what does and doesn't get included, how did they have any idea what to put for the KS goal? It's likely just a made up number they've pulled out of a hat with no real breakdown-of-costs behind it, because at this stage they don't even know themselves what content will/won't be included.
I'm actually waiting to see what happens when someone raises the absence of the reactor gameplay mechanic, since it was an essential element of the original games but it's not mentioned in any of their game modes (and will likely be hand-waved away as part of the "it's a prequel" story).
I'd also raise issue with their claim that all the older assets are unusable (as they belong to someone else) since nearly all of the sound effects were sourced from free-for-commercial-use collections.
-
I'm actually waiting to see what happens when someone raises the absence of the reactor gameplay mechanic, since it was an essential element of the original games but it's not mentioned in any of their game modes (and will likely be hand-waved away as part of the "it's a prequel" story).
I'd also raise issue with their claim that all the older assets are unusable (as they belong to someone else) since nearly all of the sound effects were sourced from free-for-commercial-use collections.
AFAIK, stuff like the Pyro and the PTMC are the property of Parallax Software, that got divided into Outrage (non-existant now) and Volition, and it would be a true PITA to ask for permision to use that stuff from a splitted company.
Some people doesn't realize this, but to make a full Descent game is not as easy as it seems in regards to copyright.
Interplay is not the only company to have a word regarding the license of Descent stuff, they only have property over the brand.
-
Some people doesn't realize this, but to make a full Descent game is not as easy as it seems in regards to copyright.
Interplay is not the only company to have a word regarding the license of Descent stuff, they only have property over the brand.
If that were the case they would have had no right to request that Sol Contingency stop using anything from Descent besides the name. But they requested removal of levels, weapons, models, sound effects, anything remotely related to the original games, citing their exclusive right to "duplicate, distribute and prepare derivative works of Descent and its sequels". In other words, they claimed the IP wholy and completely belongs exclusively to them.
(And that alone is a load of bullshit since as I stated earlier, most of the sound effects came from free-for-use collections.)
-
This is what Descenters having been waiting for for nearly two decades and this team are probably the closest we'll ever get to the RIGHT kind of team. They aren't perfect, but do you really want a 'Press A to open door' type Descent title in 5 years time? Because that's what you might end up getting. Reject this project at great risk, guys. Just chill and give it a chance.
Yeah, Sol Contingency may be better and we may like it more, but whether we like it or not, it won't have the Descent brand nor assets on it, so it won't be an official Descent title, period.
So there's no better oportunity to get an official Descent game than this one, don't let their KS campaign fail, I would really LOVE to see a new Descent game on the Steam store!! 8)
Actually, to be perfectly frank, I would rather see Descent left alone and to continue to languish in inactivity rather than have it be half-heartedly revived with a game that will miss the mark, in hopes someone will eventually come along and do it better. And if no one ever comes, then maybe that just means that Descent, as painful as it'd be to admit it, has had it's day, and it's time to let it go and move on. Whatever the case I'm not going to support a game purely out of the principle of promoting the Descent name because I'm not so desperate that I just want to merely see the Descent name back on the market. There's more to Descent than just the name. What I want is a Descent game, like the one's previous I've been playing all this time. I want a game I can point at with absolute confidence and truthfully state "THAT is Descent!" and I can't do that with Underground yet. If the game can't make that promise, then odds are I'm not playing it, and if I'm not playing it, then what's the point?
Worse still is that I'm clearly not alone in this mentality. There are plenty of other long-time Descent fans both here and elsewhere that are skeptical about Underground, and it seems to me that if Descendant sticks to the first impressions they've given, they stand to alienate a good portion of the Descent fanbase, and seeing the game's promoting the use of the Descent name so much, that's exactly who both Descendant and Interplay are banking on getting all of the profit from. So they're setting themselves up to lose money if this holds true, and we've really just wasted everybody's time on the matter.
But that being said...
Don't think I've personally lost all faith in Underground, because that's not true. Descendant Studios certainly aren't a gaggle of idiots, and the more I learn about them the more that glimmer of hope starts to grow. The fact they're taking note of our first impressions and already looking to make changes where they can to compensate does indeed suggest they have the right intentions. They're facing entirely in the right direction...I'm just not confident they're wholly on the right path.
Yet.
Which is something I believe is not too late to fix. I cannot justify supporting Underground financially yet, but I intend to "support" it in another way, by seeing to it my voice is heard as best as I can, and if Descendant is willing to listen, and we've certainly got no evidence that they aren't, then I plan to continually give my input on what they do with the hope it'll help them build a better Descent game in the end. I may seem unrepentantly scathing and critical about the game still, but that's just me being upfront, blunt, and honest; my way of trying to help this game make it as the Descent game we're looking for.
Right now I'm still probing for details, trying to get a "feel" for what Underground actually is at present. Once I've got a clearer picture on that, I intend to react accordingly, and give Descendant my thoughts on what they've got so far in earnest. Hopefully they'll meet the praise of Hunter and Pumo and lend a patient and listening ear to my ranting. :)
I know most are looking for that "Descent" feel, but maybe a change is good. If it fails at giving us a "Descent" feel, maybe it's still going to be a fun game.
Here's something funny; I tend to think the same. In fact, I'd like to consider myself fairly open-minded about this sort of thing, usually. I embraced things like AbramsTrek and Sonic Boom with open arms, both of which took radical departures from their past entries in their respective franchises, and often would point my finger and ridicule at the haters that arose in response, accusing them of being closed-minded. So I'm actually a bit shocked and embarrassed at myself for feeling so...negative...towards Underground. So much so that at first I thought maybe it was just the initial reaction and that I'd warm up to the idea after I'd had a chance to sleep on it. But nope, still look at that trailer for Underground and feel something's amiss and it doesn't sit well with me.
I mean, I'm not against change. Change can be good. And I think Descendant's got some good ideas already that I'm willing to explore. It just all doesn't feel...right...yet.
So again, I may seem negative, but I'm trying to keep it negative with an ulterior purpose, to try and encourage other changes for the better, and not just be flat-out hateful and unhelpful.
Besides, tueidji seems to have us covered on that department, and I wouldn't want to step on his toes or anything. ;)
I'm actually waiting to see what happens when someone raises the absence of the reactor gameplay mechanic, since it was an essential element of the original games but it's not mentioned in any of their game modes (and will likely be hand-waved away as part of the "it's a prequel" story).
I'd actually would be SHOCKED if they even did address the reactor mechanic, much less attempt to implement it, as I'm not at all expecting them to. It did feature heavily in the first two games, but by the third, it was clearly starting to feel a little overdone and D3 was right to decide it was time for a change, as it also helped to promote more creativity with the levels and the gameplay within them. I would think Descendant would want to continue that with Underground. And I'd actually totally buy the "it's a prequel" excuse. With the chaotic environment they seem to be setting it in, a fusion reactor seems like it'd be too tricky a thing to set up and maintain in such a turbulent environment anyway.
AFAIK, stuff like the Pyro and the PTMC are the property of Parallax Software, that got divided into Outrage (non-existant now) and Volition, and it would be a true PITA to ask for permision to use that stuff from a splitted company.
Some people doesn't realize this, but to make a full Descent game is not as easy as it seems in regards to copyright.
Interplay is not the only company to have a word regarding the license of Descent stuff, they only have property over the brand.
Then that would mean Interplay really only owns Descent in name only, something I've already been long suspecting up until now (hence why they've done so little with it up 'til now), and it'd be just like Interplay to not even make an attempt at getting permission to use the rest.
But I have to side with tueidj on this and question if that's really true, at least in its entirety. Not only is there the fact that Interplay DID claim full possession to Descent when they (tried to) shut down Sol Contingency, surely whatever rights that belonged with the other companies have lapsed by now (at least in the case of D1; it is twenty years old now). Outrage isn't even around to complain and I don't think THQ, who I believe were the ones inherited what was left of them, even knows they might have anything pertaining to Descent, and even if they did, it can't possibly be enough to do anything with. And I know Volition has next to nothing on Descent, otherwise they would've tried to do something with Descent by now too (I know they've got people over there who are willing). Interplay is actually the only one who has ever made any attempt at all to keep their rights to Descent active, and convey an intention to use them. Granted, more for the profit than anything, but this fact still stands.
But then again, I'm no lawyer. Maybe I ought to add this to my list of inquires to Descendant Studios...see what they know about it and if they've got a straighter answer to give...
-
If that were the case they would have had no right to request that Sol Contingency stop using anything from Descent besides the name. But they requested removal of levels, weapons, models, sound effects, anything remotely related to the original games, citing their exclusive right to "duplicate, distribute and prepare derivative works of Descent and its sequels". In other words, they claimed the IP wholy and completely belongs exclusively to them.
If that's true then I don't see what legal standing Interplay have to prevent SC from using assets such as the Pyro. I think we better call saul on this one *grabs phonebook*.
-
I suppose the same that also applies to D:U? As it also doesn't features any of said stuff (robots, levels, ships, names).
I think that Interplay are just a bunch of braggarts that likes to show they are important and have lots of power by intimidating people, even if they are just a bunch of incompetent lawyers playing to be publishers (not even developers by now).
They don't want to admit that they don't have such power and that the licenses doesn't only belong to them.
I suppose Descendent Studios realized that just now, and that's why even if they got the name they won't want to risk any further the project with legal issues.
If Interplay shows they are not the total authority they would lose their 'fame' as an important publisher.
-
I suppose the same that also applies to D:U? As it also doesn't features any of said stuff (robots, levels, ships, names).
That's what makes it ridiculous. The reason Interplay issued the cease and desist notice to SC was because they'd reached an agreement for D:U to carry on the franchise, yet it won't feature any of the content (besides the Descent name) that they claimed belonged to them and requested to be removed.
-
The Torch-KS looks like a Pyro - Technically if your previous statement is correct, then they wouldn't be able to include the Torch in DU, either.
-
The Torch-KS looks like a Pyro - Technically if your previous statement is correct, then they wouldn't be able to include the Torch in DU, either.
So why aren't they using the actual Pyro then?
-
I guess you haven't been following closely - They've stated several times this is intended to be a prequel which predates the Pyro-GX, but perhaps not the 'origin' of the Pyro. But if the rights to the Pyro extend to it's physical shape, then perhaps the Torch is in breach of that? :o
-
They could always just talk to Volition. The guys there seem to be reasonable people... moreso than Interplay who let them license the name and the setting. And they're probably easier to contact.
-
Exactly my criticism on the matter. If Interplay's really is lacking in the full rights to Descent, then they've made no clear attempt to even try to obtain them, which is ridiculous, because I can't see people like Volition being unreasonable about it. But again, I question whether or not whatever rights to Descent people like Volition might are are even still legally valid. Remember, Interplay's own rights to Descent had lapsed back around 2008 before they went out of their way to reobtain them. Haven't heard the other parties who had been involved in Descent do the same.
Still, I'm starting to think that speculating about it ourselves will get us nowhere, especially as we don't know the facts. I think we need to ask these companies themselves and see what they can tell us.
-
I guess you haven't been following closely - They've stated several times this is intended to be a prequel which predates the Pyro-GX, but perhaps not the 'origin' of the Pyro. But if the rights to the Pyro extend to it's physical shape, then perhaps the Torch is in breach of that? :o
Apparently you weren't following the conversation when I already criticized their "it's a prequel" excuse which seems to get trotted out whenever someone mentions using content from the original game.
Unless Interplay gave them permission to use the name only, I don't see why they couldn't use any of the original assets or their likeness. The excuse of the IP belonging to other companies simply doesn't hold water (and I haven't actually seen anyone from DS using it, only commentators on their forum).
I think we need to ask these companies themselves and see what they can tell us.
Ha. Don't hold your breath for an answer since it would probably need to be ok'd by their legal department first, lest it wind up being used as part of a future action.
-
There's been a lot of interesting points to read in this thread, and it's good to see the community so active.
I have to share a lot of Scyphi's opinions about this. While it would be fantastic for a new Descent game to hit the market, it just seems like a big money-grabbing play from Interplay. At the moment, even if the game is in a very, very early stage, it looks nothing like Descent. The common theme throughout the three existing games was (relatively) the same ship. Yes this may be a prequel, but it almost feels like it ruins the Descent name.
The developers don't even seem to have any ideas nailed down either. It seems to be a lot of promises, vague answers to community questions, more of a "please don't be mad at us, we want to do everything!" kind of attitude. From these forums and Descendant's, there seems to be a lot of speculation as to what they'll actually put in the game.
Furthermore, the idea that micro-transactions will exist at all is enough to make me mad. Even if they are purely cosmetic, that's the common trend for modern games, and I think it is not a good direction for the gaming community to head in. Even further, usually a game's single player is created first, with multiplayer taking its assets into further use on non-objective based maps later on. I don't quite understand their desire to launch a multiplayer game first.
-
An interesting article here: Classic FPS Descent to be rebooted by Star Citizen alums | Ars Technica (http://arstechnica.com/gaming/2015/03/classic-fps-descent-to-be-rebooted-by-star-citizen-alums/)
Here are some quotes from that article that I feel specifically address some of the things we've discussed in this thread.
On the subject of reactors:
From a gameplay perspective, Peterson plans to use Descent Underground to expose modern gamers who might not have been playing games in the mid-1990s (or might not even have been alive in the mid-1990s) to Descent’s 6-DoF style—but to do so in a modernized fashion. For the game's single player campaign, that means not going back and recreating D1 and D2’s find-the-three-keys-nuke-the-reactor level progression but instead giving players more interesting and varied things to do.
What the game will be like:
"You’re not actually in the cockpit," explained Peterson as we delved into gameplay specifics. "You’re actually flying a drone," he said, "so, you’re in your harvester—think of Dune—and a contractor comes from Earth and says, 'I need ten thousand pallets of this type of ore,' and three or four teams will pick up that contract, land on an asteroid, and launch their drones." The drones you’ll be flying—from a first-person view, or else it wouldn’t be Descent—run the modern gaming gamut in terms of abilities. Some will be suited to take and deal out tremendous amounts of damage, some will be able to repair other ships or extend their shields, and others will be able to drill through walls. The idea is to introduce a more modern role-based multiplayer experience with team objectives and the ability for teams to balance out with players of different play styles and abilities, without falling into a MOBA-style pit—because Descent is an FPS, not a MOBA.
Who owns the rights to assets:
Peterson has been very up-front about wanting to give the Descent name the full AAA treatment, so that also means not reusing the original game's video or sound assets. "No, we’re not doing sound and graphics from the original—we’re bringing everything up," he said. "The assets are owned by somebody other than Interplay. So we can do prequel derivatives—we’ll show you the genesis of some of these things, like the PyroGX."
-
I now have mixed feelings about this whole project. I feel that Descendent Studios has not been completely honest with the community. A lie of omission is still a lie. Apparently they have a license to make a game called Descent, but that is all. They do not have any rights to use any of the Descent assets. That is why they are sticking to the whole prequel with drones concept. Since last November they were working on a "Ships That Fight Underground" (a.k.a. STFU) project and now it's been branded as a Descent game by Interplay. I suspect that one of the reasons Interplay chose this project over Sol Contingency's Proving Grounds is that Proving Grounds made heavy use of Descent Assets while STFU used none.
I wish Descendent Studios had been more forthcoming with the community in what they cannot do (use of Pyro, PTMC, sounds, music, etc...). Instead they have created confusion that could jeopardize the project, such has having poll on including the Pyro when they knew in advance it was never going to happen. If they would have laid out the parameters of the project, the scope and the restrictions, they would get more useful input from the community.
In my opinion the Descendent Studios product Descent Underground will never be the Descent game we wanted. Descent Underground may still turn out to be a good 6DOF shooter, similar to Proving Grounds if it's ever released. As I stated on their forums, in my opinion if there is no Pyro, it's not Descent. Interplay is trying to cash in on the only Descent asset they have, the name. This is similar to what they have done previously with Descent Freespace and Descent to Undermountain.
While Descent Freespace was a good game in it's own right, it was no Descent. Descent to Undermountain was just a turd.
-
Well, Freespace actually wasn't really a cash-in attempt (hence why the sequel lacked it) but rather brought about due to completely different legal issues. They had wanted to publish the game as "Conflict: Freespace" and I believe they did just that in the UK, but state-side, there already was a company who had laid claim to the "conflict" title and unable to resolve the matter in time, they swapped it out, kind of last minute, with Descent, as that was a title they did have permission to use (at the time) and in a way loosely tied in as the two games share similarities in gameplay mechanics. But it was obvious it had squat to do with Descent, so even if it was a cash-in attempt, it didn't work. As I understand it, on average most Freespace players aren't even aware of Descent as an actual game.
But Interplay really does only own Descent in name only. I knew it. I had long suspected it, but I had dared to hope that maybe I was wrong. But, nope, Interplay, as usual, has met expectations precisely. Typical Interplay. Sitting on an IP they own only in name and can't really do much with because they're greedy.
And yes, I agree with PyroJockey, Descendant should've been upfront about this from the start, rather than getting the hopes of fans up unnecessarily only to have to crush them later (and inevitably rob themselves of both supporters and buyers). But still, maybe hope's not all lost. I can still see Underground capturing the Descent spirit enough to be worthy of the name, even without the iconic assets, it just means Descendant's going to have to get very creative in trying to mimic said assets without actually recreating them as they appeared in other Descent games. The question is, will Descendant have the gumption to pull off exactly that? And see, that's the problem we have now. Doing this won't be easy and would require a lot of hard work (you try reinventing a universe without actually reinventing it at the same time), and to me, Descendant hasn't shown that yet, and indeed, haven't really tried. But at least now I know why, and in some ways I can't blame them for playing it so safe. This is a very tricky matter they're in, and one wrong move could spell legal disaster. It's just that they're putting themselves at risk of building a game that all will agree is utterly unworthy of Descent title, and would've been better if they had kept it as something else. And indeed, now I'm wondering if that would've been for the best.
-
...Descendent Studios has not been completely honest with the community. A lie of omission is still a lie...
They have not omitted anything:
Peterson has been very up-front about wanting to give the Descent name the full AAA treatment, so that also means not reusing the original game's video or sound assets. "No, we’re not doing sound and graphics from the original—we’re bringing everything up," he said. "The assets are owned by somebody other than Interplay. So we can do prequel derivatives—we’ll show you the genesis of some of these things, like the PyroGX."
-
..Doing this won't be easy and would require a lot of hard work (you try reinventing a universe without actually reinventing it at the same time), and to me, Descendant hasn't shown that yet, and indeed, haven't really tried...
This is contrary to what I (and Lothar and other active users at the Descendant Studios forums) have been seeing, as I'm seeing they are trying hard and making a big effort to listen to the Descent community and to implement a lot of the stuff suggested by us to bring that original Descent feel and to bring a bit of continuity, even if the game's story will be set several decades before Descent.
So I can't agree with the 'haven't really tried' part at all... :P
They are being EXTREMELY communicative with us, be it either on chat on or forums or through interviews or through video streams.
So they are trying to do the best they can.
-
...Descendent Studios has not been completely honest with the community. A lie of omission is still a lie...
They have not omitted anything:
Peterson has been very up-front about wanting to give the Descent name the full AAA treatment, so that also means not reusing the original game's video or sound assets. "No, we’re not doing sound and graphics from the original—we’re bringing everything up," he said. "The assets are owned by somebody other than Interplay. So we can do prequel derivatives—we’ll show you the genesis of some of these things, like the PyroGX."
I disagree. The article you are quoting was from arstechnia (http://arstechnica.com/gaming/2015/03/classic-fps-descent-to-be-rebooted-by-star-citizen-alums/) . I have not seen this on the Kickstarter page or any official statement on the Descendent web site. The forum post (http://descendentstudios.com/community/topic/1010-clarification-on-the-licensing-of-the-ip/) where I asked about the IP directly was ignored by developers.
Also the article from arstechnia (http://arstechnica.com/gaming/2015/03/classic-fps-descent-to-be-rebooted-by-star-citizen-alums/) was published on 3/18/2015. On 3/12/2015 Wingman started a poll (http://descendentstudios.com/community/topic/878-the-genesis-of-the-pyro-to-add-or-not-to-add-that-is-the-question/) for adding the Pyro and promised "open development and we are committed to making that happen...let us know your thoughts, and we the team will honor your decision", a promise that he can not deliver.
We have had a ton of requests for the Iconic Pyro-GX ship in our game - but being a prequel, we were planning to show the BIRTH of the 1st iteration of the Pyro - in the single player portion of the game.
However, tons and I mean TONS of people have emailed us asking for it, so we are thinking of adding it earlier as an add on opportunity with an exclusive campaign version - only available during the campaign - and it would be the genesis of that iconic ships line.
However, we want to know how everyone feels about adding it now, or waiting until later, so we are going to have a poll and let you guys decide.
We promised open development and we are committed to making that happen, so Descendents, vote, and let us know your thoughts, and we the team will honor your decision.
Many contributors were under the impression that Descendent Studios had full license to the Descent franchise and all it's assets. Even though this quickly became obvious in the forums, Descendent Studios took no steps to clarify this. At the very best this is a major communications failure. This would be a lot easier to swallow if they stated up font (in the official site and Kickstarter) that they could not use the original assets but would provide precursor ships with the same gameplay. Yes it was stated "we've got the name" but most people would not have assumed that was all they had.
-
I think the worst dishonesty is saying "Yes single player will be included" but further down on the kickstarter page it is stated that only a "mini-campaign" will be included, with development of a full single player component being dependent on the success of the initial release and no details given as to how it will be made available - will it be a free add-on, a completely separate purchase, or DLC?
-
This is contrary to what I (and Lothar and other active users at the Descendant Studios forums) have been seeing, as I'm seeing they are trying hard and making a big effort to listen to the Descent community and to implement a lot of the stuff suggested by us to bring that original Descent feel and to bring a bit of continuity, even if the game's story will be set several decades before Descent.
So I can't agree with the 'haven't really tried' part at all...
Not really. Most of this stuff I have to agree with something that was said earlier and that Descendant's only really applying some of that after the fact, meaning they didn't think of it themselves. On some aspects of that I can understand, but others I can't at all; they should've been obvious. Like the whole post about the gameplay physics that they made such a hullabaloo about. WillyP's right; that should've been set to happen from the beginning, back when it wasn't even Descent just yet. Furthermore, when they announced it, all they did was slap "Descent" on the title and then made next to no other attempt to even make it look or even feel like the franchise it claimed to be taking upon it's soldiers. Personally, if I were them, if I were serious about building a Descent game, I would've at least done something to present it so it was clear that was what I was doing in more than just the name.
And yeah, they're applying some of these things now, but largely under pressure from the fans. I'm not convinced that were it not for that pressure from fans, they would've actually thought to apply some of these things on their own. Indeed, after looking around their forums and seeing their average reaction to some of these suggestions, a lot of it feels almost half-hearted and something that's just getting tagged on as an afterthought. They could be trying a lot harder to bring it closer to Descent, even with the stumbling block of lacking full rights to do so, and yet, even now, the game they're presenting still feels like it's massively missing the mark.
In the end, I still have to question, as good as the intentions of Descendant are, and I really do believe they want to make a fun game in the end, that they don't "get" Descent as much as they'd like us to believe. There's a lot more to Descent than 6DOF, after all, but they seemed to have thought that as long as they got that much right, they were good. But no, we fans know better, as can be demonstrated on any internet thread discussing this very subject.
To be sure, though, Descendant certainly could still pull it off. I just can't help but think that we, the fans, are going to have to hold their hands all the way through it or they'll wander off and get themselves lost.
-
As whiny as I may sound, I'm still backing this game. I'm always looking for a good 6DOF game. If they get the gameplay right, and allow object customization in private servers, they could have a winner.
-
Interesting post from Lothar regarding D:U, worths a read in case you're skeptical or undecided:
http://descentbb.net/viewtopic.php?p=349336#p349336 (http://descentbb.net/viewtopic.php?p=349336#p349336)
Much as him, I truly think D:U deserves to be supported!
-
Been sick lately so haven't been following closely - But mostly TLDR. Read the forums (in detail), join chat often, speak with the developers and then form your opinions about this project. You can't base everything on the PR material alone. TBH I believe they were rushed into the Kickstarter by Interplay (which doesn't surprise me)
-
That... wouldn't surprise me either.
I honestly do think these guys have good intentions but I get the impression this is still early days for them and they're still trying to figure out what their game should be. I don't think that's a bad sign.
-
They are halfway through the Kickstarter but haven't reached half their goal. This is discouraging. I wish they would have gotten the Descent community involved BEFORE they launched the Kickstarter.
-
I also wish they had been more upfront both about what they planned, and what they could or could not do, because the confusion over that has NOT helped. A reoccurring theme I've seen throughout the Descent community is a widespread and general skepticism over just what, exactly, it is Descendant intends to do with this game...as well as how dedicated they actually are to the project. Some of this is brought on by disinformation, to be sure, but Descendant's attempts to clear it up are now seeming like too little too late. I, personally, am STILL unclear on certain details of what they have planned, and that's worrying.
-
BTW, there's a new gameplay video of Descent: Underground (although it's still very WIP and pre-alpha):
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-jCoP9HJkNg (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-jCoP9HJkNg)
-
Not bad, though it seems awfully spacious for such small ships, and I'll say it again; I can't help but feel there's something off about the physics. It being pre-alpha, though, I'm not sweating that too much just yet.
-
Not bad, though it seems awfully spacious for such small ships, and I'll say it again; I can't help but feel there's something off about the physics. It being pre-alpha, though, I'm not sweating that too much just yet.
Agreed, in fact just posted in the poll thread. I think in modern game engines it's just too tempting to build large areas.
-
Not bad, though it seems awfully spacious for such small ships, and I'll say it again; I can't help but feel there's something off about the physics. It being pre-alpha, though, I'm not sweating that too much just yet.
Agreed, in fact just posted in the poll thread. I think in modern game engines it's just too tempting to build large areas.
The team mentioned in their weekly update video that the physics are still being tweaked:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G9ztRVT465s (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G9ztRVT465s)
In BadNewBaron's interview today, Rob mentioned the scale and referenced the desired "2x2" tunnel size, which wasn't in the video:
http://www.twitch.tv/badnewsbaron/v/3985186 (http://www.twitch.tv/badnewsbaron/v/3985186)
-
New trailer @ https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ko8EOVfY26k (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ko8EOVfY26k)
-
I backed ask the way to Combat ready status XD
-
New trailer @ https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ko8EOVfY26k (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ko8EOVfY26k)
Nice. I must admit, I am impressed. 8)
-
*rises from the dead again*
Check this video: https://youtu.be/K06s2Yvf91E?t=22s
Notice the text in the rear view camera, and then in the next scene vs the Hellion, notice the name of the Black Shark and Smart missile (I laughed my ass off at that). Without a doubt, that's footage from my playthrough on YouTube :P
But I think it's cool that they used a piece of my video.
Anyway, I feel like voicing my opinion. It looks cool, but it doesn't have that Descent atmosphere. Idk if it's the design or the way they're marketing it. In that video, I suppose the Pyro looks alright, but to be honest it looks as thin as a potato chip. And that green ship that they launch along side it reminded me of the guide bot in the way that it had three wings to it, although it looks a little large to be effective. Overall I was not expecting these designs, and I mean that for every ship in the trailer. Ever since Descent 1, things have been designed to look blocky and industrial. Also the other ships look like miniature flying whales.
And on the marketing aspect, it seems like they're trying to sell is as a blaring AAA title. It's a really good way to get the word out there, but for some reason it seems like what they are doing is subverting the fact that Descent is supposed to have a dark atmosphere, you know? Scary robots and all, but it doesn't seem like any of that is there.
Also I am noticing that they are going for gigantic areas. Those did not work out too well in Descent 3 and I can recall making a few Magnum pilots rage while I flew a Phoenix out in the open. Basically all of the weapons flew too slow and it doesn't seem like Descendent Studios has fixed the problem.
Wingman seems like a cool guy, tho.
Tbh, I've put my chips in for Sol Contingency and I'm making gameplay suggestions and offering to help with the story. They're shooting for that dark and familiar atmosphere and are looking to right the old wrongs and keep the formula that works.
-
All of the points you've raised have been discussed at length over at the DU site. Most of them are null and void points because the material you see in the trailer isn't the game, but just some basic assets whipped up for that trailer.
-
I would likewise urge you to pursuse the Descendant Studio (http://descendentstudios.com/) site, especially their forums, NUMBERZero before being too quick to judge. Already they have made leap and bounds to address many of these concerns, and it would also explain why some of these things are the way they are (like the guide-bot look-a-like; not a guide-bot at all but a playable ship called the Typhoon).
The helicopter tail ships you see in both trailers are no more, so disregard them.
Size and scope has been adjusted since then to be more compressed; they didn't yet have this fine-tuned yet when they put together these trailers but knew it was going to need to when they made them and were quick to inform viewers of this intent, which they've made good on.
And there's plenty more, and Descendant's been both very open to fan input and have gone out of their way to try and apply it where possible so if there's something you have a problem with, tell them.
In short, DU's not fully in the clear yet...but it's definitely starting to step in the right direction.
Also lately I've heard more about it than Sol Contingency, which I haven't really heard any new updates about since this past spring.
-
I think a lot of your concerns have already been voiced to the DU team, and I think you'll find that development direction is steering towards a more classic Descent approach as it moves forward. The team has been quick to point out that the trailer was essentially a hastily thrown together tech demo to boost backing.
Ship design: DU has scrapped all but the new Pyro (here known as the Torch) design and revamped the entire line of ships to look more in line with Descent.
Level design: DU is using D1's mines as a blueprint for how levels should flow and how fast-paced the action is. In a word, the giant open areas are said to be gone, for the most part.
Multiplayer: DU will, in fact, adopt a more Call-of-Duty-like experience progression system. However, when I voiced my concern that this would decrease the attraction of DU to old-school shooter fans like myself, who want a pure-skill challenge, Wingman personally assured me that a classic mode would be in the works to appeal to the D1/D2 crowd.
And basically Wingman's response is indicative of the development of DU. The developers take time out of their busy schedules to peruse the forums, answer questions, gather input, and generally be all around nice guys. It's a seriously transparent effort, and I think that transparency has helped to not only bring the descent community together in support of the game, but has also helped ease the initial tension between the SolC team and the DU team. :D
-
The folks at Descendent Studios have been talking about releasing a new trailer. The current one was from when the Kickstarter campaign was still running and they have come a long way since then.
-
...and revamped the entire line of ships to look more in line with Descent.
Well...I don't know about that. The designs they've shown off thus far actually strike me as being rather peculiar in comparison most of the time, but I'm slowly adjusting to them. ::)
It's loads better than the helicopter tailed versions from before, though...though I'll admit the red one looked okay...it had faint Pyro stylings and looked great head on...it's really that silly elongated helicopter tail that bugged me about those early designs...
Oh well, they aren't around anymore, so little point in dwelling upon 'em.
-
It also looks like they are taking a lot of direction from Drakona and Lothar.
8)
-
It also looks like they are taking a lot of direction from Drakona and Lothar.
8)
And that's a heck of a consulting group. ;)