EPTAn article on the announcement, giving some information about the business model they are planning to use.
Guardians of Atlas - Page 12
| Forum Index > General Games |
Development ended, game appears to be dead. https://forums.artillery.com/discussion/911/end-of-development -Jinro | ||
|
_Spartak_
Turkey397 Posts
An article on the announcement, giving some information about the business model they are planning to use. | ||
|
Musicus
Germany23576 Posts
 . Aren't there enough freaking team games nowadays? Sigh, well I will stick with sc2 until wc4 comes I guess. Not that I don't love sc2 and Legacy is looking good, but I thought having anohter 1v1 rts game and some competition would be great. | ||
|
JimmyJRaynor
Canada16700 Posts
On October 22 2015 02:08 _Spartak_ wrote: http://venturebeat.com/2015/10/21/chinese-gaming-giant-tencent-leads-series-a-funding-in-free-to-play-developer-artillery/ An article on the announcement, giving some information about the business model they are planning to use. well i guess my publisher question got answered. 1000 player beta in December and "its in pre-alpha" sounds like the game is still a long way off. | ||
|
-NegativeZero-
United States2141 Posts
public test is opening up to 1000 people next week, go sign up if you want to try to get in | ||
|
goiflin
Canada1218 Posts
| ||
|
opisska
Poland8852 Posts
| ||
|
Endymion
United States3701 Posts
| ||
|
Deckard.666
152 Posts
They gave up on the idea of it being playable in the browser a couple of months ago iirc. | ||
|
-Archangel-
Croatia7457 Posts
 | ||
|
decemberscalm
United States1353 Posts
On November 29 2015 20:25 opisska wrote: The only thing I don't get about this is the browser idea. SC2 has enough trouble with performance as a standalone client, is there really any chance that a browser-based RTS would be even remotely playable? I know they also have a client, so its not a problem, but still, it seem quite absurd. Quite playable. Browser tech is pretty amazing and rapidly advancing. Check out http://littlewargame.com/ and http://www.adityaravishankar.com/projects/games/command-and-conquer/. Pretty sure they stated in a blog somewhere that one of the biggest problems is that you are at the whims of browser devs changing a piece of code on their end and breaking everything on atlas's by doing so. You can have literally changed nothing in your games code base and have the entire project fall apart for chromes users the next day. Also some full screen issues are evident in games like little war that google doesn't seem to have a high priority on fixing. Still, can be made absolutely playable and performant though. Sc2's engine leaves much to be desired. BW was doing massive 8 player battles how long ago with pretty damn good stability? | ||
|
-Archangel-
Croatia7457 Posts
On November 30 2015 04:25 decemberscalm wrote: Quite playable. Browser tech is pretty amazing and rapidly advancing. Check out http://littlewargame.com/ and http://www.adityaravishankar.com/projects/games/command-and-conquer/. Pretty sure they stated in a blog somewhere that one of the biggest problems is that you are at the whims of browser devs changing a piece of code on their end and breaking everything on atlas's by doing so. You can have literally changed nothing in your games code base and have the entire project fall apart for chromes users the next day. Also some full screen issues are evident in games like little war that google doesn't seem to have a high priority on fixing. Still, can be made absolutely playable and performant though. Sc2's engine leaves much to be desired. BW was doing massive 8 player battles how long ago with pretty damn good stability? Changes to windows can also do that. A new update can break your program. But it happens less often. | ||
|
opisska
Poland8852 Posts
| ||
|
Yoav
United States1874 Posts
Imagine it as a vague sorta kinda TvZ with one faction having tanks, marines, scv/turret, while the other has ling, bling, muta. In addition to the primary type, you could have supporting units of various kinds (medics for marines, vultures for tanks, vikings for medivacs or whatever). You get an interesting dynamic where it's not inherently coin flippy, but each player has to work together to make sure their prong of the attack works well. On another, it could be bullshit coinflippyness. (I liked monobattles, but they were always a little bullshit.) Who knows!? | ||
|
jalstar
United States8198 Posts
On November 29 2015 14:42 -NegativeZero- wrote: http://blog.artillery.com/2015/11/atlas-test-weekends.html public test is opening up to 1000 people next week, go sign up if you want to try to get in Screenshot makes it look like map control = resources, the same model that Relic (Dawn of War, Company of Heroes) likes to use. | ||
|
eviltomahawk
United States11135 Posts
On November 30 2015 13:31 jalstar wrote: Screenshot makes it look like map control = resources, the same model that Relic (Dawn of War, Company of Heroes) likes to use. Where is this screenshot? | ||
|
jalstar
United States8198 Posts
On October 22 2015 02:08 _Spartak_ wrote: http://venturebeat.com/2015/10/21/chinese-gaming-giant-tencent-leads-series-a-funding-in-free-to-play-developer-artillery/ An article on the announcement, giving some information about the business model they are planning to use. It was in this post, not the one I quoted before. | ||
|
-NegativeZero-
United States2141 Posts
On November 30 2015 13:31 jalstar wrote: Screenshot makes it look like map control = resources, the same model that Relic (Dawn of War, Company of Heroes) likes to use. i remember reading somewhere that it's a very old screenshot, and the game both looks and plays very differently now. | ||
|
Incognoto
France10239 Posts
edit, closed beta is now open: a friend of mine got in. but i still haven't. q_q | ||
|
Endymion
United States3701 Posts
| ||
|
-NegativeZero-
United States2141 Posts
the good news is that this means there's a decent amount of interest in this game already, since well over 1000 people must have signed up if so many are getting rejected. | ||
| ||
