|
|
On September 19 2016 05:12 Jonoman92 wrote:Show nested quote +On September 19 2016 04:09 eviltomahawk wrote:On September 19 2016 03:30 Jonoman92 wrote:
This seems weird... It seemed like a close to finished game and they are cancelling it after putting in so much work? Maybe they just straight-up ran out of money or had the investors pull out. It was a big mistake to drop Day[9] just before the open alpha. He could've done so much with promotion. Oh, they dropped him? I hadn't realized that. I thought he was deeply involved in it or something. Then on the day the alpha was coming out I played some BGH with him which I found weird that he wasn't streaming GoA or something.
They parted ways in early August. I actually don't know if they dropped him or if he decided to leave, but it's a shame that the project didn't work out in the end.
|
Welp. Didn't see that coming.
Granted, I thought the game might fail either way, maybe six months down the line or something. But two weeks later? That's rather telling. It likely means going into Alpha was their last ditch attempt and they were already facing a shutdown.
Oh well. Can't say the game looked very appealing; it was bland in many ways and compromised too much on the aspects it drew from the two genres involved. It's a damn shame too, because I do think the scene needs a new RTS. Just look at WC3's steady rise over the last year or so, there's been a real revival of the competitive scene. Yet the game is 13 years old.
I still believe there's a real yearning for a RTS like WC3, but I doubt it's on the radar of any developer.
|
Wow, that's really surprising that they're quitting on it after such a short time. It does seem like desperation but I don't really understand what they were thinking if this was the timeline they knew they were facing. Maybe they didn't... You don't really see if something is a success or a failure in a couple of weeks if your almost only marketing is word of mouth.
It does seem like issues with funding but I'm interested in hearing if Artillery's platform or the company itself will still survive. Dropping the in-browser part from the concept for GoA made the platform much less appealing but maybe it could still work for simpler things or have some value for developers.
Interesting additional context for Day9's silence on it all.
|
wait they pulled the plug on the project???
|
On September 19 2016 19:02 nighcol wrote:
Wow, that's really surprising that they're quitting on it after such a short time. It does seem like desperation but I don't really understand what they were thinking if this was the timeline they knew they were facing. Maybe they didn't... You don't really see if something is a success or a failure in a couple of weeks if your almost only marketing is word of mouth.
It does seem like issues with funding but I'm interested in hearing if Artillery's platform or the company itself will still survive. Dropping the in-browser part from the concept for GoA made the platform much less appealing but maybe it could still work for simpler things or have some value for developers.
Interesting additional context for Day9's silence on it all.
Strange part is that it seems like the devs did not see it coming. Well, until maybe 2 days before where they fell silent. But until then, they were still putting in full work loads.
|
On September 20 2016 01:03 Spyridon wrote:Show nested quote +On September 19 2016 19:02 nighcol wrote:
Wow, that's really surprising that they're quitting on it after such a short time. It does seem like desperation but I don't really understand what they were thinking if this was the timeline they knew they were facing. Maybe they didn't... You don't really see if something is a success or a failure in a couple of weeks if your almost only marketing is word of mouth.
It does seem like issues with funding but I'm interested in hearing if Artillery's platform or the company itself will still survive. Dropping the in-browser part from the concept for GoA made the platform much less appealing but maybe it could still work for simpler things or have some value for developers.
Interesting additional context for Day9's silence on it all. Strange part is that it seems like the devs did not see it coming. Well, until maybe 2 days before where they fell silent. But until then, they were still putting in full work loads.
I would suspect that means that a 3e party (investors) pulled the plug and they fell silent to try and work out if there was a way to keep going and failing to find one they dropped development right away rather then limp along and incur (more) debt.
|
So, I didn't know about this game up until finding this thread an hour ago. Like most people that value their time, I read the first page of the thread and proceeded to jump to the last few. My impression is that the game is not worth playing yet, but the thread seemed to have gone off a tangent with arguments about "hating on Day 9" and "what makes a good RTS" along with "RTS games is a niche/dying genre" and lets not forget "technically all MOBA is a version of RTS". None of these arguments actually helped me decide if this game is worth playing, thus I use the word "yet" in a previous sentence.
|
On September 20 2016 02:41 Jett.Jack.Alvir wrote:
So, I didn't know about this game up until finding this thread an hour ago. Like most people that value their time, I read the first page of the thread and proceeded to jump to the last few. My impression is that the game is not worth playing yet, but the thread seemed to have gone off a tangent with arguments about "hating on Day 9" and "what makes a good RTS" along with "RTS games is a niche/dying genre" and lets not forget "technically all MOBA is a version of RTS". None of these arguments actually helped me decide if this game is worth playing, thus I use the word "yet" in a previous sentence.
Since they stopped development of the game, your impression of if it is worth your time or not is sort of irrelevant. So clearly valuing your time made you miss on some critical information.
|
OP still talks about it being in browser... lol
|
It was a good run. A fun few days of playing and I can say I got top 8 at a guardians of atlas major tournament. Could've gotten in the money but the game design was shit, letting the archive get killed without taking out any earlier buildings. On a more serious note it is kind of a shame it had to end so soon after getting my hands on it. There was some fun to be had and it still had potential.
|
On September 20 2016 10:05 mishimaBeef wrote:
OP still talks about it being in browser... lol
that OP is from the initial announcement, i'm not editing it for a game which is apparently literally dead before it started it ;p
in fact i can't edit it without annoying a mod, so i'm not gonna :D
|
Sweden33719 Posts
Added a little link to the end of development notice at the top.
|
On September 20 2016 02:41 Jett.Jack.Alvir wrote:
So, I didn't know about this game up until finding this thread an hour ago. Like most people that value their time, I read the first page of the thread and proceeded to jump to the last few. My impression is that the game is not worth playing yet, but the thread seemed to have gone off a tangent with arguments about "hating on Day 9" and "what makes a good RTS" along with "RTS games is a niche/dying genre" and lets not forget "technically all MOBA is a version of RTS". None of these arguments actually helped me decide if this game is worth playing, thus I use the word "yet" in a previous sentence.
i mean.... there was actually a good few pages of heavy rts design discussion which imo was very interesting, all of the things that you quoted tied back around to the game in some way
|
Well than, it seems I have wasted my time in reading this thread. However, Endymion is right though, some of the points brought up regarding RTS design were quite insightful. Regardless, 'dead game'....
|
On September 18 2016 05:05 Hider wrote:Show nested quote +On September 18 2016 02:54 goswser wrote:On September 18 2016 02:22 Hider wrote:Artillery was a mess for a long time. As the head game designer I think you have to put a lot of the blame on Day[9] for the outcome. At the very least he should have seen the direction that the game was heading in and changed it long before it got to this point. What didn't you like about it? And did you tell the devs/day9? Taking objectives such as destroying towers didn't feel that important, resource collection felt overly complicated and confusing to new players, unit model sizes were too small, hero units didn't really feel like heroes. I got responses from the devs and other playtesters, not from day9 though. They actually made all the unit models larger after my feedback, and everyone I talked to in the discord including the devs liked the larger unit models more and thought it was the right direction to go in. But you enjoyed the core gameplay in terms of unit control? Show nested quote +I didn't know asking a question instantly means I'm a fanboy. I'm getting the impression from the tone of your posts that you're attacking Day9 (again I don't really care) for reasons other than him having a different opinion of/vision for pathfinding than yours. I remember one time where a reddit user was downvoted after he pointed out that Nathanias casting showed that he lacked an understanding of relevant terran builds in the current meta. But Nathanias could get away with saying completely incorrect stuff and all of his fanboys would defend him because "he can do nothing wrong" and saying he is wrong = Your a hater. And this reddit user - who was 100% correct - was the one getting downvoted. That type of bullshit is what creates a shitty community. If you want progress. If you want meaningful discussions and actual analysis, then you give criticsm when criticism is needed. Imagine someone - in a relevant context - is saying that Person X is bad at math because he can't sum up 2+2. But person Y likes person X and therefore steps in order to say that this other dude is a hater and "attacking him". And that's exactly what you did. Day9 saying the pathing was perfect years ago is inexcuseable. If you thought that pathing was good = Your not a good designer, just like your not good at math if you can't sum up 2+2. And yes criticizing Day9 is needed because otherwise people would get the perception that Day9 was the good guy who just couldn't get his design decisions through and therefore left the company, and that it was the rest of Atlas who failed. Meanwhile Day9s design videos should continue to be perceived as widowm. (at least alot of users seems to think that). /End rant.
You're an interesting character to say the least. Fyi people found like 10 games easily that had the 3rd cc before double ebay, because that's always been the norm. Love you tho fam <3
|
i'm sad to see it go down, even after all my personal doubts.
i wanted to see it rise and shine or at least try and be a force like smite is in the moba community.
so they're stopping development, but maybe it will move on to another company. it reminds of a squad based rts (no base building) that had stopped or transfered development. i forget the name. TB had tried it one time with some friends. and i was so excited to play it because it reminded me of an old Nexon mmorpg called Shattered Galaxy (wonderful little game btw).
they say they are working on the 'detail's. i don't think any light will surface on what happened on development, but this game was definitely something i was looking at from a distance.
seems a bit like an obituary ):.
|
Still no news about the details of why it ended and what is going to happen?
|
On October 01 2016 02:01 Grumbels wrote:
Still no news about the details of why it ended and what is going to happen?
I keep thinking someone is going to get sued in the end. Investors must be pissed.
|
Wow I just found out his game is DOA. Compared to this game, Grey Goo or Act of Aggression are masterpieces, they at least got released and sold more than 100+k copies.
|
no idea how people can be "shocked" or "stunned" with this game getting cancelled. It was a 4 year old company with no track record. With employees who had almost no track record with developing games and zero revenue. The game itself did not even have a revenue model.
On October 02 2016 01:04 -Archangel- wrote:
Wow I just found out his game is DOA. Compared to this game, Grey Goo or Act of Aggression are masterpieces, they at least got released and sold more than 100+k copies.
they had experienced game makers running the show. For $10, the GG and the AoA the campaign and skirmish modes aren't half bad. As a full priced game with viable automatch multiplayer GG and AoA failed. You are correct though,
The makers of GG and AoA accomplished far more than the snake oil salesmen promising a browser-based platform that will make hte console obsolete and then ended up producing absolutely nothing.
I love RTS games and I admire all these developers for trying to make a great game I might love. However, the marketplace is just not there. Everyone is playing Clash of Clans and Mobile Strike to scratch their army-building, stragetical-tactical itch. And its more easy and more convenient to set up those games on a tablet than any PC-RTS game.
In retrospect, this is some awesome hyperbole and big talk marketing; what makes its even better is that fact these guys had never done a damn thing before.
http://www.dailydot.com/esports/project-atlas-artillery-games-day-nine-esports-ankur-pansari/
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
