| Mail |
You might also like: WoW Insider, Joystiq, and more

Reader Comments (45)

Posted: Mar 23rd 2010 10:11AM Thac0 said

  • 3 hearts
  • Report
The skills system and play time and setting ... This IS the game I've been waiting for!

Posted: Mar 23rd 2010 10:20AM (Unverified) said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
so cool! please reward me with betacake???

Posted: Mar 23rd 2010 10:32AM Tom in VA said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
The game sounds intriguing and fun. I like the ability to mix and match skills, the smaller group sizes, the number of soloable missions, and also the fact that it sounds like you can wear a jeans and t-shirt and still be uber if you want to.

The "Funcom" part of the equation makes me a tad nervous but, otherwise, count me as interested. :)

Posted: Mar 23rd 2010 10:33AM Draccan said

  • 3 hearts
  • Report

Pure awesomesauce

Posted: Mar 23rd 2010 10:38AM (Unverified) said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
Good write up, much better than the ones currently available on other portals. Props to the author ;)

The game mechanics sound fun and engaging and hopefully funcom are prepared for things better thanks to their 'experience' with the AoC fiasco.

On another hand, I'm worried that this game will be heavily into instances; taking away that 'breathing, persistent world' feel. Guess we need more info to draw any solid conclusions.

Posted: Mar 23rd 2010 12:51PM Snichy said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
It clearly states:

"The world will be persistent, but there will also be instances in dungeons and mini dungeons. Many of the regular storyline quests will be completely solo-able, while the instances are more for your 4-man party."
Reply

Posted: Mar 23rd 2010 2:27PM Tom in VA said

  • 2.5 hearts
  • Report
I can see how the instancing could really HELP the storyline.

Having a kazillion other people running around town killing zombies along with you would really destroy a creepy atmosphere for me. I hope the game has a generous mix of both instances and persistent areas.
Reply

Posted: Mar 23rd 2010 10:40AM Birk said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
No development for mac? Seriously, so many people are buying apple computers these days...developers should really jump on that bandwagon. WoW acknowledged that, and as a result it was the only game I played for the last 4 years. Fallen earth got it, and now I play that too.

This game looks great, but they are missing out on a big chunk of the market if they dont support mac.

And dont tell me about bootcamp. Yes, I use it, but the majority of people arent inclined to do so, and it is a major pain in the ass to reboot my computer for the sole purpose of playing a game, and then having to switch back for work or school.

Cheers-

Posted: Mar 23rd 2010 11:16AM (Unverified) said

  • 3 hearts
  • Report
Blizzard developed World of Warcraft's engine to support both DirectX 9 and OpenGL 2.0. The game even had a linux client at one point in beta, but that was scratched.

Funcom's Dreamworld Engine does not support OpenGL at any level, and would require a good amount of time and effort to bring any game running it to another rendering engine. The reason they announce an Xbox version as well is due to that console also supporting DirectX. If you take a look at the games that do support mac (Warhammer, Fallen Earth) you can see that both of them were ported to mac, their engines don't officially support OpenGL, so they use a compatibility layer called WINE. This may work well for some engines, but an engine like Dreamworld supports some of the most advanced features of DirectX that aren't exactly possible under OpenGL.

Mac, while gaining popularity, is still not financially ideal for game development. With Steam making it's way there, hopefully that will change in the future.
Reply

Posted: Mar 23rd 2010 11:31AM (Unverified) said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
There are better Windows platforms out there than bootcamp, which do not require a reboot of your machine....

Try VMware.
Reply

Posted: Mar 23rd 2010 11:58AM (Unverified) said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
@Zypher

I think you mean to refer to Direct3D specifically, not DirectX in general. Direct3D (a component of DirectX) is the immediate competitor to OpenGL. In that light, the spec for OpenGL 4 has been detailed recently and it's feature set is equal to that of Direct3D 11.

http://arstechnica.com/software/news/2010/03/opengl-4-spec-arrives-with-direct3d-11-feature-parity.ars
Reply

Posted: Mar 23rd 2010 1:23PM (Unverified) said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
Specifically yes, Direct3D but the Dreamworld Engine also uses DirectInput, and DirectSound. So in general, the term DirectX is a broader way to explain what I'm talking about.

Yes, OpenGL 4's spec is improving but that doesn't change that to port the engine over would require a large investment in time and money, and would set the game back by a good amount of time.
Reply

Posted: Mar 23rd 2010 10:41AM Infamous Nefarious said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
FINALLY something that looks like it'll actually be worth whatever subscription fee it'll have..... maybe they'll offer lifetime subscriptions too. And from everything i've seen it's gonna be absolutely awesome.

Posted: Mar 23rd 2010 10:46AM (Unverified) said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
Warning: Funcom did the very same thing with AoC. They released tidbit and a demo of the (polished) Tortage that had everyone foaming at the mouth. Then with release came the truth... tons of bugs, tons of missing content, quests, and features that were printed on the box, and a PR campaign that would make the Democrats and Republicans blush in shame. Now with Secret World I see the very same marketing Funcom used before.... Be Warned that this game and Funcoms history with AO and AoC it could be a dog! Don't jump on the bandwagon.. that is what they want.

I want Secret World to succeed and be a good game from release but I DO NOT trust Funcom.

Posted: Mar 23rd 2010 11:22AM MrGutts said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
Yea I would agree with this.

I am sure we will see all those Cinematics and voice overs in beta and the demo's for the first few hours of the game and then POOF, nothing else after.
Reply

Posted: Mar 23rd 2010 11:44AM Thac0 said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
Mr Guts, if you had at all followed the game or read about it prior to buying it you would have known they specifically stated that the first 20 levels were different then it would spit you out into the MMO world. I guess your going to blame Funcom for your lack of reading skills?
Reply

Posted: Mar 23rd 2010 12:19PM MrGutts said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
@THAC0

That is utter horse shit, they only made that statement when people called Funcom out on it. So how long did it take them to put DX10 into the damn game ( This was printed on the box ). Oh wait if you read the forums or any place on the site, it was like it has ALWAYS been in the damn game from Day 1.

Also, since when is it the job of a consumer to read every damn post that Funcom puts out before you buy the game? You gotta be freaking kidding me, oh and should have I tried to read the 1000+ posts they removed from there forums in the first 4 weeks of the game in order to hide them from the Share Holders?

No, what I will do is to blame Funcom for false advertising , being a douche bag of a company ( at the time ) and having crappy customer service worse than Cryptic!

Reply

Posted: Mar 23rd 2010 12:34PM Thac0 said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
Nope i wont argue that DX10 at release was a flat out lie on the box. However the 20 levels thing was in their interviews and hype statements for months before release. You can fault AoC for stuff but not the "the first 20 levels was a lie" statement i keep hearing that is just false.
Reply

Posted: Mar 23rd 2010 4:21PM Ivasen said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
I keep seeing the delusion that Funcom is the reason the blame for the state of the game AoC use to be in.

Do you not know how the industry works?

The DEVELOPMENT TEAM and the Lead Designers are the reason it was like that, which are almost completely different than the ones creating this game.

The only real solid argument for holding Funcom itself responsible is it's customer support, which is probably the worst in the industry.

The only thing really linking this game to AoC under the Funcom banner is their access to AoCs tools and information.

Warning everyone to be weary about "big bad funcom because AoC was fail" is not only stupid, it's completely false.
Reply

Posted: Mar 24th 2010 12:03PM (Unverified) said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
@Ivasen

What the fact is that FUNCOM DEVELOPED and RELEASED the game AoC... so your argument is not just stupid but false! So Funcom is to blame for the game, the false advertising, hundreds of bugs, tons of missing content, and the crap-tastic game they released.
Reply

Featured Stories

Engadget

Engadget

Joystiq

Joystiq

WoW Insider

WoW

TUAW

TUAW