I do not know what goes on within the confines of Funcom’s offices, so I can only speculate. However, it seems like the new three-month Chapter schedule is pretty tight for getting new content of acceptable quality standards out in time from my outsider’s perspective.
It may be that a Chapter can put out 95% of the intended content, then push the extra 5% into the next Chapter, but then the next Chapter can only put out 90% and then there is 10% to be pushed back.
This isn’t very sustainable, and could hurt the next Age when A2 now has 15% of A1’s leftovers being pushed into it. I notice the Down-But-Not-Out mechanic never made it into A1 at all, despite being teased for A1:C2.
So what if there was a three-month gap between Ages? Get the leftovers out of the way and ensure enough time to start a new Age properly. Bug patches and unfinished remnants of the previous Age could still be released during this time.
And if this gap was unassociated with an Age, what Battle Pass would run during this gap? No new Battle Pass, it should be a time when players are allowed to go back and complete any old Battle Passes they might not have done from any Age.
Maybe the development crunch isn’t as bad as it seems, maybe the suits higher up won’t let this happen regardless, but I think a time between Ages that gave an out to the FOMO practices of the Battle Pass and gave a bit more time for the next Age to be done right would benefit everyone.
I seem to recall a thread that suggested they take some time off and fix some stuff. Since the issues just seem to stack up more with every Chapter. But that thread got brought down fast by a few people that are well known for doing so.
I’ve done construction most of my life. I want to do the best job I can. Been a few times a foreman has told me they needed something right now, and I’ve had to tell them I can give it to you right, or now, but not both. That is the problem here with a set release date, updates go out the door AS IS. Which isn’t good for players or funcom.
Looking at it from the players’ perspective, this would be a great practice. However, from Funcom’s perspective, it could be unfeasible. What the introduction of “ages” has shown us is that when the game is being monetized (generating good revenue), the team becomes a content-creating machine. I don’t like the Battle Pass model, let alone the bazaar model, but it’s undeniable that the game has never brought so many new mechanics in such a short period of time as it’s happening now. The dev team has probably grown, and there’s no way to give collective vacations to these folks. It’s also not possible to monetize without the hype of a new age and a bomb of new monetized content.
Where did I mention vacations? I never said any such thing. The time would be to finish whatever didn’t get done during the last Age, fix bugs, and properly get the next Age ready for launch. That is not vacation, that is work.
Nonsense, the Bazaar would still be running (they could even add new content to that money-furnace if they wanted to) and people would have the opportunity to buy in to missed Battle Passes, the number of which will increase with each new Age.
The art team are not the programmers and its doubtful every age will have as much overhaul as Age of Sorcery had (perks, journey system now, sorcery, building hammer, backend bazaar/bp changes, the stuff I forgot). We also don’t know the staffing levels they have now vs. before which may or may not make things go even quicker. I don’t think we’re in a position to know if going slower would help. I doubt it would personally.
Sorry if I misunderstood. But I believe that the teams that generate new content and the team that fixes bugs are independent teams. For example, designers, 3D modelers, story creators, people who create new mechanics, etc. don’t participate in the technical maintenance of the game. But I agree with you that if the entire technical team (devs) joined forces for a few months to fix bugs and improve the game’s performance, it would be something very good.
However, rotating the bazaar without new content would drastically reduce monetization. And if the idea is to include new content in the bazaar, the effort required would not justify not including a new age.
Not exactly. There isn’t one team that writes code and another that fixes that code, that would be super impractical. The modelers make models and fix broken models, the coders write code and fix broken code, etc.
The Bazaar is mostly art, which needs little maintenance. Producing new art during a time between Ages would be completely reasonable - far more reasonable than the prices in the Bazaar.
This is really an important issue. However, I believe that a change in “age” will indeed bring changes as big as the Age of Sorcerous did. Players have already speculated about agriculture, sailing, flying transportation, and so on. The Age of Sorcerous showed that Funcom is still willing to bring great innovations to Conan, and that’s what I hope for in the new age.
Why would any of them need to go on vacation? They’d be needed for the month long bug hunt.
Game did fine with DLC’s, Funcom aught to be able to weather NOT having a season pass for a month. No reason to shut down the {way over priced} bazaar. Not sure why people think the money just disappears if they aren’t releasing a battle pass for a month.
So they would still be producing content for the bazaar.
As I have said the next “Age” needs to be the age of Quality of Life updates.
However, we don’t know how long Funcom has been working on the new age. It’s possible that they have been working on it in parallel, but there’s no way to know for sure.
In this regard, I can’t argue with you. It’s unquestionable that the game has many technical problems. However, once players choose to pay for new mechanics instead of paying for a more optimized game, it’s not the developer who makes the choice. It’s the players themselves.
Revenue decrease is a fact. And if a company has an alternative to avoid revenue decrease, the best course of action is to take advantage of that alternative.
That’s right, as I mentioned, from the player’s perspective. However, as long as players continue to accept Funcom’s practices with open arms and they continue to generate good revenue for the company, they don’t have many reasons to change.
I think many of the plans on the horizon had their groundwork laid with the Age of Sorcery systems tho. There is a ton of stuff under the hood that changed for that stuff to work and I would bet the new changes leverage that per the plan. Roadmaps are far in advance so its not like Funcom just does work quarter to quarter.
Even if they have, that doesn’t change anything. The fact is that Chapters are being delivered unfinished. If the % push back is coming from them devoting part of their time towards the next Age, a time between Ages would still make sense to make up for that.
What facts? You are making assumptions based on nothing as there has only been one Age so far and a time between Ages has never been tried.
It is possible (again, never been tried, we have no facts to go off) that revenue would increase. Why? Because there would be three Battle Passes available for people to buy rather than only one. And after the next Age (assuming each Age has three Chapters), six Battle Passes.
Additionally, releasing sub-standard quality content is bad for reputation. Reputation is not something you can calculate into revenue, but directly affects it. From what I’ve seen, Funcom’s reputation has been falling pretty fast throughout the Age of Sorcery due to the new monetization and poor quality standards.
Rapid-fire content releases are not sustainable, and I think many of us have seen evidence of that. Taking the time of a Chapter to cool down, finish and fix what came before, and prepare what is coming next would be beneficial in the long run.
Just when were we offered this choice? I missed it. Can I opt for the more optimized game now? As I am sure a majority of players would.
But they aren’t, with every chapter released with bugs, players leave the game. The longer it takes to fix those bugs/exploits the more players leave. That is lost revenue.
I’d also be whiling to bet only a small % of players actually buy at the bazaar, or buy regular enough to be depended on for revenue.
More over I doubt the chapter passes are making much money. I assume most players do what I do, use the croms made from the pass to buy the next pass. Right now I have enough croms built up to buy the next 2 battle passes. I don’t believe funcom is making near the money you are assuming they are.
Do you know this or are you just assuming it because it’s what you want to believe?
I won’t respond individually as I believe my viewpoint has already been well-expressed. But to address the basics:
I’m not assuming the game’s popularity. I track the game’s population on sites/tools dedicated to it, and the number of players is increasing. This leads me to believe that the game’s changes are being well-received by the general public.
It’s possible that Funcom isn’t making as much profit as I imagine, but it appears so. And I hope so.
I don’t believe that one person alone has the power to decide the direction of the game. So I don’t think you individually had the option. As with everything, it’s the majority, or at least those with more economic power, who end up making the choice for everyone.
I think it is clear that the battle pass content isn’t going to be renewed. However, I do think that mini dungeons in the disjunction (at frost temple) could be added to let players experience older chapter content (like headhunting and the Kurak storyline) with new unlocks (mostly reskins of battle pass gear) and with the battle pass story (and beautiful backgrounds) able to be viewed while within.
I think a better solution would be to shift the focus to the bazaar for a month and focus on simpler content that can bring in revenue while letting the team get some breathing room.
What is clear is Den saying they may change their minds on this depending on feedback. I will continue to give that feedback until such time when their minds are changed.
I think that was just a diplomatic way to say “no” because it’s probably not in his hands to make that decision, no matter what the public opinion says about the matter.
And because saying “we’ll never change this” is a bad idea because in game design, “never” often happens sooner than “Soon™”