Glorious Alpha Two Testers!

Alpha Two Phase II testing is currently taking place 5+ days each week. More information about testing schedule can be found here

If you have Alpha Two, you can download the game launcher here, and we encourage you to join us on our Official Discord Server for the most up to date testing news.

What Integral Component? AHHHHH

2»

Comments

  • Happymeal2415Happymeal2415 Member, Alpha One, Alpha Two, Early Alpha Two
    Atama wrote: »
    I hope it’s not UE5. Then this is basically an announcement that they’re pushing release back another 2-3 years.

    Theyre only going to UE5 if it speeds up production
  • AtamaAtama Member, Braver of Worlds, Kickstarter, Alpha One, Alpha Two, Early Alpha Two
    Atama wrote: »
    I hope it’s not UE5. Then this is basically an announcement that they’re pushing release back another 2-3 years.

    Theyre only going to UE5 if it speeds up production

    Yes, but that's still bad news, even if it's the right decision. Because moving to UE5 will be a big delay. If it means the game is 4 years out instead of 6 years out, that's better, but it still sucks.

    The last time they did something similar was when testing APOC they found their infrastructure couldn't handle the load of the players, that pushed things back a couple of years. I expect UE5 to be a bigger overhaul than even that.
     
    Hhak63P.png
  • Happymeal2415Happymeal2415 Member, Alpha One, Alpha Two, Early Alpha Two
    Atama wrote: »
    Atama wrote: »
    I hope it’s not UE5. Then this is basically an announcement that they’re pushing release back another 2-3 years.

    Theyre only going to UE5 if it speeds up production

    Yes, but that's still bad news, even if it's the right decision. Because moving to UE5 will be a big delay. If it means the game is 4 years out instead of 6 years out, that's better, but it still sucks.

    The last time they did something similar was when testing APOC they found their infrastructure couldn't handle the load of the players, that pushed things back a couple of years. I expect UE5 to be a bigger overhaul than even that.

    no theyve literally said they wont upgrade to UE5 unless it makes the process quicker regardless of whatever transition delay. meaning if it takes 6 months to transition its because its going to save them a year meaning the total development went quicker
  • AtamaAtama Member, Braver of Worlds, Kickstarter, Alpha One, Alpha Two, Early Alpha Two
    edited December 2021
    Atama wrote: »
    Atama wrote: »
    I hope it’s not UE5. Then this is basically an announcement that they’re pushing release back another 2-3 years.

    Theyre only going to UE5 if it speeds up production

    Yes, but that's still bad news, even if it's the right decision. Because moving to UE5 will be a big delay. If it means the game is 4 years out instead of 6 years out, that's better, but it still sucks.

    The last time they did something similar was when testing APOC they found their infrastructure couldn't handle the load of the players, that pushed things back a couple of years. I expect UE5 to be a bigger overhaul than even that.

    no theyve literally said they wont upgrade to UE5 unless it makes the process quicker regardless of whatever transition delay. meaning if it takes 6 months to transition its because its going to save them a year meaning the total development went quicker

    I think those timeframes are extremely optimistic. One problem is that UE5 isn't even going to be available until next year, with no actual date specified. I've seen it will be "early" 2022, but who knows if that means January or May. And that assumes it doesn't get pushed back further. So that means they can't even get started until then.

    That also means you're an early adopter for a brand new engine. That will likely mean you're dealing with all of the bugs that are inevitable in a new system. That means more delays.

    And while Epic promises that the transition is "easy and smooth", that is relative. Here is their page which has a (most likely simplified) guide:

    https://docs.unrealengine.com/5.0/en-US/MigrationGuide/

    There are a lot of manual updates that will likely be needed alongside what the conversion tool handles. And that's assuming all of the homemade systems Intrepid has created will be compatible. They may have to redo some things from scratch.

    I can only see a UE5 conversion as a very bad thing. It's like finding out that an athlete on a sports team requires major surgery. Yes, they need it so they're better off getting it done. And it might help clear up problems they've been having. But it is always bad news.
     
    Hhak63P.png
  • daveywaveydaveywavey Member, Alpha Two
    Vhaeyne wrote: »
    Talents wrote: »
    I'm like 99% certain it's them upgrading to UE5. Steven said a few months ago that he assembled a "task force" to look into the viability of upgrading to UE5.

    I doubt it's combat because just last month they spoke about how they're discussing internally what to do with it and I doubt they have anything to show us after only a month.

    So yeah, I think it's them announcing the upgrade to UE5.
    I hope you are right. That's way better than my predictions.

    It's not better than the new Star Trek outfit, though.
    This link may help you: https://ashesofcreation.wiki/


    giphy-downsized-large.gif?cid=b603632fp2svffcmdi83yynpfpexo413mpb1qzxnh3cei0nx&ep=v1_gifs_gifId&rid=giphy-downsized-large.gif&ct=s
  • If they are going to change to UE5 I rather have them do it now. UE4 might not be super outdated yet, but what about when the game releases or what about 2/3 years after release? will they change to UE5 then? just to see UE6 released the year after?

  • Happymeal2415Happymeal2415 Member, Alpha One, Alpha Two, Early Alpha Two
    Atama wrote: »
    Atama wrote: »
    Atama wrote: »
    I hope it’s not UE5. Then this is basically an announcement that they’re pushing release back another 2-3 years.

    Theyre only going to UE5 if it speeds up production

    Yes, but that's still bad news, even if it's the right decision. Because moving to UE5 will be a big delay. If it means the game is 4 years out instead of 6 years out, that's better, but it still sucks.

    The last time they did something similar was when testing APOC they found their infrastructure couldn't handle the load of the players, that pushed things back a couple of years. I expect UE5 to be a bigger overhaul than even that.

    no theyve literally said they wont upgrade to UE5 unless it makes the process quicker regardless of whatever transition delay. meaning if it takes 6 months to transition its because its going to save them a year meaning the total development went quicker

    I think those timeframes are extremely optimistic. One problem is that UE5 isn't even going to be available until next year, with no actual date specified. I've seen it will be "early" 2022, but who knows if that means January or May. And that assumes it doesn't get pushed back further. So that means they can't even get started until then.

    That also means you're an early adopter for a brand new engine. That will likely mean you're dealing with all of the bugs that are inevitable in a new system. That means more delays.

    And while Epic promises that the transition is "easy and smooth", that is relative. Here is their page which has a (most likely simplified) guide:

    https://docs.unrealengine.com/5.0/en-US/MigrationGuide/

    There are a lot of manual updates that will likely be needed alongside what the conversion tool handles. And that's assuming all of the homemade systems Intrepid has created will be compatible. They may have to redo some things from scratch.

    I can only see a UE5 conversion as a very bad thing. It's like finding out that an athlete on a sports team requires major surgery. Yes, they need it so they're better off getting it done. And it might help clear up problems they've been having. But it is always bad news.

    the numbers were throw away to make the point. im not making any predictions on how long. im telling you what theyve said is they will only switch IF it makes the process quicker... which is why they keep re evaluating. So when you say its going to add years. im saying its not because if it did they wouldnt make the switch
  • NerrorNerror Member, Alpha One, Alpha Two, Early Alpha Two
    edited December 2021
    Isn't UE5 also pretty modular? As in, they can decide to only change some of the game to UE5 if that makes sense to do and especially if it allows them to do even larger battles..
  • LorebarianLorebarian Member
    edited December 2021
    I get it that folks are worried about the development timeline, but given how often they do development updates and communicate with the community, I could really care less about it being released “sooner rather than later.”

    As a veteran MMO gamer, having played just about every big title release from 1999 to now, starting with Tibia, Ultima and Everquest - I can say from experience that I appreciate developers who understand that rushing titles to meet the demands of an impatient community only = failure. It has happened many times over, and often, the same folks who say “We want it now whether it is fully developed or not!” Are the same ones who, when release is rushed, are on the forums and on social media saying “See, this is what happens when developers rush game release, the game sucks!”

    The AoC team are doing the right thing in taking their time, and I for one fully support their decision to do so - even if I have to wait years longer to experience the game. Just the fact that they develop heavily based on community feedback is an absolute breath of fresh air.
  • AtamaAtama Member, Braver of Worlds, Kickstarter, Alpha One, Alpha Two, Early Alpha Two
    edited December 2021
    Lorebarian wrote: »
    I get it that folks are worried about the development timeline, but given how often they do development updates and communicate with the community, I could really care less about it being released “sooner rather than later.”

    As a veteran MMO gamer, having played just about every big title release from 1999 to now, starting with Tibia, Ultima and Everquest - I can say from experience that I appreciate developers who understand that rushing titles to meet the demands of an impatient community only = failure. It has happened many times over, and often, the same folks who say “We want it now whether it is fully developed or not!” Are the same ones who, when release is rushed, are on the forums and on social media saying “See, this is what happens when developers rush game release, the game sucks!”

    The AoC team are doing the right thing in taking their time, and I for one fully support their decision to do so - even if I have to wait years longer to experience the game. Just the fact that they develop heavily based on community feedback is an absolute breath of fresh air.

    I agree 100%. Rushing a game and releasing it too early is disastrous. You only get to release a game once and if you do that before it's ready, that can tarnish you forever. Even if you fix problems and/or add features later, you'll never completely get rid of the stink of a bad launch. Just look at Fallout 76 for the best example of that sort of thing.

    But at the same time you also want to avoid feature creep. The other extreme is a project like Star Citizen. They've added so much unnecessary garbage, new game modes, and so on that after more than a decade in development there still seems to be no end in sight.

    I don't expect Ashes of Creation to come anywhere near that, but if they delay release needlessly as other projects have done then it could be just as disastrous as releasing too early.

    Regardless, delays are always bad. The delays we had previously with this project were also bad. They were necessary and it's a good thing they were done, but we went from having a development estimate to having everything "TBD". And another delay would be bad too. I don't think anyone should be cheering for something that delays the project any further, though whether or not Intrepid deserves criticism for the delay depends on the reason for it. (Again, I'm glad they delayed it to fix their stability issues, I just wish they didn't have to do that.)

    And again we are totally speculating here. We don't know that they are moving to UE5, we don't know what this announcement will be about. We're just clucking hens talking out of our rears to fill the time until an announcement comes out. (I include myself in that too, I am just as blind as anyone who isn't part of the development team.)
     
    Hhak63P.png
  • CROW3CROW3 Member, Alpha Two
    FFXIV is the only mmo I can think of that got a second chance at life after its initial (and awful) release.
    AoC+Dwarf+750v3.png
  • OkeydokeOkeydoke Member, Alpha One, Alpha Two, Early Alpha Two
    You don't want to rush release and this is the more important thing. But you don't want your game to become a fucking meme either like Star Citizen, even if it is going to release one day and be good.
  • AzheraeAzherae Member, Alpha One, Alpha Two, Early Alpha Two
    Well, we're almost there, and I'm really interested to see what could be classed as an 'Integral Component'.

    If those weren't Steven's direct words, I'd have assumed it was like... showing off the Character Creator work they've been doing, but then there was 'development', which I can't get my mind to stop interpreting as 'architecture or build process'.

    I guess it could be a person, but Steven doesn't strike me as the type to refer to people as Components, even with obfuscation as an intent.
    Y'all know how Jamberry Roll.
  • VhaeyneVhaeyne Member, Alpha One, Alpha Two, Early Alpha Two
    Congratulations to @Atama on your accurate prediction.
    TVMenSP.png
    This is my personal feedback, shared to help the game thrive in its niche.
  • CROW3CROW3 Member, Alpha Two
    Good call on UE5.
    AoC+Dwarf+750v3.png
  • AtamaAtama Member, Braver of Worlds, Kickstarter, Alpha One, Alpha Two, Early Alpha Two
    Vhaeyne wrote: »
    Congratulations to @Atama on your accurate prediction.

    Oh dear heavens no!!!
    Atama wrote: »
    Stufferton Version 2.0

    Sigh... I'm not happy about UE5. I think it will probably make for a better game in the long run, but "long run" is the operative term. We're in for a longer wait. :/

    Oh well.
     
    Hhak63P.png
  • VhaeyneVhaeyne Member, Alpha One, Alpha Two, Early Alpha Two
    Atama wrote: »
    Vhaeyne wrote: »
    Congratulations to @Atama on your accurate prediction.

    Oh dear heavens no!!!
    Atama wrote: »
    Stufferton Version 2.0

    Sigh... I'm not happy about UE5. I think it will probably make for a better game in the long run, but "long run" is the operative term. We're in for a longer wait. :/

    Oh well.

    I have had a waiting mindset for a while now. Playing the alpha wet my appetite a little, but I want the game to be the best it can be. I am content to spend the next few years testing as needed.

    UE5 looks good, and he was only on a 2080... I mean, we could be on much better GPUs by the time the game comes out. Would could be all on GPUs made Texas by then. Today's video made me more optimistic about the future of MMORPGs.
    TVMenSP.png
    This is my personal feedback, shared to help the game thrive in its niche.
  • OkeydokeOkeydoke Member, Alpha One, Alpha Two, Early Alpha Two
    edited December 2021
    I don't think Intrepid had much of a choice if they want their game to be on the same footing as other games using it. I guess they could always upgrade it later, but why not now just to make things ultimately smoother in the long run.

    But the UE5 announcement has given me a ton more confidence in the game. And I appreciate Steven's level headed approach to UE5 since it's come up. Not overly optimistic in previous live streams when asked about it, nor overly pessimistic. They took the time to look into it and make a decision without getting hopes up for hype's sake beforehand.
Sign In or Register to comment.