Lost Ark Online

[Eclipze]

Lost Ark is a newly announced Korean MMOARPG developed by Tripod Studios, published by Smilegate, it has been in development for 3 years.

I'll let the videos speak for themselves.

Debut trailer:

G-star 19mins video (show cases the MMO elements, game mechanics and 3 other classes). You can turn on the english subtitles.

More translated info here:
http://steparu.com/previews/mmorpg/1...d-translations

This is the most hype I've ever gotten for an MMO, much less a Korean one. But holy shit, the quality is real.

[Chaos2Frozen]

Okay the combat looks really impressive, a more flashy Diablo-ish game, but it's the exploration world stuff that really caught my attention, especially the ships. Personally I'm still hesitant about making it an MMO which in Korea usually just means endless grinds, but if they make exploration engaging and have an interesting storyline with various quests (I see some hints of this) they might just pull it off.

EDIT:

Oh shit at the dungeon bosses, now THIS is what I'm talking about.

But really, there's so many features here you would think are suppose to be in D4

[Eclipze]

Originally Posted by Chaos2Frozen

Okay the combat looks really impressive, a more flashy Diablo-ish game, but it's the exploration world stuff that really caught my attention, especially the ships. Personally I'm still hesitant about making it an MMO which in Korea usually just means endless grinds, but if they make exploration engaging and have an interesting storyline with various quests (I see some hints of this) they might just pull it off.

EDIT:

Oh shit at the dungeon bosses, now THIS is what I'm talking about.

But really, there's so many features here you would think are suppose to be in D4

D4? Heh...Blizzard has a lot of work to do if they actually plan on being able to compete with this game from what we're shown so far.

D3 took them what, 11 years? to develop, and Lost Ark has only been in development for 3 years. Comparing the amount of content, Lost Ark easily wins by a long shot, even if you consider the older tech Blizzard had to work with.

>7 classes shown, each with its own unique gameplay mechanic.
>11 more classes in development.
>Tripod System is basically a more advanced, 3 layered Rune system that D3 currently has.
>Crazy good art and animations all around.
>PVP
>life skills (resource gather/crafting)
>open world with exploration and other activities (boat net fishing, treasure scavenging)
>cinematic dungeons and boss fights ala God of War, that are more than just tank-and-spank

I mean, shit, even Lineage Eternal pales in comparison, and that game was first revealed in 2011?

The fact that they actually provided a good english subtitle to their G-star video gives me faith that the English release will happen fairly close to the Korean one. I sure hope so at least.

[Chaos2Frozen]

Well I don't think D3 actually took 11 years to develop, more like 5 years... And this game looks to take another 2 more years so I guess it evens out?

To be fair to D3, they did put in a lot new stuff to make the world seem more alive and dynamic like the random quests and the npc dialogues and environmental destruction. But what I'm saying was that if they were ever considering D4 in their boardrooms right now, Lostark has definitely beaten them to the punch with a number of their features... Plus MMO trappings.

And it looks like they can develop for an audience with impressive PC capabilities, something that Blizzard never assumes.

[Esclair]

Oh man, this is really what I was hoping for when they announced Diablo 3.

[Marcus H.]

And it looks like they can develop for an audience with impressive PC capabilities, something that Blizzard never assumes.

Well, a game is not made by a flashy or realistic graphics engine.

I have to commend Lost Ark for the graphics, though. It's definitely top-notch, but may not be fit for players with lower-end specs. Combat-wise, Lost Ark handles better than Black Desert Online, whose combat action lacked finesse compared to Lost Ark's. Also, dat level of interactivity is insane.

My favorite would be the Arcana. Finally, a caster that has a unique system and not only just spewing elemental spells with inpunity.

[Firefly00]

What is shown does look interesting; I do, however, wonder about a couple of things that the trailer doesn't show. An obvious one would be to what degree individual characters' appearances are customizable... this isn't Kamino, after all, so the devs should build on what Runic did with Torchlight 2.

Next, if it's going to be a free-to-play game supported by microtransactions, those had better be purely of the ethical sort - no player should be able to buy/rent an advantage with actual money. By way of example consider Path of Exile - Grinding Gear Games' cash shop for that game offers nothing but conveniences (such as extra stash space) and aesthetics (non-combat pets and alternate weapon models and skill VFX - and they had lots of fun with this), but they don't appear to be hurting for income...

PvP is okay and all, just so long as it doesn't become the dominant factor in design considerations; also, some mode variety would be nice... can you imagine, for instance, an adaptation of Kill Confirmed?

Sort of related: if you're going to have an arena, there's no reason you can't also use it for survival challenges (example would be X waves of enemies capped by a boss encounter) with associated leaderboards? That would represent an alternative outlet for competitive urges.

Originally Posted by Chaos2Frozen

And it looks like they can develop for an audience with impressive PC capabilities, something that Blizzard never assumes.

Which is nice, but not if it comes with the assumption that everyone has that kind of hardware. In other words, their engine would ideally scale gracefully to allow as wide a range of hardware setups as possible.

[Chaos2Frozen]

Originally Posted by Marcus H.

My favorite would be the Arcana. Finally, a caster that has a unique system and not only just spewing elemental spells with inpunity.

My favorite would be the Devil Hunter or Summoner- because for some strange reason I favor the gun user in a fantasy setting (and the sword user in a sci-fi setting). Summoner because I've never tried that play style before.

Originally Posted by Firefly00

Which is nice, but not if it comes with the assumption that everyone has that kind of hardware. In other words, their engine would ideally scale gracefully to allow as wide a range of hardware setups as possible.

From what I understand South Korea is super big on PC gaming, and that leads to an expectation of higher than average gaming PC.

[Firefly00]

Originally Posted by Chaos2Frozen

From what I understand South Korea is super big on PC gaming, and that leads to an expectation of higher than average gaming PC.

Perhaps, but if you plans include a global launch, it would be unwise to assume that those expectations hold true everywhere. In other words - by all means have the bells and whistles for systems that can support such, but don't make such support an absolute requirement. Again using Path of Exile as an example: the majority of the game plays smoothly on an average stock system (in my case, a Dell Inspiron 570), but certain areas... don't. Case in point: the Dominus battle in Path of Exile - the ambient rain effects there do horrible things to frame rate, making the fight much harder than it should be... and the otherwise competent developers didn't think to include an option to suppress such environmental effects.

And speaking of assumption-of-capabilities: yes, that concern also holds true for network infrastructure - those GoW-esque platforming segments are nice, but just imagine how much fun they won't be once lag of various sorts enters the equation.

[Ak3mi]

Thing is a lot of games that come out of Korea turn out to be a really bad grind. This could be a big let down or could be the best MMO-arpg that comes out. Will have to wait and see. Exciting but cautious

[Shadow5YA]

I'm not so much concerned with the grinding. In an instance-based game, you are expected to run through the stage multiple times, so it is the developer's job to make sure the dungeons/stages are engaging enough to not feel tedious.


What I am more concerned about is their business model. Many "free to play" KMMOs end up with bloated cash shops where your level of success mid to endgame dungeons is linked to how much you pay instead of how well you can play the game...

Originally Posted by Chaos2Frozen

From what I understand South Korea is super big on PC gaming, and that leads to an expectation of higher than average gaming PC.

I would assume that the trailers are just running at max settings, which can be lowered like most KMMOs from my experience.

[Firefly00]

Originally Posted by Shadow5YA

I'm not so much concerned with the grinding. In an instance-based game, you are expected to run through the stage multiple times, so it is the developer's job to make sure the dungeons/stages are engaging enough to not feel tedious.

As examples of attempts to make replays interesting (by offering a means to increase challenge in return for greater rewards):

• Bastion and Transistor offer a roster of 'mutators' players can use if desired;
• Torchlight 2 and Path of Exile have a mechanic where dedicated instances can have a variety of mods associated with them (their execution is, however, slightly different).

Originally Posted by Ak3mi

Thing is a lot of games that come out of Korea turn out to be a really bad grind...

Originally Posted by Shadow5YA

What I am more concerned about is their business model. Many "free to play" KMMOs end up with bloated cash shops where your level of success mid to endgame dungeons is linked to how much you pay instead of how well you can play the game...

This leads to what I believe is an obvious question: what is it about Korean gamers (well, not solely, but in particular, given that we're talking about MMOs that are developed and launched there first, then find their way out into the rest of the world) that makes developers or publishers think such practices justified?

[Shadow5YA]

Originally Posted by Firefly00

This leads to what I believe is an obvious question: what is it about Korean gamers (well, not solely, but in particular, given that we're talking about MMOs that are developed and launched there first, then find their way out into the rest of the world) that makes developers or publishers think such practices justified?

To be fair, a "free to play" MMO can't be entirely non-profit, or nothing will pay for the neverending development costs of the game.

There has to be some incentive to spend money on the game, just not to the point where you're spending several fold more than if you would on a subscription model or a normal full priced game.

[Marcus H.]

There has to be some incentive to spend money on the game, just not to the point where you're spending several fold more than if you would on a subscription model or a normal full priced game.

Extra Credits on Youtube covered about why F2Ps can turn bad (most games usually focus on the big spenders—the "whales" of a particular gaming community) and suggested to allow even the smallest contributions to the game to be worthwhile to the player and to the gaming experience.

I still think F2P is the way to go in MMOs. Pay to Play is a game killer because you can't expect players to add another bill to their paycheck, and Buy to Own is no guarantee that a player would stay in the game for good. F2P, however, leaves the game's fate to the publishers and how they want to earn their income.

[Firefly00]

Originally Posted by Shadow5YA

To be fair, a "free to play" MMO can't be entirely non-profit, or nothing will pay for the neverending development costs of the game.

There has to be some incentive to spend money on the game, just not to the point where you're spending several fold more than if you would on a subscription model or a normal full priced game.

We appear to be worrying the same bone from different ends. The practice I refer to is, specifically, the idea of a game structured in such a way that success becomes contingent on how much cash you are willing to part with as opposed to how well you can actually play. One would expect this ability to buy a direct advantage over other players to be anathema to gamers the world over - leaving us to wonder why it seems accepted among Korean MMO gamers.

On the other hand, there are games whose microtransactions eschew such nonsense. An example thereof is Path of Exile, mentioned earlier in this thread; another would be Airmech (which, interestingly, does have 'super' versions of units that can be bought; however, the game's PvP mode explicitly disallows their use).

Originally Posted by Marcus H.

Extra Credits on Youtube covered about why F2Ps can turn bad...

Ah, thanks for pointing that out; it's informative.

[Shadow5YA]

Originally Posted by Marcus H.

I still think F2P is the way to go in MMOs. Pay to Play is a game killer because you can't expect players to add another bill to their paycheck, and Buy to Own is no guarantee that a player would stay in the game for good. F2P, however, leaves the game's fate to the publishers and how they want to earn their income.

I agree that F2P is the way to go... but only for newer MMOs where they need to get people to try out their game and a subscription paywall would only hurt that.

For a MMO with an already large and stable install base (like say... WoW), I still think it's better for them to stick with a subscription based model, since they need a steady source of revenue for them to maintain the game.

Originally Posted by Firefly00

We appear to be worrying the same bone from different ends. The practice I refer to is, specifically, the idea of a game structured in such a way that success becomes contingent on how much cash you are willing to part with as opposed to how well you can actually play. One would expect this ability to buy a direct advantage over other players to be anathema to gamers the world over - leaving us to wonder why it seems accepted among Korean MMO gamers.

That's because as mentioned earlier in this thread, the MMOs are built around repetitive grinding, which does get tedious to many people to where they don't mind getting what they believe to be their money's worth to speed up the process. Also, the quicker they speed through the game, the more content they can enjoy.

It's not too different from Capcom or Arc System Works or Namco DLC practices as of late, where content is cut from the game to nickel and dime players for more money later. And believe it or not, many people have been fine with it. And the rationalization is always "it's not necessary to buy it", or "it's not that expensive"

[Chaos2Frozen]

So, everyone kinda forgot about this game...

...Except me... I'll never forget...

Close beta testing is finally happening (in Korea and China)

[SvenCalBayan]

I hope this comes to consoles.

[Kafriel]

Looks very good, I'll give it a shot. It's been a while since my last few MMOs (TERA, quit after having nothing to do and pretty much every character maxed out - Neverwinter, just got bored at one point - DFO, the grind hype got me too worked up, slowed down for a month, never got back to it).

So, if CBT is underway, should we expect an official launch in May or so? I don't want to see anything rushed like tree of savior (had to quit that one because it was a mechanical mess).

[Marcus H.]

Holy cow, it looks like a console game. Even the typical high-end PC would struggle in playing this smoothly.
Looks like this game is designed with consideration towards PC bangs and their souped up rigs.