Saga of Lucimia is in love with World of Warcraft Classic

    
31
Someone hold the lamp up.

You know who’s super-duper excited that World of Warcraft Classic is becoming a thing? A competing fantasy MMO, that’s who.

Saga of Lucimia’s dev team feels vindicated by the enthusiasm behind the upcoming WoW legacy server, saying that this shows that there is an audience out there for hardcore mechanics and group-oriented play. In last week’s developer diary, the team pretty much wrote a gushing love letter to Blizzard’s project.

“You mean games used to have a slow enough pace that you could focus on the world and the players around you?” the team said. “The simple fact that [Blizzard has] focused a significant amount of resources to develop this experience shows that yes, there is market for group-based gameplay.”

Saga of Lucimia is preparing to push out Release 11 during December. This build will include a patcher, shared banks, smaller group content, an updated inventory system, UI revamping, and an early iteration of the wound system.

newest oldest most liked
Subscribe to:
John Artemus
Reader
John Artemus

WildStar’s closure seems to belie a longing for a return to hardcore gaming on the part of the public. If more people wanted that type of hardcore experience, I do believe WildStar would have been more successful, and it wouldn’t be sunsetting.

Reader
rosieposie

Nothing hardcore about Vanilla mechanics, the bosses had at most 2-3 rather simple gimmicks to avoid, everything was much simpler than today. The difference was that you as a player were much weaker, had a much slower time accruing upgrades, and overcoming bosses that were designed as simple gear checks, many of them requiring resistance gear checks. This resulted in a much slower overall pace of progress, which is something that some people actually enjoy. But it has nothing to do with difficulty. People going back from WoW as it is now, will find it almost embarrassingly easy as far as mechanics go.

Reader
Bruno Brito

Hey, there’s absolutely a niche out there for these kinds of games ( and to be honest, modern mmos aren’t really that good. )

Now, there’s also a issue: The attachment of time = difficulty = hardcore.

Vanilla is NOT difficult. Vanilla is time consuming. Vanilla is NOT hardcore, altho you can be. WoW was NEVER supposed to be a complete hardcore game, but it was supposed to be a timeconsuming world.

It’s pretty much a issue i have with GW2. While the world is big and you feel it…i never actually felt at home in it. I just don’t get immersed enough. Maybe is the UI, maybe is the fact a lot of stuff is still missing from the game ( housing for instance ), and that the game doesn’t really feel versatile anymore.

It’s naive to pretend WoW is some kind of hardcore godsend. It’s just a good experience on a overall decent game. And the MMO crowd miss that coming from big companies with the tech and the budget to pull it off.

Water on the desert.

Reader
Ironwu

I think you may be missing the point of CWoW and Sol. In these MMOs it is NOT about the content so much as the social dynamic. Of course if you are running around solo in CWoW (or trying to in SoL), it is going to be long, grindy, and boring (somewhat). The idea is to make friends, get in real social groups, and work the game as a team.

The really funny thing is that in CWoW, from the very first dungeon, you were playing pretty much the same game as you would be playing in the raids. Players would not succeed in Ragefire Caverns or Deadmines (very first dungeons) without serious team effort. And teamwork only became more necessary as you progressed.

Players unfamiliar with that territory may actually find they prefer it over what most MMOs have become today. When you put water on the desert, it blooms. Let’s hope the rains keep coming. :)

Mordyjuice
Reader
Mordyjuice

Modern MMOs do have their strengths, GW2 has an mmersive opened world with a lot of replayability I’ve not seen in other MMOs, and ESO on the flipside has some strong story telling elements that set it high above the rest (imagine if they combined those elements though, you’d have the greates MMO ever made).

Reader
Robert Mann

Slower, longer term content (without it just being grind) is a huge thing. In fact, I’ve long said that the entire design of games being about the vertical power push is wrong. Where characters should grow in power, I think it should be a slow, long term process with a whole world that applies to them. I’m not talking scaling and the flat feeling as so many games have band-aided on, but rather tackling the issue from the start with a much flatter overall power curve and reasons why the entire world matters.

I have always wanted the genre to be about an alternate world. I want combat to be dangerous and less of a constant push to just kill more stuff, but also be needed as otherwise foes just build up more and more. I want economics and reasons to move around the world without just using fast travel (it can still exist, but maybe it is costly to move too much stuff!) Etc.

Where that might well not appeal to everyone, diverse offerings are the penultimate goal to me. Because we shouldn’t HAVE to agree on stuff. We should have games that please different people. Where I have less interest in WoW Classic than in jumping off a tall cliff, I can appreciate that some people want it. I can appreciate even more that some people dislike where WoW went, and how it changed. Because the changes would not be a plus for me… if I was to have any interest in the title Classic would be far more appealing than traditional live.

Slowly things change, and where everything for decades has been combat driven we are getting more and more games all over that offer alternatives that interest people. I look forward to spending a ton of time in some of those worlds.

Reader
Tim Anderson

“Slower, longer term content (without it just being grind) is a huge thing.”

Absolutely. It’s all about creating a virtual, alternate world.

For us, that’s where it’s at. Anything less is just a video game.

We want WORLDS, not games :)

Reader
Rolan Storm

“We want WORLDS, not games :)”

YES. WE. DO.

kjempff
Reader
kjempff

“make worlds, not games” used to be my signature quote on mmorpg for many years. I might be tempted to be a bit snarky and say, a world where you can only do things in groups sound more like a game – I hope you prove me wrong on that :D

I do agree that there is a unfilled demand by a portion of players to have a deeper and more social role-playing experience in a virtual world (instead of a story driven themepark), but I also think going full forced grouping without activities on my own will be claustrophobic for me; as a player with a lame amount of time put into eq, I would still say I only grouped under half of my (fighting)playtime and I loved that freedom.

Reader
Robert Mann

My personal opinion is that games need to work on having choices, and enough variety that it is better to work with other players as part of a society than against, for this.

I believe that combat is where this is actually the trickiest, as people being around to work together can be a pain.

It is just one more thing where variety is what I consider important. Not every fight or combat activity needs to be group focused, just like not every crafting activity needs to be. I’m all about the idea of variety, not just from game to game, but within reason in games, there.

I like the idea of a deeper world. I don’t mind some game being part of things, because otherwise it turns into a 90% worse than modern life ‘real life simulator’ for fantasy games.

Reader
Tim Anderson

At no point have we ever claimed we are “full forced grouping”. That is a misconception brought about by media outlets reading into our FAQ and blog posts.

We are an MMORPG, which means the MAJORITY of what we are building is keyed towards players who are in groups together, playing together, like a tabletop game. If not, we would have built an RPG for single players.

But that does NOT mean that we do not have things for solo players to do, or for players to do with micro-sessions of time available to them.

Straight from our FAQ Page:

“Challenge means different things to different people. For us, it starts with group-based content.

If you make the decision to leave the safety of town and its guards, it’s not a decision you should be making lightly. While there are little things you can do on your own just outside of outposts and cities in micro-sessions of 30 minutes to 1.5 hours (gather pelts and harvesting supplies, take on small bandit outposts, etc.), the further you go afield, the less civilized the world is, and the more dangerous things become.

Think early EverQuest. You can head out, harvest a few things, craft a bit, kill a few mobs close to town within the safety of the guards if you need to run, but if you want to hit up Orc Hill you’ll need 3-4 other players, and if you want to head into Crushbone and handle the Throne Room, you’ll need a full group. You need a well-balanced group of adventurers to handle whatever you might come across in the wild. You need gear. You need supplies. Bandages. Potions. Scrolls. A pack mule. Rope. Never leave home without a good length of rope.

It’s an excursion, not an afternoon stroll down to the river to pick daffodils for your sweetheart or mum. You need to prepare for adventures that will take multiple game sessions to complete, just like with a tabletop campaign.

Think the Mines of Moria; we want the dungeons and adventures our players encounter to be on par with what The Fellowship encountered while being forced to skip the pass and head into the mines.”

Reader
Shadex De'Marr

People have been trying to put down players looking for that more difficult, group centered design for years. Saying it is only nostalgia or rose colored glasses yet here we are seeing a market wide resurgence of classic designs.

I don’t care if some developers keep building easier solo focused mmos. I just don’t think people should sit on high telling others why they like something is wrong or that what they like is bad.

Even if only a smaller group take part and enjoy these classic designs that is that many more people that are happy and look forward to coming home and gaming once again. And that should always be a good thing.

Reader
Tim Anderson

The important thing to remember is that those “people” are typically folks who lack any actual, factual information. They have opinions, and they are vocal about them, but they lack any actual knowledge of the business side of the development industry.

The companies making these games have access to data that the average consumer does not. And these design decisions aren’t made on a whim, nor are they made purely to cash in on a nostalgia market (though that is absolutely part of the equation).

There is a reason why we are seeing the wheel turn back to the “old school” game design.

And we, for one, are tickled to death by the change. Not simply for our own title, but also because it means we get to play the shiznizzle out of other titles that cater to our preference, rather than to the masses.

Reader
Ironwu

I think the relative failure of EQ2 against the monstrous success of WoW in 2004 was the killing stroke for group centeric MMOs. You literally could not get off the EQ2 newbie island without forming a group to tackle the final boss. After that, it was grouping for pretty much everything. I think EQ2 was way ahead of its time. Of course, now it is just another WoW clone; had to change to survive at all.

Reader
Tim Anderson

I have *very* fond memories of EQ2 prior to the combat revamp that came with the 1st expansion. We had a great guild (who went on to become a worldwide top 10 and #3 on our server up through and including the Sky expansion), and loved how the overland was dangerous, groups were required for most content…was such a great game.

I still went on to play it for 7 years. That’s also why I missed on WoW vanilla; I was too busy in EQ2!

Reader
Wilhelm Arcturus

That people are hungering for a more hardcore experience is certainly one possible read. Go go Gadget optimism!

The other, more likely one to my mind, is a hunger based on nostalgia for a specific experience. The isn’t a transferable to another game.

One of the long held pundit theories during the first few years of WoW was that it was a training ground and that people would graduate from it in order to move on to more hardcore MMO experiences. While that was undoubtedly true for some, it never became a trend of any substance.

Reader
Tim Anderson

It’s not merely optimism :) We wouldn’t have chosen to do an old-school MMORPG based purely on hopes and dreams and whims. There’s a lot of great data you can get your hands on from the developer side of the coin, and there’s a reason why so many many games are now spinning up old-school versions and “progression” servers.

Hint: it’s not merely nostalgia. We’ve had some great conversations with a few publishers who have taken a shine to what we are building, and we’ve got some exciting news about our latest round of investors coming in 2019.

There’s a niche for everything these days.

Reader
Coldrun ??

I tend to agree. This is a very specific nostalgia.

I believe that some people want a hardcore, “old school” MMO experience. I just think it’s a fairly small number that want that as their primary game.

I hope everyone who wants that sort of game has a good variety to choose from and enjoy, whether it’s Sage of Lucimia or WoW Classic or Pantheon or whatever.

Reader
Tim Anderson

It’s a far larger niche than most people think it is.

Think 100m+ users. Certainly not the billions that mobile and free-to-play cater to, but still well worth the development dollars by any company willing to break away from the “easy” money of microtransactions and F2P cycles.

And yes, there’s plenty of room for all types of games, whether it’s Patheon (we can’t wait to play), WoW Classic (we can’t wait to play), or Camelot Unchained, or Ashes of Creation, or any of the others in developing or coming up.

As gamers, we’ll be there, playing them all. That’s what we do :)

Reader
Arcanum Zero

As gamers, we’ll be there, playing them all. That’s what we do :)

I appreciate the rousing chorus of Kumbayya, Tim, but as a player with time (and money) to invest, I want to know how you are planning to beat up these other games for their lunches — particularly WoW Classic.

“We” may want to play them all, but it seems far more likely to me that “we’re” going to be playing a lot of WoW Classic, logging into the rest of these games once a month, and complaining in the comments on MOP about how no one is ever logged into the rest of these great games.

You talk about the “world” of “persistent world” like it’s the hard part, but it’s the “persistent” that worries me. It’s not just a matter of server uptime; it requires almost unprecedented population maintenance.

To experience an eight-man dungeon, I need seven other players subscribed, logged in, properly geared, available, interested, and listening. I’m no statistician, but it is easy to see that requiring artificially high concurrency. That 100M is going to dry up fast.

Your data obviously says otherwise, and I wish you good luck. I’d love to experience your vision of Lucimia. But from where I’m sitting, you’re all building Flintstone cars and I have only one pair of feet.

Andy McAdams
Staff
Kickstarter Donor
Loyal Patron
Andy McAdams

Maybe I’m misreading the situation, but my understanding was less from the “hardcore cupcake” (already a failed design choice) and more of a world that wasn’t a made rush to the end game then bitch about lack of content – of actually being able to make decisions that are meaningful (in that they have to be able to be the wrong decisions).

I think there’s a lot of potential there, but who knows? In some ways the Vanilla server is also a validated concept with all the Emus out there, but it’s still somewhat of a unknown whether those people will come back to Blizzard proper.

I’ll probably play a bit of Classic as I don’t recall much, but I’m not of the mind that it will ‘be the savior of WoW’ as some people seem to suggest. I think at best it’ll be a nice side diversion, but I don’t think it’ll have the same impact as progression servers in say, EQ/EQ2. Could be wrong, it happens frequently.

Reader
Ironwu

SoL (unfortunate acronym) is one of the MMOs that I am watching closely. I hope they can solve the problem of Lengthy Quest + Dangerous Travel + Missing Group Members. There needs to be some way to fill out a group that is deep in the field when they lose a member to Real Life, Disconnects, etc.

I look forward to Classic WoW for the exact same reasons that I am hopeful for SoL. That they will breathe some needed fresh air into the stagnating MMO genre! Even if the design is old school. I think that MMO developers have lost their way and such designs might reset the direction.

Reader
Tim Anderson

We’ve got some summoning in the works via relic-items that will allow certain players to bring you in.

And we’re also working on some very limited fast travel portals (ie. early EverQuest druid rings/wizard spires crossed with early WoW portals.) that will have some very specific requirements to use (have to go there first, multiple group members @ the portal to use, and one-way only).

We’re conscious of the “missing group member” issue and ease-of-access to groups in a group-based game, and we’ll do everything we can do make things accessible to players without breaking our rule of “no instant teleports, no matchmaker system”.

First iteration of quests should be in for R12 in March, so stay tuned :) And travel is already hella dangerous in Early Access!

Reader
Ironwu

Awesome, thanks for the update! Yes, no LFR/LFG tools, please. I see those as real game destroyers. Summoning in a new group member, very nice. Portals that you have to wait for to activate, also nice. Old school rocks! Pity there is so little left of those designs. Looking forward to CWoW and SoL, for sure. :)

Reader
Tim Anderson

Thankee, sir! We’re getting there, slowly but surely!

Reader
BraxKedren

There is a market for those that remember the days of where the content before end-game was just as much fun, if not more, than end-game. Warcraft is the only game I know of currently that actively pushes players to bypass content they create as fast as possible.

The game doesn’t even need levels anymore as after level 100 you don’t get anything per level except a stat increase. Those could be baked into gear and you’d never miss a beat.

Reader
Tim Anderson

100% agree.

Reader
kalech

I find this kinda funny because I remember someone from Blizzard (maybe Ion, Im not sure) saying that “People don’t really want vanilla, they just think they do”

This despite the fact that progression servers have been quite successful for several other mmos.

Reader
Tim Anderson

Everywhere you turn more progression servers are opening up across more and more titles.

Reader
Ironwu

Meh. My feelings on the uselessness of progression servers has been voiced here many times.

To date, only EQ1 has really even attempted a classic server, and even that one was half-baked with a strange mishmash of old and new stuff.

I want the real deal! As soon as SoL puts up (mostly) always-on servers, I am buying in. Will certainly be subscribing for CWoW when it launches.

Reader
Reht

There’s a lot you can lay at Ion’s feet, but it was actually WoW’s production director J. Allen Brack who said that.