With the current development status of mmo I think you’re right. Fully to rely on other players goes wrong. It should have a outer and an inner time-line to be built. In the first, the reality goes, the modifications made by the player against time A. flows in the other. How to program this … 0 notion. My job is the idea and concept, the work I leave basically smarter (and more industrious people) 
sorry, google-trans…hope u can understand, what I mean
Also the issue is MMO’s like making the player character a hero ive yet to see one that doesn’t make you a hero maybe wow but then i don’t remember that well.
Ill let city of heroes and villians off because your meant to be a super hero/villian.
but most go the stupid route of a main questline that makes you the hero which i completely disagree with now i believe making the questlines you being a soldier, of course promoting people would have to be managed by of course gm’s and dev’s if you had military rank system but in medieval times you don’t really rank up, if you lucky and survive long enough you might get some decent armour.
1 Like
I also think this game should be a single player game, but i can imagine this game could also be a good multiplayer game too. Not as a public MMO where strangers meet, but as a coop game like arma II. If you have the right people even a multiplayer-game can be really intense.
But the focus should be on singleplayer as it is, and if Warhorse need all their power on the singleplayer part they can drop a not so important multiplayer part.
2 Likes
Absolutely my opinion for Act 1
Not everything needs to have multiplayer. Some games greatly benefit from it, but this particular game is meant to be a single player experience.
What I wouldn’t mind is some multiplayer pvp on the side, although many here will have a rash reaction to that. I think this game has a big possibility to be really special, but I hope it never becomes an MMO.
Look at ESO…it’s terrible… Not everything is suited for MMO’s.
But yes, I’d like some pvp ala mount & blade. Probably won’t happen but it would be very cool
I agree, I’m sick of people looking at every great single player game, and their only thought is:
“Is der muitlyplaer? ლ(´ڡ`ლ)”
Grrr… ಠ_ಠ No more!! I like both… But not both together.
2 Likes
Eh. If I wanted to play solo all the time, I’d pick Solitaire. Part of the enjoyment (for me) of gaming is the chance to do so with others in more than superficial ways. In all likelihood, I’ll give this game to my guy and wait for something that allows either small groups or they succeed wildly enough to take on an MMO. (shrug)
Then play Wow. or ESO, or anything else like that.
1 Like
I really don’t get that MMO hype. It’s the same with Star Citizen. I guess about 70% of all backers, mostly the new ones, think it is an MMO. I also don’t get how you can back a project without understanding what it will be first.
But nonetheless, good that you backed Kingdom Come, RPGs are way more fun than MMOs.
4 Likes
I can understand why people want this game to have some form of multiplayer capability. On the other hand, I would like the planned three acts to concentrate exclusively on single player. Why is that so?
The same reason I like to read my books myself, and not with my friends around me, reading the same book out loud. (This metaphor would probably be better with actually writing the book, as the story goes on in the game.) It would wreck the immersion, it would kick my story, my world, my little bubble in the groins. Skyrim just came into my mind: I’m not really into RPG-s, but I like and played a lot that game, because it felt like a whole story, where everything has it’s place, everything stands together as a coherent, monolith structure. Now look at ESO… gah. When everyone is a hero, no one is. It’s hard to tell a story, when there are strangers strolling around, killing randomly spawning stuff, being a dick and/or generally doing the same exact thing than you do. I’m not saying it’s not fun - it’s just not the fun I seek. There was, are and will be great games with multiplayer (for example, I hate the whole zombie survival thing, yet I play a tons of Unturned with my friends as it is hilarious and engaging, or Minecraft could be another fine example, though it is pretty nice in either SP or MP, with different focus points - and naturally, a million other, very different games up until Pong), but I do not want KCD simply to be a game. I want it to be a story, to be a world, to be a time machine with its own coherent rules which I can dwell into after a hard days night without having to regard what other people are screwing around with.
With that said, personally I only ever liked one MMORPG, and that is World War II Online. It doesn’t bother with storytelling, cool items, grinding, classical guilds, character stealing and all that “fun” stuff, it just does what I would like to have when I think about “massive multiplayer game”: hundreds of kilometers of moving frontlines with people on those massacring each other, and period, no bullshit. There is hard to break immersion when the whole game is about war and nothing else, and that is exactly what is happening on screen. This works. KCD’s current state and goals transplanted into a multiplayer game? Not so much I imagine. It would be being pregnant and not pregnant at the same time.
Still, I hope that one day a (or more than one) fine and accurate medieval-ish MMORPG comes out, hell, maybe even I will like it - but first of all, all I want is a nice “book”, something what I can “sit down under a tree with” - and so far KCD seems to do give me that. Give the people MMORPG-s! …but not from the budget of this particular game.
Lastly, about the “simple” multiplayer: Naah. Warband, Chivalry, War of the Roses… in those terms KCD would be just yet another “sword fighting game”, and - god forbid - maybe not even the best. Been there, done that.
2 Likes
I do want Warhorse make game they want make and that means singleplayer story.
But I could not agree with your metaphor. Thats matter of community, the people you choose to play the game with. A good RP server wouldnt be disturbing like that.
ESO is a theme park MMO and I dont see any point doing those. But there are other ways how to do it.
Also I would compare KCD with Chivalry and War of Roses like that… otherwise you can say that the whole idea of RPG is “Been therem done that”. I would play KDC “arena” rather than any of those you mentioned (and I tryied them all) as developers do claim their combat is something different (as I get it).
(sigh) I couldn’t understand what the last guy said too well, and I think the guy before him may have said something similar, but I shall say this: Their are already multiplayer games that feature medieval style combat, play those, this doesn’t need any multiplayer at all. The end. Their is no need to add something like that, an arena style thing would be pointless, because of the other games that exist (all 5037 of them), and large scale multiplayer (like co-op or an MMO) simply won’t work with this type of game. People must realize that not everything is made better by letting multiple people play at once, those games already exist.
1 Like
There are a number of incorrect assumptions at work here… first and foremost, not everyone that arrives here comes via the Kickstarter page. In fact, I would wager that a significant number of new arrivals in the last month are coming from Steam (as I did).
And, to underscore something important: Steam put this game on my recommended list for MMOs. So the assumption that I (or others) showing up here only to start talking about MMOs are deliberately injecting the topic to disrupt is just erroneous. This should also be highlighted as one (if not the biggest) contributor to the whole “why not add MMO” tangent because, as mentioned elsewhere, MMO players have been slavering for an MMO that offer realism (not just graphics, not just “medieval style”) for at least 12 years.
In context of me - I not only didn’t know this was a standalone when I got here, I only discovered it as I began engaging. It was a natural reaction to ask “why” and, of course, to suggest that there is a huge demand for it. Eventually, I settled in to accepting this wasn’t going to be the game I’ve personally waited 20 years to play… but it demonstrates that such an idea isn’t entirely off the radar of possibility.
So I’m sticking around to support it. I’ll let my guy play the standalone so the backing doesn’t completely go to waste. I’m certain that this choice will garner additional backers for Warhorse as my guy is highly engaged in stand alone games.
Does this make me some manner of “second class citizen” here? Perhaps. I’m ok with that. If nothing else, I get to keep an eye on this game and see how it progresses; because, after all, regardless that it’s standalone, it’s the best chance I’ve seen in a while for the notion of realism to get into the gaming ecosystem long enough to influence its direction.
Don’t worry:D In decade when we have perfected virtual reality, their will certainly be a realistic MMO. Think Sword art Online style.
Sorry, I guess that my reply wasnt much understable due to my english.
You said there are multiplayer games with medieval combat. I said that those arent similar to what Kingdom Come seems to be in future. I played Chivalry, War of Roses, M&B… I think that Warhorse combat could be better and offer different multiplayer experience and absolutely not pointless.
Its like asking why people wants IL-2 Battle of Stalingrad multiplayer when they can play World of Warplanes, H.A.W.X.2 or fly a kite with friends… (and other 5038 options to fly).
I would love to be able to fight a duel aggainst friends — even if limited to a tournament or a small yard or something. And I believe Im not alone.
Large scale multiplayer is something that wont work. I agree.
1 Like
This is probably the most brilliant point made on the topic that I’ve seen on this forum.
That’s all, folks.
I am sorry, I don´t want to offend you, but I cant stay quiet. Again I am sorry, but:
You have a King status, you payed a lot of money… A lot lot of money for a game you knew nothing about? I mean there wasnt any trick that would make u think this is MMO. In many videos the team clearly proclaimed that they dont want to make an MMO. Are some kind of millionare who is throwing money anywhere he wants?
You don’t understand there are people who have so much money they don’t care what they spend it on and how much it is? There are plenty of them.
She said it was listed on Steam in the MMO section.
1 Like
Oh I see… I didn´t know that…
Yeah I dont understand it im just a poor boy :(.
Well, I’m definitely not one of those, so the reality that I haven’t withdrawn should tell you all something. I’m sure a few of you could have fun with variants on “what that something might be” (and will do so regardless what I say), but, for the record, it’s precisely what I said previously:
You are confused because you think that no one will support something that isn’t exactly what they want. In reality, I thought it was one thing, discovered it was another. But even so, can still see the line from “what it is” to “what I want” as a future possibility… if not for this group of people, then some other who get inspired by them.
And I happen to believe that likely enough that I’m willing to “king up” to do my part toward seeing that day get here.
As for $500, it’s not that much if you really think about it, roughly:
- 50 fast food lunches
- 1440 packs of cigarettes
- 71 specialty coffee drinks
- 1 night partying your ass off (evil grin)
I suppose it just depends what you find important and how you choose to look at it, eh?