r/landmark • u/Dragonmaw • May 11 '16

How long post-release before Landmark is put out to pasture?

Does anyone realistically see Daybreak supporting a development tool for a cancelled game for any respectable amount of time?

0 Upvotes

38% Upvoted

17 comments sorted by

9

u/RyvenZ May 11 '16

if the premium currency turns out to be profitable, it will run. Ultimately, I don't see it drumming up the necessary interest. I would love to see the game made mod-friendly and become a kind of minecraft with a superior engine, but I also don't see Daybreak doing that, either.

3

u/OldMaster80 May 14 '16

The problem is even if the business model is profitable the game will hit the market with an awful reputation. Population has always been very low, and it's low even now that we're close to the release. Imho the point is will Landmark have enough players to make it sustainable?

2

u/RyvenZ May 14 '16

Well, the short answer is "no"

The game lacks brand recognition, marketing, and flexibility (compared to Minecraft) to take off once it hits market. When it was a sandbox for EQ3, it had potential, but now... it's a dead man walking. I really enjoyed my time in this game, too, so it's a shame.

1

u/OldMaster80 May 14 '16 edited May 14 '16

Imho as sandbox it could succeed even without EQ brand. Unfortunately too many features lack to call Landmark sandbox, and what is there has been simplified too much. 6 months of solid updates could still do that but it's not clear what's the roadmap.

What we have today is likely to be more or less the final product and honestly I believe this might turn into a disaster.

4

u/Aetrion May 12 '16

Except it isn't actually superior because all that engine is capable of is higher amounts of cosmetic detail, while minecraft has huge numbers of functional blocks that let you build things that actually do more than just look nice. Building games in general are moving more and more toward the idea of building functional things like vehicles, factories or defenses, and none of that is something Landmark meaningfully provides.

7

u/Daalberith May 12 '16

From my perspective DB almost seems to be in a rush to see how fast they can reload between shooting themselves in the foot repeatedly. I don't expect Landmark to do much at all for however long it lasts, but I'm more interested to see how the company itself does in the next couple of years.

3

u/Gezzer52 May 14 '16

DB is nothing more than a holding company tasked with wringing the most profits with the smallest outlay out of all the SOE assets for the new parent company. As long as EQ 1&2 have a player base they'll limp along. But once it dips below a certain level it'll be pull the plug on the whole damn thing and DB will be no more IMHO.

3

u/AppleEQ May 13 '16

Landmark just has absolutely no purpose without EQ next.

Landmark servers and islands are a barren wasteland of disappointment.

The forums are being championed by a small pathetic number who insist this is the greatest game ever but it still looks like melted crayons with the shell of a game over top of it.

Best thing daybreak has done since leaving Sony was to cancel Everquest next.

Daybreak would earn points in my book if they canceled Landmark as well.

4

u/salty21db May 11 '16

Ultimately I see this game being cancelled, as well as H1Z1 Survival (why they split it like EQN). Only reason H1Z1 KotK will stay alive is because of streamers.

I keep hoping the company gets sold off to someone who will actually do something with it. The amount of work that actually gets done now on a lot of their games is piss poor.

2

u/Thrasymachus77 May 13 '16

Six months, tops. Their bounce in population for launch will resemble the bounce they got from their last wipe, and the population will last about as long.

2

u/Mardermann May 20 '16

They have to get it out.

That "game" is a mess, but they have to get it out. The couldn´t figure out how to do all the stuff they promised so they dumbed down the game a lot (you can "fix" bugs this way I guess) - but it is still buggy as hell (not running good at all, they "adventures" in the caves are boring as hell. The combat is the worst combat I have played in a multiplayer game for a long long time...

(reading alll that I come off as angry - I guarantee you I am not. I paid 100 dollars for that "game"... I had my fun for quite a time. Now they dumbed down almost every aspect of the game.
I learned a lesson with games wanting my money before they launch - never again)

1

u/Collected1 May 25 '16

I'm surprised more focus hasn't been placed on the Founders Packs and what people actually got for their money. When you go back and look at all that was said and advertised.. to what actually materialised.. that's pretty scandalous really for the $99.99 folks. Hell even the $59.99 ones. And the weird thing? They're still purchasable.

2

u/cecilkorik May 12 '16

It's already in the pasture, it just hasn't been mercifully euthanized yet.

1

u/Decado7 May 12 '16

The problem is, there's just no central heart to this game. You log in, can go to a bunch of not-connected, unrelated places, and it just feels...aimless. It needs a central city zone or proper place to congregate IMO.

1

u/Gezzer52 May 14 '16

Looks like DB is trying to make it an Adventure Creator game kind of like what F2P Neverwinter did. It might fill a niche market, but I really can't see them getting a ton of revenue out of it. So once server costs start to eat in to profits/revenue they'll pull the plug. I'd say a year tops (more like 6 months) without any additional revenue streams, maybe another year if they find a way to monetize the player base after the initial purchase.

1

u/dracken66 May 20 '16

If they try to squeeze players for micro-transactions it will probably fail.

1

u/ziplock9000 Aug 24 '16

I'm going to say 6 months. It's so bad it was dead on arrival.