Tribal Instincts: Red 5 Explain Firefall

By Jim Rossignol on October 7th, 2010 at 3:24 pm.


Earlier this week I had a chance to talk to Matt DeWald, community manager at Red 5 Studios, the company making Firefall. It’s a shooter that promises to do new and unusual things to the free-to-play space. The game was the big surprise at the most recent PAX event in Seattle, with its blend of cartoon good looks, Tribes-like shooter action, and a persistent world. Perhaps most intriguingly, Red 5 is the company that Mark Kern and William Petras went on to form when they left Blizzard. It seems to have both the vision, and the design pedigree to be a really big deal. I asked DeWald to go into some of the details.

RPS: Can you tell us a bit about what Red 5 is all about? Why a shooter? What is the philosophy with Firefall?

DeWald: So Red 5 was founded by Mark Kern back in 2006. He had just got done with World Of Warcraft, and he was looking for something new. At the time he was working on World Of Warcraft he was playing a lot of shooters, and he ended up thinking “Well, there’s not a game that combines these elements with a persistent open world and massive scale and character progression, or the stuff that I find really fun in WoW, so let’s do that.” He went ahead and formed the company and was able to pick up Scott Youngblood, Tribes lead designer, and after that he really pulled together a great team. So that’s where we come from with Red 5, we really like shooters, we really like MMOs, we really like a lot of genres, and we want to combine a lot of the best features from them. And I think we have come pretty close to doing that with Firefall.

RPS: And it’s free to play.

DeWald: Correct. We’re planning to release at the end of 2011, and you will be able to download and play for absolutely free. We will obviously have a marketplace to support the game, but we are working to not have anything on there which would compromise the game. We’re making a shooter, first and foremost, and with that comes skill-based play, and so we find it really important not to unbalance the game. You shouldn’t be able to buy your way to the top, so making that balance with gameplay is really important to us.


RPS: You guys must be pretty confident in the free to play model to announce that’s definitely the way you’re going to go. Was that always the plan?

DeWald: It’s not a recent development, it has been the plan for quite some time. Free to play is a proven model in quite a few different games, and we think that this is the way games are going. Going to a store and buying a $65 box is really not where games are headed, especially if you can buy triple-A games as download, we feel like free is the next step. We want to push the limits on that, we want people to say “are you sure this is really free?” And be able to prove you can make a free to play shooter that is kick-ass, looks great, everything else. We want to push that model. I mean it was tough decision, there was a lot of debate, it went back and forth, but this is the best model.

RPS: Yeah, you see a lot of scepticism with free. “Can it really be free?” is something I saw asked a bit when the Firefall video hit. Do you think that’s a problem? I mean there’s an issue there with how free games are perceived by many gamers, isn’t there? How do you find yourself combating that kind of scepticism?

DeWald: It’s going to be tough. Until the game is in players hands I don’t think it can beat that scepticism, but I think we have a game that can beat that stigma away. Once people get to play it, those comments will fall away. We want to get rid of the general consensus that free to play equals poor quality. Firefall will do that.


RPS: Let’s talk a bit more about the game, then. Can you talk through the game experience a bit – how much is it based on skill-based combat?

DeWald: All gameplay is, in some way, based on skill-based combat. There is no tag targeting, there’s no automated attacking. Every ability you use and every shot that you take will be skill-based. So let me give you a run down of how the game will work for the player going into the game. Say that I am working towards an army technology progression, for instance the thumper is an army technology, and I want to increase my thumper capacity. What I need to do is to gather some resources, so I am going to look for a dynamic mission that is going to allow me to collect those resources. I open up my world map and I look for an available mission. Other players, or the game director, may have found a deposit for me to use. I will call down a thumper and start that on collecting resources. The thumper will then come under attack. So I am soon playing a shooter like this Starship Troopers defence experience, fighting these creatures, and immediately I am in this game where I have to think about how long I keep the thumper out here, do I hold on until I get 100%, or do a fall back because there are too many creatures? I could die! This is all skill based, there are no dice rolls happening while this is all going on.

Of course something else will happen, too. So I send my thumper back and see that another dynamic world event is going on. The city of Dredge is under attack by enemy forces, The Chosen, so instead of sitting worrying about thumpers out there, I head back to Dredge. By the time I get there it’s been taken over, so we need to take it back, and it’s not a defence anyone, it becomes an attack. This is stuff you have seen during the PAX gameplay, but the point is that it can dynamically change as you play. These are just some examples of how that could happen. It could be different depending on the time of day, the time of year, what other players are doing. That will all determine what missions are available to you.

RPS: “The Chosen” are the big bad NPC faction?

DeWald: Yes, we thought it was really important to get across that this Earth, and this is humanity’s last stand. We’re trying to get rid of the enemies so we can survive on Earth. It was really important for us that everyone feel like they could push against a common enemy.


RPS: But there is PvP too, right?

DeWald: Correct. Think of it as a kind of Wild West area, so people are fighting over resources. Players fight as part of these mercenary armies, and these will fight for specific goals, for bonuses, against each other. We will have a mature competitive multiplayer aspect to Firefall, but we’re not revealing too many details. Right now we want to talk about the co-op campaign.

RPS: Can you explain a bit about how the Firefall world works? Is it instanced, open and all co-op? How does it deliver as a persistent space?

DeWald: One of the things we’re trying to figure out right now is the exact number of players that we can have in the open world. We’re working on hundreds, but whether that’s two hundred or three hundred we just don’t know. All these players will be sharing their world, and they will be co-operating or competing, or at least seeing each other, forming up into squads for dynamic missions. It’s a living, breathing persistent world. Leave and then come back and things will be a little different. There will be multiple instances of that one shared world.


RPS: The other thing I wasn’t clear about is progression. I guess with the WoW designer in there people are expecting a vertical level structure. How will that work in Firefall?

DeWald: So it’s a bit of a combination of multiple things. There are levels for each of the battleframes. These are different sets of a equipment that players use, and each of those can level up independently. They can be switched out in the fly, so you could switch out in the city, or someone has a battleframe depot out in the field, and they need a medic, so you switch to your medic battleframe right there. We have multiple battleframes, but we are just talking about assault and medic right now.

Not only do we have levels for the battleframes, but we have resource gathering to buy components, so there’s this gathering mechanic to think about. Then we also have complete customisation for battleframes and equipment, and these are drops and mission rewards and other things like that. This will equate to things like, say, you want greater accuracy in your assault rifle so you put a 5% accuracy mod on there, or you might want a level 2 crater ability that does a little more damage, and you will have to unlock level 2 to do that. So there’s is the process of gathering equipment but also the unlocking equipment as you progress.

RPS: So does that create an imbalance in PvP? Aren’t high level characters just going to be too badass to take down? Or does the skill aspect mean low level types have a chance?

DeWald: No, we are definitely cognisant of that, and we want to make sure that a low level character is still competitive with a high level character. We don’t want to operate along the lines of the classic MMO structure where if you are level 65 and he is level 75 there’s no way in hell you can even harm them, let alone kill them, this is a skill-based game, so skill should matter. The upgrades are understood as being about having more options than necessarily having more power. There will be a power increase for levels, but it will be small. You are really opening different modules, different areas for your abilities, more variety of options for you to explore. A level one player will still be able to play in the same game as a level thirty player, he will just have to be good.


RPS: Can you talk a bit more about the powers that are available to these medic and assault battleframes, then?

DeWald: Well the two different sets have different roles. The medic is a support role, and its abilities are focused on buffs, heals, keeping people alive. The assault battleframe is about dealing damage, so you have crater and shockwave, for example, which cause massive damage abilities against areas. Other, different battleframes will have different specialisations.

RPS: And will there be any non-combat abilities? Any crafting and so on?

DeWald: Actually, crafting is something we’re still looking at, and we are not sure exactly how that would work in Firefall, so we won’t talk about it at the current time.

RPS: Fair enough. We saw a dropship in the video, is that an indicator of other vehicles to come? It seemed on rails, public transport sort of thing?

DeWald: We will have vehicles for your to drive, we can’t talk about what they are just yet!

RPS: And the dropship is a scripted thing, like WoW’s griffon and so forth?

DeWald: Yes, in the PAX demo it was a scripted event, it was public transportation in that, but whether that’s what it is in the final game, we’re not sure yet.

RPS: So I’ve been thinking a bit about the natural reaction of companies to say that the items purchased in the free to play game won’t actually have major in-game implications for players, that they won’t give them an unfair advantage. I wonder about that, I mean, why shouldn’t my cash make me more powerful? If I want to pay to be tough?

DeWald: I do think there is a definite application for cosmetic items, and I think that does have an impact in the world, to be able to strut your stuff and look good while you are playing. But that also doesn’t mean there aren’t possibilities for other stuff to buy that aren’t power items. Short of buying weapons that just make you more powerful, there are other options such as, for example, paying to gain access to different areas of the game before other people. We want to make all content available for free, but paying might give you early access to new content, also there is paying to save time. You might pick up a 10% boost to your crystite mining ability. You’re going to get more per second than I would. It doesn’t give you direct power, but it allows you to pay for impact in the world, and save time if you can’t play as much as I can. What we’re working towards is to make the paid items diverse, but to avoid anything that directly impacts power.


RPS: Another thing from that PAX demo – the perspective seems to move back and forth between first and third-person perspectives. What’s the thinking behind that?

DeWald: Well, that’s kind of funny. We had gone back and forth between first and third-person in the office, to the point where we had lively and heated debates about whether we were a first or third-person game. In the end we decided that the public decide. If we were split then so would the players be, and so we made it easy to switch. We are, of course, a game that breaks the genre conventions. We are a skill-based shooter, but we have character progression and character customisation. With character customisation you will want to be able to see what you have done, in the world. I tend to run around the world in third-person, to see my character, and then switch to first person for the combat because I am better in first person. It’s really just to give people options.

RPS: How much is being part of guild or a clan going to influence the game experience for you? Is it important?

DeWald: Well we think playing together is essential, and the main game we are talking about today is a co-op campaign. However, while there are places to go and hang out when your friends aren’t around, we want to make it really easy for you to group and play with anyone. For instance, when you attack Dredge, that might involve twenty or thirty people, and you don’t want to be messing around with squad invites and all that stuff, you just want to get stuck in, so we made it so that as long as you are a part of the attack you will get a reward.

But also we have made it so that your army (guild) will have its own progression. It’s foremost a social structure, but it will also have impact on the game world. There’s a technology tree to unlock through your army, that allows you to call on various tactics for combat in the world.


RPS: So then: the Tribes question. You have the Tribes designer, the jetpacks, the vehicles… how like Tribes is Firefall really going to be?

DeWald: Ooh, tough one. Well my first competitive game was Tribes, and obviously there’s Scott, but it’s tough. We’re still working on just how much boost there is, all those sorts of balancing issues. That’s the stuff that’s going to change as we head toward release, and it will probably change after release too. But it’s worth saying that we don’t see Firefall as a sequel to Tribes, we’re very much “we love Tribes and we want to capture some of what was special about it.” We’re not trying to copy it or create a sequel to it, but we are trying to replicate some of the fun you had while playing it.

RPS: Any word on that beta?

DeWald: We’re not announcing the final date for that, but announcement soon, hopefully. We’re an open company, we want feedback. Feel free to sign up to the beta, get on the forums, tell us what you want to see.

RPS: Thanks for your time.

__________________

« | »

, , , .

59 Comments »

  1. Baboonanza says:

    So brown :( Otherwise this sounds really interesting.

  2. ShineDog says:

    This looks amazing, and yet all I can think about is how the font looks very much like starcraft.

    • Dawngreeter says:

      I was expecting this to be some kind of StarCraft mod. Or something.

      Don’t really fault them for it, and I’m not even a StarCraft fan. But it’s just so… starcrafty.

    • kikito says:

      I subscribe this. Definitively starcrafty

    • blah says:

      Come on Blizzard get the C&D action going!

    • Stromko says:

      Blizzard isn’t that hypocritical. I hope.

    • DrGonzo says:

      Am I missing the joke here? It doesn’t look anything like Starcraft. It maybe was inspired somewhat by Warhammer, but even that’s taking it a bit far. It’s clearly inspired by Borderlands.

    • Sardaukar says:

      @DrGonzo – Look at the logo.

  3. Kast says:

    Okay, I’m interested. Hadn’t really heard about it until now but, hey, I liked Tribes and always feel like I should get into some kind of MMO properly at some point. If it’s free to play, I think I can drum up the money somehow.

  4. goodgimp says:

    The continued Tribes comparison baffle me. This game has as much to do with Tribes as Call of Duty or Halo does.

    • Ringwraith says:

      I think that’s because there are large open spaces and jetpacks. Of course having a lead designer of Tribes on board also brings that up somewhat.
      It’s not tribes if there’s no disc launcher though!

    • Spectre-7 says:

      I was just popping in to post pretty much the same thing. Every game with a jetpack gets labeled Tribes-like, and it seems awfully shallow, doesn’t it? Combat in Tribes and its sequels was wholly unique in that the jepack wasn’t just an afterthought; it was the player’s primary means of locomotion, and they were constantly slinging themselves over dunes and through the air at a few hundred KPH. The games were just this side of a flight sim.

      Every time a title like this or Section 8 (whose combat much more resembled Halo’s, IMO) is called Tribes-like, I sort of feel like it diminishes Tribes’ name a bit. It perpetuates the idea that Tribes was just another first-person shooter with a jetpack haphazardly strapped onto it, when I think it was really so much more.

      No offense, Jim, of course. This is just becoming a pet-peeve of mine, and I’d like to see Tribes-like mean something more than has a crappy jetpack.

    • the affront says:

      Yeah, it definitely needs jetpacks and skiing both to qualify. And a movement pace that’s not so snail-like like this game. Hopefully that was just because of the class used in the video, though…

      Overall it looks pretty good, though. One more chance for a decent MMOFPS (after Tabula Rasa was a little shitty (and dead), Global Agenda not in any way “MMO” and Planetside a complete ghost town for years now in EU) – which is always a good thing.

    • K says:

      I want a disc launcher, mines and a jetpack, so I can trickshot my mines in mid-air. Also, I need to get 10 years younger so my reflexes will allow me to do that again.

      But Free to Play? I’d rather pay 60$ for the box and have it done, like Guild Wars, and none of this “you must pay 3 [stupid currency] to get the rocket launcher”. I want to play a game, not barter it.

    • FalseMyrmidon says:

      DeWald also ran the largest Tribes forum for a long time.

    • mcnostril says:

      I hear that he also defeated a chair in single combat.

      Confirm/deny?

  5. Freudian Trip says:

    Absolutely beautiful style, I’m not a massive fan of the character having a hard outline to it while the backgrounds are incredibly soft though.

  6. ix says:

    It’s very MMO borderlands. I don’t see the starship troopers reference at all (though it’s been a while since I played tribes, so it’s probably more tribes).

    Anyway, I’m unimpressed with their general F2P approach. Upgrades like 10% faster crystine mining is basically a roundabout way to do gold selling. It’s one of the things that CCP are making tons of money on, and so it is proven to work, but I don’t see how it will not favour the big spenders, even over the people with a lot of time on their hands. We’ll see, I suppose.

    • the affront says:

      True. These F2P games especially suck if all the blatantly gameplay-efficiency-affecting stuff (if it has that at all, which I’m entirely not a fan of, but which sadly seems to be necessary for financing) adds up to more than the usual MMO subscription.
      If it had all that stuff in a nice bundle for 10-13 bucks or something per month I’d pay that, if the game was good enough and felt like a “real” MMO, but there are way too many of these games where you don’t really get far with that much, which is frankly fucking ridiculous.

    • Stromko says:

      The example he gave (the 10% faster mining) didn’t sound too bad, but hopefully they won’t feel the need to make the grind painful in order to convince us to buy our way past.

  7. Lonesock says:

    This might be unfair, but Firefall has to convince me it isn’t “APB in space” before I try convincing my friends to get it. It was a little disappointing that “skill-based combat” didn’t cover the dry stuff like hitboxes, localized damage, spawning, etc. Also, it would have been interesting to hear how those special attacks like the ground pound work with gunplay.

    The world/environment looks damn nice though.

    • Spoon says:

      The fact that it has PvE already makes it not an “APB in space”.

    • Fox says:

      Also APB wasn’t F2P outside of the Social district (which still required the $50 purchase up front), so there’s really no reason not to encourage your friends to try it. Y’know, in a year.

    • Dances to Podcasts says:

      “One of the things we’re trying to figure out right now is the exact number of players that we can have in the open world. We’re working on hundreds, but whether that’s two hundred or three hundred we just don’t know.”

      Sounds more APB than WoW, tbh.

    • Stromko says:

      APB wanted you to buy the full-priced box, buy game time, AND it had a cash store. Aside from the unsatisfying game play, their multiple revenue streams annoyed me. If they’d just focused on one way to get our cash, things would probably have been more efficient and less intimidating/insulting to the customer.

  8. Schaulustiger says:

    This looks and sounds pretty interesting, but I’ll not get excited about it yet, considering the release is over one year away.

  9. tanith says:

    Looks interesting enough.
    And hey – it’s free! So you can definitely check it out, even once.

    I really want to see how they’ll balance it out, though.
    Not only the game itself but the pay vs. free system.

  10. Jimbo says:

    Looks ace. Like WoW and Borderlands loved each other very much and had a babby.

    But then the babby had a terrible business model and had to be put down.

  11. cyrenic says:

    “We want to get rid of the general consensus that free to play equals poor quality.”

    Too late. League of Legends beat you to it.

    • Mad Doc MacRae says:

      And by the time this is out I think World of Tanks will have, too.

  12. Fumarole says:

    I approve of the name Red 5 for a developer.

  13. Quasar says:

    Tribes + Borderlands + Planetside.

    Want.

  14. Urthman says:

    I love how this looks.

    Will there ever again be a shooter with a third-person view directly behind the character (like in, say Tribes) instead of set off to the side?

  15. irongamer says:

    Been lurking on the Firefall forums since it was announced. Really looking forward to this game.

  16. Stijn says:

    That logo is very StarCraft II.

    • ScubaMonster says:

      Yeah I totally agree. I was about to post the very same thing. I realize they are former Blizzard people, but directly copying the Starcraft font/logo seems pretty unprofessional. It’s like shouting “Hey we are ex-Blizzard, so our games are fun too by default”.

  17. Marcin says:

    They really need a new logo/font.

    I’ve wanted this since I saw the first video, so no change there.

    This part sounded a bit … off to me though: “We are, of course, a game that breaks the genre conventions”. It’s like, “I know I sounded reasonable throughout the interview so I have to throw in a bit of this PR absurdity here.”

  18. Borgeau says:

    Global Agenda is like that.

  19. Po0py says:

    I like this.

  20. tribal whore says:

    “It’s not tribes if there’s no disc launcher though!”

    Dang that gun was hard as hell to use. Some people were masters with it but some where totally useless (me). I could see them having the disc launcher as a paid item. You’d get absolutely no immediate benefit from purchasing it unless you used to be a hard core tribes player. And in that case your hard core tribes skills are what’s “not fair” not the disc launcher itself.

  21. Choca says:

    Free to play shooter, heh ? Man, that community is going to be SO mature !

    • Dominic White says:

      Better than the Tribes community, who were violently hostile to anyone new. If they hadn’t outright rejected the very concept of Tribes 3, it would have actually gotten the post-release patches it needed and could have been a contender, too.

    • Ringwraith says:

      Vengence was the only Tribes game I played, mostly as it was the only one with single-player, and it was great. It’s solely to blame for my wants of a disc launcher and burner.

  22. Cael says:

    Confirmed.

    (The chair deserved it though).

  23. Superjudge says:

    The Spinfusor was my bread and butter. There was nothing so satifying as being able to tag a moving target traveling at a different speed, altitude and vector with blue disc of doom. I always loved hitting someone as they were on the upslope side of a nice ski run just before they were about to take off ahead of me.

    Honestly though, “it’s not Tribes-like” if it doesn’t include super versatile custom user content creation. Firefall: Shifter anyone?

  24. FRIENDLYUNIT says:

    I’ll be watching this one very, very intently and praying that it’s not another Global Agenda.

  25. Armyofnone says:

    Oh, what, with the people from Tribes? My interest has been sparked. I kinda feel bad for not paying attention to this game at PAX now :/

    • Rugged Malone says:

      Not people…person. AFAIK the only former Tribes dev involved is Scott Youngblood.

      @Superjudge: client-side scripting would definitely be cool, although I suspect it would be relatively gimped in an MMO setting compared to what we had in Tribes and Tribes 2.

      My interest goes down a few notches if the dropship ends up being just a scripted choochoo train ride; hopefully there will be some pilotable vehicles. As much fun as jetpacks can be, I also want to zip around that terrain in the equivalent of a Planetside Mosquito.

  26. gerafin says:

    Red 5 were the only people to send me an email saying “happy birthday” (twas on the 3rd). The only people, out of all my friends and family. They made me feel loved. Therefore, I am going to play their game. Lots. And support them with every ounce of my heart :D

  27. Butler` says:

    They’ve got a good team. The video looks good. I’m quietly hopeful.

  28. ZephyrSB says:

    Looks interesting, and I like the Borderlands vibe to it. Maybe this is finally the game to cure the emptiness I feel when playing online shooters left over from Planetside…

  29. fatalerror says:

    Colosus,
    this looks slamming dude!

  30. YouGottaBelieve says:

    Mark Kern had as much to do with the design of WoW as Yoko Ono had to do with the any of the Beatles music. It’s sad that they keep lying by omission about this simple fact (http://www.worldofwarcraft.com/info/basics/classic-credits.html). I also don’t see any of the tribes influence evident in this game which makes me wonder why they keep touting that?

    With that gripe out of the way the game looks pretty but uninspired. It will have to perform extremely well if it’s going to complete with the likes of TF2, CS: Source, CoD and Halo in the competitive shooter space. This guy here pretty much hints at as much in his responses as he continually brings up the co-op and progression aspects. So we’re getting a co-op borderlands-esque pseudo-FPS in space with progression. This is another case of a game developer trying to combine as many elements as possible thinking it will make a great game. I think if you look at all the best games they tend to do one thing really well instead of just taking a kitchen sink approach.

    At the end of the day it will be free to play so it will be easy to decide without any commitment. But on that note, imagine if Valve had to pay to run all of the TF2 servers? How do you make any money unless you can really wring a lot of money out of your players? Just charge me a subscription, if the game is good I will pay for it and then you can keep the lights on. Right out of the gate they’re basically telling me this game isn’t good enough for me to pay for or subscribe to but hopefully I’ll give them some money for some crappy micro-transactions that have no measurable impact on the game?? BOOO!

    Ugh, these guys are just begging to be another failed MMO. Maybe they should rename their company to Red Flag and the game to Firefail.

    • Nethlem says:

      I don’t know why you are linking the WoW classic credits when they just proof you wrong. He’s listed there as Team Lead, now i don’t know what that means, but considering it’s the second position right after the executive producer i doubt it’s some kind “go and grab coffee after that be as unimportant as possible” position. But rather a position with quite some influence and responsibility.

      And what tribes influence? They just say what they worked prior on and the things they worked prior on ended up pretty good for the most part so i don’t see anything wrong with mentioning that as a track record to get some trust into their team. If you apply for a new job/audience don’t you tell them what you worked on before?

      Btw it doesn’t feel to me like “trying to combine as many elements as possible thinking it will make a great game”. To the contrary it’s a concept i’ve been wishing for for a long time because it could work well if it’s done. The last thing we need is even more 1 dimensional shooters that don’t try anything new like CoD or Halo. And when you look at the “best” games you realise they are the best/got popular because they did something new. Counter Strike got popular because it introduced progress to FPS gameplay by buying weapons/getting money, Team Fortress got popular because it introduced classes to FPS gameplay. Halo got popular… because it got online multiplayer going on consoles… These things didn’t get popular because they stayed as simple as possible, they got popular because they tried new things.

      If that wouldn’t happen we still would be playing Wolfenstein 3D without the ability to aim up or down because some nut-job like you thought “adding the 3rd dimension is so not needed they just try to cram stuff in there”.

      The last thing we need in this time and age is even more stupid 1 dimensional games like an MW3 which do nothing besides adding a few new models and weapons. Many of the games that are really considered classic’s are in the end nothing else but mashing together certain ammounts of different genres. Dungeon Keeper, System Shock, Syndicate, X-Com just to name a few TRUE classics…

  31. wikiwhacker says:

    This is not Tribes but I can see a lot of the “Tribes” elements in the game. Obviously the jetpacks are there. The larger immersive environements etc. If you watch the full demo video from PAX you will see the game essentially uses a similiar type of “inventory station” as Tribes and a similiar custom armor concept. Instead of armors they call them battleframes. They have packs and weapons that you can customize to your battleframe (armor). Instead of preset classes, you can customize your own loadout with a battleframe (ala light, medium, heavy) to your liking. Mucho better then set classes.

    The difference is that Firefall will have a lot more armortypes instead of just 3 basic types. You should really have great ability to customize a player to your liking. Skiing is a questionmark but a lot of people have to remember that skiing was not originally intended or built into Tribes. It was a glitch that turned a good game into a ‘fantastic” game especially for competitive PVP stuff. Sounds to me like firefall will be more like a the way base Tribes would play. I just hope they throw in a multiplayer game thats fast and furious ala Tribes with jump skiing. Wont hold my breathe though. Either way it looks awesome for a free game.

  32. Jon Smith says:

    @YouGottaBelieve

    Butthurt detected. Seriously, you are complaining that the game is free and that they should charge you. You are an idiot.

  33. Clunky says:

    Right now, being free and graphically high-endish is about the only thing that can tempt me into even bothering with online gaming.

    So this is right up my alley. Free-To-Play is priced just about right, now let’s see how long it can remain fairly so vs people who pay stuff.

  34. YouGottaBelieve says:

    @Nethlem scroll down to the designer credits. “Team Lead” is a cheerleader position, not a developer or designer. RE competitive shooter, the issue I take is that that keep touting as a competitive skill based shooter in their interviews and the dev commentary but I don’t see any of that in the game. I am a hard core shooter player so I’m just saying, if you want to win me over you have to compete with the big boys and show me the goods not just make promises and show some weak borderlands knockoff.

    @Jon Smith quite the contrary. I want to see this game to succeed and not fail, I’m sick of seeing every MMO fail because of game developers with zero business sense. They have not put forward anything resembling a sustainable business model. If they are going to take risks they should allow people to buy upgrades that matter like the interviewer hinted. That would be slightly ‘evil’ in some peoples eyes but I can see that actually being very profitable (there are examples of this in China currently). I think the US is ready for this. Also, box sales act as a soft gate on server load. It helps pay for the initial R&D and prevents the servers from collapsing on day one.

    Sorry if my OP was slightly negative but I have been following this game with interest and would like to see it succeed but all these responses just pushed my buttons and this DeWald guy seems like a complete dufus. Don’t they have anyone who can tell us something interesting and promising about the game? Where is the “Lead Designer” of WoW or Tribes?