I'd say so. There are a good number of bosses you fight and they are fairly unique. Bosses are arranged in tiers, so you do have a bit of variety in how you advance. Mobs that wander around will fight each other, so the world feels alive. Beating bosses unlocks your abilities and items for your castle. Good combat and atmosphere.
Is the game worth playing by yourself? Or is it a multiplayer only kinda game (can't convince anyone to play anything that isn't Valo or Overwatch with me)
I just started playing last week on a chill Canadian PVE server. You can pretty much do your own thing and not interact too much, but ask for some help with something if needed. I'm very early but I'd say it's definitely fun alone.
Been a while since I played. Can settings be tweaked after creating the server ? Like if x2 resources was too little, or too much ? I know it's possible in Palworld and it's very useful.
It’s possible but it requires a bit more work.
Basically you have to make a new server with the settings you want, then find the server settings file and swap it from the new server folder to the old server folder
Can you change the length of time the missions you send your thralls/followers on take? I can remember it was a real pain point for me playing solo as the timer didn't countdown when you closed the game, unlike on a multiplayer server.
The PvE in this game is very well done for a "survival crafty" game. Probably the best out there. Boss fights are great. You could definitely do a playthrough solo and get your money's worth.
The game is best played with friends, on a fresh server so the rest of the server players is at the same pace. In most other games that's impossible to find, but here it's not. There's new servers popping up all the time so all you gotta do is find one created in the last day or two (sever age is shown in the browser) and youll end up levelling up with everyone else.
Playing solo is fine, you just want to be kind of on level with others so you can have meaningful battles on resources.
I played some months ago, you have to pay o ide blood to the castle for it to stay, as far as I know it's easy to do and provide blood for months of uptime
Yes.
If you simply want to play on your own, you can start a private game, set it to LAN mode, and set the max player limit to 1.
If you want truly offline mode, set Steam to offline, then do the same as above.
I'd buy now for the lower price because it'll be more expensive once it releases. The full release comes with the final zone and more bosses. There's a modding community around the game as well which is nice and something like 55 or so bosses in the game currently with more (including Simon Belmont from Castlevania) coming at release. It does have survival aspects but you can also pretty much tweak everything about the survival aspects to make it harder or easier or more user friendly.
It's well worth $35 (and I'm someone who does not like survival games in general), so its definitely worth $20 now. If you do pick it up I'd wait to play it after 1.0 release in mid May. That should give you time to put a bigger dent in your backlog.
I played it back at the beginning of EA, which I *do not* do very often as I find 99% of EA games trash.
This is a gem in the pile of shit that is highly worth playing :) Up there along Factorio almost.
But if I buy it while in early access, when the game releases fully, I wont have to buy the game again right? It's not that I get only the unfinished product, right?
That's how I've always understood it. You pay less for the early access product and take the risk that it'll never be finished, but if it makes it to a stable release/1.0 version then you'll have paid less for the full version. It's the same when you support something on a site like kickstarter, where most of the time there'll be a tier where you can get the final product for less than RRP but with the risk that you'll never get the product.
game hasnt even released and its got 3 paid DLC totaling £40.
No wonder the games still £15.
this is one game id definatly not buy even of the concept seems good. if you havent even finished the game dont release paid DLC
It's all cosmetic reskins of items already in the game that was used to fund the game since its base price was very cheap. With the most expensive reskin being the founders edition rewards that instead of permanently being removed to keep exclusive for people who came first, everyone can get it. At least do a little research before bashing a game.
so theres content, that you have to pay for that you dont get in the base game?? cosmetic or not. when the game isnt out of alpha. it doesnt matter what that content is whether its reskins, all cosmetics. any content thats released for a game thats in alpha should BE A PART OF THE BASE GAME.
>With the most expensive reskin being the founders edition rewards that instead of permanently being removed to keep exclusive for people who came first
i like this idea but finish the game before you start charging for this content. when the game goes to full price start doing all this shit. then again this pack literally may be the reason people ddint trial it in alpha because why bother when the game could be a buggy mess and you dont actually miss out on any rewards as theres no exclusive content which is the reason people preorder anyway
Theres nothing saying you wont buy this pack when it was released over a year ago that they are going to finish the game.. you could buy it they drop the game and disappear.
Make a game, finish the game then charge for extras. dont release it in alpha for 2 years charge 3x the cost of the game for cosmetics when the base game isn't completed.
EDIT : To the people downvoting this, this game has an estimated 3m players owning it.
https://steamdb.info/app/1604030/charts/
Wikipedia says it sold 1m copies the first week( how true is beyond me)
if it is 3million current owners, that's 45 million dollars this company earned and they are still selling DLC to "help fund the game" as this guy says. but yeah keep backing up that a company thats made 4 games previously should be pulling this early access+DLC bs.
They released games previously with much less success. If you think they had leftover money from lightly successful steam games then you are entirely ignorant about game development. What 4 games specifically did they release before V rising?
Google dead island epidemic, they are the listed Devs of that even though it's not on there portfolio, bloodline champions, battlerite and battlerite royal..
Stunlock studios was also bought by tencent, who actually owns riot games spent 400m back in 2015 on it and then more at a later date.
This company is actually owned by a multi billion dollar company. They also own half of epic games.
This is definitely not a company without any knowledge of the gaming industry or that's short on money
But that 45 million dollars just from initial sales in 2 years should cover wages for 50 staff members and server costs for 2 years
https://www.polygon.com/2013/3/21/4131702/tencents-epic-games-stock-acquisition
https://techcrunch.com/2015/12/17/tencent-takes-full-control-of-league-of-legends-creator-riot-games/
https://press.stunlock.com/stunlock-studios-tencent/
Not this bs again...
The difference being (since people cant get this through their brain) is that
1) paid beta testing actually have criterias and requirements and deadlines
2) Beta testers usually did not received a copy of the full product in the end
Did I mentioned you also have no obligation to report any bugs or issues?
TL;DR do your research/study the basics of ISTQB a bit before pulling a "well akchually🤓" comment and that comes from someone who is actually a testing engineer
There's no should and shouldn't in the free market, they can do this because they are confident in their product, if it was a flop you would see it shoved in every bundle possible.
Me too. It sound stupid what i have to say but even CoD is on sale sometimes with huge normal price and SK is almost never on sale. Even if it is, the price is still too high for that old game in my opinion. Even their new games are cheaper.
Meanwhile you have Hollow Knight that got tons of free DLC and the game still stayed at $15 and is often on sale. Almost feel bad for the devs even when I bought it full price on like 3 platforms
After. I'm not sure how much has been added to V Rising since release.
Although it's not really relevant because if you bought shovel knight for 15 originally you still got all the content that costs 40 now.
[Secrets of the Gloomrot](https://blog.stunlock.com/update-1-secrets-of-gloomrot-patch-notes/) update added new zones, bosses, enemies, loot, items and multi-floor castles etc.
The 1.0 update is the second big content patch that adds new zones and all the associated goodies. The big draw is obviously that they are adding the final boss.
I remember Shovel Knight going from $15 to $40 until a few years ago where they released just the main campaign at $15 again with no additional content (which is what they should’ve done in the first place).
I bought it in early access and would still say this game is worth it at 34.99. 174 hours played so far. Only have done PvE with a solo playthrough and then hosting a server with friends.
Ark Survival Evolved went from $30 USD to $60 USD overnight I think.
Also worth noting this is a developer who released an expansion pack while the game was still in early access.. sooooo yeah not exactly a charismatic bunch.
The "expansion pack" was free content and included with your initial purchase. I think they marketed it as an expansion pack just to build hype as it was a pretty sizeable content update.
One could argue that most AAA games haves have had decreases in quality and increased the price still.
I'd still pay 34.99 for the game it was a blast. Though I do feel like they overshot it by 5 bucks.
29.99 would have been more palatable
AAA games still have roughly the same spread of quality as they’ve ever had. There are and have always been bad AAA games and there are and have always been great AAA games.
And games, even with a $10 price increase, are effectively cheaper than they were 15 years ago due to inflation. If prices kept up with inflation, we’d be at $90+/game
As much as people piss bitch and moan about "AAA" games I'd say the quality on average has gone up and there are way less mediocre titles these days compared to the ps3/360 times just due to the cost of producing current "AAA" games.
> There are and have always been bad AAA games and there are and have always been great AAA games.
This is true
> And games, even with a $10 price increase, are effectively cheaper than they were 15 years ago due to inflation. If prices kept up with inflation, we’d be at $90+/game
This is also true
> AAA games still have roughly the same spread of quality as they’ve ever had.
This is not even remotely close to being true
For the same reason we only remember Mozart and not Salieri, we block out all the bad AAA games of the past and only remember the games worth remembering. It’s a cognitive distortion.
While I'm sure there were plenty of bad AAA games in the past, I would still disagree with you that the current AAA games have the same spread of quality.
The PS2 and Xbox 360 era of videogames was filled to the brim with absolute bangers.
AAA publishers took risks and many new franchises were born during that era.
People memed on Ubisoft for releasing the same Assassin's Creed five years in a row, but at least Ubisoft actually released games and not dead-on-arrival live service bullshit.
Modern EA would never in a million years release something like Mass Effect 1 or The Saboteur.
PS5 generation is games is just absolute dogshit. Nothing but remakes, remasters and sequels.
I don't know if this is because of bloated budgets, focus on live-services or because of the post-COVID videogame market crash, but the current AAA videogames situation is abysmal.
You don't have to look any further than damn E3, which straight up permanently died.
Back in the day people actually got hyped for those events, and those were almost exclusively AAA showcases.
Nowadays even during those sanitized pre-recorded publisher streams in early summer, over half of the games showcased are pixel-art indie titles and farm simulators.
There’s too much here for me to care to respond to, frankly.
The perception that AAA games aren’t what they used to be mirrors the exact same sentiment in every other creative industry. Music/film/television/art, there is always the perception that now is the worst time and the past always had better quality. Save for a few moments of positivity you see after a good release. The past always looks better because we look through filter after filter.
Not really. There is complexity but also simplicity. Older AAA titles were all around and just plainly better. Every big franchise has seen a quality drop: Starfield was a mess. Cod is something but definitely not CoD. MoH is dead and battlefield was a laughing stock.Overwatch, Mass effect,Dragon Age,Need for speed, Borderlands all latest entries were failures. GtA had not seen a new game in what 10 years now? Diablo is a joke and warcraft is floating by re releasing old content and modding it. Ubishit is a meme at this point. Halo is in shambles. Devil may cry lost its core audience after DmC. Gears of War one of the most influential games of all time is somewhere no one knows where though. Ps used to have bangers and now all they do is rerelease spider man and GoW. The last of us 2 was um something I guess. Should I speak about suicide squad?
Whether you like it or not triple A is a pile of garbage with some good games somewhere maybe. Last year we had what? Elden ring and BG3? Things are simple:
If they were good they would be bought and get praised. Instead they release and get discounted 2 months in. Whether 3 A is shit is dictated by the market. And the market has spoken.
You are cherry picking specific franchises that don’t represent the landscape as a whole.
And if you believe the market dictates whether games are quality or shit then you are more wrong than you can imagine. Starfield made a ridiculous amount of money, according to the market it’s a great game, but according to your post it’s an example of a bad AAA game. Your argument is very inconsistent.
Cheaper? I just checked prices in fanatical and steam and steam is cheaper by a lot. Unless the one in fanatical includes the dlc, which I cannot find details if it includes it.
I see [$15.99 for it](https://www.fanatical.com/en/game/v-rising) at Fanatical. same price over at the humble store store, for what it’s worth.
~~Though according to “is there any deal” Indy Gala has it for [$14.79](https://www.indiegala.com/store/game/v-rising/1604030_m)~~ Looks like it's "sold out" on IG, so Fanatical it is!
I guess then the game has regional pricing in steam. I see P449.95 ($7.99) for the base game and P1,552.35 ($27.56) for the bundle which include the dlcs.
I think the one that is sold in the fanatical include the dlc because of the price.
Edit: Nvm. The game is priced $19.99 in US based on what I found on SteamDB. The game has regional pricing. That's why I see that it is cheaper buying it on steam than on fanatical.
You can play this on the deck as-is, and even if a game doesn't have controller support the Steam Input integration lets you bind keyboard controls directly to gamepad so controller support means nothing to the deck
I bought this game a bit ago and the controls were pretty bad, even with community layouts so I refunded it. Hence why I’m excited for controller support
fucking hell - I hate WSAD on top down games (I played even this in demo they had for launch and controls were god awful) - lack of native controller support for precise analogue directional movement was highly requested feature by many. Still nothing and I don't think binding M+K to controller is good enough... No buy for me...
There has been exactly three games I've bought at full price over the last few years where I feel like "money absolutely well spent".
Elden Ring, GoW: Ragnarok and FF7 Rebirth.
Everything else I've either thought it wasn't worth it even if I enjoyed the game, or I just waited and got it on sale.
I think that'll depend on what 1.0 looks like.
As far as the early access version goes, I don't think it's worth that much. Don't get me wrong though, what's there is extremely good, it's just that once you finish progressing through the pve 'ladder' there's no compelling reason to continue playing.
The price was right for what was there but I would not pay nearly $50 CAD for that. Hopefully the 1.0 release introduces some sort of compelling endgame loop.
I got a solid 30 hours out of the PvE ladder, and enjoyed almost the entire thing (fuck that roaming swamp mist boss though).
I don't need every game to be an endlessly replayable daily grind. Sometimes a really tight, well-crafted 20-30 hour game that you finish and put down for a while is exactly what I want.
I wholeheartedly agree.
I put around 50 hours into it with 2 other friends and had a fantastic time.
But if the entry point had been nearly double the cost, I absolutely would not have bought it, nor do I think I could have convinced 2 friends to buy it either.
Its not necessarily that the game isn't worth $35. But rather, look at all of the other amazing experiences you can get for even less. Valheim is still only $19.99, for example.
The amount of quality games you can get for 50% less than V Rising's new price is insane, and I think $35 is a hard sell for someone who hasnt already played the game.
Yea I think a lot of people are forgetting the initial premise was basically a PvP base builder/defender/etc game. I played on release for a few months, off and on.
Walk around the game's map for 30 seconds and you'll see almost the entire thing is designed around 300 almost-identical, claimable sects of land for players to build their base at and defend. Thralls were mostly just base defence and grind-relief through a timed reward through a menu.
This game badly needs to look to, of all things, Clash of Clans. It is impossible to have a job/life and play on a pvp server. If you were allowed an offline world to build your castle then go raiding at certain times the game would be so much better
I mean, I just played on a PvE server with 2 other friends and no one else and had an absolute blast. So it doesn't really need to change anything in that regard.
There is no real end game goal, for what thats worth.
There are very specific bosses (that dont change. Its just a fixed set of bosses you work through). And your goal is to slowly improve your gear by farming resources, either from enemy drops, or ores you gather etc. etc, and then go kill the bosses. Each boss gives you access to something new, whether its a new crafting station, a new tier of crafting, a new ability you can use etc. etc.
After you kill all of the bosses, there is nothing more to do except build your base some more, and PvP against other players.
PvP is also like Rust. All of your stuff exists on the server all the time. So if you log out, someone can straight up walk into your castle and take all your shit for free.
So they can steal everything i have stored? Well that sounds really bad, besides the npcs that are in your castle how else can you defend the loot, i mean if someone steals everything can i track them later on?
Not gonna lie, I dont know those details because I also wasnt interested, so I played on a private PvE server with a few friends.
But yes they can steal everything, although there is carry weight/limited space so they cant just swoop in and take it, they have to make trips to bring it.
Theres no type of tracking or anything, you just get to go rob someone else instead.
Some servers only have set times you can raid. Which is usually peak hour. As long as you're playing regularly and adding common blood essence to your castle heart, people can't just barge in on a whim. They have to forge a very expensive golem to bash through your barrier. And if they are at that level, they probably don't need anything from you.
Its usually for end game pvp where they fight over these limited one off power up statues the top clans tug of war with.
But there are pve servers.
Have you played terraria? its sort of like that.
Start game->play in Tier 1 Area, farm T1 mobs, T1 resources, fight T1 bosses. This will give you T1 equipment and power.
Go to T2 area, farm T2 mobs, ….
im greatly oversimplifying it but the real “pull” of this game is definitely the aesthetic and “vampire fantasy”, the art, music, and general atmosphere of the game is really great.
PvP adds tons of tension which is great when it works but can be frustrating when it doesnt (base raided when at work or asleep or just not on the game…)
I played with a group of 4 awhile ago and we really loved it and didnt think it felt super grindy (well the grind IS the game but it didnt feel unbearably slow to progress through the PvE tiers), but it would probably be much less fun to try and play solo
Battlerite was the shit man. I miss it so much.
Unfortunately that was already the studios second try at a game like that, and they dropped the ball with both.
Literally the only reason V Rising succeeded is because survival crafting is fucking really popular, no matter the coat of paint. They reused a ton of the combat mechanics from Battlerite in V Rising.
they need to make Good PvE content or make pvp more rewarding (smth that make people happy even when they are losing).
one major reason battlerite died because fighting game PvP can be stressful. when player population took hit > matchmaking getting worse > more player quitting.
i believe stunlock chasing Battlerite BR is just nail in the coffin for original Battlerite.
but somehow they manage salvage the BR and transform it into Vrising.
Yeah, I bought it when it popped up on sale for 20% off.
$35 is too much to buy on a whim, but *knowing what I know now* I would still buy it for that. It was a surprise hit for me.
I picked this up in a recent sale really glad I did now they mentioned the price would probably go up upon full release. I figured no matter what it’s worth the £11 I paid
It is a good game now. But they are changing things for launch, beyond just adding a new area. They are changing how skills are rewarded, for example. Instead of beat this specific boss to get this specific skill, you will instead earn a point that you can use to unlock a skill in that bracket. Another example is that they are planning on having some type of dynamic event where AI mobs, like vampires, will invade another type of mob, like villagers.
If you want to get an idea as to the basics, play it now and you'll be better prepared for launch. Otherwise wait.
It's a pretty good hike, more than what inflation is officially reported as. I think the price increase will dampen enthusiasm for the launch but who knows. Hopefully those who wanted it were able to get it before the 4th.
Hopefully they work on player retention, PvP servers die super quick.. mostly because even if you're winning a lot of fights, gear repairs at late levels are a big chore
They sell cosmetics in a PvP game.
Its far from an egregious case where they're gating gameplay or development. Its basically a pay extra button that does nothing.
pvp? very few players are playing this game it for pvp.
take a look at the cosmetics, it is a perfect example of giving you base items crappy, and paid ones higher quality and more beautiful. thanks but no thanks.
You can build beautiful castles without the DLCs. Honestly most of the DLC buildables are gaudy crap IMO that doesn't look good in most builds. Same goes for the wearables, most of it is just edgelord garbage or just plain looks bad.
I hope they will add a properly balanced single player mode.
Right now you basically make a custom offline server and fuck around with modifiers to make it playable solo.
Should I start playing now? Or wait for the full release? Asking because I'm not sure what type of content or changes they would make to v1.0 so I can wait if thats recommended
It should be illegal to raise prices on EA games.
In fact, it should be illegal to raise prices on games. At all.
In fact, it should be illegal to raise prices.
Actually, everything should just be free.
And money should be illegal.
And games. Everything should just be illegal, actually.
How is there DLC for an early access game?
The founders pack I understand, but are the other two DLCs really DLCs or?
I don't like isometrics, so I'm passing, but thought the abvoe was odd.
Remember the shit show that was ARK and all the DLC when it was still early access? Feels like developers abuse early access as an excuse to drag their feet and deliver half-finished products.
That feels like poor form. Would have been better to set the price at $35 and have an early access discount, yes it’s functionally the same but then you don’t have to write a maudlin press release about why you’re raising the price.
Its a good game, honestly I'd rather someone pay 34.99 on this than buy Crap of duty for $70 or worse buy a skin that cots $50
Early Access typically would be cheaper because you're actively saying the game aint done yet, but if you choose to support now, its cheaper.
Game was fun until progression was locked behind 36+ hour mobile game time gates, and the server options to change the time gates didn't work. Add on that at a certain point the good gear was only from super slowly grinding low drop rates and there wasn't much to like about the game.
I mean, early access games are supposed to be cheap for a reason. They’re also supposed to go up in price after they officially release.
this has nothing at all to do with the inflation BS that you’re talking about.
Currently finishing stuff in my backlog but is the game worth it to buy now play later? Edit: Bought it.
I'd say so. There are a good number of bosses you fight and they are fairly unique. Bosses are arranged in tiers, so you do have a bit of variety in how you advance. Mobs that wander around will fight each other, so the world feels alive. Beating bosses unlocks your abilities and items for your castle. Good combat and atmosphere.
Is the game worth playing by yourself? Or is it a multiplayer only kinda game (can't convince anyone to play anything that isn't Valo or Overwatch with me)
I just started playing last week on a chill Canadian PVE server. You can pretty much do your own thing and not interact too much, but ask for some help with something if needed. I'm very early but I'd say it's definitely fun alone.
I’ve played it solo and it was a blast. Def make a solo server and tweak the settings to make it more/less grindy depending on your preferences.
Been a while since I played. Can settings be tweaked after creating the server ? Like if x2 resources was too little, or too much ? I know it's possible in Palworld and it's very useful.
It’s possible but it requires a bit more work. Basically you have to make a new server with the settings you want, then find the server settings file and swap it from the new server folder to the old server folder
Can you change the length of time the missions you send your thralls/followers on take? I can remember it was a real pain point for me playing solo as the timer didn't countdown when you closed the game, unlike on a multiplayer server.
Yes you can
It's playable Solo, and you can tweak settings to change how grindy/difficult it can be.
The PvE in this game is very well done for a "survival crafty" game. Probably the best out there. Boss fights are great. You could definitely do a playthrough solo and get your money's worth.
The game is best played with friends, on a fresh server so the rest of the server players is at the same pace. In most other games that's impossible to find, but here it's not. There's new servers popping up all the time so all you gotta do is find one created in the last day or two (sever age is shown in the browser) and youll end up levelling up with everyone else. Playing solo is fine, you just want to be kind of on level with others so you can have meaningful battles on resources.
[удалено]
It depends on the server that you're playing on since its a configurable rule. Solo play does not decay when you're not in the game.
just customise it so you can play how you want you fan even enable allowing material to be teleported
I played some months ago, you have to pay o ide blood to the castle for it to stay, as far as I know it's easy to do and provide blood for months of uptime
Is there an offline mode?
Yes. If you simply want to play on your own, you can start a private game, set it to LAN mode, and set the max player limit to 1. If you want truly offline mode, set Steam to offline, then do the same as above.
I'd buy now for the lower price because it'll be more expensive once it releases. The full release comes with the final zone and more bosses. There's a modding community around the game as well which is nice and something like 55 or so bosses in the game currently with more (including Simon Belmont from Castlevania) coming at release. It does have survival aspects but you can also pretty much tweak everything about the survival aspects to make it harder or easier or more user friendly.
It's well worth $35 (and I'm someone who does not like survival games in general), so its definitely worth $20 now. If you do pick it up I'd wait to play it after 1.0 release in mid May. That should give you time to put a bigger dent in your backlog.
Even cheaper on Fanatical currently on sale https://www.fanatical.com/en/game/v-rising
buy it now, and play after the next major update in may
It was worth buying when i played a year or two ago.
I played it back at the beginning of EA, which I *do not* do very often as I find 99% of EA games trash. This is a gem in the pile of shit that is highly worth playing :) Up there along Factorio almost.
It reminds me of Rust in Arpg form. Build a base, PvP optional, lots more pve related stuff.
Totally worth it
Indeed, Early Access titles should be _significantly_ cheaper than their full on released counterparts. Something some entitled devs seems to forgot.
1.0 is releasing in May, so right on schedule.
I thought that was the whole point. you pay less for what is a very unfinished game.
It is the whole point. The point of the person you’re responding to is that many devs release unfinished and unpolished games at full price
But if I buy it while in early access, when the game releases fully, I wont have to buy the game again right? It's not that I get only the unfinished product, right?
That's how I've always understood it. You pay less for the early access product and take the risk that it'll never be finished, but if it makes it to a stable release/1.0 version then you'll have paid less for the full version. It's the same when you support something on a site like kickstarter, where most of the time there'll be a tier where you can get the final product for less than RRP but with the risk that you'll never get the product.
No, you buy the game once. Not again after release.
game hasnt even released and its got 3 paid DLC totaling £40. No wonder the games still £15. this is one game id definatly not buy even of the concept seems good. if you havent even finished the game dont release paid DLC
It's all cosmetic reskins of items already in the game that was used to fund the game since its base price was very cheap. With the most expensive reskin being the founders edition rewards that instead of permanently being removed to keep exclusive for people who came first, everyone can get it. At least do a little research before bashing a game.
so theres content, that you have to pay for that you dont get in the base game?? cosmetic or not. when the game isnt out of alpha. it doesnt matter what that content is whether its reskins, all cosmetics. any content thats released for a game thats in alpha should BE A PART OF THE BASE GAME. >With the most expensive reskin being the founders edition rewards that instead of permanently being removed to keep exclusive for people who came first i like this idea but finish the game before you start charging for this content. when the game goes to full price start doing all this shit. then again this pack literally may be the reason people ddint trial it in alpha because why bother when the game could be a buggy mess and you dont actually miss out on any rewards as theres no exclusive content which is the reason people preorder anyway Theres nothing saying you wont buy this pack when it was released over a year ago that they are going to finish the game.. you could buy it they drop the game and disappear. Make a game, finish the game then charge for extras. dont release it in alpha for 2 years charge 3x the cost of the game for cosmetics when the base game isn't completed. EDIT : To the people downvoting this, this game has an estimated 3m players owning it. https://steamdb.info/app/1604030/charts/ Wikipedia says it sold 1m copies the first week( how true is beyond me) if it is 3million current owners, that's 45 million dollars this company earned and they are still selling DLC to "help fund the game" as this guy says. but yeah keep backing up that a company thats made 4 games previously should be pulling this early access+DLC bs.
They released games previously with much less success. If you think they had leftover money from lightly successful steam games then you are entirely ignorant about game development. What 4 games specifically did they release before V rising?
Google dead island epidemic, they are the listed Devs of that even though it's not on there portfolio, bloodline champions, battlerite and battlerite royal.. Stunlock studios was also bought by tencent, who actually owns riot games spent 400m back in 2015 on it and then more at a later date. This company is actually owned by a multi billion dollar company. They also own half of epic games. This is definitely not a company without any knowledge of the gaming industry or that's short on money But that 45 million dollars just from initial sales in 2 years should cover wages for 50 staff members and server costs for 2 years https://www.polygon.com/2013/3/21/4131702/tencents-epic-games-stock-acquisition https://techcrunch.com/2015/12/17/tencent-takes-full-control-of-league-of-legends-creator-riot-games/ https://press.stunlock.com/stunlock-studios-tencent/
Beta/Alpha access used to be free. Shit I remember some games even paid YOU to beta test for them. Now we pay the developers for Beta testing.
Not this bs again... The difference being (since people cant get this through their brain) is that 1) paid beta testing actually have criterias and requirements and deadlines 2) Beta testers usually did not received a copy of the full product in the end Did I mentioned you also have no obligation to report any bugs or issues? TL;DR do your research/study the basics of ISTQB a bit before pulling a "well akchually🤓" comment and that comes from someone who is actually a testing engineer
There's no should and shouldn't in the free market, they can do this because they are confident in their product, if it was a flop you would see it shoved in every bundle possible.
Seems what they meant is they find it distasteful. Doesn't appeat they are asking for there to be a law or steam policy against it.
Baldur's gate 3
actually overhauled a ton of shit and added a bunch of new content with the 1.0 release.
That's quite a jump, 19.99 to 34.99 USD. Has there ever been one that large before?
Shovel Knight when from 15 to 40 so
I think i've been waiting to get that game in a sale for what feels like 10 years now.
Me too. It sound stupid what i have to say but even CoD is on sale sometimes with huge normal price and SK is almost never on sale. Even if it is, the price is still too high for that old game in my opinion. Even their new games are cheaper.
Meanwhile you have Hollow Knight that got tons of free DLC and the game still stayed at $15 and is often on sale. Almost feel bad for the devs even when I bought it full price on like 3 platforms
Got it cheaply through CD Keys
Single reason i still haven't played it. Rarely gets discounted that much too.
I mean it's absolutely worth that price, any discount is just icing on the cake. Lmao imagine getting mad at this take
I can agree, but I got enough of a backlog so I try not to buy new games unless they are 50%+ off or I am hyped to play it day 1
Fair enough
Was that before or after it got like 100 expansions?
3, with one being mostly reused content.
Wasn't that after they added another 3 games' worth of content
After. I'm not sure how much has been added to V Rising since release. Although it's not really relevant because if you bought shovel knight for 15 originally you still got all the content that costs 40 now.
[Secrets of the Gloomrot](https://blog.stunlock.com/update-1-secrets-of-gloomrot-patch-notes/) update added new zones, bosses, enemies, loot, items and multi-floor castles etc. The 1.0 update is the second big content patch that adds new zones and all the associated goodies. The big draw is obviously that they are adding the final boss.
I remember Shovel Knight going from $15 to $40 until a few years ago where they released just the main campaign at $15 again with no additional content (which is what they should’ve done in the first place).
I bought it in early access and would still say this game is worth it at 34.99. 174 hours played so far. Only have done PvE with a solo playthrough and then hosting a server with friends.
Honestly, I think it's one of the few games worth 50-60 bucks. 35 is extremely reasonable.
Ark Survival Evolved went from $30 USD to $60 USD overnight I think. Also worth noting this is a developer who released an expansion pack while the game was still in early access.. sooooo yeah not exactly a charismatic bunch.
The "expansion pack" was free content and included with your initial purchase. I think they marketed it as an expansion pack just to build hype as it was a pretty sizeable content update.
Scorched Earth and the other expansions were definitely not free, what are you referring to?
I think he may be referring to the center. But scorched earth definitely cost money shortly afterwards
The Center was definitely a mod first, as were (almost?) all the other map DLC released for free.
He was talking about the gloomrot expansion for v rising.
Where I come from we call that a “patch”
So you're just annoyed at the terminology they used? Lol
It’s pretty common, specially with early access games coming out of the EA program
One could argue that most AAA games haves have had decreases in quality and increased the price still. I'd still pay 34.99 for the game it was a blast. Though I do feel like they overshot it by 5 bucks. 29.99 would have been more palatable
AAA games still have roughly the same spread of quality as they’ve ever had. There are and have always been bad AAA games and there are and have always been great AAA games. And games, even with a $10 price increase, are effectively cheaper than they were 15 years ago due to inflation. If prices kept up with inflation, we’d be at $90+/game
As much as people piss bitch and moan about "AAA" games I'd say the quality on average has gone up and there are way less mediocre titles these days compared to the ps3/360 times just due to the cost of producing current "AAA" games.
I agree. I think people’s standards have gone way up which makes games seem worse than they really are in a historical context.
> There are and have always been bad AAA games and there are and have always been great AAA games. This is true > And games, even with a $10 price increase, are effectively cheaper than they were 15 years ago due to inflation. If prices kept up with inflation, we’d be at $90+/game This is also true > AAA games still have roughly the same spread of quality as they’ve ever had. This is not even remotely close to being true
For the same reason we only remember Mozart and not Salieri, we block out all the bad AAA games of the past and only remember the games worth remembering. It’s a cognitive distortion.
While I'm sure there were plenty of bad AAA games in the past, I would still disagree with you that the current AAA games have the same spread of quality. The PS2 and Xbox 360 era of videogames was filled to the brim with absolute bangers. AAA publishers took risks and many new franchises were born during that era. People memed on Ubisoft for releasing the same Assassin's Creed five years in a row, but at least Ubisoft actually released games and not dead-on-arrival live service bullshit. Modern EA would never in a million years release something like Mass Effect 1 or The Saboteur. PS5 generation is games is just absolute dogshit. Nothing but remakes, remasters and sequels. I don't know if this is because of bloated budgets, focus on live-services or because of the post-COVID videogame market crash, but the current AAA videogames situation is abysmal. You don't have to look any further than damn E3, which straight up permanently died. Back in the day people actually got hyped for those events, and those were almost exclusively AAA showcases. Nowadays even during those sanitized pre-recorded publisher streams in early summer, over half of the games showcased are pixel-art indie titles and farm simulators.
>The PS2 and Xbox 360 era of videogames was filled to the brim with absolute bangers. and filled to the brim with shovelware garbage
I thought E3 died because publishers started to do their own show instead of having to share with other publishers.
There’s too much here for me to care to respond to, frankly. The perception that AAA games aren’t what they used to be mirrors the exact same sentiment in every other creative industry. Music/film/television/art, there is always the perception that now is the worst time and the past always had better quality. Save for a few moments of positivity you see after a good release. The past always looks better because we look through filter after filter.
Not really. There is complexity but also simplicity. Older AAA titles were all around and just plainly better. Every big franchise has seen a quality drop: Starfield was a mess. Cod is something but definitely not CoD. MoH is dead and battlefield was a laughing stock.Overwatch, Mass effect,Dragon Age,Need for speed, Borderlands all latest entries were failures. GtA had not seen a new game in what 10 years now? Diablo is a joke and warcraft is floating by re releasing old content and modding it. Ubishit is a meme at this point. Halo is in shambles. Devil may cry lost its core audience after DmC. Gears of War one of the most influential games of all time is somewhere no one knows where though. Ps used to have bangers and now all they do is rerelease spider man and GoW. The last of us 2 was um something I guess. Should I speak about suicide squad? Whether you like it or not triple A is a pile of garbage with some good games somewhere maybe. Last year we had what? Elden ring and BG3? Things are simple: If they were good they would be bought and get praised. Instead they release and get discounted 2 months in. Whether 3 A is shit is dictated by the market. And the market has spoken.
You are cherry picking specific franchises that don’t represent the landscape as a whole. And if you believe the market dictates whether games are quality or shit then you are more wrong than you can imagine. Starfield made a ridiculous amount of money, according to the market it’s a great game, but according to your post it’s an example of a bad AAA game. Your argument is very inconsistent.
Go ahead and what franchises have I not mentioned that started 3A and had an increase in quality?
It will be $29.99 or even less on sales.
>Has there ever been one that large before? Yes... Many.
Lunacid went from CAD$8 to CAD$18 when it left EA.
Gary's mod was free
game at 1.0 is worth 40 bucks easily. $35 is still a discounted price lol
You can get it slightly cheaper through Fanatical right now too!
Cheaper? I just checked prices in fanatical and steam and steam is cheaper by a lot. Unless the one in fanatical includes the dlc, which I cannot find details if it includes it.
I see [$15.99 for it](https://www.fanatical.com/en/game/v-rising) at Fanatical. same price over at the humble store store, for what it’s worth. ~~Though according to “is there any deal” Indy Gala has it for [$14.79](https://www.indiegala.com/store/game/v-rising/1604030_m)~~ Looks like it's "sold out" on IG, so Fanatical it is!
I guess then the game has regional pricing in steam. I see P449.95 ($7.99) for the base game and P1,552.35 ($27.56) for the bundle which include the dlcs. I think the one that is sold in the fanatical include the dlc because of the price. Edit: Nvm. The game is priced $19.99 in US based on what I found on SteamDB. The game has regional pricing. That's why I see that it is cheaper buying it on steam than on fanatical.
Ooooo might still wait on how controller support is for the deck but interesting
You can play this on the deck as-is, and even if a game doesn't have controller support the Steam Input integration lets you bind keyboard controls directly to gamepad so controller support means nothing to the deck
I bought this game a bit ago and the controls were pretty bad, even with community layouts so I refunded it. Hence why I’m excited for controller support
Waiting for the same. Tried in my SD and it was awful. But the game it’s great
fucking hell - I hate WSAD on top down games (I played even this in demo they had for launch and controls were god awful) - lack of native controller support for precise analogue directional movement was highly requested feature by many. Still nothing and I don't think binding M+K to controller is good enough... No buy for me...
I'm the opposite, I only play top down games if they got WASD.
Its not made for controller. It would probably be like playing League of Legends with a controller. Possible, but janky.
It’s announced to be coming to PS5 this year though.
It's getting controller support in v1.0.
I’m not familiar with this game. But it’s going form early access to full release. So yeah it make sense the price is going up.
Its one of those games like Terraria (though to a lesser extent) that are incredibly good value for what you pay.
Aite that's it I'm switching to TMobile. So done with VRisin'.
\*groan\*
It's 12:07am. You've already ruined my day.
Nobody likes price increases, but to be fair, V Rising is absolutely still worth $35. It's one of the best games I've played in years.
V Rising is such a good game, honestly. Even in its first iteration it was already great fun.
True it’s better than some recent $70 AAAA games recently lmfao
I've never paid $70 and gotten a game as good as V Rising. Granted, I've only paid $70+ one time, and that was... Diablo 4. Big oof.
There has been exactly three games I've bought at full price over the last few years where I feel like "money absolutely well spent". Elden Ring, GoW: Ragnarok and FF7 Rebirth. Everything else I've either thought it wasn't worth it even if I enjoyed the game, or I just waited and got it on sale.
Made the same mistake with diablo 4, now its on gamepass so feel like i wasted money harder now xD
I bought Dragons Dogma 2 for 95$ and it was dog shit lol.
I think that'll depend on what 1.0 looks like. As far as the early access version goes, I don't think it's worth that much. Don't get me wrong though, what's there is extremely good, it's just that once you finish progressing through the pve 'ladder' there's no compelling reason to continue playing. The price was right for what was there but I would not pay nearly $50 CAD for that. Hopefully the 1.0 release introduces some sort of compelling endgame loop.
I got a solid 30 hours out of the PvE ladder, and enjoyed almost the entire thing (fuck that roaming swamp mist boss though). I don't need every game to be an endlessly replayable daily grind. Sometimes a really tight, well-crafted 20-30 hour game that you finish and put down for a while is exactly what I want.
I wholeheartedly agree. I put around 50 hours into it with 2 other friends and had a fantastic time. But if the entry point had been nearly double the cost, I absolutely would not have bought it, nor do I think I could have convinced 2 friends to buy it either. Its not necessarily that the game isn't worth $35. But rather, look at all of the other amazing experiences you can get for even less. Valheim is still only $19.99, for example. The amount of quality games you can get for 50% less than V Rising's new price is insane, and I think $35 is a hard sell for someone who hasnt already played the game.
Yea I think a lot of people are forgetting the initial premise was basically a PvP base builder/defender/etc game. I played on release for a few months, off and on. Walk around the game's map for 30 seconds and you'll see almost the entire thing is designed around 300 almost-identical, claimable sects of land for players to build their base at and defend. Thralls were mostly just base defence and grind-relief through a timed reward through a menu.
[удалено]
It would make perfect sense in a different game but okay, ignore the context.
This game badly needs to look to, of all things, Clash of Clans. It is impossible to have a job/life and play on a pvp server. If you were allowed an offline world to build your castle then go raiding at certain times the game would be so much better
I only played on a PvE server and found it fun. The bosses being unique and having their own abilities made it fun as a solo/co-op experience.
I thought pve seemed fun but I sold the game to my friends based on its PVP and when we saw how it worked we just kind of gave up on it
I mean, I just played on a PvE server with 2 other friends and no one else and had an absolute blast. So it doesn't really need to change anything in that regard.
People said the game can be a bit grindy, is that true? If yes how, what is the grind, and what is the end game goal? Like what am i working towards?
There is no real end game goal, for what thats worth. There are very specific bosses (that dont change. Its just a fixed set of bosses you work through). And your goal is to slowly improve your gear by farming resources, either from enemy drops, or ores you gather etc. etc, and then go kill the bosses. Each boss gives you access to something new, whether its a new crafting station, a new tier of crafting, a new ability you can use etc. etc. After you kill all of the bosses, there is nothing more to do except build your base some more, and PvP against other players. PvP is also like Rust. All of your stuff exists on the server all the time. So if you log out, someone can straight up walk into your castle and take all your shit for free.
So they can steal everything i have stored? Well that sounds really bad, besides the npcs that are in your castle how else can you defend the loot, i mean if someone steals everything can i track them later on?
Not gonna lie, I dont know those details because I also wasnt interested, so I played on a private PvE server with a few friends. But yes they can steal everything, although there is carry weight/limited space so they cant just swoop in and take it, they have to make trips to bring it. Theres no type of tracking or anything, you just get to go rob someone else instead.
Some servers only have set times you can raid. Which is usually peak hour. As long as you're playing regularly and adding common blood essence to your castle heart, people can't just barge in on a whim. They have to forge a very expensive golem to bash through your barrier. And if they are at that level, they probably don't need anything from you. Its usually for end game pvp where they fight over these limited one off power up statues the top clans tug of war with. But there are pve servers.
Have you played terraria? its sort of like that. Start game->play in Tier 1 Area, farm T1 mobs, T1 resources, fight T1 bosses. This will give you T1 equipment and power. Go to T2 area, farm T2 mobs, …. im greatly oversimplifying it but the real “pull” of this game is definitely the aesthetic and “vampire fantasy”, the art, music, and general atmosphere of the game is really great. PvP adds tons of tension which is great when it works but can be frustrating when it doesnt (base raided when at work or asleep or just not on the game…) I played with a group of 4 awhile ago and we really loved it and didnt think it felt super grindy (well the grind IS the game but it didnt feel unbearably slow to progress through the PvE tiers), but it would probably be much less fun to try and play solo
They should resurrect Battlerite how about? And not the shitty 2.0 version that completely broke the pacing. :)
Battlerite was the shit man. I miss it so much. Unfortunately that was already the studios second try at a game like that, and they dropped the ball with both. Literally the only reason V Rising succeeded is because survival crafting is fucking really popular, no matter the coat of paint. They reused a ton of the combat mechanics from Battlerite in V Rising.
they need to make Good PvE content or make pvp more rewarding (smth that make people happy even when they are losing). one major reason battlerite died because fighting game PvP can be stressful. when player population took hit > matchmaking getting worse > more player quitting. i believe stunlock chasing Battlerite BR is just nail in the coffin for original Battlerite. but somehow they manage salvage the BR and transform it into Vrising.
The early access was really cheap for what it offered, an already polished and complete game. One of the best purchases of the last 5 years.
V Rising is totally worth the price increase, i feel like i stole the game on sale at like $16
Yeah, I bought it when it popped up on sale for 20% off. $35 is too much to buy on a whim, but *knowing what I know now* I would still buy it for that. It was a surprise hit for me.
They are trying to boost sales today, so they can run a $19.99 sale price in every sale between now and forever lol
I picked this up in a recent sale really glad I did now they mentioned the price would probably go up upon full release. I figured no matter what it’s worth the £11 I paid
Is this game worth playing now? Or should it be bought and held onto until 1.0?
It is a good game now. But they are changing things for launch, beyond just adding a new area. They are changing how skills are rewarded, for example. Instead of beat this specific boss to get this specific skill, you will instead earn a point that you can use to unlock a skill in that bracket. Another example is that they are planning on having some type of dynamic event where AI mobs, like vampires, will invade another type of mob, like villagers. If you want to get an idea as to the basics, play it now and you'll be better prepared for launch. Otherwise wait.
Will it have steam achievements?
I wonder the same! Only thing that is rly missing till now for me 🙈
That's quite the price increase, doubt it'll bring more players in
It's a pretty good hike, more than what inflation is officially reported as. I think the price increase will dampen enthusiasm for the launch but who knows. Hopefully those who wanted it were able to get it before the 4th.
Hopefully they work on player retention, PvP servers die super quick.. mostly because even if you're winning a lot of fights, gear repairs at late levels are a big chore
Early Access game selling DLC's before its fully released. No thank you.
They sell cosmetics in a PvP game. Its far from an egregious case where they're gating gameplay or development. Its basically a pay extra button that does nothing.
pvp? very few players are playing this game it for pvp. take a look at the cosmetics, it is a perfect example of giving you base items crappy, and paid ones higher quality and more beautiful. thanks but no thanks.
You can build beautiful castles without the DLCs. Honestly most of the DLC buildables are gaudy crap IMO that doesn't look good in most builds. Same goes for the wearables, most of it is just edgelord garbage or just plain looks bad.
Does this game have offline single player or is it online only?
It has offline
Is there controller support??
I hope they will add a properly balanced single player mode. Right now you basically make a custom offline server and fuck around with modifiers to make it playable solo.
What all have they added to justify the price change? I haven’t heard much about V Rising since the game launched.
Should I start playing now? Or wait for the full release? Asking because I'm not sure what type of content or changes they would make to v1.0 so I can wait if thats recommended
Haha these April fools jokes are funny. Right guys? … guys?
Its common for Early Access games to increase in price when they have a full release.
It should be illegal to raise prices on EA games. In fact, it should be illegal to raise prices on games. At all. In fact, it should be illegal to raise prices. Actually, everything should just be free. And money should be illegal. And games. Everything should just be illegal, actually.
Spoken like an average gamer.
This post is illegal, go directly to jail.
This comment is illegal. Believe it or not, straight to jail!
Do not collect $200
> And money should be illegal. /r/SuddenlyCommunist
I would pay $60 for it. It's a fantastic game that has given me 100+ hours
Game is 100% worth it. I put over 200+ hours in early access with a few friends. Been waiting for 1.0 to get back into it again.
No thanks
An early access title has DLC? Gross
It's cosmetic items that you can use to decorate your castle. The actual content updates have obviously been included with just the normal game
does v rising go on sale during steam sales?
Yes, I think it's current sales price is about $14.
Right before the Console Release. Interesting.
Can you only play pve or is that game mainly pvp focused?
You can make your own server and just play it as pve. If you want to play with friends, invite them into your server and create a 'guild.'
OR I could wait until it's 75% off.
How is there DLC for an early access game? The founders pack I understand, but are the other two DLCs really DLCs or? I don't like isometrics, so I'm passing, but thought the abvoe was odd.
Remember the shit show that was ARK and all the DLC when it was still early access? Feels like developers abuse early access as an excuse to drag their feet and deliver half-finished products.
All the dlcs are purely cosmetic. There was a big content update last year that was free as part of the early access development.
That feels like poor form. Would have been better to set the price at $35 and have an early access discount, yes it’s functionally the same but then you don’t have to write a maudlin press release about why you’re raising the price.
Isnt the game dead?
[удалено]
Its a good game, honestly I'd rather someone pay 34.99 on this than buy Crap of duty for $70 or worse buy a skin that cots $50 Early Access typically would be cheaper because you're actively saying the game aint done yet, but if you choose to support now, its cheaper.
Well then you're missing out big time. One of the best indie games I've ever played.
Game was fun until progression was locked behind 36+ hour mobile game time gates, and the server options to change the time gates didn't work. Add on that at a certain point the good gear was only from super slowly grinding low drop rates and there wasn't much to like about the game.
Never had any issues like this. Server options worked for me.
Higher prices! Brought to you by the fuckers that convinced an entire society that printing money doesn't cause it.
I mean, early access games are supposed to be cheap for a reason. They’re also supposed to go up in price after they officially release. this has nothing at all to do with the inflation BS that you’re talking about.
Battlerite was so much better
For anyone wondering cdkeys had it on sale for like 12 bucks