|
Post by neroluck on Dec 7, 2014 14:01:47 GMT
will.. i made a normalemail to a personal friend of claus during his time @ av office.. + made a ticket couple of months later on trying the same thing.. Its not gonna happen.. they will not open df1 server and or sell the df1 engine code for a reasonal price.. i am also intrested in the proffesionalisme of this emulator tryout project. Like I said, presenting the idea in a more professional manner than a hastily written email or an ingame ticket would actually make them take the request more serious. No company suddenly makes a 360 degree business decision based off of one single email from a fan requesting it.. You need more than that if you want to get your message taken seriously and put into actual consideration. Same thing goes for the price of the engine. Were those "negotiations" based off of email correspondances as well? Are there actually any calculations or reasonings behind that 650k client price tag? For all we know Tasos might've just thought of a random number and thrown it out there. Gonna have to agree. If you want anything taken seriously on a company-based level a simple email or ingame ticket wont cut it.
|
|
|
Post by propain on Dec 7, 2014 14:31:57 GMT
Trying to keep the thread alive in DFUW forums to bring any eyes to this project. As the 2nd post said, I do not have any experience at all tech wise but i'll help however I can if you guys are serious about this.
GL.
|
|
|
Post by willswiftarrow on Dec 7, 2014 14:58:00 GMT
the request was taken serieusly.. and you need to read will My request was a to a developer from av's office to a friend of claus backed up with spreadsheet of the signed petition he forwared that request to tasos which in return he emailed me with a no this was about the subject to open an df1 server.. Lord zanuul tried something different.. dont know really the facts or seen any email from it.. i just heard the amount of df1 650k price I'm not to judge whether your request was taken seriously or not. All I say is, that I think there might be more "professional" ways of trying to get in contact with them, that might make them reconsider. Currently I think one of the issues might be that AV doesn't even think there is any profit to be made from digging up DFO from its grave. I don't think they are aware at all of just how many people would return, support and resubscribe for a classic server. Thats why the biggest task if we want an official run server would be for us to convince Aventurine that there exists a monetary incentive for them to relaunch DFO. If they know there is a profit to be made from the old game they will most definitely grab the opportunity, especially considering how grim things are currently looking for them (InternetQ and extremely low sub counts)
|
|
|
Post by copperfield on Dec 7, 2014 15:05:28 GMT
Well i think you need to put av out of the picture... 2x NO backed up with 1900 signed players with unique ip's from the site. its defo a no..
I think av has concerns in other departments maybe. legally rights orso.. ( dont know )
tbh.. i dont av will make it either way.. they have major money problems upcoming next year.. when then need to make an payment..
I would rather see an official df1 server running aswell.. atleast not an emulator. its not gonna happen when av's in charge
|
|
|
Post by mandatorydds on Dec 7, 2014 15:19:31 GMT
I thought AV's biggest issue with DF1 is they actually do not own the code. I had previously spoken to Taos about acquiring and was told he couldn't sell it as it went against the funding deal he had back then to produce a DF2 for the Asian market. I have since learnt, only via Reddit that he cant sell it because of some law suit with the co-devs and designers?
Either way I doubt buying is an option.
|
|
|
Post by willswiftarrow on Dec 7, 2014 16:07:46 GMT
Seems like a lot of different rumors as to why AV can or can not re-launch DFO is going around. On one hand someone (Xenuul?) was told he could buy it off of AV for 650k euros. Another rumor is that AV can't sell/host DFO cause of the deal they made with InternetQ and the asian market? Third rumor is that AV don't actually own DFO/parts of DFO due to lawsuits with the norweigan founders(Claus,Henning etc)? Then we have Norweigan founder Claus' statement that AV still does own all rights to Darkfall and the Darkfall brand. And then the official statement from AV (IcyWave aka AV employee on the forums imgur.com/2MCdhQk ) that they do own the rights for DFO.It is all very confusing with all of these conflicting rumors flying around. If we are to believe Icy Wave and Claus' statement though it seems that we can debunk the rest and conclude that AV DOES still own the rights to host and run DFO.
|
|
|
Post by Admin on Dec 7, 2014 16:33:46 GMT
I believe they are still restricted to not running DF1 however, as the incentive to relaunch has been MASSIVE. There's something they ain't telling us.
|
|
|
Post by Nat on Dec 7, 2014 17:00:58 GMT
I'm just a talentless pleb who loved Darkfall. Best I can do is be a member of a community and donate some money when the time is right. Though as the Admin says, before money stars changing hands, we need a community and some kind of prototype.
|
|
|
Post by Admin on Dec 7, 2014 17:32:45 GMT
For those who didn't notice already, Foma and King Hussien joined the forums today, the 2 guys that have been pushing the development of an emulator these last months, and also Foma who uploaded the vid last night.
Foma mentioned he will probably do a Q&A soon on the current situation with the emulator.
|
|
|
Post by willswiftarrow on Dec 7, 2014 18:26:35 GMT
I believe they are still restricted to not running DF1 however, as the incentive to relaunch has been MASSIVE. There's something they ain't telling us. You are right, there is probably something they are lying about regarding all of this, as per usual with AV. Until we (hopefuly) become more informed I think however that we should stick with the (few) backed up facts that we know. When both a current AV employee AND former AV manager confirms that they still have the rights then we have to assume that there is some truth to this statement.
|
|