"guys we sent the files out to 1000s of people we dont know and they are leaking stuff!!! how could they do that after pressing the checkmark that agrees not to leak stuff😢😢😢😢" idk why they even have NDAs if they give out the game files like candy to randoms🙄
Hey I know this aint the finals but can you ask embark when they gona add the ball to the luis casino gun skin. It was in season one and it showed the ball. WE NEED THAT BALL lol.
I don't mind paying $40 for it ngl, games rn are usually $80+. But they need to include a bit more rewards as far as game skins go if they include something like a battle pass.
Hopefully there's no battle pass at all. Premium games really have no need for that crap. You already paid. Why milk another 20 dollars a month from your players unless you're REALLY THAT GREEDY.
@@GFlight.916 yes premium single player games don't need microtransactions, but live service games need a constant stream of revenue for continued development, where is this money going to come from if not microtransactions? THINK!
Thanks for the great video @RockhoundBlack! I was so let down when I saw the short clip at ONL because there wasn't much news in there. I was greatly relieved when I found you're video and was and still am surprised by the amount of detail in it. Appreciate you man! Keep up the good work :)
All I have to say is if they treat the cosmetics like they do in The finals I will support it, prolly one of the coolest microtransaction models for the fans.
I hope solo/duo/trio are the only party sizes as they offer the most balanced gameplay. Trio being the maximum due to the fact that while one person is down, one is ressing and one is defending.
Thanks for giving all this great detail about your inside scoop. I am pleasantly surprised about it being $40 though I am sure that will create a smaller player base. Hopefully it's enough to sustain the game though. My biggest concern is if they are going to actually spend time balancing the game before launch unlike The Finals which got changed so much after launch. They need to have multiple, longer, open beta tests to do this though and I fear that won't happen.
Erma Cora showed up before somewhere. Had it my easter egg notes as "erma = hermes cora = persephone goddess/queen of the underworld" Not sure where I was going with that but the whole "goddess of the underworld" immediately seems relevant for Arc Raiders.
Great video with a ton of information, thanks a lot! Can't wait for the game. Would be nice if the game would not only offer solo squads but also a solo mode. Fighting against squads of 2-3 players is a bit hard.
Hey I know this aint the finals but can you ask embark when they gona add the ball to the luis casino gun skin. It was in season one and it showed the ball. WE NEED THAT BALL lol.
I think being a pay to play now over free to play is a good thing especially since it's a PVEVP it's hard with it being free to play to make the game not pay to win so making it pay to play means they won't feel ever to add things that could be considered pay to win.
I SERIOUSLY hope they don't do the mistake they did with The Finals' closed betas where they completely neglect older sign-ups to the playtest request program. They had the system completely based on newer requests filling the top so all of the older non-accepted request would get drowned, signed up for the game a day after the alpha sign-ups closed and had to get into closed beta 1 through that finnicky steelseries giveaway... Anyway, that's more of a literal concern. As for my hopes for the game; I've been following a PvEvE game called Forever Winter for a while now and really hope they take some inspiration from that game. The problem with most exfil shooters nowadays is that although there might be an intricate PvE system and gameplay features thought out with the idea of strangers teaming up. Most of the time it devolves to people either disabling VoIP entirely and shooting on sight or the PvE systems getting neglected entirely. I hope they take some design elements from Forever Winter in this case where they bank on the PvE aspect more in order to make fighting ARC robots more rewarding than stealing loot from players, which would set a notion for seperate players and groups to team up to take down bigger enemies with better loot and such. Would hate to see this game go down the same path as Cycle Frontier...
@@xPetyr youtube shows everyone your other interactions on the channel, you're taking out your frustrations on others instead of listening to their sincerity.
I am honestly glad to hear the decisions they're making towards the future of the game. If they can keep out of the Forknife/PUBG model of cosmetics/etc then they can have my 40 bones and more. As for the gameplay loop, I am very curious how ARC is going to differ from these other extract type FPS loops of "Hi, go X, get Y, return, redo" which is what made/makes Marauders feel... a little lustless. I am SO HAPPY to hear a dev talk about respecting the player's time, I don't know how many games I've stopped playing simply because it does not respect time. AWESOME
But isn't that the best way to do microtransactions? all cosmetics with no P2W and the ability to even earn some cosmetics or the battle pass for free with reasonable game time?
@@PepperoniRonin. The model of cosmetic microtransactions I'm referring to are specific to the games I mentioned, but which are not all inclusive. Flashy, bright, silly, over-the-top cosmetics that cater to an adolescent crowd or things you'd likely see in CSGO as a wild skin. The Finals provides a more suitable environment for that sort of cosmetic appeal.
@@RIXINUS wtf does inclusive skins mean? 😂 They just sell what the consumers want and the consumers of those games want those skins. Its just business, never sell what *YOU* think your customers should buy... sell what *THEY* want to buy.
I was thinking about this same thing a few weeks ago. For Embark, to have two free to play games out there to support didn’t make financial sense. The only solution was to make Arc Raiders a premium game. I’m glad they made this decision. Hope it works out for them.
Did they say anything about certain objectives requiring the help of another team? Will they incentivize short term alliances in lobby for higher level loot?
@@RockhoundBlack What about overall player speed? Can you tell us how fast players moved? Is there another popular game you felt the speed / pace was close to?
I am happy that they are making it pay to play than free to play. There is always that fear in a free game that it might be ruined by cheaters and griefers mixed with developers need to introduce something purchasable to sustain the game. I think they should explore their other side and try a premium game with a price tag on it. It really fits what they are showing and visioning.
@@candycommander because cheaters need to pay to play and if they cheat and get banned they need to buy the game again that mostly they don't compared to F2P.
Hey mate 😄 I'm assuming--was the press briefing restricted? I can't find any video specifically of the gameplay shown that you mentioned, I'm clamoring to see it!
The focus on Tension is one of the best parts about The Finals so seeing them wanting to create so much drama in the game gets me excited. The energy they show on each of the new trailers is deeply contrasting with the first trailer though, it really gives off a bad first impression, many even believe they took away the robots.
They definitely have not taken away the robots, they were shown in the gameplay we watched, except for the largest ones, which I’m guessing they’re holding back.
Thanks for the in depth update! I’m down to get it especially since the art style and theme interest me so much. That being said, my old gamer brain doesn’t like loose it all sort of games; so I hope the game brings a lot to the table in order to keep me interested…
@@j3t_l4g17 just help buy it for them! I always offer them like $5 in there steam wallet if I ask them to buy a game. It's totally worth it, don't be stuck not being able to have fun in games you like with friends.
Kinda messed up that they've changed their advertising for the game so much. They entirely changed genre from Co-op PvE to PvPvE Extraction Shooter, and then jump from F2P to now a 40$ price tag. I'm not completely opposed to the price increase, but it's just a bit screwed that they changed it after it'd already gotten so much hype. I recommended it to a lotta my friends since it'd be free to play, so some of my friends that weren't entirely interested wanted to give it a shot, but now they're a bit opposed to it due to the big price increase. Since it's 40$ now though I hope we'll see plenty of free content not locked behind paywalls. I'll likely buy the game either way, but it's just a bit of a downer to see them jump the price up.
40$ price tag ain't bad, however for console players, this switch to a paid game will now require a mandatory subscription (i.e playstation plus) valued at, at least 60$ per year in order to play online... Surely this will refrain a lot of console players (who are not willing to pay for the subscription) from the game unfortunately...
Just changed their mind. I don't think it's a horrible decision, however, as long as they can then produce and deliver that same value or more back to their playerbase. On the other hand, a paid model means fewer cheaters, as people may not be as capable of returning after a ban. It also means that hopefully, their soulless publisher overlords won't have them milk everything through microtransactions. Definitely a bit of a twist, but it may not be as bad as we instinctually might receive it to be.
I am very cautious with my optimism at this point. I would have liked this to be a looter shooter pve focused game. There are so many extraction games now and in the pipelines. Also the whole premium game thing....we will see about that. There still might be shitty microtransactions or pay 2 win in the end. Looking forward to getting my hands on the game and see for myself what it's like though. But in recent years there were only very few games that were designed well enough and that were fun enough and fair to keep me around for longer than a couple of weeks. I hope this game will be different, but I was burnt too many times so I am not getting hyped just yet.
Damnit! I have been watching for news on this game since 2021. Why did they HAVE to make it PvP? If they don't have PvE only options when it comes out, then I am NOT buying it. In my experience, other players are toxic to play these games with.
True, but that comes with the territory with any game that's PVP plus it's PVPVE so there might be times where you have to probably work with the player or if not I mean from at first it seemed like it was going to be possibly PVP elements anyways
Embark Studio has a lot of trust from me. I really enjoy playing The Finals and although extraction shooters are not my cup of tea, I think I'll give this game a chance.
The game was meant to be an extract shooter to begin with and making a $40 was probably a better idea than having two free games and having a good chance of them not working out
40$ is a good price point, that's something i would consider if it's a good game. anything more and i would only buy it with a big sale. games just cost too much
I'm really interested to see what direction they take this and how the bigger robots fall into the mix. Everyone living in the same underground city, but then killing each other on the surface made no sense, and there was no way people would team up to fight a queen or baron without killing each other over the loot. Still disappointed it's an extraction shooter with segmented maps instead of a fast paced open world looter shooter like they originally announced, and I hate extraction shooters and they are niche with generally small player bases, but we'll see what happens.
This is precisely what I wanted to see. The Finals is a great game that has extreme potential, but with the amount of flaws I could hardly say I would recommend if people had to pay for it. I genuinely think people underestimate how problematic Unreal engine is in terms of quality and how it feels. Will keep an eye out at least.
Cool interview and shit, but I find it really disturbing when the reason to change from PvE to PvPvE is "because it wasn't fun enough"... PvE is fun, PvPvE is fun, PvP is fun, it all depends on the game, not the model. The model shouldn't be the motive to change from one to another, but all the rest of the game. Putting npcs on a PvP game won't necessarily make it better, the same goes for putting players on PvE. It's totally different approaches of how to have fun. Destiny 2 made a move on PvPvE with Gambit, and ppl hated it, but they love the PvE and the PvP, separately. My concern is, if the game wasn't fun, adding pvp to it won't save it. But at least they're being really clear on what to expect, I was waiting a lil more PvE focused game, so now I know this isn't the case. Sad for me, good for those who prefer PvP, but knowing this is awesome.
i don't believe that pvp was always supposed to be a part of the game, literally the first delay announcement was because they wanted to add a pvp mode (before the announcement that it shifted to pvpve)
Im very scared with the "premium live service" thing, because most of the live services survive because of the flux of players in the free to play format, being in a premium game will make the player base smaller, queue times longer and can became niche games with very little playerbase grow, that player base cant buy the game again, so eventuallly they will need another form of monetization if the new content is free as said or they will change or move on to the next embark project
The leadership are not the smartest. They switched to PvPvE and missed the opportunity to get in front of Helldivers and First Descendent which were huge successes and now trying to compete with the PvP crowd. Not for me. They lost their chance.
@@xPetyr ha ! You are reinforcing my point big boy. By virtue of Tarkov / others in this genre, the market for PvPvE is highly saturated relative to PvE games, as evidence by how well those two recent releases fared. By virtue of their change in mandate, and NOW deciding to charge $40, this will likely fail miserably. A missed opportunity.
@@Deltium5683It will not likely fail because they changed it at $40. They changed it because clearly what they're giving is probably more worth than just a free to play game and if it was then you would have to by microtransactions up the ass. Not in a bad way but you get the point. Also, even though the market has enough of these games. We've also still seen some other PVE games before they don't always last for eternity unless you consistently keep up updating with the enemies and what you deal with. It doesn't last. And look at tarkov even though it was bad it got big because of what it was
And they never missed the opportunity to do that first to send it as good as it is is basically generic and basic the majority of time. People only really like it cuz it's just fun to kill things. Same thing for hell divers, but you see where that's happening look. They even said that it might need a PVP mode, possibly in the future to keep it consistently. In case you know PVE does not work out always. It's not always fun to just constantly kill enemies of the same nature It gets real boring Even with hell divers
Personally I think switching from PvE looter shooter to PvPvE extraction shooter was the wrong choice. This genre is getting saturated and some companies are seeing it, Look at Ubisoft cancelling The Division Heartland when the game was already finished. Why do you think they did this? Note that these big companies usually have very good risk assessment teams. By the time Arc Raiders comes out we will have enough extraction games to play and people will either be too busy with Marathon to play this or they will be saving their money to get Marathon if it wont be out yet. Going from F2P to P2P was also a wrong choice IMO. For any live service multiplayer game, F2P is almost always the way to go as it really lowers the barrier to entry and gets more people looking at your game. Some people may say 40$ is not a lot of money but to these ppl I remind you that not everyone lives in a 1st world country, 40$ is a lot of money for a majority of the people. Ppl will talk about cheaters but guess what? P2P games get cheaters too, its not about the cost of the game (tho that does help a tiny bit) but how good your anti cheat is. I hear way more about cheaters in R6 Siege and Tarkov than in Fortnite or Valorant, guess which games is P2P there. All in all, good luck to the devs, I personally lost interest when they switched genres but I am still willing to give it a chance after watching some reviews and first impressions. IMO the pattern I have always observed is when you mix PvP and PvE one ALWAYS suffers for the sake of the other and when this happens you better hope the one suffering is PvP coz PvE has a WAAAAY wider audience than PvP in every single game. Like it or not, its just the objective truth.
I put this on the last video you did of Arc Raiders. When this game was first announced as a PvE looter shooter game, it was easily my most anticipated game. Even when it got delayed the first time, it still was. But when they announced that it was being delayed again but this time to change it from a PvE looter shooter to a PvEvP Extraction shooter. I lost all excitement for this game. I was still going to try it since it was going to be F2P, but now it's $40. I'm not sure I will. That decision alone to make it $40 may kill the game, especially when you still have Tarkov and now Delta Force, Arena Breakout and the one upcoming game that looks like The Cycle all of which are free to play.
@@ericmatthews9894there's going to be tons of games out there in the future. There's going to still have this element that will me either around that price range or maybe higher
Probably it being free to play would have led it being killed too because it would have been lugged between those two as being a free-to-play extract shooter It being around $40 might be more worth it. Even people are saying that this would have maybe hurt the company if it was still free to play. Most likely they probably have this idea considering the devs have been talking about this a lot And it being no longer a PVE it's probably might be an okay thing. They might make it separate like how they're doing with Warhammer and even they're doing the same thing. But yet people are still going to buy $69 with that game. And then saying that they're making it only $40 is going to kill. It is ridiculous. If they put it at the price tag of a actual game like $69 or something like that then it would be dying because at least with 40 bucks you're not putting in that much money And for some cases a lot of these people probably got points saved up where they can probably buy it on their own. Personally, I'm kind of curious to see where they're planning to go with this. If I ever have the money, I'll definitely buy it. I want to support these guys cuz I want this company to succeed to make more games
£40 means this game has zero chance of succeeding, they think they're going to go head 2 head with hell divers, lol. Its not going to be worth anything close to that price and it'll be DOA if its not A LOT cheaper or free. This news is massively disappointing and I for one will NOT be paying £40 for it! OH and guys "Live action service" Literally stands for we will scam you when we feel like it, how we feel like it, as much as we feel like it!
I would say yeah it would be Maybe not depending on some people of how you see it. But if that's the case then I guess Warhammer is not a competitor even though people say it is?
If there are ANY micro transactions, I won't be playing. Reasonably priced battle pass, fine, I guess. But other than that. I'm sick to death of these games trying to charge thousands of dollars to get everything like mobile trash.
No, maybe because the game was worth a bit more than just being free and not having a s*** ton of cosmetics and also the finals is not dying and doesn't suck
@@madvortex39 for sure - like 15k max on steam? you think this is great for such game? And also company budget reports says that the Finals Underperform their expectation means - it make LESS money that they want it to... So.. In my opinion - all of this looks like the game is hardly struggling... I know what I'm speak about - I played each and every season and 700hr+ of playing.. like for me rank search every time like 4-5 minutes. Imagine - there is 5 game modes 5-6 regions - for 15k it's nothing so yeah. I think it's kind a suck :) sadly
@@whitewhalo yeah that's not consider. It's Max and even then most people consider it to seem that steam sale charts are not the best to show off how a game is doing, people say they're inconsistent all the time Time and even then that is still pretty decent for a small game If it was a bigger game then yeah. The company didn't say that Nexon they said that it had lower sales and they expected and It underperform This is because despite of people liking it, they all just simply went back to other games cuz they didn't like the new style in the destructive nature of it. And the company does seem like knowing what they're doing. It seems like they kind of knew it was not going to perform as well as they wanted it to not because it's terrible because they knew that they were going to have too many competitions. And my dude you can put about 1,000 hours in the game and it's still would make me talk like this to you. And then having five game modes what you rather have them copy off other games and have game modes that will just piss off people. They try that with terminal attack And no one liked it they want to stick with their roots of how the game show should be. At the same time for it to be a terrible game. Well, at least it's significantly better than most first-person shooters out there right now. Definitely feels fun and fresh. I mean seriously, how many games has the concept of destructive environments in first person shooter currently continuing replying? The only one I can think of is battlefield. Not to mention, usually seems like Free to play games. Lose players regardless. Eventually people tried out they feel like they didn't like it didn't fit what they wanted and they just simply stopped playing. Not cuz it's bad or nothing cuz everyone eventually figures out that it's not their game. And to say it sucks, there are still dozens of people still talking about it with on the internet.
@@whitewhalo game will have its problems. It's literally the first game of the company and then the second game is. I don't know what's going on. No one seems to have faith in new companies that try to release a new game Not just this, but every new game I have with the exceptions of helldivers 2. Actually even with that one, people expected it to eventually fall off. It's just like everyone expects every new game to come out and just die in a matter of months or a year. Well would that attitude It will and will be stuck with poor sloppy stuff so you know what don't play it. I don't care anymore talk about it. It's clearly you're not going to change your mindset. But just know that people are still liking it and still having fun so go have fun with that. I don't know destiny 2
My dude, the finals didn't flop that hard. It's still going pretty good at its moment and still raking them a good amount of money. And then you're saying they lied to us again. When do they say this was just going to be PVE And they changed it to free because they thought it would be a much better idea as explained in the video. Like my dude, even then at a financial point this would have been a terrible idea if they were both free to play
My dude did you get hit on your head as a baby? Why would they make games as a service for free? Do you know actually how much it cost to make games now?
@@madvortex39 Don't you know that now all developers are fighting for the players' TIME? There are so many GaaS that there is always less interest in new projects, players stay in old, familiar games.
@@L3tsFUN yeah And how has that been sticking out for a good amount of them? Most of the games over time being overloading with microtransactions or hitting them with other crap. And also not all live service games should be free. Some generally have something that's worth that money
It’s probably $40 because of the failure of The Finals to retain players. Understandably so, they have the same fear for Arc Raiders and need some confirmed cash.
they literally said it was better for the game to be premium. I think they're trying to avoid pay2win stuff and paid DLC , look at destiny its not even free to play tbh its free to TRY but if you really wanna get that destiny experience you have to pay up. In some cases wayyyyy more than 40 dollars. $40 in the destiny world would give you two dlc (idk if they lowered but dlcs used to be like 15-20 bucks) I personally love their ideals on this topic. It shows how passion they are to make us nice quality content
@@arcanum3882But he does have a point. Also the finals isn't the failure. If anything is doing well, it's just in a state of just I guess. Stillness losing some players gaining some players. The game is not a failure, they never deemed it as a failure. It's only a failure until the company who makes the game deems it as one and stops making it
What price did you want to them to put it at? Dude they are a whole new fresh new company. They're not like Arrowhead where they have at least a decent amount of experience of making a game on their own.
They went PVP, this immediately killed my interest in this title. The market is flooded with PvPvE extraction titles and I'm just burnt out, it looks cool aesthetically but the genre is dead to me at this point.
Any comments breaking the ARC Raiders Closed Alpha NDA will be deleted. Sorry guys, this ain't the place to disregard the NDA you agreed to.
"guys we sent the files out to 1000s of people we dont know and they are leaking stuff!!! how could they do that after pressing the checkmark that agrees not to leak stuff😢😢😢😢" idk why they even have NDAs if they give out the game files like candy to randoms🙄
Could tell you have no experience in legal conversations. Good. Hope you won't ever have to grow up! I wish I could see the world with your eyes man!
@Emptyheaded. Weird shade to throw but OK buddy 😂
HERE WE GOOOO..... oh wait wrong game, enlist. resist.
Who dis? New phone.
LETS GOOO, cant wait for another game!
that's right June!
@@THiiXY Played CB1 of TF, would love to see if would could get into this beta
Hey I know this aint the finals but can you ask embark when they gona add the ball to the luis casino gun skin. It was in season one and it showed the ball. WE NEED THAT BALL lol.
Thiixy paid me to like your video
LMAOO
🤣🤣🤣
And I'm ok with that.
holy shit is that noble the finals
Enlist. Resist. Ready for some deep lore in this game. Glad they gave you a chance for the Q&A, lots of insights!
Can't wait to hop into this game! I'm so glad they went for a premium price model instead
i knew it was old dice devs. but wow its the dice sound expert!! gz man so happy!!!
Actually really stoked for it being $40. Was very nervous about it being F2P with needing to constantly feed cosmetics and cheaters.
It going to be paid with cosmetic
Alot of content recently rockhound keep it up brother
I don't mind paying $40 for it ngl, games rn are usually $80+. But they need to include a bit more rewards as far as game skins go if they include something like a battle pass.
It's probably gonna be like drg where the battlepass is free but some cosmetics are paid dlcs
@@normalhuman4951 I'm expecting that too, with the extra paid stuff not being too in-your-face.
Hopefully there's no battle pass at all. Premium games really have no need for that crap. You already paid. Why milk another 20 dollars a month from your players unless you're REALLY THAT GREEDY.
@@GFlight.916 yes premium single player games don't need microtransactions, but live service games need a constant stream of revenue for continued development, where is this money going to come from if not microtransactions? THINK!
@@PepperoniRonin. a season pass/battle pass is no mere "micro" transaction.... "THINK"
Now this was aaa good overview about the game! Very informative. Thank you❤
Great news they went with a premium model! Can't wait to play the game
Thanks for the great video @RockhoundBlack! I was so let down when I saw the short clip at ONL because there wasn't much news in there. I was greatly relieved when I found you're video and was and still am surprised by the amount of detail in it. Appreciate you man! Keep up the good work :)
@@Killerjockel95 thanks! No detail left behind in this one haha
Honestly I’m kinda glad with it moving to be paid. Hopefully that’ll make the game better. Great video!
Commenting for the algorithm ✌🏻 great video man! Watched it on stream with Thiixy
All I have to say is if they treat the cosmetics like they do in The finals I will support it, prolly one of the coolest microtransaction models for the fans.
Let them cook. If it comes out in a complete and optimized state, I will gladly spend $40.
I hope solo/duo/trio are the only party sizes as they offer the most balanced gameplay. Trio being the maximum due to the fact that while one person is down, one is ressing and one is defending.
Thanks for giving all this great detail about your inside scoop. I am pleasantly surprised about it being $40 though I am sure that will create a smaller player base. Hopefully it's enough to sustain the game though.
My biggest concern is if they are going to actually spend time balancing the game before launch unlike The Finals which got changed so much after launch. They need to have multiple, longer, open beta tests to do this though and I fear that won't happen.
Damn the whole gangs here we got everyone from noble to thixx can’t wait for this release lads look forward to everyone’s work on it!
Erma Cora showed up before somewhere. Had it my easter egg notes as "erma = hermes
cora = persephone goddess/queen of the underworld" Not sure where I was going with that but the whole "goddess of the underworld" immediately seems relevant for Arc Raiders.
i really like the graphics
Don't forget we can now get Arc Raider gear and other things in THE FINALS! imagine that as a mid-way event in the next 2 seasons!
i like the $40 price, it seems like the right choice too
ive been waiting for this even when it was only a trailer and PVE
Lets go!
Great video with a ton of information, thanks a lot! Can't wait for the game. Would be nice if the game would not only offer solo squads but also a solo mode. Fighting against squads of 2-3 players is a bit hard.
Hey I know this aint the finals but can you ask embark when they gona add the ball to the luis casino gun skin. It was in season one and it showed the ball. WE NEED THAT BALL lol.
Looking forward to this game I hope it doesn't disappoint
I’m excited
tbh i would have paid $40 after the playtest. i cant wait to see what else they cooked up over the past year
I kinda like the premium purchase model better. Hoping that it discourages the cheaters.
I think being a pay to play now over free to play is a good thing especially since it's a PVEVP it's hard with it being free to play to make the game not pay to win so making it pay to play means they won't feel ever to add things that could be considered pay to win.
PvPvE was 100% the right choice. im ok with the $40 price tag if it keeps the dev team staffed, supported, and releasing new content
2025 is going to be a crazy year for gaming 😳
What else is coming out that youre excited about?
@julio1148 killing floor 3, split gate 2, spectre divide, gta 6, borderlands 4, fragpunk and more 😀
@@HughJ876 you somehow don't mention the most anticipated game of the decade that will probably be game of the year in 2025
@@PepperoniRonin. what game?
@@HughJ876 GTA VI
I’m hyped
Oh my Gosh, couldn't be more excited!
i hope it has a 1st person mode
Take my money. Does this game happen in the same world as The Finals
division type of extraction ?? or tarkov and delta force type??
Tarkov, you lose all your gear when you die, equipped and looted.
Probably a mix of both considering the third person perspective
@@xPetyr damn i was hoping it would be more division and then going up is like the dark zone
@@shallot4991 Just gotta watch the video and read the latest post from Embark. You lose everything except what's on your safe pocket (Gamma container)
I SERIOUSLY hope they don't do the mistake they did with The Finals' closed betas where they completely neglect older sign-ups to the playtest request program.
They had the system completely based on newer requests filling the top so all of the older non-accepted request would get drowned, signed up for the game a day after the alpha sign-ups closed and had to get into closed beta 1 through that finnicky steelseries giveaway...
Anyway, that's more of a literal concern. As for my hopes for the game;
I've been following a PvEvE game called Forever Winter for a while now and really hope they take some inspiration from that game.
The problem with most exfil shooters nowadays is that although there might be an intricate PvE system and gameplay features thought out with the idea of strangers teaming up. Most of the time it devolves to people either disabling VoIP entirely and shooting on sight or the PvE systems getting neglected entirely.
I hope they take some design elements from Forever Winter in this case where they bank on the PvE aspect more in order to make fighting ARC robots more rewarding than stealing loot from players, which would set a notion for seperate players and groups to team up to take down bigger enemies with better loot and such.
Would hate to see this game go down the same path as Cycle Frontier...
Sorry to tell you this but forever winter is PvE only
@@xPetyr And??? I literally said that already what the hell are you trying to lecture me on?
@@de-ment Lmao you edited your comment and try to act salty
@@xPetyr youtube shows everyone your other interactions on the channel, you're taking out your frustrations on others instead of listening to their sincerity.
Yes!! ❤
I need to try it out
I am honestly glad to hear the decisions they're making towards the future of the game. If they can keep out of the Forknife/PUBG model of cosmetics/etc then they can have my 40 bones and more. As for the gameplay loop, I am very curious how ARC is going to differ from these other extract type FPS loops of "Hi, go X, get Y, return, redo" which is what made/makes Marauders feel... a little lustless.
I am SO HAPPY to hear a dev talk about respecting the player's time, I don't know how many games I've stopped playing simply because it does not respect time. AWESOME
@@RIXINUS I know you! *points frantically
But isn't that the best way to do microtransactions? all cosmetics with no P2W and the ability to even earn some cosmetics or the battle pass for free with reasonable game time?
@@PepperoniRonin. The model of cosmetic microtransactions I'm referring to are specific to the games I mentioned, but which are not all inclusive. Flashy, bright, silly, over-the-top cosmetics that cater to an adolescent crowd or things you'd likely see in CSGO as a wild skin. The Finals provides a more suitable environment for that sort of cosmetic appeal.
@@RIXINUS wtf does inclusive skins mean? 😂
They just sell what the consumers want and the consumers of those games want those skins. Its just business, never sell what *YOU* think your customers should buy... sell what *THEY* want to buy.
@@PepperoniRonin. Sounds good internet man!
I was thinking about this same thing a few weeks ago. For Embark, to have two free to play games out there to support didn’t make financial sense. The only solution was to make Arc Raiders a premium game. I’m glad they made this decision. Hope it works out for them.
Did they say anything about certain objectives requiring the help of another team? Will they incentivize short term alliances in lobby for higher level loot?
No, they didn't tell us that level of detail as far as quests and objectives go.
@@RockhoundBlack What about overall player speed? Can you tell us how fast players moved? Is there another popular game you felt the speed / pace was close to?
I really really enjyoed the first playtest i was apart off in 2023 iirc.
It was an experience i never ever had. So intense and exciting.
I dropped Destiny 2 and I'm really hoping that this game can take it's place
Same
Its nothin like Destiny lol
@@frankylampard3931 u played it?
You're right, it's going to be better@@frankylampard3931
@@frankylampard3931 obviously, but I need a game that's a time sink and enjoyable. Also I've seen tarkov players freak out over loot so 🤷
I am happy that they are making it pay to play than free to play. There is always that fear in a free game that it might be ruined by cheaters and griefers mixed with developers need to introduce something purchasable to sustain the game. I think they should explore their other side and try a premium game with a price tag on it. It really fits what they are showing and visioning.
How does making it pay to play remove the cheaters?
@@candycommander because cheaters need to pay to play and if they cheat and get banned they need to buy the game again that mostly they don't compared to F2P.
Hey mate 😄 I'm assuming--was the press briefing restricted? I can't find any video specifically of the gameplay shown that you mentioned, I'm clamoring to see it!
Yeah, that gameplay wasn't available to publish, but we could describe it.
@@RockhoundBlack Ahaa ☝️ here’s to hoping they’ll publish it for the public on Wednesday! This game sounds so incredible if it’s done right.
The focus on Tension is one of the best parts about The Finals so seeing them wanting to create so much drama in the game gets me excited. The energy they show on each of the new trailers is deeply contrasting with the first trailer though, it really gives off a bad first impression, many even believe they took away the robots.
They definitely have not taken away the robots, they were shown in the gameplay we watched, except for the largest ones, which I’m guessing they’re holding back.
Just started the video! this is going to be Premium
Thanks for the in depth update! I’m down to get it especially since the art style and theme interest me so much. That being said, my old gamer brain doesn’t like loose it all sort of games; so I hope the game brings a lot to the table in order to keep me interested…
i really want this game to be good. i was expecting a coop shooter adventure game but this looks like it'll be alright
Ill gladly pay money for anything embark makes
Not paying $40 for a game that requires internet connection
@@XenPete so don’t lol
i wait for this game since first news about developing it, now that is 40$ none of my friends will be interested in playing this w me sadge
@@j3t_l4g17 just help buy it for them! I always offer them like $5 in there steam wallet if I ask them to buy a game. It's totally worth it, don't be stuck not being able to have fun in games you like with friends.
Free to 40$ well dam ok well i hope its gonns be damm good. Gonna get it
Kinda messed up that they've changed their advertising for the game so much. They entirely changed genre from Co-op PvE to PvPvE Extraction Shooter, and then jump from F2P to now a 40$ price tag. I'm not completely opposed to the price increase, but it's just a bit screwed that they changed it after it'd already gotten so much hype.
I recommended it to a lotta my friends since it'd be free to play, so some of my friends that weren't entirely interested wanted to give it a shot, but now they're a bit opposed to it due to the big price increase.
Since it's 40$ now though I hope we'll see plenty of free content not locked behind paywalls. I'll likely buy the game either way, but it's just a bit of a downer to see them jump the price up.
40$ price tag ain't bad, however for console players, this switch to a paid game will now require a mandatory subscription (i.e playstation plus) valued at, at least 60$ per year in order to play online... Surely this will refrain a lot of console players (who are not willing to pay for the subscription) from the game unfortunately...
I mean as bad as that is. That's basically the same thing for any console games nowadays it sucks but I mean it is what it is
Stupid console subscriptions, they need to do away with that shit at some point
@@shallot4991 they're probably never going to
Why did they advertise the game as F2P, then change direction to paid?
Advertise? they've been silent for months at a time. The game has a year to come out, nobody is being mislead haha
Just changed their mind. I don't think it's a horrible decision, however, as long as they can then produce and deliver that same value or more back to their playerbase.
On the other hand, a paid model means fewer cheaters, as people may not be as capable of returning after a ban. It also means that hopefully, their soulless publisher overlords won't have them milk everything through microtransactions.
Definitely a bit of a twist, but it may not be as bad as we instinctually might receive it to be.
@@nobleshmoble w take
That question is answered pretty early in the video.
@@gauzzlez2892 lol watch the video literally
I am very cautious with my optimism at this point. I would have liked this to be a looter shooter pve focused game. There are so many extraction games now and in the pipelines. Also the whole premium game thing....we will see about that. There still might be shitty microtransactions or pay 2 win in the end. Looking forward to getting my hands on the game and see for myself what it's like though.
But in recent years there were only very few games that were designed well enough and that were fun enough and fair to keep me around for longer than a couple of weeks. I hope this game will be different, but I was burnt too many times so I am not getting hyped just yet.
finally not a washed up guy but a real chad heh
Damnit! I have been watching for news on this game since 2021. Why did they HAVE to make it PvP? If they don't have PvE only options when it comes out, then I am NOT buying it. In my experience, other players are toxic to play these games with.
True, but that comes with the territory with any game that's PVP plus it's PVPVE so there might be times where you have to probably work with the player or if not I mean from at first it seemed like it was going to be possibly PVP elements anyways
Embark Studio has a lot of trust from me. I really enjoy playing The Finals and although extraction shooters are not my cup of tea, I think I'll give this game a chance.
So it's next level rust
paid thiixy to like this video
i love how are they cooking the pve nerds in that Q&A session 💀🙏
Oooof first they get rid of the massive PVE and turn it into a extraction shooter... And now their making it 40 bucks... Yea good luck with that one.
The game was meant to be an extract shooter to begin with and making a $40 was probably a better idea than having two free games and having a good chance of them not working out
40$ is a good price point, that's something i would consider if it's a good game.
anything more and i would only buy it with a big sale. games just cost too much
Did Embark say whether or not there would be an NDA for the October Playtest?
With it being labelled as a Public test, I'm assuming that means there won't be an NDA.
because they knew that everybody knows FREE PLUS NEXON EQUALS SHIT They added a price tag to makes it a modern business game
Can you make a character that isn't butt ugly?
I'm really interested to see what direction they take this and how the bigger robots fall into the mix. Everyone living in the same underground city, but then killing each other on the surface made no sense, and there was no way people would team up to fight a queen or baron without killing each other over the loot. Still disappointed it's an extraction shooter with segmented maps instead of a fast paced open world looter shooter like they originally announced, and I hate extraction shooters and they are niche with generally small player bases, but we'll see what happens.
This is precisely what I wanted to see. The Finals is a great game that has extreme potential, but with the amount of flaws I could hardly say I would recommend if people had to pay for it. I genuinely think people underestimate how problematic Unreal engine is in terms of quality and how it feels. Will keep an eye out at least.
haha AHHHHHCK lol gotta love the Aussies
$40 usd is like $60 dollarydoos
Cool interview and shit, but I find it really disturbing when the reason to change from PvE to PvPvE is "because it wasn't fun enough"... PvE is fun, PvPvE is fun, PvP is fun, it all depends on the game, not the model. The model shouldn't be the motive to change from one to another, but all the rest of the game. Putting npcs on a PvP game won't necessarily make it better, the same goes for putting players on PvE. It's totally different approaches of how to have fun. Destiny 2 made a move on PvPvE with Gambit, and ppl hated it, but they love the PvE and the PvP, separately.
My concern is, if the game wasn't fun, adding pvp to it won't save it.
But at least they're being really clear on what to expect, I was waiting a lil more PvE focused game, so now I know this isn't the case. Sad for me, good for those who prefer PvP, but knowing this is awesome.
i don't believe that pvp was always supposed to be a part of the game, literally the first delay announcement was because they wanted to add a pvp mode (before the announcement that it shifted to pvpve)
Mistake to not be FTP IMO. I like to play games with my kids. $40 for me is doable if it's really good. $160 to play with my family is a bit much. :(
FUUUUUUUU... I was only excited because it was free. This was a free helldivers 2 vibe game. Now I just buy helldivers 2 for cheaper
My dude they're both at the same price range. You're not buying it for cheaper
The fact we could've had a really easily accessible PVE game to chill out with, especially after the Helldivers 2 fallout...
Im very scared with the "premium live service" thing, because most of the live services survive because of the flux of players in the free to play format, being in a premium game will make the player base smaller, queue times longer and can became niche games with very little playerbase grow, that player base cant buy the game again, so eventuallly they will need another form of monetization if the new content is free as said or they will change or move on to the next embark project
The leadership are not the smartest. They switched to PvPvE and missed the opportunity to get in front of Helldivers and First Descendent which were huge successes and now trying to compete with the PvP crowd. Not for me. They lost their chance.
Look at tarkov on twitch and compare it to Helldivers or The First Descendant. You are not the smartest.
@@xPetyr ha ! You are reinforcing my point big boy. By virtue of Tarkov / others in this genre, the market for PvPvE is highly saturated relative to PvE games, as evidence by how well those two recent releases fared. By virtue of their change in mandate, and NOW deciding to charge $40, this will likely fail miserably. A missed opportunity.
@@Deltium5683It will not likely fail because they changed it at $40. They changed it because clearly what they're giving is probably more worth than just a free to play game and if it was then you would have to by microtransactions up the ass. Not in a bad way but you get the point. Also, even though the market has enough of these games. We've also still seen some other PVE games before they don't always last for eternity unless you consistently keep up updating with the enemies and what you deal with. It doesn't last. And look at tarkov even though it was bad it got big because of what it was
And they never missed the opportunity to do that first to send it as good as it is is basically generic and basic the majority of time. People only really like it cuz it's just fun to kill things. Same thing for hell divers, but you see where that's happening look. They even said that it might need a PVP mode, possibly in the future to keep it consistently. In case you know PVE does not work out always. It's not always fun to just constantly kill enemies of the same nature It gets real boring Even with hell divers
F2p is always worse and for extraction games they become pay to win
Personally I think switching from PvE looter shooter to PvPvE extraction shooter was the wrong choice. This genre is getting saturated and some companies are seeing it, Look at Ubisoft cancelling The Division Heartland when the game was already finished. Why do you think they did this? Note that these big companies usually have very good risk assessment teams. By the time Arc Raiders comes out we will have enough extraction games to play and people will either be too busy with Marathon to play this or they will be saving their money to get Marathon if it wont be out yet.
Going from F2P to P2P was also a wrong choice IMO. For any live service multiplayer game, F2P is almost always the way to go as it really lowers the barrier to entry and gets more people looking at your game. Some people may say 40$ is not a lot of money but to these ppl I remind you that not everyone lives in a 1st world country, 40$ is a lot of money for a majority of the people. Ppl will talk about cheaters but guess what? P2P games get cheaters too, its not about the cost of the game (tho that does help a tiny bit) but how good your anti cheat is. I hear way more about cheaters in R6 Siege and Tarkov than in Fortnite or Valorant, guess which games is P2P there.
All in all, good luck to the devs, I personally lost interest when they switched genres but I am still willing to give it a chance after watching some reviews and first impressions. IMO the pattern I have always observed is when you mix PvP and PvE one ALWAYS suffers for the sake of the other and when this happens you better hope the one suffering is PvP coz PvE has a WAAAAY wider audience than PvP in every single game. Like it or not, its just the objective truth.
I put this on the last video you did of Arc Raiders. When this game was first announced as a PvE looter shooter game, it was easily my most anticipated game. Even when it got delayed the first time, it still was. But when they announced that it was being delayed again but this time to change it from a PvE looter shooter to a PvEvP Extraction shooter. I lost all excitement for this game. I was still going to try it since it was going to be F2P, but now it's $40. I'm not sure I will. That decision alone to make it $40 may kill the game, especially when you still have Tarkov and now Delta Force, Arena Breakout and the one upcoming game that looks like The Cycle all of which are free to play.
I agree. I can't see paying $40 for a game that has any kind of PVP
And marathon
@@ericmatthews9894why?
@@ericmatthews9894there's going to be tons of games out there in the future. There's going to still have this element that will me either around that price range or maybe higher
Probably it being free to play would have led it being killed too because it would have been lugged between those two as being a free-to-play extract shooter It being around $40 might be more worth it. Even people are saying that this would have maybe hurt the company if it was still free to play. Most likely they probably have this idea considering the devs have been talking about this a lot And it being no longer a PVE it's probably might be an okay thing. They might make it separate like how they're doing with Warhammer and even they're doing the same thing. But yet people are still going to buy $69 with that game. And then saying that they're making it only $40 is going to kill. It is ridiculous. If they put it at the price tag of a actual game like $69 or something like that then it would be dying because at least with 40 bucks you're not putting in that much money And for some cases a lot of these people probably got points saved up where they can probably buy it on their own. Personally, I'm kind of curious to see where they're planning to go with this. If I ever have the money, I'll definitely buy it. I want to support these guys cuz I want this company to succeed to make more games
£40 means this game has zero chance of succeeding, they think they're going to go head 2 head with hell divers, lol. Its not going to be worth anything close to that price and it'll be DOA if its not A LOT cheaper or free. This news is massively disappointing and I for one will NOT be paying £40 for it! OH and guys "Live action service" Literally stands for we will scam you when we feel like it, how we feel like it, as much as we feel like it!
After what happened to Concord (A live service game with a similar price tag), I will not be buying this game.
this game suppose to be the helldivers competitor but...
I would say yeah it would be Maybe not depending on some people of how you see it. But if that's the case then I guess Warhammer is not a competitor even though people say it is?
If there are ANY micro transactions, I won't be playing. Reasonably priced battle pass, fine, I guess. But other than that. I'm sick to death of these games trying to charge thousands of dollars to get everything like mobile trash.
they probably decide to change for 40 dollars cause - free to play Finals kind'a suck for their big guys :() hah
No, maybe because the game was worth a bit more than just being free and not having a s*** ton of cosmetics and also the finals is not dying and doesn't suck
@@madvortex39 for sure - like 15k max on steam? you think this is great for such game? And also company budget reports says that the Finals Underperform their expectation means - it make LESS money that they want it to... So.. In my opinion - all of this looks like the game is hardly struggling... I know what I'm speak about - I played each and every season and 700hr+ of playing.. like for me rank search every time like 4-5 minutes.
Imagine - there is 5 game modes 5-6 regions - for 15k it's nothing so yeah. I think it's kind a suck :) sadly
@@whitewhalo yeah that's not consider. It's Max and even then most people consider it to seem that steam sale charts are not the best to show off how a game is doing, people say they're inconsistent all the time Time and even then that is still pretty decent for a small game If it was a bigger game then yeah. The company didn't say that Nexon they said that it had lower sales and they expected and It underperform This is because despite of people liking it, they all just simply went back to other games cuz they didn't like the new style in the destructive nature of it. And the company does seem like knowing what they're doing. It seems like they kind of knew it was not going to perform as well as they wanted it to not because it's terrible because they knew that they were going to have too many competitions. And my dude you can put about 1,000 hours in the game and it's still would make me talk like this to you. And then having five game modes what you rather have them copy off other games and have game modes that will just piss off people. They try that with terminal attack And no one liked it they want to stick with their roots of how the game show should be. At the same time for it to be a terrible game. Well, at least it's significantly better than most first-person shooters out there right now. Definitely feels fun and fresh. I mean seriously, how many games has the concept of destructive environments in first person shooter currently continuing replying? The only one I can think of is battlefield. Not to mention, usually seems like Free to play games. Lose players regardless. Eventually people tried out they feel like they didn't like it didn't fit what they wanted and they just simply stopped playing. Not cuz it's bad or nothing cuz everyone eventually figures out that it's not their game. And to say it sucks, there are still dozens of people still talking about it with on the internet.
@@whitewhalo game will have its problems. It's literally the first game of the company and then the second game is. I don't know what's going on. No one seems to have faith in new companies that try to release a new game Not just this, but every new game I have with the exceptions of helldivers 2. Actually even with that one, people expected it to eventually fall off. It's just like everyone expects every new game to come out and just die in a matter of months or a year. Well would that attitude It will and will be stuck with poor sloppy stuff so you know what don't play it. I don't care anymore talk about it. It's clearly you're not going to change your mindset. But just know that people are still liking it and still having fun so go have fun with that. I don't know destiny 2
Wait they have changed it to a pvevp extraction shooter sigh was hoping for a good looter shooter not another PvP extraction shooter
Do those stripes on the Arc Raiders graphics represent the Pride flag?
Pretty sure it just supposed to represent the retro/old school and sci-fi look.
@@echo7project904 Thanks. I can see that now.
So Embark lied to us again. They're probably charging us for it because The Finals flopped so hard and lost money. I'm out.
My dude, the finals didn't flop that hard. It's still going pretty good at its moment and still raking them a good amount of money. And then you're saying they lied to us again. When do they say this was just going to be PVE And they changed it to free because they thought it would be a much better idea as explained in the video. Like my dude, even then at a financial point this would have been a terrible idea if they were both free to play
@@FEWGEE1 The Finals hasn’t flopped with tens of not hundreds of thousands of people playing. go back to COD lil pip squeak
40$ - mistake. Games as a service should be for free.
My dude did you get hit on your head as a baby? Why would they make games as a service for free? Do you know actually how much it cost to make games now?
@@madvortex39 Don't you know that now all developers are fighting for the players' TIME? There are so many GaaS that there is always less interest in new projects, players stay in old, familiar games.
@@L3tsFUN yeah And how has that been sticking out for a good amount of them? Most of the games over time being overloading with microtransactions or hitting them with other crap. And also not all live service games should be free. Some generally have something that's worth that money
Know what else is a mistake, your opinion, in my opinion
It’s probably $40 because of the failure of The Finals to retain players. Understandably so, they have the same fear for Arc Raiders and need some confirmed cash.
they literally said it was better for the game to be premium. I think they're trying to avoid pay2win stuff and paid DLC , look at destiny its not even free to play tbh its free to TRY but if you really wanna get that destiny experience you have to pay up. In some cases wayyyyy more than 40 dollars. $40 in the destiny world would give you two dlc (idk if they lowered but dlcs used to be like 15-20 bucks)
I personally love their ideals on this topic. It shows how passion they are to make us nice quality content
@@LoveJattt i think
@arcanum3882
is right on this.
@@LoveJattt Whole bunch of yapping to not even disagree with me
@@arcanum3882But he does have a point. Also the finals isn't the failure. If anything is doing well, it's just in a state of just I guess. Stillness losing some players gaining some players. The game is not a failure, they never deemed it as a failure. It's only a failure until the company who makes the game deems it as one and stops making it
40? Hell nah
What price did you want to them to put it at? Dude they are a whole new fresh new company. They're not like Arrowhead where they have at least a decent amount of experience of making a game on their own.
Fuckin hell these companies are killin me with these extraction titles🤦🏾♂️hype obliterated
it should really be free to play, Im pretty sure I wont buy it for 40$
No, thanks. I'm done with premium live service games. They are no better than free to play ones regarding monetization.
They went PVP, this immediately killed my interest in this title. The market is flooded with PvPvE extraction titles and I'm just burnt out, it looks cool aesthetically but the genre is dead to me at this point.