Well it can't be:

- The bad core mechanics

- The low framerate (in some cases the framerate even drops to unplayable levels)

- The variation of guns, suits, vehicles and modules, the quantites of toys available do not merit an AAA status...

- The balancing....?

- What?



I can't find a single thing about this game that puts it up to the standard of whats considered a "normal AAA fps game".

Too me it still looks and feels like something that should still be in beta, going from there and calling this an AAA launch is, well, odd. Am I missing something?

(And no, I'm not going into specifics, those can be read all over these forums and any experienced FPS player should identify them from the start.)

One could argue the budget. Movies use a similar metric.

Your Fanboyism never seem to amaze me.

Those CPM meetings must be real Knee Busters huh

[Edit]: Argh, to slow.

Actually, I find this game comparable to BF3. If you don't well, sorry Mr. Troll

Nobody calls Dust an AAA shooter except some CCP PR person. There is potential, but it'll take a year or two and several builds before we even begin to compete with proper AAA games on FPS mechanics.

In addition to OPs list, more game modes and fixing getting stuck on terrain. The scary thing is, everything the OP listed are some of the most basic things to get right in a shooter, yet we have had these issues for close to a year, now.

Hey lets be fair here!

I would estimate Dust did cost around 10-20 Mill, which makes it a AAA by the loose budget definition, ofc a really in-expansive AAA FPS game :p
If i remember correctly Planetside 1 did cost around 10 Mill, so i personally think the result is better than PS1 given the budget?

Other than that a "real" AAA title needs a "AAA" team, since u obviously cant just throw money on such large titles and u also cant just "simply" buy talent in the gaming industries, except if a studio might be broke and u can snag its team cheaply :p

So i would be interested on what other console FPS titles did the Dust team worked on?


On a side-note i'm glad they did not blow a higher AAA budget, since it would be really hard to get a 100+ Mill budget back, which would hurt CCP overall. CCP is good at making niche games, for a loyal and well paying hardcore audience.

Your Fanboyism never seem to amaze me.

Those CPM meetings must be real Knee Busters huh

Well it can't be:

- The bad core mechanics

- The low framerate (in some cases the framerate even drops to unplayable levels)

- The variation of guns, suits, vehicles and modules, the quantites of toys available do not merit an AAA status...

- The balancing....?

- What?



I can't find a single thing about this game that puts it up to the standard of whats considered a "normal AAA fps game".

Too me it still looks and feels like something that should still be in beta, going from there and calling this an AAA launch is, well, odd. Am I missing something?

(And no, I'm not going into specifics, those can be read all over these forums and any experienced FPS player should identify them from the start.)

@AlleyKatPr0

Be more positive, i really think CCP will do fine even if Dust turns out to be less profitable than expected. EvE still pulls in good money and i don't see this changing any time soon. So they could afford this "experiment", while having a good chance to expand the EvE franchise. I'm also not sure how much they got from Sony to make it PS3 exclusive, but probably not this much to make a difference.

All in all i still think it is a reasonable try to expand EvE and CCP as company and on the operation costs, those should be manageable, since CCP has 10 years of experience managing and expanding a online game. They can still always cut costs or close Dust, but at what 10k server population Dusts infrastructure is bloody cheap!

I think the general idea to somehow create a game that fits into the EvE universe and creates some direct/indirect interaction between the 2 games is a good idea, i don't think creating a PS3 exclusive FPS game in 2013 with a inexperienced team is the best approach to this overall goal :p
In particular im not sure if Unreal3 was the best choice here, but than again a few years back there was no CryEngine3 or Unreal4 and CCP had to license some engine, given the lack of console know-how and time.

Well it can't be:

- The bad core mechanics

- The low framerate (in some cases the framerate even drops to unplayable levels)

- The variation of guns, suits, vehicles and modules, the quantites of toys available do not merit an AAA status...

- The balancing....?

- What?



I can't find a single thing about this game that puts it up to the standard of whats considered a "normal AAA fps game".

Too me it still looks and feels like something that should still be in beta, going from there and calling this an AAA launch is, well, odd. Am I missing something?

(And no, I'm not going into specifics, those can be read all over these forums and any experienced FPS player should identify them from the start.)

Lack of time? They were already planning DUST back in '07 - that's SIX YEARS AGO, and 'this' is what they deliver to a modern-day audience?

That said, they have a long way to go.

Your Fanboyism never seem to amaze me.

Those CPM meetings must be real Knee Busters huh

One could argue the budget. Movies use a similar metric.

Nobody calls Dust an AAA shooter except some CCP PR person. There is potential, but it'll take a year or two and several builds before we even begin to compete with proper AAA games on FPS mechanics.

In addition to OPs list, more game modes and fixing getting stuck on terrain. The scary thing is, everything the OP listed are some of the most basic things to get right in a shooter, yet we have had these issues for close to a year, now.

Because It stands for abusive, arrogant, asses. SI falls prey to the triple AAA