YouTube videos require cookies, you must accept their cookies to view. View cookie preferences.
Direct Link
Direct Link
Each death in the game will go towards a counter to the game finishing forever, and no one will be able to purchase it again—say what?
Their PR folk emailed in to let me know it will release on Linux in “Q3 of 2015”.
Press release copied below:
------------------------------------
HILVERSUM, Netherlands - July 16, 2015 - Vogelsap delivers their first-person asymmetrical multiplayer horror game The Flock to Steam in Q3 2015, in a way that has never been done before. Time left for people to buy the game depends on the death rate of the players within The Flock. Developer Vogelsap commits to a hands-off approach and puts the lastingness of the game into the player's hands.
With each death in the game, one life will be taken from the Flock's population. When the Flock's population reaches zero, the game will never be purchasable again. Only players who have The Flock in their Steam library will then be able to partake in the yet to be announced climactic finale. After the ending, the game will go offline permanently and no longer be playable.
The Flock population countdown will be embedded in the game's menus, Steam store page, Vogelsap's website and The Flock's sub-reddit to make sure all gamers are aware of the amount of lives left.
Gamescom attendees will be able to play The Flock in the Indie Arena Booth.
Indie industry luminaries behind Indie Fund such as Ron Carmel, John Graham and Kellee Santiago have provided financial backing to flesh out what started as a student project into a full commercial release.
The Flock are a tragic race as they are doomed to extinction. The titular abominations are irrevocably attracted to the light of the Artifact which will lead to their death or transformation into a whole other being. Trying to convey this story into the game as well as the team's aspiration to find a solution to the anticlimactic ending of multiplayer games, resulted in the idea of the Flock's population countdown.
"A multiplayer game can take players to incredible heights, but at some point gamers will start to play less, get disinterested and stop playing altogether," said Jeroen Van Hasselt, creative director, Vogelsap. "In opposition to other multiplayer games, we want The Flock's experience to inspire a sense of awe, to keep players eagerly anticipating what is coming next and to end with a memorable climax."
Set in the year 3000, an unrecognizable Earth is in ruins. Centuries of devastating pollution have blocked out the sun, blanketing the planet in darkness. No longer able to support human life, a horrifying race of monstrous creatures known as the Flock is the world's new dominant species. That is, until the emergence of the Carrier.
Each player begins as a member of the Flock, when a strange light emitting device known as the Light Artifact will suddenly appear somewhere on the map. The first player who touches the Light Artifact will transform into the Carrier, who then becomes the hunted.
Equipped with the Light Artifact, the Carrier can defeat the Flock by using the Light Artifact to illuminate the creatures. The Flock can in turn avoid the light's lethal effects by remaining motionless when caught by the beam. When a member of the Flock successfully lunges at the Carrier, it seizes control of the Light Artifact and becomes the new humanoid hunted. The previous Carrier then respawns as a member of the Flock just arriving at the scene.
The only way of winning a match of The Flock is to survive as the Carrier while keeping the light lit or to capture certain objectives. Objectives can be captured by directing the artifact's light towards these key points. Article taken from GamingOnLinux.com.
0 Likes
Some you may have missed, popular articles from the last month:
The comments on this article are closed.
All posts need to follow our rules. For users logged in: please hit the Report Flag icon on any post that breaks the rules or contains illegal / harmful content. Guest readers can email us for any issues.
It's an interesting concept, but maybe not such a great long-term business model.
3 Likes, Who?
I think this is a brilliant idea!
I've actually always wanted an online game that was only playable for specific periods of time. But permanently going off is good too
For starters, they don't have to waste any money on supporting the game after it's finished.
But I definitely think they'll be getting a ton of sales they wouldn't have gotten otherwise, just because of how unique the idea is.
Personally I hope this sort of thing does become popular, and we see more games like this. I'd also like to see variations on it like periods of temporary unplayability instead of permanent unplayability.
I've actually always wanted an online game that was only playable for specific periods of time. But permanently going off is good too
It's an interesting concept, but maybe not such a great long-term business model.I don't think so at all, especially while this is a new concept in online games.
For starters, they don't have to waste any money on supporting the game after it's finished.
But I definitely think they'll be getting a ton of sales they wouldn't have gotten otherwise, just because of how unique the idea is.
Personally I hope this sort of thing does become popular, and we see more games like this. I'd also like to see variations on it like periods of temporary unplayability instead of permanent unplayability.
0 Likes
Looks very interesting. Actually I dont like the never-playable-again idea, cause its stoping you from revisiting the game at a later time.
And I hope they somehow prevent abusing the population idea. I can imagine some people having fun dying all the time to reduce population and spoiling the game for others.
And I hope they somehow prevent abusing the population idea. I can imagine some people having fun dying all the time to reduce population and spoiling the game for others.
1 Likes, Who?
Interesting artist concept, but kinda shitty from a player perspective (planned obsolescence gone wild) and from an art preservation perspective (I don't want games, or any artistic work, to vanish just like that).
And I'm going to call it: people will be dicks and just kill themselves as quickly as possible, just to troll. Especially the usual suspects of arseholes will think that, as they say, "top kek".
And I'm going to call it: people will be dicks and just kill themselves as quickly as possible, just to troll. Especially the usual suspects of arseholes will think that, as they say, "top kek".
7 Likes, Who?
For starters, they don't have to waste any money on supporting the game after it's finished.Instead, the people who bought this will have wasted money. As someone invested in several FLOSS projects to make old games playable on modern systems and in a portable manner, I really don't like this.
Just like I really don't like that idea of that one band (Wu-Tang Clan, IIRC) only selling a single copy of an album, withholding it from anybody else. Even though I really don't care about their music.
Personally I hope this sort of thing does become popularIf it does, you can bet your life that you'll find me in demonstrations against it.
8 Likes, Who?
What a tremendously stupid idea.
[edit] If the game turns out *good*, I can easily predict people buying several dozen copies, then dying a million times so the game is pulled from the store, and then selling these copies with 200%+ profit. So I hope the game turns out really bad and nobody cares about it.
Last edited by pb on 17 July 2015 at 12:08 pm UTC
[edit] If the game turns out *good*, I can easily predict people buying several dozen copies, then dying a million times so the game is pulled from the store, and then selling these copies with 200%+ profit. So I hope the game turns out really bad and nobody cares about it.
Last edited by pb on 17 July 2015 at 12:08 pm UTC
3 Likes, Who?
This sounds like a publicity stunt to create a buying frenzy. Only time will tell if said publicity stunt will be successful. I, for one, ain't biting.
4 Likes, Who?
That does sound interesting to me.
Imagine the endgame is not one endgame,
repeatable, beatable if you take enough time,
but the endgame.
You either save the world - or you don't.
Imagine the endgame is not one endgame,
repeatable, beatable if you take enough time,
but the endgame.
You either save the world - or you don't.
0 Likes
Odd concept.. will be interesting to see how it plays out. Seems like a terrible idea to me. Why would you build in a mechanism to limit sales? What happens when it is a sleeper hit and they end up missing out on millions of sales? It will get cracked and released to the wild so people will still play it they will just not get paid for it. Seems kind of gimmicky to me.. but I'm interested to keep an eye on it just to see how it goes.
0 Likes
This is brilliant!!!
The geniuses designers of this game have created a sociological experiment to demonstrate how stupid the human race is. Do not be mistaken about them, they are dressed up scientists.
I am looking forward to the sequels of this game. I hope we will see a game that can not be played at all, or maybe a game that doubles it's price after every purchase. I am really excited.
Where can I preorder it?
The geniuses designers of this game have created a sociological experiment to demonstrate how stupid the human race is. Do not be mistaken about them, they are dressed up scientists.
I am looking forward to the sequels of this game. I hope we will see a game that can not be played at all, or maybe a game that doubles it's price after every purchase. I am really excited.
Where can I preorder it?
2 Likes, Who?
Side note: I don't like implicitly being called stupid for finding a new concept intersting.
Other side note: I'm going to cinema today, which will entertain me for less than two hours(!). And I cannot carry it home and play it back for a lifetime. How stupid is that!?!
Last edited by Eike on 17 July 2015 at 1:56 pm UTC
Other side note: I'm going to cinema today, which will entertain me for less than two hours(!). And I cannot carry it home and play it back for a lifetime. How stupid is that!?!
Last edited by Eike on 17 July 2015 at 1:56 pm UTC
1 Likes, Who?
I hope we will see a game that can not be played at allActually, there have been a number of games that have released in this state, though likely not through a conscious design decision.
1 Likes, Who?
For starters, they don't have to waste any money on supporting the game after it's finished.Instead, the people who bought this will have wasted money. As someone invested in several FLOSS projects to make old games playable on modern systems and in a portable manner, I really don't like this.
Except the people who buy this know exactly what they're getting into, and the experience of playing a game with a definite shutoff is what they're playing it for. Nobody's getting ripped off here, the devs are absolutely up front about what the game is about and the players who like that concept are the ones who will buy in.
Just like I really don't like that idea of that one band (Wu-Tang Clan, IIRC) only selling a single copy of an album, withholding it from anybody else. Even though I really don't care about their music.
There are some interesting questions raised by this comment about feeling entitled to access to a creative product. "Withholding" is an interestingly entitled word in this context, don't you think?
Last edited by Nezchan on 17 July 2015 at 2:25 pm UTC
0 Likes
There are some interesting questions raised by this comment about feeling entitled to access to a creative product.That's...kinda my point, yeah.
I do think I'm entitled access to this creative product. And not just me, not just this creative product. I think everyone is entitled access to every creative product. For the good of the people.
0 Likes
Well it's their product, their hard work, and they can do with it as they see fit. They are clearly telling people how it will work, and it will be stated everywhere, even in-game.
I don't see an issue, I think it's an interesting experiment.
I don't see an issue, I think it's an interesting experiment.
0 Likes
Interesting artist concept, but kinda shitty from a player perspective (planned obsolescence gone wild) and from an art preservation perspective (I don't want games, or any artistic work, to vanish just like that).
That was my initial reaction as well, but thinking about it I'm not sure that really applies. There is already art that is more of an event, a temporary installation or event. Like if you go to the theatre, you'll never have that exact same experience again, but the play still exists. And it's not like the developers have to delete the source code when they are done. They can probably even reset the population counter and make this a recurring event. Though that big surprise finale will of course not be the same if people know what's coming.
I definitely think it's an interesting idea, and I'm curious to see how it works out and how they handle this after the game has finished.
0 Likes
Like if you go to the theatre, you'll never have that exact same experience again, but the play still exists.
Hmm, yes, plays or concerts without recordings also rub me the wrong way.
It's just...I feel that these things are all part of our cultures, and not having them available is...wrong. It takes away from our collective knowledge, our collective experience. I want it all available eternally, for everyone. To experience, to critique, to analyze. Also in context of related works and in historical context later.
That's where I'm coming from, if that makes sense. I don't necessarily care that I personally don't get to experience them, it's not that I absolutely want to play this game, listen to that Wu-Tang Clan record, watch all the plays and read all the books. I don't like the idea of it vanishing from the public record. It leaves the world poorer for it.
0 Likes
Hmm, yes, plays or concerts without recordings also rub me the wrong way.
It's just...I feel that these things are all part of our cultures, and not having them available is...wrong. It takes away from our collective knowledge, our collective experience. I want it all available eternally, for everyone. To experience, to critique, to analyze. Also in context of related works and in historical context later.
A recording is never the same experience as being there, though. That's why people still go to the opera, rather than just waiting for the DVD. And Flock players can record their gameplay; of course, that's also not the same as playing yourself, but that's the same for all art/entertainment that involves audience participation. For me, it really depends on what the devs do afterwards: if they lock away the code for good and the game is never playable again in any way, I'm inclined to agree with you to some extent. The experience and historical impact (if any) can still be documented through gameplay recordings and social media archiving. But the game itself will be lost. But if they make it accessible in some way at some point, I don't see a problem.
And, unfortunately, the game becoming inaccessible is really not more of a problem than any other games that you can only get by pirating anymore, where the source code was lost or it's not clear who holds what license, or the license holder just sits on it. So it's not unique to this game, it just potentially happens a lot faster in this case. It's a general problem for gaming as a whole. And I agree that that is a problem that needs more attention. But it shouldn't keep devs from trying new ideas and innovating.
0 Likes
In the history of bad ideas, this one is in the upper half, and likely near the top of a games-only version of the list.
I understand "Limited Edition" appeal in attracting people, but this is completely the wrong way to do it. I was gonna say the same thing as DrMcCoy: They will troll the hell out of it! Heck, it might even be a 10-year old that just accidentally keeps dying, and may or may not understand the way it works.
The devs' point is that in a multiplayer game there should be a very short, abrupt, and absolutely permanent end with as few players as possible, and that causes fewer and fewer players to play ; vs what multiplayer games are now, which is hundreds and hundreds of players slowly decreasing over years, even decades.
If you want people to anticipate anything, you don't permanently end it, you keep changing it. You do something interesting or spectacular, or even constantly new.
I knew game devs were making worse and worse games in recent years, for the most part, but now it seems to have become a competition of "How Stupid Can You Get!?" We've got a real winner here...
I understand "Limited Edition" appeal in attracting people, but this is completely the wrong way to do it. I was gonna say the same thing as DrMcCoy: They will troll the hell out of it! Heck, it might even be a 10-year old that just accidentally keeps dying, and may or may not understand the way it works.
The devs' point is that in a multiplayer game there should be a very short, abrupt, and absolutely permanent end with as few players as possible, and that causes fewer and fewer players to play ; vs what multiplayer games are now, which is hundreds and hundreds of players slowly decreasing over years, even decades.
If you want people to anticipate anything, you don't permanently end it, you keep changing it. You do something interesting or spectacular, or even constantly new.
I knew game devs were making worse and worse games in recent years, for the most part, but now it seems to have become a competition of "How Stupid Can You Get!?" We've got a real winner here...
0 Likes
thelimeydragon Jul 17, 2015
I have mixed opinions on this.. I've always been very pro-software/hardware preservation and admire the work teams like MESS/MAME do to aid preservation. It always saddens some deep OCD side of me when old servers of old games go offline.. servers such as Dreamcast games... these experiences/games become no longer playable.
It is however an interesting concept.. does remind me of that urban legend about some old game that deleted itself once it had been beaten.
From a business perspective it's the "buy it now! before it's too late!" trick... as you wont be able to wait for the price to go lower... not sure what happens tho if someone buys the game and there's only 1,000 lives left.. by the time they download and get to the title screen there will probably be only 700 left.. I suppose that's another reason for buying early, so that you get to experience it all.
I do wonder if any hacked servers will be made to make lives unlimited..
Last edited by thelimeydragon on 17 July 2015 at 10:23 pm UTC
It is however an interesting concept.. does remind me of that urban legend about some old game that deleted itself once it had been beaten.
From a business perspective it's the "buy it now! before it's too late!" trick... as you wont be able to wait for the price to go lower... not sure what happens tho if someone buys the game and there's only 1,000 lives left.. by the time they download and get to the title screen there will probably be only 700 left.. I suppose that's another reason for buying early, so that you get to experience it all.
I do wonder if any hacked servers will be made to make lives unlimited..
Last edited by thelimeydragon on 17 July 2015 at 10:23 pm UTC
0 Likes
Patreon
PayPal
See more from me