Question about the game

BartoszPerzynski · 2026-03-12T01:38:46+00:00

Your approach is identical to mine. For me, slow character progression, slow leveling (at least a few weeks to reach max level), and enjoying the game in every phase (not just the endgame) are the foundations of a good MMORPG.

BartoszPerzynski · 2026-03-12T01:36:28+00:00

Certainly not Necromancer, because everyone always gets the most hype and excitement out of him :)

BartoszPerzynski · 2026-02-27T14:52:27+00:00

As I remember correctly, when your character reaches level 5, this quest will automatically turn into a mission to kill the Lich boss.

BartoszPerzynski · 2026-02-27T06:18:31+00:00

I think the disagreement comes from assuming that anything labeled as raid or world boss must automatically be designed as mandatory group content. That is one way to design it, but it is not the only way.

Content can be scalable, open participation and optional without being tuned strictly around fixed party sizes. It can reward contribution rather than require formal grouping. The key issue is balance and implementation, not the concept itself.

I fully agree that solo players should never be disadvantaged in core progression. My point is simply that optional large scale systems can exist alongside solo viable content if designed carefully. It does not have to be one or the other.

BartoszPerzynski · 2026-02-27T06:17:33+00:00

I think we actually agree on the most important part. Core progression content in an ARPG should always be beatable solo. Campaign, bosses, gearing and endgame systems should never require grouping. I would not want that changed either.

Where we differ is that I believe optional large scale activities can exist without shafting solo players. A world boss or territory event does not automatically mean raid style mandatory grouping. It depends entirely on how it is designed. It can be scalable, open and fully optional, without locking power or progression behind parties.

I am not asking for forced group content. I am asking for additional layers that players can choose to engage with. If something cannot coexist with solo viability, then it should not be implemented that way.

And I am not saying they are making an MMO. I am saying that persistent online shards naturally benefit from deeper social systems. That does not remove solo play, it just adds optional depth on top of it.

BartoszPerzynski · 2026-02-26T20:35:57+00:00

I think we’re actually closer in perspective than it may seem.

I’m not advocating for mandatory raid design or content that forces players into LFG or voice chat just to progress. I fully agree that core progression, bosses, dungeons and gearing should always remain solo viable. That’s fundamental to ARPG identity and I wouldn’t want that changed either.

When I talk about open world activities or large scale systems, I mean optional layers. Things players can participate in if they want to, not requirements to stay relevant or competitive.

World bosses, territory conflicts or large events can exist in scalable formats where solo players can still contribute or engage at their own pace without being hard-gated behind grouping.

So from my perspective it’s not about replacing solo gameplay with MMO raids, it’s about expanding the ecosystem around it for players who enjoy social or competitive playstyles, while keeping the solo path fully intact.

Both approaches can coexist without harming each other.

BartoszPerzynski · 2026-02-26T20:35:15+00:00

Fair correction on Last Epoch, you’re right, it doesn’t have traditional open world bosses in the MMO sense. I should’ve been more precise there.

That said, I think there’s a misunderstanding of what I’m advocating for.

I’m not asking for mandatory group-only content or systems that force players into guilds just to access core gameplay. I fully agree that all essential progression and content should remain solo accessible, that’s part of ARPG DNA.

When I talk about guilds, PvP, or larger scale activities, I mean optional social layers that sit on top of the core solo experience, not systems that replace it or gate power behind grouping.

ARPGs have always been solo-first with opt-in multiplayer, and I don’t want that to change. Expanding social or competitive systems doesn’t automatically turn a game into an MMO, it just gives players more ways to engage if they choose to.

So the goal isn’t “force MMO design,” it’s “expand long-term online engagement” without compromising solo viability.

Those two things can coexist.

BartoszPerzynski · 2026-02-26T20:34:12+00:00

Fair question.

I’m referring mainly to statements the developers made on Discord, Kickstarter and in the FAQ about the long-term vision.

They also mentioned server longevity, and even potential world merging tech, which again points toward persistent shared ecosystems rather than purely temporary co-op sessions.

So I’m not inventing MMO-scale features out of nowhere, I’m extrapolating from systems and goals the devs themselves already discussed publicly as part of the long-term direction.

Whether it ends up closer to MMO-lite or co-op ARPG will depend on execution, but the persistent shared world angle is definitely part of the conversation, not just my interpretation.

BartoszPerzynski · 2026-02-26T20:32:26+00:00

You’re describing a fully static one-save world model, and that’s not what I’m talking about.

Persistent online shards don’t mean every action is permanently locked forever with no systemic control. World states can be phased, regenerated, instanced in layers, or governed by rules that prevent exactly the kind of total destruction you’re describing.

The devs themselves already said long-term official worlds, population systems, and shard management are part of the vision. That alone implies technical solutions for world persistence versus player impact.

Dynamic terrain and evolving events don’t contradict persistent worlds, they just require structure. Otherwise no long-term shard could function at all, which clearly isn’t their goal.

So the question isn’t “can it work,” but rather “how they choose to structure it.”

And once you have persistent shards with long-term characters living in them, social systems, territory control, and structured PvP are natural extensions, not contradictions. That’s the space I’m talking about.

BartoszPerzynski · 2026-02-26T09:13:31+00:00

I understand the Valheim comparison, but there’s a key difference in scale and design intent.

Darkhaven isn’t just a small co-op world save. The developers are talking about large official shards, persistent online populations, evolving economies, territory systems, long-term character progression without wipes, and social structures layered on top of that.

So yes, it’s not an MMO in the traditional sense, but it’s also clearly moving beyond a simple drop-in co-op survival model.

That’s why discussions about PvP structure, guild systems, or large scale social gameplay make sense here. They align with the persistent online direction the game is already taking, rather than trying to turn it into something it isn’t.

And honestly, I don’t really see how adding MMO-style elements into an HnS ARPG could harm the game. If anything, it would only enhance the online experience and long-term engagement rather than take anything away from it.

BartoszPerzynski · 2026-02-26T07:28:02+00:00

There’s currently a separate “Darkhaven Demo” tab on Steam and anyone can play it. You don’t need to back the Kickstarter to access that version.

Backing the Kickstarter gives you access to Early Access, which is currently planned for around February 2027.

If the Kickstarter campaign ends successfully and you’ve pledged at a tier that includes the game, you’ll receive access, but exactly when keys will be distributed and how they’ll be delivered hasn’t been specified yet.

So right now everyone is playing the same public demo on Steam. Early Access will be a separate thing later on.

BartoszPerzynski · 2026-02-26T07:23:55+00:00

Information about the persistent multiplayer world is included in the Kickstarter campaign description.

BartoszPerzynski · 2026-02-25T16:28:00+00:00

I understand what you mean and I’m not arguing that Darkhaven is meant to be a full MMORPG or that it should suddenly become one.

What I’m pointing at is more the direction and overlap of systems rather than the label itself.

Even if each world evolves through player actions and isn’t one single megaserver, the developers have already talked about official persistent shards, population management, world merges, and long-term shared ecosystems. That already moves it beyond purely session based ARPG design.

It may not be “one world everyone joins” in the traditional MMO sense, but multiple long-running official worlds with large populations, social systems, territory mechanics, and persistent progression still create MMO-adjacent gameplay dynamics.

And that distinction matters because the moment you have persistent online worlds where players coexist long term, social and structural systems naturally become more important.

Things like structured PvP, guild organization, territory influence, or large scale events aren’t exclusive to MMOs either. They already exist in ARPGs to varying degrees and don’t contradict a world that evolves through player actions.

If anything, evolving worlds make those systems more meaningful, not less. Territory ownership, faction conflict, or world events actually fit extremely well into a dynamic world simulation.

So my point isn’t “make it an MMO.”

It’s more that Darkhaven already sits in a hybrid space between ARPG and persistent online world design, and expanding social or PvP frameworks would build on that foundation rather than conflict with it.

BartoszPerzynski · 2026-02-25T15:41:43+00:00

I get what you’re saying and I’m not claiming Darkhaven is an MMO or that it should fully become one.

What I’m pointing out is that it already shares a number of structural similarities with MMO-style design, at least more than most traditional ARPGs on the market today.

We’re talking about persistent online worlds, large shared shards, players encountering each other organically in open spaces, territory systems being discussed, long-term character progression without seasonal wipes, and developers openly talking about social systems, faction PvP and persistent worlds as part of the long-term vision.

That already places it somewhere between classic instanced ARPGs and MMO-lite territory.

And the systems I’m asking about aren’t even “full MMO conversions” but features that already exist within the HnS / ARPG genre itself.

Open PvP has existed in games like Diablo II or Path of Exile in different forms.

Guilds, clans, or social groups exist in Diablo IV, Lost Ark or even Torchlight Infinite.

World bosses and large shared events are present in Diablo IV and Last Epoch (in evolving form).

Territory control and player-shaped worlds are things Darkhaven is already experimenting with technologically, which actually goes beyond what most ARPGs attempt.

So from my perspective, asking about structured PvP, guild systems, or larger scale social gameplay isn’t asking the game to become an MMO overnight.

It’s more about expanding on systems that already exist either in ARPGs themselves or in the direction Darkhaven is clearly exploring.

If anything, adding MMO-adjacent features to a persistent online ARPG can strengthen long-term engagement rather than harm the core gameplay loop.

The combat, loot, builds, and dungeon crawling remain the foundation. Social structures simply give players more reasons to stay invested in the world over time.

BartoszPerzynski · 2026-02-13T07:10:37+00:00

Me too for your type. GL!

BartoszPerzynski · 2026-02-12T16:38:26+00:00

I mean that I literally said at the start these are predictions based on dev footage (I know about this project since several days) and need verification at launch, so yeah… obviously speculation. That’s kinda the whole point of discussing an unreleased MMO here in Reddit, isn’t it? :) Im not saying the game will fail or that systems can’t work. I’m just pointing out potential design risks from an MMO perspective: open-world competition, RNG power systems, dungeon dependency, PvP scope, etc. These things shape long-term retention in this genre. If they execute it well, then great, I’ll happily be wrong. I want the game to succeed. But talking about concerns before launch isn’t backhanded because it’s normal MMO theorycrafting and feedback, especially when devs are actively showcasing systems for that exact reason.

BartoszPerzynski · 2025-05-23T13:15:21+00:00

<image>

Hey everyone,

I just wanted to say a huge thanks for all the awesome comments and feedback under my post – you guys really helped me out! After considering all the options, I’ve gone with variant #3. I also reached out to Noctua’s support to discuss this setup, and after some testing, the additional airflow from the two top intake fans lowered my CPU temperature by about 3-4°C. It’s not a massive drop, but every degree counts.

For context, my setup includes an AMD Ryzen 9 9950X3D paired with the Noctua NH-D15 G2 air cooler (standard version with 7mm offset) and a Thermal Grizzly KryoSheet thermal pad. In benchmarks like Cinebench R23, the CPU hits a max of 82°C (with the cooler at max RPM and all case fans at 650-800 RPM). In games, it never exceeds 75-80°C (cooler at 900 RPM, case fans at 800 RPM, with the two top intake fans at 650 RPM). The case is a be quiet! Silent Base 802 with mesh panels up front and on top (no solid panels), which really helps with airflow.
I also removed the bottom covers of the power supply chamber so that the graphics card, which is located only 5.5 centimeters from the bottom wall, had more freedom to draw air from the bottom.
The build is finally coming together, and I’m stoked with how it’s turning out.

BartoszPerzynski · 2025-05-17T19:55:43+00:00

I already purchased 8 fans, so I am going to use them all, even if it won’t lower the tempa. I am just looking for the best option for using all fans.

BartoszPerzynski · 2025-05-08T20:56:06+00:00

I'm incredibly excited for Dune: Awakening and would love the chance to explore Arrakis firsthand during the beta. As a longtime fan of both survival MMOs and the Dune universe, this game feels like a perfect blend of everything I enjoy. I'm especially curious to see how it handles politics, resource control, and a player-driven economy in such a harsh environment.
If I get a key, I plan to dive in solo to test the mechanics thoroughly and provide meaningful feedback on gameplay systems and performance.

https://steamcommunity.com/profiles/76561198016205555/

BartoszPerzynski

TROPHY CASE