CCP "Evolving The Scope" Of Project Nova, Will Retire Name
Eve Online-inspired spin-offs have never fared all that well. Dust 514, at least, managed to launch, though it only lasted three years. Its PC companion game, Project Legion, never saw the light of day. In its wake, CCP Games announced Project Nova, meant to be a more tightly contained first-person shooter set in the Eve universe. Based on one senior employee's comparison of the two games, I said that Project Nova looked like it had "a much higher chance of success."
Well, maybe I was wrong. When we last heard about the game, in November 2018, its alpha test was being delayed. Now, the name has been retired, but the game ... sort of lives on, though in a different form and from CCP's London studio.
MassivelyOP sat in on the Pearl Abyss investor's call last week, where it was announced that Project Nova had been shelved indefinitely, though word from the official Discord channel is a little more positive. In that forum, Game Director Snorri Árnason (CCP Rattati) updated fans on the status of the project, or rather its successor:
Remember that Árnason said that Dust 514 "failed to contain scope" but now CCP is "evolving the scope" of the Project Nova successor game. Someday, he'll find that balance, we hope.
Related Articles
About the Author
Jason Winter is a veteran gaming journalist, he brings a wide range of experience to MMOBomb, including two years with Beckett Media where he served as the editor of the leading gaming magazine Massive Online Gamer. He has also written professionally for several gaming websites.
More Stories by Jason WinterRead Next
Legends of Aria's next major update is only two days away.
You May Enjoy
They aren't giving up on early access development, but this can't be good in the long-term for the title.
Loving the character models of these two new ghosts.
He states that the second version of a game rarely does as well as the first.
Imagine that...Call of Duty sold a bunch of copies and will likely lead to an increase in Game Pass subscriptions.
Discussion (1)