Hello, I am Dererif, lead developer of 'Project ER'. I have spent about 12 years in software technology and consulting, and I am currently dedicating my sabbatical to developing 'Project ER', the Elancia replay project. While I have experience in adjacent domains like server optimization consulting, this is my first time leading a project within the gaming industry.

I first encountered Elancia around 2003 on the recommendation of a childhood friend. I started casually, just following them around, but ended up enjoying it far longer than expected. From 2003 to 2008, I piloted several merchant characters on the Shube and Sasra servers, pushing them into the top 10 rankings. I have particularly fond memories of crafting items to sell and using the hairdressing skill to style other players' hair in exchange for tips.

Between 2014 and 2017, I pushed a merchant character on the L server into the single-digit rankings, and a warrior on the Tess server into the top 50. I explored various roles in the adventurer class—spirit mages, bards, wilderness experts—but the merchant class remained my true attachment. Being a merchant was inherently about connection; crafting, trading, and hairdressing required me to talk to others and exchange help. It was a different kind of joy than just boosting stats, and that remains the greatest charm of Elancia as I remember it.

It is difficult to pinpoint a single moment of inception. Since I was young, I often pondered the structural design of Elancia—'Why, unlike other NEXON MMORPGs, can't warriors party up?' or 'Why was the merchant's crafting manual never completed?' The freedom of having combat, cooking, hairdressing, tailoring, and fishing grow independently was charming, but that very structure often left systems feeling disconnected.

I had been brainstorming improvements since the mid-2010s and began a rigorous analysis of the original elements a few years ago. When the 'NEXON Replay' project was announced, it provided the perfect catalyst to turn my personal research into a tangible project.

My application focused less on proving I could restore the game, and more on demonstrating how I would address the structural flaws I had identified. I didn't want to just recreate the past; I wanted to propose a game that could evolve indefinitely. My portfolio included a sustainable development framework regardless of organizational size. I submitted it through the official channel in January of this year, and after several rounds of Q&A and documentation updates, here we are.

When I was selected and received the official data, my first thought was 'Stay focused.' I have had such deep personal affection for the 'what if' scenarios of Elancia since childhood that the realization I could actually work on it was overwhelming. I was so excited that I feared making a mistake, so I cut off contact with everyone for a few days to process my emotions and organize my thoughts.

The first task was to cross-reference my technical hypotheses with the actual structure of the original. Fortunately, my core theories held up well, though some parts differed from my expectations. It took time to bridge the gaps. While I expected the initial phase to take a week or two, finalizing the image asset data structure took about two and a half months, delaying the start of actual content development until mid-May.

The primary cause of the delay was underestimating the scope. I had designed a pipeline based on various dev logs, but I overlooked the fact that this project was on an MMORPG scale. Since I am using a custom engine based on Monogame for optimization, standard industry pipelines for Unity or Unreal didn't apply. I had to build a proprietary ERP to manage all assets. The real bottleneck was the 'art asset production pipeline'; the internal structure didn't match my projections, necessitating multiple redesigns of the entire binary structure.

The provided materials included not just implemented content, but also scrapped elements and broken narrative threads. They were fascinating pieces that any Elancia fan would be curious about. While I cannot disclose specific details or volume, the data was invaluable for re-understanding the original and charting our future direction.

The development phase was not a single point in time, but a span of about a year. From late 2024 to mid-2025, I analyzed the design intent behind every system. I discovered that the sheer volume of image assets required for equipment like weapons and clothing was an immense hurdle.

I became fascinated by 'pixel art production' and independently researched AI image generation, leveraging my previous experience with object detection (YOLO). Ironically, this research—meant to cut asset production costs—ended up improving the 'Project ER' production pipeline significantly.

Actual development truly started in December 2025. After the NEXON Replay project was announced, I quickly pivoted my analysis into a shippable form. I rebuilt the entire structure, knowing that Proof of Concept (PoC) and commercial games have vastly different stability and maintenance requirements. Fortunately, I had been conceptualizing the server architecture for a long time. The initial server PoC took 3-4 weeks, the client took 2 weeks, and the total time for the proposal and prototype was 6 weeks.

The core development team currently consists of three people. One team member is an infrastructure engineer who handles critical decisions like server defense and load balancing. Another is a lawyer who, while not an official employee, provides significant legal and administrative support. Because we have different linguistic and cultural backgrounds, deciding on localization strategies has been quite organic. We are in ongoing discussions with others via Discord, but additional recruitment is expected after Q1 of next year.

Surprisingly, the hardest part was not the technical implementation. Technical hurdles can almost always be solved. The real challenge is 'fun'. Deciding how to translate the specific joy of Elancia into a modern play experience is difficult because it is subjective and lacks a clear answer. That is why I frequently seek feedback from the team and those around me.

Technically, we follow standard software development practices: planning, PRD writing, issue tracking, code writing, and rigorous testing. The only real difference is that AI handles much of the coding. We operate a feedback loop where we use headless clients for server attacks to run massive scenario tests after every unit of work, opening new issues based on detected bugs.

For art, we built a dedicated production pipeline. We can generate dozens of button icons in a minute, or several types of multi-frame armor in a day, all derived from the same technology.

The project was initially labeled a 'remaster'. What does that imply in terms of scope? Will you just polish graphics and UI, or are you adding new elements?

'Remaster' was a temporary term used to explain the project's nature early on. In my portfolio, I used terms like 'remaster, reboot, and redux'. 'Remaster' just seemed to stick in the community.

It is hard to strictly define 'Project ER' with those labels. We are inheriting much of the original while actively recreating what needs to change. 'Replay', the term used by NEXON, feels most appropriate. The official release name has not been decided yet.

We will maintain the original's graphical style. UI will be redesigned for modern aspect ratios and high-resolution displays, though we are considering keeping some legacy HUD elements because fans often find modern UI clunky. Audio will balance legacy sounds with enhanced new compositions; we are leaning toward a toggle mode, though it is not finalized.

Systems and balance will feel familiar to veterans, but the play tempo and system connectivity may shift. I want to avoid 'bad historical accuracy'—keeping unnecessary friction or entry barriers just because they existed in the past. We are not tethering ourselves to a specific version from the 2000s. We are examining what to keep from the entire history of Elancia and building new systems on top. It is neither a carbon copy nor a game that just borrows the name.

I categorize unfinished elements into two groups. The first are those with 'concrete traces' left in official data, NPC dialogue, or game files. These have clear intent and are high priority.

The second group consists of elements that aren't explicitly mentioned but become 'naturally necessary' when following existing systems. For example, if a merchant's crafting ability ends at a certain point, it should naturally bridge into a new growth stage. I want to go beyond just restoring what was recorded; I want to touch on areas that would have naturally evolved had Elancia continued to grow.

For maps, many areas in the original look disconnected when laid out. We will bridge these gaps while aiming to keep 90-95% of the original map structure. We will only alter structures if necessary for new content.

For jobs, we will keep most names. However, some jobs like the adventurer, which currently bundles everything from fishing to underground exploration, might be split into 'gatherers' and 'explorers' (or miners). Combat classes will mostly retain their original names.

Skills will likely expand significantly, and we plan to add many quests. Our priority is fixing the broken progression flow rather than just increasing the count. 'Abilities' and 'spells' will be unified under a new 'Skill' tab.

World-building will be told through scattered clues in items, NPCs, and quests rather than long exposition. We will sort through the discarded settings found in official archives and expand upon them naturally.

The sixth village, which many are curious about, will not be in the initial release. We have designed the structure to allow for expansion into it later, but we will focus on filling the gaps in the original scope first.

Yes, we intend to use almost all of the original assets. They are crucial to the atmosphere players remember. New content will require new assets, but the extent of that is still to be determined.

I believe 2D pixel art has a timeless quality. Realistic graphics age as technology advances, but well-styled pixel art often retains its charm for decades.

I don't think of Elancia's graphics as 'preserved because they are old.' They possess an atmosphere that is impossible to replace. The style is an identity we must protect, though we will modernize shadows, animations, and screen effects that were limited by technical constraints at the time.

Not all automation is created equal. For example, having to click a button every 10 seconds to fry 100 eggs is just inconvenient, not 'fun'. I see no issue with changing that to a continuous production system.

Auto-battle, however, is a different story. It impacts combat, growth, game economy, and player interaction. I cannot make a definitive statement yet; we are currently building the foundation to analyze how these features affect the economy. We will establish behavior-based metrics and refine our policy based on community feedback and actual content density during the test phase.

Movement speed isn't just about making characters faster. In a 2D MMORPG, positioning is a core part of combat balance. If everyone is fast, the strategic weight of movement abilities vanishes.

Elancia is also about incidental encounters. The walk to the blacksmith is where you might see a hairdresser and ask for a style. If we make everything instant, those organic relationships disappear.

Instead of just increasing base speed, we are looking at other ways to mitigate long-distance travel, such as integrating quest-based 'waypoint portals'—making the travel itself part of the world content.

In the original, while there were many weapons, they lacked meaningful functional differences, making character growth boil down to just stacking stats for the most efficient 'growth route'. I agree that this needs improvement. In 'Project ER', we will keep the freedom to switch jobs and the ability-based growth, but we will differentiate the playstyle for each weapon and job.

We are planning to increase active skills for combat classes so that changing jobs changes your role, not just your appearance. We are also testing an 'ability point' system.

Even with the same weapon, points could be allocated to increase attack speed, base damage, or critical hits. This allows players to choose between stability, speed, or high-risk burst damage. These points are not a new level system but an instrument for personalizing familiar abilities.

We are simulating various growth combinations, and while current figures are placeholders, the goal is to balance freedom with specialization.

Yes, PvP will be included. Well-designed PvP adds tension and competitive fun. However, we will not allow the one-sided harassment found in the early version. All competition will be based on agreed-upon rules.

We are looking at structured content like guild wars or siege warfare where the rules are clear and the stakes are defined.

Nearly 30 years have passed since Elancia was announced. The original player base has aged, and the lack of new content meant the torch wasn't passed to the next generation.

Returning fans are our most important audience, but we cannot sustain the project on them alone. We must reach out to younger players. We will trim away overly hardcore elements that alienate newcomers, but we will not dilute Elancia's unique identity to please everyone.

Our core target is the sandbox MMORPG player who loves freedom, diverse roles, and player-driven stories. If a feature is unique to the Elancia experience, we will keep it, even if it is a bit inconvenient.

The plan is a global, single-world server. We want players to meet in the same world regardless of language or region.

We have implemented a core base for real-time translation that displays both the original and translated text. We are currently refining how it looks on screen and how easily players can toggle it.

We are prioritizing Korean, Japanese, English, and Chinese. We are focusing on Steam first and have not yet confirmed other platforms.