Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!




Last Active
  • Griefers costing me rl money ?

    My understanding is that after being killed once you can't lose anymore spirit for 2.5 hours. So you cannot get camped.

    The direct counter to griefing is if he did kill you 'many' times he would lose exponentially more play time when he gets killed/imprisoned. So while everyone will lose a little play time due to getting killed in general, a griefer will lose a lot more. This balances the practical reality that he is imposing on your playstyle.

    You also have to take into account the OPC feature, which means a griefer can never log off. He can't enter a settlement and is vulnerable 24 hours a day. Unlike in other mmos where a griefer can log in/off when it is to his advantage.
  • Alright, Caspian, let's dance

    The person I responded to stated that he doubted Caspien ever made such statements so I provided them.  Don't ask questions to which you don't want answers.

    No, I said he most likely made the post in response to a small malicious minority, whose comments you conveniently choose to ignore. Clearly you think context is overrated.
  • Alright, Caspian, let's dance

    I have no idea whether the game WILL in fact realise anywhere near what they promise but the basis for most of the harassment on this forum is pretty thin.

    Taking much longer to recruit than anticipated has nothing to do with their competency to produce a game. This seems a trivial concern and goes a long way to account for most of the delay.

    As for the dealing with the community, I think the point here is that the responsibility has taken more time than they anticipated rather than Caspian being resentful of it. What probably has cost the most time is the deliberate spread of misinformation. Take this harping about a 'rude post', I suspect that it was directly aimed at people that bombard forums with misinformation and deliberately over dramatized issues. He probably shouldn't have posted that but it isn't proof of anything other than he got annoyed by what are essentially trolls.
  • Alright, Caspian, let's dance

    Don't you just love it when feature creep is so real that the core of the game isn't even getting attention / its base features added anymore.

    I really do not think these guys can pull it off. It shows by adding little things like this instead of focusing 100% on the features and core they already have. Instead they are just jumping all over the place adding little easy things to make it look like stuff is getting done.

    Word of advice is to focus on the core features you already have and get that in before adding even more fluff to that long list you already have. Otherwise this game feels like a Greed Monger 3.0 happening all over.
    This is pretty much the reason why traditionally MMOs have publishers to keep devs on track. Without someone to tell them "No, you have a deadline to focus on instead of getting sidetracked" they are all over the place. :P
    This is really true. Sometimes publishers get a bad rap for just making the hard, but necessary choices.
  • CoE selling Legendary items for straight cash also unretiring Duke and Count packages

    Video games are experiences that take us outside the confines of reality.  Nobody (or almost nobody) wants to experience class stratification in a friggin' video game just cause they have to watch the rich ride their yachts in real life.

    There is always class stratification. Just because they are called "nobles" does make it any different. In any game there is a upper tier of players or guilds that have more status than others. And even in this game there will be players with social influence and status who will not be noble.

    I really don't get this obsession with nobility. Players farm, trade, fight in all sorts of games. There is no reason why suddenly in this game it will be a problem. It is about whether the game mechanics of farming is enjoyable. The titles, social class etc is the RPG aspect of the game.

    Nobles are simply group leaders with some built-in RPG for players to use. It is a major drawback of many sandbox games vs single player games that a dev supplied social design doesn't exist to give the world a lived-in feel. The whole purpose of nobility, kingdoms etc is to provide that.
  • Alright, Caspian, let's dance

    MadFrenchie said:

    These developers are choosing to forego or supplement those funding attempts by approaching a segment they are well aware they can mislead unlike traditional investors. 

    This is pure hyperbole regarding the developers intentions AGAIN! Have an issue with Kickstarter sure but don't start badmouthing people with baseless accusations like that.

    Besides you cannot compare investors who are looking to make a profit vs a gamer who is making a donation who is not looking to make a profit. Their risk profiles are completely different and a gamer will donate in situations that an investor would not invest. Not to mention the size of the investment vs average donation.

    The vast majority of Kickstarter backers are willing to lose that money for the hope they simply get a product that the mainstream developers are not willing to produce. This is what it boils down to. Should there be a better infrastructure where backers own shares? That is worth looking into but not as a replacement for Kickstarter.

  • Alright, Caspian, let's dance

    No you are saying their intentions are dishonest. You have nothing to base that on.
    No, I've actually said here (I think) and other places (I know) that in some cases it may not be a malicious dishonesty, but an unrealistic outlook.  However, as @Iselin mentioned above me, that's the reason there are traditional investors.  Those folks, generally, are much better equipped to spot the malicious dishonesty as well as the unrealistic dreamer.  Consumers don't have the expertise, the experience, nor the resources to evaluate the project on the same level.  And developers know that.
    As I have already said an investor is looking to make a profit, not simply whether the project is technically feasible. The return has to justify the risk. The investor will also look at a range of investments and pick the best ones. Even if they thought this project could turn a tidy profit they might be opting for other investments that return the same profit but at lower risk. I don't think you understand how financial decisions are made.

    The gamer is not basing his decision on an analysis of risk vs return, or at least their tolerance for risk is very high. You are comparing two different motivations/paradigms/goals and thus completely nonsensical.

    The gamer is knowingly donating a comparatively small amount of money for the chance to get what large publishers are not making. If he doesn't donate he get nothing. If he donates he might get something. It is that simple. For many it is worth it. If there are a minority of backers with unrealistic expectations the problem lies with them, not with the developer using the platform provided to them by others.

    Should there be a more structured 'investment' type of crowdfunding platform where gamers can get an actual profit... sure no harm in that but it is not up to developers to create this. They use the avenues available to them and right now it is Kickstarter. It is ridiculous to complain that they are using it.