@Azherae
Well I imagine "failure of the server" would be when every node fails and players can't reclaim one.
I can see how there'd be a "Last Hurrah" sort of thing.
@Dolyem
Why don't you just say the name of the game instead of alluding to it.
It matters quite a bit lmao.
your interpretation of why something failed is up for question
I was watching that exact video when you posted it.
I'm hearing a lot of different criticism to do with it being Very Buggy, Unfinished, PvP focus not playing out I guess [not sure the exact nature of this critique], and suffering whatever various issues.
Perhaps lacking in Gameplay too, based on the look of the game.
It had the Elden Ring tree before Elden Ring on its Steam Page that's kinda suspicious From Soft. . .
Anyway; your contention doesn't have much to back it up when the game failed for many other legitimate reasons than being "hardcore".
Just sayin'
It matters quite a bit lmao.
your interpretation of why something failed is up for question
I was watching that exact video when you posted it.
I'm hearing a lot of different criticism to do with it being Very Buggy, Unfinished, PvP focus not playing out I guess [not sure the exact nature of this critique], and suffering whatever various issues.
Perhaps lacking in Gameplay too, based on the look of the game.
It had the Elden Ring tree before Elden Ring on its Steam Page that's kinda suspicious From Soft. . .
Anyway; your contention doesn't have much to back it up when the game failed for many other legitimate reason than being "hardcore".
I mean, I actually played it. It required a massive amount of time, constant crafting so explorers could go to further regions on the maps for better materials and to improve crafting to stay ahead of other factions. Every couple of days you had to fight of progressively more difficult waves of NPCs while at the same time dealing with opposing factions coming in to destroy your main faction base. There was plenty of imbalances and problems with the game, but even with everyone accepting those and having a tight knit community the game still imploded into drama and rage quitting due to massive failures during the war phases where a bunch of work put into improving the base over 100s of hours gets destroyed.
Hmm yeah. Having hundreds of hours thrown away is pretty bad lol. That's not well designed.
If you put in 60 hours and get some good gear, make an impact on the world, meet and cooperate with players, overcome some stuff, establish Industries; that sounds better tbh.
World Progression should be the focus not Character Progression.
The hostile PvE I suggested would be a less rage filled focus compared to PvP anyway.
Servers that "Win" can have players move onto "Losing" servers to contribute, Friendly Fire some idiots trying to Grief, lead some followers, and eventually win or otherwise make an impact before deciding they're not worth the effort after 30 hours.
EDIT: A more "Alive" game is way better than this Rend design; Having people try and organize stuff
on the daily so that "4 PM tomorrow most people are on and we can Raid XYZ and open up some territory. Make sure you're there for that."
and Hourly "Miners can't Mine, place got raided by high level Stone Elementals and we need to take it back. This happened 20 minutes ago we still need like 1 more to get it done. Right now the Miners are scavenging around in the Northwest but they're decent enough in combat to be useful when taking the Mine back. Oh shit there's ZuggZugg ez pz."
Listen to a Writing Pro:
WRITING isn't about SHARING WHAT'S IN YOUR HEAD.
It has a PURPOSE or NO ONE WANTS TO READ IT.
If you don't like the Purpose (Game Design) then Say so and Elaborate. This is a place of Discussion.
Said Harvard Writing Pro thought every fucking UNDERGRAD and most GRADS wrote LIKE SHIT.
But of course yall have many reasons you don't want to read it and have yet to actually come out with it from some fear of confrontation.
So fuck off with the English Teacher crap.
I wasn't going to say anything more about the horrid state of the OP - until I saw this attempt at justifying it.
The video in question is in relation to academic writing (or, academics and writing).
In the academic world, there is a strict (as in, STRICT) format that is acceptable - just as there is in the legal world.
In the academic world, if your spacing is out, you are told to resubmit. In the legal world, if your line spacing is out, it is basically an invalid document (not quite literally, but you are told to resubmit it).
These aren't nit-picking or OCD or anything like that. Both spheres have set standard document formatting in order to make things easier for the reader.
If you actually listen to the video you linked, that is essentially what they are saying. They are saying that too many academics (faculty, in this case) write in order to organize their thoughts, and expect the reader to follow along. What the video is essentially about is to not do that, but rather to focus on the experience of the reader when writing something.
Keep in mind, that video is for academics. As such, even those that are being complained about are still functioning within the STRICT bounds of formatting for academic writing. The expectation of the presenter/lecturer in the linked video is that the listener understands basic formatting, and has understood it for at least 4 years.
The formatting in the OP of this thread is an abomination. There is no defense of it. Hand in an essay using a similar format and see how well that goes for you. I honestly wouldn't be surprised if you were just given an instant fail for the paper as a whole.
If you look at this thread, actual discussion on your ideas didn't even start until someone had essentially translated what it was you were trying to say. Even then, the discussion wasn't about your ideas at all, it was about the translation of your ideas by someone else.
Think about that for a second, the way you wrote the OP of this thread was so bad, it actually REQUIRED translating to be understood.
How can you guys complain so much about anything that breaks monotony.
I've listened to the video multiple times. STOP trying to justify every little thing about your preferences. I don't care about how good you feel that the subject matter has to do with Academics; the most monotonous shit, thus making you feel your dogshit opinion is safe.
I imagine a Node "taken over" by NPCs would leave most buildings and resource intact. So when retaken it wouldn't be a complete wipe. It could vary a bit of course.
So REND's issues are overall a lot more specific to that game and I wouldn't want to copy it.
Comments
Well I imagine "failure of the server" would be when every node fails and players can't reclaim one.
I can see how there'd be a "Last Hurrah" sort of thing.
@Dolyem
Why don't you just say the name of the game instead of alluding to it.
@Liniker
lol. no I'm not
your interpretation of why something failed is up for question
I was watching that exact video when you posted it.
I'm hearing a lot of different criticism to do with it being Very Buggy, Unfinished, PvP focus not playing out I guess [not sure the exact nature of this critique], and suffering whatever various issues.
Perhaps lacking in Gameplay too, based on the look of the game.
It had the Elden Ring tree before Elden Ring on its Steam Page that's kinda suspicious From Soft. . .
Anyway; your contention doesn't have much to back it up when the game failed for many other legitimate reasons than being "hardcore".
Just sayin'
I mean, I actually played it. It required a massive amount of time, constant crafting so explorers could go to further regions on the maps for better materials and to improve crafting to stay ahead of other factions. Every couple of days you had to fight of progressively more difficult waves of NPCs while at the same time dealing with opposing factions coming in to destroy your main faction base. There was plenty of imbalances and problems with the game, but even with everyone accepting those and having a tight knit community the game still imploded into drama and rage quitting due to massive failures during the war phases where a bunch of work put into improving the base over 100s of hours gets destroyed.
If you put in 60 hours and get some good gear, make an impact on the world, meet and cooperate with players, overcome some stuff, establish Industries; that sounds better tbh.
World Progression should be the focus not Character Progression.
The hostile PvE I suggested would be a less rage filled focus compared to PvP anyway.
Servers that "Win" can have players move onto "Losing" servers to contribute, Friendly Fire some idiots trying to Grief, lead some followers, and eventually win or otherwise make an impact before deciding they're not worth the effort after 30 hours.
EDIT: A more "Alive" game is way better than this Rend design; Having people try and organize stuff
on the daily so that "4 PM tomorrow most people are on and we can Raid XYZ and open up some territory. Make sure you're there for that."
and Hourly "Miners can't Mine, place got raided by high level Stone Elementals and we need to take it back. This happened 20 minutes ago we still need like 1 more to get it done. Right now the Miners are scavenging around in the Northwest but they're decent enough in combat to be useful when taking the Mine back. Oh shit there's ZuggZugg ez pz."
I wasn't going to say anything more about the horrid state of the OP - until I saw this attempt at justifying it.
The video in question is in relation to academic writing (or, academics and writing).
In the academic world, there is a strict (as in, STRICT) format that is acceptable - just as there is in the legal world.
In the academic world, if your spacing is out, you are told to resubmit. In the legal world, if your line spacing is out, it is basically an invalid document (not quite literally, but you are told to resubmit it).
These aren't nit-picking or OCD or anything like that. Both spheres have set standard document formatting in order to make things easier for the reader.
If you actually listen to the video you linked, that is essentially what they are saying. They are saying that too many academics (faculty, in this case) write in order to organize their thoughts, and expect the reader to follow along. What the video is essentially about is to not do that, but rather to focus on the experience of the reader when writing something.
Keep in mind, that video is for academics. As such, even those that are being complained about are still functioning within the STRICT bounds of formatting for academic writing. The expectation of the presenter/lecturer in the linked video is that the listener understands basic formatting, and has understood it for at least 4 years.
The formatting in the OP of this thread is an abomination. There is no defense of it. Hand in an essay using a similar format and see how well that goes for you. I honestly wouldn't be surprised if you were just given an instant fail for the paper as a whole.
If you look at this thread, actual discussion on your ideas didn't even start until someone had essentially translated what it was you were trying to say. Even then, the discussion wasn't about your ideas at all, it was about the translation of your ideas by someone else.
Think about that for a second, the way you wrote the OP of this thread was so bad, it actually REQUIRED translating to be understood.
I've listened to the video multiple times. STOP trying to justify every little thing about your preferences. I don't care about how good you feel that the subject matter has to do with Academics; the most monotonous shit, thus making you feel your dogshit opinion is safe.
Stop replying.
I mean, you may as well whack someone in the face with a 2 by 4 and say they shouldn't complain, because you were just breaking the monotony.
After looking at the OP, my eyes do indeed feel like they have been hit with a 2 by 4.
So REND's issues are overall a lot more specific to that game and I wouldn't want to copy it.
Crowfall might be decently successful in a year lol. Then become a good MMO in 4 years.
This game might be good. . .