It's not like nodes are new, they're just new to to us (nerd alert)

The way I see the node system is roughly encapsulated in this paper: https://arxiv.org/abs/1301.2281

What I'd LIKE to see is math models like the one linked being used to make games that are player driven, not mechanic driven, story driven, law driven, culture driven, or actual behavioral emergence boxes in which explication is part of the mechanic (i.e., only explicit contract is enforceable).

All it requires is as much attention to the behavioral economics of social exchange and a means to report/measure a given territory's economic and crime stats. Maybe some community tools for law enforcement that are open democracy driven.

Imagine a game where you were more motivated to solve problems than to fight over them. But when you did fall into conflict requiring war, you choose "Just" war or "Total" war it actually MATTERS if you're killing non-combatants because they're bound to contract not to fight as much as you are to defend them. And there are COSTS for all of them.

You know, the tools by which any society manages long-term civilization, and of course, all the Machiavellian appearance play around plausible deniability. Heh.

Long game hopes in a short-cycle (and often short-sighted) market, me.

Find more posts tagged with

Comments

Wandering Mist

ekadzati wrote: »

Undead Canuck wrote: »

Yo, idiot. Please do not put words to my name . I did not say what you quoted. Please assign the correct quote to the correct person.

You all sound so much alike that a posting error doesn't really make much difference. (shrug)

But sure, treat a typo like an intention.... par for a forum course, itn't?

As for the rest - let's just say it's real hard to find things you're avoiding, folks.

Acts with a superiority complex, claiming everyone else is stupid and then resorts to the finest of all school-boy traditions:

"You disagree with my opinion so you must be an idiot, la la la la..."

unknown

This content has been removed.

Caeryl

ekadzati wrote: »

Wandering Mist wrote: »

ekadzati wrote: »

Undead Canuck wrote: »

Yo, idiot. Please do not put words to my name . I did not say what you quoted. Please assign the correct quote to the correct person.

You all sound so much alike that a posting error doesn't really make much difference. (shrug)

But sure, treat a typo like an intention.... par for a forum course, itn't?

As for the rest - let's just say it's real hard to find things you're avoiding, folks.

Acts with a superiority complex, claiming everyone else is stupid and then resorts to the finest of all school-boy traditions:

"You disagree with my opinion so you must be an idiot, la la la la..."

Correction: Your projections are your problem. I don't have to be superior, just unconcerned.

Your self-inflated ego is obnoxious and I’m not sure if you have the social awareness to understand this, but people don’t like you. And it’s not because they’re “too stupid” or “trying not to understand” like you try to insist; it’s because you’re a know-it-all who actually knows very little at best as seen by posting articles that have little to no relevance to the points you assert, or is intentionally trolling people. I‘ll assume you’re doing it intentionally, but mostly since I would like to think no one could inherently have such a grating personality.

The short translation: People are gonna hate you in-game if you don’t learn to reign in your insults and annoying “tech speak” where it’s clearly not needed, wanted, or contextually relevant to the discussion.

unknown

This content has been removed.

Caeryl

ekadzati wrote: »

Caeryl wrote: »

Your self-inflated ego is obnoxious and I’m not sure if you have the social awareness to understand this, but people don’t like you. And it’s not because they’re “too stupid” or “trying not to understand” like you try to insist; it’s because you’re a know-it-all who actually knows very little at best as seen by posting articles that have little to no relevance to the points you assert, or is intentionally trolling people. I‘ll assume you’re doing it intentionally, but mostly since I would like to think no one could inherently have such a grating personality.

The short translation: People are gonna hate you in-game if you don’t learn to reign in your insults and annoying “tech speak” where it’s clearly not needed, wanted, or contextually relevant to the discussion.

I do love how you try to speak for everyone, particularly for Intrepid.

You seem to be missing my point - "unconcerned" means I don't care.

You are thinking to "threaten" me by telling me that if I don't act like you and the other little white knights want, you're gonna to "hate me"... oh B-O-O H-O-O!!

What you're actually doing is showcasing precisely the "toxicity" for which this particular niche is known.

Given that each of your reactions are to your own misconstruction, your own bias, or your own ignorance, or simply your own inability to just let differing opinions be, I'm not sure why you think that's anyone's issue (but your own) to resolve.

The idea that you think your judgment and toxicity matters is cute. I hope you're getting what you need out of it; I mean, you're working really hard for it.

The only one who came out swinging with judgement and toxicity is you. I don’t need to cite unrelated academic papers like some in order to see how people don’t enjoy your presence is a discussion, namely due to extreme amounts of condescension and abrasiveness paired with a complete lack of willingness to expand on your stance in a coherent way. Also, it may do you some good to actually make a brief google search so you understand what a white knight is.

I’ll be blocking you so don’t expect any more entertainment of your ”high society, low relevancy” ramblings, they haven’t provided any decent points yet. I’ll let noanni sufffer that special hell if they choose to.

unknown

This content has been removed.

Noaani

ekadzati wrote: »

Probably for the best given your inability to stay in context

You realize you've not actually been in context on any thread you've posted in, other than those you start, right?

I mean, your idea of entering a thread seems to be to disregard everything that has been said before, make a completely out of context statement, and then turn the thread in to a discussion on that.

I've not seen you reply to a single post in a thread that was posted before you posted in that same thread - which clearly shows a complete lack of consideration for other points of view.

That said, your most recent post on the combat tracker thread will have a response from me in a few hours - it's long enough that I want a proper keyboard.

unknown

This content has been removed.

Noaani

ekadzati wrote: »

Since it's clear no one is going to manage their own misunderstandings, I'll be heading on out of this thread.

But, to summarize for those who let the poo-flingers distract them:
- node design is not new in tech, in many other industries, nor, frankly, in gaming.
- the paper demonstrating that node design is and can be used for all kinds of things (hence the idea of modular, unique player paths through a game).
- nodes aren't new. they're only new if you're out of date.

Ya'll have fun now, y'hear?

We know that nodes aren't new. In fact, nodes as a general sense have been around since the 70's in computer science - that I know of.

We played BDO. It has nodes. Path of Exile uses a node system for it's skill tree, as do many other games.

It isn't the fact that this game is using the word "node" that is exciting - as that doesn't mean anything. It is what those nodes actually do - or what players can do with them - that is exciting.

When players talking about Ashes talk about "nodes", it isn't just the fact that it is a node that they are talking about - it is the fact that it is a game with a city that players can build and destroy and rebuild and make decisions about and vote on leadership.

That is what is exciting - not the word "node".

afar

I agree with ekadzati

There are games like travian or EVE online which are mainly interesting because they give players tools and free will to do whatever they want

They are realistic because you can lose everything there. In travian, some people spend 3k dollars per month and can lose everything if they are stupid or have bad luck

If you have more to lose in game (time, money and dedication for example), there are more emotions, calculation and good decisions

If someone in travian is annoying me, i can just remove him from game. Of course if he has influence, or big army himself, he can defend

It allows weak players with good diplomacy skills lead, same as midgets can be feared leaders of mafia. Even though weak physically, even try to do something against them and you are dead or worse

If one player is stupid enough to be warmongering, he won't mess up things for a long time. If you give people power to remove those they don't like, things begin to get interesting

If there are no consequences, and players can ruin game for everyone by let's say spawn killing, or doing bad decisions, that is good way to make a game a dead one

If better thing is to talk dragon out of attacking a city, so be it. If it's better to split than steal, let's do it. If peace is better than war, that's amazing. If you need mindless entertainment, go watch game of thrones or something

Wong

Okay.. So, OP.. Why do you play computer games?

Atama

ekadzati wrote: »

Since it's clear no one is going to manage their own misunderstandings, I'll be heading on out of this thread.

When you can't get a single person to side with you, that's as clear an indicator as there can be that you are flat-out wrong.

Ya'll have fun now, y'hear?

I'm sure we will. Whatever digital tripe you're insisting on sure doesn't sound like it though.

Up next for @ekadzati: heading over to a FPS game discussion board to push for a stronger gun control message.

afar

FPSs stand for 'first person shooters' so it's a game about shooting.
No one is going to push for gun control in shooter games, same as no one is going to lobby for removal of cars in car racers

MMORPGs stand for 'massve multiplayer online role playing games'. RPGs can be won without fighting, sometimes like in real life pushing for fight can make you lose, or get a bad ending. And, well, realistic role playing game is realistic. You don't pick up a fight with everyone, if you want to do so, go play league or counter strike. Or even wow, with stupid quests like 'go kill 10 dogs', doing things just for the sake of it.
Wow is pointless in general, we should go more in EVE tracks (eve is far from perfect tho).
Let's say in knights of the old republic you could kill 2 characters or make them join you. My friend was really surprised you don't have to fight with them.
And MMOs can have no fight involved at all

I really hope intrepid won't cater to degenerate desires of some smug murricans, only thinking about violence and guns. Don't waste good ideas trying to please brainlets

Ventharien

afar wrote: »

FPSs stand for 'first person shooters' so it's a game about shooting.
No one is going to push for gun control in shooter games, same as no one is going to lobby for removal of cars in car racers

MMORPGs stand for 'massve multiplayer online role playing games'. RPGs can be won without fighting, sometimes like in real life pushing for fight can make you lose, or get a bad ending. And, well, realistic role playing game is realistic. You don't pick up a fight with everyone, if you want to do so, go play league or counter strike. Or even wow, with stupid quests like 'go kill 10 dogs', doing things just for the sake of it.
Wow is pointless in general, we should go more in EVE tracks (eve is far from perfect tho).
Let's say in knights of the old republic you could kill 2 characters or make them join you. My friend was really surprised you don't have to fight with them.
And MMOs can have no fight involved at all

I really hope intrepid won't cater to degenerate desires of some smug murricans, only thinking about violence and guns. Don't waste good ideas trying to please brainlets

You are bringing up an idea of player agency, where a player is given a choice to play out situations how they please, and making the leap that less combat would be better in MMO. You bring up a single player example of being able to choose a non confrontational dialogue choice, in a game where the remaining 98 percent is forced combat. Especially in the multiplayer content. Conflict breeds good story. If there is no chance of combat, there is no conflict, and if combat has solid you lose situations, that's bad design.

unknown

This content has been removed.

afar

@Ventharien good points. There are many ways to resolve conflict, violence isn't the only. I personally hate everything fake, including fake conflicts.
There should be a way to allow players to punish others for bad decisions, but also a way to resolve conflict without fighting/losing resources.
We can't have meaningless conflicts, fake artificial conflict without a point or meaningless fights.
Let's say some people are really annoying me with all shit they say. Or I annoy you because you disagree with me. We have true conflict right now, one side can prove they rights. By civil discussion, or, if one side will not listen, by war. There are other reasons for it too, like betrayal lets say. One player did a very bad decision of betraying the other, and now they can either resolve it peacefully, or, if it's a situation without hope, they can punish traitor by going to war with him. That war should have consequences for both sides. Also smaller scale, like if player has not perfect reputation he can be hunted or sth. It needs to be balanced, but if someone talks shit and will get hit, and will lose his time/money/dedication invested, he might rethink his stances on things. Things like "okay so now fight because i said so" is one way to make a game a dead one. Fake drama is also terrible, unless you can punish those talking shit, then that's good. If you really can hurt them

They can learn not to do it next time. We don't need dopamine junkies with their constant nonsense conflict, instead of making new ways of drama let's educate people how to deal with problems in life - if this game will be realistic 'kingdom simulator', experience gained from this game can be actually used in real life, this time is not wasted

Ventharien

Very true, when the conflict has a meaning, it is that much more impactful from a narrative standpoint, and i think people just receive it better as well. But it is hard to balance that around the idea of a game. In the end, this isn't an educational game (though some people could possibly learn things), but one for entertainment. I'm all for giving players as many avenues as possible to play out how they want their character to be, but in the end, the world of Verra, as we have had it described to us; is one of mystery, danger, and magic. It is a hostile world, and combat will be at the center of us bringing civilization back to it.

Plateau

BlackBrony

Can't wait for an node invading other nodes to save them and free them!

And omgosh, you guys are boring. I mean, it takes real skill to make something fun boring, I'm surprised.

Noaani

ekadzati wrote: »

The best part about facts is even a group of dissenters do not change them.

I'm glad to see that your takeaway from this thread is that no matter how much you dissent, you can't change facts.

Here I was thinking that was something you would never learn - you proved me wrong there.

Child Item