Register
Events
Popular
More
Post #41
It was absolutely necessary.
The forums were becoming flooded with idiots demanding Rust become more of a DayZ clone, which Rust began life as and has been fighting to get away from ever since.
It was attracting completely the wrong playerbase and sending the wrong message, because zombies were never meant to even be in the game by the time it hit Steam. There was genuinely a problem of people buying Rust under false assumptions, and even though those assumptions were their fault, the presence of zombies was causing them.
So, no. I will not agree.
-
-
I don't love the red animals, but I don't hate them either.
-
They aren't much of a threat though. That's my biggest concern. Once you get any indirect weapon they become obsolete (think i spelled it right lol?) very quickly. They need a major buff in speed plus a nerf in how long you can sprint instead of being infinite stamina. i'm sure the weight system will help with that too.
-
We shouldn't be hoping for improvements to be made to silly-loot-drop-placeholder #2... we should be hoping for the appearance of challenging-logical-more-than-loot-drop-placeholder #1. The best thing about mutant animals was that they required close to zero development cycles: some red paint, some stat buffing and some loot table modification and you're done. Putting effort into a placeholder ruins the fact that it's just a placeholder.
-
http://steamcharts.com/ rust really isn't dying, it is 15th in terms of people playing it at this moment, at the time of posting
-
I'm glad they got rid of zombies; I don't care if rad animals are just a placeholder. In fact, they take more ammo to kill. You can't just rock them to death with ease at the beginning of the game either because they take more damage and you can't headshot them, so you at least have to use your bow to kill them or jump on a foundation.
That, and quite a few people are getting sick of zombies as the enemy for EVERY game. It's worn out; they can still be fun, but it's nice to not fight them in every, single game.
-
No i understand what you mean, but that place holder might be there for a very long time so it doesn't hurt to "test" what if x was faster, what if player x was slower etc.
-
I enjoyed my 300 hours I put into the game back in December/January, I've tried to revisit, but quickly lose interest and go back to waiting for something fairly impressive to make it into the game. And also get the people I played with back and playing with me again.
People complained about getting shot randomly even 6months ago, and 6months from now there will still be somebody complaining about it. I never saw a need for it, I always found it boring to shoot naked people. On the other hand some of the best fun I've had in the game is being naked with a handful of pistols and a couple of people and going up against full kevlar group bigger than us. Relatively easy when you have people that work together, and the rage from people that decided to try and piss on you first is always fun.
I don't agree. In my mind the games never been about the animals/zombies/aliens/whatevertheyaddnext, its about the interaction between players and groups of players. You can make friends in the game, it may take a while to find someone who wont shoot first. Hell you may even shoot them and end up working together at some point. If I wanted to shoot ai all day long I'd go play L4D, if I wanted to pound rocks I'd go play minecraft. Rust offers what most other games wont. I also found DayZ to be far worse than rust for dying to players, because I'd spawn in and somebody would be on the map with a sniper rifle, at least with rust I can usually find a server that was wiped recently, or even for the most part get far enough to start killing people with guns.
That said I haven't even bothered to try and kill a red animal yet, tend to lose interest too quickly at this point.
-
But that's the thing. Most games I can think of most of the AI isn't dangerous. Once you have a weapon that isn't melee the threat is instantly gone. It just turns into dealing with other players. I would like to see npc's that offer more on the table. I understand the current ones are just placeholders and thats just fine, but not having an element that might change your idea of attacking anther player because npc x is nearby, will make the game that much more enjoyable.
-
Guess rust should go back to zombies that hone in on your gunshots. :P
I've always found any of the ai in the game so far too stupid to be a bother. Pickaxes are (were?) zombie killing machines... and cheaper than bullets.
The problem is the benefit of killing NPC's diminishes quickly, if there were npc's nearby that could pose a problem I could see you deciding not to shoot a player (you may hatchet instead). I just think it needs to go in a direction that doesn't have you avoiding all fights with other players because AI swarms you and fucks you over completely. *shrug*
-
As long as hostile npc's don't pose any threat from range or from within your base and are always in the same area there will never be any threat from any kind of npc and they will never be more then a nuisance.
I'm all for the games main threat being other players but that doesn't mean that npc shouldn't pose any threat at all.
Right now the rad animals are there just to get blueprints and annoy you when you don't need them by them chasing you for a while (wolfs) but they are certainly an easy kill aswell.
-
It was fun walking around Big Rad Town in the dark with a shotgun and a flash light hearing footsteps and zombie moans. Rust is a better game than DayZ, and it was a better game with zombies.
-
Plus they were pretty nice for practicing some archery.
What's better than walking/running targets in the distance? You could practice to shoot human shaped targets, not just big bears and wolves, painted red, slowly strolling around. There was also some kind of variety (normal zombie, fast zombie, strong zombie) and a better atmosphere.
They just gave the game some more "something", in my humble opinion.
-
Here's a candy for all of you docile fanboys! The fact anyone can say at this time that there is nothing wrong with a company stockpiling 30M$ and providing 0 update in an early access game for what, 4 months now, is appalling. Either you guys have stocks in the company you want to cash in later on or you've simply been stripped off of your judgement. Alpha or not, when you sell a product, you gotta deliver.
IMO, most people have passed the state of frustration with this game and have now moved on. The new experimental build better be epic if they want people to return after Garry and his (way too small/slow) crew turned their back on them for so long.
-
It's pretty obvious they're using the money to make a console version of the game, the experimental version even feels like a console game
-
Dying? LOL!
This game is such a bare bones structure and is already immensely popular!
The users who have exhausted Rust in its current state are simply playing other things.
Everyone will come back down the track when Rust is updated.
-
What
I don't get all the people raging about "no update dese guise r fuckig criminals loll u fanboys"
-
(russian accent) Oh noes that garry guy scam all of us for game. we should cry and moan on forums about how rich he is. (end of accent.)
It's arguable about the re-coding of the game. There's no excuse for that. Most people who bring up that kind of fault get fired from a company. I'v been in similar situation at electronic arts when a recode was brought up.. not a meeting i will ever forget. I know that feeling all too well.
I'll take with a grain of salt, and just wait patiently for the new re-coded game. it looks promising, and worth waiting for. Of course while I wait I can play the other games I own. I can always come back a few months later, and see whats up.
-
EA also took good games, and made them shitty. (i.e. battlefield) Just to try and compete with CoD.
There is an excuse for recoding. Yes I'm of the mind that when you do something, do it once, no need to go back to it. But if you slap something together its unavoidable. Ever written a report in which you trash a large majority of it? I've had projects in which we really thought one thing would work, and wound up having to go back to it. Granted I'm not speaking from working on anything to do with video games. But I can still understand it, even if it does seem like a waste of time.
-
Still pretty popular on our server. 20-30 people is a good game balance. We found over 50 it was just a gankfest.
-
Yeah the currently map is too small for 50-100 players. 30-50 players is pushing it. The small size of the map and players getting bored are the 2 main reasons the game has turned into a deathmatch arena.
Lets hope the procedural maps are 2-3 times as big as the alpha map is now or it'll be the same thing all over again.
I also think the devs need to focus on A vision they have for the game instead of having none at all. It would solve a lot of problems when the players know what the game is actually about compared to this direction-less game we have now.
-
REALLY do you follow nothing they are rewriting the whole freaking game
-
So, I'm playing this awesome game called Rust. It doesn't seem like you've ever played it before - You really should download it.
It's annoying to see noobs complaining about death - This is rust, not minecraft. I'd have loved to see you play rust when there was only the official servers w/ all the dupe bugs... Not only did the servers wipe near-to-daily, but just about every second person was running around killing naked with M4s.
(I should note that back then, creating an M4 was only 200 metal fragments, the same price as a metal door)
-
For the game to be considered dying, it has to have been "alive" at some point, which would imply it was released as a final product. The Friday DevBlogs show that the game has been completely revamped from the ground up, so clearly that is not the case.
They could have patched the current iteration of the game, yes - or, they could have ripped off the bandaid and started from a much more solid foundation. Which they did, and it will be a better game for it.
-
It's interesting to note from chat in-game just how many people DON'T realise that they're playing an alpha game and that the final product is being developed elsewhere (the new experimental branch).
Many people I've met expect the improvements to be made to the version they're playing.
I think there are going to be a lot of disappointed faces around when the penny drops and they realise that the 5x5x50 base and 500 C4 they've been cultivating are going the way of the Dodo into extinction ;)
Not sure what this says about the longevity of the game and its player base, but I'm sure it's something profound.
-
It says that the reason Early Access will fail is not the lack of quality control on the store, but because Steam users seem incapable of grasping that the development process is actually a thing and games don't spring out of the vaginas of development studios fully formed and debugged out of nothing.
Reading actually is too hard for this subforum, most of the time.
-
True. It's easy to berate people who don't read the information presented to them.
But a LOT of people don't read the information presented to them. Hence so many people's expectations and frustrations of Rust are out of proportion.
You can get angry with these people. But that doesn't mean they're not out there and growing in numbers... a bit like zombies ;)
-
Who the fuck is Uberhaxornova and Summit1g and why do I give a shit if they play or not?
-
I was wondering the same thing... I've never heard of these two people.
-
my 11 year old son says Uberhaxornova is a "famous" youtuber
-
This is like comparing building a skyscraper to furnishing it. Frostbite 3 was developed to be used in BF4 therefore the time and number of people to do so would obviously be more. However Rust is being developed with Unity an already functional engine and they are using several 3rd party tools. As seen with the networking fiasco that occurred a few months ago with the D Dos attacks and having to wait for the parties involved to fix the issue. As well as the GUI. Therefore the development process should be a lot quicker as well as require a lot less people. Not to mention there is no story to Rust no advertising group. That alone reduces the number of people needed to work on the game.
The fact of the matter is the initial design phase for rust was not well though out. Things were not discussed prior or put down in any sort of cohesive design document in detail. It seems to me it was a more fly by pants and do stuff that was interesting at the time. Such as removing the zombies and then just coloring the current wildlife red. This fly by pants mentality is what has led to the current rebuilding of the whole core of the game. If they had figured out what they needed ahead of time they wouldn't have to have gone back and pretty much refactor the whole codebase in order to add what they would like to later.
This is also further seen during the latest update of Rust where they are showing a Rocket Launcher. Ive read where they say they are getting "rid of the modern military weapons and going with something more rustic." However here we are being shown a Rocket launcher. Not to mention the helicopter that was developed but never released. This is all "eye candy" just stuff to get people talking and to get people excited.
Honestly Rust in its current state is not an alpha but rather a prototype and a experiment on pvp gameplay. We are the investors and we were shown the prototype and bought into it. So why not offer it for free apparently Garry doesn't need the money...
"To me this isn't a big deal because I'm rich as fuck—so I'm more likely to just buy the latest model instead of trying to get 10fps extra in BF4 by upgrading the graphics card." -http://www.pcgamer.com/2014/05/05/show-us-your-rig-rust-creator-garry-newman/?ns_campaign=article-feed&ns_mchannel=ref&ns_source=steam&ns_linkname=0 &ns_fee=0
-
No, stop calling yourself an "investor" in Rust.
Also, prototyping is incredibly important. I don't think it's fair to criticize the devs for prototyping. Rust wasn't supposed to get nearly this popular this early. Game development looks a lot different when you're this early in the development cycle, and a lot of people have trouble recognizing this.
-
seeems pretty famous to me with like 2 milion subscribers or something, not sure why youtubers not playing some game is a problem tho
-
Haven't you heard? If a famous youtuber stops playing your game, it'll wither and die and you'll go bankrupt.
Fortunately, garry is smarter than the average Rust player.
-
I'm not quite sure you understand how the development process works. A prototype is created in order to entice investors and or show a general game-play idea or mechanic. Which is what Rust was. Therefore yes I was an investor. If the game was in an alpha state then there would not have needed such an overhaul on the game core in the first place. It is easy to say "Oh we didn't think it would be so popular". That is such a ludicrous statement. The purpose of developing a product is because you want people to buy it. If they really wanted to limit the number of purchases then they could of easily done so. However it was not done. In fact even when the game couldn't even be played for a week due to ddos; the game was still up for sale.
My criticism is not that its a prototype its that it appears to have just been put on the market. Everyone says clearly it states its in alpha state and changes will be made upon purchase. However this is a blanket statement that can encompass many things.
Do not get me wrong I got more then my 20 bucks out of this game as I have over 1100 hours on Rust be it a prototype or not. However to ignore how mishandled the game has been is a different matter. Then to read a statement of Garry saying hes "rich as fuck" is very disconcerting. Its just not good business practice.
-
Oh, but it was, before the game was available on Steam, before you registered here. And it didn't work well at all; the forum was being flooded with demand that outpaced key supply by like 30x and that's only a slight exaggeration.
No, you're not an investor. You have no equity in this venture. You preordered the game, that's all you did. Don't delude yourself otherwise.
-
You aren't an investor. You bought a licence to play the game. That's all. Valve for instance can void your licence at any time for any reason. So you keep on thinking you are an investor every time you buy a game lol. Silly kid.
-
Investors expect a financial return for their investment. You just bought a video game that wasn't finished.
Two very different things, one of them just happens to make people feel much more entitled than they should.
-
So you prove my point. Putting the game up for sell and saying don't buy it was total rubbish. You are missing the point of the post in its entirety. I at no point assumed I would have monetary gain. However I did purchase for $20 a "license" for an unfinished game therefore making an investment in order to support the game. If I invest my time in studying then my gain is better grades. This does not mean monetary gain has to be mutually exclusive and the only motive.
In any case you guys missed the whole point of the post. The handling of the development was done poorly and could have been better. Which is my only complaint. You can be fan boys all you want but facts are facts. Picking out small parts of my post to try to undermine me doesn't accomplish much. I did however learn something new from this so I will at least take something away from it.
In the end its my opinion that I have invested in this game so it really doesn't matter what you have to say.
-
We've heard this all before. You certainly aren't the first person to have this thought.
You can whine about it all you want, it doesn't change the fact that you're butthurt because you bought a game that was unfinished even though you were thoroughly warned beforehand.
If you enjoy the game then quit bitching and just wait for the experimental branch to get finished, just like the rest of us.
If you don't enjoy it then why keep talking about it?
I don't understand what all of your infinite wisdom has to do with anything at this point. Hindsight is always 20/20 but people still won't read the "Early Access" warning before clicking the buy button.
Agree x 6
Winner x 1
Disagree x 1
Dumb x 6
Optimistic x 1
Funny x 1
Informative x 1
Artistic x 1