Register
Events
Popular
More
Post #41
I came on here just a couple of weeks and started the same discussion as you. As I debated back and forth with people a couple of updates were made that seemed to make everything much more playable. Sure there's bugs, some balance issues, and tons of missing content, but you know what? I'm having fun again playing the game.
In many ways Legacy almost felt finished and all it needed was more stuff and places. I would've been happy if FP had done that. But after coming on these forums and following the development more closely and then playing the recent iteration of the game my faith has been restored. It's good now, and it's gonna be even better. I just hope my new friend doesn't kill me while I'm sleeping : /
-
-
Played 1000+ hours on old rust.... Best game ever played, and ym a old player!!!
The New rust lost feeling thriller athmosphere .... And maybe 80% players...
Old rust need ed only a good anti cheat .... A paar grafical up date ( guns, and player personalizations) and noth much more ....
Sorry y now mi englisch is REALY bad.... Only learned it on Internet, redingote forums..
:(
-
Déjà vu, this iteration of Rust doesn't feel like Rust.
People had a game they enjoyed it needed recoding and hack proofing, couple of new features and and some solid graphics, done Rust 1 released and fucking awesome.
There was a roadmap laid out with a winning formula, just copy and paste. Instead we sent on some radical ride, then people continuously post the early access pic with the disclaimer, to those who don't understand the drastic change in direction.
Here is another train of thought: You make an insanely addictive game and its in alpha, be very careful and don't fuck with it too much because you're game is already a success. Now it simply needs tweaking.
All this junk being added to the current game mechanics could have been saved for Rust 2. I honestly don't get the point of procedurally generated map(new experience of the same trees and rocks placed a little different?), would it not have been more productive to create a map editor, so if people wanted to change the map they had some tools to do it with?
Every week I have more questions than answers. the lack of professionalism when releasing patches just confuses me. I have another game called Prison Architect(also early access), every month they release a blog and they talk about the new features and things they added to the game, they even show you the new mechanics that are added, its clean it has a clear path, and you get a sense of progression, they play the game while they talk to you they explain exactly how the new things work(very open about what is happening).Rust is actually very cryptic and, random remember the blueprint debacle? we have havnt even seen a blueprint in the new experimental branch, yet it was spoken about as if it was coming soon, the weird bandage video, that looked like it took a lot of time(concept drawings mean diddly squat)?
Telling people to just play legacy then is also not an answer. When this was supposed to be the next step forward. You can't really fight in the new rust, those mechanics are broken, you will be running away from ppl and then just die. Building your house and you suddenly drop dead(you got shot no one knows from where), you dash from one point to another, but you're already dead you just don't know it(then it happens and you feel like someone is hacking). The netcode is just bad, for a game thats core mechanic is to play with a large group of people this took a nice backseat. There are so many factors at this stage, where things are not working properly, whole new building system added with some weird destruction mechanic that adds nothing new to the game, but we still lag and cannot fight one another properly.
The Problem with rust at this stage is the changes are massive, so if we waited a whole month to see changes the game would be morphing every month. The original build system was not shit, no one complained about it, or did they? im talking legacy.
This is why we have 20 different iterations of battlefield the core game is still the same, shit just gets added on top of it. You get to sell the same game over and over again, and make lots of money.
-
I like new rust way better than legacy. It's broken sure, but in time it's gonna be a vast improvement. What makes you think experimental isn't going to be like legacy? Just because the tools are currently different doesn't mean the core gameplay experience is going out the window.
Facepunch has done an awesome job at sharing their design process with devblogs, they keep up-to-date change logs on their twitter feed. They have a forum space and a bug report page, and garry has personally responded to more threads than any other studio head I've ever seen.
There is no problem with this stage, alpha is all about experimenting with different paths. If you don't like that DON'T SIGN UP FOR ALPHAS. Massive changes WILL happen, if you didn't think that was a possibility then I'm not sure what you think the design process is.
Finally, the legacy building wasn't horrible but it definitely needed improvements. Sitting there waiting for your prefab pieces to finish crafting was the single most sleep inducing feature in legacy. There were times when i wouldn't be able to leave my base because the 10 foundations i needed took 30 minutes to finish.
-
I have no complaints with FP. Garry replying to players is amazing, as is their openness. Honestly I have trust and faith in them - to a point. I do think that Rust 2.0 will eventually be a great game. But they need to be careful.
Some things they have now are very different, such as the generated maps. I do think they want to improve them a lot, but they are very far from making them as good as the one on legacy. Legacy has distinct areas divided up by the hills, and the rockiness was great. Rust 2.0's map is so far behind. This is a perfect example of one way experimental is much worse than legacy (the map). But I do think they realize the issues and want to fix them.
We will see what the final state of the game is. IMO it probably will be pretty good. I hope they figure out a way to not have the new version have much higher minimum requirements than legacy. There are some big performance issues right now and it is much more demanding of our computers. When I turn down the view distance the game looks pretty bad, whereas in legacy with all settings low it looks much better. The main problem is when you turn down settings in experimental everything in the distance disappears. I am looking forward to optimization and seeing if in fact you can play this on lower end PCs like you can legacy.
-
why do people complain about the quality of experimental when looking at it, its so much better. better building system, actual projectile physics for bullets instead of hitscan, and armor. the towns everyone wants will be there, they are still working on the landmark system as well as linking them with roads.
-
For a large number of players (not a majority, maybe, but a ton of players), experimental does not run well and we have to turn down the settings. When I turn them down to play, it looks worse than legacy in several ways. The map looks empty and the draw distance is low. So, maybe for only players with good gaming PCs does it really look better at this point. It is messed up that a lot of can't really play yet.
-
Welcome to alpha testing, don't buy early access if you're not prepared for it?
No, seriously, these problems will be solved in time and the finished game will be much better compared to its current state. If you weren't ready for it, you might have been better off waiting.
-
I would've killed for updates regarding the Legacy version.
Yes it sucked that we all bought into an alpha which was pretty damn good already and they decided to start all over again.
But there's a good reason they started over again. It will just take time. We all are waiting for updates and we're all hoping that gameplay in experimental will resemble legacy's gameplay for a big part.. But all we can do is wait. :)
-
Who are you talking to? who said I was not prepared?
Why does it bother you so much when someone points out problems with the current state of the game? There is no reason to tell people "don't buy early access" if they are talking about the state of the game. You are stuck in this mode of always replying "It's Alpha".
Saying that many people can't play now due to performance problems is reality. Sorry the truth bothers you so much you have to say "It's Alpha". We actually all know already that the game is Alpha.
-
Don't argue with Elix. He's the alpha male around here.
-
I hate experimental. I've tried it multiple times but for the reasons you say I hate it.
I hate not having a singular map that you could learn and build around and meet up with your friends easier along with the reasons the OP listed.
I hate that it's buggy as hell with stupid crap like the cupboard. I had no idea I needed this. I spent an entire day gathering, building an amazing base. I logged on and everything was gone structure wise due to me not building a cupboard. Someone took down all my foundations, walls, doors, ceilings etc and cleaning my loots out. Why is this feature on there? how effing stupid.
Died INSIDE my house to a spear going through the locked door. There's hacks and there's bugs. This I'm sure was a bug.
Hit markers? I thought I was missing this guy with my rifle until he died...The entire combat needs reverted back to legacy.
Speed of animals. Are you kidding me? I can spend 10 minutes just trying to catch a boar with my spear. Ridiculous. Then when I kill it finally the corpse rolls down the mountain and into the ocean.
Speaking of mountains and hills. It's impossible to walk up some hills and mountains even though you should be able to if this game was trying to be more real.
I think the game would have been better if you just upgraded the legacy version's visuals, maybe added a few new options. Just gave it a face lift.
-
What worries me the most is that the things that made Rust so much fun had absolutely nothing to do with textures, lighting, object models, map variation, or animation, yet all the development focus seems to be going on this.
Facepunch does not understand what made their own game good. They know what they were trying to build the time round, and they know that people loved what they built, but don't truly understand why. And without that understanding the second version is soulless. The magic isn't there.
The new maps suck? Let's fix that by making them prettier. Nvm that the real issue is that they lack the flow of a handcrafted map, too open with no choke points, no focal areas for different activities.
What was good about the old combat? The weapon and armor models were crap, the animations lolbad and weapon selection limited, but the controls were crisp, responsive, precise, rewarding tactical movement and aiming skills with instant death for your enemy. New system has imput lag, net lag and your best hopes are spamming the attack button in the enemies direction and praying the server will agree with you on where the other guy was and where your bullet went. No amount of pretty models and animations is going fix that. Gunplay has gone from CS:GO to Fallout: New Vegas with netlag.
The old building system looked ugly. But it worked. Like the gunplay, precise and immediate. Fast and functional enough to be used both attacking and defending, adding a layer of tactics to raids. Stairs into a base or walling raiders into your base because they only brought 2 C4 and forgot to cover their way in. I've had epic battles over building bases, fighting tooth and nail to drive off attackers, running out between attacks to gather materials, turning a 2x1 built around my shelter into a sprawling multi-towered 8 story 7x8 castle in the middle on Next Valley on a very active PvP server. Fighting over that base every step of the way, raiding, getting raided, even lost the base once but I took it back. 5 days of probably the most fun I've had in a game.
I can't even imagine trying to use the current building system under fire. Slow, clunky, complicated. And the balance is completely broken. Anything that can be broken into with basic tools available to all will be broken into. All we need is something that works like the old system, but with the new angled foundations and possibly an intermediate tier between wood and metal. A few new item types, some new meshes, maybe a little rebalancing or tweaking. But no, we have destructibility, cupboards and more locktypes.
-
Hopefully Garry and others at FP will read this and think about these things. I am sure they care about them.
Maybe they will try to restore balance and regain some of the magic of legacy. It was all the parts that worked together so well in legacy. They are in danger of not being able to put all these new parts together as well as they did in legacy. In any case, it will be months before they even get the basic game pieces working - but I don't want to complain about the time. It sucks to wait, but from what I see they are doing a good job.
-
I think the best points from alexconnor's post are that if anything can be broken into by anyone, it will be. There needs to be something to feel safer. Basically metal walls, and add c4 back in the game, and make it only available by airdrop (also perhaps make it one c4 per door/wall) or at the least very rare.
Also I think the netcode is probably the most important. One of the worst things about legacy was being killed by hackers, and with some of the bugs meaning we get killed by invisible players now on experimental, it sure feels similar to that. Also PvP is basically impossible at the minute, even without invisible players. There's just too much rubberbanding.
I know that it's not an easy job. And I'm sure the relevant people know it's an important one.
-
I recall paying 1$ on the German auction :)
-
In all honesty a discussion about this whole "Experimental vs Legacy" stuff is pretty pointless - simply because these discussions are endless. But whatever, here we go:
Sticking to legacy and just refining the game won't be the best solution when the code is pretty messed up, creating the experimental branch was needed. In the future the game will experience major changes, definitely some throwbacks as well, but all in all it'll be worth it.
Isn't testing new stuff exactly what "experimenting" is? It's vital to search for better solutions and not everyone can be satisfied at all times. I'm sure the dev team will refine the current mechanics but recreating something like the build system is a part of experimenting. Also look at the roadmap they created, many features that many players currently miss are planned to be implemented later on like the radtowns or roads which connect the monuments so just be patient - I doubt that Garry will leave us hanging :)
-
My biggest dream when it comes to the development of Rust, is basically just having legacy Rust with the new building system. (triangles etc)
Experimental as it is in its current state just doesn't quite feel like the game i love (and i understand why of course)
I just hope to God that they don't get lost on the way while developing new features in experimental...
Also a problem in legacy was that the servers usually start lagging after 1-2 days of activity (due to the server load of all the constructions), hopefully this won't be as much of a problem in the newer rust.
I think most people realize experimental will get most of the old features from legacy back, but I think many of us are simply nervous that the devs take a different turn somewhere, and end up with a game too different from legacy.
-
i want legacy feeling rust not this new : O not realy what i paid for xD
-
Never played Legacy. What was the average age between resets on servers? Weeks, months, years?
-
Its early access, alpha testing. You got exactly what you paid for!
-
depends on the server. anywhere between 3rd daily and monthly. most can't cope without a reset about every week.
-
Wow, that's it?
-
Legacy has several major limitations that make any busy server choke and lag unless decay is very aggressive. Experimental is going to be able to handle building much better, although building's not finished yet.
Plus, most private servers get wiped as soon as they get a bit laggy, so it's artificially often.
-
A lot of the popular servers have kits with supplies and/or gather multipliers when combined with insta-craft result in it being incredibly easy to quickly build lots of sprawling bases all over the place. Some impose building limits and are able to last a bit longer before wipes are necessary. People tend to be attracted to freshly wiped servers, too, so often a wipe happens to both clean up lag and refresh the population.
This latter fact is one reason I am not convinced that a better building system that prevents lag will magically address the frequent wipes that you find with legacy servers. If combined with something else that increases server 'stickiness', then maybe.
-
I've never manually wiped my server. Last upgrade (1160 to 1162, I think) everything was wiped automatically. Wasn't having any issues, but I think they changed something with the build system that required buildings to be reset. On the flip side, my server doesn't have a very large population. It does seem to get a delay sometimes (opening/closing doors, accessing chests, crafting, etc.), but a server restart usually takes care of that. I'd be interested to monitor performance with high population just to see how things go.
-
the whole legacy reset cycle is due to the limitations in the code, and part of the reason for the total rewrite. they want server cycles to last for months, years. legacy servers can't handle that.
-
Makes sense. There were a lot of Oxide plugins developed for removing decaying structures, sleeping bags, sleepers, garbage items, etc. Cleanup wasn't written in yet and that seemed to be a major cause of server performance issues which lead people to develop their own solutions (plugins for Oxide, regular server wipes, etc.)
-
Ironically, the decay system is the source of most of the performance problems. There are two decay systems, one for items deployed on the ground, and another for structures. Each system runs on every game server frame - 30fps - looping through all deployed items or structure components to see if the owner has used it within the decay time limit. The more structures and deployables you have, the harder the server has to work to find the abandoned ones.
If you disable the decay system and instead use a plugin to check for and dispose of unused structures, the server lasts for a couple of weeks before needing a reboot. You can set the following in server.cfg to cause the decay systems to do nothing each frame. Can't make it stop looping, but you can fool it into doing a noop. Since the server.cfg can't parse an exponent, use 9999999999 in place of the MaxValue. It's plenty long enough to make sure no decay event is ever triggered.
Code:// Disable deployed item decay // System.Single.MaxValue = 3.402823 x 10^38 decay.decaytickrate = float.MaxValue / 2 decay.deploy_maxhealth_sec = float.MaxValue decay.maxperframe = -1 decay.maxtestperframe = -1
Code:// Disable structure decay structure.maxframeattempt = -1; structure.framelimit = -1; structure.minpercentdmg = float.MaxValue;
-
Wow, checking every single deployed item for use every server tick, that explains a lot. I wonder if anything on the server was done multi-threaded if it is doing decay work on the main tick thread.
Great info!
-
what is it with peoples need to suck legacies figurative dick?
-
Are we not allowed to sing its praise?
-
I feel your frustrations too with the new Rust, as do a number of us. That's not to say that we don't support Facepunch's efforts with the new Rust.
When it was announced that there would be a new version of the game, a number of us, including myself, ass-u-me-d it would be a remake with the current mechanics, but structured code-wise to make it far easier to combat exploits. Rust Legacy has a winning formula.
It's possible the new Rust will tick the same boxes and more, but with the added features comes extra complexity which will take a ton more effort, feedback and time to hone.
A lot of us just want that winning formula which is Rust Legacy...fixed. If it had just been a recode with the framework for additional features; to allow easier integration at a later stage, with existing holes closed...
Ah well
-
Calm down... it is in the plans
http://mind42.com/mindmap/7abd1334-d...9-f74010b9b143 <<<-- proof
-
It was the best game I'd played for a very, very long time. Just amazing. It must have left a similar impression on other people too. I'm sure not everyone feels that way, but that's undoubtedly why.
-
It was released on steam literally a year ago last week. What constitutes "very, very long time" for you?
-
He's saying that it was the best game he'd played in a long time, not that he played it for a long time.
-
O wow I read that wrong then. I need to go back to bed.
-
Oh yeah it's multi-threaded, and every GameObject inherits a "call me every tick" method. There is an attempt to short-circuit the check if it was done recently, but the work required to check whether to check increases with the number of items in the game, too. Designing a game is hard. ;)
-
Almost everyone ive played with in past few months has thought the same thing. Im still goin strong in legacy with 2100 hours. I dont even need an update id just like more high pop servers.
If garry hadnt made experimental main branch id be all set
Friendly x 2
Dumb x 1
Agree x 1
x 1
x 1
x 1
Optimistic x 1
Disagree x 1
Zing x 1
x 1
Useful x 1
Informative x 3
