Register
Events
Popular
More
Post #81
only if you were my accountant, or I let you make any decisions at all, or if I really did hire fifty more people, a figure Gary threw out, not me. I just reused the number he threw out.
Rethinking it, I wouldn't want to be the CEO, as I have no right to be.
I bet a small team of less than 30 people could make Rust and go about their merry way without me really caring at all about the end product. It is just a video game after all.
I just hope those people do the best at whatever it is they are doing and also have fun while they are doing it.
-
-
and everyone would still kill each other on sight, because it is the most effective way to gather food and resources.
Its a lot easier to benefit off the hard work of others by killing them violently, and cutting the flesh from their bones. Day z doesnt let you go cannibal, does it now?
Your lack of trust also is of no trouble to me, and just makes me more likely to just pop off a round in your skull because your likely to shoot me if I have any power weapons.
In the end, it doesn't change anything because one of us is dead because my big scary guns are holstered on my hip/back. Your logic is flawed.
-
it shouldn't be required to KOS via game mechanics (eg only food source, hostile ai etc.) but i see nothing wrong with it as a gameplay style.
-
Legacy was the best idk the experimental just doesn't have that rust feel to it that legacy did and was so fun to play.
-
I don't know why people are so stuck on the Rad Towns and roads as in Legacy. In legacy all they were used for was to give someplace to hold spawn points for some of the resources. In some of the towns the radiation was so bad you couldn't explore them anyway. The road had no purpose other than to lead Noobs around the map and the road didn't go all over the map anyway. The provided maps were huge but at any time only about a 3rd of the map was used.
I like the feel of the new rust's openness. You are forced to go exploring to learn your way around the map instead of just following a road that went in a circle. If you wanted to find something important you just followed the road until you found it and you didn't really need to know where anything is.
I think we sometimes loose sight of the issues and Gary listens to much to the people complaining on the suggestion lists and forums. After all the people most likely to post are those that are unhappy while the people who like what he is doing feel no need to post anything. Before he made/makes any user suggested changes listed in the forums, he should put the change into a poll to get a better feeling how the general user base feels about it. I know of a few changes that were made based on forum suggestions that raised a huge uproar afterwards. Yes, people who find bugs and list them, these issues should be addressed and fixed.
What pissed me off more than anything, was the constant updates that were broken and not so much the contents of the updates. The update process really sucked and lead me to believe there was no QA being done before it being released. It was as if "oh this is a neat feature, lets merge it to the main release branch, compile it and and kick out a new update. There is no excuse for releasing an update that then needed another fast patch(s) to fix the basic functionality that it broke. Gary seems to of finally listened to everyone and quit putting out the constant set of updates (every week or more often) and gone to a more regulated set of updates. The quality of the updates still seem to be lacking though, but at least we can now get some playing time in before the next patch.
I kind of also get tired of the PVP and raiding arguments going on. Raiding is always going to be a part of rust, or at least I believe it should be. Should it be easy or totally prevented? No in my opinion and if you don't like raiding, there are already PVE servers that they can play on. I kind of get tired of people coming onto a server that is plainly a PVP server and then getting upset that they were raided.
-
While DayZ does, you have a 25% chance of catching Kuru.
KOS is the easiest gameplay jn Legacy. Thats why its flawed. There is no balance.
-
Rust lagacy was a good game destroyed by hackers, Yes the code was buggy but that wasnt a fun ruiner hackers were what wasted everyones time.
Fix this problem and you got a fun game
Edited:
I want the old rust map back it was so magical and wayy better than any generated map i've ever seen it was created perfectly plz bring a similar map to the new rust!!!
-
No my logic is perfectly fine i already have a good idea of how people behave in rust and other games, i have no extreme idealistic expectations in how people behave, from my experience not every one is a exact clone of you either tho a good number of them surely are.
-
Worst thing about new Rust is the totally dead feeling of the maps. Just flat rolling hills and with snow mountains and more flat deserts.
I want to see an environment like legacy, thick grass, trees rocks... roads, radtowns, barns.
Get rid of those stupid statues and satellite dishes, christ.
-
mart, the wolf statues were a gimmick feature to test out the monument spawning systems. the satellite dish is pretty awesome (IMO) and they are working on implementing rad town monuments.
-
I know FP realizes this, but this is still a really important point. The new map completely fails compared to legacy's map with it's mountains and rockiness.
I also know FP/Garry have talked about bringing over the legacy map and adding things to the experimental map. But it needs to be said how bad it is compared to legacy's.
I am sure they will try to avoid this, but the worst possible thing that could happen: keeping the new maps with no rockiness, and just adding a lot of items on the map. In other words, if they tweaked the current new map, and basically kept it the same with a lot of new items, then the game will never be as good as legacy (or at least the map and map-related gameplay will never be as good).
Legacy gives you distinct areas bounded by the hills - the new map has none of this. This gives the map character and you can learn and remember the geography.
The legacy map gives you places to hide in the rocks, and ways to sneak up and spy on other players. It has places to hide your base so a player can walk close to it and never see it. These are really good features.
Lastly, thank god Garry listened to the people giving their feedback on the problems with the new version, instead of just dismissing it, or saying "it's Alpha". All those people telling players to stop whining, or to go play other games, were basically missing the point.Facepunch needs all feedback, good or bad, and said before or not - so they know how many people feel a certain way.
-
You don't seem to be the one who gets the point... legacy map is finished, while procedural maps are far from being finished and all of you say is just "remake legacy on the new engine!", meanwhile they said they are willing to give out an SDK, custom maps, usermade content, how much time do you think it would take to the community to create a legacy-ish map? But yeah, go the f**k back and remake legacy.
-
I am not asking FP to remake legacy. But I have no problem saying the current map is much worse. FB can make the new version of Rust better than legacy - but they need to make the map at least as good as legacy's. There is a reason people are saying legacy is so much a better game at this point. It is obvious that experimental is not done.
But by trying to do so many new things, the game took a big step back in terms of fun. Garry said that was a mistake.
-
so to cut it down to the basics, you feel the generated maps aren't rocky enough?
-
-
I wasn't saying they're not going to make it good, I'm sure they will... but recreating the legacy map in the new engine would have been a good starting point, something familiar to play with, and of course they could work on the alternate environments as well.
I'm not a huge fan of mixing the landscapes into one maps till, I'd prefer separate snow/forest/desert maps. By trying to make maps too big they will run into performance problems too. Legacy map was a nice size, and took a while to learn but that's half the fun.
-
legacy or non-legacy. it doesn't matter without content to explore and some kind of challenge pve.
pvp alone is ok for some people but some of us want to be explorers trudging through caves tunnels rad towns and maybe just maybe a working town like a safe area for trade and commerce.
frankly i have never been on board the whole open world pvp bs. but i put up with it because as a game rust is very unique to me. i would be much happier with zones for organized pvp. house robbery aside. at least you could explore with out the constant threat of being gunned down as soon as you leave your house.
right now rust is like a wild west pissing contest. everyone says their junk is huge so no one will bother them. then someone comes along to test it to see if its fact.
its more chaos than i like. no organization means very little progression and it proves to me that we as a species really are doomed.
-
heh, penis.
-
Why do we have to rehash this constant class warfare against PVP? I'm as disgusted by the mindless "get rekt!!" junior high school brigade as anyone else, but remember... you have the option to play on monitored PVE or creative servers where Player-killing and raiding are either frowned upon or outright bannable offenses. And you always have had that option.
I respect the fact that a lot of people want Rust to be a survival/exploration game with social aspects. But even if the map remains procedurally-driven, what is there to explore that doesn't need to be manually coded into the game? What is there to trade for once you have everything, and everything interesting has been crafted? Rust is obviously geared towards combat and has been since day 1, and I have no idea how anyone could have ever arrived at a different impression. It may evolve into something more or better, something that involves conflict but doesn't revolve around it..... and that would be great! But that still requires it to become something else, something you want it to be... something it is not now and has never been in the past.
Unless Garry codes a genuinely innovative and AI-driven ecosystem that requires time and effort to understand and interact with, anything worth exploring or seeing beyond a couple of days of gameplay will be coming directly from the actions of other players. So if you want to replace combat, you need to come up with a couple of other systems of interaction that can allow the game to remain new and exciting. Because unless Facepunch gets bought out by Bathesda, Rust will remain a sandbox where we provide the motion that moves the sand.
-
Rust is trying to look too clean, it's lost the grittiness. Starting to look like every other game.
-
Combat is part of PVP, but its not the only thing that makes a PVP game. There is the psychological aspect of working with or against other players. The choices.
-
And what is the point of combat when you have already everything ?
It's just beeing a dick with the other (and less stuffed) players.
Rust is not a combat game like CS where you have a leaderboard or where you can make team competition, it's a survival game with pvp on it.
-
So other than combat and base-raiding, what other ways can players work against other players in a meaningful way within the post-apocalyptic wasteland setting of Rust?
But what's the point of doing anything (harvesting, crafting, building) that you've done a hundred times in a variety of ways? How does the minor variations in those activities make them so much better than the minor variations in firefights or base-raids? At least with raiding, there's the potential for a bit of a puzzle game, builder vs. raider... or there used to be back when there was raiding.
Don't assume I'm a COD drone, I rarely engage in combat in Rust unless I see someone armed and armored and never go looking for a fight until I'm on a PVP server that has reached a critical population level. I'd love something more and have tried to come up with ways to achieve it. But saying Rust is "a survival game, not a combat game" over and over doesn't make it so... and unfortunately the past year+ of the game's history doesn't bear that out. Either someone comes up with some pretty exceptional ideas on how the Rust that IS can effectively circumvent the motivations for KOS and RDM, which hasn't happened yet beyond PVE or whitelist RP servers, or we're looking at waiting around for a lot of hardcoding that may or may not be in the cards for 2015.
-
Murdo, thats sorta the point. There should be more ways. As it stands now, deception, blocking or purposely zeroing resources. Actually a great example I saw of this was in LiF:YO, some bandits kept attacking, so the players went to the bandits compound and chopped d0wn all the apple trees so they wouldnt have any more food.
-
Worth noting that I made a thread in the suggestions forum months and months ago about forest size changing dynamically over a timeframe of days/weeks as the trees are harvested more heavily, and if they're left alone they begin to grow back. garry's response was basically "This goes under gardening, I guess" which implies he was either thinking about it beforehand, or he liked my idea.
He's mentioned dynamic forest cover as a planned feature since then, so eventually, you won't be able to just build a base next to resources and swallow them infinitely. You'll either need to move your base around, or you'll need to roam around for wood. Others can force you out of an area be depriving your site of resources.
-
Yes it is true, there has always been PVE server (even official). There is a reason they are always the least populated. People vote on what they want/like by what servers they play on.
Thankfully, Garry admitted that a 1:1 port of Rust should have been done. Let's wait and see if this can come to pass. Hopefully, the steady decline evident by the number of people playing Rust with steam metrics (and how it correlates with the release of new rust and exponential increase in hackers on legacy) is setting off alarms at Facepunch.
Dumb x 1
Agree x 4
Disagree x 2
Informative x 1
Winner x 1