elentari

Members
  • Content Count

    746
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    5

elentari last won the day on August 5

elentari had the most liked content!

Community Reputation

766 Excellent

3 Followers

About elentari

  • Rank
    Villager

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Male
  • Location
    Romania

Recent Profile Visitors

2398 profile views
  1. Screw it. 100 Stealing. GG with that
  2. Wurm's game design has been solidified as being able to do ALL skills if you want, except those related to being a priest , unless you choose to convert. You can't limit professions, since once you hit 90 in something most players choose another skill to grind. If that were to happen people would spam alt accounts with 10 different professions on each. That would be real fun right? Kinda like how ultima online did it or how people in wow had alts with different professions. Old players on the NFI do have the advantages of knowing many in game mechanics that helps them to grind easier. That is true. But as Nekojin said, it would be impossible to enforce since old players can create as many accounts as they want. Sorry but your suggestion wouldn't bring any benefit to wurm.
  3. Growth can only happen by admiting mistakes and making better choices. Anyway, what do I know.
  4. +1 . Especially the bit of crafting from containers. It's silly to do so many actions to make 20 bricks for example. 1. Open container. 2. Drag rockshards to inventory. 3. Combine rockshards. 4. Open crafting window. 5. Drag rockshards into crafting window 6. Drag chisel there. 7. Begin spamming bricks. THis could be simplified to. 1. Open container. 2. Open crafting window. 3. Drag rockshards from container to crafting window. 4. Drag chisel into crafting window 5. Begin spamming bricks.
  5. Also what I forgot to mention that for those who put in the gold to maintain a kingdom, PvP is actually a big money sink in the realm of 100s of Euros since maintaining a capital + hota/war deeds gets expensive over time. Buying tomes/cherries from the pve market is also expensive. I don't want to necesarily call it full pay to win, but there are advantages for those who have deep pockets. They won't buy you victories, but having funds for a prolonged war effort shifts the balance over time. Dunno, think buying 300 high ql shields to sac for dmg bonus? Is that still a thing nowadays?
  6. Hanging trophies would be awesome. Could make it part of the butchering skill reward as well. Having 1x champ of everything , INCLUDING UNIQUE SKULLS on walls would be great.
  7. In any pvp game, there will come a % of toxic players that will do everything possible to ruin everyone else's immersion. We had them in Wurm, where people made alts equipped with troll clubs and ganked newbies. Or spy alts. Or alts stealthed in mines to check various locations. Alts alts everywhere in wurm. In Rust, you got OP veterans that can snipe new players easily. In ultima, your belongings and your most prized possesions could be easily lost in pvp. In WoW classic you got lvl 60 characters spending their time in lvl 20 zones killing players and quest npcs to prevent the players from actually progressing. Amusingly enough the 2 main types of servers in wow are defined as such 1. PvP 2. "Normal" . Whereas normal = opt in pvp in battlegrounds or flagging yourself for pvp. Funny ain't it? Pvp is not normal. I can list a crap ton of mmos where pvp just meant you would be griefed, ganked and everything possible because the game design didn't restrict high level players destroying new players. Long story short, there are keyboard sociopaths out there actively searching for gaming experiences to ruin other people's fun. Not hundreds, not thousands, but in the tens of thousands or 100s k? Very likely. As with all things, PvP to thrive MUST be balanced. It will never be balanced in wurm if you don't restrict kingdom balance to never tip into one direction or another. WHich honestly is almost impossible to do. At any point in time a kingdom will either: a ) become more populated (strength of numbers) b ) become better equipped (strength of gear) c) have better pvp leadership (strength of leadership and tactics) d) have overall better experience and/or coordination (strength of skill) When that point is reached, a kingdom will simply steam roll against others. It happened on chaos, it happened on Epic, it will eventually happen on defiance as well. Merging pvp and pve is just a disaster waiting to happen. Wurm's core population is pve. Most updates over the years were intended for the Pve crown. Wurm's pvp population as a result, left. Lack of pvp updates leads to stale pvp, and people no longer play there. Are there any CA's on Epic left? Nope. Anyone that joins there will get a sad experience. In any case. Wurm's PvE and PvP populations have to be kept separate. The only way to give pve'rs a taste of pvp would be to introduce instancing to wurm. Some small dungeons or arenas to fight in for example. That's about it.
  8. +1 for me...again. Some players in the community have always shutdown such suggestions because of : 1. Ruins immersion for traders/merchants. What immersion is there in a simple trade window? 2. Lowers prices for customers. That's pretty much an arguemnt that belies how greedy some people are and don't want any changes in wurm for fear they might lose their precious little digital coppers. 3. Fear of change. 4. It kills the "social aspect" of spamming the same sentence in trade chat 500 times. Customer eventually buys your stuff and you never chat with him again. Social aspect, huh? The real reason and I do recall rolf once talking about it, is that it isn't easy to code and implement. The devs would have implemented a long time ago. But with the Steam release and bugs and stuff that needs to be fixed, the AH isn't a project I see coming soon. Don't get me wrong. I hope we see it in 2021 implemented. But it's not going to be done in a month of work. I'm too lazy to post all the times this has been suggested over the years but here are a few threads:
  9. Aye, but the real cash influx from a lot of mmo's out there isn't from subscriptions but from microtransactions. Keep in mind there are actually very few games that still use the subscription model. Wow comes to mind, but then again Activision has so much money at this point they don't really need it. How you implement microtransactions is another thing. If you use a purely cosmetic shop or minor game conveniences then sure, a microtransaction shop would be harmless. I mean I really can't call it game breaking to buy things like : +1 hour sleep bonus cap, or caring for an extra creature, or a unique skin, etc. It really doesn't give you any advantage over others. But it could give Wurm some financial boosts over time. Honestly personally I'd just rather have a shop where it says " This monthly shield skin for only 1.99 EUR" or "Care for 1 more creature for 4.99 EUR or care for 10 more creatures for 40 EUR" rather than having to pay premium, in order to get marks, so I can get the skin or extra creature slots. Hell you might even make more money long term that way. Just my 2 coppers there. The farmers and breeders might be happy due to that. But a shop that actively allows you to buy ingame advantages such as rare armors, skill boosters, affinity tokens, that's a big no no for me. The delineation is where it offers a competitive advantage in pvp or where in Pve it creates artificial limitations to those who don't purchase from the shop.
  10. That's also the point I was trying to make as well. TOO many articles written on gaming these days have little credibility and are often times made by people who are interested in "generating more traffic" or being "SEO friendly" or churning out so much content that the casual reader wouldn't even know how shallow the work really is. They have as much to do with journalism as oranges have to do with nuclear fission. I used to work back in 2011 in research/marketing, often writing articles about digital mobile tech, smartphones and tablets. One key standard I had to gladly live up to was that I HAD to cite my sources (which is required for any research really) and to properly research everything I needed to. My boss often times asked me "How do you know that statistic/number is real?" He asked me not out of spite or to stress me out but to simply see if I was doing a good job and could back up my claims when I made them. So when I read an article or see a report on some game, I also view it from the perspective of someone who did a similar job in the past. WHen I see reporters constantly "giving their opinion on something" and that's 99% of their content, that is NOT reporting. That's stating your own individual perspective. That's blogging .That's personal subjective review. That is NOT reporting. Reporting is about presenting facts as objectively as humanly possible. NOT giving your personal opinion on something. When you hire a reporter to cover a game and play it, he has to go open minded about it and be patient with the tutorial & instructions. The format of their content is also weird and nonsensical to me. "Choose my adventure" where people tell the writer what to do? What sort of gaming experience is that? Sounds good for a twitch stream, but for something that's supposed to be journalism? When you try to combine entertainment with reporting it can often times lead to disasters if you're ALSO streaming while doing it and allowing your viewers to tell you what to do/what not to do. It's like an invitation for trolls to ruin your game. In that case the reporter should only report the experience he was asked to have. If I told him " do a meditation grind" , his feedback would have been bad since meditation objectively is frustrating in wurm , more frustrating than any skill. What sort of objective reporting could come out of such a gaming experience when you let your viewers/readers tell you what to do? Is that reporting or just regular online content made for inbound marketing/views/ad generated trafic, etc? Because that person should have his title changed to "game streamer" but NOT reporter. That's my personal issue with this situation. You don't get to wear a title without having to live up to its requirements. The guy in question might be an awesome person that has a title that was given to him by the company but his actual role and job might be something else entirely.
  11. I respectfully agree on some points and disagree with others on what you said Retro. My reasoning is as follows: The OP that is in question has the title of "reporter" on his website. Look up the team description. Don't know if it's an age thing but when I see the title "reporter" that comes with things attached. Should we treat his words from the point of view of a blogger who just gives his personal opinion on games? In that case it's just an average Joe giving his thoughts on something. On that I agree that the normal customer/gamer doesn't really bear any responsibility for his reviews/experiences. Some just might be having a bad gaming experience because they didn't configure their PC well enough to handle a game and hence throw a negative review "the game sucks cause it lags". But in this case, the writer has the title of "reporter" and is publishing his words on a website that stipulates to regularly publish editorials/columns on games. That's pretty much the definition of journalism. And they also have a journalism statement on their "about us " page. The gripe some of us had, is that the writer didn't do his research well or didn't read everything patiently and thus his experience,words, review will be skewed due to that. As I said this isn't just some random player. It's someone who has a specific title and the responsibility that comes with it.
  12. Play divinity original sin 1 or 2 . You'll eventually get curious and read a wiki about quest outcomes, recipes, secrets, combat suggestions, npcs, etc. Play Starcraft 1 or 2. You might just check up on some sites that show optimal build orders or secret in game mechanics or little easter eggs. Play a lot of single player games and a player might just read the game's wiki to find out some information about certain things. Wikis are also read to find out about bugs or potentially game breaking situations that weren't patched in the game. Any decent player or so called "gaming journalist" will HAVE to do his research , and this isn't an optional thing, it's a must when you're playing/reviewing a game. How can review something when you don't even bother to learn how it works or performs? And honestly, constructively speaking, anyone that dares to review a game without actually bothering to read the tutorial attentively rightfully deserves criticism seeing as it's a generally poor life attitude. But when it comes to journalism and the responsibility it comes with the job ? (a lot of journalists forget they do have a responsibility) Research isn't optional. Don't become a journalist if you're too lazy to read. Wurm's tutorial is pretty short. It's part of the job. 99% of journalism is research, writing is 1% of it. While I don't support trolling people, there is valid criticism to be made on a person's skewed review based on shallow gameplay.
  13. Some people are just "bad players" as in they have no intuitive logic when beginning any game. They come into a game with the wrong attitude from the very beginning. They come with expectations and a closed mindset. Any game should be approached without expectations and with an open mind and just let it take you on a journey. Even as kids I remember my first few rpg's I played I simply held on to as many items as possible because "I didn't know if they had a later use". Trust me when I say this but I've introduced many games to people and some simply have zero, and I do mean absolutely zero critical curiosity, logical thinking, the "what if I do this" attitude towards a lot of games. They don't explore the interface (which honestly is a trait any user needs to have for any digital software, whether games, apps or working with pcs in general), they don't read the tutorials, they miss key elements in their environments and so on. I can't explain why this phenomenon happens since some people I know to be smart and they've worked in other professional software before (Autocad, MS Office packs, some were linux users, etc), but oh god, when it came to introducing them to a new game? They suddenly became computer illiterate and utterly lose any manual dexterity on a keyboard/mouse and controller. I had to hold their hands and explain stuff to them as if they were kintergardeners. A friend once began playing Arx Fatalis (old school ultima like RPG) and he opens his inventory, sees he has a weapon but doesn't bother reading the tutorial to equip it. So he enters combat with a goblin and dies. He then rants "Why didn't the game tell me I had to equip a weapon before entering combat? I thought the game was supposed to do that!" Two issues there. 1. Making assumptions is rarely ever useful. Most of the time it's destructive. 2. He didn't use basic thinking considering the tutorial literally gave him messages on top of the screen telling him what to do , step by step. And guess what? Some of these types of people become : Gaming journalists. It's just one of those professions where there is little to no responsibility to what you work on. There aren't many professions where if you're really bad at what you do, you don't get fired. But gaming journalism just seems to be one of those jobs anyone can do these days without having any prior experience with gaming, PC software, critical thinking and so on. Wurm isn't a hard game but it does have a steep learning curve. Difficult to learn i'd say, but easy to master afterwards. "Wogic" would be Wurm's main challenge. But oh boy if you present Wurm to some gaming journalists? It will get tons of negative reviews by the bucketload simply due to brain dead "journalists" that have a 3 sec attention span to learn something. Reminds me of that awful Polygon video from 2016 where some "gaming journalist" tried playing doom. One of the most god awful things I have seen.
  14. Oh I agree. And i'm also guilty for buying a full year's of prem so I can afford a tome and a magic chest. However it seems people do that not for the prem itself , but for the items/benefits from the shop. Now again, why remove RMT since this is basically still RMT in game with extra steps? Why can't we have the marks shop either A) changed so we can buy said items with RL $ or B ) Add an extra shop where similar bonuses could be bought directly with $ Is this due to steam rules or somesuch? I'm not familiar with steam's legal policy versus cash shops in games.