Sign in to follow this  
JockII

The Decline Continues

Recommended Posts

23 hours ago, Wargasm said:

 

Consoles?  Seriously?

 

A PC is not a "cheap alternative".  A PC is a console that lasts for longer than 1 year before the next latest and greatest Playstation 57 hits retail stores at Christmas.  PC gaming has a longer life span than consoles these days, but when you look at the reign of the NES (1986? - ~1996) compare it to whether you actually believe people will still be playing on the PS4's 10 years from now.  Not...gonna...happen.

 

 

Not saying its smart, its just the way "mainstream" gaming is moving and has been moving for a long time.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I premium 6 accounts when I actively play Wurm Online.

 

I tried coming back a few months ago on Epic, didn't work out, the game is stale on PvP servers even after I changed things up and went a different kingdom.  So I left Epic.

 

I tried coming back to Chaos when they made a new PmK and it was fun for a bit, couldn't really compete with the bigwigs and was really annoyed with how the server fights because of the features it has. So I left Chaos.

 

I tried out Freedom for the first time in my Wurm career, made a deed, logged on a few times a week and built it up.  Got bored, left, came back bored again.  So I left Freedom

 

tl;dr - The PvP servers are stale, if the people that live on them don't agree then they are seriously in denial and don't want any change to what they own.  I played this game for about 10 years or so, its a shame that I don't see myself playing it anymore.  Unless some balances and drastic changes are put forth to the actual PvP side of the game, I won't return.  Someone should put up the graph again so we can see what the playercount is down to. 

  • Like 5

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 minutes ago, Mojo said:

I premium 6 accounts when I actively play Wurm Online.

 

I tried coming back a few months ago on Epic, didn't work out, the game is stale on PvP servers even after I changed things up and went a different kingdom.  So I left Epic.

 

I tried coming back to Chaos when they made a new PmK and it was fun for a bit, couldn't really compete with the bigwigs and was really annoyed with how the server fights because of the features it has. So I left Chaos.

 

I tried out Freedom for the first time in my Wurm career, made a deed, logged on a few times a week and built it up.  Got bored, left, came back bored again.  So I left Freedom

 

tl;dr - The PvP servers are stale, if the people that live on them don't agree then they are seriously in denial and don't want any change to what they own.  I played this game for about 10 years or so, its a shame that I don't see myself playing it anymore.  Unless some balances and drastic changes are put forth to the actual PvP side of the game, I won't return.  Someone should put up the graph again so we can see what the playercount is down to. 

 

Basically the same, the only difference is I premium three accounts and commonly fund a lot of kingdom projects dumping in a lot of money for bricks, or upkeep as opposed to holding onto other accounts.

 

I haven't been premium for three months now, after having been constantly subbed and playing on/off for as long as i can remember, playing actively since 2008, and being a moron little kid prior to that who couldnt play much but still enjoyed the game.

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Took a trip to Affliction last weekend, there were 18 people on the entire Epic cluster. The rift was visible not far from Blackbone but nobody was around to do it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

:(

 

I want to see massive changes before I ever consider coming back again myself..

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Massive changes is what it will take to even come close to bringing back epic. Servers should just be shut down tbh

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 7/11/2016 at 3:19 AM, Marlon said:

 

Are they running? OK. This tearjerker thread is still alive.

For your information (which seems to solid, and so well informed)... I came back to wurm a year ago, and still going strong. 5 Months ago I got Angora involved, New player, he is going strong. His brother joined us last night. My neighbours (Payu and co) is going strong, and stronger, and old players and new, are moving into our marina.

So don't tell me "running"... the problem is, if you have such a bitter, sad, unhappy time, take your ###### and go. it's really really simple.

 

You'll find that there's only, ever, problems (and "contested points" apparently???) on the forums. The rest of the people are actually logged in, and playing, and they don't have problems. Stay off the forums, and play, and you'll see how problems just go away. Ivory tower self entitlement is a terrible thing to waste.

 

 

I'm going to assume English is not your native language. However, I think I understand what you are getting at.

 

Here's the problem with the points you make. They are anecdotal and not indicative of reality. The numbers don't lie and there are several glaring problems with the game that are making people that were fanatical about playing this game drop it like a hot potato. Those people, like myself, have invested a lot of time and effort using the forums to voice their concerns over the years only to be ignored. The consequence of that apathy is the current decline in the numbers of people that actively play this game.

 

The fact that some of us are still here on the forums just shows how passionate we are about the game and would love for it to bounce back. However, a lot of us have reached a breaking point on waiting.

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19 hours ago, Etherdrifter said:

 

Not saying its smart, its just the way "mainstream" gaming is moving and has been moving for a long time.

 

That's old news and, fortunately, no longer correct.

https://stari.co/articles/pc-vs-console-10-good-reasons-to-choose-a-pc#10-pc-is-the-new-market-leader

 

The console market share is still larger than PC in five countries - the U.S., Canada, Mexico, U.K. and Japan - but of course their trend is the same.

The truth of the matter is that console gaming has always experienced a cycle of waxing and waning due to hardware generation shifts.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Tried Age of Urath on WU. I am having fun. I will not be coming back to WO again, unless I decide to sell off belongings. WO has not been fun for many years, I simply kept logging in to make money.... yay? Thanks Rolf for giving us the perfect competition to WO, so far I find it superior.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, Cerberus said:

Tried Age of Urath on WU. I am having fun. I will not be coming back to WO again, unless I decide to sell off belongings. WO has not been fun for many years, I simply kept logging in to make money.... yay? Thanks Rolf for giving us the perfect competition to WO, so far I find it superior.

When you treat a game like a job, do you expect it to be fun?

 

TL;DR "I spent my time in wurm doing what I needed to make money, i find another game that i dont treat like work fun" Kind of a no brainer

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

We all knew this was going to happen at some stage...as soon as Epic came online, a copy of the former Wild. That 'died'  because a certain person tried to please everyone, but ended up being seen as bowing to the will of one or more factions and powerful players within the game and community.

This has to stop.

Get the leaders from all kingdoms on a voice  comms or on irc, talk out a solution that will heal the many wrongs within pvp right now.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

They shouldnt have put all our (epic) unique features on freedom, like the missions, valrei mobs, valrei items and that stuff. The only unique thing we now have is a curve lol

 

not weird at all that epic has no playerbase left

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 hours ago, Lancelot said:

We all knew this was going to happen at some stage...as soon as Epic came online, a copy of the former Wild. That 'died'  because a certain person tried to please everyone, but ended up being seen as bowing to the will of one or more factions and powerful players within the game and community.

This has to stop.

Get the leaders from all kingdoms on a voice  comms or on irc, talk out a solution that will heal the many wrongs within pvp right now.

one thing that drove wurm into this mess is constantly listening to player advice. there's a reason game companies do that, precisely because you CAN'T please everyone. as a game developer you should know your game enough to come up with a solution yourself, but then again there are no game devs working at codeclub, so theres that.

Edited by Elktazahjr
  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Elktazahjr said:

one thing that drove wurm into this mess is constantly listening to player advice. there's a reason game companies do that, precisely because you CAN'T please everyone. as a game developer you should know your game enough to come up with a solution yourself, but then again there are no game devs working at codeclub, so theres that.

 

no

player advice is good if it comes from a large selection of players. player advice is bad if it comes from a singular player or a group of players on an issue with clear bias.

 

from a PvP perspective, if you manage to get 100 people from all kingdoms its probably a good idea, but usually those are the ones that take 3+ years to get added, while the ones that are paraded as a bad idea and supported by one person or by one kingdom get implemented within a week or two.

 

but its worth nothing that players cannot give suggestions that aim towards the vision of the developers because the vision of the developers has never been clarified, what they wish to achieve has never been clarified.

Edited by Propheteer
  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
51 minutes ago, Propheteer said:

 

no

player advice is good if it comes from a large selection of players. player advice is bad if it comes from a singular player or a group of players on an issue with clear bias.

 

from a PvP perspective, if you manage to get 100 people from all kingdoms its probably a good idea, but usually those are the ones that take 3+ years to get added, while the ones that are paraded as a bad idea and supported by one person or by one kingdom get implemented within a week or two.

 

but its worth nothing that players cannot give suggestions that aim towards the vision of the developers because the vision of the developers has never been clarified, what they wish to achieve has never been clarified.

now tell me, what is your definition of a large selection of players? How do I determine if a group of players have a clear bias? because that is about as vague as can be. If I'm part of a certain group and I give a suggestion, are you immediately going to shoot it down because "you're part of group X!"? Why 100 people? What if wurm suddenly gains or loses a lot of people in a short period of time? With what system do you redefine the amount of players needed for feedback? Why is feedback bad if it's from one player if it's a genuinely good idea?

 

see how retarded a baseless system like that is? And this is the reason you don't ask players for constant feedback, precisely because there is no way to get a consistent system to ask for it. The point of suggestion and feedback from players is not "you're going to do what we say", it's to potentially give the gamedevs some ideas which they can work into their own planned system. But as I said, Codeclub has no developers, so there is also no planned system. They have nothing to go by and they've proven that too many times already.

 

 There was the poll thing once which they seemed to have backed away from immediately, and that was even more vague than what you just said. I can't stop laughing when I think about "a majority vote does not mean we will go for that option". Like, what else is the point of holding a poll when you can't even do that properly?

 

Edited by Elktazahjr
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Elktazahjr said:

now tell me, what is your definition of a large selection of players? A considerable majority of the game, easily seen through the ingame poll system. How do I determine if a group of players have a clear bias? It's a hard one because i can't really explain what happened in the past. But if you browse the suggestions forum, its pretty clear when a suggestion is denied by all members of the same kingdom with the same forum avatar/kingdom mention in their signature. Nothing i can really think of to prove this though. because that is about as vague as can be. Why 100 people? I didn't specify 100 people, you did. What if wurm suddenly gains or loses a lot of people in a short period of time? It already has, not sure what this means as the ingame poll system can show percentages. With what system do you redefine the amount of players needed for feedback? The ingame poll system should be ample enough for feedback if it was ever used.

 

see how retarded a baseless system like that is? And this is the reason you don't ask players for constant feedback, precisely because there is no way to get a consistent system to ask for it. There was the poll thing once which they seemed to have backed away from immediately, and that was even more vague than what you just said. I can't stop laughing when I think about "a majority vote does not mean we will go for that option". Like, what else is the point of holding a poll when you can't even do that properly?

 

Not sure what the latter part of your post is addressing, but, the ingame poll system wasn't too vague and it should be easily expanded upon. But what i'm still angry about is what happened years ago, where players would get their lives refunded or various reimbursements or features changed because themselves and one or two others would send an email to rolf and it would be changed overnight without any regard towards balance or public opinion resulting in many players quitting. I'm still extremely salty about this.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 minutes ago, Propheteer said:

 

Not sure what the latter part of your post is addressing, but, the ingame poll system wasn't too vague and it should be easily expanded upon. But what i'm still angry about is what happened years ago, where players would get their lives refunded or various reimbursements or features changed because themselves and one or two others would send an email to rolf and it would be changed overnight without any regard towards balance or public opinion resulting in many players quitting. I'm still extremely salty about this.

"a considerable majority of the game" Still makes no sense. What is "majority"? Anything above 50%? Above 60%? Between 80 and 85%? How do you prevent people endlessly complaining that it shouldn't be this percentage but that percentage? How do you stick to the chosen percentage? Codeclub seems to have an allergy to sticking to things and being consistent tbh.

 

As for the bias thing, this is has nothing to do with bias but rather a lack of critical feedback. If all of the players under one banner can give good and factual reasons as to why a suggestion is bad, then would you deny it simply because it was under one banner, even if they're right? If something in the past happened where the same group of people just said "no" to a suggestion, then that's codeclubs fault for just listening to a "no". But that's another story.

 

you literally said " if you manage to get 100 people from all kingdoms its probably a good idea, ". The loss part was related to that.

 

 

Edited by Elktazahjr

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
47 minutes ago, Elktazahjr said:

"a considerable majority of the game" Still makes no sense. What is "majority"? Anything above 50%? Above 60%? Between 80 and 85%? How do you prevent people endlessly complaining that it shouldn't be this percentage but that percentage? How do you stick to the chosen percentage? Codeclub seems to have an allergy to sticking to things and being consistent tbh.

 

As for the bias thing, this is has nothing to do with bias but rather a lack of critical feedback. If all of the players under one banner can give good and factual reasons as to why a suggestion is bad, then would you deny it simply because it was under one banner, even if they're right? If something in the past happened where the same group of people just said "no" to a suggestion, then that's codeclubs fault for just listening to a "no". But that's another story.

 

you literally said " if you manage to get 100 people from all kingdoms its probably a good idea, ". The loss part was related to that.

 

 

 

A considerable majority of the game is like 51%. If you poll a server, and 51% votes yes, and 49% votes no, 51% is the considerable majority. Deal with the other people.

No i wouldn't deny it, and yes, many things like that have happened in the past.

 

And yeah i forgot i wrote that, the 100 people is probably over 50% of every kingdom of active pvpers put together at this point in time honestly. Was just a random number.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Propheteer said:

 

no

player advice is good if it comes from a large selection of players. player advice is bad if it comes from a singular player or a group of players on an issue with clear bias.

 

from a PvP perspective, if you manage to get 100 people from all kingdoms its probably a good idea, but usually those are the ones that take 3+ years to get added, while the ones that are paraded as a bad idea and supported by one person or by one kingdom get implemented within a week or two.

 

but its worth nothing that players cannot give suggestions that aim towards the vision of the developers because the vision of the developers has never been clarified, what they wish to achieve has never been clarified.

That is the thing, on forums it is so easy to create an illusion, like a large group of player wants something. SoTG nerf is recent example. Only small group (from overall playerbase) was advocating for it. It was presented, like nerfing it would save Wurm for all future generations, so it was changed, but has it changed anything for the better? I don't PvP, but I haven't at least heard, like it has changed much..

Also that PvP perspective, I think this is not good example as PvP-ers are like wolfpack, most of them howl like their leader does, even when they don't understand about what is being talked. That goes to most of player groups tho, you always want to support your friend.

 

I agree with this tho, that developers vision is not clear. Not long ago, it was clear, that Rolf's vision was to have a PvP game. Right now he seems to have abandoned that idea and try to let players guide the "ship". But reality is, that after that change in approach the "ship" isn't moving anywhere. Because one group wants to head one direction, another group wants to go exactly the opposite etc, which effectively makes the "ship" float at the same spot and makes people angry, because they are not moving where they want to go. Best approach would be tho, that when captain tells, that "we are in this spot, from here we go there.. who wants to go there, hop aboard".

 

And that brings me to biggest problem Wurm has, it lacks a lead game designer, who knows where the game should go.. of course player ideas, which are supporting that vision, are welcome. But until the suggestions are considered based only on how easy/hard they are to implement, things get only worse.

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Just gonna say,  a majority voted for the elevation reset, that didnt go well.

 

Budda is now the product manager, thats the lead design

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
21 minutes ago, SeeD said:

Just gonna say,  a majority voted for the elevation reset, that didnt go well.

 

Budda is now the product manager, thats the lead design

 

Really?

 

Prior to elevation reset. the population was just about as populated as it is now, between all four servers. It was a good bandaid, but it lacked what the players requested. It was a rather empty map.

 

I guess the reset was a bad idea to get a 6mo surge of 200 players and we shouldve just left it with 24 and waited another three years for meaningful change while the population stays in decline, like lol what?

 

The whole idea, atleast from the perspective of me and my friends, was to reset it to a bigger map to accommodate more players and to offer a bandaid while the dev team thinks of solutions, and the second was never done. Its fun when things are fresh, as people get deeds established, it gets boring. PvP also gets boring the more skilled everyones accounts are because there is simply no balance in the lategame, its just terrible, every single aspect of it is just terrible. I could go on about this for days, but the simple fact the PvP servers arent combined, they aren't cycled, meditation and valrei systems arent bricked yet just blows my mind.

Edited by Propheteer

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this