Sign in to follow this  
Darnok

After many months of inactivity, a few suggestions...

Recommended Posts

11 minutes ago, Darnok said:

 

I like when people with a different view do not have arguments and do not hide it 😉
 

Because I was playing and I can see what problems the game has.

Several hundred players quit because I was right a few months ago and I am right today. To attract new players, the game has to change, new textures are not enough, you have to change some basic elements of the game so that the modern player considers it worthy of attention. Solutions that were good 15 years ago are no longer as good as old players think they are. Tens of thousands of sandbox and open world fans are there around the world, but they give up Wurm, not because you are all right, but because you are all wrong.

 

If we're all wrong, why do you have any interest in getting involved? If we're all-wrong, we're going to stay all-wrong, and nothing you say is going to make a blind bit of difference because all you have is your certainty that we're all-wrong.

 

7 minutes ago, Darnok said:

 

You overestimate the amount of content in this game, but even if you were right, the fact that someone did not know every super hidden mechanism (moreover, things that discourage people from playing, the modern player likes to plan character development, how he can do it if the game hides many important elements from him?) does not mean that he misunderstands basic issues such as economics or character development and what are the consequences of such solutions. And the consequences can be seen, almost a year ago there were many new players, how many have survived in the game until today? From the group that started out on Melody, Cad or Har?

 

If all you see is discouragement, why are you ignoring that and trying to impose some new game on a playerbase you clearly don't understand? You are one of the ones who rejected this entire game. Why should the entire game change to win your approval?

Edited by Drayka
  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Oblivionnreaver said:

i mean literally anyone could have guessed that a newly launched mmo server would lose players over time because that's happened in 100% of mmo launches due to hype dying down. you could argue that they quit because there's no glocks in the game and you speak for the silent minority who feel this way. I don't think i've ever seen any posts by you that would make newbies magically want to stay around

 

Really? It is a pity that Wurm online is not on this list, but Unlimited is and you can check with other games to see if there are actually fewer players in each case.

 

https://mmo-population.com/list

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Drayka said:

 

If we're all wrong, why do you have any interest in getting involved? If we're all-wrong, we're going to stay all-wrong, and nothing you say is going to make a blind bit of difference because all you have is your certainty that we're all-wrong.

 

Sandbox + open world fans are growing, but the players in Wurm are decreasing, what more facts do you need to see who is right?

 

4 minutes ago, Drayka said:

 

If all you see is discouragement, why are you ignoring that and trying to impose some new game on a playerbase you clearly don't understand? You are one of the ones who rejected this entire game. Why should the entire game change to win your approval?

 

If the game has been around for 15 years and doesn't evolve, it will soon be swept away by the competition. Simple law of the market.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, Darnok said:

 

Really? It is a pity that Wurm online is not on this list, but Unlimited is and you can check with other games to see if there are actually fewer players in each case.

 

https://mmo-population.com/list

4e43ced27765413472ae806efd49081a.png

seeing as wu has had varying populations over the years i'm not sure i trust this chart where there was 0 players for 6 months in total, or the playerbase randomly halving in certain months, or the fact that WU has dropped from 6k to 5.7k subs over the years when it's a 1 time purchase and has no form of subs. doesn't seem like very useful data lol. can you check the websites before you post them next time ta

Edited by Oblivionnreaver

Share this post


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

 

Sandbox + open world fans are growing, but the players in Wurm are decreasing, what more facts do you need to see who is right?

 

 

If the game has been around for 15 years and doesn't evolve, it will soon be swept away by the competition. Simple law of the market.

 

A hell of a lot more facts. Maybe being common and popular isn't as important as being unique and catering to a niche but stable market.

We don't obey the 'laws of the market'. We're Wurm. Those who have a problem with that, go elsewhere, are catered to, and those games boom and bust predictably as fashions change.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, Oblivionnreaver said:

4e43ced27765413472ae806efd49081a.png

seeing as wu has had varying populations over the years i'm not sure i trust this chart where there was 0 players for 6 months in total, or the playerbase randomly halving in certain months, or the fact that WU has dropped from 6k to 5.7k subs over the years when it's a 1 time purchase and has no form of subs. doesn't seem like very useful data lol. can you check the websites before you post them next time ta

 

Can you show other data or just your opinion? Games can be removed from the steam account or you can request a refund.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
28 minutes ago, Darnok said:

a single-player game played remotely on the server

 

I have not noticed Wurm being a single player game. Far from it. Friendly positive people attract other friendly positive people, and Wurm attracts (and keeps) positive people.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, Darnok said:

 

Can you show other data or just your opinion?

You're the one posting websites chief with the supposed data without checking them first chief, you go find a proper one.

Edited by Oblivionnreaver
  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, Drayka said:

 

A hell of a lot more facts. Maybe being common and popular isn't as important as being unique and catering to a niche but stable market.

We don't obey the 'laws of the market'. We're Wurm. Those who have a problem with that, go elsewhere, are catered to, and those games boom and bust predictably as fashions change.

 

A niche and shrinking market means bad, so this is not a very good argument. If the number of players grew steadily, that's good it mean's that the game is going in the right direction, what case do we have here?

The game mechanics and amount of content in Wurm are not enough to keep players for a year in game. But you still think that a new map every year is a bad idea, it is impossible to rationally discuss new ideas with such people.

There is something wrong with either the mechanics of the game or with the assumption that the new server should keep players in game for many years.
So either you have to tweak the mechanics of the game, or you have to change the premise and stop expecting players to suddenly change.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, Oblivionnreaver said:

You're the one posting websites chief with the supposed data without checking them first chief, you go find a proper one.

 

If you want to prove that this data is incorrect, show the data that you consider correct. Your opinion vs data matters little.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, Darnok said:

 

A niche and shrinking market means bad, so this is not a very good argument. If the number of players grew steadily, that's good it mean's that the game is going in the right direction, what case do we have here?

The game mechanics and amount of content in Wurm are not enough to keep players for a year in game. But you still think that a new map every year is a bad idea, it is impossible to rationally discuss new ideas with such people.

There is something wrong with either the mechanics of the game or with the assumption that the new server should keep players in game for many years.
So either you have to tweak the mechanics of the game, or you have to change the premise and stop expecting players to suddenly change.

We ARE the players. We ARE here. So maybe you need to change YOUR premise and stop expecting players to suddenly change.

 

3 minutes ago, Darnok said:

 

If you want to prove that this data is incorrect, show the data that you consider correct. Your opinion vs data matters little.

To whom? He plays here.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You remind me of a new manager a local business had for a while. Came in with orders from on high to go 'upmarket' and 'get rid of the riff-raff'.

 

Business lost it's long-term customer-base, new trade never turned up, manager got moved on, old customer base returned.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Darnok said:

 

If you want to prove that this data is incorrect, show the data that you consider correct. Your opinion vs data matters little.

 ok we're on the track to find out if anyone did actually play during these supposed 0 player months

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

"After many months of inactivity, i am back once again to spam the forums with my stupid suggestions that nobody likes or wants."

 

Also speaking of population data, dude just have a look at the steamcharts page of WU instead of posting some random website that flat out says "ESTIMATED PLAYER NUMBERS"

 

But here, i'll make it easy for you:

446f684e83ad363757195e08f9a59909.png

 

Now compare that to that website you linked that claims "485" daily players 

facepalm

 

 

Edited by atazs
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, Darnok said:

 

There are several religions, but just a few months ago more than 80% of players on the PvE map were of only one religion

4 hours ago, Darnok said:

 

Can you show data or just your opinion? 

 
Edited by atazs

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, Darnok said:

because you are all wrong.

 

Well, it a took a while, but we are back on the familiar song sheet.

 

Wurm isn't for everyone.  If you fundamentally don't like the core game you don't have to play it, but instead of trying to change what is quintessentially Wurm, play a game you like more.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, Darnok said:

 

If you want to prove that this data is incorrect, show the data that you consider correct. Your opinion vs data matters little.

That's not how falsification works.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Do these fora have rules about trolling?   We have a poster here who admittedly no longer plays Wurm and does not intend to play Wurm yet posts a bunch of stuff that they already know is highly contentious.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
20 hours ago, Darnok said:

I haven't played for a few months and so far I am not going to change it, but I am checking changes on forums, the fact that they appear more often is a good change, but the donkeys are not going to fix few wrong assumptions of the game.

 

I remember several people argued with me that I was the only one complaining about some things, but I guess I was right many new and average players quit without complaining on the forum, which the more advanced players don't seem to understand. The declining population caused a decline in economic.

As I suggested months ago, a system in which items are virtually indestructible doesn't make sense in the long run because it only it destroys trade and without trade other players are enemies taking your resources even in PvE.

Items should be destructible (i.e. they shouldn't be repairable), a matter of rebalancing durability, and perhaps adding a feature that allows you to smelt a useless item back into resources.

 

Character statistics also affect the economy, the fact that every player to have a strong character must develop all skills not only makes each player strive for self-sufficiency but also kills the trade. Character skills and characteristics should be organized a bit differently, i.e. developing a few skills should be enough to build a character with high characteristics. Maybe each player should be able to choose a profession when creating a character and in this way individual characteristics would derive gain from the skills of a selected profession?

Each profession would have 7 or 14 skills (one or two skills for each characteristic), the development of which would increase the corresponding characteristics. The development of skills beyond the 7 or 14 would be possible, but it would be more difficult (slower) and would not develop the character characteristics any higher. Thus, players should have to rely on others and trade.

 

Another problem for trade is the availability of resources. Biomes are too small and you have to travel too short to collect everything you need, so we don't need to trade. If the biomes were larger and players had to travel longer, many would choose trade over long trips. Maps should be designed so that they have as few points as possible where all the resources are available, then the player who will control the area will have a good source of income. But there should be many such points with resources and they should be at large distances between each other to disperse players and give everyone a piece of the map to own.

 

Something that can discourage new players at this age of servers is a lot of inactive deeds with a lot of animals. Maybe if the deed has high density of animals, but the player is not very active, the animals should get sick? The less active the player and higher density, the disease should be more serious, which means that more animals should die very fast. This way, a many animals will be released for active/new players, but the inactive player will not lose everything he has, because at some point when the density of his animals is lower, they will stop getting sick.
It also seems to me that the starting cities should have some larger area where players cannot build anything, and even cannot modify the terrain, because after logging into the game for the first time at this stage of server development, the view is discouraging.


New players should start out with gear made mostly of bronze or copper. Then the promotion/development of copper->bronze-> iron-> steel would be better visible and the differences between tools and weapons made of better metals should be more visible.

Iron should be less available than copper and tin, after all, many civilizations in history started with bronze and then used iron. Unfortunately, it is impossible to make the iron deeper underground, but you can increase its melting temperature compared to bronze, in this way, for example, it would not be possible to melt iron without the use of coal or high-quality wood (the quality may affect the temperature that is obtained during combustion). A quality restriction can also be added for the forge so that a low-quality forge cannot melt the iron and heat the steel. Or add a new structure that is more difficult to build, but can be used to melt metals in higher temperatures.

The development of alchemy. The quality of metals has always been something strange to me, because in reality metal has the same quality, only the concentration of the metal and the impurities differ. Maybe it is worth developing the alchemy branch and adding the possibility of purification low ql metal, i.e. 20 ql contains only 20% of metal, and the rest are impurities. In this way, a skilled alchemist could purify 10 kg of iron at 20 ql and obtain 100 ql of iron from it, but only 2 kg or even less, depends on what the purification looks like. If it were chance he could get less. Although a more interesting solution would probably be to limit the ql obtained ql of the metal through the level skill. In this way, a poor miner (not everyone has to like it) could produce higher-quality metal for his needs by developing alchemy.
 

A new map each year, does not have to be big, but it would probably ensure constant activity of many players and attract new ones. In fact, what Wurm has the best to offer is the constant exploration of new areas and the search for new and most favorable places for temporary settlement and development. After some time, the repetition of all activities is so boring and costs of premium becomes so high, with zero growth economy, that forces many players to quit.

 

 

 

... No.

-1.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, atazs said:

"After many months of inactivity, i am back once again to spam the forums with my stupid suggestions that nobody likes or wants."

 

Also speaking of population data, dude just have a look at the steamcharts page of WU instead of posting some random website that flat out says "ESTIMATED PLAYER NUMBERS"

 

But here, i'll make it easy for you:

446f684e83ad363757195e08f9a59909.png

 

Now compare that to that website you linked that claims "485" daily players 

facepalm

 

 

 

You're missing the point, I have provided a link to the MMO popularity list as an argument that there are MMOs that are gaining popularity over time as they develop in the right direction and attract more and more players.

Meanwhile, you provided arguments that the content in Wurm, from the players point of view, is insufficient to keep them in the game for longer and is not attractive enough compared to the competition to attract new players, because sandbox + open world supporters are growing, but in Wurm it is not visible.

 

If you set the date earlier than 2021 for Wurm Unlimited, or for Wurm Online on steam, you will see what I'm talking about.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, TheTrickster said:

 

Well, it a took a while, but we are back on the familiar song sheet.

 

Wurm isn't for everyone.  If you fundamentally don't like the core game you don't have to play it, but instead of trying to change what is quintessentially Wurm, play a game you like more.

 

Define the core game.

 

Due to these critical posts, I don't think I wrote a single post that would criticize terraforming, the item management system, the ability to catch and raise animals, plant forests, crafting system and buildings (although I complained about improving things that it is too monotonous for me).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, TheTrickster said:

Do these fora have rules about trolling?   We have a poster here who admittedly no longer plays Wurm and does not intend to play Wurm yet posts a bunch of stuff that they already know is highly contentious.

t. me 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Darnok said:

 

You're missing the point, I have provided a link to the MMO popularity list as an argument that there are MMOs that are gaining popularity over time as they develop in the right direction and attract more and more players.

Meanwhile, you provided arguments that the content in Wurm, from the players point of view, is insufficient to keep them in the game for longer and is not attractive enough compared to the competition to attract new players, because sandbox + open world supporters are growing, but in Wurm it is not visible.

 

If you set the date earlier than 2021 for Wurm Unlimited, or for Wurm Online on steam, you will see what I'm talking about.

 

 

From what I can tell through the passive-aggressive pitch, your suggestion is basically "Be more popular; do what everyone else does and abandon everything else as dross, you're only hurting your public image, and maximising profit is all that matters."

 

And the response you are getting is "Stuff being trendy to impress the fashionable. Wurm is based."

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, TheTrickster said:

Do these fora have rules about trolling?   We have a poster here who admittedly no longer plays Wurm and does not intend to play Wurm yet posts a bunch of stuff that they already know is highly contentious.

 

Wurm Online*, I am testing Unlimited, so far I can say that the person who generated the official maps deserves a special place in hell. Compared to Melody or Cad both maps in Unlimited are far too steep. If I were new to Wurm I would rage quit after my character would be stuck in the water at the shore and could not make one more step on land to regen stamina, but that is different topic 🙂

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