Life is Feudal Official Forum

[MickeySmith]

I'll keep this short and to the point.

I have seen often in the forums where posters feel strongly about maintaining realism within the game. I propose that too much realism will draw away from the actual game mechanics. If the game becomes too much of a time sink with doing mundane chores such as repairing, eating, drinking or whatever then when will the player actually have time to enjoy playing the game?

If people want real life they need to just live their life. I come to a game to get a break from real life. I don't want to come to a game and work. I don't want to spend hours building stuff only to have it decay or be destroyed by another player within minutes. With some of the new durability rules our work shops are decaying and needing repair almost as much as we use them.

I really think the DEV team needs to take into account what is fun and what is work when they design how they want the game to play. I personally do not find it fun to click for hours. UO and SWG neither were this much of a time sink. Both games this one was meant to emulate.

[Razoreqx]

I have to agree with the decay rate on crafting buildings. At least an option to disable this would be beneficial for those of us who dont want to tax our player base would be nice. Say a setting in the world_1.file

Thanks

[MickeySmith]

To me that is just one aspect of the growing grind added to the game. I personally will not have fun if every day I play I have to repair, keep the monument going, replace tools, buildings etc.. that have either been broken, decayed or destroyed/looted by other players. There comes a point at which players feel the game is more work than fun. Game mechanics need to be taken into account over the impulse to make everything realistic. Players should not be overburdened with mundane everyday parts of real life that is replicated with constant clicking. i don't want to play real life I want to play a game. That is my escape from real life. I want to enjoy my time with friends! I want to build stuff, socialize with nothing to do, pvp and maybe even join in on some server wide events....not click buttons and keys.

[Razoreqx]

To me that is just one aspect of the growing grind added to the game. I personally will not have fun if every day I play I have to repair, keep the monument going, replace tools, buildings etc.. that have either been broken, decayed or destroyed/looted by other players. There comes a point at which players feel the game is more work than fun. Game mechanics need to be taken into account over the impulse to make everything realistic. Players should not be overburdened with mundane everyday parts of real life that is replicated with constant clicking. i don't want to play real life I want to play a game. That is my escape from real life. I want to enjoy my time with friends! I want to build stuff, socialize with nothing to do, pvp and maybe even join in on some server wide events....not click buttons and keys.

I agree. But they could have adjusted the decay rate of crafting buildings. Getting them to 100 ql to make HQ items is insane in itself but to see them take damage and the durability cap to reduce each time you repair them is kinda out of whack right now. HQ stations should have a separate variable of decay on use and repair cap loss. I see the value of this to encourage reconstruction over time but not after a few uses and repairs.
Sadly this is hard coded in the engine so I don't even have an option to reduce the rates in the DB function tables.

[Jimboski]

I absolutely agree with both of you. I have devolved my gameplay as a result of the durability cap loss. I am now making food on a campfire, using primitive tools and no longer making any items at any crafting station.

I do not wish to spend every day of of the week harvesting building logs and flux to rebuild workshops and other crafting equipment.

At some point playing 10% of the game is going to get old.

If we all applied this durability model to our computers, nobody would be playing this game.

[Hoshiqua]

You can also make small repair kits.. they only take a softwood billet and 10 nails, that's nothing.

About realism, I think a well made "realistic" game should stick to realism. If something is that much of an unbalancing, it's a flaw in the game design, and that means you're not realistic enough. In real life, weapons all had a purpose, there weren't "better" weapons that required the same training time or cost the same.

Now, for gameplay mechanics, I think it should also stick to realism as much as possible and find ways to make it fun for everyone. Of course,elements that are pure time sinks with no fun should be replaced with a BIT less realistic mechanics.

But there are a few things that can stay completly realistic and be enjoyable for everyone ! Like melee, archery, horse riding, damage system.. As I said, if something gets unbalanced, it's a flaw in the design, not because of too much realism.

So, there shouldn't be wierd ass WoW like abilities like "arrow rain" or somethings like that.. or you shouldn't need to be a master of the bow for your arrow to the leg to slow someone down.. that's just dumb. Same for melee .. why wouldn't you be able to mitigate all the damage with a parry ? That's like 60% of fighting in general x)

[MickeySmith]

On the decay, yes small repair kits are very easy to make. However, they also cause such a huge drop in total durability that if that's all you use you might as well replace the building every week. That's just insane and definitely not realistic. I also think tying the quality to the shops is going to be an ongoing problem concerning the durability. I actually don't like the quality system at all. Why not a simpler system where the item is tied directly to the skill of the crafter...the end. I know SWG had the whole different resource quality system but it was awful and most the crafters I knew didn't like having to store piles and piles of the same resource just because of quality. UO had a much easier system and it worked just fine. That's all another debate though and one I don't even want to argue.

Mastering a weapon in game mechanics (speaking from a table top rpg point of view) implies you have the ability and knowledge of how and where to put your weapon strikes to do damage. If you were a novice archer (let's say in game terms a 30-60) do you really think you could put an arrow into an armored target on the run while in combat yourself? Now if you answer that I would then like to ask you where you got your combat training and what medieval wars you are a veteran of.

No one on here can talk of realism in medieval combat and the realism of the weapons because I'm pretty sure no one on here has had the real life experience of combat in the medieval age. If you are referring to what you think is realism from what you have read or what you have seen on tv then you really don't know first hand. So let's stop talking about realism in medieval combat

Balancing of game mechanics is much more important than being realistic. Realism is a nice by product if it can be attained. However, I don't want realism if it is just going to cause me to click endlessly at the computer for nothing other than someone wanted to fill their time at the computer.

[Razoreqx]

You can also make small repair kits.. they only take a softwood billet and 10 nails, that's nothing.

About realism, I think a well made "realistic" game should stick to realism. If something is that much of an unbalancing, it's a flaw in the game design, and that means you're not realistic enough. In real life, weapons all had a purpose, there weren't "better" weapons that required the same training time or cost the same.

Now, for gameplay mechanics, I think it should also stick to realism as much as possible and find ways to make it fun for everyone. Of course,elements that are pure time sinks with no fun should be replaced with a BIT less realistic mechanics.

But there are a few things that can stay completly realistic and be enjoyable for everyone ! Like melee, archery, horse riding, damage system.. As I said, if something gets unbalanced, it's a flaw in the design, not because of too much realism.

So, there shouldn't be wierd ass WoW like abilities like "arrow rain" or somethings like that.. or you shouldn't need to be a master of the bow for your arrow to the leg to slow someone down.. that's just dumb. Same for melee .. why wouldn't you be able to mitigate all the damage with a parry ? That's like 60% of fighting in general x)

I'll go back to my original point. Why dont you let US as server admins decide whats realism vs fantasy. Its our server and our community. Please add the decay features as set option in the world config.

Thanks.

[Hoshiqua]

No need to be a veteran to know that, when you got an arrow in the leg, no matter the skill of the archer who shot it, you got a frickin arrow in your leg.. it hurts !! D: But I get what you're saying, and this is where I think you're wrong on another point.. Combat is in this game should be entirely based on the skill of the player himself. Having a "skilled" character should only be considered as having a better "Combat Tool", for easier aiming and all. But if you manage to land an arrow and make it pierce the leg armor of some guy, you shouldn't have to be a master for it to have effect on the speed of the guy !

Also, no need to be a vet to know how medieval fighting worked, at least the basics. No one is a vet here, and we'll never know the exact reality of things, but we do have, I think, a good enough vision of it. Yes, I documentated myself by other means than TV or that shiet.
We NEED to worry about realism, and you can do so and, at the same time, keep the game enjoyable. This game was never supposed to be a simple game for everyone. Unless Bobik changed his mind with the big sales, and the taste of selling a lot, this is supposed to be a niche game, groundbreaking in terms of realism, skill based gameplay, and immersion. So stop saying we need to worry about gameplay first, it does not have to be any different than with realism, except for a FEW aspects that can't work in a game, like sleeping.

You got to understand that "realistic" has always been one of the keywords of this game. Get that through your skulls, people.

[Jimboski]

You got to understand that "realistic" has always been one of the keywords of this game. Get that through your skulls, people.

Realistic to what end? Do you have any idea how long it takes a tree to grow big enough to make a building log out of it? Are we going to wait 3-4 months for our crops to grow? There is no sleeping in game, can you go days and days on end without sleep?

[Hoshiqua]

As I said in the post right above, YES it has to have limitations on things of life that are 100% lame. But the things most mentionned, like combat, archery, crafting.. can be very close from realistic, AND make the game more based on PLAYER skill (which is always better), and more enjoyable.

[MickeySmith]

Realism can also kill the game if the realism is so much work that players are not enjoying the game. Right now food production is so low that most of the players I have played with that liked to do food have quit the game. The returns on food production doesn't even cover replacing your fields. Shops are decaying so fast that you have to repair them as much as you use them.

As for combat, you want them based off the player. That is a twitch game or a first person shooter. Last I checked this is a rpg game right? That means combat is based upon the skill of the character. I don't agree with you that a game based off of player skill is always better. I personally don't enjoy shooters where how good I do is based off how good my hand eye coordination is in real life because I'm old and it isn't what it used to be when I was a kid If this is going to become a twitch game then I might as well leave now. BTW that combat upgrade that SWG got that killed the game and drove 1000's of players out of it was a change from auto target to twitch based self targeting. So obviously not everyone thinks that kind of combat is better.

It's fine to try to get a niche in a game market. But if that niche isn't going to sell to players then it's not going to become anything because without alot of players this game is a fail. Settlements are going to require large amounts of players to survive in a MMO.

[Kjaskar]

SWG did not get killed by having twitch targetting included, since this so called "twitch targetting" was just a poorly done attempt at making the broken NGE-combat system "iconic and fun". No real player skill was required.

This game however already has twitch targetting and playerskill based reaction, and probably will have even more once combat gets polished.

The only RPG-aspect will, as far as I can see, be "special attacks" that can be executed by clicking a button on your hotbar, or similar.
You still will have to aim your attack and time it. Which basicly is all about playerskill.

Simple example:
Two Players, one is bad at FPS-Aiming, the other one is great at it. Same character skills and equipment. In this game, the one that has more experience and training in FPS-Games will probably win over the lesser experienced. Why? Because aiming that bow and being able to predict where it will fly will give you the upper hand. Knowing where that sword will strike when you aim it in a way, might turn the battle to your favor.

In classical non-twitch based RPG's you have none of that. Your equipment, character skill level and knowledge of abilities and how to combine them decide mathematically how much damage you have and depending on what abilities you use you will decide the battle. There is still player skill, but its largely based on numbers, not on reactional skill.


To the topic at hand I think realism is a good way to create immersion, but a very bad way of creating fun systems. Realism based game mechanics, like for example the mini-games on the website that are planned for the MMO, can be fun for a while and also support immersion to an extent.

The Idea that my furnace and anvil lose durability so fast, that crafting 300 nails will render it useless in quality, neither is realistic nor does it promote any fun gameplaywise. It doesn't even balance anything, as you'll only put in more time, effort and materials to build a new station every now and then to keep crafting at a reasonable quality. Not fun, not balanced, not realistic. Some extent of durability loss (that does not mess with quality, for example) is great. Maybe let your buildings lose durability as it is, but remove the quality-loss alltogether for now. You'd have a use for repair tools and another way of realism to mess around with.

[Jimboski]

Hoshiqua, the intended discussion started by the original poster had nothing to do with combat. Subsequent postings had nothing to do with combat either, yet you decided to bring it up anyways. Even as the thread continues you steer it back to combat. If you want to talk about combat, bring it up in another thread.

Way to be be the forum troll completely off target.

[Hoshiqua]

The forum troll.. get home you are drunk. I'm talking about combat a lot as an example, and this is the thing I do the most in the game, so I know the mechanics. I was here longer than any of you, and I can tell you, this game is (was ?) supposed to have the maximum amount of realism, with balancing in the way. But why make balancing on stuff make the game less competitive, less rewarding, less opened ? Why can't people see that you can have a very close to realistic game (IN A WAY, STOP BRINGING UP THE NON FUN PARTS OF LIFE) and still make it balanced, and WAY more enjoyable than when you don't even try ? If you want to play a damn RPG with mathematical combat, there are TENS of those on the market right now ! All of you came when YO had good success and are trying to shake up the niche game this was supposed to be. Now, give me a real example of something that would become completly game breaking with no other ways to fix it than making the whole mechanics less realistic, and less enjoyable.. As far as I know, this game takes element from things that did exist, and were used in real life, in the past.

Maybe am I the last one thinking that ? Well, you can thank me for giving 50 bucks to make the project survive, when none of you were here, or willing to risk the money. Enjoy turning this game into yet another MMO that is not gonna live up to its promises, and will die.

[MickeySmith]

You mean because you have that alpha yellow tag under your name you have more invested than anyone else and that your comments mean more? Wow. Maybe I should throw out there that I have invested over $100 for several accounts so that our gaming community could give the game a try. Maybe I should also then note that several of our gaming community players then invested $100s more to join in? Does that make my comments now relevant?

I guess it boils down to one question; do the DEVs want to make money or do they want a niche game where a 100 people are playing? Right now if you look at the YO servers there are maybe 100 people online at any given time. What were they like 6 months ago? I've seen people complaining about server populations dropping. Guess what. The game was new, fresh and people wanted to try it out. Population grew and now it has ebbed. Why? Because claims were given protection? Judgement Hour was introduced? I'm thinking because the game lacks much to keep you in once it has drawn your interest. I'm thinking many of the changes have made the game more work than fun. Those are the reasons our community members have been giving when they exit the game.

I love that everything in the game is player made. I love that all the combat is going to be pvp. That to me is its niche; not realism. However, with 64 max population servers that have trouble supporting even that many online at one time that leaves the game seriously lacking. Servers are going to need population to be fun. That means putting a game out there people are going to want to play and continue playing. Right now most of the players that purchased in our community are not wanting to play

[Hoshiqua]

That is true. I know a lot of PvPers who do not play much right now because combat is really lacking, and I fear what the devs planned is not going to make them all come back. And same for skills.. there are VERY annoying elements in the game that make it plainly.. more work. No more realism and/or playability !

I see the debate has turned into an argument, so let's put an end to it and go back to a debating state.

To make it clear with my vision on Realism vs Game Mechanics..

I'm totally aware some realistic elements, elements of our real lives, are not to be put in a game, because it doesn't bring more fun / balance / rewardness (is that even a word ?) to the game. Those things could be, for example, having to sleep, having to take a long time to eat meals or cook basic food.. those are what I call "Real realism" which is the realism we can not escape from, that makes life a bit less fun, in its ways, and would break a game.

Now, my point is, there are MANY realistic elements that could totally fit into the game, AND make it more playable, more fun, more rewarding, and sometimes, more skill-based, which, by the way, is something you can train. You may have a harder time if you are "old", but you can still train a bit, and it will come. On Mount & Blade, I've seen much older people doing very good !

Back to the point. Those realistic elements that would FIT into the game and make it better (for my point of view, that is), I call them "Good realism". Realism that is, or was also, at least majorly, part of the real world, and that is not boring or timesinking.

And I thing the game, considering the goal I know it had for a long time (and that was my point here, I was here for quite a while now, it doesn't make my post any more valuable, but at least it makes me more credible to say such things), could use MUCH more changes and additions that would add a lot of "Good Realism" to the game, and actually make the "realism" argument that you can see on the website's front page be more relevant.

I have posted many ideas in many threads here on the forums, or on the suggestion pages. Ideas for a better health system, to simply drop the old fashioned health bar, ideas for better combat, ideas for better crafting, progression, and economics (remove the "skill line" logic, and change / remove a few skills that right now wouldn't work that well with that change), ideas for better interactions between players.. and there is many more to come.

Now, when I say "better", remember it is my, and those who upvoted the idea, point of view. Everything is opened to debate, and I'm listening. Of course, I am mainly using elements from other games, that should be dead by now because of their age, but are in fact still filled with a, at least, quite active community !

So, this is what I call "realism". I know, just like you, that it needs limits or a game is not longer a game anymore. But a game can be very "realistic" ans still make you have a very good time. How ? By making you "live" in another era .. Middle Ages ! Unless you invented the time machine, your life is nowhere near like the one you will """"""live"""""" in the game.

Realism should not be AGAINST Game mechanics. Both can exist with ease. And that is what I try to prove with my ideas, and I'm not the only one !

[Jimboski]

If this game ends up being yours, hers, his, mine, their, concept alone it will fail. This game is already swirling around the toilet bowl. There are too many people with different opinions to make it one size fits all.

There is only one way to keep it from going down the crapper and keep everyone happy. Make it playable for everyone's idea.

I'll go back to my original point. Why dont you let US as server admins decide whats realism vs fantasy. Its our server and our community.

[Hoshiqua]

We're also talking about MMO.. Where there won't be any modding from players.

[Jimboski]

Its semi-modable now, but they only let you go half way with the modding. I feel like I am on a short leash. Some things I can change a little bit but not the whole bit.

Lif1.jpg

[MickeySmith]

I myself am more concerned about the MMO. The YO is just too small a world to be any fun with the kind of community that's required for the elements of the game. Any large scale construction projects require a good amount of people or you plain burn out on the grind. PvP to me is not much fun if we are talking less than 10 in the total battle. With most servers you are lucky to have 10 online at the same time. I don't get much out of the game at this point. I kind of think releasing YO is going to kill the game because the game is not much fun at low populations.

Realism to me that I don't consider much fun is the repair, rebuild, redo--reruns....I think a game is most fun when you get something new to do, something new to explore, something different. Rehashing the same stuff you did yesterday and the day before and the day before....you get the picture. That gets old, boring and stale. Putting stuff in the game with the sole purpose to give people stuff to do so they aren't bored is bad programming period. I don't really understand why people are asking for being forced to rebuild or repair the same things over and over. I'm really not interested in taking a week or two building a settlement only to have a group raid and destroy everything in one night. Castle walls are a pain to build and seeing one drop in mere moments is just nuts. Why even build walls?

I sure hope they take a different direction on some of their ideas otherwise they will lose our whole community if they haven't already. I've tried talking some of our players into staying but we went from almost 20 down to 3 and even the rest of us are wavering. We might try again at MMO time, but YO is a waste of our time.

[Hoshiqua]

Nice one ! You removed skill lines ! It looks like shit tho Does it work well ?

Yea, I agree, community is thining out. I think it's mainly because of lack of communication from developers. Devblogs are good but they are too short, too inacurate and too thin on info, AND they came.. too late.

Back to the point. I agree that having to repair buildings all the time is not realistic. You do not break an anvil so easily, nor do you.. burn ? out a stone chimney. Repairing should stay tho, because it will give the builders something to do after everything is built up.. that will also force people to maintain large amount of people to keep a castle up ! But rates of durability loss should definitly be lowered, for buildings.

[MickeySmith]

I think they should adopt the wiki as official and feed it with the information that is available. It seems info is in short supply and in high demand. I read the reddit interview and some of the things sounded promising on there.