P2P worlds

Warcaptain · #1 01-15-2002, 03:30 AM

Ive PM'ed stefan about this many times, and he (as usual) never responds, so i'll post here about it.

Graal2002, Graal2001, and NewWorld, all started or are still on, private servers that are unaccesable to players. This is so they can build without players actualy seeing it. The reason for this is simply that age old saying 'first impressions are always best'. They dont want to release one of their p2p worlds if its buggy, or too incomplete. And that I agree with.

But here's my dig.. we, the players, are supposed to do the opposite.

When we want to make a p2p world, we have to make it all offline and pray that it works online. And cant really add awesome content that would draw players. But the first time that that pw's staff get a chance to make those cool things, is when the pw is up for the public. Which is not fair to us, because the first time the pw is up, is when we get the most players, and is usualy when the pw has the least cool p2p content.

Not only is this not good for the pw, but bad for stefan because it wont draw players because the current p2p players wont be interested in it, and it wont draw free players to play it.

Im not sure what the solution for this would be.. wheather it would be to give p2p worlds special tests, to see if they diserve to go up on a different p2p testing list, like 2k2,2k1, and nw were\are. Or lower requirements for p2p worlds so that we can get up sooner as testing worlds, like TOT did.

All in all, it isnt fair to require a p2p world to do the same things a free world does and still be good, because p2p is supposed to be exceptional, and all we can do offline is less than exceptional.

I hope, Stefan, that you take this into consideration, because its most likley a money loss to you, and a major loss to players that could be playing excellent pw's.

WHIPENIE4 · #2 01-15-2002, 04:05 AM

I agree, maybe they should put an option for pw owners and there staff and server when they get past the first stage like the reviewer they get to test everything online etc.. than eventually get put up on the list , this would also help reduce the UC servers

Warcaptain · #3 01-15-2002, 04:19 AM

but the requirements for p2p worlds shouldnt be as high, if a p2p world makes that much stuff, it wont be that good, unless they have alot of experience, but if we only had those types up, we'd not have any player made p2p ones.

royce · #4 01-15-2002, 09:41 AM

<3 for Warcaptain.

Echos · #5 01-15-2002, 09:49 AM

p2p playerworlds are more or less dead before they're put up, their destiny is sealed, so it doesn't really matter

Torankusu · #6 01-15-2002, 10:55 AM

Which is why the P2P owners are given about a week or so (UC, I suppose) to fix it up. Same with free, I think.

BlKnight · #7 01-15-2002, 11:03 AM

Oh please, make something good and people will like it, you have a few weeks to fix buggy NPCs...thats all you need. Simple as that...stop your complaining, I have waited a year and half trying to get my PW up, and one thing I have learned is stuff you thin is good isn't...you made think your stuff is good, but to others it isn't...work on something long enough, hard enough, with enough to do, then it may be good. Stop looking for the easy way out, because there isn't an easy way.

Oladahn · #8 01-15-2002, 04:23 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by BlKnight
Oh please, make something good and people will like it, you have a few weeks to fix buggy NPCs...thats all you need. Simple as that...stop your complaining, I have waited a year and half trying to get my PW up, and one thing I have learned is stuff you thin is good isn't...you made think your stuff is good, but to others it isn't...work on something long enough, hard enough, with enough to do, then it may be good. Stop looking for the easy way out, because there isn't an easy way.

Unfortunately that isn't true. No matter how good your stuff is a lot of people won't like it, wether out of spite, jeleousy, or flat stupidity. Though I agree a lot of bad builders really think their work is awesome. Though think of it this way, if the server is good enough to get put online you would hope that means it passed a certain quality standard at least, so maybe the real change needing to be made is that the quality standard for level tiling should be weighed more than the scripts for a p2p server when it's being reviewed, because frankly most p2p scripts don't work correctly offline so there really is no way to test them out thuroughly before they go online.

I think it's a good idea for new p2p servers to have time to work on their server online before it's actually on the server list for players to enter so they can fix up their scripts. Ideally when a server goes up the levels "should" be built completely, so all the attention could be payed to scripts in that time.

konidias · #9 01-15-2002, 06:06 PM

I think there needs to be stricter reviewing.. some of the playerworlds up now are GODAWFUL..

No content, a bunch of personal houses, bad levels, bad tiling, bad npcs, admin toys, stolen music, stolen graphics, stolen ideas..

I really do think that P2P servers should get a period of time on a private server to get everything in order, and ready for grand opening.. it's stupid to work on a playerworld for months and months, then come opening time, you have to blindly put it up, with 0 online testing, and there's probably going to be more people on your playerworld when it opens, then it will get ever again.

First impressions are very important.. heck you could make the awesomest playerworld, better then anything on Graal to date.. but it requires users to download new tilesets, or there are lots of errors when it goes online, or something.. then the players see a terribly tiled world, buggy npcs, and 99% of the time the first level doesn't even work.

If the playerworld passes the test of having a lot of content, nice levels, nice npcs, and a nice plot/story/whatever.. and it's p2p, then it should get maybe a week or two of a time period on a private server to make everything run like clockwork. Also, levels don't seem to be graded on quality.. but more quantity.. and if you're like me, you want quality over quantity..

Having a playerworld with 5000 levels on it that are nothing but scenery, isn't what I call exciting.. If the playerworld has towns, and quests, and detail on every level.. then heck yeah put that sucker up. If the playerworld has a bunch of empty levels, houses you can't go in, and silly quests, then give it a big thumbs down.

Funkee · #10 01-15-2002, 08:08 PM

point taken... hmm

Lycia · #11 01-15-2002, 08:43 PM

My opinion is this:

I agree 100% with Warcaptain and konidias. I have gone on several of the newer servers and seen crap levels, and not only that, but graphics that were used on other servers.

I am going to speak about my server.

PACHUKA gave me his levels. They now belong to me. I am free to use the graphics contained in his levels because they are mine now. That means, I am allowed to use his rainbow temple graphics, and so forth. In my playerserver, we have original signs. They haven't been implemented yet, but the signs that my graphics administrator created are very, very nice. They are designed for specific parts of the map. Now, not only do we make our own graphics, but, we're taking the time to make the levels the best before we implement quests. Thats the problem with most servers. They make 9847234 levels that are lousy, and then, they make these thoughtless quests where you go through the cave, kill Baddies, and get the prize. There's no thought, no nothing involved with those quest types. The good quests are where theres a puzzle involved. Some kind of mystery and intrigue that will captivate your audience. That's why I really liked Tyhm's airship quest. It was filled with SO many different things to do, and you actually had to use your brain to do them instead of slashing your sword endlessly.

Another quest I remember from Classic that I liked was Antago's Tower. Lots of stuff to do there. I think long quests are the best. I hate a quest where I'm done the darn thing in under 5 levels. It's stupid. Another thing, is I hate quests that have nothing to do with the plot of the server. It's like, I remember this one server, where it was based in the past, and what did I see? A quest for a futuristic item! LIKE, WHAT THE HELL? Have some damn cohesion, geez, will ya folks?

Now that we've covered quests, I think there should be something said about level quality. konidias mentioned that quality over quantity, and konidias, I couldn't agree with you more. Quality vs. quantity has been my motto for a long, long, very long time. I am so sick of going on these servers that have bad level linking, horrible tiling, and lousy landscaping. Take NPULSE for example, you walk along, and all of a sudden, the entire level goes black, or you wind up in the middle of the screen of an entirely different level unrelated to the ones surrounding it, or, you're walking on a path, and you'll see the path continuing in the next level about 10 tiles misaligned from the original.

Some people really need to learn how to make levels, and not only that, but learn how to link door to door levels. It's like, you walk in a doorway, and you wind up 6-7 tiles in front of the other side, and 2 tiles to the left of it. How damn hard is it to link those correctly?

It gets so dumb. I sometimes spend 2 hours on a level to make sure its perfect before I continue. Otherwise, theres no point in the level creation.

As for P2P, I think P2P servers are pointless. It's just a way for the owners and their friends to get account so they can post here and cause trouble for actual paying customers. Not only that, but I think Andor is the only decent P2P server there is. Graal 2001 is excluded because its the main one, but I'm referring to other "unofficial" servers. I think P2P people should get a test run, just as was mentioned earlier in this thread. It doesn't make sense to let them go online and have players see accidents that can't be prevented because the NPC scripters don't have access to a built-in NPC Server in the level editor.

BLAH!!!!!!

I could go on and on.

Anyway, I'm done rambling here. I hope also, that Stefan starts taking more strenous action upon how he accepts servers because frankly, I'm sick of trash on Graal.

BlKnight · #12 01-15-2002, 09:00 PM

Wow the lazyness is amazing....

Make all your scripts offline! Impress the PW Testers, show them what you will have...online, just rebuild the scripts. Don't want players to see? Put up start levels! Put in a title screen! So many other options, the one you people are thinking up are narrow minded...

As for what Lycia said, don't mkae me laugh...

Lycia · #13 01-15-2002, 09:06 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by BlKnight
Wow the lazyness is amazing....

Make all your scripts offline! Impress the PW Testers, show them what you will have...online, just rebuild the scripts. Don't want players to see? Put up start levels! Put in a title screen! So many other options, the one you people are thinking up are narrow minded...

As for what Lycia said, don't mkae me laugh...

Why? Because it actually contains some semblance of intelligent thought?

konidias · #14 01-15-2002, 09:14 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by BlKnight
Wow the lazyness is amazing....

Make all your scripts offline! Impress the PW Testers, show them what you will have...online, just rebuild the scripts. Don't want players to see? Put up start levels! Put in a title screen! So many other options, the one you people are thinking up are narrow minded...

As for what Lycia said, don't mkae me laugh...

You're the narrow minded one.. don't you understand that people want to PLAY on a server when it comes out? Make all your scripts offline? How exactly do you script online things, offline? Do you just magically guess that everything is right? Are you so good at scripting online npcs that you can debug your own script by glancing over it? I don't think so. Put in a title screen or start levels? Why, if the server isn't ready it shouldn't be publically playable. I think you're just getting your undies in a knot.. I swear, I'm starting to dislike you more and more each day.. You're so full of yourself it's unbelievable.. I mean, I know I can be ****y sometimes, but geez..

Here's some advice.. stop acting like you're some pro playerworld owner, and stop acting like your server is the greatest thing since sliced bread (because it isn't)

Lycia · #15 01-15-2002, 09:21 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by konidias

You're the narrow minded one.. don't you understand that people want to PLAY on a server when it comes out? Make all your scripts offline? How exactly do you script online things, offline? Do you just magically guess that everything is right? Are you so good at scripting online npcs that you can debug your own script by glancing over it? I don't think so. Put in a title screen or start levels? Why, if the server isn't ready it shouldn't be publically playable. I think you're just getting your undies in a knot.. I swear, I'm starting to dislike you more and more each day.. You're so full of yourself it's unbelievable.. I mean, I know I can be ****y sometimes, but geez..

Here's some advice.. stop acting like you're some pro playerworld owner, and stop acting like your server is the greatest thing since sliced bread (because it isn't)

Thank you, konidias.