So.. Let´s get online!

[DuBsTeRmAn]

We are all saying there aren´t enough people online to play..

Now there were only two people online to play, so i decided to log on and have some fighting.. About 15 minutes later the playercount raised to 10 already.. If we just get online, more people will follow.. and more..

I´m back! Where are you..

[dude2020]

Cutting my wrists because your back.

[Feonix]

Nothing worth staying for, other than the free exp you get from trial noobs.

[Deas_Voice]

Originally Posted by Feonix

Nothing worth staying for, other than the free exp you get from trial noobs.

this and zone needs something new to be "alive"; alter the gameplay, quests or something...

[dude2020]

Quests doesn't fit on Zone. At all.

Its a pure PvP server. What it needs is actual updates.

[bahamutstevetff]

a new planet could bring home the bacon, id say some new weapons but they would just mess that up.

[dude2020]

New weapons that are not OP, and don't suck ass with a new planet that you can unlock them on (and be able to use them every else) would be amazing.

[BigBear3]

New oldbies.

[Feonix]

Blue wizard quests and unlockables

[kia345]

Bring back random alchemy

[sandroviet0]

lol no bull**** quests on zone.
quests doesn't fit on zone, zone is just getting exp and playing events.
in other words "just havin fun".

zone just need new stuff like weapons,new maps,maybe a fun planet with a whole new system. just the little things can change alot.

[scooter123]

A new planet didn't work the last time

[Feonix]

Events planet sucks

[fowlplay4]

There should be a planet where you race to build a Large Hardon Collider for science.

[Seeya]

urma needs a hardon collider

[HirakoShinji]

Originally Posted by dude2020

Quests doesn't fit on Zone. At all.

Its a pure PvP server. What it needs is actual updates.

Yes, updates.
But look at WoW, it sucks, has quests, it's somewhat PvP, it sucks, and people actually have fun on it.
I'm pretty sure if they added quests to Zone it'll be worth playing again.

[Seeya]

Originally Posted by HirakoShinji

Yes, updates.
But look at WoW, it sucks, has quests, it's somewhat PvP, it sucks, and people actually have fun on it.
I'm pretty sure if they added quests to Zone it'll be worth playing again.

WoW has updates, content, PVP, a balanced gaming system (i've only played until level 45 as a Mage), and it's got support, plenty of things Graal doesn't have.. Adding quests to Zone won't magically bring playercount back to graalonline.

[dude2020]

Originally Posted by Seeya

WoW has updates, content, PVP, a balanced gaming system (i've only played until level 45 as a Mage), and it's got support, plenty of things Graal doesn't have.. Adding quests to Zone won't magically bring playercount back to graalonline.

Balanced is the last thing you can call it.

Quests=/Zone. It just doesn't fit with Zone. Zone is a pure PvP server, now if we added challenges (EX. Halo Reach's challenge system where you are rewarded credits for completing certain things in gameplay but in Zone's case money/exp) that would be acceptable.

[Fulg0reSama]

Originally Posted by Seeya

a balanced gaming system

[scooter123]

Originally Posted by dude2020

Balanced is the last thing you can call it.

Quests=/Zone. It just doesn't fit with Zone. Zone is a pure PvP server, now if we added challenges (EX. Halo Reach's challenge system where you are rewarded credits for completing certain things in gameplay but in Zone's case money/exp) that would be acceptable.

I would like a challenge system. I second this.

[Stephen]

Short "Missions" (rather than quests) would be a great way for players to enjoy Zone during timezone spikes. Missions should be short enough that they won't interfere with regular PVP gameplay but complex enough for small groups to enjoy. The biggest problem would be making decent bot AI and fun stage layouts. However, this would be a great way to introduce achievements, which could later be extended into regular PvP fighting.



I firmly believe there isn't enough activity within Graal Online to bring profit back to Gold Servers, regardless of content quality. The only way to make servers popular at this point is to remove poorly performing playerwords entirely and funnel the playercount into a handful (3-4) of better supported servers. It certainly sounds like a poor option, but it is definitely the most effective.

Removing poorly performing playerworlds should free up player-developers so that they can help on the new "focused" servers. The overall problem is that this would limit sales of playerworlds for Eurocenter, the backbone of their sales to date. I'm sure they see this as too high-risk. If the new focused playerworlds were re-hauled for in-game sales (gelat shop) we would see better sales performance across graal at the minimal risk of dissuading owners and loyal developers from removed playerworlds.

It's very clear, after all, that Graal Online is enjoyed more by players than by developers. Eurocenter needs to refocus their business plan... presuming they don't intend to kill off Graal Online.

[Supaman771]

Originally Posted by Stephen

The only way to make servers popular at this point is to remove poorly performing playerwords entirely

So you want Zone removed?

Also, how does removing poor playerworlds (the ones which average 0-5 people) make the others more popular?
80+0=80?

[haunter]

Originally Posted by Stephen

I firmly believe there isn't enough activity within Graal Online to bring profit back to Gold Servers, regardless of content quality. The only way to make servers popular at this point is to remove poorly performing playerwords entirely and funnel the playercount into a handful (3-4) of better supported servers. It certainly sounds like a poor option, but it is definitely the most effective.

Removing poorly performing playerworlds should free up player-developers so that they can help on the new "focused" servers. The overall problem is that this would limit sales of playerworlds for Eurocenter, the backbone of their sales to date. I'm sure they see this as too high-risk. If the new focused playerworlds were re-hauled for in-game sales (gelat shop) we would see better sales performance across graal at the minimal risk of dissuading owners and loyal developers from removed playerworlds.

It's very clear, after all, that Graal Online is enjoyed more by players than by developers. Eurocenter needs to refocus their business plan... presuming they don't intend to kill off Graal Online.

I've been creeping your posts a bit for the last day. :3 This is kind of a weird place to carry on a discussion about this, but I guess it's as good as any. :P The following is an account of the Graal that I would be interested in as a consumer, and does not represent any kind of professional opinion or advice. (in other words: "I don't really know what I'm talking about!")

What you've said here about restructuring Graal Online is interesting. You also bring up a good point about losing the income on playerworld rentals though, but I think there is a way around that. I don't think refocusing the business plan solely onto graal players is the way to go, I think it's almost the opposite. Namely: Separating Graal the game and Graal the "engine".

I think what you've said here is good for the first part of the change.

The Game: Restructure Graal Online:

• Cull the current list of playerworlds to try and...
  
• --- Thicken the talent pool
  
• --- Aid the increase of overall quality
• Make what is left F2P and bring in some income using microtransactions (be sure to study the successes well before attempting this)
• Treat these "official" servers as a product demonstrations.(more on this below) This means more involvement from GO to ensure quality, and even compensation (commission) for "player developers" to draw in top talent.

That's pretty much what you've described, but I think there is an essential secondary part of the business that I would be more interested in.

Development a.k.a. Graal as an "engine" (using Unity as a template):

• Beef up the development tools. This means:
  
• --- 100% offline tools available on Windows, Mac, and Linux.
  
• --- More focus on scripting rather than in-built features (e.g. movement, default swords) with a heavy library of pre-created scripts to replace what was "removed".
  
• --- Fully supported layers.
  
• --- I'm sure others could list more...
• Market the engine as an easy to learn WYSIWYG tool for 2D action MMO titles. No 3D modeling experience or software required!
  
• ---Use the "official" servers to show off what you can do with the tools.
• Offer a free version of these tools, and a "Pro" version that you pay a 1-time licensing fee for.
  
• --- Not sure what the cost would be, or how much is in the base package, and how much would be add-ons. You could not charge nearly what they do for Unity though.
• Offer game hosting as a separate service. (the third pillar of the business model)

Free version:

• Ability to use the "engine"s full features to create a 100% singleplayer experience
• Can be published and played through a proprietary Graal client (can't publish stand-alone)
• Can be hosted online and played through a browser plugin (still only singleplayer)
• Includes a Graal Engine splash screen, un-removable banners, whatever else...
  

Pro version:

• Is purchased as a one-time licensing fee. Uses similar pricing structure to Unity's packages, but must be more affordable (Graal can't compete on Unity's level).
• May be used by companies, educational institutions, etc, that made $X amount of net / gross in the previous year.
• Tools for publishing to a standalone .exe or .app, as well as iPhone, and whatever else you can fit in: Android, XNA (Xbox 360)(Essentially anything you don't need a dev-kit for.)
• Includes the tools needed to get the game running as an MMO.
  
• --- Users can buy hosting through Eurocenter, through a third party, or do it themselves.
  
• --- Users can choose to monetize their game how they like, or choose not to. Subscriptions, micro-transactions... All the tools they need to get these things started are included with the Pro version
• No Graal Engine splash screens or banners required.

That's a quick overview, and I probably side stepped some pretty big pitfalls in the idea, but essentially, that is the kind of thing that would be interested in spending money on... :P

What are your thoughts on it?

[Stephen]

Originally Posted by haunter

I think what you've said here is good for the first part of the change.

Graal Online could be a great example of Quattro Play, Eurocenter's game engine, currently popular on the iPhone. I anticipate Stefan intends to merge Graal Online and iPhone Graal.

This kind of integration will make a big difference, but it's more like buying new clothes instead of doing laundry. I hold personal interest in Graal Online, I can see the awesome opportunity for improvement - potential. We don't need big changes over night.

It's realistic to say that Graal Online is in a period of critical decision. Like a boat that is sinking, you wouldn't sit ankle-deep in freezing water and design a better boat. Over the next 1-2 years a few simple changes could be made. Focus shouldn't be driving new players to graal but optimizing profitability and then looking at the bigger picture.

[jkool666]

Originally Posted by BigBear3

New oldbies.

Newboldbies? :O

[CharlieM]

Originally Posted by Stephen

it's more like buying new clothes instead of doing laundry..

I do this, please don't discriminate.