graal 4.1?

[Googi]

Originally Posted by Skrobo2

"Make everybody use it even though they don't want to." <-- How do you know what everyone wants or doesn't want?

I do not "know" what everyone wants or doesn't want. I think we can safely infer, however, that the average player does not want to go through another server just to get to the server he really wants to play.

[Tyhm]

Originally Posted by Googi

I do not "know" what everyone wants or doesn't want. I think we can safely infer, however, that the average player does not want to go through another server just to get to the server he really wants to play.

...am I allowed to agree?

The Average Player should start on their common server. Log off on Classic, log back on - hey, you're on Classic again. Oh, you wanna go to Zodiac instead? Go through Hubworld. Wanna skip Hubworld and warp directly to Zodiac?
*shrugs* This is the debatable part. I get saddled a lot with saying "No, you have to go through Zodiac, there can be no F7 Server List!" I just want to discuss the possibility. You say a lot of players like to hop from one server to another as quickly as possible, and it would greatly inconvenience them to have to go through anything more complex than our current F7 Server. I say without a common ground there's no sense in Global Games, Global Currency, Etc; and without an enforced "hallway" there's no common ground. But that's me.

Am I wrong? Or is your argument that Global Currency isn't worth the inconvenience?

[Googi]

Originally Posted by Tyhm

I say without a common ground there's no sense in Global Games, Global Currency, Etc; and without an enforced "hallway" there's no common ground. But that's me.

The thing you have to understand about global games is that whether you put them in a hubworld or not, they're still in a position of direct competition with the servers. Whether the player is forced to walk past the games in order to get to the server he wants to play is irrelevant. Choosing to play a game means he is choosing not to play a server.

You seem to think that people really want to play global games but can't because there's nobody else to play with. This isn't true. Zone is, in a sense, a sort of "global game" because anybody can play it. It requires a large number of people to be fun far more than the other global games do as well. You can have a good game of Bombermad with four people. Zone with four people is no fun at all (and it does fall to such low numbers daily). Zone is successful as a "global game" because it's able to compete with actual servers. Something that the real global games can't do.

Global currency can be a source of revenue to Graal (I assume you're talking about the kind of global currency where people buy it for real money and then convert it to the currency of other servers.) A "hubworld" doesn't help this though. Whether players have to go through a hubworld or not doesn't matter. Either way, global currency is just a tool to get the things the players really want on the server they really want to be playing.

You could argue that hubworld gives an added incentive as Graal can offer things that can be purchased using global currency for use on hubworld, but that assumes that hubworld would have people who truly "play" it, which would require it to be a true server capable of competing with the other servers. Doing so would require you to turn hubworld into a server with a vast map, complex economy, possibly quests, kingdoms/guilds, etc. It would have to cease to be the hubworld you describe and become more like a 2K2 that advertises itself to the rest of Graal by forcing players to go through it to get to the servers they want to play.

[Tyhm]

Originally Posted by Googi

The thing you have to understand about global games is that whether you put them in a hubworld or not, they're still in a position of direct competition with the servers. Whether the player is forced to walk past the games in order to get to the server he wants to play is irrelevant. Choosing to play a game means he is choosing not to play a server.

You seem to think that people really want to play global games but can't because there's nobody else to play with. This isn't true. Zone is, in a sense, a sort of "global game" because anybody can play it. It requires a large number of people to be fun far more than the other global games do as well. You can have a good game of Bombermad with four people. Zone with four people is no fun at all (and it does fall to such low numbers daily). Zone is successful as a "global game" because it's able to compete with actual servers. Something that the real global games can't do.

Global currency can be a source of revenue to Graal (I assume you're talking about the kind of global currency where people buy it for real money and then convert it to the currency of other servers.) A "hubworld" doesn't help this though. Whether players have to go through a hubworld or not doesn't matter. Either way, global currency is just a tool to get the things the players really want on the server they really want to be playing.

You could argue that hubworld gives an added incentive as Graal can offer things that can be purchased using global currency for use on hubworld, but that assumes that hubworld would have people who truly "play" it, which would require it to be a true server capable of competing with the other servers. Doing so would require you to turn hubworld into a server with a vast map, complex economy, possibly quests, kingdoms/guilds, etc. It would have to cease to be the hubworld you describe and become more like a 2K2 that advertises itself to the rest of Graal by forcing players to go through it to get to the servers they want to play.

Well argued, particularly the Hubworld=G2K7 point. I suppose the great hope will have to remain independant advertising (Graal as a Hosting Service over Graal as a community of worlds (despite that these worlds hate and try to destroy each other to cannibalize the others' playerbase)), and the Global Games are destined to failure. By extension the global economy's a joke, as why would anyone care about money that only matters in the global games that only detract from [insert playerworld here]'s playercount? Zone and Bombermad are natural enemies competing for the rare resource that is Players, thus it is in Zone's best interest to see that Global Gralats fall flat.

Maybe in a world where Zone has a strong enough playerbase that it need not fear losing 4 players to Bombermad...or in a world where the community is generous enough that a multi-server scavenger hunt doesn't devolve into petty attempts to steal each others' players in a server-spanning secret game of Hungry Hungry Hippos...

[Googi]

Originally Posted by Tyhm

Maybe in a world where Zone has a strong enough playerbase that it need not fear losing 4 players to Bombermad...or in a world where the community is generous enough that a multi-server scavenger hunt doesn't devolve into petty attempts to steal each others' players in a server-spanning secret game of Hungry Hungry Hippos...

Zone doesn't "fear" losing games to Bombermad. It can't fear anything - it's a server. Of course, the developers may fear that their server will lose players to another server or to global games (though in the case of Zone only Stefan does much development), but even if they didn't, the servers wouldn't be in competition with each other any less. The average player doesn't play Zone rather than Bombermad because Zone (or its developer(s)) is "afraid" of losing him to Bombermad, he simply finds Zone to be better than Bombermad (and, really, it would be hard to argue that he's wrong. Bombermad gets old after a short while. Even if there was an "unlimited" number of people to play Bombermad with, the idea of clocking even 50 hours playing it is unimaginable.)