![]() |
Applications to create playerworlds.
I never saw this discussed before, so I decided to give it a shot. What does everyone think of Graalians having to apply to be able to create a playerworld? It's a known fact that there are very very many UC servers, and that developers are running thin amongst them, which results in bad things for them. A lot of the UC servers I've seen are a waste of space, and have absolutely no chance of becoming hosted whatever.
The pros and cons I see are.. Pro(s): - With less UC servers, the developers will be less thinned out, meaning servers with competent Management will be more likely to be dev'd. - Apparently, the spam of UC servers can cause occasional lag to other servers? I'm not sure about this, but it's a rumor I picked up.. So basically, if it's true, there'd be less lag, I guess. Con(s): - It kind of takes away from the whole "PLAYERS CAN EASILY DEVELOP THEIR OWN GAME!!!" bit. - Graal would lose money selling less useless servers, which probably means we'd have to pay more Euros to buy accounts :[ An application would most likely ask about the Manager/Owner's past experiances in developing, their development skills, the server plans/ideas, and who they'd already have working for them, and what they are capable of. Not sure if it's a good or bad idea, so I was wondering what others thought. |
Lag? Just use the money to upgrade the server machines.
|
Quote:
|
I disagree. If someone wants to create a playerworld, they should be allowed to. CJ makes more money this way anyway, so it won't change.
Maybe applications for someone who can't afford to buy a server, though. |
Quote:
|
Problem is, if they start putting standards into purchasing a server then there will be probably no UC servers. Meaning no income, meaning raised prices for those who don't want to own a server(the players).
|
Quote:
Quote:
If the number of UC servers were drastically reduced I could see more developers, let alone quality ones, having to work together. I would guess this increases the chances of a quality playerworld being released. With a quality (and I mean really really really good quality) playerworld you can attract more players and have a bigger playerbase...which would mean more accounts being upgraded. I don't know. :blush: |
Crono, I asked you to help us out, you said no D: You aren't helping to fix that problem, either.
|
Quote:
|
You will be delighted to know that we are right in the process of developing an application to create playerworlds with!!
|
Quote:
|
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
|
Quote:
Quote:
It's a good idea in theory, but beggars(Graal) can't be choosers. Even if this were to work, do you think Graal would cut quantity for quality? |
Quote:
|
Quote:
You make it too strict, and then you have very few servers. You make it too lenient and you have a minor inconvenient of having servers fill out a template of what, how and why. Like I said, there were a lot less projects back in the day before you paid for a server... because back then you HAD to come up with a decent server to get PWA to allow you to have an UC server. So in reality, this has been done before... and there were still tons of crappy servers, and a few that were worth noting. |
Quote:
Like bread |
Quote:
|
Quote:
|
Quote:
I think good developers either are doing their own playerworlds, or work on good projects. I dont see a reason for applications for playerworlds. If an idea is good, then it might peek the interest of good developers. That's how I see it, anyway... |
The real pro to applications is that less servers = devs gathered.
There are plently of competent devs on Classic servers that appear to work together fine enough to keep the sever running, so I don't quite see it written on the walls that it will result in destructive (to the staff roster and the server) drama frequently. You're going to have mature and immature staff wherever you go ;p Anyways, Dusty pretty much hit the nail on the head, but it seems as though many believe Graal isn't worth it's current prices anymore, and when you inflate the prices, you should inflate the quality of the game to make people WANT to pay for it, which is why controlling the quality of the servers could be worth a shot. I'm not necesscarily saying yes or no to it, myself, but sometimes a business may need to take risks to survive ;o |
Quote:
|
Quote:
|
Yeah, it's ridiculous.
Players develop his game, he should at least develop/update our tools z.z |
I don't think it's a good idea just because it would take away too much money from the game. Stefan makes the majority of his income from playerworlds, not player accounts. Or atleast half.. ;x
The reason most people like graal is because it's developed and run by the players, for the most part it is anyway. Taking the ability to make your own playerworld away, no matter how crappy, would take away from it's spark imo. :mad: Some players might not be as talented or creative, but it takes time to learn. There really is no other way to learn to script other than buying a server so unless Stefan plans on making a gs2 editor, that would actually slim down the number of new developers aswell. Maybe the PWAs could give server stars to rate how good they are based on content already developed and the future plans that they have for the server. Aswell as maybe telling what they already have done. Obviously, there are way too many playerworlds to get to them all, and some (the bad) servers might not agree to it. But at the owner's request they could inspect the server every, say 6 months. ^^ It would help developers choose which servers to work for so they aren't just wasting their time with some dead end project and could instead work on a well thought out one with other good developers. Though I guess it shouldn't be that hard for you to figure out if it's going to be a waste of time or not for yourself. :p |
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
|
I believe I've seen this discussion before, I just can't remember the thread.
Anyway, I think if they're willing to pay for it, they should be allowed to have one. People could want it for practice, fun, or just to have a place to call their own. |
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Yeah, but it would be nice to be able to see them all instead of waiting for a new update. There are other servers worth working on other than just those. Quote:
|
GS2 is more similar to C#, C++, or Java than GS1.
|
Quote:
|
Wow, this must have been planned out by Stefan and Unix!
"Let's create a crappy GS1 scripting language and let it become the primary scripting language for awhile.. then we'll unleash GS2 and watch the insanity begin.." |
Quote:
|
gs1 is perfectly fine programming language, you are all crazy :confused:
|
Quote:
|
Quote:
|
Quote:
Anyway, I'd love for Graal to have REAL classes and inheritance and stuff. |
Quote:
Quote:
|
All times are GMT +2. The time now is 02:35 AM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, vBulletin Solutions Inc.
Copyright (C) 1998-2019 Toonslab All Rights Reserved.