Jump to content
Game-Labs Forum

Anarcke

Members2
  • Posts

    127
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by Anarcke

  1. And so if you can afford it, no problem you can unbalance the econ, but if you don't have enough money, you're left behind, but that's not a problem. What is the worst, let a few "more" privileged people be favorised in game thanks to their money, and make the others unable to do the same because they don't have real money to give, or let everyone do it, and be rewarded by the time they spend playing? And i repeat, my point is for people willing to share an account, but not a character, so they can have the game experience they want. Maybe the problem is that people tend to forgot that no matter how good it is, it is a game. I have no problem sharing my account, maybe you can share lets say 1/2000 of the econ with 1 more player?
  2. Dans quel jeu multijoueur ne peut on pas avoir plusieurs personnages? Même dans DayZ en réalité on a plusieurs persos, un par hébergeur de serveur. Et pourtant les ressources, du fait du jeu lui même, sont très rares. Au niveau éco je pense qu'il suffira d'ajuster différentes valeurs. De plus ceux qui ont les moyens pourront toujours acheter une autre copie du jeu et avoir un second perso, et là ca devient de la selection par l'argent.
  3. Bonjour, Je vais redire ce qu'ai j'ai tenté de dire en anglais sur le topic d'origine. Je ne pense pas que la limitation soit une bonne idée. Principalement parce ce si plusieurs membres d'un même foyer veulent jouer, ça les oblige à racheter le jeu. Exemple personnel, ma fille a bien envie de jouer, mais avec un seul perso, je peux pas me permettre de ressortir cet argent pour lui racheter un jeu. Ce que je propose, ainsi que d'autres, c'est soit tous les persos dans la même nation, soit un perso par serveur (mais ca veut dire qu'il faut ouvrir d'autres serveurs).
  4. Then we are fine, at least you and me. Of course it is based on the fact there will be at least one more server. The thing i can't understand is the "one game copy, one character, if people want more they buy another copy", because as we agreed, there is at least an alternative, maybe more. As i said i understand your worries about exploiting the multi character option, and only wish we can find a compromise.
  5. I'm french, I don't know were you come from, or if you are aware of what is happening in France since November 13th. We are in emergency state, and our government is trying to modify our constitution in order to limitate our freedom, be able to spy on us, etc. All that because of a feeling of fear. So yes, crimes happen, and if in order to prevent it you have to suppress freedom, then you're not better than the ones who want to force their view of the world...And still can't prevent attacks. Other example : weapon control in the USA. How many killings? And what is done to limit the access to firearms? They are lots of deads due to car accidents, and yet we still have cars. Restricting access to the game may be a bad thing too, because if you prevent casual players or family players to play and have fun, they may just stop playing. But if you are enjoing the game with a very small community, that's your right. I don't think it is a good thing in a long term view for the game, as they need some money to maintain it. With on character by game copy, i fear that more casual players will stay away from the game as they'll not have enough freedom, or even ask for a refund. i understand that you want to preserve the game quality, but without enough players, how much time will the game last? I'm just asking for a compromise, i've said various times one character per server, and only a few answered to it. With the new players joining the game, is guess new servers will be opened, so what is the problem with one character per server instead of one character per game gopy?
  6. Well, the debate is mainly for multiple persons playing on the same account. Because someone willing to take advantage and having enough money will buy an other copy, limiting to 1 character will not solve anything. But it will prevent two persons sharing the game within a house for example to have one character each, and so to have the gameplay they want. Those two persons will not share ressources to craft the same thing, but to achieve the goal they have in mind. Don't see it as an advantage, but just two people participating in the economy. Anyway ressources may become scarse because there will be (hopefully) a lot of new players during EA, and they will participate in the economy also. What must be seen too, is that the people giving their opinion (including myself) may not be representative of the majority of the players that will join during EA or after full game release. The "make them pay for spying" argument is not a good thing, overall when a vast majority is not going to do that. I've played POTBS some time, never did it, even if it is easy. i think only a minority of player do it, and making everyone pay for that minority is not fair. There must be another way to prevent that, like being able to log in one nation, or as it's been said already, one character per server, but it requires another server. But let people create more than one character plz, our goal is not to take advantage on you, we just want to be able to play just like you, and allow a family member to play too.
  7. @ Z4ys Since NA isn't a singleplayer game, there is no reason to apply the rules of a singleplayer game, no? I have read and agreed with that proposal: one character per server, like that there is no economy problem, since the two persons with the same copy of the game can't interact. And it allows for two persons within the same house to play. @ Nathaniel Have you tried crafting something since yesterday's update? with that huge amount of carriages to craft even for a small ship like a trader snow, it takes so much labor time that it is an incentive to create an alt. Beside, if the two persons want to craft differents things for their own crafted ship, it will take them twice the time because if one uses all the labour hours in the morning to craft a part of his ship, the over will not be able to craft for his ship because he will not have enough labor hours. I have never mentioned the teleport and travels to get the components, since i don't want to be able to "cheat" with the econ, but only to be able to let my daughter play a game i payed for. I can't understand that need to make people pay again at all cost just to ensure YOU have as much fun as possible, and not care if the others have less fun because of your point of view. Think about the 1 character per server, how can it "harm" you? it just needs another server up, i suppose it can be done.
  8. No, it is like buying a dvd, but be allowed only to watch it alone, and have to buy another dvd if someone else in your house want to watch the movie.
  9. Steam family only allow another account to play games from your account, with only one character per account the problem remains the same, two players on the same characters, with differents goals or gameplay styles, shared pool of labor hours. On the other side, one character per server would solve everything, no economy problem, no competition between two players with the same character, and the "buy another copy" people are listened to and can do it if they want to play on the same server, without avoiding those who can't afford it to play.
  10. Good idea, one character per server, not by account. It only requires more servers, i hope with EA and later with more player, they'll need to open new servers.
  11. @ Nathaniel Have you seen the amount of materials (especially iron) needed since yesterday update? If person A wants to craft a ship and player B another ship, they will have to wait a loooot more than of they have a character per person. Maybe you have a lot of time to play, or enough money to buy another game copy, that's good, but not everyone can. And it will give a great advantage to people not sharing the labor hours for a better progression, that's not balanced.
  12. Plz don't make only one character per copy of the game. Limit the characters to one nation, no problem. As said before, making people buy more copys is not a way to go. To the people saying buy a copy, support the devs, i'll answer that personally i don't have a lot of money, and already supported the devs as much as i could by buying a copy before game release, and i just can't afford to pay another time just to allow my daughter to play. If you prefer to buy another copy because you can afford it, nothing prevents you from doing so. And during EA, there will be more people with the ability to pay only one copy. If in the family they are 2 members willing to play but only one character avalaible, they need to share, but what if one is more pve or trade oriented, and the other pvp oriented? they'll be destructing each other work of crafting, progression, etc. Also share the labour hours between characters is a bad idea to me. If one character/ player is keeping his hours to craft something, but the other character/ player needs to craft something to make money, it is going to be competition, and eventually they'll stop playing because they can't buy another copy, or continue sharing the account. Make a realistic game yes, but plz not an elitist game.
×
×
  • Create New...