To me experimental really doesn't feel like rust at all. It feels cartoony , your character floats about with the most awful animations. The worlds are boring , they feel like shadered up minecraft worlds. The building system is tiresome , building a base should be fun not a chore. And locks... God I hate those things. There is no hit markers .. making combat seem buggy and feels like you are never hitting anybody. The guns seem clunky and don't feel good to shoot. Just overall I really don't see how any of this is an improvement of legacy.
I may be alone in my thinking but it seems rust has lost what its about and is now just a joke.
Knowing these forums I will probably get slated but ask yourself this . Do I prefer legacy or the "new" rust better ?
Posts or comments like this make me twitch a little with my left eye.
The state the experimental version isn't much more than a tech demo <wr...meaning, you can almost forget about it gameplaywise. If it is about gameplay, I agree...legacy is the more advanced version. But legacy also feels to me as it is at a "dead end" where you mostly slap new items on top and change crafting costs. Experimental feels like there is more potential.
I also like the new building system in principle. Rather than standing around, not moving while crafting walls you can later use to build a big ass house in just a few minutes, you are actively involved in building it. A huge base needs time, especially if it is supposed to be secure. And it does give a bit of an edge to "weaker" players as "Oh look! I just raided this guy and now my base magically doubled in size!" isn't as much a thing. I agree, that it's not perfect yet...but that is why you experiment.
Constructionwise, experimental is already ahead of legacy...at least in my opinion.
Although I agree with most of the things you mention here, you have to remember that the game isn't even in an alpha state, but more of an experimental state. Things are being experimented. Not many features are complete or even in the game as of now. This is early access. I would wait a few more months before actually playing the game. Things will change.
I agree with everything except the building system. I absolutely love it and with a buddy or 2, it's definitely more palatable. Everything else is a leap backwards from legacy.
Cue elix and his "it's alpha!" Yeah, we're well aware that it's alpha. However, the core mechanics are there and they're bad. We certainly have the ability to compile knowledgeable opinions based off of the core mechanics that have currently been implemented. To shout back "It's alpha!" deprives us of that oh so diversified thought called opinion.
A. James no im not going to shout back its alpha...but you have to remember with the new Experimental - they are working with the new Unity 5 engine and have started it from scratch - things will be a bit rough to start with but they will get better in time :) Give them time to develop before throwing in the towel :3 and help out with bug reports where you can! Can only get better
[QUOTE=A. James;46305071]I agree with everything except the building system. I absolutely love it and with a buddy or 2, it's definitely more palatable. Everything else is a leap backwards from legacy.
Cue elix and his "it's alpha!" Yeah, we're well aware that it's alpha. However, the core mechanics are there and they're bad. We certainly have the ability to compile knowledgeable opinions based off of the core mechanics that have currently been implemented. To shout back "It's alpha!" deprives us of that oh so diversified thought called opinion.[/QUOTE]
this is stupid. It really is. Every single criticsim in OP is based on the fact the game isnt polished or refined as another game. How else can you respond to that other than to say "duh, its in alpha" and not even close to the same stage of devlopment. Its like juding the paper before the mill is able to refine the wood. Almost every criticsim he/she/it mentions are things the developers are working on....
[QUOTE=billy79;46305197]How else can you respond to that other than to say "duh, its in alpha" [/QUOTE]
you don't need to respond to every post. let people say what they want without your approval or disapproval.
Garry has said he wants players feedback and input as they develop the game. sometimes that feedback will be "this is not good".
They're trying to recreate a shooter game that has other fun stuff to do as a survival game. You can say its not even beta yet but the core of the game is completely different. After 1700 hours of legacy theres no way i could ever play experimental as long as it is being designed to be a survival game. I cant play a game that has no point. There has to be goals and a reward for reaching them. At this point experimental just feels like a bunch of random ideas thrown together theres nothing that brings the ideas together like there was in legacy.
I think they are trying to create the basic features of legacy - but they have a long way to go. When they have it all in, and fix things like base griefing, then it will be more like legacy in terms of game play.
[QUOTE=cinderstar;46305481]you don't need to respond to every post. let people say what they want without your approval or disapproval.
Garry has said he wants players feedback and input as they develop the game. sometimes that feedback will be "this is not good".[/QUOTE]
Were back to this whole "wanting feedback" thing. The problem with this is, you guys cant handle when someone provide feedback on your post and you expect your criticsim to be taken seriously? Do not get butt hurt when someoen provides feedback to your comments....
Seriously though, who made you a forum police that needs to respond and give your opinion on other people comments? Why not just let people say what they think.
Most of us don't feel a need to say the same thing over and over in every thread about how the game is still in alpha. It's not that you can't comment or give your opinion, but you dismiss other people's comments over and over again.
This thread is progressing well...
:suicide:
[QUOTE=cinderstar;46306659]Seriously though, who made you a forum police that needs to respond and give your opinion on other people comments? Why not just let people say what they think.
Most of us don't feel a need to say the same thing over and over in every thread about how the game is still in alpha. It's not that you can't comment or give your opinion, but you dismiss other people's comments over and over again.[/QUOTE]
So I cant/should not post if I have something critical to say about the OP? I'm not dimssing it. I'm being critical.
just to state it explicitly, they are trying to implement basically everything in legacy. so it's only a matter of time before all of these missing things are back. as for the building system and the locks, well everyone has opinions on those.
i'd suggest discussing them in the appropriate threads, or submitting bug reports. but remember, the more details, rationale and options you give, the more likely it is to actually have some change occur. vague statements like "i don't like this" or "the key system sucks" are worthless beyond a popularity vote.
[QUOTE=mrknifey;46307910]the more details, rationale and options you give, the more likely it is to actually have some change occur. vague statements like "i don't like this" or "the key system sucks" are worthless beyond a popularity vote.[/QUOTE]
I am not buying this argument. Feedback is feedback. If a lot of people say the key system sucks, FP will see that. No reason for people not to express how they feel about any part of the game. I don't believe in the theory that only well written, academic level feedback is useful. Any feedback is useful, and you don't have any evidence only a certain type counts to Garry or FP staff.
IMO it is really important for anyone who feels strongly to give feedback and suggestions. Somehow there is a group of forum posters here who want to ridicule or try to answer feedback, and try to stop players from giving it with things like "it's alpha" or "there are already threads on that" or "stop whining" or "that type of feedback is not useful". All feedback is useful - the quantity of it can help FB see how many players feel the same way. Garry would never know how many players dislike the key system, unless they spoke up many times like they did on this forum and reddit.
[QUOTE=cinderstar;46308849]I am not buying this argument. Feedback is feedback. If a lot of people say the key system sucks, FP will see that. No reason for people not to express how they feel about any part of the game. I don't believe in the theory that only well written, academic level feedback is useful. Any feedback is useful, and you don't have any evidence only a certain type counts to Garry or FP staff.
IMO it is really important for anyone who feels strongly to give feedback and suggestions. Somehow there is a group of forum posters here who want to ridicule or try to answer feedback, and try to stop players from giving it with things like "it's alpha" or "there are already threads on that" or "stop whining" or "that type of feedback is not useful". All feedback is useful - the quantity of it can help FB see how many players feel the same way. Garry would never know how many players dislike the key system, unless they spoke up many times like they did on this forum and reddit.[/QUOTE]
i think you misinterpreted what i meant. i'm saying comparatively more can be done if you give more information, alternatives for the problem, or even have extensive arguments about it in different threads, not that it has to be some kind of thesis.
if i hire you to draw me a cat, then tell you "it's crap", what do you do to fix it? 500 people telling you "it's crap" is no better. whereas if i tell you, say, that it's head is bigger than its body, you can change that. i can review the work and give you further feedback about what can be done to fix it and we continue until we are both happy. so by all means, comment on everything; just remember that "it's crap" helps no-one in the long run, it just tells them that a particular element is not popular with x people.
[QUOTE=SimplyRust;46304038]To me experimental really doesn't feel like rust at all.[/QUOTE]
Couldn't disagree with the OP more. I guess it depends on whether you are expecting a survival game, or just yet another first-person shooter...
The core gameplay atm isnt really fun. To mme it looks like alot of things are set in stone e.g the new in game models for items . They dont look like they belong in a survival game. I would say the current build is only a few additions away from having all the same features as legacy but the game simply isnt as fun. Heck for all I care legacy could have been a full release for the amount of time I spent on it.
[QUOTE=cinderstar;46308849]I am not buying this argument. Feedback is feedback. If a lot of people say the key system sucks, FP will see that. [/QUOTE]
Not true. Anybody who says this obviously wasnt around when they first added sleepers. That shit caused tons of people to leave, and tons of complaints, and Gary openly said that he wont respond to any complaints until we grow to like it...
Even if FP ignores players comments, they will at least know how players feel. Legacy turned out pretty well, except for the hackers.
All I am saying is trying to stop people from giving feedback is the wrong approach. Shouting them down, ridiculing them, mocking them, saying "stupid, this is alpha" is not helpful.
Specific suggestions are good, but general feedback is helpful too. Without so many people posting, we would not really know how many players find the key system a bad one as it is.
There are a handful of people here who dismiss or argue any time anyone gives any feedback that is not positive. Any post they don't like they vote as Late or Stupid. Those posters act like they know better than everyone and it is stupid for players to point out problems with the game. I disagree. Positive or negative, feedback and comments from players are important.
[QUOTE=SimplyRust;46304038]To me experimental really doesn't feel like rust at all. It feels cartoony , your character floats about with the most awful animations. The worlds are boring , they feel like shadered up minecraft worlds. The building system is tiresome , building a base should be fun not a chore. And locks... God I hate those things. There is no hit markers .. making combat seem buggy and feels like you are never hitting anybody. The guns seem clunky and don't feel good to shoot. Just overall I really don't see how any of this is an improvement of legacy.
I may be alone in my thinking but it seems rust has lost what its about and is now just a joke.
Knowing these forums I will probably get slated but ask yourself this . Do I prefer legacy or the "new" rust better ?[/QUOTE]
hehe id would agree an disagree but more disagree since its so early and development angle of implementing their content is very sparse, the bugs yes always makes things feel bad an then takes time to solve the issues an build on top of it again which can create more issues an/or more overhauling. but it seems to be moving quite smooth now to me at overall stage to me because of the housing system alone changes lots of game-play when it can be destroyed, robbed, in different ways -very interesting...
As an Artist I'll explain Rust's Development in the same way i create my own art.
First is the Construction Stage(Building the Frame), This is basically sketching out the design,(Legacy was the sketch)
Second is the Render Stage(Putting up the walls), here the design begins to take shape, here we correct mistakes and refine our creation.
Third is the Detail Stage(Painting walls, adding furniture), This is where we put in the fine details
Experimental is inbetween the first and second stage, much closer to second really.
At this stage mistakes MUST be made inorder to refine its design. Most people dont seem to understand the principle of Mistakes is that they, in art, are guidelines of what not to do, and what is not wanted or satisfies the overall intention of the art work.
While i do get frusterated with the bugs, and for good reason too,(game crashed last night for a record of 10 times in row, i'm a persistant man) i dont give up, i keep trying and i still managed to enjoy Rust at this early stage despite its faults.
It was Marilyn Monroe who said that "If you dont like me at my worst then you dont deserve me at my best."
People should apply these principle when playing Rust.
Mistakes need to be made inorder to refine, if you cant understand this nor are willing to or coordinate with it, then you're playing the wrong game.
I still have fun with Rust despite its bugs and mistakes, I built the first tree house in experimental, i also was the first to link up two tree houses Ewok style.
Not everything about Rust is about PvP, Its beauty lies in the construction of Epic Buildings.
[QUOTE=GrymThor;46316584]i'm a persistant man[/QUOTE]
Well shucks, I was hoping you were the chick in your avatar...
After my eyes adjusted to this version, the old Rust looks like huge crap.
[QUOTE=SimplyRust;46312153]The core gameplay atm isnt really fun.[/QUOTE]
... again, I couldn't agree more! I have played for over 350 hours on Experimental, and all of them were fun! It is the most addictive, immersive, and fun game I have ever played. If you are not having fun, you are playing the wrong game!
im scarred with the new maps PvP will get lesser is guess...
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.
