[QUOTE=panicx72;43171898]If the server files won't get released within a few months, they'll be leaked.[/QUOTE]
I have heard tell they have been leaked; but I'd rather that we get legit ones.
[editline]13th December 2013[/editline]
[QUOTE=StryfeKhaos;43171824]Some good points, and I will try to come back to them when I get a chance, but what is YOUR vision? What is the game YOU want to play?[/QUOTE]
My personal vision doesn't actually matter. Which is my point entirely. I've played the game in a certain way with a certain admin doing things and I've liked that. Taking away private servers would remove both the server and the style of play that I like. If Private servers are maintained, I can set up a server and continue to play the game I like; if I'm forced by fiat to play on a specific server or servers I'm beholden to that servers play style, regardless of how I want to play.
You feel me?
[QUOTE=NiteMayr;43172045]I have heard tell they have been leaked; but I'd rather that we get legit ones.
[/QUOTE]
I agree with you.
As for the leaks; Indeed some people have access to those files.
If they won't release the server files, i'm sure there will be a bigger leak.
[QUOTE=StryfeKhaos;43171647]I don't think it's half and half, polls seem to say otherwise, but then, the forum may not be a good sampling of the player base at large, I don't know.
It's only the players choice if the choice is available, which I think is the fundamental disagreement. I don't think people should be ALLOWED to play on low population servers if it means that the population is so spread out that it affects all of them. New folks tend to want to be left alone, but being left alone should not be an option in Rust, in my opinion. The conflict is integral and necessary to the game. PvE servers can be used to figure out the game without being shot.
Some people think because it has elements of an FPS that it should be served like an FPS. The problem is that it has the persistence of an MMO, and so players have server affinity when established. Allowing those with no server affinity to server hop at will might be nice for them, but is a pain for those that have invested and committed to particular servers and when populations dwindle because so many keep server hopping to be 'left alone'.
"Without that option you either join the top clan on the offical [sic] server or quit the game."
My argument is that whither official or private, there shouldn't be an effectively unlimited number of them.
I will say that I think many of the hardcore PvP rust players shoot themselves in the foot, running around raiding shacks and killing clearly fresh spawns, scaring people off to other servers. You should let the sheep grow up, produce wool, and take the wool, not kill the sheep right when it's born. :)
[/QUOTE]
I do see where you are coming from. The bottom line is flavor. The more flavor, the more options, which means the more players and playstyles. That is the point of a sandbox game like this. The more things become linear and "single file" driven, the more this game will become just another DayZ clone like all of the others that have basically fell short of the mark. What keeps Rust ahead of all those other games even as an alpha is the ability to choose how you want to play. Private servers give admins that option, for better or worse and at the end of the day [B]you still choose what server you play on[/B]. If you do not like private servers, do not play on them. It is that simple.
Yeah, both of you make good points, I guess I just don't see 'playing on a server where I am not harassed because there aren't many people on it' a flavor or style of play, I see it as a symptom of allowing the population to spread too thin.
I can't choose to go play on a low pop server and play the style of game where there is conflict everywhere anymore than you can choose to go on a high pop server and play without conflict. Before the steam release, I couldn't 'choose' to play the former style period due to the player base being scattered. This is where the previous analogy breaks down, it's not really a choice of gameplay, it's a choice of which server to play on.
Now, I am all for them adding PvE elements that allow players to choose to have 'end game' or 'late game' activities that don't have to be PvP focused. I think in the long run, they won't be able to maintain the player base if they don't. That just doesn't exist right now.
[QUOTE=StryfeKhaos;43172772]Yeah, both of you make good points, I guess I just don't see 'playing on a server where I am not harassed because there aren't many people on it' a flavor or style of play, I see it as a symptom of allowing the population to spread too thin.
I can't choose to go play on a low pop server and play the style of game where there is conflict everywhere anymore than you can choose to go on a high pop server and play without conflict. Before the steam release, I couldn't 'choose' to play the former style period due to the player base being scattered. This is where the previous analogy breaks down, it's not really a choice of gameplay, it's a choice of which server to play on.
Now, I am all for them adding PvE elements that allow players to choose to have 'end game' or 'late game' activities that don't have to be PvP focused. I think in the long run, they won't be able to maintain the player base if they don't. That just doesn't exist right now.[/QUOTE]
I think you are being deliberately obstinate now; on one hand you (and your supporters/cohort) decry the lack of population on the main servers (and believe that this is solely due to private servers) but on the other hand "OMG there are too many noobs who don't want to line up to be shot"
All I'm saying is "There needs to be a heterogeneous environment to allow multiple styles of play" and you seem to be stuck on "there should only be a limited number of servers in order to preserve the game at all" which is counter intuitive to me and a position which I simply cannot support or even understand. The game itself is not going to be the same game once the "zombies" are gone. Heck, I imagine a year from now, Garry willing, there will be mods and game modes that radically change the game from where it is now to something else entirely.
I guess in the end it is up to the devs to decide; one would hope for an open ended solution. Look at DayZ, Dayz would not exist except for modding and private servers; take that as evidence that such things are a net good and be sated. Or not. It's your life and your game to play as you like. Just let me play mine.
[editline]13th December 2013[/editline]
[QUOTE]Well, when some bastard comes on to my server at 2AM when it's empty and raids my base when I'm not online...that's a load of bullshit. Right now, raids are 100% successful with no such thing as failure. The bandits are being constantly rewarded with no balance on the other side of the team. My server is losing a HUGE player base due to this fact. It's just stupid that no matter where you build your base...the bandits always find it and always have a way of breaking in. We need to get this balanced and stop the constant raiding, because honestly....my server will be empty by the time the last of the players have been raided.[/QUOTE]
This is the kind of thing that private servers, with judicious modding could/would prevent. Vanilla Servers to preserve the vision of the main game and private servers so that casual folks could have a little villa on the plains that they could tend daily but not have to defend to the teeth. Right now you need 100% live guards on 100% of the time to guard your house or town or hut from raiding (which is really easy, I mean just catch a couple supply drops and you are usually 50% there) I know there is a vision that would promote cooperation to provide security but that just ends up in 1 or 2 scenarios, every one ends up in one "team" and no one competes at all for resources, which is pointless as there is no other content or all out war where no one gets to rest at all.
With no trade functions, no limits on raw resources and no external threats PvP is the ONLY way to play the vanilla game and let's face it, without a Zero Sum game (where resources run out) cooperation is totally unnecessary.
[QUOTE=NiteMayr;43173143]I think you are being deliberately obstinate now; on one hand you (and your supporters/cohort) decry the lack of population on the main servers (and believe that this is solely due to private servers) but on the other hand "OMG there are too many noobs who don't want to line up to be shot"
All I'm saying is "There needs to be a heterogeneous environment to allow multiple styles of play" and you seem to be stuck on "there should only be a limited number of servers in order to preserve the game at all" which is counter intuitive to me and a position which I simply cannot support or even understand. The game itself is not going to be the same game once the "zombies" are gone. Heck, I imagine a year from now, Garry willing, there will be mods and game modes that radically change the game from where it is now to something else entirely.
I guess in the end it is up to the devs to decide; one would hope for an open ended solution. Look at DayZ, Dayz would not exist except for modding and private servers; take that as evidence that such things are a net good and be sated. Or not. It's your life and your game to play as you like. Just let me play mine.[/QUOTE]
I feel very much the same about this subject. I understand both sides of the fence on this topic and both sides have reasonable arguments. The whole point I am trying to make is that someone else should not have a say in what a player does if that original someone has nothing to do with that players actions. If every server was forced to have PvE and no player damage, the game would suck. Likewise if every server was forced to be PvP and no progress could be made, the game would still suck. The combination of private servers and official servers gives the ability to have both or even more advanced mods like instacraft. This is why I think the more flavor and options the better.
Honestly the sole reason I rented a private server is so I could build and play without the fear of some abusive admin fucking up my progress, yet so many people use admin abuse as the reason for why private servers should be removed. It really comes down to the admin and what they are doing to keep the game fresh and interactive. If the server admins just tele around in full gear harassing people then the game is terrible for those players involved. If the admin is wise and helps players build and learn then it creates an enjoyable playing experience and makes the game alot more dynamic for both old and new clients on that server.
If there are only OFFICIAL servers then things like this can not be done and the game becomes stale and generic. If you expect Garry or Postal to join the official servers and host events/support then you have not been on these forums long enough. :)
[QUOTE=panicx72;43172117]I agree with you.
As for the leaks; Indeed some people have access to those files.
If they won't release the server files, i'm sure there will be a bigger leak.[/QUOTE]
Unsure if there has been a leak, even if there has in order to host the game you require a password.
[QUOTE=StryfeKhaos;43171360]There is a big difference between "freedom in game by providing open-ended game mechanisms" versus "freedom to run a private server."
It's not surprising that Garry and Facepunch probably aren't ready to release the server out into private machines at this stage of development.[/QUOTE]
I disagree with this. The first part being the open-ended game mechanisms v to run a private server. I personally have more fun running a server where its just me and my friends. People I can trust in the game and not having to worry about being killed by random players. I can also see your point about the release of the server files. However, you can pay a company to host it for it, so they are ready to release the files. Either a they shouldn't have done that if they weren't going to allow us to download the server files, or b they should release the files to the public. Why should I have to pay to host a server when its something I can easily do?
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.
