Something needs to change . .. - Rust

[QUOTE=YotaYard;44824428]Man, some of the other early access games are WAY worse off than Rust. [url]http://kotaku.com/valve-pulls-controversial-game-from-steam-for-false-mar-1572372276[/url][/QUOTE] Could be worst ...right! ...but a multiplayer (server) only game that doesnt even support their own official servers? cheaters? "ah ok let them run on our servers!", ... no one running the place? Ive had my own server and we good admins kept the good experience for alot of people. great game but we have to be reasonable (ive been), look at things without taking sides, but expect.

[QUOTE=FlamingBlizza;44820229]*cough*alpha*cough* Also, they do what they want to do. Who gives a rats ass if someone popular quits it? They want to take the game in the direction [B]THEY[/B] want to take the game.[/QUOTE] Yup and in doing so 30,000 quit playing [editline]17th May 2014[/editline] [QUOTE=Sgt. Lumpy;44823824]You are very much uninformed. They NEVER planned for zombies to be a permanent part of the game, NEVER. They made this pretty clear from the get go, but people keep choosing to ignore that fact. Also, Garry has stated he is aware of the changes in the numbers and totally expects them. It's part of the normal process. Not to sound callous or anything, but who the hell are Uberhaxornova and Summit1g, and why would any of us care?[/QUOTE] They should have kept zombies which everyone loved until they had an actual NPC that could act as an enemy not half-ass it and throw ina red wolf

[QUOTE=fullylaced23;44829094]Yup and in doing so 30,000 quit playing[/QUOTE] Which they've stated that they wouldn't mind that the player base is shrinking since the game blew up before it was ready anyway. [QUOTE=fullylaced23;44829094]They should have kept zombies which everyone loved until they had an actual NPC that could act as an enemy not half-ass it and throw ina red wolf[/QUOTE] Thanks for speaking on my behalf as a member of, "everyone," but you're incorrect. I for one didn't care for the zombies, and as mentioned above, zombies were the first half assed placeholder, so they were never meant to be there anyway. Keep in mind that it took DICE (of which over 500 employees work in production) 2 years to fully develop BF4. Facepunch is 20 dudes, and they've been at it about a year and a half. It's gonna take time to get out of the alpha, or, "still in development," stage.

[QUOTE=hippowombat;44829345] Keep in mind that it took DICE (of which over 500 employees work in production) 2 years to fully develop BF4. Facepunch is 20 dudes, and they've been at it about a year and a half. It's gonna take time to get out of the alpha, or, "still in development," stage.[/QUOTE] The funny thing is, after all that time DICE still managed to release an unfinished game. Actually, they've just released their own "Experimental" branch called CTE. Not gonna lie, I love BF4. Hell, I'm one of the suckers that spent $100 on the game for all future DLC. That said, I spent $20 on Rust and just surpassed my BF4 play time of over 400 hours.

[QUOTE=Haxer;44824502]1. "It could always be worse!" is not a good platform to stand on. 2. I actually agree with him, and hope that the "Pay me for an IOU and promises that I may or may not deliver on" fad that has taken over gaming will pass. My guess is people will get tired of feeling like they're paying for a sales pitch rather than receiving a product.[/QUOTE] I don't understand this. Then why do it? Early access is exactly for people who want to pay for a sales pitch if the idea being presented is something you're interested in and as a bonus you get to play with the developmental iterations of the product. Nobody is forcing you to buy into early access, you could just wait until release.

[QUOTE=JesusCrust;44829388]The funny thing is, after all that time DICE still managed to release an unfinished game. Actually, they've just released their own "Experimental" branch called CTE. Not gonna lie, I love BF4. Hell, I'm one of the suckers that spent $100 on the game for all future DLC. That said, I spent $20 on Rust and just surpassed my BF4 play time of over 400 hours.[/QUOTE] You aren't the only sucker who spent $100 on BF4.. in fact I highly regret buying BF4. Especially when I picked up Arma 3... and just face melted in joy of how amazing that game was in comparison. (even the bugs aren't awful in arma 3).

Rust is awesome. One of the most fun and addictive games I have ever played. This is the time for people to take a break and wait for the next major update. When that happens loads of people will come back.

maybe i'm just adding my 5c here, but look at the devblog updates. the reason we aren't having physical updates yet is because they are rebuilding the foundations of the game! there's no point building extra rooms on a house with rotten foundations.. and as for zombies and all the stuff they have removed, well it's their damn game. don't like where its heading, voice it here, or stop playing.

[QUOTE=hippowombat;44829345]Which they've stated that they wouldn't mind that the player base is shrinking since the game blew up before it was ready anyway. Do you love the red animals? Thanks for speaking on my behalf as a member of, "everyone," but you're incorrect. I for one didn't care for the zombies, and as mentioned above, zombies were the first half assed placeholder, so they were never meant to be there anyway. Keep in mind that it took DICE (of which over 500 employees work in production) 2 years to fully develop BF4. Facepunch is 20 dudes, and they've been at it about a year and a half. It's gonna take time to get out of the alpha, or, "still in development," stage.[/QUOTE]

i think we can all agree zombies being replaces by radiated animals was completely stupid and unnecessary

[QUOTE=Brute_Force;44833144]i think we can all agree zombies being replaces by radiated animals was completely stupid and unnecessary[/QUOTE] It was absolutely necessary. The forums were becoming flooded with idiots demanding Rust become more of a DayZ clone, which Rust began life as and has been fighting to get away from ever since. It was attracting completely the wrong playerbase and sending the wrong message, because zombies were never meant to even be in the game by the time it hit Steam. There was genuinely a problem of people buying Rust under false assumptions, and even though those assumptions were their fault, the presence of zombies was causing them. So, no. I will not agree.

[QUOTE=fullylaced23;44833017][/QUOTE] I don't love the red animals, but I don't hate them either.

They aren't much of a threat though. That's my biggest concern. Once you get any indirect weapon they become obsolete (think i spelled it right lol?) very quickly. They need a major buff in speed plus a nerf in how long you can sprint instead of being infinite stamina. i'm sure the weight system will help with that too.

[QUOTE=TheQuagmire;44834166]They aren't much of a threat though. That's my biggest concern. Once you get any indirect weapon they become obsolete (think i spelled it right lol?) very quickly. They need a major buff in speed plus a nerf in how long you can sprint instead of being infinite stamina. i'm sure the weight system will help with that too.[/QUOTE] We shouldn't be hoping for improvements to be made to silly-loot-drop-placeholder #2... we should be hoping for the appearance of challenging-logical-more-than-loot-drop-placeholder #1. The best thing about mutant animals was that they required close to zero development cycles: some red paint, some stat buffing and some loot table modification and you're done. Putting effort into a placeholder ruins the fact that it's just a placeholder.

[url]http://steamcharts.com/[/url] rust really isn't dying, it is 15th in terms of people playing it at this moment, at the time of posting

I'm glad they got rid of zombies; I don't care if rad animals are just a placeholder. In fact, they take more ammo to kill. You can't just rock them to death with ease at the beginning of the game either because they take more damage and you can't headshot them, so you at least have to use your bow to kill them or jump on a foundation. That, and quite a few people are getting sick of zombies as the enemy for EVERY game. It's worn out; they can still be fun, but it's nice to not fight them in every, single game.

[QUOTE=Murdo;44835006]We shouldn't be hoping for improvements to be made to silly-loot-drop-placeholder #2... we should be hoping for the appearance of challenging-logical-more-than-loot-drop-placeholder #1. The best thing about mutant animals was that they required close to zero development cycles: some red paint, some stat buffing and some loot table modification and you're done. Putting effort into a placeholder ruins the fact that it's just a placeholder.[/QUOTE] No i understand what you mean, but that place holder might be there for a very long time so it doesn't hurt to "test" what if x was faster, what if player x was slower etc.

I enjoyed my 300 hours I put into the game back in December/January, I've tried to revisit, but quickly lose interest and go back to waiting for something fairly impressive to make it into the game. And also get the people I played with back and playing with me again. People complained about getting shot randomly even 6months ago, and 6months from now there will still be somebody complaining about it. I never saw a need for it, I always found it boring to shoot naked people. On the other hand some of the best fun I've had in the game is being naked with a handful of pistols and a couple of people and going up against full kevlar group bigger than us. Relatively easy when you have people that work together, and the rage from people that decided to try and piss on you first is always fun. [QUOTE=TheQuagmire;44834166]They aren't much of a threat though. That's my biggest concern. Once you get any indirect weapon they become obsolete (think i spelled it right lol?) very quickly. They need a major buff in speed plus a nerf in how long you can sprint instead of being infinite stamina. i'm sure the weight system will help with that too.[/QUOTE] I don't agree. In my mind the games never been about the animals/zombies/aliens/whatevertheyaddnext, its about the interaction between players and groups of players. You can make friends in the game, it may take a while to find someone who wont shoot first. Hell you may even shoot them and end up working together at some point. If I wanted to shoot ai all day long I'd go play L4D, if I wanted to pound rocks I'd go play minecraft. Rust offers what most other games wont. I also found DayZ to be far worse than rust for dying to players, because I'd spawn in and somebody would be on the map with a sniper rifle, at least with rust I can usually find a server that was wiped recently, or even for the most part get far enough to start killing people with guns. That said I haven't even bothered to try and kill a red animal yet, tend to lose interest too quickly at this point.

But that's the thing. Most games I can think of most of the AI isn't dangerous. Once you have a weapon that isn't melee the threat is instantly gone. It just turns into dealing with other players. I would like to see npc's that offer more on the table. I understand the current ones are just placeholders and thats just fine, but not having an element that might change your idea of attacking anther player because npc x is nearby, will make the game that much more enjoyable.

Guess rust should go back to zombies that hone in on your gunshots. :P I've always found any of the ai in the game so far too stupid to be a bother. Pickaxes are (were?) zombie killing machines... and cheaper than bullets. The problem is the benefit of killing NPC's diminishes quickly, if there were npc's nearby that could pose a problem I could see you deciding not to shoot a player (you may hatchet instead). I just think it needs to go in a direction that doesn't have you avoiding all fights with other players because AI swarms you and fucks you over completely. *shrug*

As long as hostile npc's don't pose any threat from range or from within your base and are always in the same area there will never be any threat from any kind of npc and they will never be more then a nuisance. I'm all for the games main threat being other players but that doesn't mean that npc shouldn't pose any threat at all. Right now the rad animals are there just to get blueprints and annoy you when you don't need them by them chasing you for a while (wolfs) but they are certainly an easy kill aswell.

[QUOTE=elixwhitetail;44833422]It was absolutely necessary. The forums were becoming flooded with idiots demanding Rust become more of a DayZ clone, which Rust began life as and has been fighting to get away from ever since. It was attracting completely the wrong playerbase and sending the wrong message, because zombies were never meant to even be in the game by the time it hit Steam. There was genuinely a problem of people buying Rust under false assumptions, and even though those assumptions were their fault, the presence of zombies was causing them. So, no. I will not agree.[/QUOTE] It was fun walking around Big Rad Town in the dark with a shotgun and a flash light hearing footsteps and zombie moans. Rust is a better game than DayZ, and it was a better game with zombies.

Plus they were pretty nice for practicing some archery. What's better than walking/running targets in the distance? You could practice to shoot human shaped targets, not just big bears and wolves, painted red, slowly strolling around. There was also some kind of variety (normal zombie, fast zombie, strong zombie) and a better atmosphere. They just gave the game some more "something", in my humble opinion.

Here's a candy for all of you docile fanboys! The fact anyone can say at this time that there is nothing wrong with a company stockpiling 30M$ and providing 0 update in an early access game for what, 4 months now, is appalling. Either you guys have stocks in the company you want to cash in later on or you've simply been stripped off of your judgement. Alpha or not, when you sell a product, you gotta deliver. IMO, most people have passed the state of frustration with this game and have now moved on. The new experimental build better be epic if they want people to return after Garry and his (way too small/slow) crew turned their back on them for so long.

[QUOTE=Aragor;44840144]Here's a candy for all of you docile fanboys! The fact anyone can say at this time that there is nothing wrong with a company stockpiling 30M$ and providing 0 update in an early access game for what, 4 months now, is appalling. Either you guys have stocks in the company you want to cash in later on or you've simply been stripped off of your judgement. Alpha or not, when you sell a product, you gotta deliver. IMO, most people have passed the state of frustration with this game and have now moved on. The new experimental build better be epic if they want people to return after Garry and his (way too small/slow) crew turned their back on them for so long.[/QUOTE] It's pretty obvious they're using the money to make a console version of the game, the experimental version even feels like a console game

[QUOTE=fullylaced23;44819891]Come on guys, you all know this. This game is slowly dying, and I also know how everyone says "We want a dedicated fan base, that will stay forever" and "Its alpha". Well in case you don't believe check this link [url]http://steamcharts.com/app/252490#All[/url] (This link basically explains it all). Some serious Dev decisions really need to be re-thought. First of all no zombies anymore? I know you guys don't want to be a "Dayz clone" well news flash just because a game has zombies doesn't mean its a straight rip off of dayz. Because of these changes people like Uberhaxornova and Summit1g have quit the game because of it. Also everyone just shoots on sight, there needs to be some reason not to shoot someone. Well there you go im gonna say it again re-think some of the decisions you have been making. If these are the decisions you guys are making leading up to the Beta release and eventually a full on release this game wont get anywhere.[/QUOTE] Dying? LOL! This game is such a bare bones structure and is already immensely popular! The users who have exhausted Rust in its current state are simply playing other things. Everyone will come back down the track when Rust is updated.

[QUOTE=Aragor;44840144]Here's a candy for all of you docile fanboys! The fact anyone can say at this time that there is nothing wrong with a company stockpiling 30M$ and providing 0 update in an early access game for what, 4 months now, is appalling. Either you guys have stocks in the company you want to cash in later on or you've simply been stripped off of your judgement. Alpha or not, when you sell a product, you gotta deliver. IMO, most people have passed the state of frustration with this game and have now moved on. The new experimental build better be epic if they want people to return after Garry and his (way too small/slow) crew turned their back on them for so long.[/QUOTE] What I don't get all the people raging about "no update dese guise r fuckig criminals loll u fanboys"

(russian accent) Oh noes that garry guy scam all of us for game. we should cry and moan on forums about how rich he is. (end of accent.) It's arguable about the re-coding of the game. There's no excuse for that. Most people who bring up that kind of fault get fired from a company. I'v been in similar situation at electronic arts when a recode was brought up.. not a meeting i will ever forget. I know that feeling all too well. I'll take with a grain of salt, and just wait patiently for the new re-coded game. it looks promising, and worth waiting for. Of course while I wait I can play the other games I own. I can always come back a few months later, and see whats up.

EA also took good games, and made them shitty. (i.e. battlefield) Just to try and compete with CoD. There is an excuse for recoding. Yes I'm of the mind that when you do something, do it once, no need to go back to it. But if you slap something together its unavoidable. Ever written a report in which you trash a large majority of it? I've had projects in which we really thought one thing would work, and wound up having to go back to it. Granted I'm not speaking from working on anything to do with video games. But I can still understand it, even if it does seem like a waste of time.

Still pretty popular on our server. 20-30 people is a good game balance. We found over 50 it was just a gankfest.