(I originally posted this on the steam community forum and a few readers recommended that I post it on the official forums)
This game (currently) brings very little new to the table in terms of longevity. I want a game like this to really work and succeed, but it’s going to take some serious development on in-game systems that will make it more than a FFA-PVP-KOS rerun of others in the same genre. (The WarZ comes to mind). The following are my thoughts how to make Rust a better game so it won’t end up in my “that was almost a good game” pile.
Many on the forums have made suggestions as to what might help alleviate this dilemma.
I have a few that I’d like to share.
***They are not perfect, finalized answers. They are just suggestions to be built upon.
The first in my mind is the introduction of element(s) more dangerous than players. Those elements would make players focus on that rather than solely on PvP. I’m sure the implementation of zombies/hostile wild-life is their version of this. The problem is that when the threat factors involved in a survival game are removed due guns/bombs/other weapons and accumulation of basic material, players get bored. Instead of playing another game, they get their rocks off by messing with others.
Players need goals, things to strive to achieve. They need constant threat factor that can match them as they get better. At the start, that goal is to get the basic necessities to survive. Once shelters are built, guns made and people are thriving, there is no more goal or threat. No purpose. Is there really even a reason to play at that point?
As an ***example to add to the point I’m making, it is similar to real life. Once our needs our met and no imminent threat is present, we fill our time with things we care about, want to accomplish and entertainment: We go to movies, play games, have hobbies (just an example, there is more to life than entertainment). In the walking dead (comic) they addressed this point when Woodbury introduced its own version of entertainment (I won’t say what it was exactly to avoid any spoilers). Give players other options than finding and killing naked players.
**Point being – There needs to be more thought put into the endgame. **
Another factor to change would be the jump from a bow to guns/c4. Are we really going from Rocks to guns? Took us a lot of time to do that in human history.
This comes down to where they want their game to go and what they want it to be.
For those that have played survival games, you know the intensity that comes along with close range combat against something terrifying, unknown, or powerful - It’s tense and exciting.
When you can shoot it from a mile away from a hiding spot, not so much.
When guns are removed, there are so many more options for combat (IMO). Not to say that ranged weapons should be removed, but having to load and arrow, pull the string, and fire an accurate shot, (example for combat), before someone bashes you in the face with a rock is a lot more engaging than unloading the 30 round clip in the general direction of a naked caveman. It also gives that naked caveman a chance instead of it simply being a massacre.
On that note, I feel some weapons/explosives add to the excitement and overall experience. However, they need to be extremely hard (like sacrifice your left nut hard) to make and only available in small quantities. They need to be very useful, but not 100% necessary to the games goals. Limiting factors on powerful objects/weapons will make you really consider when to use them.
"Do I want to nuke a noobs 1x1 shack hidden behind a rock or save my two homemade grenades(that took forever to make, but are very useful) against boss monster ‘X’ or for a group of raiding bandits? "
Sure, there will be some Youtube videos and Twitch streams of players using them for the lawlz to get views, but it won’t be the majority of players and will only be occasionally.
Summary: Make powerful items really fing hard to get and in very limited quantities so they can be used in conjunction with endgame goals (from my first recommendation).*
I’ve played a number of similar type survival games. They all have their merits. The problem is that they suffer from the same genre issues: Lack of endgame features, balancing, and hackers. Many of these games do an early access and end up turning off most of the prospective player base. By the time release comes, you have a handful of abusers and a slow trickle of unknowing suckers that pick the game up for $2 on a steam sale. It is almost inevitable. So while the idea of early access is nice and provides devs with important funding to continue creating a worth-while game, the majority of games usually fail to deliver on promises or rise above mediocre.
There are so many more ideas that could really make this type of game successful for a large audience of gamers. I really hope this development team can break the status quo by not letting Rust turn into another “FFA-PVP-KOS” f***fest that it will be if nothing is changed.