Community vote on game.

[infectedking]

Thread has been edited to involved Russian and Korean Voting as VenatorVentator requested.

[venatorvenator]

It's more or less what Avu said somewhere else in the forum: neither of us is bringing more people to the game, what we want shouldn't matter.

Doing a reset right now, with half-implemented and half-tested features, might please some but it will also make others quit for good for all the arbitrarity and wasted effort it'd mean.
Not doing a reset will keep those players, but it'll annoy others who desperately want a new world for different reasons, and these will probably quit too.

But both parties are irrelevant. At best, if everyone is pleased somehow, the game will keep it's current numbers, which are very low.
Maybe what the game needs are new players, who would stay because they like the game for what it is, and not maintenance of the old ones who constantly rage on contradictory issues.

[infectedking]

It's more or less what Avu said somewhere else in the forum: neither of us is bringing more people to the game, what we want shouldn't matter.

Doing a reset right now, with half-implemented and half-tested features, might please some but it will also make others quit for good for all the arbitrarity and wasted effort it'd mean.
Not doing a reset will keep those players, but it'll annoy others who desperately want a new world for different reasons, and these will probably quit too.

But both parties are irrelevant. At best, if everyone is pleased somehow, the game will keep it's current numbers, which are very low.
Maybe what the game needs are new players, who would stay because they like the game for what it is, and not maintenance of the old ones who constantly rage on contradictory issues.

People who have played for years have been quitting very fast on this because it wasn't as good as the hype made it out to be and once you hit a certain stage, all it becomes is maintenance and people don't really like that. The old systems had much more players, even if they were mostly old players, new players were coming into the game as well, by leaving this world the way it is, yes it will bring it new players onto the game, but not as fast as old players leaving it.

Even if the features are half-tested and half-implemented, once they are fully tested and fully implemented, that would mean about 6months+ of work and money that people have given to this game would have been gone anyway for nothing, so it's a question of getting more players in fast that would pay money and help fund this game. Would you rather those new players who will either verify and play 14hours a week or those players who would give a consistant amount of money(Subscription) and presence in the game.

[CSPAN]

New world with fixed stone quality, map gen with better river systems to promote travel and exploration of the giant map, revised death mechanics, along with whatever siege mechanics theyre cranking out, are what Id want to see with a world reset.

also this three different quality business is annoying as all hell

[Jalpha]

Resetting Hafen before the game is actually functional is a retarded idea. Yay, let's have another world as broken as this one. Holy cow.

Vote 1 for Devs ignoring players opinions on this.

[infectedking]

Resetting Hafen before the game is actually functional is a retarded idea. Yay, let's have another world as broken as this one. Holy cow.

Vote 1 for Devs ignoring players opinions on this.

Your opinion on this voting is retarded as well, if you think resetting the world before it's "functional" is a bad idea, then how is it any better if people are paying to play this while it isn't functional anyway. You might as well not pay and just play the 7 hours a week with a concept like that.

[Amanda44]

Personally, I think the best thing for this game would be to keep the new style and new content in the way of builds/crafts, wildlife but go back to legacy mechanics/gameplay ... I know it had it's own problems but it had more longevity and the game was still 'fun'.

I think new players would still suffer the same fate as old players when it comes to the playability factor and I'm not sure introducing new players at the moment is going to particularly help and neither do I think would a reset, I did say a few wks back that I wanted one but now I don't really see the point and I've since changed my mind.

But, as Ven says, we all have our own take on the situation and we are contradictory as a group on almost every issue ... and wanting a reset of W7 is just unfair on the devs for all the hard work and the good things that they have done with the new version, it does have good points.

[Jalpha]

I want a world reset and nobody should disagree.

[Redlaw]

The game as it is while not easy to get to and yes my first post in the thread is still right. Its a lot better then past worlds. yes I am not suggesting it strongly as I was before this one, but who will wan tto play past die hard player 7 hours a week? That is before paying if its an option to them.

The game i think this world if are lovely devs do things right, has a year before a reset, then the game itself will be ready for the long run as a constant world.



The trick is getting the player base happy with the changes enough that they be willing to play a scrappy 7 hours a week in the game min....

hell that is how much they wear suggesting per month the start, it haft to be that good to do even better. I mean 7 hours or less for a month for free.... the game better as hell be worth the idea if playing. Some dump face book game that would be a challenge within the first day if I was not paying in would be more worth my time if it stayed that low.

Glad they changed that, but I cant give good ideas or suggest people to try the game when I cant do anything.

[infectedking]

I'm a faggot]