Game Development: Mushroom Circle

[BoxingRock]

everytime that chrome says is harmfull.

I can send you a virus package that Chrome will say is all right. Chrome has done what Microsoft did around 15 years ago and ended up pissing most of their loyal customers off, and effectively made it easier to move viruses between systems.

Learn a bit more about it and quit crying to indie devs about what security protocols they do and don't use. If you don't like the pop-ups, quit using Chrome. It's more harmful to your system (and life) than Java is.

Please remove this comment and refrain from discouraging users from reporting important stuff like this just because it somehow personally bothers you.
It just reads like you have a personal problem with this stickman user.

Also, being sent a "package" from an aggressive stranger on the internet that stops your computer from warning you about potentially harmful files sounds incredibly sketchy.

Stickman's report is perfectly relevant and no part of his concerns should be construed by your personal feelings.

[Audiosmurf]

Also, being sent a "package" from an aggressive stranger on the internet that stops your computer from warning you about potentially harmful files sounds incredibly sketchy.

This sounds like you've got no idea what you're talking about, or need to re-read that post.

[BoxingRock]

Also, being sent a "package" from an aggressive stranger on the internet that stops your computer from warning you about potentially harmful files sounds incredibly sketchy.

This sounds like you've got no idea what you're talking about, or need to re-read that post.

ah yes, I misread that part my bad

his post is still highly inappropriate though

[MagicManICT]

his post is still highly inappropriate though

What's inappropriate about it? It's a problem that might be resolved by Seatribe, but would it be practical, if its even possible? Chrome autoflags Java as well as any executable or installation files depending on your security settings. Firefox and Edge do the same. Java has the added problem of "perception of reliability" as there have been some glaring security issues in the past. Warnings are just that--warnings. The end user needs to pay attention and make an informed decision on if they trust the site or not. The warning doesn't make the software bad just because it shows up. You shouldn't be asking developers to jump through hoops to circumvent warnings--it ends up being a scam that lets bad software through the gates and blocks legitimate software from being able to compete with those that can "afford" to buy their way through the gates.

Don't like the warnings? Buy and use a suite of good security software to run anything you download through that instead of relying on your browser's sketchy warnings. And let me emphasize buy good security software, not use free or adware-supported security software.

Personally, I never cared for Chrome. Google (now Alphabet) treats the browser (and anything you look at through it) just like Gmail, Facebook does with anything you look at or post, etc--sells it to anyone buying and tracks you all over the Internet. Use whatever browser you want or need to. Firefox is currently the leanest running of all the major browsers. Chrome has a lot of extras that are nice to have if you use them. A lot of business software still demands you only use Internet Explorer to access servers with. Some people are just fine with whatever was installed with their operating system. Just learn to use your browser and modify it to suit your needs. Demanding others change what they are doing to meet some arbitrary standard is just bad manners. I'd agree if bad practices were being used, but they aren't.

[insanechef]

Magic u just get baited by nobodies

[BoxingRock]

Personally, I never cared for Chrome.

yah i think you made that clear but that's no reason to go on a rant telling users to spend money and buy software unrelated to haven.
there is nothing wrong with reporting what stickman reported, like 50% of all internet users are using chrome and stickman is 100% right in thinking that this warning might deter people from trying the game
i don't know what stickman did to you but telling him to stop whining is a very inappropriate response, especially for a mod, and i think you should remove your message

[iamahh]

sometimes a little instruction like "rightclick and save jar to desktop" goes a long way for regular users without java experience

[shubla]

Personally, I never cared for Chrome.

Well can't you just use chromium then?

I think that its very reasonable to warn people when downloading executable files.

[Ag_Revol]

This secrecy is killing your game more and more, can u guys for once just be transparent and say "there wont be a wipe anytime soon this year" or "wipe is relatively soon". By not doing so you are killing your player count until the inevitable wipe that everyone is anticipating for the coming months that might not even exist.
For this reason alone a bunch of people have quit, and i bet a decent amount of people would like to play again but dont want to waste time on a world that could get wiped in a month.

Been around for a couple worlds now, this always comes up. Any official hint of a wipe immediately nukes the population. But at the same time previous worlds didn't lose as much player count over endgame burnout.

I'm curious what's different.

Yeah maybe they could experiment for a few worlds to see what happens if they announce next wipe date A LONG beforehand (like months, years). So far they have only been thinking that it would negatively affect playercount, but in reality, who knows, its just speculation?

I'm pretty sure Rust has been brought up before, but most servers there follow a wipe schedule every Thursday. After Sunday the game is practically dead, especially if the next wipe is a full wipe (every month or so). In the game like haven, where you steadily progress trough long and time-consuming development, knowing that your progress will be gone in N amount of days/weeks is discouraging to the point where playing the game is pointless
Plus it'd put additional pressure on devs to meet the "deadline" (and we all know they aren't very good at it)

[shubla]

I'm pretty sure Rust has been brought up before, but most servers there follow a wipe schedule every Thursday. After Sunday the game is practically dead, especially if the next wipe is a full wipe (every month or so). In the game like haven, where you steadily progress trough long and time-consuming development, knowing that your progress will be gone in N amount of days/weeks is discouraging to the point where playing the game is pointless
Plus it'd put additional pressure on devs to meet the "deadline" (and we all know they aren't very good at it)

Well that is true, but Rust is a very different game when compared to HNH. In rust, if you want to start playing, you will just check up server that was wiped within 24hrs or something. But in HnH, there is only one server, so you don't have this option. Would this result in people not playing the game, at all? I don't think so.