by Aerona » Fri Oct 06, 2023 2:06 am By this logic, if we were not better-equipped than them, then Jorb and Loftar would have done it already. So, ... no, that logic doesn't work, take your own advice. The reason we're better-equipped is because we have more time and resources to devote to it and (at least, theoretically) we already know what we want. As for the 'utopia' part, every journey begins with a single step. In this case I would suggest you begin by creating prizes or trophies (presumably in the form of digital artwork) to hand out, though you could also start by defining what criterion you want award or ranking decisions to be based on and making assignments. Perhaps you can figure out which player hunted a 970 quality grey seal? I don't think Loftar's database provides that information, but maybe you can investigate.HasseKebab wrote:What kind of a deranged stance is that? If we were "better equipped" we would've already have done this, this suggestion would be a moot point because the community has gotten togheter and made all of this utopia of yours true. Get a grip.
This was answered in the OP of this thread. It's different because players go through all of those in the first few months and run out. They're an opening, an entry, a tutorial-like ease-in to the bulk of the experience. Like I said already,VDL wrote:How is this any different[...]
It's just not feasible to extend this all the way to the end, sooner or later players have to pick up the slack... and that's not a oversight, it's a intended feature.Aerona wrote:It's much, much, much more work to keep people entertained with a series of specific objectives than to give them the means to make some up on their own. Haven & Hearth is never going to give players a theme park ride-style gameplay experience like the most popular MMORPGs and their knock-offs do. Instead, it gives us more freedom and agency.
As much as I find this kind of "achievement" icky and bad for flavour, I acknowledge that it would be a relatively light burden, both on the developers and on the minds of the players. Rankings and leaderboards not so much, especially since those aren't get-and-forget but would demand constant support and pursuit (although they sometimes have the side benefit of exposing unreported game exploits or balance issues).VDL wrote:The wonderful thing about achievements, implemented in the classic manner, is that they have very little development cost relative to the game experience impact they have. (The disadvantage is that this may make them feel 'cheap', particularly if there are too many.) Simple ideas (get 500 STR) are accepted by gamers as achievements, as is repetition (get 500 INT, get 500 CON, get 500 DEX...) making it a matter of a few simple if-statements (and in this case one-time UI work, as Haven isn't on a platform with built-in achievement support). Achievements are a prime example of a quick win.
I've got no direct input into the display of badges idea; I'm neither for it nor opposed to it. I find some irony in it, though. This is a game where giving away information about your character is dangerous; then again, it can work as a threat display, too. Many players would want to keep that information hidden and those that didn't would either be vulnerable to predatory players or would be a very small elite class, which seems to make it a feature that would be detrimental to more players than it would benefit, and avoided by many others. But that's more if it applies to the current world. Achievements acquired in previous worlds are far less actionable, though there's also a higher bar to clear to make them worth considering at all.
Thematically, I still like the idea of attaching any such thing to the ancestral shrine, perhaps it could be decorated or equipped with bonus cosmetic features, and guests could be invited in to see it. Would serve the purpose while at the same time being no easier to exploit than regular visitor's rights.
I refuted your refutations; for example, I explained earlier that (and how) this game has more in common with toys than it does with most games; so the hard delineation you're trying to make between the two concepts does not exist.VDZ wrote:If a take is sufficiently retarded, don't grace it with a response. Note how he talked about everything except the core (that recognition requires the shared ruleset), only going on about evolution of game rules which I had already refuted in the previous post (game without rules is a toy, we can't change the server so we have no say in this game's rules). You'll just go in circles if you argue with someone who re-asserts things that were already refuted and does not acknowledge the refutation.
Re: Retarded, you two keep using that word. I don't think it means what you think it means.
