End of days might be coming!

[mikuli]

You design a game based around a specific group of people, be it the creative people, (see: Minecraft, Terraria) or the fighting people (See: CoD, Battlefield). If you build a game for both, then you need opinions on both, and that's where suggestions come in. There is 8 pages of suggestions, and yes I realize that most of them are crap, but there are a few that are actually decent and would be GOOD for the game.

Unless Ben of course wants to make it a cheaper/lowsys requirement of Spades of Duty: Block Ops.

So who gets to decide what would actually be GOOD for the game? Oh, right, the GAME DEVELOPER does. See, there's a bit of a problem with trying to forcibly bring democracy into something it doesn't belong to. Democracy is not always the right answer for everything. The guy who does the development of the game has decided it will be good for the game he wants to make, so it's in there, and no-one else has absolutely zero say about it. Of course saying "Oh hey, that's a bad idea" is okay - it just doesn't mean the dev should actually agree and comply with it. He can do that, he totally can, but nothing obliges him to.

... you need opinions on both...

You do not need anything at all but some coffee, a vision, some skill and a computer.

[Pulchritude]

So who gets to decide what would actually be GOOD for the game? Oh, right, the GAME DEVELOPER does. See, there's a bit of a problem with trying to forcibly bring democracy into something it doesn't belong to. Democracy is not always the right answer for everything. The guy who does the development of the game has decided it will be good for the game he wants to make, so it's in there, and no-one else has fuck-all of a say about it. Of course saying "Oh hey, that's a bad idea" is okay - it just doesn't mean the dev should actually agree and comply with it. He can do that, he totally can, but nothing obliges him to.

Well I imagine if he wanted it to be successful and well known, then he'd listen to the community. I mean granted it achieved 8th place in IOTY, but it could've done better. I know quite a few people who didn't vote because they didn't like the way the game was turning out which is really a shame. Regardless of that, a game without a community isn't much of a good game at all. I'm also pretty sure that some of the staff have also agreed that the community is 'not what it used to be'. There is a dedicated .51 server up, and it's MOSTLY always full.

The problem with democracy is that there is ALWAYS a silent majority. I'm sure we haven't heard responses from even 200 of those people.

(This is to the people who haven't seen it yet; view this thread. viewtopic.php?f=63&t=1848 )

If Mat^2 does release his OpenGL client, then I hope to god there is a classic version people could play.

You do not need duck all but some coffee, a vision, some skill and a computer.

See my first sentence above.

[Tai]

So who gets to decide what would actually be GOOD for the game? Oh, right, the GAME DEVELOPER does.

Although I will stipulate that devs can do what they want with their game, consider this; the servers are community owned. If a bunch of servers go down when people lose interest, there's not much of a game anymore, and the COD kiddies who the game is trying to cater to generally don't know how to set up servers on their own.

[IrishElf]

So who gets to decide what would actually be GOOD for the game? Oh, right, the GAME DEVELOPER does.

Although I will stipulate that devs can do what they want with their game, consider this; the servers are community owned. If a bunch of servers go down when people lose interest, there's not much of a game anymore, and the COD kiddies who the game is trying to cater to generally don't know how to set up servers on their own.

Well. Servers come and go regardless of the status of approval of the updates on just about any applicable game.

Besides, I imagine even if the game becomes full on CoDfanboys then at least a handful of them will be capable of server hosting and many will be capable of paying people [like jestservers] to host for them.

Now, if ben actually CHARGED you to play AoS then I can imagine the playerbase kinda deserving a say in what happened in regards to updates. But, demanding control over his game that is FREE TO PLAY? No. Just no.

[Gorman]

The only thing I really have to say about that is that Ben should accommodate server-side modding as much as possible. That way if a part of the community doesn't like one part of the game they don't have to have it. Ben can make the game he wants to make, and people who want to can play that, and people that don't can play their variation.

[Tigershield]

Why even create a, suggestion part in AOS forum.Offcourse the developer has all the rights to decide what he wants to do whit his game. But the community has great idea's to.And lisening to the few members that actualy post.

[lehma18]

So what people are saying is, that if Ben decided to remove the SMG, the shotgun, building & destroying, and would change the graphics so that there's bright flashing colors everywhere, the community would have no right for speech becourse "He's the developer, he can do what he wants" and becourse the game is free. Can't argue with that logic.

[Gorman]

So what people are saying is, that if Ben decided to remove the SMG, the shotgun, building & destroying, and would change the graphics so that there's bright flashing colors everywhere, the community would have no right for speech becourse "He's the developer, he can do what he wants" and becourse the game is free. Can't argue with that logic.

He has the right to ruin the game as he sees fit.

Why wouldn't he?

[lehma18]

So what people are saying is, that if Ben decided to remove the SMG, the shotgun, building & destroying, and would change the graphics so that there's bright flashing colors everywhere, the community would have no right for speech becourse "He's the developer, he can do what he wants" and becourse the game is free. Can't argue with that logic.

He has the right to ruin the game as he sees fit.

Why wouldn't he?

Becourse he develops the game for people to play, not himself and his friends. The community has a right to give him feedback, but he doesn't have to listen to us. Adding killstreaks and other bullshit would ruin the basic idea of the game: A nostalgic throwback to the past for HC-gamers.

[SNIPSSNIPERX]

With all due respect, you are wrong. Obviously it is the minecraft community.

hell no i play minecraft and aos they probly dont even know this is real paulsoresjr found it and hes minecraft player to
did he trash it no

[Gorman]

Becourse he develops the game for people to play, not himself and his friends. The community has a right to give him feedback, but he doesn't have to listen to us. Adding killstreaks and other bullshit would ruin the basic idea of the game: A nostalgic throwback to the past for HC-gamers.

I don't get it. Because people play his game he has to take what they say in to account? Who says he didn't make this game for him to play and his friends? And even if he did make it for you to play, why should he do what you say?

You say he doesn't have to listen to us, but why then can't he make changes to the game without our consent?

Sounds like you are conflicting with yourself quite a bit, get your story straight son!