State of the beta

I get what you're saying RC but it's hardly constructive it talk about this here. I mean sociology gives me as hard of a boner as any other guy and I'd be interested to hear more about your thoughts on the subject but what relevance does it have to do with KAG? Do you want KAG to scrap competition and become Terraria or something?

 

Thats up to them. Personally, I'll look into modding in a custom Zombie Fortress gamemode and play that mostly, but not really engage with the default competetive side of the game.

I'm just pointing out something worth being aware of, whether they agree or not, hopefully it will affect how they'll design their future projects. The current focus of KAG is designed around competetive play and theres no point in scrapping all the hard work, so this may just as well be yet another competetive game to earn money and have some fun, but hopefully realize the danger of such games in the future and make something better further on.

Still, the robust modding system they're putting in means that KAG can be changed by the users into a non-competetive game, which is what I'll eventually do. Technically, the framework of KAG can be reused for another project by the devs to make such games too if they want it.

The whole discussion rose from me asking if the zombie fortress mode would be in the new kag and why I wanted it.

 

That doesn't sound in character at all. In any case, I can attest that it isn't fun to lose when the cause is a team of builders that doesn't know basic English. Hell, it isn't even fun to PLAY when you're hardly playing with humans.
Well, I wish this game the best luck with a Steam re-release.
PS. Please don't take out notching
yours truly, me

 

Would love to see it out!

Making your own classes would be awesome, but if only payed users and admins/guards can only do it... Others will be bit dissapointed.

 

How dare they not utter our superior tongue (in which there's some of the most irrelevant and non-sensical rules of language...)!

 

If the person scripted them and made the art to a certain level of quality I would include them, and as part of that balance them. If anyone wants to contribute and it fits appropriately; although there may be a clause of exclusivity to a certain extent, not full lock down but preventing copied projects but I'm working on bringing a website together and getting graphics to be done before I say the extent of the project.

Also vanilla gameplay is super fun and the community won't be left out; and the developers like keeping people up to date with features they are trying out, realising some are too big or don't work (that's why they post on the Devlog). Rather then, to an extent insulting the developers, we should be cheering what they've done and what's in the game and also trust them. Their progress and expertise is incredible.

 

wall jumping better stay in kag!

 

Wrong. What would happen in real life, would be 2 companies having a monopoly for the technology. They wouldn't need to rush up developing and maintain good quality of their product as there would no rival in the market who could take part of their income.
Competition in market, science, ecology and pretty much everything is needed as hardly as nothing else because it forces you to adjust to the surroundings and therefore improve.




As of implying that competitive games are bad:

grow some balls, sissy

 

that article is totally bogus. first of all you're using it as a straw man since it is arguing against competition being the only effective motivator and i've described it as the best, which is hardly the same thing.
next, it presupposes that competition and cooperation are mutually exclusive. in your "two companies" analogy it might be, but that doesn't make it universally true(shad's right). in fighting, i teach my competitors what i know and they teach me what they know. if we have a fight scheduled against each other, yes, we stop cooperating in training for the time being. not indefinitely. after our fight, we hug and it's all very sexy with smiles and congratulations.
same goes for KAG. when i am 1v1ing some pub on a server in the middle of the knight. i take my time to explain to him some of the tricks i'm using. without this, he will not be competition for me. he will not be driving me to improve. in fact, i get worse if i play only against pubs all the time. because there is no competition. so in order to promote competition, and thus drive myself to improve, i cooperate with my enemies. to help them improve as well.

 

And the whole growth of agglomerations, ie Cambridge Science Park.

 

About 75% of this thread is made up of arguments between Reactorcore and pretty much everyone else.
Can we just have faith in the guys and move on.

 

Just look at the video game industry. Nintendo and Sega were the first rivals who competed all throughout the 90s, and even today we have the whole Nintendo/Microsoft/Sony rivalry. Everyone strives to outdo the other. It's human nature. Using companies as an argument AGAINST humankind's competitive nature is, frankly, really dumb. If there were no competition or rivalries, nobody would strive to do any better and everyone would be content with mediocrity. It's all about having the biggest, the best, the fastest, etc.

 

looks like someone likes their capitalist ideology

But again, this is neither here nor there. We should all head over here or just a make a thread in misc discussion.

On topic: the beta is still fairly rough but it is fun, and will get even more fun once it's been polished. It's come a long away since early beta, I remember when even just simple jumping would cause your character to spin like a wheel. Progress is being made fairly rapidly, and you will all get a beautiful game if you give it the time it deserves. That's not to say you shouldn't give feedback, just no need to jump to conclusions or be alarmed by what you see just yet.

 

First I'd like to say thanks for the invitation to the club, but I only talk about these things when they're relevant and its making a difference, like now. Talking about it just for the sake of it seems vain, since were just throwing words at each other, so I'll pass.

About the conflicts always arising, yes it makes sense and wherever there is scarcity or its impossible to find a compromise on something, then yes of course, people will take sides and fight for it. But this is not about that. This is about games actively setting up these environments for people to get conflicted with each other on purpose.

Games encourage hostile behaviour by creating these conditions of conflict. And since games and media are a big part of our lives, it has an effect on the culture as a result. Sure its not the only factor, but it does have an impact regardless.
</br>--- merged: Mar 23, 2013 8:55 AM ---</br>

So you're saying competetion is irreplacable to make better quality products?
How about that simple feeling of dissatisfaction over something you see that could be done better? That is what drives real improvement.

Again, competition is not what drives us, it is the want to make something were dissatisfied with get improved what makes us motivated to do something. If you see potential in something and you know it can be done, that alone can drive you to do it.

Also that article is not bogus. Alfie Kohn is highly decorated author and lecturer with many awards recieved for his work. That article basically takes his book and gives you a compact summary.

Yeah, but my example was to demonstrate the simple idea of competition damaging its participants, and the "companies-working-on-new-tech" seemed like a good analogy to explain it with. But like I said above, this isn't what my point is about.
</br>--- merged: Mar 23, 2013 8:57 AM ---</br>

I'm sure you will find this article I posted on the last page very interesting. Please share your thoughts about it, but do so once you've actually read it: http://www.shareintl.org/archives/cooperation/co_nocontest.htm