1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.
  2. Hey Guest, is it this your first time on the forums?

    Visit the Beginner's Box

    Introduce yourself, read some of the ins and outs of the community, access to useful links and information.

    Dismiss Notice

State of the beta

Discussion in 'Announcements' started by MM, Mar 20, 2013.

  1. Contrary

    Contrary The Audacious Paramount of Explosive Flight Donator Tester

    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?
    NinjaCell, Hella and Ghozt like this.
  2. Reactorcore

    Reactorcore Shark Slayer

    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.
  3. FuzzyBlueBaron

    FuzzyBlueBaron Warm, Caring, Benign, Good and Kind Philanthrope Global Moderator Forum Moderator Donator Tester
    1. The Young Blood Collective - [YB]

    RC, you may want to look into role assumption and its connection with play. See, humans (adults & children alike) have a fascination with taking on roles they see/hear acted out around them. This becomes relevant when we consider that until everyone (the whole world over) adopts non-conflicting outlooks on life there are always going to be differences that will give rise to disagreements, fighting, and (you guessed it) competition. Basically, while there is conflict in the world there will always be a part of us that will have no problems stepping into a competitive role-- even if only to see what it might be like.

    Also, regarding "don't games and other activities define the said culture?" I fear that it's never that simple; rather (like much of sociology, actually) it's a case of each--games & culture--forming/informing the other. They both exert influence over each other and trying to say which pushes/pulls more than the other is a chicken & egg problem. Thus, while a particular game setup might exacerbate negative examples of competition, it's an overly broad statement to say definitively that "a competetive [sic] game breeds the problematic culture". ;)

    That said, Contrary is right; if you'd like to continue this topic might I extend a warm invitation for you to join the Child and Eagle Philosophy Club? There we can continue the discourse without further thread derailment. ^_^
    NinjaCell, Ghozt and Contrary like this.
  4. ShnitzelKiller

    ShnitzelKiller Haxor

    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
  5. Hella

    Hella The Nightmare of Hair Global Moderator Donator Tester

    RC, I can understand your point, but I feel that it's irrelevant due to the fact that KAG is a game, and therefore is casual to the extreme. If each team were being developed seperately by two rival companies without sharing information, then maybe your example would make more sense in respect to the game, but it simply isn't. If anyone tries to play KAG in a truly competitive way, then I doubt they'll have interest in the game for as long as many of us have.
    In many ways, it's become a social game, and it's probably better for that factor.

    Walljumping makes up for it, man, as well as other small changes to movement and construction. It really does.
  6. PinXviiN

    PinXviiN Haxor

    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.
  7. AnRK

    AnRK Shark Slayer

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

    VanHuek KAG Guard Tester

    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.
  9. Slojanko

    Slojanko Shopkeep Stealer

    wall jumping better stay in kag!
  10. 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
    NinjaCell and Cpa3y like this.
  11. Hella

    Hella The Nightmare of Hair Global Moderator Donator Tester

    In any case, I'm sure those companies would be having a whale of a time as well, proving that competitive games can be fun, proletariat notwithstanding.
  12. Shadlington

    Shadlington THD Team THD Team Administrator Global Moderator

    Bad example. Loads of companies compete with each other and share technology.
    For example, Samsung and Apple collaborate on chip development even though there are direct competitors in the smartphone market, in which said chips are used.

    Plus there's been a huge rise in the development of open standards and technologies, which sees whole groups of companies pool their resources for development.
    NinjaCell and vampo like this.
  13. vampo

    vampo alchemist Donator Tester

    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.
  14. VanHuek

    VanHuek KAG Guard Tester

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

    Bint Haxor

    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.
    NinjaCell and Guitarman like this.
  16. thebonesauce

    thebonesauce All life begins and ends with Nu Staff Alumni
    1. MOLEing Over Large Estates - [MOLE]
    2. The Ivory Tower of Grammar-Nazis

    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.
    Titmau5 and kubasanus like this.
  17. 8x

    8x Elimination Et Choix Traduisant la Realité Forum Moderator Tester Official Server Admin
    1. The Young Blood Collective - [YB]

    It's about money
    Reactorcore likes this.
  18. Contrary

    Contrary The Audacious Paramount of Explosive Flight Donator Tester

    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.
    NinjaCell, kaizokuroof and vampo like this.
  19. Reactorcore

    Reactorcore Shark Slayer


    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
  20. Shadlington

    Shadlington THD Team THD Team Administrator Global Moderator

    Implying this philosophical debate about the nature of competition is making a difference.

    The purpose of a game is to be fun, not some realisation of idealogical perfection.
    Competitive games are fun in a different way* to cooperative games but so long as they are fun at all they are worth making.

    * And for me personally, a superior way - I enjoy cooperative games but get bored of them eventually without human competition to make things interesting, whereas competitive games entertain me forever. I've never been one for minecrafting and all that sort of thing for any prolonged period of time - I need to be in your base killin' your dudes. To be clear though, my point here is not that competitive games are better than cooperative games (as you clearly think otherwise) but that it is purely a matter of opinion - you can't really argue a case one way or another because it is entirely subjective. Arguing that your particular brand of fun is superior seems pretty vain to me, if we're tossing around condescending comments of that ilk right now.

    [Note: Whilst I have enjoyed reading several of reactorcore's insights in the past and often found that he has independently come to the same/similar conclusions that I and other team members have on many issues of kag's development (or indeed had original ideas that I've respected), this debate is really getting on my tits. This isn't remotely on-topic any more, take it somewhere else.]

    Getting on my tits = Britishism for 'annoying me'