Build Land Issue

This is true, but some conflict is resulting from design decisions, right? We both played Trove. I never saw this kind of conflict on the Trove forums back when it first released because it wasn’t possible to screw with peoples’ builds.

I do get this, but then the question is, if 8/10 people who try this game want a ferrari, and when they play it realize it’s a g-wagon, then quit, but 2/10 people end up enjoying it, then either the marketing of the game, or the game itself needs to change to appeal to the larger consumer base.

If I’m a donut shop, and every day I get 5 people asking for donuts, but 1,000 people asking for coffee, I might think about changing my menu to include more coffee brands.

You find the right balance. We know they are looking at core systems and seeing what works and what does not. We know they are willing to change those core systems even if it causes possible conflict.

I am pretty sure they would hope (because that this is a sandbox) that people that play the game would be more willing to adapt. I think we see that because they let the wipe thread stay open to show that people could adapt and see the game differently. We see how that experiment went. It is very hard for people to adapt. We see how people are having a hard time to adapt here to this buffer zone change.

So any person that logically looks at this challenge and is a developer will start to think about how to solve THAT problem. Does separation of church and state help lower the friction? And if so, in what ways? Or do you keep changing out the core systems (or maturing them) and just deal with some of the complaints.

In the end they HAVE to do things to improve retention and adoption. They WILL do it because if they do not the game will not progress. They cannot have an inbred group of people… we aren’t big enough of a customer base at this point for that. So James has to look at ways to increase adoption and that is only done by solving retention.

To be fair, there were a few bad actors in that thread, and it’s not fair to generalize that the rest of the community wouldn’t be amenable to some compromises.

A fair number of people did say they’d tolerate a wipe if they could get blueprints.

But what about a partial wipe? We never even asked that. I’m sure people would be WAY more receptive to a partial wipe of current high tier worlds if it meant new worlds every day for instance.

I think it is both sides.

It is a people problem with many MC people and solo people and mmo people all being in the same room. Sparks will fly… people have different wants and needs and values in the sandbox. We won’t play well.

It is still a game problem because they put the systems in that help cause the sparks and need to fix that or be the parents and separate the kids in the sandbox. :).

1 Like

We did experience a lot of griefing on the club worlds before they added all of the permissions (kinda like how people tear the ■■■■ out of towns here in Boundless when they rage). Once they added the slew of permissions, virtually all of the problems went away. Any public builds on the public/temp worlds (aka: cornerstones) are able to be placed only in pre-determined real estate spots & no one else could edit/touch your stuff. So no problems there.

I think it’s going to cost them some time and possibly some $$ to hire someone, but they are absolutely going to need to update, fix, clean up the website, the reddit, the wiki, post a vid once in a blue, etc. Other indie games work the hell out of social media.

Even the bad actors the reality is that they were having a valid concern because they were trying to protect their stuff. While I don’t really respect how their concern was conveyed I can fully have empathy for it.

I don’t want to lose my stuff either. I will just “tolerate” it and make myself enjoy the starting over (which I do enjoy)… but I want all my gear too if I can … So I really do get it.

I just don’t want the stale world the conflict and the same neighbor. I love Major living next to me but some days I want Major on another planet… I am sure she feels the same… that way we can go visit each other… :).

The partial wipe won’t solve the conflict or anything. It is the result not the cause. WE all want more worlds to explore. We all want our own area to build. Some of us are fine being together in a city but hell sometimes we all want a bit more space in that city and are mad Moe lives beside us. All I needed was 2 more plots… etc.

By “adapt” I mean in a variety of ways. We all will but only if it meets our needs and makes sense. Right now the adaption needed really wasn’t solving our problems. Hence why it failed.

1 Like

I would like to point out that I was vehemently opposed to the Guild update - only because I felt that they neglected to fix/concentrate on the plot/beacon/settlement issues.

However, I was able to work around a lot of those issues and adapt. I re-built the roads, moved beacons…over and over. My hands are totally tied with the new system that has been added on. I cannot move anything without bad consequences. Give me tools to work with, permissions, commerce zone status…something and I will adapt. Then I will gladly help any other markets or malls adapt.

We still have those original issues. Now we have the buffer and older-plots-steal-your-plots issue layered on top.

lol

10chars

@majorvex @Xaldafax

I can summarize all 109 of our posts (110 including this one) and say…

I am just as lost as before. lol. Seems like no matter what, SOMEONE gonna be pissed because something gotta change.

Where’s @wade44423 to give his opinion? We need some other civil ideas here.

1 Like

My new base is almost ready for me to move :heartpulse::wink:

@Xaldafax is gonna give your new home an upper decker as a welcoming gift.

1 Like

They are all probably like:
giphy%20(80)

Or maybe:
giphy%20(82)

Or because it’s friday night…
giphy%20(81)

2 Likes

This is the longest thread in Boundless history without someone telling someone else to die in a fire.

:tada::tada::confetti_ball::confetti_ball::sparkler::sparkler:

Congrats @Xaldafax @majorvex we did it. We made history.

4 Likes

James, I’d like a new achievement trophy. :blush:

2 Likes

I certainly didn’t mean that people were not trying to adapt. I should have stated that more clearly. I think it is HARD to adapt to some of these changes and it feels like you are still bad off after it. So I certainly don’t feel that we can all adapt… but I think that having that friction to adapt hurts a lot.

I know James and the Devs feel this way. Someone some where is mad they made the decision they did.

I do want to note that we achieved a lot here. I wanted what is basically a design discovery session and problem clarity identification session. We gained a lot of clarity. More than likely the Devs have talked about all these issues. I know James spent a LOT of time on this buffer issue. People don’t give him and the Devs enough credit. But, I think the one thing we achieved most here was honest feedback from OUR point of view as people that love and play the game. That is something the Devs cannot get - the context in the way we see the problems. So it achieved what I wanted with this post… popcorn for the Devs to eat up and think about.

Thank you to everyone that did and might add their thoughts in a civil and ideation type way.

1 Like

For me the fairest system would be the following: It is yours what you plot and the rest not, nothing of reservations (maintaining the rule of the code of conduct that says you cannot isolate someone with walls or holes). It would also initiate the possibility of transferring plots and also one market per planet for the sale of plots and beacons with all its plots and an option to request the purchase of a beacon. In case the parties involved do not reach a civilized agreement with the previous options, the last option would be: the duel: a duel would be a fight where both would have a state called “duel” that would end the duel when any of the 2 I reached his life at 1% forming a barrier that protects them at 2 for 5 seconds and ends this special state of “duel”, which we say would be a special mini pvp. While this “duel” state is activated, it will be the only time when both will be able to fight in an area around the disputed frames that are technically feasible. To be able to access this last resource and be able to access the “Propose duel” option, it is necessary to have made at least 3 purchase attempts with prices equal to or greater than the average price on that planet. The one who receives the duel has a week to decide the moment of the duel that must be between 7 and 14 days.
-Implicated:
A: Challenger. You need to have as a deposit the average price of the plots.
B: Challenge.
-Possible results:

  • B does not answer. A win, get the frames, B receives the average market price from A.
  • B answers, A does not show up. B retains its frames. He only has 2 more opportunities left to request a duel from B for the same plots. In addition, he has to go through the 3 purchase attempts, maybe everything is a misunderstanding, and they can still solve it as civilized people.
  • The duel takes place: The winner wins the plots, the loser gets the average price for the plots. If A or B are less than level 20 and are the first person in that account, the money in question would be provided by the game as part of the tutorial, or for everyone the first time in a chest. (In this I am doubtful, there should be a reasonable limit to avoid abuse).
    I do not know if it would be simple, but in this way the developers did not have to be aware of the disputes between the players, only the company will be in charge of resolving if there is a complaint with evidence with captures that the terrain has been altered with walls and holes as dictated by the rules of conduct that are prohibited in wild plots. In your frames you can modify them, they are yours you can plan, and even checking the terrain beforehand and taking captures would be a smart option, but during the activated duel state your opponent can break your blocks as if they were wild, in this way you prevent one from being locked up to pass the time and thus avoid the duel, although it allows it, as a possible tactic, but keeps an exit open for the opponent such as taking out their tools and entering.
    If after 15 minutes (for example), and there has not been a winner, it is a draw and the plots are preserved. Start over, you have other opportunities to solve it in more civilized ways, if I don’t start over. Each case has 3 opportunities for mourning or learn to live with your neighbor or move and / or sell.
    It gives us many options to all, new and old players. When they challenge you to a duel, they notify you to the associated email and by steam and ps4.
    Maybe this special pvp mini of last resort scares some but this is a game played by people and not all people are civilized, I have a system of rules, that is limits, and with a kind of judgments that would be cumbersome for developers neither that suits the game, or we allow players to have a way to resolve their disputes on their own with many options, the market, the transfer, to speak it, the option to request the purchase and the duel with the aforementioned restrictions. The system would be something like that. I hope to hear your opinions.

You lost me at dueling for real estate.

I walked away from one of the most holy-grail-of-all-alpha keys I ever received because they added PVP. It’s a deal-breaker to some, including me. If it’s optional, that’s ok, but if it’s required participation, nope. :woman_shrugging:

3 Likes

yeah seem like PVP to resolve plot issues, isnt ideal. boundless not a PVP game and people would fear stuff they built could result in a hostile take over?

1 Like

I love the idea but we are trying to lower conflict not create more. While I think PVP is great for this game in a select isolated area, I’m not sure it helps in the building scenarios we are talking about for the type of people we are dealing with. For a whole new area it might be a great idea for how to have a PVP area.

2 Likes

I am speechless as to this concept… If someone does not want to “make a deal” you can force them into a Duel and take it from them anyways? Unless I am reading this wrong… oh and if it is NO.

1 Like