Yeah, and maybe thatâs an issue that some of the more âadvanced expectationsâ stem from. Weâve had access to this amazing (albeit not overly intuitive) tool that lets us do near anything, and then we get this.
I do agree though, I donât know how they can replace the world builder in such a was that is is more user-friendly but retains all the power either. Perhaps they shouldnât try. Perhaps the world builder could be a tool for people to create biomes that get added to a curated library, and then allow users to just select from the library. I know that would suck a little for PS4-only users, but it would be better than nothing.
Ahh. Well maybe cause those are surface resources and not imbedded resources they were easy to implement. I forget which section the liquids are in. been forever since Iâve gone to an exo
There has been some consideration on moving world-builder INTO the game (which they could do) but the amount of time and coding required probably wouldnât be worth the investment right now. Not a big win compared to other challenges and needs the game has.
Abuse of the rental system aimed at getting a wanted color is a possibility, but Iâm sure devs have something in mind to mitigate that.
First of all, is it even technically viable to get limitless rentals? 100 worlds attached to one public world - all visible in the sky?
There must be some idea behind the rental system to stop any kind of abuse. Simpliest would be to put limit on number of worlds per account. Another, to apply some sophisticated price scheme discouraging any manipulative behaviors (like dropping unwanted world and renting another).
I suppose it could work this way as well:
FIRST OF ALL - rent only one world at once. You cannot apply for 2, 3 or 10 worlds together. Just one. SECONDLY - you may apply for more additional worlds after you finalize the first one and after one full month has passed (and only if you keep the first one online, so if you pay beyond the first month)
SO, if you decide to stop paying for your fist world, the new one you get needs to be online for at least 2 months before you can rent another one (so you will have to pay for 2 months ahead). If you discard the second world after those 2 months, the new one you get then (and your third) will have to be online for 3 months (you must pay for 3 months ahead) before you can apply for yet another one (and your fourth). Long story short: If you donât discard any of your worlds, you can get a new one every month. After a full year you will have had 12 sovereign worlds to your account, providing you kept paying for all of them. Every time you stop paying for one of your worlds, the waiting time for the new one is increased by 1 month.
Also, for every 3 worlds you discard (stop paying for), one of your locked worlds (the oldest one) is permanently deleted. There can also be an additional renting ban for every 3 discontinued worlds you had (letâs say renting a new world unavailable for 6 months, and that would be on top of whatever delay you âearnedâ by discarding worlds earlier).
These are just rough ideas and numbers, donât argue the actual details, please. Just think about a possible way of managing the rental system so players canât run a rental roulette in hope of getting colors they want. Slowing the renting process seems the most obvious to me. It doesnât place limits on actual number of worlds you can have, but it does make the process of acquiring them pretty slow. Itâs some kind of reputation-based system. Constant discarding freshly rented worlds is punished with delaying of getting new ones.
If renting planets = more colors for everyone, and people have the ability to rent planets, then people will rent planets. Who cares how many they rent?
If devs donât want this to happen, then getting new colors this way shouldnât be a possibility.
The idea of limiting you have is currently easily worked around by the fact that you can make 100 steam accounts and access Boundless from the steam game library of the primary account.
You can also make however many PSN accounts and access Boundless from the main purchasing account. (max PSN accounts on same PS4 can play Boundless if one account has purchased it)
In effect, it would be much more work for the player, but if committed to cycling, itâs still quite doable, after all the world just needs to be unlocked for everyone to gain access.
Seems like it would hurt the devs more this way. I can say if it was like this I wouldnât even bother renting a single one any time soon. Iâd wait till the exact colors I want are available instead of renting any before that time.
I would say the best way to address this is to let players have control to start with instead of making the selection pure RNG and creating some complex system to try and prevent it. If you want to stop most players from getting and dropping works then let them get what they want the first time.
Yeah, it does kinda look bad. Like people will be paying irl $$$ to spin a gambling wheel to see what colors they may get and it might not be what theyâre hoping for. At least with most season passes, DLCs, skins, etcâŚyou know which ones youâre getting.
Some people like paying for RNG
apparently full 100% control of what you get can upset the balance planned for the public live universe (there is a certain idea, donât matter if you agree with it or not, behind how resources and block colors are introduced/made available and it might be turned upside down by letting a bunch of fully customized worlds join the universe)
Iâm not advocating for limitations here, however⌠I could see and respect a sensible limitation like, say, 10 active planets per account (same as characters.) The planets would then have to run a 30 day rental cycle before being taken offline if not renewed. At that point a player could decide what to keep or delete and purchase new rentals as they see fit following the same guidelines. IMO, one planet at a time is just too limiting (again, if we must even have limits in the first placeâŚ)
I can agree that something should probably be in place that would prevent purchase & delete / rinse & repeat planet-cycling âabuseâ. Only if the developers deem such actions would actually be harmful to the game, that is.
Thatâs the gut reaction quite a few seemed to have initially. Whether it is the intent or not, the perception is certainly there. Theyâre busy working on the system though so we will just have to wait until they have time to give us more info and details, as they stated already. Until then, weâll speculate for all sorts of great things and bad things
we pay money to play Boundless (the initial price and for some GC after) and we agree to the constraints imposed by the game (progression and skill system, types of worlds, environmental challenges, availability of resources and block colors etc.); there is entire system of random world generation and we manage the universe we get that way (itâs not all fully random - we do know we will have starting worlds and then several higher tier and then exo appearing here and there; we also know general limits within which each type of world is created - be it its atnosphere type, available resources or color palette possible)
we pay extra to get sovereign world (or worlds) - and itâs totally acceptable to have limits placed on them too, as they need to fit in the universe we all play in, and follow this universe constraints; what we get is control over who visits and/or build on sovereign worlds we pay for, getting a peace of mind and safety in our building, crafting and exploring/gathering/hunting endeavors; we can also pick a name for a world we rent and (Iâm sure of that) we will also get more control over some aspects like lava/water or general climate and terrain type; there will be random aspect to any sovereign world generation and itâs ok
I just want to add⌠my statement of saving my money until later is not threatening the devs nor holding them to ransom in any way. I just donât see the value for money (even though we donât know what the price point is yet) in the current sovereign world implementation and where my expectations are currently set.
And this is the real point, the developers need to flat out state what the motivation is to the limits they want to place on Sovereign Planets. They also need to be clear on if any color is possible or if there is some algorithm that is going to prevent certain colors from spawning on certain tiers of planets. Until then it is all supposition by players. And quite frankly a lot of doomsday projections by some players if their precious rare colors are not protected.
been forever since Iâve gone to an exo
