Testing 246: Creative Worlds!

I certainly hope not.

That being said, it could be argued that if the “real game” (as if any part of this game was more or less real than the others) were to die because of the inclusion of creative or sovereign worlds, it would be better to take that as a note that the “real game” just isn’t appealing enough instead of an opportunity to start laying blame on other playstyles.

Are they really so different? From what I can see, a user will interact with my builds in survival by visiting them and exploring them. A user will interact with my builds in creative by visiting them and exploring them.

3 Likes

Survival = footfall, shopping stands, portal networks, XP gains, buffs, debuffs, death penalties, no flying…
Creative = access to all items, no ff, no selling/buying items, no portal networks, no XP, can fly, etc.

(I know I don’t need to list this lol)

It will be interesting to see which planet type most people select.

And all of those things are subsystems underpinning the core of the game to provide a different flavour to the same game. In every scenario: You build a thing, and people interact with it. Just think about which bits of this game the devs started building first to get a feel for what the core of the game is.

Unless you believe those things are more important to the game than the worlds and the building? In which case, why does creative even exist? If it’s so different, why isn’t it a completely separate standalone game?

1 Like

Agreed. I anticipate I’ll be roaming around and exploring builds a lot more than I have been lately, once I have my world. When I need a mental break from building I can go talk to people and have fun in survival. Not like I’m switching games.

Presently I have to take unwanted breaks from building to craft and gather, and that makes me far less likely to hang out and explore. Two sides to every coin.

5 Likes

I personally am not interested at all in Creative Worlds. Everyone doesn’t play BL for the same reasons. The “other little unique details” and the MMO aspect make the game for me.

Not to knock BL, but if I just wanted to build & didn’t care about the rest of the game, I could already be using 10 other games/programs. :woman_shrugging:

Edit to add - I think the addition of Creative worlds will be a great thing for the game overall. It will give a lot of players the game mode/experience they’ve been waiting for & it will give active content creators something to really dig into & put out there for others to see.

5 Likes

Cool. So you like flavour of survival more than creative. Nobody said that you should like all flavours equally. How does that mean the core of the game isn’t the same? Seems like you’re letting your preferences for what the game should be get in the way of seeing how it could be.

Creative is an MMO. Many people, meeting and interacting in an online space. It couldn’t be more MMO if it tried (unless it had a larger player base, and fulfilled the ‘Massively’ better).

Could you though? Can you list those 10 other games that allow for the degree of chiselling, colouring and fine-tuning of builds that Boundless offers? I can only think of one off the top of my head that arguably does it better, and it’s a janky AF resource hog, without even being able to be online. Then I can think of a couple that are roughly comparable and then… that’s definitely not 10.

I just stated what I liked about BL. The devs aren’t creating the game based on my preferences. I have also stated many times that I believe adding Creative worlds is a big plus for the game overall.

As I stated, I like BL for many reasons…but building is last on my list so the ability to chisel etc doesn’t rank high for me. Yes, there are other games that have building features that Bl doesn’t, but they lack many other things that I personally love BL for.

Feel free to PM me :blush:

True, but you specifically said:

So I just logically assumed we’re talking about 10 games based on their build capabilities only.

Thanks, but I’ll pass. I’ve work to get on with, and I think we’ve both said our piece.

Another different idea… would spacing out the portal types some be enough to discourage this? So say, a creative-creative portal couldn’t be opened if a creative-survival portal is within a certain distance, and the reverse. I’m thinking like 1000m or so, maybe even less would be enough.

Portals are all about convenience - if you made it so a creative hub had to be a distance away from survival portals, might solve the problem… I think. I mean, industrious hub owner could just build a big bridge or tunnel with signs and flashing LEDs leading the way, since mats aren’t an issue in creative. But most wouldn’t want to run/fly 1000m each time they traveled. So let’s say we have a big creative hub, linked to creative planets connected to most the permanent planets. That means for it to work as a replacement survival hub, you’d have to jump to the appropriate creative planet then walk/fly a distance to get to the survival portal - I don’t think most people would want to do that every time they traveled? But not sure, with Oort so pricey maybe some would consider it worth it. But as it stands now, given existing hubs out there, no way I would go through that trouble to reach my T6 place rather than just running through an existing hub to a 1x2 portal there. So, problem could still be there, but perhaps it would mitigate it enough. Free creative portals and no timers or restrictions otherwise, might be simpler?

Problem it brings up would be making sure others you allow to build didn’t mess up your plans by building a portal, but with individual beacon wipes, easy to solve the problem I suppose if someone built one then refused to remove it. Could also add an option I suppose to turn off portal opening permissions. This idea has issues, but figured I’d throw it out anyways.

I’ve talked about this a few weeks back with others, but I’m really curious to how it actually works.

Are bigger portals more of a burden on the server than smaller portals? Or is it more a client side performance issue instead?

I mean, I kinda assume that no matter the size of the portal the same amount of data of the other side needs to be loaded?

2 Likes

What about making oort shards and raw oort the only thing you can’t spawn on creative (you have to bring it from the live universe).

Every creative planet gets three free portals to other planets at any distance they want; after that, they have to fuel portals.

Also you’d get unlimited free portals that go to other parts of your creative planet.

The only other/alternative idea I have is making it so there are no portals to creative planets and you have to warp there (free for everyone). Seems less elegant though.

I agree with this point for what it’s worth. If everybody flees survival and moves to creative, it would be the fault of the balancing within survival by the devs. It’s not the users faults.

2 Likes

You did the poll non anonymous though which makes the results very suspect IMO. Still, I’m glad to have you on Team Poll ™️

Also I saw some mentions of confusion between portals potentially.

I feel strongly that portals to sovereign and creative worlds should be some easily identified colors that are different from perm portal colors.

I don’t understand why someone would answer differently when it’s anonymous…

For sensitive things I understand it, but sjeesh, which planet type you’re likely to rent?
People will know eventually anyway once you do rent it :wink:

5 Likes

It’s ok padawan
I will teach you the way of the poll

:heart::metal:t3:

Will I be poll spamming like a pro soon too?? :joy:

1 Like

There can only be one.

2 Likes

If by the death of the game, you mean more players in creative or that being the part of the game where player growth happens then why is that a problem? If the gaming community buys the game and rents planets in order to play creative versus survival, those players are still contributing financially

2 Likes

If half the player base moved to creative and never left again, and the game failed to grow its player base, it would be bad just because of dilution.