There was no question:
“Although, I wouldn’t be surprised if those who hate to see abandonned builds litter the view would say you’re wrong, too.”
All you did was prove my point by basically saying “you guys are wrong!”
If you scroll up, I have said MANY MANY TIMES that I understand why the current beacon system is here for.
Did I ever say that it would be good to get rid of world-regeneration when a beacon dies?
I don’t think so.
I’ve always been trying to argue for compromises.
The reason there is no permissions is because in EA and alpha it was decided that scavenging was a part of the game. There is excitement in finding a dead build and gathering the stuff. People discussed both sides of this and the community and developers decided that the treasure finding part of the game was good.
From my discussion with James the reverse it actually the issue. They already have a system to give us stuff because we had a situation where they needed to give items to people (if i remember right). The primary issue is to tally and iterate possibly thousands of plots and millions of blocks on the server while people are playing and not impact it. From my understanding there is no “data file” like a previous person discussed and on a design level it makes no sense to have it that way due to some reasons in how things are currently.
I like a quest idea to get items or other things that can help those coming back ease the grind they are faced. I just need to balance it with those that would take advantage of it. Like how do you prove they lost it?
Also there are people that want to move. They could use this system to move easily when it wasn’t intended for it.
Ultimately with the right discussion and points made I could see returning items to people and losing the treasure aspect of the game. So far nothing seems viable enough. Instead I’d like to see new content that includes quests and other things to engage people because “stuff” can come and go…
A full design change to beacons would be an issue. Just adding a “stuff return” function wouldn’t be beyond the indexing of items and how it might affect the game in other ways. Ultimately I think the challenge is just many in the community feel this change would affect a small group versus the larger win that focusing on keeping people from leaving and adding new content would do.
I would think randomly spawning dungeons and structures that players can deconstruct would be preferable to scavenging an unfortunate players hard work.
The tally would just be a part of the regen code though, how much more taxing could a few lines of code counting and assigning a player id to what it currently is deleting???
From the regen code, surely it could flag a player id when it deletes their beacon.
Letting the build decay from regen would certainly be less grindy than manual deconstruction.
That’s great for current and new players, but does little to entice a player to return
Building a game is solving issues from alpha to beyond release. Patching is filled with issues. Adding new content is filled with issues. Changing content is filled with issues. Also, I don’t see where this is a full design change to beacons, It’s an addition to the beacon’s function.
The community has lost 100’s of players who have lost their stuff. The large group is the group that left, the small group is the group still here.
I like to make an emergecy alt, pack him with coils, machines and plenty of resources. Then even if every build of mine goes away I can be on my feet in less than 15 mins. The game is wildy forgiving, the best beacon fuel gives months of time. The only way to “improve” the system would be to completely remove regen of player structures.
The assumption was that is an additional form of game play that is to be added but that they are mutually exclusive. One does not affect the other and both forms are nice.
Also this scavenging of found items was not and is not contextualize as “unfortunate players hard work.” It was a result of a person leaving the game and letting their beacon expire. Some might have worked hard, some might have done little, some might have been given that beacon and done nothing. But that person allowed the beacon to expire and an explore should not be at fault for that. From some of the threads I read, of course conversation was brought up about the person that lost the items. Various suggestions and ideas were presented but nothing ever finalized into a good feature and people focused on growing and brining in features what would keep new players coming in.
The player id is probably already there at some level from the beacon permission design even if it is at the grander plot level. But, I am certainly no expert on the regen process so I don’t know if it is a few lines or a lot of lines.
The key thing is currently the beacon dies and all plots disappear while regen happens over a 4-12 hour process (if I remember right) and then resources are applied. So you would have to do your tally basically instantly after the beacon expired and before the plots were removed. That is the server hit that is not good.
The only option otherwise is to then have to keep the plots there even though the beacon isn’t fueled which means you have to create a whole new model of “plots” that allow regen and counting of items over that 4-12 hour process. And that probably isn’t a few lines of code because it is a different game mechanic.
But how do you decide who let their beacon expire because they were in the hospital versus who let it expire because they were tired of living in that area and decided to exploit this game mechanic to make it easy for them to move around from planet to planet? Whether it was slow or fast they are still using the feature in a way it was not intended.
We’ve seen many people exploit mechanics in this game to get the most benefit. That is fine in some cases but causes big problems in other cases.
“issue” probably wasn’t the right word in the context I was trying to be in – I meant “concern.” And I said “wouldn’t” when I should have said “would”. From what I understood it goes beyond just indexing so there are other concerns. But I would need to request some direct time with Ollie or someone to understand much more on a technical level and the impact either way and to see if this is a minor or major feature change.
Yeah certainly a large group has left and that is bigger than those that stayed. Of course I don’t have the actual numbers of people that left because they “lost stuff” versus the amount that left for the 50 other reasons they didn’t like the game. If we ever had those numbers the “lost stuff” group might be bigger or smaller than expected. People didn’t worry much about it because the amazing thing is that the world regenerates and all that stuff can be acquired again or bought or traded especially since when the person came back they were at the same level they were when they left. So getting your stuff back was certainly much faster…
But the point I was trying to make about the “larger win” and why new content and gaining new customers was seen as important is because the “largest group” is those that haven’t played. They dwarf even the amount that have left game and still play the game. So people wanted to iterate the “careful or you lose your stuff” notifications and continue to grow the game in ways that attract people to stay playing and bring in NEW people.
I think most gamers enthusiastic about the voxel building surviving genre are aware of Boundless, those that haven’t bought it yet probably have read the reviews and are aware of the pitfalls, didn’t like the cash shop, didn’t like the grind, not enough enemies, not enough features, etc. The game will have to make major changes to bring them in. New features might bring a few of them in, but many will still want to know, will I still lose my stuff? is there still a cash shop with Gleam Club? Is it still a huge grind? I think the game is losing massive sales based on those three things of which are highlighted in many negative reviews. I think the current update roadmap is mainly putting lipstick on the pig.
I’d argue this is wholly incorrect. I’ve read enough post from you to know that actually engaging with you in any form of conversation where the goal is to present an alternative point of view or narrative to the on that you ascribe to is entirely futile.
I could sit and argue this back and forth (because I still stand by my statements), but it’s not on topic at all, is also pointless and wastes the time of anyone who reads it. So instead I simply hold my hands admit I have made a mistake. I should never have replied to or included you in any discussion or comment I made on these forums. For that I am genuinely sorry, and apologise to the other forum users who’s time they will never get back.
I guess you didn’t read enough posts… The issue wasn’t that you responded and have a view point to challenge me – it was that you responded with personal attacks and generalization that were uncalled for and actually the irrelevant parts. It would have been VERY easy say your points about what SamF said without incorrectly stating it was a classic post of mine.
It is confounding why you and so many others feel the need to communicate like that. Negative personal attacks and never any apology and self awareness on why that decision didn’t help anything.
Myself and many people here are more than capable on having a conversation with different view point and still have a respective well thought discussion showing the each of the various viewpoints have merit. In the end you can still respect and the key point - understand - the other viewpoint from the other persons perspective even if you don’t agree.
That is why your assumption about it being futile to engage me is false. Many other people in the forum feel the same as me - the only difference is they just gave up on the forums because of the personal attacks and I’m the type of person that will call people like you out and challenge you hard to become a better person at how you communicate.
Why? Because then we can actually have a conversation and if your points have merit and directly address what I and others bring up, then we can and would change our minds and support your views. How else are you going to get a developer to change their view point when you don’t give a good argument and just tell them they don’t get the point or give a response that does nothing like you insinuated SamF did.
Just going to leave this right here…
Back to what happens when beacons expire! GO GO!
Should you wish to further discuss my distain for your communication style, why I chose to use this ‘personal attack’ (however much it was also intended as partial light humour) and why I feel that walking on eggshells through a forum is just as negative as throwing around insults in every post, please feel welcome to PM me.
While I feel this thread has already mostly run its course and is at an end, I still do not with to pollute it further.
Very much so.
what if when beacons expire a explosion happens and that sends up a light into the air notifying anyone nearby that it has expired, then portals appear whenever players are near enough and the creatures appear to try to scavange the site as well 
We could then encounter ‘wildstock creations’ and it will be like they used expired beacon stuff to build their ‘creature creations’
sounds like an event though
just a silly idea but hey! fun!