Haven Forums

Full Version: Dead Game
You're currently viewing a stripped down version of our content. View the full version with proper formatting.
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
[Image: r5SAAK1.png]
(03-11-2018, 07:48 AM)Ama86 Wrote: [ -> ]If there's a 5.0 this summer, I hope some serious lessons are learned from 4.0.
You said this, and all of a sudden everyone talks about 5.0, pwipes and how we could (or not benefit) from a reboot. are you people really that tired of 4.0, especially while at the same time believing it has been progressing slowly? As far as I see, the "beginning" of this version isn't even over yet, and while two of the lore/staff plots have had some development, there are things that still didn't happen (eg., the founding families have yet to hit the roster).

Hoping for a new version, and hoping that its existence will magically fix Haven's problems (which, I believe, are mostly cultural) won't achieve much.

Kestrel

Honestly I don't hate 4.0 as much as other people do, I've just grown tired of a large segment of the playerbase. I also don't think it's the worst version by a long stretch; it's a marked improvement over 3.0. Even the grid is vastly superior so I don't know what Crayon is talking about when he says there haven't been significant changes.

I mean, come on. Blackfield Institute over the Academy? It's an easy choice to make. The Academy still exists but at least it's no longer quite as glaringly vile and prominent.

My main gripe is secrecy, and I don't think a 5.0 is needed for that. It could easily be dealt with in the current version.

Dreamworlds are easily fixable with a tweak to the rule system for creating one, too.

Just about everything else seems to be expressed in a long list of Amatsuka's bad ideas, right down to her bizarre affection for paedo players.
It's not so much that I've grown tired of 4.0, I just never liked it in the first place. If by "the beginning isn't over yet" you mean it never really went anywhere from its starting point, I'd agree. If you mean chronologically, we'll be due for a new version sometime this year when going by the timing of previous versions. Doesn't mean we'll get one, but the precedent is there. It's not some outlandish request. It's how it has been thus far. Maybe staff doesn't want to do it this time, and that's their prerogative, but it certainly would be the right time to do it.

It's quite clear that 4.0 wasn't really finished. It's got gaping voids in places like the founding families that were never enabled, or the huge Tranquility Farm area that never got used. I don't think these are just future episodes of this season that haven't aired yet. It's abandoned content, let's be honest, and it's a bit disingenuous to call it a sign that 4.0 has more in store. Considering this chapter's reception and the current atmosphere in the community, I don't think it's worth trying to patch it up at this stage. The enthusiasm is gone.

Player culture is shaped by the game. You can't fix the culture without changing the parts of the game that created it. Traditionally, this has been attempted by making new versions. Large changes to the game are best paired with a clean slate, and Haven is never as popular as when a new version rolls out. If anything, I'd say it's what defines this game and keeps it healthy. Haven's design doesn't lend itself to years upon years of continuous play, and if that's what's one wants, one should ask for a version of the game that accomodates it rather than pine for it in a version that doesn't.

The alternative is to passive-aggressively criticize players on the forum, which never accomplishes anything. People have been doing that here for years. Soapboxing about player behaviour is basically a tradition, and it's completely futile as long as the game continues to foster the kind of player culture that people complain about. Opposing changes to the game and calling for a change in player culture should be two mutually exclusive things, because you can't do both and expect any results. Defending a status quo only makes sense if things are good the way they are.

Amatsuka's weekly fishing for player ideas is a good sign, but staff's continued obstinancy toward any idea that differs from what's already there is not. A fresh version would be a better way to look at the game as a whole and try something new. If staff doesn't want to try something new, that's up to them, but it seems that increasingly fewer players want the current menu.
I think OF's pretty on the money regarding WOD, it's a fun setting and I've enjoyed WOD games but it doesn't really translate well to online games. I think its popularity has more to do with familiarity and that all that's required to start a new WOD game is spin up a stock codebase and tell people, go buy the books.

Obviously Haven's been remarkably successful when it comes to pbases, but I don't really think that makes it a better game than others which haven't broken like 10 concurrent players as long as those 10 people are enjoying whatever they're doing. You can also prolong a game's life by putting in treadmill like compulsion loops but that doesn't mean people are really enjoying themselves that much. If people are leaving for other games you should celebrate people having fun other places not worry about it being some sort of competition. I guess I can see how it might be offputting if you're someone who really only enjoys big games, but I'm somewhat skeptical that that's driving a lot of posting as opposed to people's obsession with mu drama.

Even though theory crafting can be a lot of fun and sometimes generates good ideas, it's important to remember there's a big difference between the world that theory crafting exists in and the real world. In theory world everything is kind of perfect and nothing unexpected happens and everything works according to plan and there's no trolls trying to shit all over all the everything. It's like how each time there is a new version everyone radically overestimes the positive benefits of the announced changes before they happen.

For at least 99% of players the only way you're really going to have a positive impact on the game is if you change your behaviour. Which is obviously a lot less appealing than the whole, coming up with some super idea that's the key to all the stuff and a lot more just, effort, but unfortunately reality is rarely terribly convenient. Sure sometimes people get rich by coming up with some brilliant get rich quick idea, but it's usually a fair bit less effective than just showing up to work on time.

I think even if you don't want to put in that extra effort though there's probably stuff you can do to just make a more fertile environment for others. Probably the biggest thing I'd say with regards to that would be working to foister a sense of individual accountability.

In general the biggest determinant of if someone does something bad is the degree to which they can believe and convince others that doing it doesn't make them a bad person. So you know, 'everyone else is doing it', 'I'm less bad than most people', 'He started it', 'She deserved it', 'I'm just evening the playing field' or in games some combination of the code/staff/my character's personality/that dude over there made me do it.

You even get a sort of bad behaviour excuse market, where I'll basically nod and smile as you explain why you're not really a dick in exchange for you nodding and smiling when I explain why I'm not really a dick. Some people seem to all but make a profession out of coming up with broad sweeping plausible sounding excuses for being a dick which can earn you made dick groupies.

You can imagine if a substantial portion of the pbase just shifted their view to something more like, 'If you're being a dick, no matter your reasons or excuses, you're being a dick' it'd likely have a pretty big impact on the quality of experience. And you wouldn't think it'd be a tremendously big ask, I mean nobody can make you do it, and I'm sure the excuse makers will come up with a million reasons for why you shouldn't, but if you wanted to it certainly wouldn't be hard.

There's kind of a good example of that kinda excuse making in this thread actually, which I'm going to break down a little for educational purposes and because life just isn't complete without courting angry and barely coherent forum rants.

"People are always trying to default to whatever's easiest while netting themselves the most gain. Take a prisoner, victimize them for LF, take anything they own worth more than $200 and ebay it, etc."

What's interesting about this statement is that it lays out basically the absolute worst possible way for you to try and be successful at Haven as the 'way the game incentivizes you to play.' You should be able to see pretty easily how this is a 'the code made me do it' excuse, but it's worth digging in a bit deeper.

So you grab someone off the street and do all of the above, lets say you even go further and drain them for resources. Well firstly you're out the LF for the nightmare pull in all probability, the LF gain you get from victimising is determined by the victim's choices, and if you're ebaying their shit, probably not going to give you great returns. Ebaying gets you what, 1/5th or 1/10th the value of the objects? So not much money, and the resources you gain from harvesting is probably equviliant to like, a professional logging on.

So the gains are tiny compared to what you'd make from other similar investments of time, but they're still non-zero right? So what makes this the worst say to try and be successful?

That comes from the fact that in this example you're pretty clearly being a dick, especially since you're stealing someone's shit to ebay it. When you're a dick at least some people wanna be a dick back to you, and importantly you can't stop them. You can't murder them to stop them getting back at you, you're reliant on allies they can target, and with the way armor, groups, abduct and arrest warrants work no matter how badass or twinked out you are, you can't stop this person getting back at you. Consequently a lot of your faction mates will probably flake out or reroll, lots of people will talk shit about you and avoid RPing with you and even if you do avoid quitting yourself you'll be left limping along mostly miserable and probably having lost a bunch of money/lf/resources etc on the dick war you just got caught up in. We've literally seen people ruin themselves and their fun or implode their factions/societies with this kind of approach too many times to count at this point.

By contrast you could look to the most successful characters in Haven, people like Flynn, Roman, Caitlyn, or Nathalie. Characters with vast and powerful factions at their beck and call, constantly in demand for RP, with massive influence over the game and usually rolling in resources and other useful assets. Not a one of them was particularly twinky, griefy, or engaged in any dick-style bashing. They also weren't even mostly very high tier/class.

There are some additional requirements to excel of course, you need to be able to play a lot, be good at 'petting' people or making them feel good and valued, and be a good RPer. Importantly you probably need to have a character that has ambition while also not falling into twink traps which is pretty rare, twinky people do make up the majority of the people who care about having power for obvious reasons. It's also not true that it's all sunshine and roses, at least to a degree people can benefit from behaving in shitty ways, just not the ones listed.

So why is dick bashing still so popular? Well two reasons, one is that sometimes people want to or feel they have to do something mean to someone, and that's the only thing that requires no real imagination or creativity. Secondly for a lot of people a large part of the enjoyment of the game is in being able to vicariously enjoy being a badass who aint take no shit and so when someone gives you a bit of shit it can be almost game breaking for you to not bash them over it.

There's obviously a lot of ways you can improve there, from just getting better at self control to focusing on designing characters who have different, and less dickish, sources of pride. But that's really unlikely to happen as long as you have people loudly jumping up and down and carrying on about how 'The code incentivized me/them to do it'

You might also think it's slightly ironic that people advising on the 'ideal way to play the game' are so frequently those who are always rage-quitting all over the place.

TL;DR If you really do want to make the game better, start by calling a dick a dick.

Kestrel

(03-16-2018, 01:51 AM)Acheron Wrote: [ -> ]By contrast you could look to the most successful characters in Haven, people like Flynn, Roman, Caitlyn, or Nathalie. Characters with vast and powerful factions at their beck and call, constantly in demand for RP, with massive influence over the game and usually rolling in resources and other useful assets. Not a one of them was particularly twinky, griefy, or engaged in any dick-style bashing. They also weren't even mostly very high tier/class.

That's a lot of wishful thinking Acheron, but how do you explain the success of characters like Vytautas and Vakhtang? The player is never, ever short of people wanting to join his harem and is pretty widely acknowledged as being extremely griefy, and always rolling in resources.

How do you explain the lack of success of characters like Alexander and Josh? (TOG's good guys from 4.0/3.0)

Good will does not always translate to success, often it translates to being taken advantage of and getting screwed over. And often ill will (IRL and IG) translates to becoming president. Or uh, winning fights in Haven and running a successful society, is what I mean to say.

If there is any reward for good will, it's the self-satisfaction of knowing you did the right thing despite the adversity you faced and despite the lack of a monetary/social/tangible reward.

In fact, I do believe that's actually the theme of the game! Power = corruption.

Quote:You might also think it's slightly ironic that people advising on the 'ideal way to play the game' are so frequently those who are always rage-quitting all over the place.

idk if this was directed at me, but uh. The way I generally advise on the ideal way to play the game is pretty in line with everything you posted above. I advise people to not be dicks, to not dial it up to 11, to not teabag and to not retaliate full-ham over every minor slight because this is bad for the game. And I think I generally walk the walk more than a lot of people do, rather than just talk the talk. You can think I'm a dick OOCly, but I make the effort to be as decent as possible ICly at least 90% of the time.

I mean, the last time someone accused me of being a twink was over lockpicking during lunacy. And the crybaby victim in that situation escaped with no LF lost, not even a mild wound, just a few rounds of an RP-heavy chase/scare scene and paragraph RP.

I'm quite comfortable saying I was not the baddie in this situation. fite me if you think otherwise, I shouldn't have had to deal with all that bullshit over trying my best to fill in a niche role for Haven's horror (the threat of the full moon) and offering this particular player multiple, even OOC concessions to ensure she had a good experience. In return, I got a slap in the face.
You know how we always say the most compelling villains are those who don't see themselves as villains? Ends justify the means? Doing the wrong thing for the right reasons? It was a victimless crime?

Anyway... I think it's a bit misleading to indicate special characters as representations of their factions/societies. Every group normally has someone within it who bends the rules of conduct more than other players. Maybe they are into creepy sexy RP (in an ooc sense) or they steal the weapons of their victims or they are brand happy with people they encounter. So you can have a leader or high ranking character who is just the picture of virtue as we define behavior in the game but within the organization there might be someone who isn't as well thought of that exists anyway. The undesirable person might even be the reason the faction is as successful as it is by being the muscle, the money, the high tier, or whatever.
The myopia in Acheron's post is a bit much for me to sort through, so I'll get back to you after I've finished baking a cheesecake. Also pretty sure that was aimed at me, Kestrel.
(03-16-2018, 04:24 AM)Kestrel Wrote: [ -> ]That's a lot of wishful thinking Acheron, but how do you explain the success of characters like Vytautas and Vakhtang? The player is never, ever short of people wanting to join his harem and is pretty widely acknowledged as being extremely griefy, and always rolling in resources.

How do you explain the lack of success of characters like Alexander and Josh? (TOG's good guys from 4.0/3.0)

I'm not sure Josh was whom I recall, so I'll say nothing of that character, but as for the others? I don't know anything about harems or griefy attitudes, but I did have good RP experiences with Vytautas and Vakhtang, and RPing with Alexander was quite less enjoyable (not that I'd avoid him).

If that's a reason, or the reason, I don't know.

EDIT: Oh, Josh, I am sure now. He was nice to RP with, too.
Throughout the course of making my cheesecake, it occurred to me that the only possible explanation for Acheron's failure to accept the obvious is deliberate obtuseness due to some sort of ulterior motive or a bizarre and myopic mental block when it comes to seeing what's right in front of him. Accordingly, all I'll say further before making an abrupt subject change is that if punishing people with whacks to their attractiveness is an effective way to keep people from doing something as inconsequential as sleeping with their shoes on, rewarding people for being fucking dicks is undeniably, obviously, making a fairly sizable difference; also, punishing dicks by whipping out a bigger dick and cutting their e-peen off is a totally ridiculous solution to the problem, and a system wherein that's the expected way things play out is one full of e-peen bandits whipping their dicks out incessantly, where people who don't want to be dicks slowly turn into rage-quitting cheesecake enthusiasts with a penchant for talking shit on forums and calling people out on their bullshit.

In other news, I've finished making a delicious cheesecake and have shoved it into the refrigerator two hours before it should be moved because my doge is a nom-pilfering terrorist intent on dying of obesity, chocolate poisoning, or pancreatic disease.

[Image: 6gy8z2Y.jpg]

We're looking at a classic cheesecake, on a crushed oreo crust, thereafter topped with a gooey white chocolate ganache, which will hide any imperfections that crop up in the surface as a consequence of improper cooling. I've then additionally topped it with more crushed oreos, and a handful of fresh raspberries. When served, it will be topped with a drizzle of fresh raspberry coulis, which is a frothy, tangy fruit sauce concocted by heating fresh fruit in lemon juice, water, and sugar, until the fruit matter starts to break down, at which point you press it through a fine wire strainer.

Baking a cheesecake is a bit of a pain in the ass, but I've started to enjoy it quite a bit. I rarely make it for myself, anymore, but still like to make the dish for parties and other events so that I have an opportunity to refine my craft. The oreo is a recent addition, and ordinarily I've used a graham cracker crust, but I think that it will fit well with the white chocolate and raspberry, which were outstanding as lone accoutrements in their own respective rights.

I think that it's important when making a dish that all of the flavors compliment each other nicely. Even the odd man out, the raspberry, fits so well just in how nicely the syruppy, tangy, sour-sweet fruit sauce goes with the creamy sweetness and crunch of the cheesecake and oreo. There's a beauty when all the pieces fit together cohesively. I rather enjoy tacos, but throwing a bunch of taco-seasoned beef on top of a cheesecake is going to be a disaster, no matter how much people like tacos, or cheesecake. You can even like both and not like taco cheesecake, you know, because it's gross.
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10