PDA

View Full Version : Q: what would make Graal better?


Kuza
10-05-2002, 05:09 PM
what do you think graal lacks, in your own humble opinion. this could range from better management to new stand-alone programs, such as advanced toolkits or something.

i personally would like to see more official playerworlds made by Cyberjourers (sp?) in the future. possibly finishing New World, now theres an ideal! they can hire somebody to do graphics for G2k2, what not hire another graphic artist to do the same for the current not-as-versatile tileset?

post what you think graal lacks the most. try to be positive about your comments too. i am going to bed, 6 am.. *snore*

Birdbird_0
10-05-2002, 05:25 PM
it lacks Pie.

KawaiiSaRiA
10-05-2002, 05:58 PM
It lacks in dedicated people. Well, there are people out there willing to do a good job -- half the time they are un-recognised.

vovavziggy
10-05-2002, 06:10 PM
It lacks proffesionality, it's all: "Let's do stuff cheap, nobody will notice and we won't let them complain."

screen_name
10-05-2002, 06:35 PM
Originally posted by Birdbird_0
it lacks Pie.

Indeed, they should send free pie samples to all players.

I would like a apple & pumpkin combo pie please.

BlKnight
10-05-2002, 08:09 PM
I think that Graal2002 was released way too early, my only problem. There is still so many things that need to be done (or are logicaly assume that are being done, since all other mmmorpg games have them).

Because now staff have people want to play on the finished Graal2002, and most likely it will be released when essential things are still left out.

konidias
10-05-2002, 08:21 PM
Originally posted by BlKnight
I think that Graal2002 was released way too early, my only problem. There is still so many things that need to be done (or are logicaly assume that are being done, since all other mmmorpg games have them).

Because now staff have people want to play on the finished Graal2002, and most likely it will be released when essential things are still left out.

Many people were upset over 2k2 being released so late... so it was really a lose/lose situation.

Zurkiba
10-05-2002, 09:47 PM
Hire true managers and staffers with a paycheck so they do their job correctly.

More moderation on servers

Less Bugs

Better GFX and Gameplay.

James
10-05-2002, 10:29 PM
Personally they should just take most of the playerworlds that are on the list. If they do that they will just leave a couple of servers that can be worked on hard and be "moderated" more efficiently.

Graal2001_NAT
10-05-2002, 10:56 PM
Originally posted by konidias


Many people were upset over 2k2 being released so late... so it was really a lose/lose situation.
I don't think they should have made it public knowledge then, if they are only under the pressure of a time limit, instead of the public and the time limit torturing them, they would be able to work better I think

AlexH
10-05-2002, 11:27 PM
Personally I would like to see only a few player worlds online, maybe about 3.
That way more talanted people could work on each player world instead of them all being thinned out over lots of servers.

And on the 2k2 thing people complained about it not being released on the date it was said to be so they had to release it early or people would just keep complaining.

_0AfTeRsHoCk0_
10-05-2002, 11:34 PM
I agree
More higher-end quality servers. I'm not expecting something of 2k2 calibre every single time, but as long as they have a good team that does updates every few days, it will make the server fun.

2k2 would have been extremely boring by now if i wasn't updated almost every other day by Stefan. Even small things such as swimming improvements, the new GUI and fortifications are something the player looks forward to and thus keep them coming back.

XxxxneosoftxxxX
10-05-2002, 11:47 PM
oh jesus where could I begin!

Before making graal 'professional' by making people pay for it, they should have made graal 'professional' by fixing up the ****TY GAMEPLAY!

AlexH
10-05-2002, 11:50 PM
Originally posted by XxxxneosoftxxxX
oh jesus where could I begin!

Before making graal 'professional' by making people pay for it, they should have made graal 'professional' by fixing up the ****TY GAMEPLAY!

There's nothing wrong with the gameplay of Graal.
Some people can use and do use the scripting engine to make the gameplay even better.
It's just that there are numerous servers up that can't manipulate the scripting engine in such a way.
That's why I think there should only be a few playerworlds online so that all the talant would be spread out, they will all be working together to make a few good playerworlds.

BlKnight
10-06-2002, 12:00 AM
Perhaps the early release is good though, puts pressure for the staff to work 24/7.

Soto
10-06-2002, 12:13 AM
to make it better is reset everythign and bring back old bodys an as bird says pie as well :D

konidias
10-06-2002, 12:36 AM
How about getting rid of all the people that say Graal sucks yet still hang around here like a bad smell?

Haha yes *win*

Kuza
10-06-2002, 12:40 AM
graal lacks management the most. i like alexh's ideal of less playerworlds. people would either have to make their own worlds or join with already present ones. whatever the case, a better playerworld would be created.... or at least one would think.

MilkyWay0016
10-06-2002, 01:10 AM
I like the less playerworlds idea as well. There should be some sort of system where staff can help set up playerworlds. (Not help help) Like, possibly, some sort of offical thing on the website. I'm not sure what I'm trying to say, its on the top of my tounge. Ah! Instead of having 1000000 groups of 3 people trying to make playerworlds, there should be a way to help connect the people so 20 people will be working on 20 playerworlds, or something. It'd work better in my opnion.

King_Arthur_Elven
10-06-2002, 04:10 AM
I like the few playerworld idea.
Then all the great levels makers,scripters,GFX People would only have like 3 PLayerworlds to pick from and then the talent would be centered and the players would have alot more fun!.
Go AlexH
shame it will never happen!
How would you pick what playerworlds stay up!?

Kuza
10-06-2002, 05:24 AM
Originally posted by King_Arthur_Elven
I like the few playerworld idea.
Then all the great levels makers,scripters,GFX People would only have like 3 PLayerworlds to pick from and then the talent would be centered and the players would have alot more fun!.
Go AlexH
shame it will never happen!
How would you pick what playerworlds stay up!?

you would think highest population, if you were stupid. in any case, that only accounts for half of the forum and Graal. it would be hard to decide, maybe on the duration of their uptime? the oldest servers might be able to stay? hell, i don't know.

Sky
10-06-2002, 10:12 AM
Watch him say:

Graal2001
Graal2002
and
Classic...


hrmmm

Amagius
10-06-2002, 10:21 AM
Wow. I think what Graal lacks is Advertising and Handling. It needs a full gameplay. It'd be more fun if they game was more interactive and only had a server. One large, large server. Sure, allow to make there own places, and give instructions on a server or computer run. Then you could have a favorites list that allowed you to bookmark the player-made one's, but the Staff made one would be the biggie. It would never end. It didn't stop at 20 hearts. You got your level 7 sword. It'd be cheaper, more fun (in theory), and also less demanding if you hired scripters and writers that just kept adding; also make it more RPG stat oriented like Graal2002 was, yet without the weird, slap-on and out of place graphics are. You could try 3D?

AlexH
10-06-2002, 08:20 PM
Well if I had to select any player world to stay up it would be
N Pulse.
That's been up forever and it's managment is one of the best.
Some people that have managed some servers don't have the right attitude to manage servers.

LordMatt
10-07-2002, 02:41 AM
Agreed on less player worlds. But picking the highest population would be wrong. It'd be hard to choose. Some servers are probably honestly working their tails off on making it great for the players but the players will not give it a chance.

Er1c2
10-07-2002, 05:05 AM
I think Graal needs to go 3D... if you've ever played Warcraft 3 by Blizzard (or even seen screen shots), that's the look Graal needs. Not being able to manipulate the camera angles, zoom, and rotation of objects is very limiting to a game. Stefan's main reason to not updating the engine to, as a start, allow tile layers is simply because many people that play Graal don't have computers that would be able to handle these updates... SO GET BETTER COMPUTERS :P

AlexH
10-07-2002, 05:13 AM
Originally posted by Er1c2
I think Graal needs to go 3D... if you've ever played Warcraft 3 by Blizzard (or even seen screen shots), that's the look Graal needs. Not being able to manipulate the camera angles, zoom, and rotation of objects is very limiting to a game. Stefan's main reason to not updating the engine to, as a start, allow tile layers is simply because many people that play Graal don't have computers that would be able to handle these updates... SO GET BETTER COMPUTERS :P

We would need lots more players to make major upgrades like that.
Graal doesn't have the playerbase for high requirments, nice if someday it would though. :)

Er1c2
10-07-2002, 05:32 AM
With upgrades comes players -- the more appealing a game, the more people will want to play it.

Graal2001_NAT
10-07-2002, 05:34 AM
if enough playerworlds were shutdown, stefan and unixmad could probably shut down one of the servers that hosts it, which should increase revinue made since they wont have to pay for another server, that could help the money problems graal seems to have every so often

AlexH
10-07-2002, 05:39 AM
Originally posted by Er1c2
With upgrades comes players -- the more appealing a game, the more people will want to play it.

I get the feeling that's what they're doing with 2k2.
They have changed it from what Graal began as.
2k2 probally appeals to more online game players than classic and 2k1 does so more players will be brought in by that.

I think we're a long way off Graal being in 3D though.

if enough playerworlds were shutdown, stefan and unixmad could probably shut down one of the servers that hosts it, which should increase revinue made since they wont have to pay for another server, that could help the money problems graal seems to have every so often

Ties in with my suggestion of only have a small amount of player worlds.
The more money they get in the more professional staff they can hire which should help the game a lot.

Kuza
10-07-2002, 05:40 AM
Originally posted by Er1c2
I think Graal needs to go 3D... if you've ever played Warcraft 3 by Blizzard (or even seen screen shots), that's the look Graal needs. Not being able to manipulate the camera angles, zoom, and rotation of objects is very limiting to a game. Stefan's main reason to not updating the engine to, as a start, allow tile layers is simply because many people that play Graal don't have computers that would be able to handle these updates... SO GET BETTER COMPUTERS :P

would we still be able to create playerworlds and our own levels, though?

_0AfTeRsHoCk0_
10-07-2002, 07:09 AM
Oh and Graal needs better customer service.

Two weeks ago my friend Larrien upgraded his account for a full gold year, and it's been in trial mode ever since. He e-mailed Unixmad twice but neve responded, and I even bugged Stefan on debug and he ignored me.

With stories like that how can you expect people to want to upgrade their account, let alone pass on good stories of graal by word of mouth. The poor guy paid with his own money and he can't even play, and the owners don't even want to help him :(

There, I had to post that, for his liberty.

BlKnight
10-07-2002, 07:48 AM
I would HATE a 3D Graal. Graal is like the only rpg game left on the internet that runs fast and has decent controls and has a cool view.

XxxxneosoftxxxX
10-07-2002, 10:26 AM
Originally posted by BlKnight
I would HATE a 3D Graal. Graal is like the only rpg game left on the internet that runs fast and has decent controls and has a cool view.

btw what happened to that?

Kuza
10-07-2002, 04:43 PM
graal use to be a democracy. i think it's evolving into a communist state. ;/

we are getting less and less input on major decisions, it seems. i remember when the player's thoughts mattered. heh, that was a long ass time ago though.

konidias
10-08-2002, 01:51 PM
Originally posted by Kuza
graal use to be a democracy. i think it's evolving into a communist state. ;/

we are getting less and less input on major decisions, it seems. i remember when the player's thoughts mattered. heh, that was a long ass time ago though.

Don't confuse communism with dictatorship. Two different things here. Maybe I'm just uninformed, but I have never seen a major decision be decided by the players...

emortylone
10-09-2002, 12:47 AM
Perhaps, you have misunderstood the ideals behind Communism. Communism, in itís true form, has the public owning everything. No private things would matter, everyone is equal. So in that aspect everyone would own Graal. A dictatorship is what Graal is. There is NOTHING wrong with it being a dictatorship anyway. Stefan owns it, isnít only fair for him to decide what goes on? I donít remember Graal EVER being a democracy. Some servers have a democratic form of Staff Selection, but that isnít the majority, and it is irrelevant. If you want things to change, then donít just criticize, get involved!.
---Shifte

Kuza
10-10-2002, 08:56 AM
i think i got the two confused.

anyways, we help build the worlds and maintain the game's pace. we are making important decisions everyday, in a way. we don't have much say in anything, anymore. stefan use to come on the forums and post stuff, like what would you think about this and new that... blah blah blah.

i proposed my go-kart ideal to g2k1 and look what happend! they considered the ideal and it became a reality. it just doesn't seem to flow like that anymore though. sosad, really.