Updates?

Mykel · #1 07-16-2005, 01:17 AM

Anything new?

Updates may be in the memories thread, I havn't been keeping up on it.

Mykel · #2 07-18-2005, 12:05 PM

Koni....?

:-(

URBANLEGEND · #3 07-18-2005, 05:04 PM

Anything new!?? HAHAHA!

Logged on lately? The Npcs-Server doesnt even start!

Emily_Cruddas · #4 07-19-2005, 03:55 AM

Don't worry! It's being worked on! It's just never going to be finished!

Googi · #5 07-19-2005, 04:01 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by URBANLEGEND

Anything new!?? HAHAHA!

Logged on lately? The Npcs-Server doesnt even start!

No more Zurroball?

kenyonandelliot · #6 07-19-2005, 04:28 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by URBANLEGEND

Anything new!?? HAHAHA!

Logged on lately? The Npcs-Server doesnt even start!

Yes it does

Lance · #7 07-21-2005, 12:14 AM

Prepare yourselves.

Mykel · #8 07-21-2005, 05:02 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Lance

Prepare yourselves.

Sarcasm twards Konidas?

Zxion · #9 07-21-2005, 05:21 AM

This is off topic, but I like the pic in your sig lance. If you look at it sideways it resembles an eye XD

Ken Takino · #10 07-21-2005, 04:31 PM

Somehow, setting a release date seems like a bad idea when it doesn't seem to be anywhere close to completion...

konidias · #11 07-21-2005, 06:05 PM

I'm not going to go into details about it. But Lance wasn't responsible for the release date. Stefan is sort of putting the pressure on both of us to get something playable ready by the end of August.

I think basically he wants to see what Lance has completed so far after working since November on it, and he wants to see what exactly is so different about my server that it would warrant having two 2k1 servers.

We're both on a deadline so except SOMETHING by the end of August from both of us. I don't think Stefan needs it to be 100% ready to go though... I think he just wants it to be close enough. I wouldn't stress too much Lance. I think you still have a lot left to do and you know I have a lot left. Good luck with finding staff though, it's quite difficult as we are both aware.

draygin · #12 07-21-2005, 06:29 PM

I would be willing to help either Lance or Konidias with level making. But I would want to discuss it with both of you first to see what the differences will be, who you currently have for staff what you intend to do with the server etc... what kind of progress has been made with the time given so far and such. Basically I don't want to work my butt off and end up wasting my time.

Edit: I agree with Huanter's post below I think the wisest decision would be to have Konidias and Lance join up and work together. It seems the most logical choice of action along with the best chance of success.

p.s. I can't post again at the moment but I can edit this post and will be getting a VIP account once I get home tonight probably. Not for any decent content in game but because I do enjoy the forums.

haunter · #13 07-21-2005, 07:08 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by draygin

I would be willing to help either Lance or Konidias with level making. But I would want to discuss it with both of you first to see what the differences will be, who you currently have for staff what you intend to do with the server etc... what kind of progress has been made with the time given so far and such. Basically I don't want to work my butt off and end up wasting my time.

Nobody does... That's why I think having to seperate servers is a useless idea. From what I understand one of the servers is probably going to end up being "The Winner" and the other is going to get scrapped or something. So yes, in the end the players get the superiour of the two servers... But why have the better of the two, when you could combine them and have something so fantastically amazing your head would explode?

I really like alot of Konidias' ideas for 2k1... But I still despise the idea of there being a chance of all of my work going down the crapper... Not to mention all of the work done by Lance, CheeToS, Scott, Thak, and all of the others that have helped "Graal2001" since it last closed.

I'd just like to see the possiblitity of combining both projects pushed a bit more. I have an understanding that Konidias isn't too keen on that idea... Unless I'm mistaken. But I think I'd like to know what the players think about the idea of a merge. Afterall... Isn't that who we're making this for?

konidias · #14 07-22-2005, 09:16 AM

A slightly updated classic 2k1 wouldn't hold anyone's interest for more than a week. You may say that is what you want, but that's because right now you can't get what you want. Once you have what you want, it won't be that desireable anymore.

I'm not changing 2k1 entirely so that it's not even recognizable as 2k1... I'm simply improving things on 2k1 that will make the server more fun. The general overworld will still be there, just modified a little. The familiar buildings and npcs and whatnot will still be there. In fact, I think it will feel MORE like 2k1 than it has ever been. If that makes any sense. Again, I'm not claiming the new graphics make the server a revolution. It's just a bonus, not my entire revision plan.

My plans for a revision have been culminating since 2002. There is a lot more to it than just new graphics and removal of some stuff. I won't waste my time explaining anymore though. I really need to work on it.

Zurkiba · #15 07-22-2005, 06:53 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by konidias

A slightly updated classic 2k1 wouldn't hold anyone's interest for more than a week. You may say that is what you want, but that's because right now you can't get what you want. Once you have what you want, it won't be that desireable anymore.

I'm not changing 2k1 entirely so that it's not even recognizable as 2k1... I'm simply improving things on 2k1 that will make the server more fun. The general overworld will still be there, just modified a little. The familiar buildings and npcs and whatnot will still be there. In fact, I think it will feel MORE like 2k1 than it has ever been. If that makes any sense. Again, I'm not claiming the new graphics make the server a revolution. It's just a bonus, not my entire revision plan.

My plans for a revision have been culminating since 2002. There is a lot more to it than just new graphics and removal of some stuff. I won't waste my time explaining anymore though. I really need to work on it.

2k1 was doing perfectly fine... even as a gold server back when everyone was playing 2k2. They said 2k2 would never come back. (Look at picture)

Why did it return? Because it was the exact same server, with kingdoms. It lasted a good while. Why did Lance's first revival fail?... no kingdoms.

kenyonandelliot · #16 07-22-2005, 06:58 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Zurkiba

2k1 was doing perfectly fine... even as a gold server back when everyone was playing 2k2. They said 2k2 would never come back. (Look at picture)

Why did it return? Because it was the exact same server, with kingdoms. It lasted a good while. Why did Lance's first revival fail?... no kingdoms.

So kingdoms is the key!

draygin · #17 07-22-2005, 07:02 PM

I know that's what I truly care about I'll be playing which ever one has the better Kingdoms system which so far seems to be more focused on Lance's 2k1.

konidias · #18 07-22-2005, 07:35 PM

I don't think kingdoms made the server. I was never really active in any kingdom and I played the server for years.

The reason the 2k1 re-releases failed were not just because of no kingdoms. The first time the server was re-released, everyone's account was reset, the ugly pre-GK bodies were used, and all the jobs paid LESS money than they used to.

I'm pretty sure most everyone is going to agree with me when I say that resetting everyone and then making jobs pay even less just so people can buy the exact same items they once had, is not going to encourage many people to stay around. The new bodies and 150HP or whatever just totally ruined pking/sparring. When you ruin the economy and fighting the whole server is ruined. Kingdoms or not.

Zurkiba · #19 07-22-2005, 09:45 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by konidias

I don't think kingdoms made the server. I was never really active in any kingdom and I played the server for years.

The reason the 2k1 re-releases failed were not just because of no kingdoms. The first time the server was re-released, everyone's account was reset, the ugly pre-GK bodies were used, and all the jobs paid LESS money than they used to.

I'm pretty sure most everyone is going to agree with me when I say that resetting everyone and then making jobs pay even less just so people can buy the exact same items they once had, is not going to encourage many people to stay around. The new bodies and 150HP or whatever just totally ruined pking/sparring. When you ruin the economy and fighting the whole server is ruined. Kingdoms or not.

People want 2k1 for the kingdoms, not to go and press D all day. The roleplaying enviroment of 2k1 was wonderful because there was a server-player interaction, my most cheerished moment on 2k1 was when the Zormite waterfall was dammed up. We were out there with our hammers and pickaxes breaking that dam up.

They did fail due to kingdoms. Yet again, No one wants a server where you run around and press D all day (you could also make the key S for PKing)

The new bodies actually increased pking and whatnot because it made it easier, it became a game of who could outthink and out maneover your opponet out of who could press S the quickest.

konidias · #20 07-22-2005, 10:38 PM

You can't speak for everybody. There were plenty of people who were never part of any kingdom. Just because it was the largest part of your experience doesn't mean it made 2k1 popular.

I plan to have kingdoms on my revision anyway. I'm just doing it a bit differently. For the better I think.

Ken Takino · #21 07-23-2005, 04:07 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by konidias

You can't speak for everybody. There were plenty of people who were never part of any kingdom. Just because it was the largest part of your experience doesn't mean it made 2k1 popular.

I plan to have kingdoms on my revision anyway. I'm just doing it a bit differently. For the better I think.

I liked kingdoms in general, but there were a few drawbacks, from my perspective. It got really annoying and to a degree, frustrating, to see leadership change so often.

Even constantly invading Karakaze got boring after a while.

Personally, I spent most of my time doing jobs--mining, breadmaking, etc.--so I could buy hats.

But after just about every playerworld started doing hats (and virtually everything that originiated in NewMain), G2k1 lost part of its uniqueness.

Sparkplug · #22 07-22-2005, 10:43 PM

2k1 owned for the CS game above the admin house

Brad · #23 07-23-2005, 12:12 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sparkplug

2k1 owned for the CS game above the admin house

hell yeah.

Leet was so good at cs

protagonist · #24 07-22-2005, 11:33 PM

I agree that kingdoms are really, really important. I was never a kingdom guy anyway, but it is quite important. Kingdom-based events and so on are important. Also, cool incentives to join kingdoms.

Nappa · #25 07-23-2005, 11:28 PM

Oh man. I am so excited to see Koni's 2k1 flop.

Chrismas · #26 07-24-2005, 12:34 AM

the best part about the Kingdoms were the idiots in it.. the human error was golden.

Brad · #27 07-23-2005, 11:31 PM

yo koni I never agree with anyone else but I don't like NPC kings at all. I am all for your server and I've supported you since day 1 but thats the only idea I don't like. If Lance's server is gonna be more kingdoms orientated I think I'll have to support that. Kingdoms and all the guilds like leet, farber, frog, etc. were my experience on 2k1. Without kingdoms being a major role I don't think the server can last. OLDSCHOOL kingdoms were awesome when we had 5 hearts and orcs would attack and **** I just had so much fun.

konidias · #28 07-24-2005, 12:25 AM

That's fine. Then don't play my server. That doesn't mean others won't enjoy it. I think you may be jumping the gun a bit though.

All I ask is that you give it a chance. If you don't want to give it a chance, then so be it. I'm not going to sit here and explain the whole concept just for you to say "I don't like it I'm playing Lance's server".

Zurkiba · #29 07-24-2005, 03:46 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by konidias

I'm aiming to make a "realistic" king who is very flexible and you will not be able to level up your rank in a visible fashion or anything. I'm going to try and make it as comfortable as possible. To the point where you feel you are a part of the kingdom and that the king acknowledges your good deeds. As I planned with Oasis, I'm making 2k1 into a server that encourages RP, not enforces it. I'm looking for something that will get everyone roleplaying, Not just the hardcore roleplayers, or people who are friends with the current kings.

Because we all know how NPCs make you feel like you're apart of the group, and how an NPC King which awards petty deeds is more realistic then a real player.

2k1 has never enforced roleplaying, it's entirely optional. If you wish to play with the roleplayers then you follow the rules. It's similiar to how a professional baseball team cant simply challange a professional football team, and both sides get to keep their rules. They completely contradict each other.

Quote:

Originally Posted by KuJi

It wasn't the server that was good, the ideas, or even the kingdoms.

It was the players, you can't bring back none of the old servers, because you are missing the players that went with them. Its like drinking a drink, with just a cup and nothing inside it.

EX:
Graal 3000
Graal2001
Elven Lands

You can't bring them back, because the players you were with will not be back.. and theirfore, people will refuse to play.

Just a theory

Even if this were the case, then you will find that a good majority of forum users are Graal2001 freaks

KuJi · #30 07-24-2005, 01:12 AM

It wasn't the server that was good, the ideas, or even the kingdoms.

It was the players, you can't bring back none of the old servers, because you are missing the players that went with them. Its like drinking a drink, with just a cup and nothing inside it.

EX:
Graal 3000
Graal2001
Elven Lands

You can't bring them back, because the players you were with will not be back.. and theirfore, people will refuse to play.

Just a theory

GryffonDurime · #31 07-24-2005, 01:15 AM

Honestly, I don't see NPC-run Kingdoms functioning well. You act as though any human player is inherintly corrupt. To which, the only counter-argument I need is to say that most hallowed name "Aftershock".

Lance's 2k1, or 2k1 Prime, won't FORCE people to Roleplay. It will FORCE Kingdom-members to roleplay. Those that don't wish to Roleplay are represented on our staff list; we are developing content for them along with the Kingdoms. Those who do wish to Roleplay will be able to do so in a well-established enviornment, and judging by the currently planned roster, they will be able to roleplay under the supervision of very competant monarchs.

So many underestimate the functions of the Kings back on 2k1; they were the best examples of roleplaying their kingdom could offer, for the most part. 2K2, which valued the game mechanics an NPC system would get all tingly at, led us to some rather incompetant kings. If you want to talk about repeating past mistakes, I'd start with gaining power through a means besides Roleplaying rather than gaining power THROUGH roleplaying.

See all y'all when the Kingdom gates swing or sink open for the first time

protagonist · #32 07-25-2005, 03:08 AM

I'd rather see kingdoms run by humans. I don't think the kingdoms need reworked at all.

Lance · #33 07-25-2005, 04:25 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by protagonist

I'd rather see kingdoms run by humans. I don't think the kingdoms need reworked at all.

But I'm confused. You said there was no such thing as negative progress, and that any change would be for the better.

GryffonDurime · #34 07-25-2005, 05:00 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Lance

But I'm confused. You said there was no such thing as negative progress, and that any change would be for the better.

Lance, when a former detractor compliments you, it's usually better not to try and stab them in the foot.

Lance · #35 07-25-2005, 05:31 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by GryffonDurime

Lance, when a former detractor compliments you, it's usually better not to try and stab them in the foot.

It wasn't a 'stab'. Believe it or not, that post was designed to stimulate some thought and perhaps even receive an answer. After all, it's tough to figure out what people really mean when they say mutually contradictory stuff.

protagonist · #36 07-25-2005, 10:52 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Lance

But I'm confused. You said there was no such thing as negative progress, and that any change would be for the better.

I didn't say that Koni's version would fail, I simply said that it wouldn't be something that I would be enthusiastic about. His 2k1 option would still be superior as long as you continue to be lazy and leave it UC, where it will never go anywhere.

Waltz5 · #37 07-25-2005, 04:42 AM

Up to this point I loved Koni's 2k1 ideas and progress 10-fold... but after hearing his intial kingdom ideas, namely the NPC king idea, I am rather turned off and quite dissapointed.

Not only that, Lance has Gryffon with him, and with that a huge advantage in the kingdoms category.

Scott · #38 07-25-2005, 06:54 PM

I'm torn between helping Koni or Lance and Jordan. ;\

draygin · #39 07-25-2005, 07:14 PM

Man you need to clean out your mail box Scott that or get on Aim more. :P

At any rate I'm helping Lance although we've really butted heads in the past the only thing in Graal that really interests me is RPing and NPC leaders just really isn't my bran.

It's nice to see you know us so well you can instantly tell what we have experienced and our reasons for not liking npc kings.
While I have not RP'd on Graal with NPC Kings I have in many other games such as Neverwinter Nights. By far and large the better experiences where always on those servers that had player controlled Kingdoms.
Now while I don't like the idea of having preset Kingdoms and then recruiting leaders. I much prefer people comming up with kingdoms RPing as small groups and building support and by then building up into a Kingdom. I still absolutely hate the idea of NPC lead Kingdoms. I could go on listing examples and reasons for why but it's clear you know more about my experiences and how things work not to mention what I actually enjoy even more than I do so I really don't see the need.

Brad · #40 07-25-2005, 11:38 PM

popularity contests rule