Change Focus?

Stephen · #1 05-31-2008, 07:31 PM

It just occured to me that Graal is still focusing a lot of development on their system.

Perhaps it's time for a shift in focus - from the development system to high quality gameplay development? It would be a great opportunity to develop new content - setting up the framework for advertising (so new players have something great and new to play). It would also give more time to document the system as it is - for new players if advertising is done.

I made a thread in the lounge so that any serious discussion could take place - so we may develop our ideas before we voice them here.

Crono · #2 06-02-2008, 04:26 PM

What I've been thinking for a long time now. V5 was completely useless and the time put into it could have been better used trying to improve the gameplay. CJ hasn't touched the actual playing aspect of Graal for years now, it's kind of sad.

Darklux · #3 06-02-2008, 06:03 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Crono

What I've been thinking for a long time now. V5 was completely useless and the time put into it could have been better used trying to improve the gameplay. CJ hasn't touched the actual playing aspect of Graal for years now, it's kind of sad.

Well they obviously have the policy:
We provide the devkit, you provide the content.
Being a development platform for online games might be a nice market, yet the game itself is vanishing, stagnating users, dead gold worlds and few people on forums.

DustyPorViva · #4 06-02-2008, 06:14 PM

Their policy before was different. They provide the devkit so we can provide the second-party content. They still, however provided the first-party content, which always had some degree of higher production value than the average playerworld. G2k1 and beta G2k2, I think, were the epitome of what Graal should have kept doing.

I agree, through the last years they have focused on everything except an actual server. And it's not even V5. There is Graal3D, iGraal, the Skills server, the cards, and countless little other things. All the time spent on these things could have probably brought a few decent servers, or one great server, to life. They've hopped on the bandwagon to try to find ways to make money, and instead abandoned what Graal used to offer... when truth be, I think making a new decent server could probably bring in more cash than all these little gimmicks.

Rufus · #5 06-02-2008, 06:19 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Darklux

Being a development platform for online games might be a nice market

It's really not. I can guarantee that almost every single user on Graal to date have joined for a gaming experience, not a development one. People are forced to develop in order to have fun, and it's turned from a hobby to a chore.

DustyPorViva · #6 06-02-2008, 06:21 PM

Truth be told, most 3D games, and I'm sure probably a lot of 2D games, offer players the ability to mod. Modding, in my experience(not personal, but from what I've seen), is a lot more powerful than what Graal offers. This is also offered mostly free for anyone who has bought the game.

Graal just offers a simple alternative, and also the ability for online capabilities. Which does appeal to people, but Graal really isn't hogging the market with some revolutionary idea.

I agree with Rufus. Everyone mostly starts Graal by playing it, quickly getting bored, and realizing there are ways to develop that intrigues their creativity. There would be a lot less developing on Graal if there were more fun servers to keep players occupied.

Crono · #7 06-02-2008, 06:38 PM

I originally started to develop because I wanted to make a house on a fun game.

DustyPorViva · #8 06-02-2008, 06:46 PM

Heh, I guess that's true. Point remains though, you joined to play.

Crono · #9 06-02-2008, 06:48 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by DustyPorViva

Heh, I guess that's true. Point remains though, you joined to play.

Naturally, but read my post again. Think it should be more clear on what I'm hinting at.

DustyPorViva · #10 06-02-2008, 06:55 PM

Ya :P
I just don't know if you still find it fun, is all.

To be honest, I think it takes a lot more skill to appeal to older gamers. Back then I found it fun to just sit outside the bank and to run around PKing. Get it little squabbles and such, and try things like taking over the Graal Castle. Nowadays I don't find those things in the very least fun... but a lot of people do(see UN). I think G2k1's aspect of gaming would still appeal to me... the grinding of GK, not so much.

Crono · #11 06-02-2008, 06:57 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by DustyPorViva

Ya :P
I just don't know if you still find it fun, is all.

I don't. That's the problem. A lot of us only develop like we do because we played Graal when it was fun. It's no longer fun, so why would people even bother to develop?

DustyPorViva · #12 06-02-2008, 06:59 PM

I honestly develop because I find it fun. I LIKE to bring my ideas to life. On the otherhand, I don't like the pressure of making a server. Graal just happens to be my only outlet for my ideas. If I had a better computer and could mod other games, I probably wouldn't be here.

cbk1994 · #13 06-02-2008, 07:14 PM

I love developing, but I would definitely play if there was a good server.

I hate how the owners of Graal expect us to make them content.

While I love scripting, I do dislike the pressures (e.g. a grumpy scripting admin, grumpy manager)

Crono · #14 06-02-2008, 07:55 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by DustyPorViva

I honestly develop because I find it fun. I LIKE to bring my ideas to life.

Unless your ideas lack playercount, its kind of hard to bring them to life in the state this game is currently in.

I mean I was a UN basher a few years ago but it's the only server I can actually be on and not feel like I'm in a ghost town yaknow?

DustyPorViva · #15 06-02-2008, 08:01 PM

Well honestly, my ideas mainly stick to graphics. I don't need Graal for that, but I can, however, implement it into Graal. So far, the level editor still supports this

My idea of 'bring them to life' strictly means to see them in action, not necessarily having it on a server being played. I have tons of stuff that no one has ever really seen, strictly because I had an idea I wanted to see working, and just that.

I occasionally script as well, which luckily someone lets me use their server for. Even beforehand I would script in the old editor. Like I said, it's just an outlet. I don't really develop to actually develop something.

But I agree, they've managed to move Graal in more of an online direction of development, which really kills the idea of people just jumping in and trying it out. Sadly, I don't think this will be changing

Crono · #16 06-02-2008, 09:20 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by DustyPorViva

But I agree, they've managed to move Graal in more of an online direction of development, which really kills the idea of people just jumping in and trying it out. Sadly, I don't think this will be changing

So many of us posting yet we're all ignored, as if they know what they're doing from ever-so-fine results!

Angel_Light · #17 06-02-2008, 09:40 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by DustyPorViva

Their policy before was different. They provide the devkit so we can provide the second-party content. They still, however provided the first-party content, which always had some degree of higher production value than the average playerworld. G2k1 and beta G2k2, I think, were the epitome of what Graal should have kept doing.

I agree, through the last years they have focused on everything except an actual server. And it's not even V5. There is Graal3D, iGraal, the Skills server, the cards, and countless little other things. All the time spent on these things could have probably brought a few decent servers, or one great server, to life. They've hopped on the bandwagon to try to find ways to make money, and instead abandoned what Graal used to offer... when truth be, I think making a new decent server could probably bring in more cash than all these little gimmicks.

Ditto

Stephen · #18 06-02-2008, 10:23 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Rufus

It's really not. I can guarantee that almost every single user on Graal to date have joined for a gaming experience, not a development one. People are forced to develop in order to have fun, and it's turned from a hobby to a chore.

Hmm, I did join as a player but got into development the more I played - I still really enjoy it, although now I prefer to work on ideas and gameplay less than graphics.

I honestly believe I hit the nail on the head with my first post... we, as the game and community, need to change focus from valuable systems to valuable content. This is really a stepping stone towards advertising... which I also think is a very valuable idea to Graal Online. The fact of the matter is a good idea will succeed regardless if it's approved or not, and as the age old saying goes "It's easier to ask for forgiveness than it is permission".

We're all very interested in the idea - we as the active community - the active community which almost entirely consists of developers. There's no reason for us not to work together, even to abandon short the individual ideas we have persued up to this point so that we may all incorporate them into a single great server.

If someone already has a server they're not sure what to do with that's the first "financial" obstacle overcome. We would all vote as a group if we want to use the server presented and the person would agree that it is no longer their server to own, but our server to develop on.

The last thing we need is a chief; we have to work as a community, make agreements, and make compromises when necessary. The sooner we get our act together the sooner we'll have the base systems developed for our server so that we may make content to be played and enjoyed.

Crono · #19 06-02-2008, 11:19 PM

There's not enough of us developers to make this game significantly different until Stefan starts giving people incentives to develop again.

For example PWA no longer check for playerworld quality, so what reason does this give players/staff to improve their abilities? Zodiac is pure trash but because it's system is working, no one cares to force them to increase the looks of their graphics and levels one bit.

Stephen · #20 06-02-2008, 11:20 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Crono

There's not enough of us developers to make this game significantly different until Stefan starts giving people incentives to develop again.

For example PWA no longer check for playerworld quality, so what reason does this give players/staff to improve their abilities? Zodiac is pure trash but because it's system is working, no one cares to force them to increase the looks of their graphics and levels one bit.

I'm talking about working together to make a new server, and dropping any small playerword projects we may have had so that we may put our heads together and make something big.

There's enough who are interested as it is - but the more the merrier.

Crono · #21 06-02-2008, 11:26 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Stephen

I'm talking about working together to make a new server, and dropping any small playerword projects we may have had so that we may put our heads together and make something big.

There's enough who are interested as it is - but the more the merrier.

I'm all for uniting and making something big as well, but I don't want Bomy Island to go to waste.

In my opinion BI can be something big, it just lacks much needed manpower.

Rufus · #22 06-02-2008, 11:29 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Stephen

I'm talking about working together to make a new server, and dropping any small playerword projects we may have had so that we may put our heads together and make something big.

Graal should probably be aiming to market itself as a product, rather than one flagship server. There's always one server being shown off, Graal Kingdoms was often the preferred flavor, and it has been this way forever, always marketing either one server or none. All your eggs in one basket and all that.

Stephen · #23 06-02-2008, 11:33 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Rufus

Graal should probably be aiming to market itself as a product, rather than one flagship server. There's always one server being shown off, Graal Kingdoms was often the preferred flavor, and it has been this way forever, always marketing either one server or none. All your eggs in one basket and all that.

Well, yes - but the difference before was that they were administrated by Graal Online, where this will still abide by the rules, it will not require the support of Graal Online Administration in the same way Zone or Kingdoms does.

It will also gather the talent so that we may work as a community - creating new content, and building the strength of the developers. I don't see any harm in this.

Rufus · #24 06-02-2008, 11:37 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Stephen

It will also gather the talent so that we may work as a community - creating new content, and building the strength of the developers. I don't see any harm in this.

Working long term on a server with a large staff group full of egos (that's what most of the 'talented' developers are like) is a disaster waiting to happen. Whether it be levels style, graphics style or scripting style, it is very hard to find a team that can work with each other based on style alone, even ignoring the egos clashing. New World was a project like that, and it the outcome was horrible in my opinion, it didn't even come out at all.

Short term events and projects are probably more suited to that setting.

Stephen · #25 06-02-2008, 11:39 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Rufus

Working long term on a server with a large staff group full of egos (that's what most of the 'talented' developers are like) is a disaster waiting to happen. Whether it be levels style, graphics style or scripting style, it is very hard to find a team that can work with each other based on style alone, even ignoring the egos clashing. New World was a project like that, and it the outcome was horrible in my opinion, it didn't even come out at all.

Short term events and projects are probably more suited to that setting.

Well, so long as we have the framework (movement, etc) the nature of the server can be as broad and expansive as developers wish.

As for the egos I hope to contain them by insisting on community votes; such that one simply has to recognize the community as a whole has come to an agreement... and if theirs does not coincide with the communities they're just going to have to deal. I think it's pretty plausible.

I hope to make it easier for people who are interested but not experienced to learn.

Rufus · #26 06-02-2008, 11:44 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Stephen

Well, so long as we have the framework (movement, etc) the nature of the server can be as broad and expansive as developers wish.

As for the egos I hope to contain them by insisting on community votes; such that one simply has to recognize the community as a whole has come to an agreement... and if theirs does not coincide with the communities they're just going to have to deal. I think it's pretty plausible.

I hope to make it easier for people who are interested but not experienced to learn.

Good luck.

Stephen · #27 06-02-2008, 11:48 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Rufus

Good luck.

If you are concerned why wouldn't you help? Idle criticism is exactly that - idle. This is a open project and your help is invited; even requested if my opinion counts alone.

cbk1994 · #28 06-02-2008, 11:50 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Rufus

Good luck.

He will need it.

Rufus · #29 06-03-2008, 12:02 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Stephen

If you are concerned why wouldn't you help? Idle criticism is exactly that - idle. This is a open project and your help is invited; even requested if my opinion counts alone.

Don't get me wrong, I wasn't criticizing at all and I hope something positive does surface out of this. However, I am skeptical as to whether this is a realistic target, rather an impossible ideal, especially with what and who we have left.

Stephen · #30 06-03-2008, 12:05 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Rufus

Don't get me wrong, I wasn't criticizing at all and I hope something positive does surface out of this. However, I am skeptical as to whether this is a realistic target, rather an impossible ideal, especially with what and who we have left.

All the more reason to help, imo. I think we have enough talent to produce some excellent work. It's just a matter of getting a server and giving it a spin - and God, I know there's probably 5 or more people out there that have servers they're not using or not sure what to do with; atleast one must be willing to share?

Rufus · #31 06-03-2008, 12:09 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Stephen

All the more reason to help, imo. I think we have enough talent to produce some excellent work. It's just a matter of getting a server and giving it a spin - and God, I know there's probably 5 or more people out there that have servers they're not using or not sure what to do with; atleast one must be willing to share?

Currently over heading a project that has already had a lot of work put into it I'm afraid!

cbk1994 · #32 06-03-2008, 12:13 AM

Developers Circle tried something similar to this. It failed.

DustyPorViva · #33 06-03-2008, 12:15 AM

No we didn't O.o... at least, I didn't. I told someone in the guild if they wanted to try, they could(they approached me about it). I don't think that ever got past the 'hmm, I wonder if I could', stage.

Stephen · #34 06-03-2008, 12:19 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by cbk1994

Developers Circle tried something similar to this. It failed.

You realize that those who don't support this idea, and then later complain about the quality of the game, are being very senseless? We're talking about actively making a change within our own scope and range - which is broad enough to do what we wish.

People have complained for years now, and this is a decent opportunity to actively make a change; not just complain.

cbk1994 · #35 06-03-2008, 12:32 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by DustyPorViva

No we didn't O.o... at least, I didn't. I told someone in the guild if they wanted to try, they could(they approached me about it). I don't think that ever got past the 'hmm, I wonder if I could', stage.

I thought someone tried and it fell apart?

Quote:

Originally Posted by Stephen

You realize that those who don't support this idea, and then later complain about the quality of the game, are being very senseless? We're talking about actively making a change within our own scope and range - which is broad enough to do what we wish.

People have complained for years now, and this is a decent opportunity to actively make a change; not just complain.

I wasn't criticizing; I said that when Developer's Circle tried, it failed.

DustyPorViva · #36 06-03-2008, 12:40 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by cbk1994

I thought someone tried and it fell apart?

Someone in the guild wanted to take all the members willing, and make a server with them. It wasn't meant as an actual server, but a learning process. Like I said, I don't think it even got past the very, very early planning stages.