14-05-06 Loftar speaks about the Haven 2.0

(15:26:51) <Bergzwerg> loftar, what exact year you started to work on hnh?
(15:26:58) <loftar> Late 2007, Bergzwerg.
(15:27:11) <loftar> We started getting players in May 2009.
(15:27:22) <loftar> Which is why they consider that to be W1. ;)
(15:27:35) <Bergzwerg> so, we can expect hafen in 2015 or late 2014?
(15:27:45) <loftar> I hope 2014, for sure.
(15:27:49) <loftar> It's hard to predict, though.
-
(15:28:40) <Maiden> Also because we're in the haven chan and hafen is the next stage
(15:28:41) <Deus> gets tiresome, never new info
(15:28:42) <Bergzwerg> hafen is just a code name
(15:28:44) <loftar> Well, I and Jorb consider them the same, though.
(15:30:13) <Bergzwerg> loftar, did you plan it like a minor update with new graphics at first?
(15:30:25) <loftar> http://www.havenandhearth.com/portal/media
(15:30:37) <loftar> No, at the very first I was simply planning to rewrite the server.
(15:30:46) <loftar> I was starting to plan this even before we started working on Salem.
(15:31:12) <Deus> do you consider salem a failure?
(15:31:15) <loftar> Because of the new object system and everything.
(15:31:43) <Bergzwerg> welp, I wouldn't if they get money
(15:31:44) <loftar> And since I was planning to rewrite it anyway, we wanted to take the opportunity to revisit mechanics that we weren't happy with.
(15:31:52) <Deus> such as?
(15:32:13) <Bergzwerg> and some ppl like salem as it's
(15:32:32) <loftar> Well, more than any specifics, I'd say the biggest problem with the mechanics are that they are often very mechanistic. ;)
(15:32:36) <loftar> If you catch my drift, though.
(15:32:47) <loftar> There's very little room for variety in the game.
(15:32:54) <Deus> it almost seems life a life simulator
(15:33:07) <Deus> *like
(15:33:17) <Bergzwerg> some things were more easy to do in hnh than it's salem
(15:33:24) <Bergzwerg> I didn't like it at first
(15:33:28) <Bergzwerg> and still do
(15:34:13) <Bergzwerg> like ore and tunning related stuff
(15:34:21) <loftar> But, well, as for the graphical update; now that we have the 3D client, we really don't want to go back to 2D.
(15:34:34) <Deus> why 3d :(
(15:34:42) <loftar> 3D is far superior for some things that matter more for as than the things that 2D are good at.
(15:34:49) <loftar> Like combining clothing and animations and such.
(15:35:15) <loftar> Why not? Do you think http://www.havenandhearth.com/portal/shots/118.png looks that bad?
(15:35:39) <Deus> i play haven for the gameplay, not the graphics!
(15:35:55) <loftar> Well, that's not our problem. ;)
(15:36:12) <loftar> I'm sure you'll find some client modder to give you your ugly red boxes back. ¦]
(15:36:48) <Bergzwerg> loftar, btw, these little hill without stipp slopes is exatcly what I wanted in salem
(15:36:51) <Deus> as for the gameplay are you going to try to foster positive player interaction
(15:36:52) <Bergzwerg> hills*
(15:37:20) <Bergzwerg> steep*
(15:37:28) <Deus> im not one of the peopel that needs blinky lights in my face to be happy
(15:37:28) <loftar> They exist in Salem too, Bergzwerg.
(15:37:36) <Bergzwerg> not like these ones
(15:37:58) <loftar> Well, maybe the map generator doesn't generate them precisely like this, but they do exist.
(15:38:22) <loftar> I also dislike blinky lights, Deus. ^^
(15:38:31) <loftar> In fact it's one of my main complaints with Wurm's UI. ^^
(15:38:41) <loftar> But serene nature is another thing. :)
(15:38:44) <Deus> haven is best like in brdgar with a large group of people mostly peaceful people
(15:38:57) <Deus> until it was ruined by raids
(15:38:58) <loftar> The main problem with those hills though, Bergzwerg, is that they are pretty much completely pointless in terms of mechanics.
(15:39:09) <Deus> can you do somethign to foster good interaction
(15:39:41) <loftar> It's a hard problem, Deus.
(15:39:59) <loftar> I mean, one of the main problems is that a very large contingent of players look at the game mostly as if it were an MMORTS.
(15:40:02) <Deus> the hardest, but the most rewarding
(15:40:17) <Deus> yes they do and its a problem
(15:40:45) <Deus> perhaps the biggest problem
(15:40:54) <Bergzwerg> loftar, can't you make something like climbing skill which define your climbing speed on those hills
(15:41:02) <loftar> I won't deny that that fact interdepends with the game mechanics, however.
(15:41:51) <loftar> I think one of the problems related thereto is the fact that there's no real "end-game content" than PvP.
(15:42:01) <loftar> And tbt I don't really know what to do about that.
(15:42:22) <Deus> what if they was a staus system
(15:42:38) <Deus> where reputation was a integer
(15:42:47) <loftar> You mean like a "score board" of some sort?
(15:42:52) <Deus> when you commit crimes it goes down
(15:42:55) <Deus> yeah
(15:43:01) <loftar> I don't really like that.
(15:43:04) <Deus> so peopel can see "oh that guys bad news"
(15:43:11) <Bergzwerg> loftar, end game?
(15:43:14) <Deus> me either but thats the point of brainstorming
(15:43:15) <loftar> I've said it before, but I dislike there being "global knowledge" of the game world.
(15:43:20) <Deus> not global
(15:43:24) <Bergzwerg> but it always was about fighting for spots
(15:43:26) <Deus> limited to peopel you see
(15:43:29) <Bergzwerg> like clay, water and stuff
(15:43:31) <Deus> in gam
(15:43:52) <loftar> Oh? To what point, then?
(15:44:03) <Deus> like names floating above heads, have rep also
(15:44:05) <Bergzwerg> untill it's too boring
(15:44:12) <loftar> >names floating above heads
(15:44:14) <Bergzwerg> or usually wipe
(15:44:15) <loftar> That's blinkenlights to me.
(15:44:24) <Deus> yeah :(
(15:44:27) <Deus> its always a balance
(15:44:31) <loftar> Furthermore, what does that say about rangers and avengers?
(15:44:34) <loftar> They also commit crimes.
(15:44:36) <Deus> i woudl prefer personalization
(15:44:44) <Deus> CB
(15:44:56) <Deus> rep woudl go down less?
(15:45:04) <Deus> sort of liek aggressive expansion in eu4
(15:45:04) <Bergzwerg> loftar, if you look at mortal online, it's about rts and territorial control too
(15:45:09) <loftar> And if anything, I'd prefer to take the crime system in a direction where it's more value-neutral.
(15:45:09) <Bergzwerg> there is no end game
(15:45:34) <loftar> Well, doesn't that mean that territorial control *is* the end-game?
(15:45:35) <Deus> id like customization where you can tell who people are by how they look
(15:45:40) <Deus> not their name
(15:45:44) <Mackerel> but how would you make it more value neutral without focusing too much on toggle buttons
(15:45:52) <loftar> Sure, Deus, I'd like that too. :)
(15:45:56) <loftar> But that's kinda hard. :)
(15:46:06) <Deus> howso?
(15:46:08) <Mackerel> >tresspass, but don't steal anything toggle
(15:46:10) <Bergzwerg> loftar, not really, they still didn't implement it properly
(15:46:22) <loftar> Visual character customization isn't entirely easy to implement, quite simply.
(15:46:36) <loftar> It's hard enough getting the kind of visual combinatorics that we do already.
(15:46:52) <Bergzwerg> loftar, what for we can fight besides spots?
(15:46:59) <Bergzwerg> not ladies I think
(15:47:30) <loftar> Well, the further we take this conversation, Bergzwerg, the closer it will come to the fundamental question of "why do we play games at all?" ;)
(15:48:25) <Deus> i always hoped the endgame woudl be positive social interaction
(15:48:37) <Deus> bcs social interaction is player generated and extends forever
(15:48:41) <loftar> I'd say that PvP is a bit set apart from other mechanics in that 1) there is some variety and 2) it's kinda "meaningful" to grind it to any level.
(15:48:57) <loftar> There aren't many other mechanics in the game that cover those points for the "end-game".
(15:49:15) <Deus> encourage social interaction more
(15:49:23) <Deus> mostly now its negative
(15:49:29) <loftar> But there's no reason to play a game for that, Deus. You could just as well be in an IRC channel in that case.
-
(15:50:32) <Deus> events that bring players together are nice
(15:50:32) <Bergzwerg> killing*
(15:50:38) <Deus> liek what grapefruit did
(15:51:03) <Deus> in game there is trade and intrigue and things happening
(15:51:13) <Deus> its more akin to talking to people irl than on internet
(15:51:26) <Deus> thats the distinction i see
(15:51:30) <loftar> But trade is always a means to an end, in my mind.
(15:51:45) <loftar> You can't just trade for the sake of trading, because in that case, nothing would have value.
(15:52:09) <Deus> tradign is a means to an end but it is a positive social interaction
(15:52:21) <Deus> that is the foundation of society
(15:52:24) <Maiden> It's too easy to just take, yeah
(15:52:31) <Maiden> Which is kinda realistic
(15:52:38) <Bergzwerg> loftar, exploring and adventuring can prolong
(15:52:38) <Bergzwerg>  interest in the game
(15:52:41) <Maiden> But trading isn't really that much of a reward
(15:52:45) <loftar> Certainly, but there'd have to be other mechanics to be the end to encourage trading.
(15:52:49) <Deus> no the interaction is
(15:53:01) <Deus> rare items?
(15:53:17) <Maiden> The only truely regional resources are water, soil, and clay
(15:53:31) <Deus> players need to create the world
(15:53:34) <loftar> Well, I dunno. I shan't say that village-building and such aren't also kind-of meaningful as end-game content.
(15:53:37) <Maiden> And they are common enough that any large group is going to have decent to good sources of them
(15:53:46) <loftar> People certainly seem only moderately interesting in that right now, however.
(15:54:12) <Bergzwerg> right now it's about some powerful players sitting on a top spots and other noobish player who don't and can't get like even 60q clay, so they sold out themself for a good clay or something else
(15:54:14) <loftar> I'm not sure exactly why, though; if it's because the options aren't interesting enough or if the world is just too volatile, or if there are other reasons.
(15:54:58) <Maiden> You have to be a large group to keep control of a good+node that isn't soil
(15:54:59) <loftar> That is true, Maiden. I do have some plans to try and remedy that.
(15:55:13) <loftar> They are a bit too unformalized to be able to talk about meaningfully yet, however.
-
(16:16:28) <Bergzwerg> loftar, can you zoom in and rotate camera?
(16:17:52) <loftar> You can rotate the camera, yes. That's half the reason why we wanted 3D.
(16:18:02) <loftar> You *can* zoom in, but there's often little point to it.
(16:18:13) <loftar> And we've optimized all the graphics to be viewed in the zoomed-out state.
(16:18:26) <Bergzwerg> it's just rotation on one axis or both?
(16:19:04) <Bergzwerg> like only around z axis or around x/x too
(16:19:07) <loftar> Only one. It's not like you can actually see farther anyway.
(16:19:16) <loftar> So there'd be no point to "tilting it down".
(16:19:37) <Bergzwerg> loftar, but loading range is limited?
(16:19:44) <loftar> Just as it is in Haven, yes.
(16:19:44) <Bergzwerg> of objects and map
(16:20:11) <loftar> That's what I meant when I said that you can't see further anyway.
(16:20:18) <deusm> you dont think 3d is a gimmick?
(16:20:38) <deusm> idk, i need a gameplay vid or something to make my mind up
(16:20:46) <loftar> Depends on what you mean by gimmick, deusm. Isn't a game a gimminck? ^^
(16:20:48) <deusm> a demo server would be sweet ;)
(16:20:59) <deusm> im deus/mobile
(16:21:10) <loftar> Yes, we'll put one up as soon as the game is playable in any meaningful sense.
(16:21:14) <Bergzwerg> I don't get ppl who upset about 3d thing
(16:21:25) <deusm> bcs nostalgia
(16:21:49) <loftar> Well, I'd like to think we've kept most of the visual style of Haven, precisely because we also are nostalgic. ;)
(16:21:55) <deusm> its not about playing haven 2, just about running anround and getting a feel for the camera
(16:22:37) <loftar> Well, sure, but right now you can't even create characters. ;)
(16:22:49) <loftar> That's primarily what I meant by it not being playable at all. :)