loftar speaketh (Jan 04-05 2014)

2014 Jan 04
(17:07:59) <loftar> Arguably, the 3D client runs better than the 2D, cmekss.
(17:09:29) <cmekss> what's the ETA on the new hafen?
(17:09:36) <loftar> There's no ETA, as always. :)
-
(17:10:57) <cmekss> ok ok ok, so what's the new LP system i've been hearing about
(17:11:10) <loftar> I doubt you've been hearing about a new LP system, cmekss.
(17:11:28) <cmekss> i've heard rumors of a new LP system
(17:11:32) <loftar> Unless by mischievous mouths. ^^
(17:11:34) <thehuntedpie> is there one?
(17:11:58) <loftar> Well, we are going to remake character progression in various ways. I don't yet know if there will be LP at all.
(17:12:45) <thehuntedpie> loftar to be honest I didnt hate the way differnt study items were themed for what they represented
(17:12:55) <thehuntedpie> in salem
(17:13:35) <loftar> Well, we want to do something completely else in Hafen. We've been discussing it amongst ourselves for quite some time.
(17:13:38) <thehuntedpie> the leaerning system in this game while very flexible is a bit generic in that you can gain a general point and do anything with it. Im not sure if thats what you meant by doing away with LP
(17:14:25) <thehuntedpie> loftar, what kind of system do you mean?
(17:15:14) <loftar> I don't quite know yet, thehuntedpie; we've only been able to discuss it in vague terms. We're going to experiment a bit once we have something playable in place and see what we arrive at. :)
-
(17:16:39) <thehuntedpie> loftar, well that sounds promising. Either way I hope theres a chance for us to get involved in the alpha and beta testing
(17:17:06) <thehuntedpie> plenty of ppl have way too much time on their hands and would be more than happy to assist you guys in the development of such an awesome game :P
(17:17:10) <loftar> As I've already said several times, we will mostly not have any "special" testing phase at all, but just open it up whenever we feel it's barely playable.
-
(17:18:32) <Ratonces> Isnt haven like, beta yet?
(17:18:54) <loftar> More like alpha, as shewn by us still rewriting it from scratch every now and then. ;)
(17:19:04) <Ratonces> Nono, Haven
(17:19:08) <Ratonces> No Hafen
(17:19:12) <loftar> Hafen = Haven
(17:19:25) <Ratonces> Hafen = Haven 2.0?
(17:19:31) <loftar> In our minds, the rewrite is not a new game, but the continuation of Haven.
(17:19:45) <loftar> Hafen is just an internal name we use to keep the codebases separate.
(17:20:36) <loftar> I was already planning to rewrite it some three years ago; Salem just happened to get in the way. :)
-
(17:21:41) <Ratonces> Was Salem like, as loved as Havenwas on produtcion, or jsut like, they hired you to make it?
(17:22:01) <loftar> Salem used the new object system that I had prepared for Haven. It has been very useful to use it in practice.
(17:23:14) <loftar> Well, it's a bit of both, tbt. I'd like to love Salem, but having business in the way makes it harder, which is a pity.
(17:23:41) <loftar> It has become far easier now that it hasn't been hard business for a couple of months.
(17:23:44) <Ratonces> Zoom has nothing to do with scale
(17:24:01) <thehuntedpie> i thought he meant the viewable size
(17:24:09) <loftar> The scale in that picture should be almost identical to the scale in 2D Haven.
-
(17:25:14) <Tonky> is jorb releasing more pics later?
(17:25:38) <loftar> We'll release more pictures sooner or later, but right now our first priority is to get Salem's update done.
(17:26:13) <Tonky> when are you planning to release the updates on salem if its not a secret?
(17:26:48) <loftar> The intention is to get it done during January, though I'm not sure exactly when.
-
(17:28:40) <loftar> I think I wrote on the Salem forum that the intention was for the end of January.
(17:28:43) <Tonky> so, at least, you dont have to wait for another year regarding salem
(17:29:04) <Ratonces> What is the Salem update? a major one?
(17:29:10) <Tonky> yeah
(17:29:16) <loftar> Rather major, at least.
(17:29:31) <loftar> We're remaking at least the studying system and the gluttony system.
(17:29:47) <loftar> And we're trying to throw in a few more things as well.
-
(17:29:58) <thehuntedpie> will the salem remain uniquely differnt from haven?
(17:30:02) <loftar> I also hope to get a look at the combat system.
(17:30:15) <thehuntedpie> other than the scarecrow horse art i mean xD
(17:30:20) <loftar> Of course, otherwise there'd be no point to having them separate, no? :)
-
(17:31:24) <Tonky> but it does sound like you are starting to translplant lots of things from salem to hafen
(17:31:59) <loftar> It does?
(17:32:01) <TimothyHD> I keep finding random unlit campfires :/
(17:32:07) <Tonky> the thing is that many people have bad impressions towards salem
(17:32:15) <Tonky> hope this updates would change that
(17:32:23) <Ratonces> Hmm
(17:32:26) <loftar> You mean like how I said that we want to take things from the new gluttony system into Haven?
(17:32:41) <Tonky> that is one
(17:32:46) <loftar> When I say such things, you should note that I only mean them in the most abstract terms. :)
-
(17:33:57) <Ratonces> Looks twice as good than salem
(17:34:00) <Ratonces> Twice...
(17:34:01) <Ratonces> 10x
(17:34:02) <loftar> Well, it is the same water drawing algorithm thus far, so they're bound to be somewhat similar. :)
(17:34:13) <thehuntedpie> water drawing?
(17:34:26) <Tonky> sure
(17:34:31) <loftar> The method used for drawing the bottom and surface of the water.
-
(17:41:54) <loftar> >will there be new content added, or will the changes mostly be in game mechanics and graphics
(17:42:05) <loftar> If we change game mechanics, of course we'll have to add content to match, too. :)
(17:42:29) <thehuntedpie> I meant new entities and activities specifically more than updated assets and sprites
(17:43:14) <thehuntedpie> loftar, im not belittling the huge amount of work that goes into said updates
(17:43:14) <loftar> Well, let's just say that our aim is not to merely reproduce what exists.
(17:43:39) <loftar> There are many things that need to be reproduced, of course, but we're going to make changes also.
(17:43:48) <loftar> Don't expect the game to work like it currently does. :)
-
(17:47:18) <cmekss> loftar, are you ever going to try to monetize this game (i'm hoping you don't do in-game purchases)
(17:47:43) <loftar> At least for Haven. It's too complex to try to develop a large update "in isolation". They always need to be tested gradually.
(17:48:11) <loftar> Well, sooner or later we're going to have to make money, cmekss. Or we won't be able to continue working on it.
(17:48:20) <loftar> It's a harsh world, but 'tis what it is.
(17:48:37) <thehuntedpie> the way I read in the forums and loftar correct me if I'm wrong is that a small amount of content will be available for free for a limited amount of time
(17:48:47) <thehuntedpie> after which you will have to pay
(17:49:01) <loftar> That's the model we've been discussing the most, at least, yes.
(17:49:13) <loftar> That's not to say that it's set in stone, however. Far from it.
(17:49:36) <thehuntedpie> loftar, its the best model i know of. the game I used to play for along time had a model along those lines that went like this:
(17:49:44) <thehuntedpie> there was starter area of the world that everyone had access to
(17:49:56) <thehuntedpie> with enough creatures and content to keep you entertained for a while
(17:50:11) <thehuntedpie> but if you wanted to explore further you could look but not touch
(17:50:36) <thehuntedpie> until you subscribed of course
(17:50:38) <loftar> I'd very much like to avoid having any kind of "starter area" in Haven, though.
(17:50:47) <Ratonces> Agreed
(17:50:48) <thehuntedpie> why's that?
(17:50:55) <thehuntedpie> In that it would get eveyrone killed?
(17:50:56) <loftar> Because it's a centralized location.
-
(17:51:45) <loftar> Not so much because "every would get killed" there, but because I like Haven to be decentralized.
(17:52:12) <thehuntedpie> loftar, yeah fair enough. cities are ok as long as there are many of them right?
(17:52:21) <loftar> Well, as long as they are player-built.
-
(17:52:46) <TimothyHD> So it feels like you're in your own little world.
(17:53:01) <loftar> More like so that it feels like the world is open.
(17:53:07) <loftar> That there may always be things you don't know about.
-
(17:54:44) <loftar> Well, sure enough, but siege and defense is a separate question.
(17:54:44) <thehuntedpie> well i mean
(17:55:11) <thehuntedpie> i just wish there were safe zones where you could get killed but thered be a huge penalty for it
(17:55:20) <thehuntedpie> so you *might* be killed
(17:55:24) <Ratonces> NOPE
(17:55:25) <loftar> So that every criminal could go there? ^^
-
(17:57:10) <Ratonces> The thing is, they are giving people the same options that in real life
(17:57:15) <Rawrz> lets not get into philosophical talks here
(17:57:16) <thehuntedpie> but if we could create an area where it was protected by law
(17:57:32) <loftar> What you want is more balance in PvP and siege, rather than "safe zones", and I would basically agree with that.
-
(17:59:11) <thehuntedpie> loftar, but at the same time people should have the ability to be reasonably sure they will only be killed UNLESS they got involved with the wrong people, pissed someone off, or had alot of valuables on themand announced it
(17:59:54) <loftar> That's not entirely true though, thehuntedpie. What you speak of implies a system of morals that the game enforces on you.
(18:00:24) <thehuntedpie> loftar, what if a town could make their own system of morals
(18:00:36) <cmekss> loftar, your game creates a real world effect
(18:00:39) <cmekss> anything can happen
(18:00:43) <loftar> They can. Just kill everyone who breaks the laws you set up.
(18:00:45) <cmekss> unless you claim a plot of land and put up a wall
(18:01:03) <thehuntedpie> loftar, that soundsd like it should happen. but its not practical because its a game
(18:01:06) <Ratonces> This is how it works irl.
(18:01:15) <Ratonces> You get arrested, but there is no magic holding you
(18:01:19) <thehuntedpie> if there was another way to enforce your own laws
(18:01:21) <loftar> No; it's not practical because PvP and siege are poorly balanced.
(18:01:55) <thehuntedpie> loftar, Im not intimately aware of the mechanics of the game, surely not as much as you. I'm just expressing a bit of an idea that you can with what you will :P
(18:02:19) <loftar> I noticed that you were expressing an idea. :)
(18:02:43) <thehuntedpie> loftar, ok so basically your saying that if pvp and siege were better balanced people would be properly afraid of each other ?
(18:02:48) <TimothyHD> It's right next to a clan
(18:02:54) <thehuntedpie> or that people would be less afraid?
(18:03:03) <TimothyHD> or some sort of red head thing
(18:03:14) <Ratonces> People would stop hiding behind walls 24/7
(18:03:18) <Ratonces> I guess is that what he meant
(18:03:35) <loftar> Well, it's a delicate matter, and it's not entirely clear to me either what the actual goal is. What I *am* saying is: Don't expect the game to do your policing for you.
-
(19:29:41) <Bandit> Loftar...did you answer my question earlier about being able to alter terrain(height map) ingame?
(19:30:49) <loftar> Bandit, of course you'll be able to alter the height map in some way or another. Anything else would just be stupid.
(19:30:55) <loftar> That's not to say that we've decided on just how.
(19:31:41) <Bandit> ok cool. I just think that would be a cool feature and add a lot of depth.
(19:31:42) <loftar> Just pop down a minehole and you'll have a brand new cave. ^^