PDA

View Full Version : Dinís Curse Multiplayer hackers


kyol
03-08-2010, 05:16 PM
How will this game cope with hackers?
Will there be bugged, user made items with +99999 life etc.?

Or does this game have semi-secure system like Diablo 2?

Thanks in Advance <3

interesting
03-08-2010, 08:01 PM
It wont.
No security, because it would cost too much time, effort and money from Shadow.

Thats why people will do whatever they want.

People will use trainers, mod the game, use memory editors, speed hacks, hex editors, duplicate save games, change the game files, even pirate the game since they wont need cd-keys anyway...

It sucks. But thats how it will be.

Look how my thread about it got ignored.
http://www.soldak.com/forums/showthread.php?t=1820

You will be playing and thinking: whats the point, someone else will just skip all of this and edit their character anyway. People will come to the forum and post screenshots of their stuff. You will play with edited characters and you wont be able to tell. Everyone will be in a state of insecurity and uncertainty, because you wont know who is legit and who isnt.

Its life. The opportunity of a life time, delivering what millions of players crave for, but... no.

Welcome to the forums.

Shadow
03-08-2010, 08:49 PM
Look how my thread about it got ignored.

It was definite not ignored. Right now trying to create closed servers would put Soldak out of business.

Kruztee
03-08-2010, 09:01 PM
Look how my thread about it got ignored.
http://www.soldak.com/forums/showthread.php?t=1820


<facepalm>

I don't think it's fair at all to say that your thread got ignored. Soldak relpied to your suggestion with what seemed to me to be an honest and realistic apprasal of it. Shadow AGREED with you in concept, but also made the point that for a company of the size and structure of Soldak, dedicated server-side characters were not feasable. Not only that, but many other regular posters on this forum also weighed in on the discussion. I think that to say you were ignored is plainly ridiculous.

How will this game cope with hackers?
Will there be bugged, user made items with +99999 life etc.?


Or does this game have semi-secure system like Diablo 2?

Thanks in Advance <3

The game (in it's current form) does not attempt to cope at all with hackers. In fact, it is made to be extremely moddable by design from the ground up (most mods can be created by simply editing text files). There is no requirement to be a hacker at all. My understanding is that it's extremely easy to design items that overpower your character considerably and in game breaking ways. Players who want to play that way are free to do so.

To be honest, my experience with the internet multiplayer aspect of the game has been just about unplayable (as of v0.908). I have forwarded the correct ports in my firewall, and although I can join games and chat/socialise in town, the moment I enter a dungeon the game lags so badly that it's just unplayable. I'm located in Australia and have to put up with ping times of over 200ms to the WoW servers in the US, but that alone shouldn't be cause alone for the issues I'm experiencing. I'm sure that more changes to the netcode will follow before the release of the game though, so I'll reserve judgement until release. Over LAN the game does play well though. If you're looking for a multiplayer online RPG that can be played at any hour of the day or night on secure servers with remotely saved characters and world data, then I would suggest that Din's Curse is not the game that you're looking for.

In my opinion, in it's current form, I would say that Din's Curse is a primarily single-player game with some limited co-op multiplayer functionality. If this deters you, then again, I would suggest that it's not the game for you.


*Shadow beat me to it by 10 minutes =P

kyol
03-09-2010, 05:36 AM
Well I'm sorry to say thats 3 customers lost and 1 to be refunded. :( Dev's to lazy to make closed realms, if I wanted imba hacked gear I'd play titan quest.

Sorry Soldak, I think you should be aware the reason Diablo 2 was so popular for over 10 years is mainly because of the closed realms.



This 1 fact makes the game: un-tradable, can't trust randoms, pvp pointless (if there is pvp) and zero's the challange for alot of players.:mad:

GeorgiaBoy
03-09-2010, 08:11 AM
:( Dev's to lazy to make closed realms,

Too lazy??? You have got to be kidding! Soldak is an indie shop consisting of a one person developer/producer/communications/finance person. Just see if you can get the same level of responsiveness from a high-budget title which would have the closed servers. No high budget titles I know of even have a money-back guarantee...

Hopefully, with the community's help, Steven and Delilah can build Soldak up to they will need closed servers :)

GB

timeh
03-09-2010, 10:01 AM
Well I'm sorry to say thats 3 customers lost and 1 to be refunded. :( Dev's to lazy to make closed realms, if I wanted imba hacked gear I'd play titan quest.

Sorry Soldak, I think you should be aware the reason Diablo 2 was so popular for over 10 years is mainly because of the closed realms.



This 1 fact makes the game: un-tradable, can't trust randoms, pvp pointless (if there is pvp) and zero's the challange for alot of players.:mad:

sounds like you can't even trust your friends

if there's 4 of you, why would you ever need to play with randoms? why would the loot any of you have be hacked? there is no pvp, but if there was, see my previous two questions

what a joker

dnuggs40
03-09-2010, 10:21 AM
Well I'm sorry to say thats 3 customers lost and 1 to be refunded. :( Dev's to lazy to make closed realms, if I wanted imba hacked gear I'd play titan quest.

Sorry Soldak, I think you should be aware the reason Diablo 2 was so popular for over 10 years is mainly because of the closed realms.



This 1 fact makes the game: un-tradable, can't trust randoms, pvp pointless (if there is pvp) and zero's the challange for alot of players.:mad:

I really hate it when I see some snot-nosed kid call developers lazy...do they have any idea how hard these folks work?

Delilah Rehm
03-09-2010, 10:39 AM
Dev's to lazy to make closed realms, if I wanted imba hacked gear I'd play titan quest.

If by too lazy you mean he works 12+ hour days and 10-20 hours every weekend, then I agree. But then what would we call actual lazy people?

If Din's Curse is not your kind of game, that's cool. We know it isn't for everyone.

And while we love the idea of closed servers, when Steven says it will put us out of business, he means we'd lose our house to the banks and be living on the streets. Soldak would be dead and there'd be no servers at all. Soldak has no publisher to fund investments that might not pay off, and as is, the company has yet to be financially stable. Maybe Din's Curse will be the thing to smooth those waters, and until then, having closed servers is like my dentist sending a rocket to the moon.

Consider this: Would you like someday for a game like Din's Curse to have closed servers? As a gamer, I do. I hope Soldak survives long enough to flourish and make that dream a reality.

getter77
03-09-2010, 12:01 PM
Really? Really? This is really even a train of thought being voiced?

:rubs temples:

The other topic was fair, myself and others weighed in cordially, Soldak's indie/industrious status is surely known---how can this line of accusation and bizarre "ransoming" be anything other than sheer insanity/trolling?

udm
03-09-2010, 10:48 PM
The amount of stupidity in this thread is beyond amazing. Lazy dev? Please, you have to stop playing this and go play whatever it is you want.

Jesus....

I don't understand the issue with ZOMG NO SECURE SERVERS. It is a social game, people! Why the hell would you want to play this competitively? Next thing you know, you people will be asking for PVP and little furries that become giant robots. If someone wants to cheat, let them. Or should we send a letter to Hasbro and Waddingtons and ask them to implement DRM and secure servers into Monopoly, Boggle and Cluedo too? :rolleyes:

kyol
03-10-2010, 05:22 AM
sounds like you can't even trust your friends

if there's 4 of you, why would you ever need to play with randoms? why would the loot any of you have be hacked? there is no pvp, but if there was, see my previous two questions

what a joker


Assumption left right and centre, get a grip frustrated child once you harnessed that please learn to read? kkthxbai :D

kyol
03-10-2010, 05:25 AM
FYI I'm apart of a dev team called lazytow, so I CAN speak from experience, cracked starcraft 2 beta in 3days. Closed realms I believe wouldn't be a bank buster if done correct, can anyone donate a xeon or quadcore?

Thank you for the replys, I'm sheerly disapointed in all these great games with no closed realms, for me and many others in kinda renders the game to a very limited timespan.

kyol
03-10-2010, 05:27 AM
I really hate it when I see some snot-nosed kid call developers lazy...do they have any idea how hard these folks work?

Read my above post, another jump to conclusion's kinda person! People like you should need licences for the interwebz. :(


I'm thinking reverse engineering with ida and XML, Flash, C++, C# is goner be about same skill levels as making a game like this, thanks. (No beef at dev's, just the randoms who type fectal matter)

udm
03-10-2010, 08:10 AM
(No beef at dev's, just the randoms who type fectal matter)

When you call a dev "lazy" without even getting your facts right:

1) it's "beef", as you call it
2) you should expect plenty of "fectal matter" being thrown at you over the interwebz

I like the idea of donating a quad core PC to Steven for this matter. Maybe you'd like to start the ball rolling?

timeh
03-10-2010, 09:23 AM
Assumption left right and centre, get a grip frustrated child once you harnessed that please learn to read? kkthxbai :D

You are the one crying about total non-issues. Also I responded directly to what you'd said.

*stops feeding*

dnuggs40
03-10-2010, 09:43 AM
Read my above post, another jump to conclusion's kinda person! People like you should need licences for the interwebz. :(


I'm thinking reverse engineering with ida and XML, Flash, C++, C# is goner be about same skill levels as making a game like this, thanks. (No beef at dev's, just the randoms who type fectal matter)

What does the fact you are part of a crack team (scum bags) have to the with the fact you made a stupid and childish comment?

They don't have the budget, that's the reality of it.

And realistically being part of a crack team isn't the same as what Soldak is doing. You break things, Soldak creates. Your "accomplishment" took 3 days...guess how long Soldak has been working on this game?

On a personal note, people like you are a bane to the game industry.

Shadow
03-10-2010, 10:37 AM
I would just like to add one minor thing. We already have a pretty nice server, which is pretty expensive, but that's a secondary concern. The real cost is how much development time it would take to implement closed servers (which would be in the months).

Wantonius
03-10-2010, 03:13 PM
I'm thinking reverse engineering with ida and XML, Flash, C++, C# is goner be about same skill levels as making a game like this, thanks. (No beef at dev's, just the randoms who type fectal matter)

The reason this business is called software development (and not programming) is that most of time you will not be programming. It's the developing, testing and finishing your product (ie bug hunt and polishing) that eats up the time. So you can do some programming, whoopdedoo. That hardly qualifies you to give out judgements on peoples work ethic. It's coming up with an original idea and transforming that into a product that's hard. Programming itself is hardly rocket science (and I would know since I've done both).

Maybe the "hackers" in multiplayer is a show stopper for you but instead of accusing Soldak of being lazy you could have just asked for a refund and stated that you hope that closed servers will be implemented in the future if possible. That would have been an adult thing to do. Instead you chose to make a total forum troll of yourself. If that was your intent, congrats.

Godot
03-10-2010, 04:58 PM
It wont.
No security, because it would cost too much time, effort and money from Shadow.

Blablablabla...

1ļ Tip, You should try to get into politics, you sure know how to lie, manipulate, and act as your the victim here, And even tho, your Thread WASN'T, and Reading some of the things you had to say there, I wouldn't be surprised if they had deleted your whole... "post/theories" if we can call them that.

2ļ Tip, and this goes to the guy above, the 3-4 w/e customers that want refund or are leaving, and any other hater/troll.

All of you, at this point I'm sure you know where the door is, you can leave when you please, and remenber to close it behind you.


As a side note, I'm happy the people behind Soldak have the guts, and Intelligence, to run a Indie Game Company now days, It's a hard market and one bad step, Bomb, It blows in your face.

If people like the ones above runned Soldak, we probally wouldn't even have this forums by now. "Closed Realms made Diablo 2 popular for 10 years"?... "Dev's to lazy to make closed realms"?...

You guys seem to have NO idea how to run a business, or even then, How to develope a GOOD game.

Aganazer
03-10-2010, 05:08 PM
Look how my thread about it got ignored.

I thought you were the same "interesting" from mmorpg.com, but you can't be. That one seemed reasonable.

It surprises me at how often people see the most friendly cooperative tasks as a competition. If your self worth is in question it can't be healthy to seek it in a computer game.

interesting
03-10-2010, 08:57 PM
I advocate a lot of things and most of them go against the "mass".

Im against any linearity in design,
Im against balance as the core fundaments of design decision as opposed to player freedom.

I like roguelike elements, randomization, customization.
I advocate that balance is an ilusion, that everything is based on the players, rather than characters or developers choices.
My take is that life is not fair and virtual reality is not as well and there is nothing developers can do about it. Superior players will win regardless of any design decisions or attempt to balance the game, either between different classes or capping the players power after a certain time spent playing.
I advocate that RPGs are about player choices, not 0 or 1, but an unmeasurable ammount of choices.
I advocate that the first M of the acronymn MMORPGs are about massivelly in scope of time and effort spent by players, by the number of players doing something together at the same time without restrictions and by cheer size of the world. Not just "more than 300 players in the same server at the same time, regardless of the same area". By my definition, only 1/10 of the games are actual MMORPGs and I kick the shit out of the because of that in any opportunity I get.

Im against the notion of "end game"
Im against the notion of "content"
Im against changing the rules of the game to "balance it" after it has started.(there is no excuse for not doing it before the launch)
Im against inflexible class systems.
Im against forced grouping.
Im against levels, restrictions, and pre-requisites or any sort of tool to control or restrict player freedom.
Im against scalable content (kill "level" 1, then go do "quest" for "level 1", then go do "quest" for "level 2", then kill "level" 2 enemies, using "level 2" equipment) It goes against what an RPG is, player choices.
Im against a game that forces the player into following a script,


Im against in-game systems that automatically track down and punish player killers instead of a punishment system organized by players through socializing.

Im against auction houses as oposed to the players organizing themselfs around specific places and creating bounds to trade their stuff.

Im against MMORPGs that are instanced calling themselfs MMORPGs.
Im against games that are too focus on combat.
Im against generic quests systems, "fetch x items", "kill x monsters"
Im against the "everyone is a hero" mechanic.
Im against developers trying to tell me how to play, how should I feel in their scripted content, limiting my options, with how many players can I play in the same area or group, how many times can I do something, wich levels or stats I have to have to do something, etc. Im against restrictions and limitations, specifically those that try to control what I call "human factor".

Im against developer invisible hand on economy.

I advocate sandbox games. I advocate Ultima Online school of design decisions.
Im against F2P games. Im against big greedy developers. Im against websites pushing big developers agenda.

Im an animal with a bunch of values and oppinions and regarding MMORPGs those are the ones I can think of right now.
Those positions I stand by them, I argue about them and defend those positions and I come to aid anyone who have similar positions.

Im very vocal in the communities I participate, many hate my radical opinions or the way that I express them, but I always argument my positions and despite not agreeing with me, I make sure people get the message. Im ok with that.

And Im only here because the inovative dinamic/organic feel the game has alongside the customization/randomization, the unexpected events, how everything nets with each other, how the player choices actually matter.
For all the positions I stand by, this game fullfills a large % of it.
And to rectify, I think Steven Peeler should do anything in its reach to get a closed server, to magnify the rewards for his effort, its too huge of a gap: to have character database stored in a server and not having it to miss.
Without it, this game will get just a fraction of praise and popularity and longevity... Go to the bank, get some financing, strike some publishing, advertising deals, put the closed servers in, bam, hundreds of thousands of players will come, keep playing, call their friends, like a giant snow ball, steven peeler gets rich and famous, more so than he could possibly envision right now.

What this game has, D3, Mythos, Torchlight wont have and it will take years untill a competitor can deliver it, but without closed servers, you have nothing, its just an interesting individual concept, that will disappear in its social "pointlessness" since people wont gather and live under the same rules. "What an awesome game" people will say, "if only..." they wont know what to say, "something is missing" is what they will think and they will move on. Opportunity of a life time.

getter77
03-10-2010, 11:09 PM
Go to the bank, get some financing, strike some publishing, advertising deals, put the closed servers in, bam, hundreds of thousands of players will come, keep playing, call their friends, like a giant snow ball, steven peeler gets rich and famous, more so than he could possibly envision right now.

This part seems to be a grave misunderstanding of the severity of the US financial/economic situation---especially in regards to lines of credit. For pity's sake, even angel investment is down in the industry IIRC! Also, publishers tend to be the lesser of things to consider nowadays considering issues with long-term rights management and whatnot to my understanding---at least if you are an indie trying to keep your things in order and together. Advertising has also, well...almost always...been more of a chicken and egg game in terms of money spent for attention given so more money can be spent to continue coverage given and---well you get the idea: especially so with the scale of 100Ks you are envisioning here.

Also, tis complicated considering the nature of Soldak's workforce that the "needs" not "wants" that brings to the table---specifically I imagine the Peeler's dinner table.

There's a chance all of the above could pull through if the stars align JUST SO...but what you are not considering is the opportunity cost of such a move considering is isn't like Steven is independently wealthy and getting this going/messing about like Woodhead and such did years on back with the likes of Animeigo and Wizardry. There's no safety net, nobody to take responsibility, just a case of "Why don't they get it? Look here!".

Also, unless they were charging a monthly fee upon some good initial sales...which would be suicide...the general upkeep and maintenance of said server(s) would quickly eat away at things at a regular tick even IF everything went across without a hitch unless the purchasing rate remained steadily high all the way across considering the asking price of the game.

In terms of "crazy sales all at once/people swarming/oh god how did I get here I'm not good with this" the only demonstrable possibility would be lightning striking twice in the form of Din's getting a ridiculous sale or so...during the big Holiday rush on Steam as that's EXACTLY what had everything really tick up for Torchlight---which is even a taller order to replicate since:

1.Perfect World did publishing for Torchlight.
2. PW already had funds allocated towards the Torchlight MMO and it was dev studio pitching well after the fact that saw the existence of the single player version come to be as a means to an end versus releasing the MMO version cold into a heated market some somewhere next year.
3. The Torchlight folks are a fully, but compactly staffed company, same as the other bigs out there due to having said publisher and whatnot. This allows certain things to become more feasible for them to engage in, but does not mandate such due to risks still being there in the timing and execution of the lot of it.

Also, the reason D2 has lasted as long as it has is not due to Closed Realms...at least not the lion's share. D2's longevity is a gestalt effect beget of pointed aspects of human behavioral psychology woven into Blizzard games since quite awhile back, brand strength, coming off strong property strength with the original Diablo, and a host of other factors, including Vivendi/now Activision---that have allowed for things to wind up just so with a dash of luck and some good timing.

So....cut slack as due, and I'd say time well spent is to reckon otherwise---in terms of ways to boost the appeal and quality of Din's Curse so as to beget a time when more ambitious designs are not only theoretically possible without grand risks, but actually make sense given the long term shake of it all.

interesting
03-10-2010, 11:55 PM
I was just giving some examples.

The overall idea is: DO SOMETHING. BE DINAMIC. GO AFTER YOUR DREAMS. MAKE IT HAPPEN.

Kruztee
03-11-2010, 12:40 AM
Also, the reason D2 has lasted as long as it has is not due to Closed Realms...at least not the lion's share. D2's longevity is a gestalt effect beget of pointed aspects of human behavioral psychology woven into Blizzard games since quite awhile back, brand strength, coming off strong property strength with the original Diablo, and a host of other factors, including Vivendi/now Activision---that have allowed for things to wind up just so with a dash of luck and some good timing.

Well, that and the fact that it was just a totally awesome game - it pioneered so many great mechanics and built on a host of others :D Yeah, but I spent waaay more time (far too much time) in D2 single player mode than I ever did online. It certainly was not battle.net that drew me to the game at all.


+1 for the articulate and thought out post getter77; an interesting read.

Delilah Rehm
03-11-2010, 10:29 AM
Soldak did go out on a limb for including multiplayer. So many players wanted multiplayer with Depths of Peril, I thought that one thing would bring us closer to financial viability, and we needed to plant the seed. It was a risk, in terms of the many months Steven had to spend creating the environment, and also the monthly cost of a server.

:) So for those who want closed servers, we are one step closer with this game.

Also I'd like to add to the discussion another bit of info. Soldak has already taken one loan so we could finish Din's Curse. Strike that. Steven took the loan personally. This is how close to the edge we really are, and probably the normal situation for many indies.

(Wouldn't life be so much easier if we were young 20somethings living in one of our parents' basements? ;))

udm
03-11-2010, 10:33 AM
+1 respect for Soldak.

I'd like to see people put their money where their mouth is - people who claim that Din's can make even greater returns by having closed realms. Why not prove this by investing in Soldak and sponsoring them with said necessary hardware, so that "hundreds of thousands of players will come, keep playing, call their friends, like a giant snow ball, steven peeler gets rich and famous, more so than he could possibly envision right now" - and if such a hypothetical scenario really happens, to be paid all dividends in the form of profits off of these "hundreds of thousands of players", over the currently speculated profits.

Why don't you.

I was just giving some examples.

The overall idea is: DO SOMETHING. BE DINAMIC. GO AFTER YOUR DREAMS. MAKE IT HAPPEN.

That's charming. Unfortunately, this isn't a movie, or a storybook entitled "Indie Developer Millionaire". This is real life, where no representative consumer is identical, where consumer preferences are seldom homogenous; this is a real economy in which the probability of an ideal situation happening is smaller than 1 in a thousand.

You can advocate the pursuit of a dream all you want, but it's easy to be an armchair general and advocate it at the expense of others.

dnuggs40
03-11-2010, 11:37 AM
+1 respect for Soldak.

I'd like to see people put their money where their mouth is - people who claim that Din's can make even greater returns by having closed realms. Why not prove this by investing in Soldak and sponsoring them with said necessary hardware, so that "hundreds of thousands of players will come, keep playing, call their friends, like a giant snow ball, steven peeler gets rich and famous, more so than he could possibly envision right now" - and if such a hypothetical scenario really happens, to be paid all dividends in the form of profits off of these "hundreds of thousands of players", over the currently speculated profits.

Why don't you.



That's charming. Unfortunately, this isn't a movie, or a storybook entitled "Indie Developer Millionaire". This is real life, where no representative consumer is identical, where consumer preferences are seldom homogenous; this is a real economy in which the probability of an ideal situation happening is smaller than 1 in a thousand.

You can advocate the pursuit of a dream all you want, but it's easy to be an armchair general and advocate it at the expense of others.

Well said man.

Aganazer
03-11-2010, 12:18 PM
Go to the bank, get some financing, strike some publishing, advertising deals, put the closed servers in, bam, hundreds of thousands of players will come, keep playing, call their friends, like a giant snow ball, steven peeler gets rich and famous, more so than he could possibly envision right now.

If there was any way to prove that it would pan out like that then I am sure Steven and everyone else would be in agreement. There is no evidence whatsoever that closed servers would increase popularity enough to justify the cost.

HGL and Duneon Runners are out of business. Borderlands with open servers is selling like hotcakes. I'm not seeing a trend.

The only thing closed servers are guaranteed to do is to make interesting interested. :) It bothers me that you're assuming your own interests are shared by "hundreds of thousands" especially since you said yourself that "I advocate a lot of things and most of them go against the "mass"."

wynams
03-11-2010, 02:59 PM
As much as I liked the DoP demo, lack of mp was the reason I did not purchase.

There are some things about Din's Curse I am not wild about, however inclusion of mp was the reason I am a beta tester.

I try to throw out some bones to indie developers who are out there, putting in the hours, taking the risks and making the games closer to my tastes than mainstream dev shops are putting out. I have already logged more hours in Din's Curse than Dragon Age :)

+1 people who give a rat's arse about closed servers here
If you ever add them, please keep the current option to play LAN/Direct IP and you'll keep many current customers.

interesting
03-11-2010, 05:32 PM
Hellgate London and Dungeon Runners screwed up.

In Hellgate London, people had to buy the game, and then pay extra money for updates/content. This is one of the major reasons why it failed. Second reason, the game was advertised as "areas will be different, the experience will be different every time due to randomization", then what we saw? mediocre randomization, everything looked the same, no diversity, it was shallow.
Third reason, people got to end game content in 5 days and then the nightmare version was broken, mobs that were some level highers would become impervious to damage due to how the mechanics of "balancing" worked.
People got to level 50 to fast, there wasnt much to do, and the content for that level was broken.


In Dungeon Runners, people could play for free, but, any drops of quality higher than magic (rares, purples, rainbows) couldnt be looted/equipped by free players. Free players didnt had access to a storage/bank, only to their mediocre inventory. Besides, it got to the ridiculous point where, free players couldnt stack potions in inventory slots, so each potion would take up one slot.

The "members" or "premium" users could use all itens, stack potions and have access to the storage.

Free players were always in a inventory management nightmare, due to the potions occupying the loot space and anything worth using couldnt be equipped, because they werent "members".

All that in a hack and slash action rpg, where power derives from random drops. Its one of the most ridiculous stupid payment ideas I had ever seen. Thats why it failed. They tried to flex it later on, but it was too late, it was already damaged.

Not worth mentioning all the exploits. I remember one where I would start a game, go straight for one area next to a boss, kill it, exit, start a new game and repeat, just farming the same boss over and over indefinitelly for purples/rainbows. This made acquiring gear extremelly easy, thus removing the fun from the organic process of acquiring gear.


So, no, you cant use Hellgate London and Dungeon Runners as examples.

As it stands, the only game besides Diablo 2 that had a sense of community, unity of rules, longevity, economy, security was the beta of Mythos, years ago. And that was just a test plataform for ping0 (the flagship studios version of battle.net)

What Steven Peeler's games have that make it unique is the organic, dinamic, living breathing world. A world that doesnt wait for the hero, it keeps going regardless of its actions. This gives a sense of persistance unmatched. It puts back the players options/choices back into the RPG genre.
Ability to change the world and see the story unfolds, without scripts.

This Star element of design makes the game good by itself, but only with the unity of rules derived from characters data stored server side can it ascend to its righteous place in the market.

D2 popularity even to this day, despite millions of players who are waiting for the next "like-experience". It influenced hundreds of asian mmorpgs. We could say that todays MMO design derive more from D2 than it does from Everquest or Ultima Online. There is a huge demand for that experience, but not a single Diablo clone could deliver or achieve its success level.

For those that cant see: the distinctive factor is the existance of battle.net.
All the Diablo clones to this date, none of them, except Mythos, had that factor: unity of rules derived from the characters data stored server side.

That unity of rules is what makes all those games fail, despite being developed years after Diablo, despite having more features, better graphics, improved in many areas...

All those game companies couldnt provide closed servers. The ones that did, Hellgate, Dungeon Runners and Mythos closed down, for their ridiculous problems. Mythos didnt closed down because it sucked. It was awesome, it went down, because Flagship failed. Dungeon Runners went down because their stupid "membership" plan wich I dont have words to express how laughable it was.

Im saying that Im one of the only persons who see that, that those awesome games had a short life, because the lack of that element.
Borderlands, for example, its awesome, it has the same hack and slash, roguelike elements, random areas/enemies/loot, but despite offering co-op multiplayer, it didnt appealed, due to lack of unified rules.

People will change all the game rules (with hacks, cheats, trainers, mods, dupes, etc) this prevents the community around the game to have any sort of sense of achievement, noone believes, noone cares, nothing matters, its pointless, ultimatelly making the act of playing the game pointless. It makes the experience something individual.

Having closed servers, magnifies the experience to something universal, collecwhatever you achieve is noted, whatever item you find has a transmissible value to everyone else, the character progression/skills/power/money/achievements/time and effort spent, everything has a point for every other player of that game. It connects players, make a sense of community, a sense of achievement, adds long term goals, objectives, longevity. How come you guys dont realize that.

Its like the difference from day to night, black to white. In one, it doesnt matter, in the other, it matters for everyone. In one, it last some days, in the other, it lasts for months/years.

This difference is so substantial that I believe is what makes all the other games without that fail, and the games with that, WICH CURRENTLY WE DONT HAVE ANY (besides Diablo 2, wich we already played to death so we want an improved version of that, and despite that, it is still ridiculous popular).

The first game in this genre to offer that (unity through closed servers), grabs the pie, hundreds of thousands, to millions of players.

Sell a copy for $20 bucks (cheap), individual cd-key per account (people who pirate cant play online, but since this types of games only matter to the majority while online, people get forced to buy the game so their time and effort spent can be measurable comparativelly to others, be part of the community and ultimatelly have a point)

Host servers that works as game indexers, similar to a lobby.
When someone joins a game, they use the host player's connection, while always connected to the server for low kb's data transfer saving characters progress.

Every player connected will have spent $20 for the game, no exception, if they use band, they payed $20 upfront.
As the game gets popular, it will allow the game to get revenue from ads.

How much bandwidth you need and how much will you spend on it? Less than what you will make for each paying player logged on, and the ammount of income derived from the popularity.

Once you have many players, many doors will open, opportunities, deals, financing, etc. People will want a new game, publishers will be interested in it (due to the popularity).

dnuggs40
03-11-2010, 05:36 PM
Sacred 2 doesn't fit your mold.

Anyways, you sound like you got this whole game development thing down to a science...not only that you sound like such a savvy business man too! I can't wait for your new totally awesome game to come out! Man, I just wish I thought of all that stuff myself. I never knew it was so easy and effortless...

wynams
03-11-2010, 05:50 PM
Its evident Interesting is passionate about closed servers.

I understand his points, however, closed servers do not prevent hacking/item duping/cheating.

Battle.net has been exploited, people exploit in WoW/EQ/etc. All closed servers do is give you logging capabilities that provide the host to track down and wave the ban stick around.

As far as a place to measure my epeen against other players, perhaps I am just too old for the novelty of that to appeal to me AT ALL.

Also, if Stephen is having to take personal loans to get by until DC ships .. I seriously doubt there is money to get a server farm at a colo to pull this off.

Its a good idea! Get your friends to buy his game so he can do it in the future!

I would say the Soldak has less financial resources today than Blizzard North did in 2000. Battle.net is just a luxury Soldak is not yet privy too ... help him get there = buy his games

Godot
03-12-2010, 11:18 PM
How come you guys dont realize that.


Your totally right, I mean, games like Rogue, Arcanum, Fallout 1&2, or in that stance, all of the roguelikes, rpg games, etc etc, Are total failures and lack strong communities because they don't have "Closed Realms" a.k.a Battle.NET.

Sigh

Funny fact is, the time I got bored on D2 was as soon as I got involved on B.NET.

people get forced to buy the game so their time and effort spent can be measurable comparativelly to others, be part of the community and ultimatelly have a point

Trust me, alot of people could careless, main reason is, I play games to entertain myself, have fun, etc etc, I don't play games as if I were on a competition ;), and the day Id start playing games to be "better" than others, trust me I'll stop playing games as a whole.


So yeah, if you wanna have a community full of Competive players and people only concerned about Gear, Grouping, Drops, Etc etc. Your way is the way to go.

So, no, you cant use Hellgate London and Dungeon Runners as examples.

Well, when you find out what the real reasons for atleast HGL failure, I'll accept them as "no-valid" examples, meanwhile, they are valid.


Oh and, instead of Brick-Posts, you should start reading other posters replies, so you don't go on the next thread saying "Buh, they ignored me on this Thread (addlinkhere)."

Blackrazor
03-19-2010, 11:34 PM
Soldak did go out on a limb for including multiplayer. So many players wanted multiplayer with Depths of Peril, I thought that one thing would bring us closer to financial viability, and we needed to plant the seed. It was a risk, in terms of the many months Steven had to spend creating the environment, and also the monthly cost of a server.

:) So for those who want closed servers, we are one step closer with this game.

Also I'd like to add to the discussion another bit of info. Soldak has already taken one loan so we could finish Din's Curse. Strike that. Steven took the loan personally. This is how close to the edge we really are, and probably the normal situation for many indies.

(Wouldn't life be so much easier if we were young 20somethings living in one of our parents' basements? ;))

It does not matter that you guys don't have closed servers for this game. I understand that and I would hope others do as well. You all added multiplayer as requested. These things have to be taken in steps.

Even though I will not play this game much. I play a lot of games, WoW, DDO, Dragon Age, Mass Effect 2, Battlefield: Bad Company 2, etc... But I can see me and my son playing this together occasionally, so I just bought two copies. For two reasons:

1. This post alone shows that you are trying to please your customers.
2. If you want a company to thrive and add more features you have to support them.

Plain and simple. So for those of you that are complaining. Keep supporting them and things can change.

Keep up the good work guys! :)

Shadow
03-22-2010, 11:32 AM
Thank you for the support Blackrazor.

udm
03-22-2010, 11:43 AM
And the community would like to thank you for finally breaking the mold and making something different, Steven.