Ishtu

The Exchange platform "breaks" the game

Recommended Posts

Not to bate the barking dog... but.

This entire issue is a non issue.  Unless:

They change the way fuel is made, limit the number of condensers you can build and reduce the use of it on the trader.

The biggest hit in the changes to the condenser and the trader is to people like myself who only build one of each.  It literally doubles the time I spend standing around. And for what reason?   I didn't exploit it and now I'm being penalised for not doing so.

The people who exploit the design, just building more condensers and I don't mean 2.. but 8, then they throw down 2 traders, 2 condensers equal the lost time and you can now produce more "free items" in so far as standing around pushing the button and ignoring the timesink to do it, makes items free.

I do agree that people need to be pushed out.. to explore, but doubling timers and power use isn't the answer.   There needs to be changes across the board, no titanium, lithium on starter planet, researchables drop only resin or compound on terran world, on the harder worlds they might also give copper, aluminium etc and so on.  Obviously later there will be more resources.. and more research items and more reasons to explore.    The issue here isn't that people can stand in their terran base and just make free stuff, but that they are able to get the research without moving far from their base.. so:

What if the trader doesn't become available until you land on the moon or the condenser, until you've completed a quest deep under the ground in terran? Like the satellite quest..  That forces people to explore and go out of the safe zone, just to find the tech to allow you to leave the planet.  This is the only real way to fix the issue, such as it is.

Instead of pointing fingers and saying "that can be exploited" why not suggest how it can be changed to the advantage of all.    At least, say something instead of just pointing fingers and yelling.  

Research could also be found through say damaged modules, you land on terran world, there's a dozen black tethers, broken and spaced out leading to a cave, in the cave is a small habitat and a broken smelter.  You can claim the habitat, but you need 2 copper and 2 aluminium ore to repair the smelter.. you find these in the cave, when you repair it, you get the tech to build the smelter.. and so on.

Instead of just frustrating the player, why not make exploring an adventure, leading you to better technology, leading you off the world to the moon.. to arid, exotic, tundra and radiated and beyond..

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 minutes ago, KurumiAndRias said:

I only ask one question: Why do you feel that just because you don't want to exploit something, that means that other people should not be able to either? 

I don't believe that people should be found guilty on a hunch.   Simple as that really.  Some people will exploit a game in the worst way's possible, others may use an exploit here and there depending on a given situation.  Many will see that something could be exploited, but feel doing so is cheating.  And others, won't even see it as important.  It won't even factor into their games. 

Now does that mean exploits should be removed?  Maybe.  Is the exploit something that is so severely disruptive to the game? Does it give a huge disadvantage over the other players?  Does removing it make the game more frustrating? Are you likely to loose players and money if you remove it?

Can it be changed so that the impact is reduced without removing it... What are the difficulties in doing so..

I think about all of this, all of the time, about every problem.   There were posts proclaiming the condenser and trader made the game easy, the result, double power requirement on the condenser and 2x the timer on the trader.  Was the exploit removed? Nope.  Was it made harder to exploit? Not really.  Are there detrimental effects of what has been done.  Definitely.  

I think that, all problems can be resolved without causing undue issues for everyone.   And I believe that issues of the few are not more important than the enjoyment of everyone else.   I'd have changed the way the issue existed to make it more fun, not just doubled power and timers.  I think they made quick decisions, on an issue that is far reaching.

It's their game, their choice.  But there's repercussions to every decision.  Good and Bad.

Edited by Martin

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
28 minutes ago, Martin said:

I don't believe that people should be found guilty on a hunch.   Simple as that really.  Some people will exploit a game in the worst way's possible, others may use an exploit here and there depending on a given situation.  Many will see that something could be exploited, but feel doing so is cheating.  And others, won't even see it as important.  It won't even factor into their games. 

Now does that mean exploits should be removed?  Maybe.  Is the exploit something that is so severely disruptive to the game? Does it give a huge disadvantage over the other players?  Does removing it make the game more frustrating? Are you likely to loose players and money if you remove it?

Can it be changed so that the impact is reduced without removing it... What are the difficulties in doing so..

I think about all of this, all of the time, about every problem.   There were posts proclaiming the condenser and trader made the game easy, the result, double power requirement on the condenser and 2x the timer on the trader.  Was the exploit removed? Nope.  Was it made harder to exploit? Not really.  Are there detrimental effects of what has been done.  Definitely.  

I think that, all problems can be resolved without causing undue issues for everyone.   And I believe that issues of the few are not more important than the enjoyment of everyone else.   I'd have changed the way the issue existed to make it more fun, not just doubled power and timers.  I think they made quick decisions, on an issue that is far reaching.

It's their game, their choice.  But there's repercussions to every decision.  Good and Bad.

well you see maybe if the game was actually competitive and not a sandbox-like exploration game i would agree that it needs to be fixed.

but it's not

and for us xbox players in single player we'd really like to be able to do some cheating (sometimes.)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That's why the devs are adding a creative mode.

Otherwise, the standard single player is obviously meant to have some form of balance to it. Expecting to playerbase to simply not use something because it is OP is a very stupid and lazy way to someone to develop a game and a good way to kill its playerbase.

 

IF you have no interest in discussing how to make the games balance better I don;t really know why you're even here as it sounds like that part of the game doesn't' even interest you. Otherwise, what's the point of even having the mining/exploration aspect of the game to begin with, if you can just get infinite resources without ever leaving your base. It's up to the players to find the most efficient and effective ways to do things. It's up to the devs to make sure those ways are balanced and that 1 method isn't infinitely better than the other methods. That's what separates a good game from a bad game.

Edited by Thysios

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Its fun how people talk about spoiling the game with fuel condenser and trade post.. at the time you got those its almost for sure you already unlock everything in this game current state.

For me this mechanic its for sure working as expected: easy the requirements and time for players that already unlocked almost all the game to play around and build anything they want with minimum effort. At that point all the fun in the game goes to creative construction, base expansion, energy management circuits, floating islands with bases and shuttles!!

This is not a competitive game, so you don't get an advantage for selling a resource gathered from a machine that was previously created with gathered resources (godd! did any of you played a farm simulator??), you just get an easy way to expand your game play to other mechanics like architecture, design or just hoarding (whatever pleases you) materials and leaving the exploration mechanics a side for some time.

Edited by kioga

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, Thysios said:

Otherwise, the standard single player is obviously meant to have some form of balance to it. Expecting to playerbase to simply not use something because it is OP is a very stupid and lazy way to someone to develop a game and a good way to kill its playerbase.

If there's an element of challenge or score, some way of boasting "i beat the game" then I'd agree, but there really isn't.  You explore.. how you build isn't really of significance.  But as I said in my above post, rather than just make stuff "balanced" why not make it fun instead?  That way you're doing both.  I get the sandbox argument, I get the score argument and I get the argument that the game is to have fun, when people balance stuff, it ceases to be fun and becomes challenging, why should a survival game be challenging? Challenge is stress.. stress is not fun.   It's like the argument behind pvp games v pve or pvpve.  Some people just don't like who they become in pvp games and don't really want to play in that kind of environment, others, are incapable of playing in anything but pvp environment, still others like both and some just outright hate violence.

Can't make a game for everyone, but you can make one for most.

I think most people like a game with attention to detail, thought out missions and storyline.  Elements of micro management, elements of pure arcade fun.. roll it all into a game and you have a great game. 

My opinion.

Edited by Martin

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Martin back at it again with the non sense lmfao.

'' why would a survival game be challenging''

''the game is about fun'' sure pressing a button to get infinite ressources sure is a fun mechanic. You basically contradict yourself in every way. The game is about fun, exploring and story telling through discoveries, you go against that by allowing a mechanic that makes your base entirely self sufficient. Way to go buddy.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Freaky said:

Martin back at it again with the non sense lmfao.

'' why would a survival game be challenging''

''the game is about fun'' sure pressing a button to get infinite ressources sure is a fun mechanic. You basically contradict yourself in every way. The game is about fun, exploring and story telling through discoveries, you go against that by allowing a mechanic that makes your base entirely self sufficient. Way to go buddy.

If you have nothing to contribute, don't post. Not really interested in your petty insults.  Read my above posts, you'll see I never said that.

Edited by Martin

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Martin said:

If you have nothing to contribute, don't post. Not really interested in your petty insults.

I contributed by basically proving you wrong in every aspect of your post.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Freaky said:

I contributed by basically proving you wrong in every aspect of your post.

You referred to one post, not to all of them, if you'd read the posts previous you'd see that I put forward another way of resolving the issues. But as usual, you're only interested in insulting people, this is the last time I'll quote you or even respond to anything you post.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Martin said:

You referred to one post, not to all of them, if you'd read the posts previous you'd see that I put forward another way of resolving the issues. But as usual, you're only interested in insulting people, this is the last time I'll quote you or even respond to anything you post.

Finally you'll stop replying with non sense and flawed logic. About time I get some peace of mind from you. I read your posts on the thread didn't find it interesting enough to reply sorry for that queen martin. Whatever you've been saying on this forum never made any sense but as usual you're delusionnal on anything you propose and for you IS always the best solution regardless of how the majority see's it. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hey everyone, I'm going to put this thread on ice and lock it down. Lots of suggestions and ideas were shared as well as good explanation of the problems you're having with the Trade module. Thanks for sharing!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I suppose it is remotely possible that you are both a youngster and not a computer programmer, so the idea of "premature optimization is the root of all evil" hasn't yet made its way into your understanding of the universe. Let me help you out.

http://wiki.c2.com/?PrematureOptimization

Now, the original context of the statement was directly in regards to programming – but strangely enough, it also applies to all fields of structural endeavor. In this case, game design.

That the game is in early access is exactly why any efforts toward balance would be completely pointless. Meaningless. But worse, a waste of consideration that could be spent on things that are actual problems. Every change that happens to Astroneer is going to require the attention of someone (and odds are a couple of someones) to implement. There is absolutely no point in trying to balance a part of the game which the developers have stated, in no uncertain terms, is largely just a placeholder for a more complicated and more interesting architecture to come. Any time and effort spent on "balancing" something that will be going away, guaranteed, is wasted time.

It is thus an absolute no-brainer to suggest that the very underlying motivation for the original post in this thread is actively detrimental to the development of Astroneer. I recognize that that is phrased in a strong manner, and it is intentional in order to reflect the strong distaste that I have for both the idea and the strong indication of the truthfulness of my position.

But moreover – there is the underlying implication by those who are continuing their misguided crusade to suggest "oh, this is terrible, it ruins the enjoyment of the game" that their understanding of both what is enjoyable and what is useful to the game is unimpeachable. And that's a pile of bull.

Hopefully that clarifies it for you. I wouldn't want you to go on misunderstanding what good sense development practices are. That way lies madness and suffering.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Honestly, I see nothing wrong with it.  If someone wants a ton to titanium, I say, "Go for it."  There's nothing to build with it, besides winches, anyhow.  The ability to spend 5 minutes farming for 8 compound is about the amount of time needed to suck it from the ground on Terra.

 

For a 4-person friends-only multiplayer game, who cares how others decide to play?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That's not really the issue for me, I think perhaps I'm worried more that people will continue to perceive this as a "game" and not as an "Early Access Game" and will then continue to demand changes to balance, when really we should be wanting minimal optimization and content.  But the further issue is that if you perceive the EA as a Game, you'll maybe start telling people about how easy it is to exploit, that maybe after an hour or two it gets boring.. etc etc.

It's ea.. it's expected to get boring, it's expected to be exploitable.. once the game starts getting fleshed out and there's missions and places to be and things to eat and so on.. then you can start to get a feel for the future of the "game", I'm not saying don't offer ideas, don't suggest to balance, feel free to suggest how to balance etc.  I just don't want people getting the wrong idea then reporting on that wrong idea that it's the truth.  When it's just an ea.  That hurts all of us.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now