Posts made by Arkandel

@Goblin I, too, hate it when wizards duel.

@Botulism said in Things I've Learned Running Horror Mu:

I really wish others would try new things like this. I'd play the shit out of a game with revolving stories and themes, where stats regularly reset so everyone is equal, where everyone gets a chance at being in leadership instead of calcified groups running factions or areas. It's why I made one.

And it was successful, and lots of people have had a lot of fun.

But I think what you may be missing is that what's fun for you isn't a universal goal across the board. For instance many players like the idea of a persistant character they can sink time into for long periods of time, or MU* where that can support power imbalances, or where the theme is set to something specific they can learn and sink their teeth in rather than have it periodically revolve.

Variety is a great thing - if I wished for anything in this regard it's just more types of games promoting different styles of play rather than copy the template (and in some cases, the exact code and general setup) of the last several MU* as a way to 'go live' as soon and with as little effort as possible.

If there is one thing we're missing from the hobby sometimes it's passion projects. Yours is one, and you should be applauded for it.

@Ganymede I don't know how big a motivator money is for Kawhi. Seriously - if it was a big deal to him he'd have stayed with the Spurs who had his bird rights. He lost a serious paycheck walking away from San Antonio, and he did it on purpose.

I have no idea how that guy thinks or what he wants. Zero.

Well, yes, that was the case.

@saturna Imagine a beowulf cluster of them.

I hadn't had time to sit down at my desk after the interview and I already had a Slack message waiting: "please tell me we're hiring her".

It wasn't from a team member but... sigh.

@Ganymede Frankly I don't think you can overpay for a guy like AD when you already have a superstar in his 30s. If these playoffs have shown us anything it's that you need a guy who can do impossible things if you want to win. You need that kind of top 5-7 player.

The Lakers now have two of them. If they stay healthy the league is in trouble.

Also let's put it this way - unless you're going to pay Ingram a max he's going to leave next year, so at best he was a rental and you'd need to pick between him and AD (since the Pelicans wanted him). It's a no-brainer.

Lonzo and Heart were the real losses, draft picks aren't that useful to the Lakers any more unless they want to do more trades. This just means they 100% won't be trading for anyone else any time soon, it's free agents or nothing.

@Misadventure Yes.

@Warma-Sheen Davis and LeBron's game at least on paper has incredible synergy; a play initiator (perhaps the best we've ever seen) with a play finisher (top-3 in the league with Harden and Steph).

The real question other than injuries which we can't predict is how they will finish up their roster.

Now, Lakers aside, there are a lot of free agents this year. Where they will end up with will determine the face of the league - it's insane people are already betting on who wins the next ring before even basic questions like these are answered.

@Thenomain I don't see why not.

@Ghost said in What Types of Games Would People Like To See?:

@Sunny said in What Types of Games Would People Like To See?:

@Ghost said in What Types of Games Would People Like To See?:

@Arkandel said in What Types of Games Would People Like To See?:

@Ghost Like there is a ton of potential game-runners/coders able and willing to take input from the masses about where they should invest their time?

I kid - mostly.

Lol right.

Mushing is 98% players to 2% coders, so the reason I proposed that idea is that making a mush takes time and effort. Maybe securing commitments to at least trying it out for 30 days will help a game launch.

Is this approach something that would help you make a game?

If I were inclined to make a game? Yes.

I would want to know that the idea was desired and get an idea as to who would pledge to try it out. I'd base the level of interest against the amount of time and effort put into making the game to determine whether or not the effort is worth it.

More seriously now - I don't think people know what they want until they see it. On paper something might look like a terrible idea, or a great one, and when you play it it's anything but that.

There's no real way to secure commitments either way. But that's what beta testing and gradually showing what you're doing to a trusted smaller subset of people you know, and whose opinions you respect, comes in; you get feedback and then you act accordingly.

@Ghost Like there is a ton of potential game-runners/coders able and willing to take input from the masses about where they should invest their time?

I kid - mostly.

@ZombieGenesis said in What Types of Games Would People Like To See?:

Again, sometimes I fail.

We all fail. I mean look around, we're all on MSB - FAIL!

However here's a suggestion. Instead of asking potential players what we'd be interested in and trying to determine if you can match up, why not tell us what you are interested in making? What are your goals, your limitations, your conditions? Are you into original games or based on existing RPGs? Or canonical settings like Stargate or <insert book fantasy series here>?

No one should expect a game made for free to match their innermost desires but that can help. For example if you have the most fun creating small, niche games then we can avoid asking you to make the Next Big Thing, or if you're into making a larger popular game then we probably won't pitch Gamma World as much.

@Lotherio said in What Types of Games Would People Like To See?:

Look at the Deadlands discussion in this thread, it was popular but two different takes on the theme/setting. If a couple folks want central California deadlands (Zorro the zombie slayer) but others want Dodge Kansas (The Boothill Nightwatch), attrition will factor in and it'll go the way of ghost town.

That's a different vector for game failure in general - some players being unwilling to compromise at all. I remember a while ago in a DCU superhero MU* discussion thread a player expressed interest based solely on if Flash was Barry Allen or not. So unless a game is 100% what someone wants or doesn't manage to dodge what appear to be arbitrary criteria on some very specific choices made then it loses some of those potential logins, and of course when you're dealing with a very niche setting to begin with, it can spell trouble before even considering the end result.

So the same thing could happen with, say, a D&D game. "I'd love it but I'll only play if it's set in Ravenloft" could be the exact same deal.

@Ghost said in What Types of Games Would People Like To See?:

You can make new games or poll for what people want to play all day long, but if those 10-15 unique IP logins aren't staying, it likely isn't because of the choice in game itself.

I'm not one of those 10-15 players but the thing is creating a new game compared to using more generic codebases is hard. Very hard. Almost anything that requires custom code alone takes a long time to do it justice - and if you don't do it right but cut corners (not saying @ZombieGenesis did!) then once the game fails was that really because the theme didn't work out or because there were important features and customizations missing?

And on the flipside of that... with so many games failing to attract players past the launching date is it a wonder more game runners don't invest too much work upfront? We could be looking at a chicken-and-egg situation.

A good D&D game. That's all.

@Ganymede As do I, but I'm biased.

Also he'd have a much harder time getting rest and managing his load anywhere in the West. Basically the only way he goes anywhere is to be in LA since he's from there. That's it.

@Ganymede Oh, I agree, and if they spend the rest of their salary cap getting more pieces than another BIG NAME then it's a good idea at this point.

In other words I think getting someone like Kemba now is a mistake. You'd be getting a guy who can do 2-3 things at an elite level and ask him to only do one - catch and shoot. Why not get someone else who is very good at that one thing instead, for much cheaper? Brogdon is an excellent catch and shoot guy. 1/3rd of what you pay for Kemba.

Then Boogie could work out, Pat Beverly is another, you mentioned Bogdanovic or Ross too. That's a decent deep teem.

All of that goes out the window if you can get Kawhi, of course. If you can, you do, and that's that.

@Ganymede Actually the Lakers have excellent talent evaluators - Jonnie West (Jerry West's son) is the head of their Basketball Operations and that's how they found Kuzma late, grabbed Wagner and Caruso, etc. He's pretty damn good at what he does.

The issue is the guys heading the front office and making decisions are not ideal. For example look at Pelinka right now - what does he have to lose by risking a decade's worth of picks (past and future ones) for AD? If this thing with LeBron didn't work out he'd be fired anyway - so from his perspective it's a win/win. Either he's a hero or he has nothing to lose, and the Lakers can figure it out once he's gone.

Personally I think LeBron wasn't a good signing for them, as weird as that sounds. His timeline is too short. In fact Davis' is probably better - he's 26, so there's at least 7-8 seasons of prime left in him, barring injuries, which can attract free agents in the future.

IMHO a much better timeline is keeping D'Rus, capitalizing on BI/Lonzo for one more year, signing AD for free next year and then that's a fucking squad. Ingram, D'Rus, Lonzo, Kuzma, AD, maybe with Randle in the mix... a ton of depth, several guys who can give you 20 a night, a great defensive back court and a dominant center. Why rush for 1-2 years of LeBron's effective prime?

@Commodore-Sergei said in Recycling characters:

It's not good. Start from scratch, please.

To be fair though sometimes new characters suffer from the same issue - there's just so much... stuff shoved into their backgrounds! Epic struggles they overcame, intriguing long cool fights they were in and it was all so focused on them so exclusively that in the end they will probably never get the chance to shine as brightly again on the grid.