The Past & Future of Linkrealms - Discussion Thread



  • @Clavicus THE ONLY PVP THERE SHOULD BE IS A GOOD PORTION OF THE MAP DEDICATED TO PVP. Seriously, people like PVE WITH PVP CAPABILITIES..... Runescape's wilderness is a PERFECT example. DO NOT make it 100% pvp. PVP ZONE IS THE BEST OPTION. I can't stress this enough. FULL LOOT PVP ZONE. Let me clarify. FULL LOOT PVP ZONE NOT OPEN WORLD.



  • @God Also a side note, this will ensure far more success than 2 seperate servers. I could go into a years worth of detail as to why this is the best way to go.


  • FOUNDER: PRINCE

    Ultima online is no longer full pvp... enough said and your modern gamers do not play that



  • So no wolves. I think that's what pisses me off the most. Devs have teased us with the release of those wolves for years. They featured prominently in the advertising, and it was all a lie.


  • FOUNDER: PRINCE

    @God This already happened in linkrealms... im assuming you are brand new... the pve server used to be a hybrid of pvp and pve. pre phoenix the game was pve and pvp.. and you know what? the pvers cried because they got shit on in the pvp area and had a hard time getting the items there. risk vs reward... a pvp area should have far better rewards then a pve only for obvious reasons... mixing the two makes no sense... no pve oriented player is going to want to travel to a pvp area and risk losing all their gear. Most games have a dedicated pvp server.

    On the dedicated pvp server there needs to be a safe zone for newbies.. i have no idea the countless amount of people who quit this game because they got owned after walking out of town and immediately dying... the current safe zone just isnt enough either... DFUW did it right with a fairly large set of safe zones for each starting area.

    PVP only servers always have a far smaller population (although i guess this game didnt because for the longest time there was 2 people on pve) but in general...

    Anyways its neither here nor there.... it sounds like @Prometheus already has been thinking of how their next game will be and how to mix the two together. We wont change his mind. ill be curious to find out. Im afraid the game will be made to appeal to the masses.

    And for the record id rather there be 1 server only full pvp. (1 na and 1 eu)

    @Denluen felucca is pvp only... all uo did was split facets and all the carebears went to trammel to hold hands.



  • @Clavicus I know it happened, and it was done wrong. As far as the pve'rs crying, sucks to be them. Regardless, it's still the best way to go.



  • @God the whole point of this game was that it allowed you to kill and strip people everywhere in the map. I was really surprised and disappointed to see people play in PvE server. I am tired of these posts from those people that cry for this to change. Devs I think will agree that the PvP was the major server here. Also as @Clavicus said the PvP zones in PvE server literally changed like 1 month ago.

    What we d need in PvP server would be a couple of more towns, one I d suggest to be an outlaw one. Adding on that, a hired NPC guard and patrol systems. That's where I d start to make a system where people can protect themselves from PK.



  • @Siltoruz Devs I think will agree that the PvP was the major server here.

    I was keeping an eye on both servers, and I think PvE was the clear winner. It's still oddly active (relatively) even now.


  • FOUNDER: PRINCE

    Ill finish this off.. PVE server constantly had around 8-13 people on at a time i would log into pvp 1-4 i get you don't want to admit that pve had a better player base but you need to come to terms with the average player in today's marked wants a casual gaming experience its not just about what you want and if the devs are smart its not just about what they would like to build and also i mean they added bless scrolls if people used them you wouldn't get anything but money which is fine but i mean really when it comes down to it wouldn't you rather have harder NPC's that require a big group of people and we all die trying to kill it? personally i would and on a pvp server you wont find that kind of cooperation plus there was an arena in the PVE server.. but no one ever used it.


  • FOUNDER: PRINCE

    @prometheus when you make this video chat are you going to record the conversations and post here for the people that will be working during the time time of it. I'm curious about everyone says



  • @Clavicus said in The Past & Future of Linkrealms - Discussion Thread:

    Take a look at the pledges. Different donations for different contribution levels. I am assuming if you are legitimately going the crowd funding route among other avenues that you will have tiers like this. Are we going to be matched directly with our contribution level from Linkrealms to your new game? Will that contribution level only be from "your takeover" on? As I previously hinted at it seems as if you are parting ways with Rewolf and as you say you were only volunteers pre phoenix I am guessing you are washing your hands clean of that portion.

    When a player spends real money on a MMO - be it to get access, be it a monthly subscription, or be it premium services / items - he is purchasing a service. Refunds are mandatory (by the law) in the following cases:

    • If the user never made use of the service / item and decides to ask for a refund within a certain time frame. This is possible in Linkrealms as well (point 21 of our TOS);
    • If the service is not as advertised (partial/total refund) or doesn't work (total refund).

    Then there can be "logical" refunds. For example if you buy a service (e.g. a 6-months Claim Stake) and the game is shut down 1 month later. Most MMO companies just shut down their games and that's it when the game is no longer financially profitable. Some others - very few - offer a refund of the services not enjoyed yet (in the example above, 5 months of Claim Stake could be refunded).

    If a player has bought a 90$ credits pack in, say, 2015 (and kept playing till now or quit - doesn't really matter) and has spent the credits, there is no legal nor logical reason why he should get a 90$ credits pack in Linkrealms 2. At most, once Linkrealms 2 is released, we could allow players to transfer unspent credits from Linkrealms 1 to Linkrealms 2 - but even that would only make sense if we shut down Linkrealms 1.

    So, to wrap it up. We'll give perks (access, founder packs) to user who contributed to Linkrealms as a form of "thank you". We'll also give high-tier Linkrealms 2 packs to users who have contributed a lot to Linkrealms 1 because we think cases of exceptional support to Linkrealms 1 should be rewarded. But replicating the contributions given on Linkrealms 1 to Linkrealms 2 makes no sense.


  • FOUNDER: PRINCE

    @Prometheus For some reason you have ignored / deemed it unnecessary to reply to this. Ill go ahead and post my concern for a 3rd time. You know what they say.. Third times the charm.

    @Clavicus said in The Past & Future of Linkrealms - Discussion Thread:

    @Prometheus Your reply leaves a lot to be desired. The problem is I am taking my list of events as it was. My list of events shows that while you were talking to us about Linkrealms/hyping up the future (and while there was conveniently a new shiny credit/founders pack sale), by your own admission, you were planning out your new project and knew that Linkrealms development was basically going to cease. Why the deception? I don't believe there was such a sudden about face.

    I have obviously erased the majority of the conversation which isnt relevant to this but in this email you sent me what were you getting at here? Again to me this was related to Linkrealms. Did you actually mean for your new project?

    On 01/04/2017 just 2 days after this email you replied to holya asking about how region control would work on pve and said Given the work we're in the middle of right now, there's no point in replying to this right today. You'll figure everything out by the end of the month!

    Then on 01/18/2017 you replied to the speculation on the next big announcement thread and mentioned that my suggestions and everyone elses were incorrect (after i mentioned a rewards program as thats what your email translated to me).

    So... now that you've hopefully read this... Whats up? I guess you are going to force me to be blunt.

    There are 2 possible reasons as i see it for the timeline that I provided in my initial wall of text and my second. (reasons not necessarily in order/dont get bent out of shape)

    1. You purposefully mislead the community/player base of Linkrealms for 1 last money grab before you decided to move on with your next project.

    2. You had every intention of working on a new project but were going to keep developing linkrealms (actually developing like.. doing the things you were saying in the timeline i presented which lasted up until 01/02/2017 which my email is proof.) Then something happened.. a falling out... a change of mind... you gave up and realized spending a significant amount of time on linkrealms any longer is pointless.

    Why the about face? Why up until ~1 month before your "huge announcement" were you talking about things that were being developed for LIinkrealms and while there was conveniently a new shiny credit/founders pack sale

    Regarding your reply to how certain LR1 contributors will be "rewarded" with LR2 high-tier packs and others "thanked" with founders packs/access I specifically mentioned the date 11/29 because unless magically 2 days later again using your own words "a couple months" you were aware/actively working on your new project and people did not get what they paid for. They paid for credits assuming this game was going to continue with full development.



  • @Denluen The Devs marketing was a full loot open world PvP game. Clearly PvP was the main server. If it wasn't like that all the time it was an unfortunate event. The game was made with PvP server in mind.

    Now group bosses, yeah I d like to see some.



  • @Prometheus Pve and Pvp players definitely butt heads in opinion of how the game should be run. HOWEVER, there is one thing we ALL can agree on, that you, Prom, have taken a HUGE SHIT on ALL OF US. I don't give a fuck about the legal shit not one bit. You have acted MORALLY WRONG. We paid for a game to continue into FULL DEVELOPMENT. We did NOT pay for your STUPID VANITY ITEMS. You mislead everyone. You pretty much scammed us. You don't see anything wrong with your bullshit? Seriously? Are you fucking kidding me? Use your fucking brain man. You are the most dishonest developing company have EVER witnessed. And the ONLY reason people aren't replying like THIS is because they HOPE you will FINISH THE FUCKING GAME AND LISTEN if they are polite. You should be ashamed prom. Fucking ashamed. Please ban me from forums because it makes me sick.



  • @God On the brightside, 15 players online! Yay!



  • @God said in The Past & Future of Linkrealms - Discussion Thread:

    @Prometheus Pve and Pvp players definitely butt heads in opinion of how the game should be run. HOWEVER, there is one thing we ALL can agree on, that you, Prom, have taken a HUGE SHIT on ALL OF US. I don't give a fuck about the legal shit not one bit. You have acted MORALLY WRONG. We paid for a game to continue into FULL DEVELOPMENT. We did NOT pay for your STUPID VANITY ITEMS. You mislead everyone. You pretty much scammed us. You don't see anything wrong with your bullshit? Seriously? Are you fucking kidding me? Use your fucking brain man. You are the most dishonest developing company have EVER witnessed. And the ONLY reason people aren't replying like THIS is because they HOPE you will FINISH THE FUCKING GAME AND LISTEN if they are polite. You should be ashamed prom. Fucking ashamed. Please ban me from forums because it makes me sick.

    @God said in The Past & Future of Linkrealms - Discussion Thread:

    @God On the brightside, 15 players online! Yay!

    I don't get if you're being serious or not given the sequence of messages. If you wish to have your unspent credits and remaining realm time that you've bought in the month before the announcement refunded, feel free to mail us at support@linkrealms.com

    Otherwise, please keep your mood swings at bay before I run out of patience and actually do what you asked me to do.

    @Clavicus I'll reply to your post and all your other posts more in detail tomorrow.



  • @Prometheus You've clearly missed my ENTIRE point.



  • I am sure if more time/effort/money was spent to advertise this game as a modern day UO, it would make it big. The main problem with your game is that I never heard of it until it got on steam and even then for maybe 6h on my feed then never heard of it again until I remembered it somehow and gave it a try. I spend a lot of time on mmo websites and not once have I seen this game on any of them, nor any famous youtube channels. It's a really good game and ill play it for a bit, but knowing that you are dumping the project for a more modern-day mmo is saddening. This game was a real jewel, coming from someone who played about 36h in the past 4 days as a new player. I hope that you find a company to takeover this game and keep making it greater and not hoard it to make a little side-buck or because you don't want to see it in other hands. Once I go through most content, there is no point in playing anymore because even if u say ''we will put our spare time into updating link realms'', we all know that's sweet talk and won't net the updates required to have someone interested in the long term. Really a shame... But hey, good luck on your new project.



  • @Clavicus said in The Past & Future of Linkrealms - Discussion Thread:

    Im curious to hear more about the crafting system and am kinda surprised you are wanting to go the full loot route still. There isnt a game on the market (please correct me if im wrong anyone and link the game to me) that incorporates full loot with things such as artifacts (powerful items that are hard to obtain.) Why? Because it will severely imbalance the game. Only the best of the best players/guilds will be able to use them (because they have an extremely low chance of losing them) whereas the casual player will be stuck with their basic crafted gear and will be at an immediate disadvantage in pvp. (this all assumes you will still have the same type of artifacts in your next game which i hope so)

    You are correct about artifacts. When we took over Linkrealms in 2015, we weren't bold enough to just get rid of the pile of artifacts and rationalize the ton of modifiers that existed in the game to design a crafting system that empathized equipment replaceability. That's the route we'll be taking in Linkrealms 2. Long-term objectives will be shifted away from gear progression and towards other components of gameplay.

    @Clavicus said in The Past & Future of Linkrealms - Discussion Thread:

    You also mentioned there is going to be interaction between pve and pvp players which im curious about. Are you planning on having just one server with everyone playing on it or different servers with different rulesets? If you are going to have open world pvp you need a legit safezone. No stat/skill cap to be protected. 100% protection so new players can get acclimated at their own pace.

    It will be one server only, but I can't reveal more about this. The solution we've envisioned goes beyond classic safe zones. You'll know everything when we launch the new website and forums and announce the game to the press. We hope to be able to do so in March already. @God @Denluen @Siltoruz @Dreworok

    @Clavicus said in The Past & Future of Linkrealms - Discussion Thread:

    Also the healing system in this game is really bad. I hope you go with something more traditional whether its from combat arts, bandages, or a skill like pallys had in uo and of course traditional mage spells.

    Yes, we'll be moving towards something different.

    @Aries said in The Past & Future of Linkrealms - Discussion Thread:

    @prometheus when you make this video chat are you going to record the conversations and post here for the people that will be working during the time time of it. I'm curious about everyone says

    Yes, it will be recorded and available later.

    @Clavicus said in The Past & Future of Linkrealms - Discussion Thread:

    There are 2 possible reasons as i see it for the timeline that I provided in my initial wall of text and my second. (reasons not necessarily in order/dont get bent out of shape)

    1. You purposefully mislead the community/player base of Linkrealms for 1 last money grab before you decided to move on with your next project.

    2. You had every intention of working on a new project but were going to keep developing linkrealms (actually developing like.. doing the things you were saying in the timeline i presented which lasted up until 01/02/2017 which my email is proof.) Then something happened.. a falling out... a change of mind... you gave up and realized spending a significant amount of time on linkrealms any longer is pointless.

    Your option number 2 gets closer to reality, but not exactly. Let me post a more detailed list of what we've been doing in the last few months. Up to you whether to believe us or not - I won't add more about this topic.

    • In early October, Linkrealms transitioned to a F2P model to expand the playerbase.
    • In late October, we've started reviewing the results of the F2P transition, which were really disappointing. While we had been acquiring a decent amount of users, the new player retention had dropped dramatically (which is normal transitioning to F2P, but even worse than expected). Additionally, monetization was so low that it could barely cover server costs (which aren't high!) and a bit of marketing. No money for the team. Zero. I hope this gives you an idea of how low it was.
    • In November, we planned and implemented the 6-month anniversary event. We also hadn't run a sale in a while, so we added that in the mix. The aim was fairly obvious: revamp interest in the game for veterans and boost monetization. Both things worked partially, but nowhere close to the extent required. We've also advertised the event as much as possible (including through ads and an Update Visibility Round on Steam). Still no money for the team.
    • In December, we've discussed the monetization issue with you. At the same time, we've started researching ways to overcome the obvious and the "behind the scenes" limits of Linkrealms which I've described here. Improving the graphical engine? Remaking the whole game client with a game engine (e.g. Unity)? Rewriting portions of the backend? Remaking the whole backend with a backend engine? How many man-hours would each thing take? These are not easy questions, they require long, long analysis and research times.
    • In the end, we came to the conclusion that rewriting/improving the current technology would take an enormous amount of man-hours - a couple years of work without content updates with such a small team, and I've explained why the team can't be expanded here. A couple years without any salary for the current team as well - because yes, we've been working without earning any money for months now. So yes, we decided to make a new MMO. Better design. State-of-the-art technology. Larger team. Investors. Kickstarter. Soon after, we announced it to you.

    @Icedrip said in The Past & Future of Linkrealms - Discussion Thread:

    I hope that you find a company to takeover this game and keep making it greater and not hoard it to make a little side-buck or because you don't want to see it in other hands.

    Hi Icedrpi. We're glad to hear that you like Linkrealms so much in its current form. You're not alone! But the data on player retention sadly show that your feeling is not shared by most of the players who try Linkrealms. We are aware of the reasons for such low retention. We've assessed the time it would take to fix them. It's all explained here. I know it's a massive wall of text, but it also explains why no serious company in its right mind would ever take over Linkrealms. It's been tried before we took Linkrealms over in 2015 - we took it over for the passion, not for the money.

    And yeah, talking about the money. Linkrealms is still running of out passion, not because we want to "make a little side-buck" out of it - as is should be clear by what I've written to @Clavicus. If we wanted to make "a little side buck", Linkrealms servers would have been shut down in 2014 and we'd be publishing silly flash games on Kongregate. You get the idea.


    A postscript for everyone at last. The fact we're developing Linkrealms 2 doesn't mean that we won't try out some of its new solutions on Linkrealms 1 - of course, we're talking of solutions that don't involve infrastructural changes (e.g. changes to crafting, to world rules, etc). So there are some interesting news you can expect from Linkrealms 1.



  • People didn't want to play because of incomplete systems and other issues that were repeatedly ignored. Instead of addressing those issues, you throw in another half assed system and do a marketing push, exposing more people to the incomplete game mechanics nobody wanted to play to begin with. Over and over again. It was like watching the Hoffmans on Gold Rush.

    This game didn't need a technology revamp, it needed to flesh out the game systems it already had in place from the start. That stupid wizard castle which is now the Void dungeon never did get finished after so many years. That goes way beyond the limitations of a small dev team.

    Honestly, it's for the best LR is no longer in development. At least it will stop getting everyone's hopes up. We're just lucky they told us they were halting development this time. Last few times it happened, the devs disappeared and didn't say anything.


Log in to reply
 

Looks like your connection to Linkrealms Forum was lost, please wait while we try to reconnect.