hey, just signed up and reading some threads i saw alot of people going "RAWR! the game is perfect and dont you dare change it".

now i have been playing for a couple of weeks and i gotta say this game need more content worse then minecraft. plus balancing is a big issue too. i have never even played a round through completely because
1) the lack of options makes it boring
2) tunnelling and undermining is so popular that no map survives a whole round.

adding in proper classes or a load-out selection would be fantastic. jeeps, tanks, boats and planes would be magical! fixed machine guns? mortars and artillery? bring it on!

hell, i some day hope to see the option of building mega flying castles and fighting it out over a bottomless infinity with a map pasted onto the ground like a background. boarding the enemy castle via helicopters and dog-fighting in propeller planes!

anyone who says this would ruin the game i would like to point out that updating is an option and there is no rules against just keeping your older version of the game. me, i want tanks.

It's not so much the fear of change rather than people don't want updates to be applied that ruin the game. For instance, if there were different game modes or specific servers that had all the things people are suggesting here, people would love that. However, throwing in a shotgun into the game as a whole, there is a downside and an upside, wherever you stand on the issue.

yeah but if we did ad shotties, sub-machine guns, snipers and so forth. do you think the current rifle would be the all purpose gun still? im 99% sure that the rest of the game will be balanced to match.

and on top of 'i afraid a patch will ruin the game', even if dose then the next patch will fix it and until then the old version still works.

RAWR! the game is perfect and dont you dare change it.

I fear change because everybodys ideas are bad

>I fear change because everybodys ideas are bad

I fear change because the ideas don't work in the context of the game. There are some actually brilliant ideas which sound awesome in theory, but could never be accomplished without breaking the game. In a game such as this, balance is very easy to tip if you're not careful.

You all must remember this is a beta game. Its simple because its beta, and the fear of change is in fact not wanting to ruin it with updates. this game wont jump from .36 to 1.0 instantly so play the game with that thought in mind.

It really doesn't need anything fancy right now, except a winning system.
Though in 1.0 or a bit later versions, I except there to be something more, like another block styles and gamemodes.

Edit: Grid would be cool right now too, since I think that it's very easy to implement.

"i have never even played a round through completely"
--> There is no end-of-round atm afaik.

No map can survive a whole round, because there are no rounds.

I think the creator should be the one to judge bad updates and patches. It's his game, and what every floats his boat should be in the game. He may add something stupid like tanks, and lose most of his current players. BUT, he would gain players. Each time he updates, he will lose and gain players. So the game should be what he wants it to be and not what we want it to be.

I'm not afraid of change, it's just there is very little that needs to be done to the game, it's already pretty good.

I don't want artificial inaccuracy, I don't want classes, I don't want a vast selection of mostly useless weapons (shotguns would be useless as everyone would just snipe you before you got to a usable range).

The only things that are needed are:
- End game conditions
- Multiple game-types
- Map grid
- Better admin tools
- Better anti-abuse systems
- Map saving/loading
- Single-player editing mode

And other bug-fixes/tweaks (like crouch-jump out of water and lack of z-sorting... or y-sorting (seeing sprites through the ground)).

Lol. So what is this forum for then, AnacondaML? Devs always want suggestions on how to improve their game/tool/software/etc. If they deny to hear on the community they're doomed.
Still in the end it's of course their own decision which suggestions to implement and which not but telling people to stop making suggestion is just stupid.

Edit: Once again I have to agree with Zuriki. Bloating the game would be bad imo.

I agree with zuriki, the basic framework of the game is fine, we just need more game types and a few helpful but not game breaking tools, and of course bug fixes. I would be happy if they made the blocks a little more detailed, and maybe if they added a few kinds of blocks (e.g. Barbed wire, concrete,etc.), but i'll leave dogfights and tank battles to the modders.

Most of the things that are necesarry for the game are non-cosmetic.

Such as?...

The blocks can't be improved without using a completely different engine or compacting 8^3+ sections of the map into a single block - essentially severely cutting into the frame-rate by making the map 512x denser.

Each block is an individual voxel, to make them textured it would have to either use a textured quad for the blocks (like minecraft, requires a new engine from scratch) or make each block 8x8x8 block of voxels, which is increasing the density of the map by 512x.

The alternative is to have EntityBlocks, which are essentially entities (like the players, grenades, rubble, etc) but static and with special properties. This doesn't improve the quality visually of the map, but it allows for special tiles like ladders and barb without making the engine require more resources or having to write a new engine.

(Oh and that's about some of the suggestions I've seen on these forums, and in this thread)

i like the shitty graphics and aside form better rendering i don't think they can be fixed. but if anyone thinks this game is finished then this is a seriously under-ambitious project by the dev team. right now it seems they are getting the multiplayer working for the basic engine before adding more features. however after that is done... ladders, barbed wire, more weapons and maybe even block types will be certain. the game is just a basic platform begging for more stuff, now if the dev team adds it as a series of official mods or just says 'suck it this is how we want the game' they are still gonna do alot more with this game.

stopping now would be like building a house then putting no furniture, doors or windows in.

also, form the readme:
This game is a work in progress, I plan to add
more weapons, map editing tools, a better server
browser and other stuff in the future. If you'd
like continued support, please consider donating
on the main site.

please explain how vehicles are going to work with block landscapes?!?!

One of the reasons I love this game right now is the simplicity and ease with which you play. Minecraft was a phenomenon but the mods have kinda killed it and relegated it to niche gaming.

You can't log on to a decent server without 1000+ mods, withuot sucking some 13 year old admins e-peen just to play.

This game, you log on and boom good game.

All this bells and whistles which just complicate the game alienate a lot of people who have been playing games long before most of you were born. We've been there and done that and realized in the end, good mechanics, balanced play and fun matter more than classes, vehicles, weapons, sound effects and graphics

I'm not saying new content shouldn't be added. it should. it's just when I was young and followed a indi game, I wanted a million things added. When they finally did, the game wound up feeling like a cheap CS knock off rather than a new and unique game.

A lot of people want to keep the sense of originality that comes along with it's simplistic nature. Obviously, it's not the first war game, or sandbox game for that matter, but the way it's presented is sort of something on it's own. Some get upset when others suggest adding features like those from say Minecraft or Call of Duty and it's perfectly reasonable (to me at least) to want to keep this feeling of originality. Obviously you need changes to the game or else people will get bored with it over time, you just have to find a good balance.

In my personal opinion, I think a lot of the ideas for new features should be held off for now. Now I'm not saying they're necessarily bad, just that a solid foundation should be set before worrying about adding new features to the game. What good is a new feature if the system has a bug that makes in unstable (being hypothetical here, you get the idea). I just think that if anything should really be discussed, it should be about bug reports, stability issues, connection issues, etc. Yeah it might not seem all that fun, but it can help make it a much smoother ride in the long run.

@chucus, hell yes. Gameplay > graphics anyday, I tell everybody that.

@Zuriki The engine is open source which means the developer can do whatever he wants with it, and the cubes are 3d objects which could be textured if the engine was altered to do so. Also shotguns are a perfectly reasonable weapon even if they have a narrow spectrum of use. They would be awesome for raiding/defending a building or tunnels. Why would it hurt you if their was a shotgun in this game if you think its so useless? Also other weapons just give players more tactical freedom in different situations. So long as they are available to both teams its even right? And if the rifle is so perfect that it doesn't allow for more weapons to be introduced to the game, then it should weakened to make room for more weapons.

Change should be embraced, if it does not work, it can always be removed.

The game maker has already stated he will be adding more features, he wants us to throw off ideas for him, try to be innovative with your ideas, and try not to change the style of play (try to imagine your suggestion in the game, does it play out well in your head?)

Changes are good, but as the slightly out of breath man says "Fans are clingy, complaining dipshits who will never ever be grateful for any concession you make. The moment you shut out their shrill, tremulous voices, the happier you'll be for it."

People, especially gamers, are afraid of changes because they're afraid it will be worse FOR THEM.

There are no people more conservatives than gamers, because they think that if you change ANYTHING about their favourite game, they'll have to learn new things.
Learning new things is BAD for gamers, because it can lower their kill/death ratio.
Lowering the a gamer kill/death ratio is an HERESY, because having a low k/d ratio means you have a small penis.

Ace of Spade has a solid base, I've played it a little with friends and it was really fun.
But after playing less than 10 hours, I don't want to launch the game anymore.
It really needs more contents, more depth, now it's really too basic to stay fun for hours (except for retards of course (it's a joke (no, actually I was dead serious))).

This game is less than 2 month old, and people are already afraid of changes.
You know what?
If you really don't want Ace of Spade to change, keeps the currents versions of the game on your hard drive, so you can still play it the same way in 10 years.
Other people will be having fun with a better game, and embittered gamers will remain on beta 0.36.

I don't get why people are so worked up over changes.

Remember Obama?

Yeah, "Change", and look what happened. we just kill bin laden.

You probably all have heard of transformers right? Well guess what, you change those things around all the time, and they bring back nostalgic memories of your glorious days a youngster!

Change = Good

Don't be a Deuce this isn't based off a real war!

Sylvine, i assume by the word ,"casual" you mean CASUALS?

because most suggestions are completely fucking stupid. Also, remember tf2?
Yeah.

Change can be good for sure, but from a creative standpoint, sometimes changes are made that can set a project down a path it can't come back from.

I just think a lot of us are weary of that. I think that if bcoolface stays true to whatever his vision is, we'll end up liking this game. I hope he has the strength to do what he feels is right for the game and not start adding random stuff to please everyone.

That's where you end up with problems.

I fear change because few people think ideas through, considering the repercussions they could have upon separate features. Serious suggestions are often fabricated with the logic of 'HURR [thing] WOULD BE COOL'