aged over 20 years in 340 days

[Will Parrot 18]

I agree with Mndfreeze on this, clearly the mechanic is not fully in game right now and there's no point in judging what we know almost nothing of. I like the fact characters are aging, I like the fact that we'll have to play our own progeny at some point. I hope that it is going to imply more than just a cosmetic reset of the character though. I'd like to have the possibility to switch gender for example play your daughter when your first char was a male etc... I hope its going to be more thought off than just keep levels and skills and reset appearance. I might be a bit alone there among people who feel entitled to everything but I wouldn't mind a level reset as you're supposed to find a crew, a company etc while playing and once you have some base, ships and all running, leveling a character back is nowhere as difficult as getting your first character started solo...

But that's all speculation, I hope they are going to surprise us in a good way, an original way ! We're playing their game after all, its their vision of their game that counts, take it or leave it. I hope they won't betray their own game to please some groups of players.

[Ucan_Kizmiaz 54]

6 hours ago, Domino said:

...

In all seriousness though, it doesn't even do anything yet.  As evident in the patch notes, they are constantly tweaking and refining values, so I wouldn't be surprised if age got some tweaks when it's properly implemented though.  I can't imagine they'd force us to re-roll every few weeks (or at least I hope not!)

the aging is way too steep considering that it might have an impact later on. why have my toon age when it doesn't have any impact ? turn it off then.

or at least slow aging down drastically. 17 years in 277 days is beyond my understanding. in another 277 i only can be at the captain's wheel after my crew got my walker from my cabin.

bogus

[mndfreeze 92]

So again, sounds like  you want a different game then.  This is an intended and planned mechanic.  If it bothers you that much you would be better suited playing something else.  If someone doesn't like ships, this probably isn't the game for them.  If someone doesn't like survival mechanics, this probably isn't the game for them. If someone doesn't like the planned aging system, probably not the game for them.

My original post pretty clearly stated 'manage your expectations'.  That involves understanding what the design goal for the game is (pirate survival pvp on a mass scale with an aging and death system) and knowing there are going to be some things you may not like but cant do anything about if you choose to ignore/refuse the systems they give you to mitigate it.  

And I don't see it as a gimmick.  It's a mechanic with planned intentions to stop people abusing other systems.  KEY systems to a survival game.  

This discussion was never about moral high ground.  It was, and has been from the beginning, about expectations on a 2 week early access game and you asking to change core mechanics on intended game play design because you don't want to use the systems they are going to give you to circumvent the mechanic you don't like.   

Here is an equally silly example:

"GOODDDD I HAATTEE STARRVVING TO DEAATH ITS JUST POINTLESS FLUFFFF" 

"just eat food"

"I DOONNT WANNA EAT FOOD THATS SUCH A WASTE OF TIME"

"Kill yourself on an animal and respawn then"

"I DONNNTT WANNNNAAA DOO THAT EIITTHER ITS SO MUCH WORK HAVING TO DIE OVER AND OVER AND OVER  I JUST WANNA NOT HAVE A FOOOOOD BAR IN A SURVIVAL GAME"

 

If the age system served NO PURPOSE then I'd be totally on your side. It would be fluff, but as I said the devs have stated it's being used to mitigate the survival aspects of the game in addition to adding more depth. So at that point you are requesting core game play mechanics that actually directly affect how people play the game for your own personal cosmetic reasons.

 

Finally, again, none of it is implemented and the game is 2 weeks into EA.  Your choices at this point are literally: wait until its implemented and reassess how they did it so you don't age any further until that point, deal with it, or quit.

 

[mndfreeze 92]

24 minutes ago, Ucan_Kizmiaz said:

the aging is way too steep considering that it might have an impact later on. why have my toon age when it doesn't have any impact ? turn it off then.

or at least slow aging down drastically. 17 years in 277 days is beyond my understanding. in another 277 i only can be at the captain's wheel after my crew got my walker from my cabin.

bogus

 

I imagine as they get closer to implementing the system they will either reset people back to age 18 or whatever it was we started at, or somehow even it out.  Right now its just an arbitrary number.  Balancing the time scale probably won't happen until they start to roll out the implementation as well or shortly after it comes out if they find it's way out of whack wit the player base

[Adfax 157]

23 minutes ago, mndfreeze said:

So again, sounds like  you want a different game then.  This is an intended and planned mechanic.  If it bothers you that much you would be better suited playing something else.  If someone doesn't like ships, this probably isn't the game for them.  If someone doesn't like survival mechanics, this probably isn't the game for them. If someone doesn't like the planned aging system, probably not the game for them.

My original post pretty clearly stated 'manage your expectations'.  That involves understanding what the design goal for the game is (pirate survival pvp on a mass scale with an aging and death system) and knowing there are going to be some things you may not like but cant do anything about if you choose to ignore/refuse the systems they give you to mitigate it.  

And I don't see it as a gimmick.  It's a mechanic with planned intentions to stop people abusing other systems.  KEY systems to a survival game.  

This discussion was never about moral high ground.  It was, and has been from the beginning, about expectations on a 2 week early access game and you asking to change core mechanics on intended game play design because you don't want to use the systems they are going to give you to circumvent the mechanic you don't like.   

Here is an equally silly example:

"GOODDDD I HAATTEE STARRVVING TO DEAATH ITS JUST POINTLESS FLUFFFF" 

"just eat food"

"I DOONNT WANNA EAT FOOD THATS SUCH A WASTE OF TIME"

"Kill yourself on an animal and respawn then"

"I DONNNTT WANNNNAAA DOO THAT EIITTHER ITS SO MUCH WORK HAVING TO DIE OVER AND OVER AND OVER  I JUST WANNA NOT HAVE A FOOOOOD BAR IN A SURVIVAL GAME"

 

If the age system served NO PURPOSE then I'd be totally on your side. It would be fluff, but as I said the devs have stated it's being used to mitigate the survival aspects of the game in addition to adding more depth. So at that point you are requesting core game play mechanics that actually directly affect how people play the game for your own personal cosmetic reasons.

 

Finally, again, none of it is implemented and the game is 2 weeks into EA.  Your choices at this point are literally: wait until its implemented and reassess how they did it so you don't age any further until that point, deal with it, or quit.

 

It is laughable that you're trying to make age seem like a "core" gameplay mechanic. If it was core to the game, then that would mean it would be core to Ark.

Since it doesn't exist in ark, it isn't core to this game either, since they're essentially the same game, except one has an ocean and ships.

How can it be used to prevent abusing other mechanics when everything just gets passed onto the next character? And that there is going to be a fountain of youth?

It doesn't do anything for the gameplay. Your age changes without you participating. 

You're claiming age will impact survival aspects of the game, I've seen no evidence of that. But lets say it is true, it still isn't CORE to the game at all, it is still just a little tag on that doesn't make the game any more or less at it's core. Ark is the core of this game, and Ark has no age mechanic.

If this game had no age mechanic, people would be indifferent. Why? Because it adds nothing, it only takes away cosmetic options.

Would I put cosmetics over slight alteration of some numbers that don't change the core of the game at all in any significant way? Yes. I believe that liking your character is KEY to people playing the game. 

And if you don't think cosmetics are important, just imagine if all character models were just replaced with giant piles of shit; do you think people would enjoy the game as much then?  Do you think as many people would by the game? Unlikely. 

Some games make all their money off cosmetics.. To somehow present that they're somehow not important is utterly ludicrous.

Edited January 4, 2019 by Adfax

[mndfreeze 92]

6 minutes ago, Adfax said:

It is laughable that you're trying to make age seem like a "core" gameplay mechanic. If it was core to the game, then that would mean it would be core to Ark.

Since it doesn't exist in ark, it isn't core to this game either, since they're essentially the same game, except one has an ocean and ships.

How can it be used to prevent abusing other mechanics when everything just gets passed onto the next character? And that there is going to be a fountain of youth?

It doesn't do anything for the gameplay. Your age changes without you participating. 

You're claiming age will impact survival aspects of the game, I've seen no evidence of that. But lets say it is true, it still isn't CORE to the game at all, it is still just a little tag on that doesn't make the game any more or less at it's core. Ark is the core of this game, and Ark has no age mechanic.

If this game had no age mechanic, people would be indifferent. Why? Because it adds nothing, it only takes away cosmetic options.

Would I put cosmetics over slight alteration of some numbers that don't change the core of the game at all in any significant way? Yes. I believe that liking your character is KEY to people playing the game. 

And if you don't think cosmetics are important, just imagine if all character models were just replaced with giant piles of shit; do you think people would enjoy the game as much then?  Do you think as many people would by the game? Unlikely. 

Some games make all their money off cosmetics.. To somehow present that they're somehow not important is utterly ludicrous.

Reading comprehension is key to debate.  I clearly stated features were not in yet and what the develops plan to do with it and what its for. 

Your ark argument pretty much invalidates anything further on this topic.  I wish you happy old age you bitter old man.

 

Stay in school kids!

[Adfax 157]

3 minutes ago, mndfreeze said:

Reading comprehension is key to debate.  I clearly stated features were not in yet and what the develops plan to do with it and what its for. 

Your ark argument pretty much invalidates anything further on this topic.  I wish you happy old age you bitter old man.

 

Stay in school kids!

I accept your concession.

Saying the ark argument invalidates anything, and then not explaining why just proves you've got nothing. It is literally a copy paste of ark, but with oceans. .A game that was going to be an addon for Ark originally. So please, don't even.

The core mechanics of Ark, are the core mechanics of Atlas.

Also, i'm clearly talking about the RESULTS of the mechanics, so don't bring up "reading comprehension". Oh the irony.

Edited January 4, 2019 by Adfax

[mndfreeze 92]

[Adfax 157]

Just now, mndfreeze said:

Like I said, you've got nothing.

[mndfreeze 92]

You're right.  Can't debate with someone with flawed logic.  

Every year I age in game now will be forever sweeter after this thread.

[Adfax 157]

1 minute ago, mndfreeze said:

You're right.  Can't debate with someone with flawed logic.  

Every year I age in game now will be forever sweeter after this thread.

Point out the flawed logic, or accept defeat. Those are the options available to you.

Don't be a sore loser. Just take the loss and move on with your life. No need to be a salt lord.

Edited January 4, 2019 by Adfax

[mndfreeze 92]

There is no salt, nor any winning. This is an internet forum and you probably should get your blood pressure checked.  Wouldn't want all that added stress making you look older.  No real life fountain of youth to hunt here (though that would probably be too much work for you anyway).

 

[Adfax 157]

1 minute ago, mndfreeze said:

There is no salt, nor any winning. This is an internet forum and you probably should get your blood pressure checked.  Wouldn't want all that added stress making you look older.  No real life fountain of youth to hunt here (though that would probably be too much work for you anyway).

 

Your post is just a salt fest. You've completely given up on the argument, and have resorted to salt.

[mndfreeze 92]

The only one salty here is you man, sorry to say.  I'm laughing quite a bit at your insistence of "concession" "winning" and "defeat".

Here is a good read for you. I feel like  you probably need it.

 

https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/blog/the-athletes-way/201404/emotional-distress-can-speed-cellular-aging

[Adfax 157]

8 minutes ago, mndfreeze said:

The only one salty here is you man, sorry to say.  I'm laughing quite a bit at your insistence of "concession" "winning" and "defeat".

Here is a good read for you. I feel like  you probably need it.

 

https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/blog/the-athletes-way/201404/emotional-distress-can-speed-cellular-aging

Strange how you knew exactly where to look for that link...

I've never seen anyone have such a meltdown over a forum post. Relax dude. 

Look at how much effort you're putting in. It is embarrassing. 

Just accept the loss and move on. Stop filling up the thread with your salt.

Edited January 4, 2019 by Adfax

[mndfreeze 92]

Still going eh?  The struggle is real.  Hold on I have another one that may be of more assistance for you.  Hopefully this one won't blow your mind too much.

 

http://bfy.tw/Lcff

[ReilanT 57]

have we real information about Aging Systeme ? dev note ? why we grow up so fast ? 

[mndfreeze 92]

 

3 minutes ago, ReilanT said:

have we real information about Aging Systeme ? dev note ? why we grow up so fast ? 

Nope.  I imagine it's not on the top of their priority list right now with all the other game breaking issues and server problems.  They usually list upcoming stuff in the patch notes.

[boomervoncannon 1,541]

2 hours ago, Adfax said:

Is that a meme? 

Memes are for people with no originality. Don't do memes.

Lastly : how on earth is aging KEY to the game?

What does it add gameplay wise other than cosmetically altering your character? Oh, and then you make a new character after that.. Great fun... Not. This is not gameplay. Not real gameplay. Creating your character is stuff you do before you play the game.

The core of the game is PIRATES. It is an MMO about pirates. Aging has little to do with pirates. Why? Because pirates don't live long enough to get old. As I've said in another thread, a pirate lifespan is around 3 years from the start of their career, if they're lucky.

Saying aging is key is just a complete misrepresentation. It is complete and utter fluff. A cheap gimic to make the game seem more impressive, when actually making it more limited. I can guarantee you, the ONLY reason they tried to crowbar it in is because of a game coming out called "chronicles or Elyria". That game isn't out yet, so maybe it works in that game.. But in Atlas? It is a complete failure, and renders the character creator mostly useless.

If this were a game about kings and queens and lineage, you know, something like bannerlord. THEN it might make sense. But pirates?.. No.

It is not my job to spoon feed you information about the game's lore, which you obviously based on your statements here, haven't done the first bit of research on. Go and actually look things up for yourself and then you will know how the aging ties into the game's lore and why it is key.  You can continue to call it a cheap stunt or fluff all you want, but that will not change the simple fact in the least that this was an announced part of the game prior to release, that it ties into the game's story in a significant way, and you, ignorant of that, are here demanding that the game be changed to suit your personal preferences. 

Memes are for people with no originality. What a joke of an overgeneralization. Because clearly the individual analogy to you at a Led Zeppelin concert that I crafted to illustrate my point shows no orginality of thought right? You know what I couldn't care less about? Critique of my creativity or lack therof by people whining on a game forum two weeks after EA begins that features they don't like should be removed without bothering to educate themselves on how or why that's an incredibly selfish and self centered demand. 

Oh wait, here it comes again, lack of originality and all

 

Bye Felicia.

[Adfax 157]

1 hour ago, boomervoncannon said:

It is not my job to spoon feed you information about the game's lore, which you obviously based on your statements here, haven't done the first bit of research on. Go and actually look things up for yourself and then you will know how the aging ties into the game's lore and why it is key.  You can continue to call it a cheap stunt or fluff all you want, but that will not change the simple fact in the least that this was an announced part of the game prior to release, that it ties into the game's story in a significant way, and you, ignorant of that, are here demanding that the game be changed to suit your personal preferences. 

Memes are for people with no originality. What a joke of an overgeneralization. Because clearly the individual analogy to you at a Led Zeppelin concert that I crafted to illustrate my point shows no orginality of thought right? You know what I couldn't care less about? Critique of my creativity or lack therof by people whining on a game forum two weeks after EA begins that features they don't like should be removed without bothering to educate themselves on how or why that's an incredibly selfish and self centered demand. 

Oh wait, here it comes again, lack of originality and all

 

Bye Felicia.

Lol, you probably think you're being funny with your little meme. So cringe.

Okay, let me explain something very simply for you : Just because something was announced to be part of a game, does not mean it can't remain optional ingame. What does that mean?

It means your argument is invalid. 

How is that for a meme?

Also, age has literally nothing to do with lore. That is like saying age should play a part in world of Warcraft, because things age in the lore. The vast majority of games that exist do not have an age mechanic, and yet, have characters who would age in the world if left to it. So you can't use lore as an argument either.

The reason you're not "spoon feeding" is because you know that i'll dismantle what you bring me. Much easier to hide it behind "I won't spoon feed you!", then you get to have your cheap little insult too.

Bring forth the information, and I will dismantle it. Otherwise i'll assume you don't have any, and you just have no argument. 

Edited January 4, 2019 by Adfax

[boomervoncannon 1,541]

11 minutes ago, Adfax said:

Lol, you probably think you're being funny with your little meme. So cringe.

Okay, let me explain something very simply for you : Just because something was announced to be part of a game, does not mean it can't remain optional ingame. What does that mean?

It means your argument is invalid. 

How is that for a meme?

Also, age has literally nothing to do with lore. That is like saying age should play a part in world of Warcraft, because things age in the lore. The vast majority of games that exist do not have an age mechanic, and yet, have characters who would age in the world if left to it. So you can't use lore as an argument either.

The reason you're not "spoon feeding" is because you know that i'll dismantle what you bring me. Much easier to hide it behind "I won't spoon feed you!", then you get to have your cheap little insult too.

Bring forth the information, and I will dismantle it. Otherwise i'll assume you don't have any, and you just have no argument. 

No the reason I’m not spoon feeding you has been already stated. It’s not up to me to give you relevant information about game design. It’s up to you to educate yourself, particularly on matters related to your own complaints. You’re not dismantling anything here, you’re simply asserting things to be true, valid or invalid because you say so. Nothing you have said changes the very simple basic fact that your position here amounts to:

”Devs remove or make optional a game mechanic I don’t like to suit my preferences or I’m gone.”

to which my response is still (and no I still don’t give a flying fart how cringe you think this is)

 

Bye Felicia.

[Adfax 157]

55 minutes ago, boomervoncannon said:

No the reason I’m not spoon feeding you has been already stated. It’s not up to me to give you relevant information about game design. It’s up to you to educate yourself, particularly on matters related to your own complaints. You’re not dismantling anything here, you’re simply asserting things to be true, valid or invalid because you say so. Nothing you have said changes the very simple basic fact that your position here amounts to:

”Devs remove or make optional a game mechanic I don’t like to suit my preferences or I’m gone.”

to which my response is still (and no I still don’t give a flying fart how cringe you think this is)

 

Bye Felicia.

If you had the information, you'd be using it to win this argument. I'm literally mocking you for not having the information, and you could prove me wrong and show it, but you won't, because it doesn't exist. Or it does exist, and you know it won't hold up to scrutiny. 

I never asserted anything was true, i'm just putting holes in what you're saying, and everyone else. If anything, i'm pointing out where you're false. I'm pointing out what the mechanic takes away, and i'm giving my reasons and opinion on the matter.

What you've summed my posts up as is what I want but you've failed to include the various reasons. The reasons for me wanting that is the important part.

I could easily say your position amounts to : 

"age good"

And do exactly the same to you. Make all your reasoning disappear to make what you're saying look like nothing. But that would be disingenuous. Of course, I don't need to do that to win the argument, so why would I?

And yes, your meme still sucks.

 

Edited January 4, 2019 by Adfax

[mndfreeze 92]

You should look up a class on arguing and debate.  You really need it man. 

 

Stay in school kids!

[[616]RexFortis 48]

On ‎1‎/‎3‎/‎2019 at 10:40 PM, Hackjob said:

This is not earth . Our years based off our planet's rotation around the sun. Who knows how many days are in a year in this world 

It's because of people like you that game developers feel it's okay to produce crappy games.  Good job buddy.

[[616]RexFortis 48]

boomervoncannon, you feel it necessary for all that noisy senseless useless rhetoric of yours over the topic of "aging 20 years in 340 days"?  really?