• There is NO official Otland's Discord server and NO official Otland's server list. The Otland's Staff does not manage any Discord server or server list. Moderators or administrator of any Discord server or server lists have NO connection to the Otland's Staff. Do not get scammed!

Servers this days

Codex, I totally agree with you in terms of developing and preventing bugs. But it's not in these terms I was talking about, my critic was about the posture of the public in face of updates and changes in the game. Please read my comments and try to understand my points before writing responses, otherwise you won't be any different from the public I have on my server :(

Have any of you that are commenting here ever had a custom rpg server? Cause I'm really feeling like we are not talking the same language at all;
 
"If you walk around with your phone on your hands, is your fault if you be stolen."
Most of the arguments sound like: the fault is of the victim and not of the aggressor.
Why some games have ip block for some countries? Because the producer has inexperience? I don't think so.
If a game don't have a healthy community, doesn't metter what the owner can do. The closure of a game is not just because he didn't know how to intreter the players (in some cases). You can't blame 100% one side or the other.
 
What I was saying is no matter how good you game is, if you advertise it as an ot, the public you'll have is the tibia public and they'll be expecting something very close to tibia. If you deliver something different, they'll dislike and criticize.
When you say the problem remains in the public you fail hard. Pick one:

# You are aiming your game to the wrong public.
# You made a game that actually sux.
# You advertised it wrongly.

When a game fail it's either a design failure or a merchandise failure, either way it's never public fault. Running away from the blame won't get you anywhere in the long run.

Seems that in the end we agree.

"If you walk around with your phone on your hands, is your fault if you be stolen."
Most of the arguments sound like: the fault is of the victim and not of the aggressor.
Why some games have ip block for some countries? Because the producer has inexperience? I don't think so.
If a game don't have a healthy community, doesn't metter what the owner can do. The closure of a game is not just because he didn't know how to intreter the players (in some cases). You can't blame 100% one side or the other.

Aggressors and victims? What you even talking about? There are tons of reasons something can go wrong, I'm talking about players and public. If you are talking about exploiting game weakness or behaving as not expected by the developer as something absurd, that sounds naive, welcome to gaming.

You talked about DDOS, that's not in the scope I'm arguing about, I'm talking about within game shit, you don't DDOS a server by playing it. Someone setting a theater in fire during a play is not public of that play.
 
Last edited:
@Peonso
Your argument implies that the public can never be accused when a game fails, what's don't the truth at all.
When I said about aggressor and victim, I'm talking about the argues here looks like the argue that people use too much (in real life cases). Let me explain with examples, even if I gave one in my other commentary.

Exemple one:
Suppose I forget my wallet on the bank of the square and someone else sees. Instead of warning me and giving it back, she simply steals it.
When I complain to someone, she says it's my fault for forgetting.
Is this really true? Is it really my fault to have forgotten, or the one of the person who stole it by not acting right?

Exemple two:
Night Wolf said that some people exploited as much as possible the bugs they found on his server and that was one of the causes of server failure.
So is he really to blame for letting some bugs through or is it the people who exploited them without reporting them to be fixed?

Both examples speak of the same thing, in distinct realities (real and virtual life), which is the deviance of behavior than is expected from those who seek to act in the right way.

So, we have three answer:
First: If you think that in example one, the fault is not of who was stolen, and in example two it is the fault of Night Wolf for having let pass some bugs. So you believe that in the virtual world, people can act dishonestly, externalizing everything they can not do in real life, totally free of guilty.

Second:If you think both are wrong, you contradict your line of reasoning.

Third: If you think both are right, well, I think there's something wrong with your character.

Now you talk that DDOS are not in scope of your argues. But I don't think so, since you started from the presumption that the public is never the culprit.
And to conclude, you say that those who make DDOS attacks are not the game's public. Well, I think you've never played global tibia, since you do not know that some guilds do DDoS attacks when they lose some war. Are these guilds not Tibia players?
 
@Peonso
Your argument implies that the public can never be accused when a game fails, what's don't the truth at all.
When I said about aggressor and victim, I'm talking about the argues here looks like the argue that people use too much (in real life cases). Let me explain with examples, even if I gave one in my other commentary.

Exemple one:
Suppose I forget my wallet on the bank of the square and someone else sees. Instead of warning me and giving it back, she simply steals it.
When I complain to someone, she says it's my fault for forgetting.
Is this really true? Is it really my fault to have forgotten, or the one of the person who stole it by not acting right?

Exemple two:
Night Wolf said that some people exploited as much as possible the bugs they found on his server and that was one of the causes of server failure.
So is he really to blame for letting some bugs through or is it the people who exploited them without reporting them to be fixed?

Both examples speak of the same thing, in distinct realities (real and virtual life), which is the deviance of behavior than is expected from those who seek to act in the right way.

So, we have three answer:
First: If you think that in example one, the fault is not of who was stolen, and in example two it is the fault of Night Wolf for having let pass some bugs. So you believe that in the virtual world, people can act dishonestly, externalizing everything they can not do in real life, totally free of guilty.

Second:If you think both are wrong, you contradict your line of reasoning.

Third: If you think both are right, well, I think there's something wrong with your character.

The analogy don't fit at all. In Night Wolf's case he is the one who brought to himself the responsibility, he controls the environment, he can stimulate behaviors and limit actions. You, as another player, see the game you are playing go to an end because of bugs, you blame the one playing the game as presented and not the one who allowed it happening and has the power to fix things? Who was the one that build a game expecting some behavior and advertised it to a public that like to do the opposite?

Now you talk that DDOS are not in scope of your argues. But I don't think so, since you started from the presumption that the public is never the culprit.
And to conclude, you say that those who make DDOS attacks are not the game's public. Well, I think you've never played global tibia, since you do not know that some guilds do DDoS attacks when they lose some war. Are these guilds not Tibia players?

I'm talking about the game itself. You can have your public DDoS attacking (and also competition, a bitter kid testing his skills and whatever), but it's not something they do as public/playing the game, it's an action out of it that deny it from being playable. Here I would agree, there is an aggressor, and the one doing the DDoS attack should also be blamed, not the developer shouldn't take measures to protect himself anyway. But no one was talking about this stuff, and neither I was referring to it, it doesn't work as an argument to negate anything I said either, all said still stand.

But the game itself is his domain, his rules apply, he is the entertainer. "People fail to be entertained", that's even possible?
 
The analogy don't fit at all. In Night Wolf's case he is the one who brought to himself the responsibility, he controls the environment, he can stimulate behaviors and limit actions. You, as another player, see the game you are playing go to an end because of bugs, you blame the one playing the game as presented and not the one who allowed it happening and has the power to fix things? Who was the one that build a game expecting some behavior and advertised it to a public that like to do the opposite?

They fit in, in this case, it would be the president and ministers (and the other people with public office) taking responsibility for governing the country, creating laws and limiting actions that they deem disadvantage to coexist in society. But, instead of being banned, he is arrested if he acts against the laws.
And I blame more who exploited the bugs and did not report, and would blame the owner of the server for being relaxed and not go after making the necessary corrections. So, I would not blame the owner 100%
You do not have way to select just who you want to play your game. Even if you aim your advertising just for what you believe to be your target audience, it will always end up attracting people you do not want.

I'm talking about the game itself. You can have your public DDoS attacking (and also competition, a bitter kid testing his skills and whatever), but it's not something they do as public/playing the game, it's an action out of it that deny it from being playable. Here I would agree, there is an aggressor, and the one doing the DDoS attack should also be blamed, not the developer shouldn't take measures to protect himself anyway. But no one was talking about this stuff, and neither I was referring to it, it doesn't work as an argument to negate anything I said either, all said still stand.

But the game itself is his domain, his rules apply, he is the entertainer. "People fail to be entertained", that's even possible?

I used the "DDOS attack" just to argue when you said "the public can never be the culprit."
And taking his case, as you said before, is just anecdotal evidence, there is no such thing as us, that never played on his server, say that he failed because he could not entertain people or the other way, that he failed because of the destructive behavior of certain players.
 
They fit in, in this case, it would be the president and ministers (and the other people with public office) taking responsibility for governing the country, creating laws and limiting actions that they deem disadvantage to coexist in society. But, instead of being banned, he is arrested if he acts against the laws.

If you want to compare a game with reality, a developer would be a god. He could make stealing even not possible, change physics laws, he creates and condemn the whole existence, he is at blame of everything that happens.

And I blame more who exploited the bugs and did not report, and would blame the owner of the server for being relaxed and not go after making the necessary corrections. So, I would not blame the owner 100%

Now put yourself in developer position. You blame the existence of people that abuse bugs, which is common ground, and you should be aware and prepared to deal with. Such wow, great developer skills, that's the path to improvement.

You do not have way to select just who you want to play your game. Even if you aim your advertising just for what you believe to be your target audience, it will always end up attracting people you do not want.

But your gameplay shouldn't let they go rampage and do something you don't want them to do.

I used the "DDOS attack" just to argue when you said "the public can never be the culprit."
And taking his case, as you said before, is just anecdotal evidence, there is no such thing as us, that never played on his server, say that he failed because he could not entertain people or the other way, that he failed because of the destructive behavior of certain players.

But you took it out of context. If public don't like a game, it's never their fault. "Ahhh but public can DDoS attack you... bla... bla..." Still, if public don't like a game, it's never their fault.

We are running in circles, I would like you to argue about what me and Night Wolf were actually arguing about, not about bugs nor DDoS. But how his flawless server, with amazing systems and super qualified staff went to ruin, by public's fault. They simply behaved as real map players always do, something he didn't wanted to, but was totally allowed.
 
Last edited:
Codex, I totally agree with you in terms of developing and preventing bugs. But it's not in these terms I was talking about, my critic was about the posture of the public in face of updates and changes in the game. Please read my comments and try to understand my points before writing responses, otherwise you won't be any different from the public I have on my server :(

Have any of you that are commenting here ever had a custom rpg server? Cause I'm really feeling like we are not talking the same language at all;

sorry of bad english

Good morning y'all
Currently im working as a hobby in a custom project , we have been launched two years ago, but for reasons like this "the public you'll have is the tibia public and they'll be expecting something very close to tibia. If you deliver something different, they'll dislike and criticize." , is that we close in the six months later ,most ppl are careless of new mechanics , like mining, forge , brewing , custom classes with tree specialization, enhanced enviroment , custom ai behaviour ,they just wanted most of the time, the same thing, a global map, with tons of botters and the same features all over again
 
Back
Top