Rusty Ethics

Barbas

ExQQxv1D1ns
Oct 28, 2013
33,804
0
0
This concise, three-panel affair seems bang on the money. Well done, OP, good shout. Burlap fashion is so very underrated.
 

Darth_Payn

New member
Aug 5, 2009
2,868
0
0
reiniat said:
AnthrSolidSnake said:
AldUK said:
I have to be honest, I don't really 'get' this new genre of games sweeping the market. Everything I've seen of them just seems downright boring as hell. I'd rather play a structured, finished game with clear goals like State of Decay. You're a survivor, here's some zombies, here's some other survivors, here's a base, here's some missions. Have fun. As opposed to, you're a naked guy in a huge empty map and when you finally find another player, there's a good chance they will bash your head in to take your rock.

HOW IS THAT FUN?
It's all the thrill of hardcore surviving without actually risking your life. I'm not sure how to explain it to someone who doesn't get it, because every time I have has been a lost cause, but really, it's just nice to play a game that's hard because of the other people. It's all the thrill of intense, online combat combined with survival elements. It's not really meant for those that can't stand losing to someone else.
I thought he mean that the game is incomplete, like, why would you like to play in an awful looking empty map, with awful looking characters and animations, in an unfinished buggy game with a dumb premise?
I love harshness tough, i played FOnline 2238 for years, but that mod was stable and all its mechanics worked, and there wasnt cheaters, and the GM organized great events. But Rust is like Many Access games, just insultingly incomplete.
I prefer to wait for the standalone DayZ, even if that takes years.
Well, now I don't know what to think about "early access" anything. Jim Sterling had me sold as a load of total bollocks, but here it's the honor of being among the first to play something new before it gets real popular.
OMG, I now get the appeal of being a hipster.
 

IrenIvy

New member
Mar 15, 2011
187
0
0
It is a second Rachel Bagg's strip. While I quite like the art style I wonder where Cory is and /crazy conspiracy on/ if burning of the offices couple of weeks before was in any way an indication of Cory leaving the comics /crazy conspiracy off/
 

Redlin5_v1legacy

Better Red than Dead
Aug 5, 2009
48,836
0
0
templar1138a said:
Well, having looked at the Steam page, Rust looks like it WOULD be a great game to play. If it had a single-player mode.
It's multiplayer only? Awh... Oh well. I have enough multiplayer games I'm involved in at the moment, I don't particularly wish to add another to the list at the moment.

Will keep an eye on it though.

[sub][sub]Did Cory switch up his style? Cause I like it.[/sub][/sub]
 

Fdzzaigl

New member
Mar 31, 2010
822
0
0
"There are no women because of the Virus", lol right.

Makes a world full of naked men have some totally different connotations that's for sure.
But still hope they rethink that lazy decision.

Fun comic btw :)
 

vxicepickxv

Slayer of Bothan Spies
Sep 28, 2008
3,126
0
0
Fdzzaigl said:
"There are no women because of the Virus", lol right.

Makes a world full of naked men have some totally different connotations that's for sure.
But still hope they rethink that lazy decision.

Fun comic btw :)
Right now it is a sound decision. If they decide to do a female model later, then so be it.
 

Something Amyss

Aswyng and Amyss
Dec 3, 2008
24,759
0
0
Too few games are concerned with Fung Shei.

Pallindromemordnillap said:
Art seemed slightly different than normal, is it Rachell Baggs again?
It mentions Rachel's name right in the strip.
 

hentropy

New member
Feb 25, 2012
737
0
0
Why are these games exclusively multiplayer in the first place? Seems no reason why you couldn't make a game like Rust single player, and yet it's exclusively multiplayer. When a big company like EA does this we all get up in arms about it, because always-online is just an annoying way to do DRM. You could say "oh well it's an online game" like WoW or whatever, but it's not, and I see no reason why it couldn't have a single player mode. I did actually consider buying it when reading about it because it looked cool, but if I'm going to have to deal with shoddy servers and other douchey players when it would just be nice to have a true sandbox.
 

BehattedWanderer

Fell off the Alligator.
Jun 24, 2009
5,237
0
0
Loving the new art. And between this and Penny Arcade (which is guess is the "Simpsons did it" of the Gaming-related webcomic world?), I'm inclined to check out Rust, just to see what all this inhumane pantslessness is about.
 

Something Amyss

Aswyng and Amyss
Dec 3, 2008
24,759
0
0
Redlin5 said:
[sub][sub]Did Cory switch up his style? Cause I like it.[/sub][/sub]
Corey didn't do the art. Rachel Baggs did, like last time.

hentropy said:
Why are these games exclusively multiplayer in the first place? Seems no reason why you couldn't make a game like Rust single player, and yet it's exclusively multiplayer. When a big company like EA does this we all get up in arms about it, because always-online is just an annoying way to do DRM. You could say "oh well it's an online game" like WoW or whatever, but it's not, and I see no reason why it couldn't have a single player mode. I did actually consider buying it when reading about it because it looked cool, but if I'm going to have to deal with shoddy servers and other douchey players when it would just be nice to have a true sandbox.
It doesn't get the same hate because it's not on the same level of attention.

But then, I don't see why it's okay for WoW to be online only but not this. Surely both could have single-player campaigns. Or maybe a sense of community here is important.

I don't care much, because this isn't really my thing.
 

Compatriot Block

New member
Jan 28, 2009
702
0
0
What would you even do in a single player version of this game? Whenever I'm the last player on a server I either get bored or stock up for when more players log on. There's no tension without other players. This game seems to be built around the threat of interacting with other real people, because without it all you're left with is a very limited version of Minecraft where the monsters don't even come to you and you can't affect the terrain.

I mean, you could peacefully chop wood and build a sprawling fort on a single player server, but why? Nothing is going to attack it. Plus all of the weapons and armor that you can make can only be used to trivialize fighting animals and zombies, which are not dangerous at all if you aren't forced to also be aware of potential player ambushers.
 

hentropy

New member
Feb 25, 2012
737
0
0
Compatriot Block said:
What would you even do in a single player version of this game? Whenever I'm the last player on a server I either get bored or stock up for when more players log on. There's no tension without other players. This game seems to be built around the threat of interacting with other real people, because without it all you're left with is a very limited version of Minecraft where the monsters don't even come to you and you can't affect the terrain.

I mean, you could peacefully chop wood and build a sprawling fort on a single player server, but why? Nothing is going to attack it. Plus all of the weapons and armor that you can make can only be used to trivialize fighting animals and zombies, which are not dangerous at all if you aren't forced to also be aware of potential player ambushers.
That's just the thing, I wouldn't mind just playing a game like this, at least for a little while, by myself just to get a hold of the mechanics. To you know, learn how to play it before I get killed by players who are basically experts already.

It just seems like these types of games intentionally model the whole game around multiplayer as a sneaky way to make it DRM-dependent, and it'll get awards and accolades and people won't stop talking about it, meanwhile EA even mentions "always online" the media and game bases lead crusades and get them voted worse company ever. I just guess it's all about precedent.
 

Compatriot Block

New member
Jan 28, 2009
702
0
0
hentropy said:
Compatriot Block said:
What would you even do in a single player version of this game? Whenever I'm the last player on a server I either get bored or stock up for when more players log on. There's no tension without other players. This game seems to be built around the threat of interacting with other real people, because without it all you're left with is a very limited version of Minecraft where the monsters don't even come to you and you can't affect the terrain.

I mean, you could peacefully chop wood and build a sprawling fort on a single player server, but why? Nothing is going to attack it. Plus all of the weapons and armor that you can make can only be used to trivialize fighting animals and zombies, which are not dangerous at all if you aren't forced to also be aware of potential player ambushers.
That's just the thing, I wouldn't mind just playing a game like this, at least for a little while, by myself just to get a hold of the mechanics. To you know, learn how to play it before I get killed by players who are basically experts already.

It just seems like these types of games intentionally model the whole game around multiplayer as a sneaky way to make it DRM-dependent, and it'll get awards and accolades and people won't stop talking about it, meanwhile EA even mentions "always online" the media and game bases lead crusades and get them voted worse company ever. I just guess it's all about precedent.
I won't speak for the EA thing, because that always derails a thread.

But I think it's a little paranoid to automatically assume that the game is multiplayer only to sneak DRM onto the users. It requires far fewer logical leaps to assume that they made it multiplayer because that's what they wanted the game to be. Not every game is required to have single-player. Diablo or SimCity I can understand, because they aren't based around player interaction. Games like DayZ and Rust fill a pretty specific niche, I think, that relies on fear of other real people.

Also, you can always play in an empty server to get the hang of things.
 

hentropy

New member
Feb 25, 2012
737
0
0
Compatriot Block said:
hentropy said:
Compatriot Block said:
What would you even do in a single player version of this game? Whenever I'm the last player on a server I either get bored or stock up for when more players log on. There's no tension without other players. This game seems to be built around the threat of interacting with other real people, because without it all you're left with is a very limited version of Minecraft where the monsters don't even come to you and you can't affect the terrain.

I mean, you could peacefully chop wood and build a sprawling fort on a single player server, but why? Nothing is going to attack it. Plus all of the weapons and armor that you can make can only be used to trivialize fighting animals and zombies, which are not dangerous at all if you aren't forced to also be aware of potential player ambushers.
That's just the thing, I wouldn't mind just playing a game like this, at least for a little while, by myself just to get a hold of the mechanics. To you know, learn how to play it before I get killed by players who are basically experts already.

It just seems like these types of games intentionally model the whole game around multiplayer as a sneaky way to make it DRM-dependent, and it'll get awards and accolades and people won't stop talking about it, meanwhile EA even mentions "always online" the media and game bases lead crusades and get them voted worse company ever. I just guess it's all about precedent.
I won't speak for the EA thing, because that always derails a thread.

But I think it's a little paranoid to automatically assume that the game is multiplayer only to sneak DRM onto the users. It requires far fewer logical leaps to assume that they made it multiplayer because that's what they wanted the game to be. Not every game is required to have single-player. Diablo or SimCity I can understand, because they aren't based around player interaction. Games like DayZ and Rust fill a pretty specific niche, I think, that relies on fear of other real people.

Also, you can always play in an empty server to get the hang of things.
The thing is, I don't need to play WoW to play an RPG. There's plenty of RPGs out there for me to play, which are exclusively single-player. Same thing with shooters and TF2, L4D, DayZ, various strategy games, etc. There's single-player options, is what I'm saying. I don't think I have to take a big logical leap, if I'm an investor in a game and I'm about to spend a lot of money funding it, what's the one way to make sure that it becomes very hard for pirates to play it? Oh, make it exclusively multiplayer, problem solved. It's not really a grand mystery why we're seeing more types of these games. On the other side, if I'm a developer, my first choice would not be to make an exclusively multiplayer game, because it opens up a whole 'nother can of worms with trying to build the game around internet connections. I have the same general animosity towards something like World of Tanks, why can't I play famous WWII battles in a single-player mode rather than have to rely on other people to make it fun for me?

Part of this simply comes from a time when I loved playing TF2- before I stopped loving it because the "human element" just got so fatally unbearable. I like Minecraft but I guess unlike others the lack of graphics also limits the game in a variety of ways. As much as it was derided, the Hearth Fire DLC for Skyrim was quite fun to me, the idea of creating my own steading and just filling it with things. While there were occasional baddies to kill, I didn't really have to worry about any number of foul-mouthed dipshits sniping me while I'm gathering wood or something. Just seems like something that could have easily had some single-player component without even working very hard on it- but chose not to do because making these kinds of games are gamer-accepted ways of doing always-online DRM.
 

The_Longier

New member
Jan 18, 2014
20
0
0
They missed out the fourth Pannel where a flying hacker suicide kills the girls and takes their stuff while teabaging the crumpled corpses.
Alot of the player base seem like they've been banned from MOBA's or crawled out of Xbox Live.
 

Jessta

New member
Feb 8, 2011
382
0
0
I dunno how I feel about all these early access games because I just got starbound, thought it was great, played the shit out of it till I ran out of non repetitive content, saw they updated, tried to play it again, then realized I didn't have the wherewithal to play through the first five hours of the game again to see any of the new content, same goes for minecraft.