Do you think adding the Knight V was a mistake?

[Sea Prince Gillywix]

I don't have any issue sci fi elements. I love these in fact. However I think that out of all vehicles Endnight could have chosen to add to SOTF, a motorized unicycle was really silly. Here is some ideas for vehicles I alternatively would have preferred.

1. Bionic legs.

Perhaps they move a bit slower then a knight V but allow you to move around fairly fast without crashing. These legs also raise your height a bit allowing you to see greater distances.

2. A hoverbike

Also would allow you to move around with crashing, but perhaps these are harder to turn and control when not moving in a straight line.

3. Motorized Rollerskates

Can crash with these light the knight V, but are easier to turn and jump with. However slower.

For non Sci fi options:

1. Mechanical Wagon

Made out of logs, wire, skulls and bones. Can be driven around like a gold cart.

2. A simple bike

Self explanatory. Made with sticks, wire and bones.

3. Spring loaded glider.

Allows you to jump to launch yourself off the ground then glide to a location.

Just some ideas. What do you think?

[Ataxio]

I can't agree with that. By manually having to traverse the terrain you are dynamically experiencing the game. It will never be the same experince twice. The knight is a wierd and fun way to squeeze more speed out of traveling while introducing a bit of risk.

If you could just fast travel and disregard evreything between points a and c it really somewhat defeats the point of playing the game.

[Sylar]

Initially, yes, I did think it was a mistake.

However, a motorized mountain bike, one with peddles and a motor for maintaining uphill might have made more sense given the terrain, and ways you could have peddled your way very fast down a mountain side in awesome fashion.

So, yes, maybe it's a bit of a mistake over a motorized mountain bike.

That said... I agree with Ataxio, fast-traveling would be the biggest mistake.

[BORG]

Origineel geplaatst door Ataxio:

I can't agree with that. By manually having to traverse the terrain you are dynamically experiencing the game. It will never be the same experince twice. The knight is a wierd and fun way to squeeze more speed out of traveling while introducing a bit of risk.

If you could just fast travel and disregard evreything between points a and c it really somewhat defeats the point of playing the game.

We can fast travel though. Your points moot. Whether it's a Knight V, a mountain bike, a dirt bike, an ATV, a golf cart, glider or sled, we can traverse the map quickly if we want to. IMO the one wheel isn't fun. It's a gimmick. It's a novelty that serves only one purpose - travel. We can also traverse where the one wheel doesn't work well and save time crossing the map without it, on foot.

So how would a mountain bike, dirt bike, ATV or any other mode of transportation be different than what already exists? They all get us across the map more quickly. Maybe all the current means of transportation should be removed from the game since they help get the player across the map more quickly. If proposed transportation methods defeat the point of playing the game, all the fast travel tools should be removed. We should have to walk and run everywhere to get the point of playing the game as a walking and jogging simulator.

[Sylar]

Origineel geplaatst door BORG:

Origineel geplaatst door Ataxio:

I can't agree with that. By manually having to traverse the terrain you are dynamically experiencing the game. It will never be the same experince twice. The knight is a wierd and fun way to squeeze more speed out of traveling while introducing a bit of risk.

If you could just fast travel and disregard evreything between points a and c it really somewhat defeats the point of playing the game.

We can fast travel though. Your points moot. Whether it's a Knight V, a mountain bike, a dirt bike, an ATV, a golf cart, glider or sled, we can traverse the map quickly if we want to. IMO the one wheel isn't fun. It's a gimmick. It's a novelty that serves only one purpose - travel. We can also traverse where the one wheel doesn't work well and save time crossing the map without it, on foot.

So how would a mountain bike, dirt bike, ATV or any other mode of transportation be different than what already exists? They all get us across the map more quickly. Maybe all the current means of transportation should be removed from the game since they help get the player across the map more quickly. If proposed transportation methods defeat the point of playing the game, all the fast travel tools should be removed. We should have to walk and run everywhere to get the point of playing the game as a walking and jogging simulator.

I think you are confusing the colloquial gamer term for instantaneous travel (which is fast-travelling) with the non-colloquial gamer term for fast-travelling, which is fast-travelling.

So, I think you are misunderstanding Ataxio's point.

But it's kind of funny because I totally understand why. It's not really fast-travelling he's talking about but instant-travelling, which happens to be referred to as fast-travelling.

Lmfao.

[BORG]

Origineel geplaatst door Sylar:

Origineel geplaatst door BORG:

We can fast travel though. Your points moot. Whether it's a Knight V, a mountain bike, a dirt bike, an ATV, a golf cart, glider or sled, we can traverse the map quickly if we want to. IMO the one wheel isn't fun. It's a gimmick. It's a novelty that serves only one purpose - travel. We can also traverse where the one wheel doesn't work well and save time crossing the map without it, on foot.

So how would a mountain bike, dirt bike, ATV or any other mode of transportation be different than what already exists? They all get us across the map more quickly. Maybe all the current means of transportation should be removed from the game since they help get the player across the map more quickly. If proposed transportation methods defeat the point of playing the game, all the fast travel tools should be removed. We should have to walk and run everywhere to get the point of playing the game as a walking and jogging simulator.

I think you are confusing the colloquial gamer term for instantaneous travel (which is fast-travelling) with the non-colloquial gamer term for fast-travelling, which is fast-travelling.

So, I think you are misunderstanding Ataxio's point.

But it's kind of funny because I totally understand why. It's not really fast-travelling he's talking about but instant-travelling, which happens to be referred to as fast-travelling.

Lmfao.

What you think is wrong. I understand perfectly well what Ataxio was talking about. You need not try explain what you think.

What does it matter whether fast travel or fast travelling? Both traverse the player faster across the map. There's little to zero difference. We can already speed run across the map in no time as our character runs like he's a gold medallist marathon runner. It really doesn't matter how you want to nitpick the differences, the point stands that we can already travel quickly across the map by foot. So, it really makes no difference whether we're travelling on a machine or by foot. Why? The map is devoid of much to see that's interesting which hasn't been copy and pasted elsewhere. There's nothing spectacular to stop and take a look at so why should it matter how fast we can get across the map? It doesn't matter at all because we can get anywhere we want quickly, with ease (which I already explained in my above comments).

[Sylar]

Origineel geplaatst door BORG:

Origineel geplaatst door Sylar:

I think you are confusing the colloquial gamer term for instantaneous travel (which is fast-travelling) with the non-colloquial gamer term for fast-travelling, which is fast-travelling.

So, I think you are misunderstanding Ataxio's point.

But it's kind of funny because I totally understand why. It's not really fast-travelling he's talking about but instant-travelling, which happens to be referred to as fast-travelling.

Lmfao.

What you think is wrong. I understand perfectly well what Ataxio was talking about. You need not try explain what you think.

What does it matter whether fast travel or fast travelling? Both traverse the player faster across the map. There's little to zero difference. We can already speed run across the map in no time as our character runs like he's a gold medallist marathon runner. It really doesn't matter how you want to nitpick the differences, the point stands that we can already travel quickly across the map by foot. So, it really makes no difference whether we're travelling on a machine or by foot. Why? The map is devoid of much to see that's interesting which hasn't been copy and pasted elsewhere. There's nothing spectacular to stop and take a look at so why should it matter how fast we can get across the map? It doesn't matter at all because we can get anywhere we want quickly, with ease (which I already explained in my above comments).

This is what I don't like about universal quantifiers: "No time." Really?
We can already speed-run across the map in "no time" at all? That's just not true.
It takes a very much obvious passage of time. Now, some variable change I can accept, like a little faster, within reason.

Whenever people say, "So, it really makes no difference," it irritates me, simply because usually when they say that it does make a difference. Just not one they like to acknowledge. When you say, "So why should it matter," that's a lost preformative: Why shouldn't it?

Look, I'm not entirely against it. I can accept instantaneous travel, provided it's extremely limited to once a day. But if it's going to be teleportation (all over the place) at infinite frequencies, then absolutely no.

That's like asking for lakes to be made of Monster Energy rather than water. Restricting it severely in frequency (to once a day) is critical to not ruining the whole survival theme, and I can accept that.

I'm a very cynical person, but as cynical as I am, even I can't agree that "There's nothing spectacular to stop and take a look at" as, if that were true to other players too, maybe nobody would even be in-game anymore.

"You need not try explain what you think." Well, I also need not listen to you, but I am.

[BORG]

Origineel geplaatst door Sylar:

Origineel geplaatst door BORG:

What you think is wrong. I understand perfectly well what Ataxio was talking about. You need not try explain what you think.

What does it matter whether fast travel or fast travelling? Both traverse the player faster across the map. There's little to zero difference. We can already speed run across the map in no time as our character runs like he's a gold medallist marathon runner. It really doesn't matter how you want to nitpick the differences, the point stands that we can already travel quickly across the map by foot. So, it really makes no difference whether we're travelling on a machine or by foot. Why? The map is devoid of much to see that's interesting which hasn't been copy and pasted elsewhere. There's nothing spectacular to stop and take a look at so why should it matter how fast we can get across the map? It doesn't matter at all because we can get anywhere we want quickly, with ease (which I already explained in my above comments).

This is what I don't like about universal quantifiers: "No time." Really?
We can already speed-run across the map in "no time" at all? That's just not true.
It takes a very much obvious passage of time. Now, some variable change I can accept, like a little faster, within reason.

Whenever people say, "So, it really makes no difference." It irritates me, simply because it does make a difference. When you say, "So why should it matter," that's a lost preformative: Why shouldn't it?

Look, I'm not entirely against it.
I can accept instantaneous travel, provided it's extremely limited to once a day.
If it's going to be teleportation (all over the place) at infinite frequencies, then absolutely no. That's like asking for lakes to be made of Monster Energy rather than water. Restricting it severely in frequency (to once a day) is critical to not ruining the whole survival theme, and I can accept that.

I'm a very cynical person, but as cynical as I am, even I can't agree that "There's nothing spectacular to stop and take a look at" as, if that were true to other players too, maybe nobody would even be in-game anymore.

"You need not try explain what you think." Well, I also need not listen to you, but I am.

Yeah you don't get it and never will so I'm going to give up on this. You're too fixated on teleportation fast travel to see things differently. This discussion isn't even about fast travel and discussing this stuff is derailing the OPs discussion. If you're against fast travel teleportation, maybe create your own discussion regarding the topic and discuss this stuff there.

[Sylar]

Origineel geplaatst door BORG:

Yeah you don't get it and never will so I'm going to give up on this. You're too fixated on teleportation fast travel to see things differently. This discussion isn't even about fast travel and discussing this stuff is derailing the OPs discussion. If you're against fast travel teleportation, maybe create your own discussion regarding the topic and discuss this stuff there.

LTR: I just said I wasn't against it, and gave an example earlier that aligns with OP's. You're nosism with who's who in the zoo is debased on who agrees with you and who doesn't.

[Ataxio]

I want to get all of us together in a big bounce house equipped with American gladiator foam q-tips and live stream a battle Royale.

[BORG]

Origineel geplaatst door Sylar:

Origineel geplaatst door BORG:

Yeah you don't get it and never will so I'm going to give up on this. You're too fixated on teleportation fast travel to see things differently. This discussion isn't even about fast travel and discussing this stuff is derailing the OPs discussion. If you're against fast travel teleportation, maybe create your own discussion regarding the topic and discuss this stuff there.

LTR: I just said I wasn't against it, and gave an example earlier that aligns with OP's. You're nosism with who's who in the zoo is debased on who agrees with you and who doesn't.

Move along Sylar. You're dribbling off topic jibber.

[Sylar]

Origineel geplaatst door Sylar:

Initially, yes, I did think it was a mistake.

However, a motorized mountain bike, one with peddles and a motor for maintaining uphill might have made more sense given the terrain, and ways you could have peddled your way very fast down a mountain side in awesome fashion.

So, yes, maybe it's a bit of a mistake over a motorized mountain bike.

That said... I agree with Ataxio, fast-traveling would be the biggest mistake.

By fast-traveling I mean unlimited teleportation and any other elaborate set-up that makes a string-through in mere seconds ridiculous. Like a hang-glider with nos engines connected to a moped. ♥♥♥♥ that noise... No.

[Sylar]

Origineel geplaatst door Ataxio:

I want to get all of us together in a big bounce house equipped with American gladiator foam q-tips and live stream a battle Royale.

Only if Queen is playing in the background.

[ConflicT Zv]

Origineel geplaatst door Ataxio:

If you had super fast unabated travel across the island it would trivialize the size of the map and dramatically change the overall experince.

Hello glider my old friend.