get-a-grip

1. Have you installed DirectX June2010 runtime? If DirectX isn't installed, the game won't launch. 2. Have you installed Net4.0*? If Net4.0 isn't installed, the launcher will stop at a windows error screen telling you that the application requires Net4.0. *A message that Net4.0 is being installed shows up in the RenX installer but it doesn't do it properly. The game won't launch until I install Net4.0 manually. I have a Win7 system so I don't know if XP or Win8 have the same problem with the RenX installer.

I will ask you for the second time Nuker77, do you have anything to add to the thread topic? Because so far you have been doing nothing but trolling.

No dude, the kamikaze zero is a joke. Nuker77 seems to be trolling pretty hard though.

Stop insulting people you don't know, especially when you have no idea what you are talking about. Keep it up and I might be forced to ask a moderator to intervene. Do you actually have something positive to add to the topic or are you just trolling?

BANZAI!!! lol.

Its not really obvious. You assume the game has conceptual problems, and you back it with dwindling player numbers. But i dint really hear complaints in game from newbs that they dont like the arcade shooting, or the pay to dominate class system, just minor things like sniper/sbh balance issues, and the biggest problem everyone mentions is still stability and the truckload of bugs that is somewhat acceptable if unfortunate in a beta build. I think its safe to say that the bugs aren't bad enough to make the game unplayable since at least two servers are still filling up with players. It seems unlikely that the intermittent crashes are so picky about hardware that only 0.25% of all people that downloaded the game are lucky enough to be able to run it. Using in-game complaints isn't an accurate measure of mass player sentiment either. Most people will just leave, they won't bother to complain in text chat before they do. I suspect that most people who rejected the game never even played RenX online at all. I would be willing to bet that those people tried a few minutes of a bot match and decided they didn't like it. Needless to say, I don't think minor balance issues can account for the mass exodus either. 40,000 people downloaded this game and only 100 people stayed to play it. That means that 99.75% of everybody that tried the game rejected it. Such a huge rejection rate indicates that there is something fundamentally undesirable about the game to the vast majority of people. Obviously, the simplest way to find out why people didn't like it would be to take a poll. Unfortunately, that will never happen. The devs have indicated that they are completely unwilling to change anything for the sake of appeal to a larger audience anyway, so asking people why they hate the game is pointless. It doesn't take a genius to figure out that there would be a huge market for a totally free, high quality military shooter. That's undoubtedly why most people downloaded this game. They thought it was a free version of BF3 and when they found out it wasn't, they threw it in the trash. That isn't to say that there is no hope for this game to gain a larger audience. I believe that if some things were changed to bring RenX into line with other modern shooters while still maintaining core game elements, it could expand exponentially. I understand the devotion that the devs and the veteran players have for the original game play of C&C:Renegade. However, I am pretty certain that the new players don't feel that way and you can't grow the player population if you only appeal to veterans.

Asking to lock another player's thread? That is so weak I am lmao. Hey bud, I can't help it if people liked that thread. Its not my fault they kept reviving it, lol. (Wonder why...hmmmmm?) You have been constantly begging the devs for info for a long time now and so far I haven't seen any response from them. I don't know what you hope to accomplish, but if its getting the devs to engage it ain't working.

Still waiting............ I thought the point of the RenX website was to inform players about the game? Are you suggesting that we are just wasting our time here since all the real information is on facebook?

Seriously? The devs aren't toying with the players are they?

Does that mean you don't have any news about a patch to share? P.S. The way the bulletin board is set up, it knocks posts off the main page when new ones are created, right? The only way this post keeps popping up on the front page is for other people to keep it alive. I am just responding.

Great, a dev! Give us all the details about the patch updates/fixes and the e.t.a. P.S. Call me superstitious, but an apparently dead game that has a dev named Kil can't be a good sign. (Just kidding dude, lol.)

Umm...I assume you can count can't you? Current players=100/40,000=0.25% People who downloaded then quit the game=39,900/40,000=99.75% Of course these are just round numbers. If you aren't satisfied with those numbers then you can publish your own, presumably more accurate results. Don't let me stop you. Are you seriously suggesting that people should hang around for a year to see if a dead/broken game will pick up? Great, let's all hold hands and sing "We Shall Overcome" while we wait for a year. Everybody can make up their own minds what they think is the best course of action but I think even the die-hard C&C fans aren't going to wait much longer. That isn't being negative, its being realistic. Sorry to bring so much un-positive energy to the planet.

"Concluding" is about all I can do since there hasn't been a patch released or even an update from the devs, lol. I call them like I see them my friend. A person would have to be willfully blind to avoid seeing something so painfully obvious. Nevertheless, I am glad that you are getting your jollies out of raising the hopes of the players and then apparently pulling the rug out from under them. It would be selfish of me to suggest that a dev shouldn't get something out of this fiasco, even if it is only his own perverse amusement. Do what you want. No harm, no foul. Perhaps we will meet one day and I can buy you a beer. (On second thought, you might be an angry drunk so I better make that a steak instead, lol.)

I think I will let the people who have been faithfully visiting this forum when they can't even play the game decide for themselves what these words mean. That's an unedited quote? Wow, how unprofessional. It doesn't matter if it's free or not. They chose to release something for public consumption. Expecting people to adhere to some antiquated notion of Internet civility is just going to bring people in who will purposely troll just to watch this place burn. That is so pathetic it is laughable, lol. The quote is UNEDITED. Do you even know what the word unedited means? The quote was not edited, it is an excerpt genius. Learn the difference before you write such nonsense again. The remaining few sentences were about player movement and were not germane to this post topic. Besides the fact that those sentences were full of spelling and grammatical errors, they have no bearing on the topic of the implied desire of the dev to abandon the project. Furthermore, the dev brought up CoD when it was never mentioned by me. Just because people around here immediately scream "CALL OF DUTY" if anybody mentions unrealistic player movement, it has nothing to do with anything I wrote. This is a classic case of projection. (If you don't know what projection means, look it up for goodness sake.) The dev's quote shows so much antipathy that it can only be explained as an attempt to excuse the decision to abandon the project by scapegoating the players. Let's get a grip on reality here. 40,000 people downloaded this game and only 100 remain to play it. It's not because of intermittent crashes or any other technical reason. Only 0.25% of people liked the game and 99.75% of people hated it. A reasonable person would conclude that something needs to be changed when there is such an overwhelming rejection of a game. If the devs prefer to watch the game go down in flames rather than make changes which might save it, that is their prerogative of course. However, pretending that the players are to blame for the game's failure is just silly.

It seems to me that the marathon game type has enough fans to keep the server full. It also seems pretty obvious that you are simply in the unlucky minority and to get what you want you are demanding that time limits be mandatory, lol. Not very democratic to say the least.

Congratulations sir, you win the only sane person around here prize, lol. Most of the time I feel like I accidentally wandered into the headquarters of some kind of cult.

Of course I can understand a suicidal determination regardless of the impossibility of success. Just because something can be understood doesn't mean it isn't silly. Your analogy is actually very apt, but I think it would be more like saying, "Rock sucks, I only want to play Skiffle." In the 1950's Skiffle was very popular. However, if a group tried to draw an audience in 2014 by playing nothing but Skiffle, they would be lucky to make enough to pay for gasoline. What is the core element that differentiates C&C from the majority of shooters? Buildings + Credits. Everything else is secondary but the veterans don't see it that way. If anybody suggests that modern gamers don't like player movements that make a jack rabbit on crack seem tame, then the veteran faithful all scream in unison, "CALL OF DUTY...BURN THE HERETIC...KILL THE UNBELIEVER!" The obvious truth is that modern gamers don't want C&C. I know that's a hard pill to swallow, but its the truth and everybody knows it. However, if C&C has enough elements of immersion that modern gamers expect then I believe that they will not only warm up to it, they will even learn to appreciate it. There are only two choices for this game as I see it: go down with the ship or start bailing. Frankly, I am not joined at the hip to any game or game mode. Like most gamers, I judge games by a very simple criterion. Is it fun? If it isn't, then I will move on to something else.

The whole point of my post was about addressing one of the causes of extremely low player population. If the RenX devs refuse to change something that is repelling the overwhelming majority of modern gamers that is certainly their prerogative. However, operating under the assumption that a game can succeed while actively offending most players is delusional.

I think I will let the people who have been faithfully visiting this forum when they can't even play the game decide for themselves what these words mean.

Maybe I missed something but I didn't think Steam would be interested in a free game that can't be monetized because of the UDK non profit clause. Do you have news about a definite Steam release?

I have been patiently defending RenX against naysayers for a while now but I have been led to believe by a recent outburst from a dev that it is a futile effort. When a dev says that they don't care if a game has any players then there can't reasonably be any hope that it will be revived. It looks to me like this is as good as it gets right now and its only going down hill. Sorry to be so gloomy, but I haven't been given any reason to come to a more positive assessment.

??? Wow. I am speechless. This game is all but dead and a dev doesn't care if it attracts any more players? I can tell you that you certainly aren't going to attract players by calling anybody who makes a practical suggestion a "cry baby" and telling them you don't give a f**k. Whoever is the person in charge should really make clear to everybody if RenX has been abandoned because I am getting a strong impression from your outrageously insulting tone that it has been.

??? I thought the point was to make RenX succeed? You seem to be dead set on watching it go down in flames. (Ok, you are actually an EA mole aren't you? You can tell me, it will be our little secret, lol.) Let's think about this logically shall we: 1. The overwhelming majority of gamers want immersion in games. 2. Most gamers consider unrealistic player movement to be immersion breaking. 3. RenX has unrealistic player movement which will inevitably drive away modern gamers. 4. There are not enough old C&C fans to keep RenX alive. 5. RenX is doomed to fail in its current configuration.

Slower backwards and side to side movement isn't "arbitrary", its REALITY. Lets see how fast you can run backwards, lol. Having totally unrealistic player movement breaks all immersion and frankly ruins the game. ??? WTH are you talking about? Changing the current super long jog into a more realistic short sprint isn't going to make infantry overpowered, lol. ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- The reality of the situation is that modern gamers are not going to accept a game that has totally unrealistic player movement. If they wanted unrealistic movement they would all love Quake and modern gamers HATE Quake with a passion. Get with the times or get left behind. If RenX refuses to be immersive then it has absolutely no chance of attracting a modern audience.

I understand your pessimism, but pronouncing the project dead may be a little premature. If RenX is judged purely from its current player population, it is in fact barely alive. If RenX is judged from the seeming lack of dev informational updates, it may in fact already be terminal. However, from a purely practical standpoint it seems unlikely that the project would simply be abandoned abruptly after so many years of effort to keep it alive. It may very well die, but pronouncing it "dead" certainly isn't going to help anything. This game was a bold experiment in the previously uncharted realm of totally free online gaming. Not free-to-play, no adverts, no micro-transactions, no revenue grabbing of any kind, just plain FREE. No matter what its ultimate fate is, it will always have the distinction of being a pioneer of the freedom that is possible in online PC gaming. If it does in fact die, it will be a loss but not the end of the world. Others will take up the mantle of free online PC gaming and the saga will continue. Instead of just sitting around and moping, why don't you try making a game yourself? You don't have to be a rocket scientist to make a game, you just have to be willing to put in a tremendous amount of time and effort to make it successful.