Would you download HAKs in a....

[VanillaPudding]

future / reworked / "V3" / whatever of EFU? Just a question out of pure curiosity really, and it should be assumed that the EFU DM team would not simply pile together loads of garbage for a few good pieces, but rather implement quality things as they saw fit.

[Dash]

I would.

[Echigo]

Definitely. Immediately. Those who wouldn't are not loyal to the awesome that is Escape from Underdark. But I wouldn't cry if it never happened.

[Blue41]

Now that I know what kind of quality I'm dealing with, sure. If I was new to the server, hell no.

[Nightshadow]

I would, definitely.

[FromTheRooftop]

Sure, why not?

[lovethesuit]

Absolutely, I would.

[Drakill Tannan]

I would, yes. But that's not the issue.

If the server requires Haks, it's much less likely for new players to log in, check it and like it. If EFU:A required hacks, i wouldn't be here.

[Echigo]

I would, yes. But that's not the issue.

If the server requires Haks, it's much less likely for new players to log in, check it and like it. If EFU:A required hacks, i wouldn't be here.

Do you know how many people play Ravenloft? I've seen 50 people online at once, and that's on a dull day. It requires a lot of haks, but people download them.

EfU is a marvelous server! The best I've ever played! I would -pay- for the Haks, then download them, no matter how long it took! And I'm sure plenty of others could agree! :D

[Nightshadow]

I also likely wouldn't have initially joined. It was randomly picking servers on GameSpy that I came to be here, back when I was utterly uninterested in haks. Now I'm much more interested in even unknown servers requiring haks and am willing to download and install them when trying a new server. Many are not like this, though. We'd see far less new players if there were haks, it's just be more things to scare them away. No solo grinding (or any grinding at all, really), heavy penalties for death, and then haks?

[Barehander]

Amia was HAK-free for years. We had exactly the concerns that new players wouldn't find their way in quite as easily. We finally decided to incorporate our own HAKs early this year, and there was no notable drop in player count. It was all speculation that turned out baseless. Yes, there were less new accounts joining, but the daily player count seemed steady. Granted, EfU is much smaller and thus more vulnerable because it doesn't hang on the top of the Gamespy server list.

Today, the playerbase of NWN grows smaller by the day. Veterans have seen it all and are looking for something new. You can't really find many vanilla servers around anymore. Everyone who still plays NWN online has managed to download large patches and a HAK wouldn't pose an actual problem. It's more an attitude question. I think the general attitude of the NWN playerbase is different than when you joined EfU.

[lilacwine]

If I was an established player I would - but the appeal of both EfU and CoA, to me, as a new player are that they are non HAK and you can jump straight in.

[VanillaPudding]

Would that appeal really be lost if both had been using HAKs, leaving almost no option that is without them and still 'popular' ?

[lilacwine]

I started out on CoA and found the server before I found the website or forums.
 
If I had tried to log into the server and it wouldn't have let me due to not having the HAKs I would have probably just gone elsewhere rather than tried to find the forums or the download.
 
There is no reason to (unless someone tells you that the server is brilliant and you have to play there) when you can simply go to another server and just click connect.
 
There are always other options and other servers - I guess it just depends on how lazy you are!

[12 Hatch]

I agree 100% that there should not be a HAK.  That barrier prevents new players from joining in many instances.  When I first got NWN, I clicked around to find servers I could try without needing HAKs.  New players outweigh some shiny new HAK stuff any day.