PC Alpha 21 Discussion Overflow

[Beelzebubs Ghost]

You are finding duplicates of the same magazine and not unique volumes in a series (like the book sets) in order to raise your skill in a particular category. 

This is why it is utterly ridiculous and a cheap way to artificially slow people down.

The book series is brilliant because with each new volume, you learn something new. Contrast this against the new system - it makes needing and finding 100 duplicates of a magazine look absurd.

Not that it requires any help. 

What really worries me is that this may be the final overhaul of the system...

 

[Jost Amman]

Having a separate tab for crafting is a good way to expand players choices but RNG magazines cancel the positives out. What do you guys want to achieve with this update and are you seeing the variables that the update will cause?

You already clearly expressed your opinion several times in a row now... no need to spam-posting.  :rolleyes2:

Also, as I said before, people who don't want to go looting when looting is an integral part of the game should rethink why they bought the game in the first place.

"Yes, but building is also an integral part of the game!" - True, but wanting to level up just by staying in the same place crafting and building, while at the same time not exploring/fighting/looting when you're in a survival-apocalypse-sandbox game, doesn't make much sense to me.

 

[danielspoa]

As myself and another individual discussed briefly recently, a hybrid system of learn by doing and learn by looting would be perfect.

I understand this is the creation of the developers, but not every change is good for the game.

Consider, for example:

* Crops and wild planting gave the game a brilliant nomadic feel.

* Climbing spider zombies added a challenge to the zombies.

*The smell system and zombies tracking you down added another depth to the game.

*Having to find the schematic for the forge was frustrating but made sense and kept you looting for just that one simple thing to get you by. 

*Learn-by-doing meant a proportionate increase in skills to the work you put into it.

Just a handful of amazing features the game used to have that have all been wiped out and no longer exist unless you use mods which may be wonky, or follow ridiculous advice that suggests previous Alphas where you may experience one or more of these features and none of the optimisation.

They game has been updated a lot, but hasn't always advanced in my opinion. And that is precisely why I agree with your post

100%.

But you know, its the EA syndrome: knowing whats fun for us better than ourselves. That was literally Joel responding players in previous diaries.

The game is far more beautiful than before, PoIs and vehicles are more diverse, many game-breaking bugs were fixed. Who doesn't remember the zombies running in circles? minibikes disappearing and driving at 15 fps?

Yet the game itself feels more empty. Thats where the frustration lies, we got suberb improvements on what was missing before, but lost what we already had. Like.. why?

PS.: Careful, kuosimodo is here. Dude is a dislike machine, every single dislike in this page has his name

 

[BFT2020]

I knew about Construction Set but : Morrowind 2002 , DLC 1 2002, DLC 2 2003, oblivion 2006, dlc 1 2006 , dlc 2  2007 , skyrim  2011 , dlc 1&2 2012, dlc 3 2013. TES VI 20 2026-2027(?).  older TES games was released so "fast" because were famouse about lore, story and gameplay not about mods, yep mods  exists but wasn't such popular as skyrim mods. Probably in this period intetnet wasn't such popular, avalible and fast.  Skyrim is still buyed by people because of mods but... this mean there is no any new game ( TES Online is alternative universe like RE operation raccon city is alternative to main  RE series, NZA is alternative series for Sniper elite etc)  "Bethesda Boss says ‘If you want us to Stop releasing Skyrim Ports, Stop Buying them’"-  so i think if skyrim mods weren't popular ( slow net) we would get TES 6 much faster.

Mods for Skyrim had no effect on when TES VI comes out.  I feel like this is Deja-vu, like this conversation has happened before...oh wait it has





[SIZE=14.6px]Bethesda Game Studios releases a major game every 3-4 years, with Starfield being the next one up (first half next year based on recent update on a delayed launch).  This is pretty impressive since a significant portion of the Starfield development period was during Covid-19 which affect the release of a lot of games (hoping that they were able to make things work for the release, not that they are simply releasing an unfinished game to meet a self-imposed deadline).  TES VI is the next one planned and development started already on it, though it was more than likely delayed because development resources were pulled from it to support Starfield as Starfield's launch date was approaching (which if you read my original post I linked, is the basic strategy of BGS for all of their games).  None of these delays are caused by modders or the modding community.  Yes, BGS still makes money for each port they do and for each time their own games are purchased (though you can buy Skyrim at a bargain today compared to when it first came out).  However, they already had a roadmap planned on what they want to do next, with wanting to expand their franchise from two major titles (Fallout and Elder Scrolls) to three.  If Starfield becomes a hit, I wouldn't be surprised if development time between sequels increases (as they are now supporting 3 franchises not just 2).[/SIZE]

[SIZE=14.6px]You seem to be very anti-modding, to the point you are blaming modders and mods for games you want to be released not yet released.  You even trashed modders in this community at one point because they didn't share the same vision you have for 7D2D.  And every time you argue against mods, you always bring up the extreme ones in your crusade against mods (nudity, cartoonish, joke, etc).[/SIZE]

In the case of Bethseda games, mods have become an important aspect of playing their games.  Is it not ironic that one of the most highly download and used mods for several of their last few games was the Unofficial Game Patch mod (Fallout 3, Fallout 4, Skyrim)?  Or that a lot of PC players (like me for example), didn't buy Skyrim until modders came in and significantly improved the graphics after Bethseda decided they wanted to do minimal effort in porting the game from the consoles to the PC?

And the whole statement that because of modders, the game studio won't release a new title yet is silly on its face.  I already bought Skyrim and Fallout 4.  Using mods on those games doesn't mean I am still giving Bethesda money for them.  I know that, they know that...which is why they try to run a tight ship on their development / release dates on new games.  And because I got so much enjoyment out of Skyrim and Fallout 4 with and without all the mods I have tried, means that I am more than likely going to buy their next game when it is released next year.  If it wasn't for the modding community, I would have passed on a new BGS game after Fallout 4 and Skyrim's launches.

 

[Matt115]

While the question is about number of mods HE specifically talks about the past:

He says "Anything prior to Morrowind is a pain to mod, but Morrowind, Oblivion, and Skyrim were designed to be easily moddable.". That is not about now, he talks about the past.

"they encouraged players to mod the games. Morrowind had its Construction Set released at the same time the game released". Again a statement about things in the past, not about 2019.

"Todd Howard was pretty clear that Morrowind players were getting the same tool that the developers were using". Again a statement about the past.

Especially PvP games have the problem that the game is really just a sandbox for the central element, the fights against other players. Balance and fun mechanics is very important, there is often no story. An RPG gets played because of story and quests and discovery. What is true for PvP games is wrong for RPG games.

Exactly. People didn't stay with older Fallouts or Skyrim, they tried the new game. And found it lacking.

No idea what you are talking about.

1. Oblivion didn't have bigger mods for longer time - i found something in 2014 probably. I don't count nude mods or higher resoults mods.

2. Yes, modding morrowind was hell 

3.  Well... total war is more like "you make story yourself" except Warhammer were you have a lot of story cutscenes. 

4. oblivion is bad game - leveling system + as i said mods were not such important then more story + lore

5. i mean - test which perk system - new or old able you get faster perks you want to have

8 hours ago, Roland said:



I agree with that but such things are constraints that Microsoft imposes on itself in order to keep their brand mainstream. Lego doesn't tell them "Don't add gore to the game or we will pull out". Microsoft tells itself, "Let's keep the game family friendly in order to appeal to the largest segment of the market as we possibly can". They could add gore anyway and then Lego would have to decide to stay in or get out.

I bet they stay in and add little gore bit pieces that snap right to the ends of limbs...

Well probably they have something about in contract - often such big contracts can have a lot of pages. So - probably it would be something  like this  

Guy from studio - We want to add gore into minecraft

Guy from MS - yes this would be good idea and we agree about that but we have deal with Lego  and contractual penalties would be pretty big. Sorry guys we are limited by this

 

[Matt115]

Mods for Skyrim had no effect on when TES VI comes out.  I feel like this is Deja-vu, like this conversation has happened before...oh wait it has





[SIZE=14.6px]Bethesda Game Studios releases a major game every 3-4 years, with Starfield being the next one up (first half next year based on recent update on a delayed launch).  This is pretty impressive since a significant portion of the Starfield development period was during Covid-19 which affect the release of a lot of games (hoping that they were able to make things work for the release, not that they are simply releasing an unfinished game to meet a self-imposed deadline).  TES VI is the next one planned and development started already on it, though it was more than likely delayed because development resources were pulled from it to support Starfield as Starfield's launch date was approaching (which if you read my original post I linked, is the basic strategy of BGS for all of their games).  None of these delays are caused by modders or the modding community.  Yes, BGS still makes money for each port they do and for each time their own games are purchased (though you can buy Skyrim at a bargain today compared to when it first came out).  However, they already had a roadmap planned on what they want to do next, with wanting to expand their franchise from two major titles (Fallout and Elder Scrolls) to three.  If Starfield becomes a hit, I wouldn't be surprised if development time between sequels increases (as they are now supporting 3 franchises not just 2).[/SIZE]

[SIZE=14.6px]You seem to be very anti-modding, to the point you are blaming modders and mods for games you want to be released not yet released.  You even trashed modders in this community at one point because they didn't share the same vision you have for 7D2D.  And every time you argue against mods, you always bring up the extreme ones in your crusade against mods (nudity, cartoonish, joke, etc).[/SIZE]

In the case of Bethseda games, mods have become an important aspect of playing their games.  Is it not ironic that one of the most highly download and used mods for several of their last few games was the Unofficial Game Patch mod (Fallout 3, Fallout 4, Skyrim)?  Or that a lot of PC players (like me for example), didn't buy Skyrim until modders came in and significantly improved the graphics after Bethseda decided they wanted to do minimal effort in porting the game from the consoles to the PC?

And the whole statement that because of modders, the game studio won't release a new title yet is silly on its face.  I already bought Skyrim and Fallout 4.  Using mods on those games doesn't mean I am still giving Bethesda money for them.  I know that, they know that...which is why they try to run a tight ship on their development / release dates on new games.  And because I got so much enjoyment out of Skyrim and Fallout 4 with and without all the mods I have tried, means that I am more than likely going to buy their next game when it is released next year.  If it wasn't for the modding community, I would have passed on a new BGS game after Fallout 4 and Skyrim's launches.

Had because people still buy Skyrim. Why would a  lot people  stil buying skyrim 5 years after released if there wasn't mods?

Rumors about Starfield are old - if i good remember i saw first news about that after Fallout new vegas. Btw that's why i hope starfiled will be terrible.  I just want new things. 

i"m not anti modding. I'm anti modding about TES. Why? i don't have problems with DOW 1. Because Warhammer 40k have tons of books, codexs etc . Tes had only games and 3 books. I like stalker mods but we have a lot of canon stalker books too. 

Unoffical game patch mod was even in Daggerfall and honestly .... lore is only reason to play Daggerfall without this patch. RLY if you play daggerfall "for fun" you would stop very fast because of bugs.

[SIZE=14.6px]"And every time you argue against mods, you always bring up the extreme ones in your crusade against mods (nudity, cartoonish, joke, etc)." - this is only problem with skyrim and it was problem before l4d2 get workshop. Skyrim, l4d2 , stalker , sw bf 2 have a lot of rly seriouse mods too - last alpha for stalker, clone wars for sw bf2 etc,[/SIZE]

"Bethseda decided they wanted to do minimal effort in porting the game from the consoles to the PC" do you remember paid mods in console editions?  Paid Mods | The Elder Scrolls Mods Wiki | Fandom . This was option for  bethesda to get more cash right?

 

[Zombiepoptard]

You already clearly expressed your opinion several times in a row now... no need to spam-posting.  :rolleyes2:

Also, as I said before, people who don't want to go looting when looting is an integral part of the game should rethink why they bought the game in the first place.

"Yes, but building is also an integral part of the game!" - True, but wanting to level up just by staying in the same place crafting and building, while at the same time not exploring/fighting/looting when you're in a survival-apocalypse-sandbox game, doesn't make much sense to me.

Sorry for being long winded but I have to hammer in how bad this update is going to be if not changed.

What does it matter to you if both ways are legitimate forms of leveling crafting? Just make it part of leveling up and still have the magazines to incentivize looting. Acting like looting is the only integral part of the game by having crafting only level up through loot is bad.

 

[Laz Man]

100%.

But you know, its the EA syndrome: knowing whats fun for us better than ourselves. That was literally Joel responding players in previous diaries.

The game is far more beautiful than before, PoIs and vehicles are more diverse, many game-breaking bugs were fixed. Who doesn't remember the zombies running in circles? minibikes disappearing and driving at 15 fps?

Yet the game itself feels more empty. Thats where the frustration lies, we got suberb improvements on what was missing before, but lost what we already had. Like.. why?

PS.: Careful, kuosimodo is here. Dude is a dislike machine, every single dislike in this page has his name

Have you tried feral sense or going into cities? 

 

[meganoth]

1. Oblivion didn't have bigger mods for longer time - i found something in 2014 probably. I don't count nude mods or higher resoults mods.

True or not, this has absolutely NOTHING to do with the question whether Bethesda was mod-friendly starting with morrowind.

2. Yes, modding morrowind was hell

He said "prior to Morrowind modding was hell" meaning modding in morrowind was much better. Naturally that doesn't mean modding support in Morrowind would hold up to todays standards.

3.  Well... total war is more like "you make story yourself" except Warhammer were you have a lot of story cutscenes. 

4. oblivion is bad game - leveling system + as i said mods were not such important then more story + lore

First of all, how do you know that others shared your view that mods were not important? For example I became interested in playing Oblivion only after hearing about a mod that changed the atrocious leveling system you mention.

5. i mean - test which perk system - new or old able you get faster perks you want to have

Well probably they have something about in contract - often such big contracts can have a lot of pages. So - probably it would be something  like this  

Guy from studio - We want to add gore into minecraft

Guy from MS - yes this would be good idea and we agree about that but we have deal with Lego  and contractual penalties would be pretty big. Sorry guys we are limited by this

Wait, what? You just invent penalties in the contract now to support your hypothesis? 

As IP holder Microsoft can essentially dictate the contract details, if they don't want to themselves they don't need to bind themselves to any limits at all.

Had because people still buy Skyrim. Why would a  lot people  stil buying skyrim 5 years after released if there wasn't mods?

Just read https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Long_tail   . Every game not totally forgotten has that.

People will be buying Skyrim at a budget price as long as there is no successor game. So why would Bethesda make a successor at all? Because then it can sell a game at full price again and even to all the players who already have the old game. And because they don't want a rival developer to bring out a similar game and take "their" players away.

Rumors about Starfield are old - if i good remember i saw first news about that after Fallout new vegas. Btw that's why i hope starfiled will be terrible.  I just want new things. 

i"m not anti modding. I'm anti modding about TES. Why? i don't have problems with DOW 1. Because Warhammer 40k have tons of books, codexs etc . Tes had only games and 3 books. I like stalker mods but we have a lot of canon stalker books too. 

Unoffical game patch mod was even in Daggerfall and honestly .... lore is only reason to play Daggerfall without this patch. RLY if you play daggerfall "for fun" you would stop very fast because of bugs.

[SIZE=14.6px]"And every time you argue against mods, you always bring up the extreme ones in your crusade against mods (nudity, cartoonish, joke, etc)." - this is only problem with skyrim and it was problem before l4d2 get workshop. Skyrim, l4d2 , stalker , sw bf 2 have a lot of rly seriouse mods too - last alpha for stalker, clone wars for sw bf2 etc,[/SIZE]

"Bethseda decided they wanted to do minimal effort in porting the game from the consoles to the PC" do you remember paid mods in console editions?  Paid Mods | The Elder Scrolls Mods Wiki | Fandom . This was option for  bethesda to get more cash right?

 

[Matt115]

True or not, this has absolutely NOTHING to do with the question whether Bethesda was mod-friendly starting with morrowind.

He said "prior to Morrowind modding was hell" meaning modding in morrowind was much better. Naturally that doesn't mean modding support in Morrowind would hold up to todays standards.

First of all, how do you know that others shared your view that mods were not important? For example I became interested in playing Oblivion only after hearing about a mod that changed the atrocious leveling system you mention.

Wait, what? You just invent penalties in the contract now to support your hypothesis? 

As IP holder Microsoft can essentially dictate the contract details, if they don't want to themselves they don't need to bind themselves to any limits at all.

Just read https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Long_tail   . Every game not totally forgotten has that.

People will be buying Skyrim at a budget price as long as there is no successor game. So why would Bethesda make a successor at all? Because then it can sell a game at full price again and even to all the players who already have the old game. And because they don't want a rival developer to bring out a similar game and take "their" players away.

1. ok fine

2. nope, i heard that morrowind modding was hell until morrowind get one of dlc. 

3.  i bought morrowind and oblivion only because... it was in sales in shop. rly - this game was only good in this story. I never heard about them before except one advertising .

4.  it was joke example. Even i , i'm not 100% time serious

5. Yes they will buy them because...  skyrim is old game now and even mods can't help make graphic good for today standard. If TES 6 was released after 2 year graphic woudn't be so big deal

 

[RipClaw]

I went out of my way to come make an account just to be able to comment how much I hate the new "learn by looting" changes.

Seriously, I started playing this game in Alpha 20 (later than most) and if this change comes to the game, I will stop playing. It sucks the fun out. My entire friend group that I play with feels the same way.

Give it a chance. I'm not a fan of the idea myself as I prefer to build rather than loot.

If I see that I'm not making any progress at all with the new system, I'm sure there will be mods to change the system back to the system that is currently given in A20.

Since the FunPimps always overdo when it comes to changes we will probably be flooded with magazines in A21.

 

[meganoth]

1. ok fine

2. nope, i heard that morrowind modding was hell until morrowind get one of dlc. 

3.  i bought morrowind and oblivion only because... it was in sales in shop. rly - this game was only good in this story. I never heard about them before except one advertising .

There exist players older than you (not talking about age necessarily but "player age".

Morrowind was the big breakthrough for bethesda into the mainstream AAA market and each successor (including fallout) made them grow substantially. 

4.  it was joke example. Even i , i'm not 100% time serious

5. Yes they will buy them because...  skyrim is old game now and even mods can't help make graphic good for today standard. If TES 6 was released after 2 year graphic woudn't be so big deal

That is one reason why Bethesda switches between their franchises, and wants a third one.

 

[mstdv inc]

I went out of my way to come make an account just to be able to comment how much I hate the new "learn by looting" changes.

Seriously, I started playing this game in Alpha 20 (later than most) and if this change comes to the game, I will stop playing. It sucks the fun out. My entire friend group that I play with feels the same way.

I'm really excited about some of the other changes that are supposedly coming to the game soon, but this single change has me upset enough to quit playing the game altogether. I really don't understand why we keep reworking systems in the game that have been reworked 2 or 3 times before already? But then maybe that's why the game is still in alpha after 8 years...

He started playing with A20, but at the same time, he knows that the game has been in alpha for 8 years and that the mechanics have been reworked several times. Was he just watching all this time? Or were friends sharing news of a game that he does not play?
This post is very similar to writing an angry review from an experienced player who created a "newbie" account.
@Roland can check a user for a multi-account?)

 

[pavichokche]

This post is very similar to writing an angry review from an experienced player who created a "newbie" account.
@Roland can check a user for a multi-account?)

Well I HAVE been playing for a long time, since the early early pre-alpha back in 2014, and I've stuck around through all the ups and downs. I agree with this poster completely - forcing players to have to do something in order to progress is not cool. The systems they established in the past few versions were good and didn't need overhauling. To me it looks pretty clear what the devs' goals are here - they want to force players to go through a "progression" in item tiers.

Why? Because they made all these nice new tiered weapons and tools, which is great. But oh no - the players can (if they want to) skip all the crappier tier ones if they focus their points. We can't be having that, our designers spent a lot of time making really nice looking primitive weapons and tools.

This is the kind of thinking that is implied by this new change, and it doesn't seem to keep the players' enjoyment as the top priority....

That said, I'm sure during the QC and experimental state of a20 they will balance this, and in a21 they will dial it back to where it doesn't limit the player too severely.

 

[BenZ0]

I went out of my way to come make an account just to be able to comment how much I hate the new "learn by looting" changes.

Seriously, I started playing this game in Alpha 20 (later than most) and if this change comes to the game, I will stop playing. It sucks the fun out. My entire friend group that I play with feels the same way.

"Learn by Doing" is silly because it's insane to have to craft 100 shotguns or whatever to get better at making shotguns - why make the player do useless crafting of items they don't want and aren't going to use - and the new "Learn By Looting" is worse because it appears to exist for no reason other than to artificially slow the player's progression down. The current system of magazine series and perks is great because it allows the player to determine what direction they want their build to take - and the idea of only progressing by looting (which is only one of many activities to do in the game) is just silly. It also means that players are now fighting for loot instead of playing cooperatively because the only way to progress is hogging the loot, and we need to do insane amounts of looting to find all the new magazines. Limitations should only be added when they make the game more fun. For example, requiring the player to have a perk to craft an item is a fun limitation because it allows a gradual power progression and creates goals to work towards. The player can achieve these goals in many ways - killing zombies, looting, doing quests, building, farming, etc. You've now made it so that any time not spent looting is wasted time in the eyes of the game.

I'm really excited about some of the other changes that are supposedly coming to the game soon, but this single change has me upset enough to quit playing the game altogether. I really don't understand why we keep reworking systems in the game that have been reworked 2 or 3 times before already? But then maybe that's why the game is still in alpha after 8 years...

I agree with the previous poster - it feels like EA syndrome - "we know what you find fun better than you do." It's never to late to walk back a bad decision - please avoid the sunk cost fallacy and revert the changes to skills. It's okay to experiment with changes or toss around new ideas, but don't commit to a bad decision just because you've already invested time and effort into it. Seriously, it's *good* that you're trying new things and always looking for ways to improve - it would be bad if you weren't. But sometimes an idea just isn't what's best for the game, and you have to not be afraid to toss it.

I post this not because I'm angry or anything, I just know that I really enjoy the game and I want to keep playing it - I don't want the game I love to become unenjoyable for me, which is what this change is going to do. The system we have is really cool and I really like it, I really hope we can just keep it so I can continue to enjoy the game.

Why are you writing it like you have been playing it and you know how it is? You act like its the end of the world and it would kill the game, it literally changes nothing of the base game, now instead of finding 5 times the same schematics you already have you find magazines of a certain skill you keep learning. The progression still stays the same as always.

 

[ZeMayoMan]

Why are you writing it like you have been playing it and you know how it is? You act like its the end of the world and it would kill the game, it literally changes nothing of the base game, now instead of finding 5 times the same schematics you already have you find magazines of a certain skill you keep learning. The progression still stays the same as always.

It's not the end of the world. At the end of the day, it's a videogame. If I don't like the change, I'll simply stop playing the game and move on with my life. But I'd rather avoid that since I really enjoy the game.

He started playing with A20, but at the same time, he knows that the game has been in alpha for 8 years and that the mechanics have been reworked several times. Was he just watching all this time? Or were friends sharing news of a game that he does not play?
This post is very similar to writing an angry review from an experienced player who created a "newbie" account.
@Roland can check a user for a multi-account?)

I've lurked for a long time following the development of the game. I was waiting for the game to get further along (and get out of alpha hopefully) before I jumped in... but 8 years later I finally said "@%$# it" because it doesn't seem like it's coming out of alpha anytime soon and I'm generally happy with the state of the game currently. I've been following the development of the game pretty closely until it reached a point where I was happy to jump in, and we're at that point. More than that, it's a bit of a "no true scotsman" fallacy to assert that my opinion is invalid because I'm a more recent addition to the community than yourself.

I guess I should elaborate more why I'm not a fan. The current system of a shared pool rewards all activities that the players do. It gives the player freedom. Yeah, finding magazines to unlock certain recipes does gate some content behind a sort of "learn by looting" wall - but that's the thing - it's only some of the content. This helps achieve a nice balance. Yes, I DO have to do some looting and questing if I want to get all of the recipes and things - but it's not the ONLY way to move forward. But when I'm doing things like base building, farming, general zombie killing, etc., I'm still making progress in the game. It's reasonable to say that players shouldn't be able to get all the way through progression by just mining and building, this is a survival game after all. But the idea of making looting the ONLY way to progress is just silly to me. The current system in my opinion is brilliant in that it rewards a lot of different player activities - it rounds out the game and reduces the constraints on the player. That's beauty of games like this - 5 different people may play the game 5 different ways and each can tailor their experience to what is fun for them. I just don't see how the new changes further that.

It's possible that I'm wrong about all of this and that the new system will be fine. But we're all here to weigh in with opinions and give feedback. This is mine.

 

[MechanicalLens]

Has anyone encountered a supposed glitch where the game will randomly switch to another item on your toolbelt when your fingers were nowhere near the numpad or the mouse wheel? I swear this just can't be me.

 

[RipClaw]

Why are you writing it like you have been playing it and you know how it is? You act like its the end of the world and it would kill the game, it literally changes nothing of the base game, now instead of finding 5 times the same schematics you already have you find magazines of a certain skill you keep learning. The progression still stays the same as always.

It's a little different. Currently, the quality of something you craft is determined by how many points you invest in the corresponding perks and skills. Some perks also allow you to unlock recipes. Whether you got the points by scavenging, killing zombies, mining or building doesn't matter.

In A21 you will only be able to increase the quality of what you can craft by looting and you will only be able to unlock recipes this way. Depending on your playstyle, this change may have a big impact or no impact at all.

 

[meganoth]

It's not the end of the world. At the end of the day, it's a videogame. If I don't like the change, I'll simply stop playing the game and move on with my life. But I'd rather avoid that since I really enjoy the game.

I've lurked for a long time following the development of the game. I was waiting for the game to get further along (and get out of alpha hopefully) before I jumped in... but 8 years later I finally said "@%$# it" because it doesn't seem like it's coming out of alpha anytime soon and I'm generally happy with the state of the game currently. I've been following the development of the game pretty closely until it reached a point where I was happy to jump in, and we're at that point. More than that, it's a bit of a "no true scotsman" fallacy to assert that my opinion is invalid because I'm a more recent addition to the community than yourself.

I guess I should elaborate more why I'm not a fan. The current system of a shared pool rewards all activities that the players do. It gives the player freedom. Yeah, finding magazines to unlock certain recipes does gate some content behind a sort of "learn by looting" wall - but that's the thing - it's only some of the content. This helps achieve a nice balance. Yes, I DO have to do some looting and questing if I want to get all of the recipes and things - but it's not the ONLY way to move forward. But when I'm doing things like base building, farming, general zombie killing, etc., I'm still making progress in the game. It's reasonable to say that players shouldn't be able to get all the way through progression by just mining and building, this is a survival game after all. But the idea of making looting the ONLY way to progress is just silly to me.

Ok, but in A21 you will still progress in the perk tree through all those activities, so "ONLY" is already wrong.

What is true is that a part of the progression, namely crafting, does not depend on all activities anymore. And crafting itself is only one of three sources for stuff.

Secondly we had that with crafting already for some recipes. You could get tier 2 and tier 3 weapon recipes ONLY through looting, and there were no shouts of doom. 

The current system in my opinion is brilliant in that it rewards a lot of different player activities - it rounds out the game and reduces the constraints on the player. That's beauty of games like this - 5 different people may play the game 5 different ways and each can tailor their experience to what is fun for them. I just don't see how the new changes further that.

It's possible that I'm wrong about all of this and that the new system will be fine. But we're all here to weigh in with opinions and give feedback. This is mine.

 

[Roland]

and if this change comes to the game, I will stop playing. It sucks the fun out.

How do you know? lol

the new "Learn By Looting" is worse because it appears to exist for no reason other than to artificially slow the player's progression down. The current system of magazine series and perks is great because it allows the player to determine what direction they want their build to take - and the idea of only progressing by looting (which is only one of many activities to do in the game) is just silly.

This is the exact argument that people who loved Learn by Doing made about the current system of book series and perks. They accused TFP of artificially slowing the progression down with the silly new system that "nobody asked for". Now you say the current system is the best and the new changes are only to slow people down and is silly.

As to the "silly" argument, it actually makes perfect sense that you can learn how to do things better by gleaning information that you find through scavenging. It may not sound like a fun prospect exploring POIs and opening boxes and cupboards and bookshelves etc but it is definitely a plausible mechanic to represent gaining knowledge. Lots of people complained about the current system making no sense that you could learn how to make a better pickaxe by spending points that were earned by killing zombies. They called that "silly". It never really bothered me but at least I can recognize that on the silly meter the current system is definitely sillier than the one we will be getting.

It also means that players are now fighting for loot instead of playing cooperatively because the only way to progress is hogging the loot, and we need to do insane amounts of looting to find all the new magazines.

They don't have to fight for loot any more than they did before. The magazines are ONLY for learning recipes. Does everyone have to be able to craft all recipes or can you split up the recipes and allow a friend to craft things for you? Seems like it could inspire selfishness fighting and a-holery if that is the type of people you play with...or...it could inspire planning and sharing and division of crafting. Basically, it will be the same thing that occurs now with teams that actually use teamwork when someone finds a weapon that they know someone else perked into. That person could hand over the weapon or hog it for their self.

For example, requiring the player to have a perk to craft an item is a fun limitation because it allows a gradual power progression and creates goals to work towards. The player can achieve these goals in many ways - killing zombies, looting, doing quests, building, farming, etc. You've now made it so that any time not spent looting is wasted time in the eyes of the game.

There is still a gradual power progression through the perks. You get better at using your tools and weapons through the perks and those goals can be achieved through all those myriad ways you mentioned. Knowledge of how to craft is now going to be handled through discovery of old world writings that you find, buy, or gain from quests. There is still plenty of variety of actions and goals you can take.

As for time not spent looting being wasted time in the eyes of the game-- that is bull. The game's difficulty curve is not nearly so fast or unforgiving that you MUST optimize to the level that such a statement implies. You can loot less and learn recipes a bit slower and still successfully survive. You can farm and build with orange and yellow level tools and still successfully survive and keep up with the progression that the game world takes vs you. The idea that unless you spend every moment in the game looting or it is wasted time does not come from the game. It comes from within the minds of gamers who focus too much on optimizing beyond what is necessary to be successful.

I really don't understand why we keep reworking systems in the game that have been reworked 2 or 3 times before already? But then maybe that's why the game is still in alpha after 8 years...

That is exactly why it is still in alpha. That is what the alpha designation is for and when you bought the game, the fact that it was Early Access was not hidden or unexplained. Besides, if you just started playing in Alpha 20 then you have never experienced any changes so why do you care about what changes happened before you ever played? Alpha 21 will be your very first time experiencing any kind of change. You can't believably complain about development fatigue when you just barely started and have yet to even go through a major alpha update for the very first time...haha

I agree with the previous poster - it feels like EA syndrome - "we know what you find fun better than you do." It's never to late to walk back a bad decision - please avoid the sunk cost fallacy and revert the changes to skills. It's okay to experiment with changes or toss around new ideas, but don't commit to a bad decision just because you've already invested time and effort into it. Seriously, it's *good* that you're trying new things and always looking for ways to improve - it would be bad if you weren't. But sometimes an idea just isn't what's best for the game, and you have to not be afraid to toss it.

I'm thinking "EA syndrome" is actually more like people who purchase a game in EA but either don't understand it or don't really believe it and start acting as though the game is a finished released product and react to development woes from an overly angry, worried, and/or entitled way. Let's say that you are right and this change is a huge mistake and needs to be walked back. Even if that is the case, they will not do it before it releases in A21 and they get feedback from the players. That's because we are in Early Access and our role is to play unfinished versions of the game and the developers can then make their decisions on whether something needs to be walked back or not. They walked back LBD after observing a couple years of gameplay and there was no sunk cost fallacy to be seen. They will walk back this decision as well if they deem it necessary but not before employing the change and observing. You seem to be coming from a perspective that this change is like a DLC for a finished game and TFP should not make the mistake of releasing it but the reality is that this is a development action for an unfinished game and we are going to test it (those of us who don't quit) and TFP is going to decide later whether this is the final version or if something else is. It's interesting that you encourage them to not be afraid to toss it while you seem to be afraid to even test it for yourself and your group and see what comes of it. I'd say to you, "Don't be afraid to test it to see what happens and how it affects your group for the good of the game. Rather than just quit playing at the prospect, try it out and give your feedback based on playtesting instead of speculating who in your group might hog all the magazines."

I post this not because I'm angry or anything, I just know that I really enjoy the game and I want to keep playing it - I don't want the game I love to become unenjoyable for me, which is what this change is going to do. The system we have is really cool and I really like it, I really hope we can just keep it so I can continue to enjoy the game.

I get it. Nobody wants to lose what they currently love and there is a real risk of that happening. I wouldn't agree that it is a foregone conclusion. I think you should try it first. No matter what, it is coming in A21 because this is an early access game in alpha development. Honestly, expecting a game in active development to just stay the same is an unrealistic take. It is always a risk to purchase a game before it is finalized because you can't know if you will end up enjoying the final version.

It's possible that I'm wrong about all of this and that the new system will be fine. But we're all here to weigh in with opinions and give feedback. This is mine.

Well this is what you should have led with, honestly. I'm glad you are posting your misgivings and doubts and you should continue to do so as long as you can admit that anyone who hasn't actually played with it is just speculating and could be wrong. There really is no chance of talking the devs out of developing their game for us to test and try at each new update. Once we've played with it we can certainly weigh in and there have been times the devs have agreed with the overwhelming sentiments of the player base who come here and chime in. Other times they have stuck to their guns regardless of the feedback. It is their game and we are along for the ride. We can give input and say what we don't like but we aren't in the director's chair.