PC v1.x Developer Diary

Status
Not open for further replies.
Any fixes for console will likely come with v2.0, which sounds like will be around late February or into March, though that may change.  Console doesn't allow experimental versions, so can only receive fixes in the stable updates.  They could put out a 1.3 version that includes some fixes earlier than that, of course.  They had mentioned the possibility of that.  But we'll see.
I hear you, but, you know I am not wrong. Someone from TFP needs to pull their head out of wherever it is and give an official update of some kind. I keep advocating for them to do something that will help THEM. These guys seemingly wouldn't wipe their ass to save their last pair of clean underwear.

They want to be a gaming company for consoles and PC...communication might behoove them.

 
There is a huge difference between what they need to do and what you want them to do.  They clearly don't need to communicate anything.  There are already enough issues from the gaming community having creative misinterpretations of what they say.  So frankly it is because of the very people that may ask that it may be best to say as little as possible and avoid further misinformation.  Timelines and strategies change and may change multiple times in a small amount of time, no value to release info that will just change soon and some in the community just cling to the old outdated information as if it's still accurate.  Sheesh, we still have people that think the roadmap is a promised timeline rather than simply a forecast, imagine what they would misinterpret from actual details.

 
There is a huge difference between what they need to do and what you want them to do.  They clearly don't need to communicate anything.  There are already enough issues from the gaming community having creative misinterpretations of what they say.  So frankly it is because of the very people that may ask that it may be best to say as little as possible and avoid further misinformation.  Timelines and strategies change and may change multiple times in a small amount of time, no value to release info that will just change soon and some in the community just cling to the old outdated information as if it's still accurate.  Sheesh, we still have people that think the roadmap is a promised timeline rather than simply a forecast, imagine what they would misinterpret from actual details.


Where is the value in not acknowledging the pre xmas patch broke a lot of console owners ability to play?

How is it not useful to communicating they are working on it?

Cutting off complaints by acknowledging problems is a pretty common thing.

I think it seems more likely they don't communicate because they don't work in a timely manner.

They are already 3 months off schedule on their first goal of their roadmap...so far.

So I'd suggest they learn how to communicate in a timely manner...because people will grumble when they are getting excuses...they go goddamn feral when they are being ignored.

 
These guys seemingly wouldn't wipe their ass to save their last pair of clean underwear.
But if one doesn't wipe their ass how would they be saving their underwear from getting dirty? Wouldn't it be better to hesitate to make a doody all together to maintain a clean pair of underwear?

 
I would point out that if a bug report was properly submitted, you can view the responses to those bug reports.  You can easily see what has been marked as a verified bug and what has not, as well as any comments from the devs regarding those.  What do you want them to say?  "Yes, there are bugs and we are working on them."?  They've said that.  Do you want them to list every bug and explain exactly what they are doing and give time frames for each?  That's a complete waste of their time and is extremely unlikely to happen.

Personally, I think they shouldn't have released to console at all until after the roadmap is complete to avoid all the bugs console players are dealing with and the headache it clearly causes everyone (devs and console players both).  But I doubt console players would prefer that to what we have now.  Maybe you have to wait a little while bugs are fixed, but you are able to play far sooner than if they waited until gold.  This is still an alpha, regardless what the version is.  Better to have it now and wait a few months than to have to wait a couple of years, don't you think?

 
I would point out that if a bug report was properly submitted, you can view the responses to those bug reports.  You can easily see what has been marked as a verified bug and what has not, as well as any comments from the devs regarding those.  What do you want them to say?  "Yes, there are bugs and we are working on them."?  They've said that.  Do you want them to list every bug and explain exactly what they are doing and give time frames for each?  That's a complete waste of their time and is extremely unlikely to happen.

Personally, I think they shouldn't have released to console at all until after the roadmap is complete to avoid all the bugs console players are dealing with and the headache it clearly causes everyone (devs and console players both).  But I doubt console players would prefer that to what we have now.  Maybe you have to wait a little while bugs are fixed, but you are able to play far sooner than if they waited until gold.  This is still an alpha, regardless what the version is.  Better to have it now and wait a few months than to have to wait a couple of years, don't you think?


cool...you know the bug submission page is not really set up for console right?

Yes...I want them update the community...especially when things like what happened to some consoles over xmas happen. It saves @%$#ing...that's the irony.

They ARE already behind on their own roadmap...why don't YOU want to know how they are progressing or hopefully catching up? is it because this does not affect YOU like it does console?

I fully agree...TFP should not have re-released to console like this. BUT...console gamers were cut out of process. The voices of dissent got blocked...thrown out of the DEV streams pre launch. We did not get even ONE dev stream just to address console concerns. 

I rewatched Guns Nerds and Steels Vid from 2022 with Joel and Rick last night...watch it for yourself...Rick said they had no intentions of going gold without having Bandits, weather overhauled, Story, player Armour reworked and radiation survival before they relaunched. WTF happened to that?

 
Uh, the game is not gold, it's merely 1.0.  Gold is around 2 years away at a minimum.  More misinformation......
Hmm.   Is this a distinction TFP have explicitly made?  Even with the way things are done in gaming right now, where there’s no such thing as fully released and content continues to be added for years after the initial release, I don’t see people differentiating between 1.0 and gold.  1.0 is considered released, and “released” was synonymous with “gold” when gold had any meaning.  Are we now to take 1.0 to mean “minimum viable product” and gold to mean “no further content planned apart from possible DLC?”

I’m not a console player and have no opinion on console matters, but as a PC guy I was pretty irritated to learn the game was “released” but integral features were still over a year away.  Why not just keep it in alpha?  I wondered if it might have been necessary due to investor deadlines, otherwise it’s baffling.   

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Let me guess...some of you have probably did go and watch that interview...won't admit I am right...and will pivot to: So...things change get over it. or some variation of that theme.

 
Since when does TFP have investors?
Pure speculation on my part.  Another early access game I play has investor deadlines looming, that’s what put me in mind of it.  I have no actual knowledge of TFP’s financing. :)
 

Wow, so many flaws in that attempt at logic I don't know where to begin.
Er… do you mean me?  Because I was actually asking for information if I’m mistaken about the current accepted definitions of those two terms.  

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Hmm.   Is this a distinction TFP have explicitly made?  Even with the way things are done in gaming right now, where there’s no such thing as fully released and content continues to be added for years after the initial release, I don’t see people differentiating between 1.0 and gold.  1.0 is considered released, and “released” was synonymous with “gold” when gold had any meaning.  Are we now to take 1.0 to mean “minimum viable product” and gold to mean “no further content planned apart from possible DLC?”

I’m not a console player and have no opinion on console matters, but as a PC guy I was pretty irritated to learn the game was “released” but integral features were still over a year away.  Why not just keep it in alpha?  I wondered if it might have been necessary due to investor deadlines, otherwise it’s baffling.   


If you look at the name of this thread, it specifically says Version 1.0 and Alpha 22.  That's a pretty clear indication it is still technically alpha.  The change to 1.0 came pretty much out of nowhere and in the middle of their negotiations regarding the console release.  Although it is speculation and they won't (probably can't) state whether or not it's true, it seems likely that either Sony or Microsoft or both do not allow a pre-1.0 version of a game to be released on their console and/or do not allow a game in Early Access to be released on their console.  So TFP had to call it 1.0 and then provided a specific roadmap to reach actual gold release with a timeline of around 2 years.  Again, that is speculation and could be incorrect, but I'd say it has a strong likelihood of being correct.  There really isn't any other reason I can think of for them to go from calling it Alpha 22 to suddenly calling it 1.0 without any explanation.

 
If you look at the name of this thread, it specifically says Version 1.0 and Alpha 22.  That's a pretty clear indication it is still technically alpha.  The change to 1.0 came pretty much out of nowhere and in the middle of their negotiations regarding the console release.  Although it is speculation and they won't (probably can't) state whether or not it's true, it seems likely that either Sony or Microsoft or both do not allow a pre-1.0 version of a game to be released on their console and/or do not allow a game in Early Access to be released on their console.  So TFP had to call it 1.0 and then provided a specific roadmap to reach actual gold release with a timeline of around 2 years.  Again, that is speculation and could be incorrect, but I'd say it has a strong likelihood of being correct.  There really isn't any other reason I can think of for them to go from calling it Alpha 22 to suddenly calling it 1.0 without any explanation.
That seems like a reasonable deduction.  I actually hadn’t noticed the current title of the thread.  Some communication from TFP about it would have been appreciated, of course.  I played the heck out of alphas 19 and 20 (if I remember correctly) and was in here every day.  I decided I’d better wait for the full release or risk burning out on it before there was a story mode… I was briefly very excited when I saw the news about 1.0, lol.  Now I check in occasionally in the hopes of a surprise update to the timeline.  

 
Hello people, long time no see, I wish you all a very happy new year and all of that.

BTW, I just came back from hidding and sneakily lurking somewhere in order to tell you that I cannot stop killing the new and improved small fauna. There's always a guilty pleasure in taking that fast, small, vulnerable lifes.

I personally like punching a rabbit to death, or skinning that chicken that probably had a mother, a father, and very tiny children with beautiful feathers. Protect the animals everybody, they are valuable to our well being.

Don't be cringe and unpolite. Pet the zombie dogs.

Happy 2025!!

 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top