The LBD theyre introducing isnt what I wanted or had in mind.

[HammerDano]

Ironically, "semantics" doesn't seem to mean to you what it means to anyone else. To most people, "arguing semantics" is having a discussion trying to refine and agree on the exact definition and meaning of a word. To you, "semantics" seems to mean "I don't like your question and I'm not going to answer it".

that is laughably simplistic...and at what point did you want to try to refine the exact definition and meaning of a word?
You haven't.
I happily ceded that the word "vision" was being used innappropriately. That it was being used to describe changing progression for "changing direction".
Still you plow on asking me to define the 3 different visions...which is why I state you just wanted an argument about semantics. You are being obtuse...whether that is deliberate or not...idk.

In none of my posts (until the above paragraph) have I demanded or requested that you define "vision" or really state the meaning of what you mean by the term "direction" nor have I offered a definition. You made a claim that they had changed their vision three times. I was simply asking you to share more of your own opinion on what those three different visions were that they changed from and to. Since you claim to see a difference in visions at three different time periods of the development, it shouldn't be hard for you to state the characteristics of your observation. That is me requesting you go into more detail about something you shared and not me arguing about the meaning of the word vision.

I have no idea why you are avoiding giving us more of your insight and opinion when usually you don't hold back.

you did receive an answer...it was that It is not on me to try and define what TFP's aim is when they change working progression systems INSTEAD OF REFINING THEM...at the cost of progress towards Bandits and Story...delaying finishing the game or that they have done a poor job of communicating WHY they do what they do.

twist this anyway you like...I look at you as being PR...and nothing else.

 

[Noxom]

that is laughably simplistic...and at what point did you want to try to refine the exact definition and meaning of a word?
You haven't.
I happily ceded that the word "vision" was being used innappropriately. That it was being used to describe changing progression for "changing direction".
Still you plow on asking me to define the 3 different visions...which is why I state you just wanted an argument about semantics. You are being obtuse...whether that is deliberate or not...idk.

you did receive an answer...it was that It is not on me to try and define what TFP's aim is when they change working progression systems INSTEAD OF REFINING THEM...at the cost of progress towards Bandits and Story...delaying finishing the game or that they have done a poor job of communicating WHY they do what they do.

twist this anyway you like...I look at you as being PR...and nothing else.

Rolands posts are far less obtuse than any of yours, which are always strangely confusing to interpret. Asking you to elaborate your claims is not obtuse.

I get that people enjoyed some things in the previous alphas. You fell in love with a puppy before it grew into an adult dog. You played during deep development of main features and didn't understand what that meant. Early access isn't for everyone and people like you are why.
The only vision that should matter is the kickstarter idea/feature list. All of the ideas they started with are still relevant today.

I look at you as someone who made up their mind long before making their first post. Basic working progression systems that were store assets or half-made creations will eventually get changed for 100% in-house assets. Refining progression has been the entire point of the changes. Just like sugar cane is changed into sugar by refining it. It's not sugar cane anymore is it? Are you saying they should've stuck with store assets instead of making their own? LBD is in the same boat, a basic asset people loved and can't accept the loss of despite its flaws. We have what is essentially learn by doing, but it's not the direct incremental kind so it's not cool enough.

Then there's the "cost" of progress to bandits and story. You don't know that this is a fact at all, it's all assumed. Especially if TFP lack the communication you say they do.

This forum itself is a place where devs can communicate with players. A lot of devs/games don't even have that much. You clearly have never appreciated the amount of communication you could get here, or you have no perspective. You spend all this time being upset over communication instead of trying to communicate or elaborate on exactly what you want from them. It's so weird to want communication and then blindfold yourself.

None of this has anything to do with the OP either. Every thread you post in ends up being an argument over a topic you can't let go of. Make your own thread and drop all your baggage there.

 

[Roland]

I happily ceded that the word "vision" was being used innappropriately. That it was being used to describe changing progression for "changing direction".
Still you plow on asking me to define the 3 different visions...which is why I state you just wanted an argument about semantics. You are being obtuse...whether that is deliberate or not...idk.

I did not get that from your posts. Sorry. In that case, why do you believe that the changes to progression was not a refining process? They have utilized elements such as xp earning, LBD, skillpoint shopping, books/schematics/magazines, and attributes in a variety of different combinations. Some elements have waxed and some have waned but I see it all as a development process of iterating and experimenting to refine the feature to the way they want it.

you did receive an answer...it was that It is not on me to try and define what TFP's aim is when they change working progression systems INSTEAD OF REFINING THEM...at the cost of progress towards Bandits and Story...delaying finishing the game or that they have done a poor job of communicating WHY they do what they do.

I wasn’t asking you to define what TFPs aim is. I was asking you to explain your own opinion with greater detail.

You don’t agree with TFPs priorities. You aren’t the only one and that is completely understandable. But it does appear to be a concrete wall you are banging your head against with no useful results.

I do agree with you that whatever the next refinement to progression is with LBD coming back to help with crafting progression, I hope it is implemented after 3.0. I think it would make a great 3.x update.

 

[Rotor]

....... I hope it is implemented after 3.0. I think it would make a great 3.x update.

NO!

"I want it all and I want it now"

Google Search

 

[Kire]

TFP has a separate sandbox mode planned with a huge list of options and toggles currently being compiled. I don’t know how feasible it would be to create a toggle for skillpoint shopping/ learn by doing as that seems like a massive amount of development and a huge overhaul— but I guess it could be possible. But sliders for screamer activity level, questing, and toggles for zombie digging, and trigger spawns seem doable along with many others.

That sounds amazing! I hope there will be lot's of different settings.
I'm not sure what causes it, but i always dread starting a new playthrough... I hope this can make things feel fresh again in the early game

 

[InfiniteWarrior]

change working progression systems INSTEAD OF REFINING THEM

No question video game marketing and hype in general is in a horrible state in the industry at large, imo, but with all due respect, you're just repeating the same thing you've said countless times before: "I would not have repurchased the console edition if I didn't think the roadmap was feasible" despite that the roadmap dates always have been tentative and you knew that going in. The only delay thus far on that road map has been in response to the poor reception of 2.0. Yet, you're going back to former LBD systems and conversations about a possible hybrid LBD-LBR system that may or may not ever be implemented as citation of a nonexistant further delay of 3.0 and 4.0 as though TFP aren't working on bandits and story mode at all when they have specifically stated that they are and that they are coming relatively soon. You're grasping at straws, iow, to prop up baseless accusations against TFP you've expressed over and over and over again and of which we -- and TFP, I'm sure -- are well aware.

You knew you were repurchasing an unfinished game and it doesn't matter to most people when it's finished. Only that it's eventually finished. "When it's ready" -- if a studio has the luxury to say, "when it's ready" -- is the best response any development studio could possibly give to questions about "launch" dates. CD Projekt Red gave that response to people who allowed themselves to get all hyped up about Cyberpunk 2077, impatiently chomping at the bit to play it early. Alas, CD Projekt Red had gone public on the Polish stock market mid-development and some clueless executive somewhere decided to dump it on the market whether it was finished or not, despite the developers having warned it required at least two more years development time. If we recall, Cyberpunk 2077 had one of the most disastrous launches in video game history. That was happening a lot in the triple A space at the time, actually, and I personally think quarterly financials had everythinng to do with it and certainly not the developers. The backlash was phenomenal for all such unfinished game releases, including FO76 and Redfall, and I notice it hasn't happened quite as often since. (Guess we'll see how long that lasts in the triple A space.)

The fact the game was playable in its alpha (now, technically, beta) state has no bearing on whether it's "gone gold". Yet, a ton of YouTubers, especially, acted (and are still acting and talking) as though it did "go gold" with 1.0, knowing full well 2.0, 3.0 and 4.0 were still on the horizon. They announced, "The game is out of alpha after over a decade in development! Woohoo! It's gone gold!" You have to wonder what they thought 2.0, 3.0 and 4.0 on the roadmap meant. None of those premature "announcements" came from TFP to the best of my knowledge. TFP did publicly celebrate coming out of alpha, which I still think had more to do with console manufacturers than TFP. Not sure how wise that was, but I'm pretty sure Alpha 22 would have remained Alpha 22 instead of being renamed 1.0 if not for the PC-console resync. An awful lot of people who have been playing the game for over a decade actually act as though it were a finished release as soon as the alpha was posted on Steam. It's not completely impossible to understand. A decade is a very long time. Doesn't change the fact that it's been in alpha for the vast majority of that time and alpha development changes on a dime. Subnautica, for example, originally had a terraforming feature. It didn't on release (bloated save game files) and I'm sure other features were trimmed out as well whether due to unforeseen difficulties or deadlines.

The finished product may actually be subject to unforeseen delays. It may not. None of us know. And that's to be expected while a game is in development. Do you want an unfinished, unpolished game? Or do you want it to be the best it can be? You're losing nothing -- nothing at all -- in the wait for it to be finished. Trimmed features, tweaked features are just part and parcel of the territory of both software and game development. Now that console and PC are resynced, console is getting the exact same updates as PC at no extra charge. Yet, you're still complaining about your own decision to repurchase it on console. Can you see why the accusations are falling on mostly deaf ears at this point?

 

[HammerDano]

No question video game marketing and hype in general is in a horrible state in the industry at large, imo, but with all due respect, you're just repeating the same thing you've said countless times before: "I would not have repurchased the console edition if I didn't think the roadmap was feasible" despite that the roadmap dates always have been tentative and you knew that going in. The only delay thus far on that road map has been in response to the poor reception of 2.0. Yet, you're going back to former LBD systems and conversations about a possible hybrid LBD-LBR system that may or may not ever be implemented as citation of a nonexistant further delay of 3.0 and 4.0 as though TFP aren't working on bandits and story mode at all when they have specifically stated that they are and that they are coming relatively soon. You're grasping at straws, iow, to prop up baseless accusations against TFP you've expressed over and over and over again and of which we -- and TFP, I'm sure -- are well aware.

You knew you were repurchasing an unfinished game and it doesn't matter to most people when it's finished. Only that it's eventually finished. "When it's ready" -- if a studio has the luxury to say, "when it's ready" -- is the best response any development studio could possibly give to questions about "launch" dates. CD Projekt Red gave that response to people who allowed themselves to get all hyped up about Cyberpunk 2077, impatiently chomping at the bit to play it early. Alas, CD Projekt Red had gone public on the Polish stock market mid-development and some clueless executive somewhere decided to dump it on the market whether it was finished or not, despite the developers having warned it required at least two more years development time. If we recall, Cyberpunk 2077 had one of the most disastrous launches in video game history. That was happening a lot in the triple A space at the time, actually, and I personally think quarterly financials had everythinng to do with it and certainly not the developers. The backlash was phenomenal for all such unfinished game releases, including FO76 and Redfall, and I notice it hasn't happened quite as often since. (Guess we'll see how long that lasts in the triple A space.)

The fact the game was playable in its alpha (now, technically, beta) state has no bearing on whether it's "gone gold". Yet, a ton of YouTubers, especially, acted (and are still acting and talking) as though it did "go gold" with 1.0, knowing full well 2.0, 3.0 and 4.0 were still on the horizon. They announced, "The game is out of alpha after over a decade in development! Woohoo! It's gone gold!" You have to wonder what they thought 2.0, 3.0 and 4.0 on the roadmap meant. None of those premature "announcements" came from TFP to the best of my knowledge. TFP did publicly celebrate coming out of alpha, which I still think had more to do with console manufacturers than TFP. Not sure how wise that was, but I'm pretty sure Alpha 22 would have remained Alpha 22 instead of being renamed 1.0 if not for the PC-console resync. An awful lot of people who have been playing the game for over a decade actually act as though it were a finished release as soon as the alpha was posted on Steam. It's not completely impossible to understand. A decade is a very long time. Doesn't change the fact that it's been in alpha for the vast majority of that time and alpha development changes on a dime. Subnautica, for example, originally had a terraforming feature. It didn't on release (bloated save game files) and I'm sure other features were trimmed out as well whether due to unforeseen difficulties or deadlines.

The finished product may actually be subject to unforeseen delays. It may not. None of us know. And that's to be expected while a game is in development. Do you want an unfinished, unpolished game? Or do you want it to be the best it can be? You're losing nothing -- nothing at all -- in the wait for it to be finished. Trimmed features, tweaked features are just part and parcel of the territory of both software and game development. Now that console and PC are resynced, console is getting the exact same updates as PC at no extra charge. Yet, you're still complaining about your own decision to repurchase it on console. Can you see why the accusations are falling on mostly deaf ears at this point?

politely,
I am not getting thru to you...and the people on this forum are not getting thru to me.

"all dates subject to change" apparently means "not one thing has changed with how they are developing this game".
I bought into the idea that, after a decade, they were finally putting it all together...not that they still don't know how long it is going to take them to implement their "plan".

"I would not have bought back in". even though I had not brought it up, fair enough you did, and yeah...I would not have given them more money...not with no idea of how long it would actually take them to finish the god■■■■ game...after more than a decade. Hell...weren't Bandits coming in 2016...they've been a decade all by themselves.

After TellTale failed...TFP were free to just make the PC game they wanted to. According to you guys, they never needed console money to finish the game, they sold 20 million copies, and that was mostly to PC, so we should be grateful they are even bothering to include console.
(does that sound about right?)

So best version of the game?...to me that would have been to continue making the PC game as good as your platform could handle...and THEN try to port as much of the finished game as you could. OR go the Rust route and do parallel development, where they make the best game they can for PC, and thru optimization Port features and major POI's over to the console version when they can, and using what they learned thru optimization to make the PC version run even better.
The whole time they are ADDING TO THE BASE GAME...for both versions.

Instead, TFP decided in 2019, that they would make consoles buy a second version of the same game, and reduce the game to the lowest gaming platforms constrictions. the xbox S...which is HALF of the xboxes sold.


"don't I like all the free update?", Madmole asked me that same question, on a different thread.
"free updates" come after the game is actually finished. What you are getting is not free, it is pieces of something YOU ALREADY PAID FOR.

 

[Rabbits Love Cactus]

It's going to be better than what we have now at least. (Lets hope). But yeah, I've been preaching about a LUBD system that is hybrid with for action skills. Lets hope that is what is coming.

 

[HammerDano]

WATCH How a despicable Moderator tells a R****-leaning poster to go k*** themselves!

thanks for teaching me a new trick...I can just copy what you did and that meets moderator approval.
again I say thank you... you C*** Lipped I**** F***.

 

[theFlu]

I can just copy what you did and that meets moderator approval.

Yes, you can. Be careful though, you will need to apply the context, not just the form; the context being "an obvious joke". But I am indeed skirting a rule there, the rule against "circumventing the automated censorship"; the words I jokingly censored (right, kill) aren't actually censored in here, so I should be safe from that. I'm not starting to guess at your word choices there, but if they're "auto-censorable", that might be an offence..

But I'd also be fine for copping the ban for either the post itself, or this further explanation (as I now explicitly turned the original into a political-related post). I would slap a "thumbs-up" on the ban message and move on with my life for the duration. Not cry about it on the forum

 

[meganoth]

Yes, you can. Be careful though, you will need to apply the context, not just the form; the context being "an obvious joke". But I am indeed skirting a rule there, the rule against "circumventing the automated censorship"; the words I jokingly censored (right, kill) aren't actually censored in here, so I should be safe from that. I'm not starting to guess at your word choices there, but if they're "auto-censorable", that might be an offence..

But I'd also be fine for copping the ban for either the post itself, or this further explanation (as I now explicitly turned the original into a political-related post). I would slap a "thumbs-up" on the ban message and move on with my life for the duration. Not cry about it on the forum

Wait! I thought you meant "Rollercoaster" (what else would deserve capitalization?) and "kid" ??

 

[InfiniteWarrior]

According to you guys, they never needed console money to finish the game, they sold 20 million copies, and that was mostly to PC, so we should be grateful they are even bothering to include console.
(does that sound about right?)

Not quite. What I said, at least, is that we don't know whether TFP needed the income from current console players as well as sales to newcomers on both PC and console to get over the finish line or not. We're not privy to their business processes and financials. Considering that 1.0 was just a regular update for PC and TFP tried to get a discount, at least, for console players to repurchase the current version, I don't get the impression it was TFP's decision alone to resell it on console instead of providing current console players with a copy of the most recent version of the game being played on PC.

We don't know. Yet, you're out here accusing TFP of lying to console players just to get their money. What you're failing to consider is that overcoming the TellTale nightmare, which TFP had no way of foreseeing; finding a new partner to port it to console; and getting the updated version to console players who were requesting it (to put it mildly) may very well have been the more benign intention and decision made. Why are you assuming the worst? Because predatory insustry practices are the norm for triple As these days and TFP are guilty of obscene greed by association in your mind? Well, I don't know about anyone else, but I've stuck this long because the kind of obscene greed displayed by entities such MS, Zenimax and Bethesda Softworks during their negotiations for control over BGS' IPs doesn't appear to be a factor in the development of this game, at least. There are no laws against such predatory industry practices as we're seeing just about everywhere else. None. Zip. So, I'm surprised, actually, TFP is somewhat bucking that trend on their own. In fact, I'm specifically looking for studios and games that are bucking predatory industry practices.

I don't think the game reflects the quality of the millions it has made since it went on sale. TFP obviously didn't hire a concept artist, for example, if they're using AI to produce images to base game models upon. They appear to have cut corners where I probably wouldn't myself, but that's their business as are all the other decisions they've made for the game. I'm disppointed in their decision to engage in microtransactions, but I'm sure they don't care if I'm disappointed in them for that or not. There is no public stigma attached to it and all tech and video game companies everywhere are climbing aboard the recurring revenue train in some form or another. I'll see how bad it gets before I decide TFP is no different than the triple As in that regard.

I bought into the idea that, after a decade, they were finally putting it all together...not that they still don't know how long it is going to take them to implement their "plan".

Exactly, That was your decision and TFP -- and we -- are not responsible for the decision you made.

"don't I like all the free update?", Madmole asked me that same question, on a different thread.
"free updates" come after the game is actually finished. What you are getting is not free, it is pieces of something YOU ALREADY PAID FOR.

A lot of players seem to be under the exceptionally weird (and disastrous for the game and community, I think) impression that major updates to the unfinished game are "free DLC", I imagine because they've been conditioned to accept everything from recolors to building sets to full story and map expansions as "DLC" in the MMO/Live Service space. Obviously, one of those require far more effort than the others. The others can be knocked out in a couple of hours, yet players are paying as much as some games cost to lease them; treating them as though they were physical objects you can hold in your hand; then crying (and threatening legal action, e.g. "Stop Killing Games") when their favorite games go offline. The human brain is a mysterious thing and, if you don't believe me, check out the thread about the plant someone's wife bought for the house. We've all experienced that split second when we looked at something in the real world and thought, "I wonder how many components I can get out of that."

Afic, it's self-deception the triple As are exploiting to make billions they don't need for themselves and their parent companies off the so-called "whales", adversely affecting both developers and players in the process. Anyone interested in bolstering their defenses against the psychological manipulation going on in that space as well as others could do worse than to watch Adam Curtis' 2002 documentary, The Century of the Self, to help them identify said manipulative tactics.

TFP are not yet guilty of the worst of worst of them, imo. Else, I'd probably feel about them the same way you do.

If I were TFP, I'd be stating proudly and clearly that my company is a scrappy independent. I can easily get on board with that myself. I don't know about anyone else.

 

[HammerDano]

Not quite. What I said, at least, is that we don't know whether TFP needed the income from current console players as well as sales to newcomers on both PC and console to get over the finish line or not. We're not privy to their business processes and financials. Considering that 1.0 was just a regular update for PC and TFP tried to get a discount, at least, for console players to repurchase the current version, I don't get the impression it was TFP's decision alone to resell it on console instead of providing current console players with a copy of the most recent version of the game being played on PC.

Cool...appreciate that has been your position. Still gotta ask...was I wrong that "consoles should be grateful" has been the sentiment?

The discount was 25%...the lowest discounted amount it has been offered at since that initial month long offer was given to "legacy" console game owners. it's been regularly on sale for 30-35% off across the platforms.

No offence intended, but, I have no idea about that last part...it makes no sense to me that some shadowy unnamed entity forced them to resell the game. Mostly i have been told it was because the original was launched under TellTale sooooo they couldn't just update the game for legal reasons. Even though they legally owned the rights to the game again.

We don't know. Yet, you're out here accusing TFP of lying to console players just to get their money. What you're failing to consider is that overcoming the TellTale nightmare, which TFP had no way of foreseeing; finding a new partner to port it to console; and getting the updated version to console players who were requesting it (to put it mildly) may very well have been the more benign intention and decision made. Why are you assuming the worst? Because predatory insustry practices are the norm for triple As these days and TFP are guilty of obscene greed by association in your mind? Well, I don't know about anyone else, but I've stuck this long because the kind of obscene greed displayed by entities such MS, Zenimax and Bethesda Softworks during their negotiations for control over BGS' IPs doesn't appear to be a factor in the development of this game, at least. There are no laws against such predatory industry practices as we're seeing just about everywhere else. None. Zip. So, I'm surprised, actually, TFP is somewhat bucking that trend on their own. In fact, I'm specifically looking for studios and games that are bucking predatory industry practices.

yes I have...because they put out a believable road map WITH dates. Dates that many of the PC faithful discounted and didn't care about. During a back and forth about how long is it going to take them to finish the game, Madmole said to me that:

This isn't changing a tire. It's impossible to nail down a date on a big feature in a game with 10000 moving parts so I'm sorry but I'd rather say "when it's done" and surprise you with something, than promise some made up bs date and be 12-24 months late. Like I said our plan is to start showing some models off and later some game play. I am pretty confident the first version can drop in 2026, but I don't want to put any sort of timeline on that because it's always twice as long as you think and often 3x4 longer than you think.

The good news is we're actually working on it and should start showing content in the next quarter.

he chose not to answer me when I asked him, "Then how did you ever put dates on the road map?"

in case you'd like to look for yourself, the thread was "They are bring a hybrid LBD!" it's currently on the third page in General Discussions.

I don't think the game reflects the quality of the millions it has made since it went on sale. TFP obviously didn't hire a concept artist, for example, if they're using AI to produce images to base game models upon. They appear to have cut corners where I probably wouldn't myself, but that's their business as are all the other decisions they've made for the game. I'm disppointed in their decision to engage in microtransactions, but I'm sure they don't care if I'm disappointed in them for that or not. There is no public stigma attached to it and all tech and video game companies everywhere are climbing aboard the recurring revenue train in some form or another. I'll see how bad it gets before I decide TFP is no different than the triple As in that regard.

Exactly, That was your decision and TFP -- and we -- are not responsible for the decision you made.

TFP are responsible for putting out those dates. and considering what Madmole had to say about how long it will take them to get the rest of the game out...any chance you have revised your opinion about THAT now?

A lot of players seem to be under the exceptionally weird (and disastrous for the game and community, I think) impression that major updates to the unfinished game are "free DLC", I imagine because they've been conditioned to accept everything from recolors to building sets to full story and map expansions as "DLC" in the MMO/Live Service space. Obviously, one of those require far more effort than the others. The others can be knocked out in a couple of hours, yet players are paying as much as some games cost to lease them; treating them as though they were physical objects you can hold in your hand; then crying (and threatening legal action, e.g. "Stop Killing Games") when their favorite games go offline. The human brain is a mysterious thing and, if you don't believe me, check out the thread about the plant someone's wife bought for the house. We've all experienced that split second when we looked at something in the real world and thought, "I wonder how many components I can get out of that."

So you don't like free updates? Minecraft is still not finished, Rust is still not finished, every decent game out there gets updated regularly, it's called a modern business model. The original kickstarter said some content would come post gold (1.0).

Afic, it's self-deception the triple As are exploiting to make billions they don't need for themselves and their parent companies off the so-called "whales", adversely affecting both developers and players in the process. Anyone interested in bolstering their defenses against the psychological manipulation going on in that space as well as others could do worse than to watch Adam Curtis' 2002 documentary, The Century of the Self, to help them identify said manipulative tactics.

TFP are not yet guilty of the worst of worst of them, imo. Else, I'd probably feel about them the same way you do.

If I were TFP, I'd be stating proudly and clearly that my company is a scrappy independent. I can easily get on board with that myself. I don't know about anyone else.

If they had gone the parallel development path that RUST had...I wouldn't care that they were selling over priced skins...micro transactions are self choice. without being able to dye the armour or see clothing...I doubt it would have been a really successful side income.

I'll give that documentary a look. I watch Timothy Caine's stuff, to try get a developers perspective on games and the industry. but, honestly don't find myself sympathizing all that often.

 

[InfiniteWarrior]

was I wrong that "consoles should be grateful" has been the sentiment?

I've never said that. Can't speak for anyone else.

it makes no sense to me that some shadowy unnamed entity

I don't think console manufacturers are an unnamed entity. Shadowy? Debatable.

Like it or not, independent studios have to work with console manufacturers to do any number of things, including getting their games rubber stamped for mod support on console. As I said, I don't how their negotiations went or even if TFP were involved as much as the partner they chose to port the game to console. All those processes, especially across companies, are unknown to us.

Madmole said to me that

You're probably not going to like what I have to say about that, but Joel's response sounds perfectly reasonable to me. Software and video game development is not just like changing a tire. For all the reasons noted above (the triple A fiascos, etc.) I'd much rather hear, "when it's done," than some clueless executive far removed from the hands-on development of the game having the power to say, "We have to show a profit this quarter. Release it, ready or not." That's how developers get blamed for stuff that is no way their fault. They're robbed of the power to make the decisions that, in all good conscience, should be made by them. Those CD Projekt developers were ignored by the suits when they warned Cyberpunk 2077 required two more years development time. Yet, they were blamed for the state of the game on release, called "lazy developers" and all kinds of equally stupid ■■■■. I can imagine how they felt. I can imagine how TFP feels when players project their own ■■■■ on them. It's called empathy.

considering what Madmole had to say about how long it will take them to get the rest of the game out...any chance you have revised your opinion about THAT now?

Nope. It's no skin off my back how long it takes. They should take all the time they think they need, afic. I only wonder how much time and energy and budget they can yet afford to spend and can only hope they have a decent cushion and aren't feeling rushed to get it finished. I also salute them for not allowing the power to decide when it is finished to be stripped from them by "nameless," utterly careless entities like Sony and Microsoft. Those behemoths don't care about anything but their bottom lines, especially you and me.

If they had gone the parallel development path that RUST had.

How is that different from the path TFP took by partnering with TellTale, getting shafted and repartnering with a (hopefully) more solid, less unsteady company to do the console port now? Other than the nightmare they went through trying to get the console publishing rights to their own freaking game back, of course. You say it should have been finished before porting it? Does any game development company do that? Or do they actually, usually develop for console? Seems to me, they actually develop for console, for the most part, and I have the worst PC ports imaginable as proof. Elden Ring is the worst. Just try putting together a keyboard and mouse setup that works for that. Took me forever and I still can't get used to it. So, I'm happy to hear up to 80% of developers are working on exclusively PC games now.

 

[Jost Amman]

I'm disppointed in their decision to engage in microtransactions

Did I miss something?

 

[InfiniteWarrior]

Did I miss something?

The microtransaction store on Steam. It doesn't have to be sold in an in-game store for it to be a microtransaction. Not sure how it's going to work all that well as a revenue stream for TFP when you can mod in all the armor sets and so forth you like. Pretty sure that's why modding isn't supported for FO76. The merchandising team knew they wouldn't sell anything if people could just mod them into a Bethesda game as they normally do. I'd sooner TFP start up a donation page if they really need the money that badly.

Obviously, FTP mobile game monetization tactics have taken over the triple A space and all manner of "recurring revenue" is being layered over and intertwined in even full-priced single player games. I think the idea there is that, if a game is made just irritating enough, people will pay for something they ordinarily wouldn't, e.g. an annual subscription for an unlimited scrapbox. <-- Obviously, a problem created for which the "solution" is sold.

The top comment on 'Let's go whaling' has it exactly right. If you have to start your talk with "I'll leave the morality out," chances are you're doing something unethical. What I find difficult to comprehend is the way players treat skins, etc. as though they were physical objects you can hold in your hand, cosplay with or place on a shelf and enjoy for years to come. They're "virtual" -- pixels on a screen that will go *poof* as soon as a MMO or live service game goes offline.

It's a slippery slope.

 

[Jost Amman]

The microtransaction store on Steam. It doesn't have to be sold in an in-game store for it to be a microtransaction. Not sure how it's going to work all that well as a revenue stream for TFP when you can mod in all the armor sets and so forth you like. Pretty sure that's why modding isn't supported for FO76. The merchandising team knew they wouldn't sell anything if people could just mod them into a Bethesda game as they normally do. I'd sooner TFP start up a donation page if they really need the money that badly.

Obviously, FTP mobile game monetization tactics have taken over the triple A space and all manner of "recurring revenue" is being layered over and intertwined in even full-priced single player games. I think the idea there is that, if a game is made just irritating enough, people will pay for something they ordinarily wouldn't, e.g. an annual subscription for an unlimited scrapbox. <-- Obviously, a problem created for which the "solution" is sold.

The top comment on 'Let's go whaling' has it exactly right. If you have to start your talk with "I'll leave the morality out," chances are you're doing something unethical. What I find difficult to comprehend is the way players treat skins, etc. as though they were physical objects you can hold in your hand, cosplay with or place on a shelf and enjoy for years to come. They're "virtual" -- pixels on a screen that will go *poof* as soon as a MMO or live service game goes offline.

It's a slippery slope.

Oh... THAT one. That has nothing to do with microtransactions or that type of approach at all. The fact that you see it that way shows that you're projecting on TFP the behavior used by other real shady (and often big) developers.

I disagree.

 

[Suxar]

With millions of players the easiest way to get an accurate reading of what the majority of players is to push an update that has a poll at launch. Log each keys response so no one can vote more than once and tally the votes. I know of many games that use polling to guide dev.

90% of players buy a game to play, not to argue or write surveys.

 

[InfiniteWarrior]

Oh... THAT one. That has nothing to do with microtransactions or that type of approach at all. The fact that you see it that way shows that you're projecting on TFP the behavior used by other real shady (and often big) developers.

I disagree.

Not sure how you get that out of everything I wrote about it. As I said, I'll see how it goes before I decide TFP is no different than the triple As. At the moment, I haven't. Microtransactions generally prey on fomo, though. That's what makes employing them a slippery slope.

 

[Suxar]

There isn't a single game dev with a widely success game that didn't take outside feedback on design and gameplay. That simply doesn't exist.

Is the 11th most popular Steam game a failure? So what's a success then?

Eric Barone always told his advisors to go to hell and did what he liked.