PC Alpha 19 Dev Diary

Status
Not open for further replies.
Roland said:
Did you want smaller or did you want real....?
Click to expand...


madmole said:
The framework allows it, but over scope and the desire to ship a better build every alpha keeps that from becoming a reality. That said A19 will take less time than 17 or 18 did. We'll be in content lock soon and you guys will certainly have a stable 19 before the Steam summer sale.
Click to expand...
Good to hear, hope I didn't ruffle any feathers. I was just poking fun is all. Being honest, I prefer better content over a longer wait anyways. I'll look forward to playing again before the Summer Sale, but I understand if things get pushed back, given... well, everything. XD

 
TWORDY said:
I wouldn`t mind if only visual content is behind micro transactions like skins/camos for weapons, vehicles, additional wall paint, or other versions/alterations of armour outfits, clothes to be found. MICROTRANSACTIONS - it`s a gold mine and viable source of income. I believe any player would survive this type of paid content. What I don`t necessarily agree on is hiding additional content behind payment walls while there is no advanced AI introduced (like bandits), no single player/story driven mode. Probably questionable netcode and balancing. Not mentioning audio-visual coherence. Just my wild thoughts.
Click to expand...
Allow myself to add to the chorus of people who do not want to see this happen.

In addition to simply not liking microtransactions - it would fundamentally change the way the game is developed, and what they allow modders to do.

If they have microtransactions, those microtransactions would have to offer something that you couldn't otherwise get - and TFP would have to change their game so that you couldn't get them elsewhere.

Offer an NPC pack? TFP would have to disallow modders who are already making pretty fine NPCs. Offer skins? Disallow modders who are already re-skinning vanilla assets. Offer custom maps that you have to pay for? They would have to be better than RWG maps - and so RWG would have to be nerfed so as not to produce a map that is comparable in quality.

Luckily for us, TFP staff have been pretty much against this for as long as the subject has been brought up.

I want them to make money too. But it seems like, rather than go with microtransactions, they'll just start development on a new game for us to buy and enjoy. So kudos to them.

EDIT: Also, not only would us PC players be upset, imagine the wrath they would get from the console crowd. "You're offering stupid microtransactions and we still don't have updates to the buggy mess we paid for?" Etc.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
XCOUNTRY said:
I forget a lot more goes on under the hood. More than I admit I'm willing to learn right now. I'll stick to my xml editing for now.

Definitely don't want a walking auto turret. Wouldn't surprise me if the first iteration of bandits that makes it to the game is melee and non firearm weapons with projectiles that have travel time.
 
Click to expand...
Yeah, you can make them miss, miss after burst shot, miss when you move sideways too fast, define behavior (snipers can just hang behind ak guys etc.). Only annoying problem is that they sometimes clip their detection cone into blocks and shoot you through ground / house walls when they get too close (but at least game is more challenging that way and you risk losing chests / stations if you ignore them).

 
TWORDY said:
I was referring to VISUAL microtransactions like skins. I`m against any content DLCs (like weapons/vehicles/missions/maps/attachements etc) while the base game is nowhere near polished. I`m againt EAs policy like PREMIUM and pre-orders because at the end of the day even so called triple-A titles feel like Early Access without content. But personally I hate andy microtransaction/dlc business overall because usually this thing breaks performance or causes synchronization issues.
Click to expand...
Non-vital content DLC's and skins, are how Paradox Games stays afloat financially.

I would hope TFP does that too, so they can work on the Prequel or a part 2 without sweating the financial front-load.

**Prequel idea: The Zombie virus has hit and hundreds of million of people have "died" throughout the world.... so far.

Have many various character origins, from starting with a well stocked underground shelter in your back-yard with little survival skills or be a homeless, street-wise, ex-special forces player, facing the full threat head on. 

 
I guess the problem with microtransactions is that it's seen as a greedy move from developers, even if it's just visual things. It's understandable when free to play games do it, but yeah, definitely not something players get excited about.

I've even seen game companies say "We don't have microtransactions!" as a marketting move for their games. Says a lot when even game companies look at these things in a bad light.

Guppys Fur said:
The game need horses and after an DLC for Horse-Armor! for just 14.99!!!
Click to expand...
There's an unused horse texture in the game files... Just sayin' 😏

 
It's a no win game in the modern age.  If you don't do microtransactions/dlc/expansions you often get accused of "abandoning" a game if you release it, push out some patches, and are then done with it.  If you DO do microtransactions or DLC or expansion passes they call you greedy and accuse you of a cash grab.  People also don't understand the monetization behind microtransactions and why the prices are as high as they usually are.  Reducing your price by 50% does NOT result in 50% more sales, that's not how it works, and since games are a business development must consider ROI (return on investment).

Considering the temperament of the 7 Days to Die community I honestly don't think they should attempt any DLC, expansions, or microtransactions.  The community would tear them apart for it.  It's a fairly....we'll be nice and say "passionate" community already.  IMO TFP should finish 7DTD through release, support it for like a year with some minor patches, and then move on to a new project.  Since the community is not going to be ok with additional funding methods it kinda forces their hand on that.  We'll blame them of course and accuse them of abandoning it, but the reality is we'll have painted them into the corner on that decision.

It'd be completely unreasonable to say that they should stay to develop the game for very long past release with no viable options of continued monetization.  That's just the tradeoff you accept for no dlc/microtransactions/expansions.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Roland said:
Real life micro transactions?

How does Snowdog get into every conversation?
Click to expand...
Hey,  Micro thumbs are a real thing.   No need to toss around thinly disguised insults to make you feel better about your own thumbs.

Ralathar44 said:
It's a no win game in the modern age.  If you don't do microtransactions/dlc/expansions you often get accused of "abandoning" a game if you release it, push out some patches, and are then done with it.  If you DO do microtransactions or DLC or expansion passes they call you greedy and accuse you of a cash grab.  People also don't understand the monetization behind microtransactions and why the prices are as high as they usually are.  Reducing your price by 50% does NOT result in 50% more sales, that's not how it works, and since games are a business development must consider ROI (return on investment).

Considering the temperament of the 7 Days to Die community I honestly don't think they should attempt any DLC, expansions, or microtransactions.  The community would tear them apart for it.  It's a fairly....we'll be nice and say "passionate" community already.  IMO TFP should finish 7DTD through release, support it for like a year with some minor patches, and then move on to a new project.  Since the community is not going to be ok with additional funding methods it kinda forces their hand on that.  We'll blame them of course and accuse them of abandoning it, but the reality is we'll have painted them into the corner on that decision.

It'd be completely unreasonable to say that they should stay to develop the game for very long past release with no viable options of continued monetization.  That's just the tradeoff you accept for no dlc/microtransactions/expansions.
Click to expand...
its really not a no win game.  I would never call a game abandoned just because it has no micro transactions.  That makes no sense.  Tons of games that didnt have microtransactions were never considered abandoned, they were considered finished products.

Expansion Packs are great when reasonably priced, Grim Dawns Expansions are amazing.  There may not be another expansion for that game,  but I would certainly not call the game abandoned just cause I cant spend 50 cents on a skin.   

 
Last edited by a moderator:
I imagine that there are more than a few people out there (there has to be) that either:
A: Don't know this game exists, and won't know it exists until past Gold.
B: Are waiting until the game gets out of development.

At that point TFP can market the game at full price, and pending those sales, will have the necessary funds to start their next project AND have a small dedicated staff to continue to support this game. If the game does well (I don't know how it couldn't, it's pretty unique) they'll be obligated to continue support. Support could be as simple as maintaining a "mod corner" and putting their stamp of approval on mods done by the community. This won't cost players any money or TFP time and effort and the players get access to unlimited expansions. As long as there is a modding community out there as passionate about this game as there is now, I see a steady stream of new content long after TFP has moved on. The dedicated TFP staff could just fix any major bugs that come up and push minor patches.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Ralathar44 said:
It's a no win game in the modern age.  If you don't do microtransactions/dlc/expansions you often get accused of "abandoning" a game if you release it, push out some patches, and are then done with it.  If you DO do microtransactions or DLC or expansion passes they call you greedy and accuse you of a cash grab.  People also don't understand the monetization behind microtransactions and why the prices are as high as they usually are.  Reducing your price by 50% does NOT result in 50% more sales, that's not how it works, and since games are a business development must consider ROI (return on investment).

Considering the temperament of the 7 Days to Die community I honestly don't think they should attempt any DLC, expansions, or microtransactions.  The community would tear them apart for it.  It's a fairly....we'll be nice and say "passionate" community already.  IMO TFP should finish 7DTD through release, support it for like a year with some minor patches, and then move on to a new project.  Since the community is not going to be ok with additional funding methods it kinda forces their hand on that.  We'll blame them of course and accuse them of abandoning it, but the reality is we'll have painted them into the corner on that decision.

It'd be completely unreasonable to say that they should stay to develop the game for very long past release with no viable options of continued monetization.  That's just the tradeoff you accept for no dlc/microtransactions/expansions.
Click to expand...
I personally don't view Micro-transaction in the same light as DLC content.

I view Micro-transactions as: loot boxes, vanity fare, gear/items that can give you an advantage over another player in a competitive environment. Along with: locked content behind a paywall, that they already have in the game, on its full release. Along with, content that you must purchase in order to experience the full game.  

DLC's: I view as content, that you can purchase that extends the games life, that they developed after the fact. Content that doesn't give one player a distinct advantage over another, in a competitive environment. Among other things..

Again with the No. You may blame/accuse them, or someone else may blame/accuse them, but not all will.

If they feel that is what they need to do as a company to get the revenue? I won't blame them.

I just won't be playing any of their games from that point on. Others will, I am sure. 

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Odetta said:
@madmole

Have you seen the new Junk Drone in action yet? Or is it still a WIP?

Also, how do you feel about ES6 possibly not releasing until 2025?  
Click to expand...
Yes it is barely roughed in enough to begin a test game for an INT build. We had a meeting yesterday with a bunch of polish points.

That would be horrible. IMO Starfield will come out this fall with the new launch consoles so it can be a launch title, and ES6 won't be that far behind, 2021-2022. Despite lack of news they have had 9 years to flesh out all the designs so really its just ramping up to full production and if Starfield is shipping this year a lot of people are already done and have moved on to ES6, typically artists and world designers aren't needed towards the end, only for polish notes and a skeleton team can work on those as the core team shift to ES6. I'm being optimistic, but the failure of Fallout 76 and funding all these other studios that have been failing has to be taking a toll on their finances and BGS main office will have to save the day.

khzmusik said:
The CreaturePack Humans have managed to do a lot with just Unity models/anims and XML. There's also NPCPack Humans that have the same models, but custom DMT scripts so you can do things like hire them and have them patrol your base.

That's probably more than you're going to get from TFP for the foreseeable future, so I suggest checking them out. Both are updated with more stuff on almost a daily basis.
Click to expand...
Come on man, this is the A19 thread. No mod talk or mod links here please.

 
madmole said:
That would be horrible. IMO Starfield will come out this fall with the new launch consoles so it can be a launch title, and ES6 won't be that far behind, 2021-2022. Despite lack of news they have had 9 years to flesh out all the designs so really its just ramping up to full production and if Starfield is shipping this year a lot of people are already done and have moved on to ES6, typically artists and world designers aren't needed towards the end, only for polish notes and a skeleton team can work on those as the core team shift to ES6. I'm being optimistic, but the failure of Fallout 76 and funding all these other studios that have been failing has to be taking a toll on their finances and BGS main office will have to save the day.
Click to expand...
as long as they dont use the same engine as the last 3. they need to update or swap game engines. and with FO76, they have proven they can set it to mp if they wished. a small lannable ES game would be fun

 
Tin said:
You would be wrong. 'IF' they did: It would guarantee the first and last game I buy from them, IF they brought in Micro-transactions. Actual worthwhile DLC's? sure. Micro-BS? nah, I would pass, shelve this game, and pass on anything they produced after. Yeah, I only speak for myself, and they might? probably? would survive doing it, Just saying I know I would be one less future sale, none the less.
Click to expand...
Depends if it was just new cosmetics that offered no advantage over vanilla ones I don't think anyone would care about that. Skins basically. That said we're not in any position to even talk about that because UMA is a mess and has to be changed before we could even think about that. I doubt we'll even make any DLCs.

 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top