I don't think that's what people want. People want a story, progression, and end game stuff to do - not to race through levels and bore themselves to tears by doing so when they reach a singular or group Alpha state.
Learn by doing. I will again take this opportunity to publicly mourn the loss of that amazing system.
That is exactly the opposite of levelling up fast, gave a genuine feeling of reward for the time put into doing something long enough to earn their skill boost. Punching a few dogs to death then suddenly knowing how to craft a motorbike for example was and is an absurd non-sequitur and removed the challenge and in turn removed a genuine extension of playtime.
I don't believe you are being fair. You are glamorizing the system you like and intentionally putting the one you don't into absurd terms. You have asked for an honest analysis a number of times and so I shall give you one.
Both systems can be rushed and both systems can be played organically. Players would speed run the progression just as much under LBD as they do now with central pool xp and skill points. People could play LBD naturally and organically if they so chose and people can do so with central pool xp if they so choose. LBD emphasized doing a single action type in order to increase the skill for that action type. Skillpoints emphasizes the growth of the character through various and all actions. Both are valid and amazing systems that work well. I enjoyed both and I recognize the strengths and weaknesses of both. In all cases, you get out of a game what you put into it and abusing any given system will make it appear absurd while using it to organically progress gives a feeling of reward and accomplishment. I have found both systems can deliver this result.
I know that many people have cast an unfair light upon LBD making it appear absurd over the last few years which may cause a desire to respond in kind about the current system but since you have asked for an honest discussion, let's leave behind the rhetoric and be honest. Both designs work and are good designs and multiple games have used both with success and regardless of whether a person likes or dislikes one or the other, that doesn't mean one design is actually trash and the other is treasure.
This is one of the things I miss and, on your point of the playerbase; and only I can speak for me, but as I said before I get bored faster with each alpha from about 17 onwards.
Thanks for your feedback.
Not because of burnout because I thoroughly enjoy other aspects of 7D, the building system for example is outstanding. But because the new stuff and fluff just isn't enough to compensate for the good things lost. The more 7d apologists dismiss opinions like mine as sentimentality that we need to get over, and not discuss it seriously with the possibility of non modded reversal or options, then who knows?
Speaking as an official representative of TFP, I can tell you unequivocably that no amount of serious discussion is going to reverse this game back to the direction of LBD. That isn't to say that the devs did not take the counter arguments seriously and did not weigh their choices carefully before changing the method of progression. In fact, it was a process that spanned from A11-A17 in which we saw the game start from a purely LBD model and slowly change towards a skillpoint model. LBD disappeared bit by bit until it was finally gone in A17. That was a period of about 3 years in which the team discussed, developed, and ultimately came to their final decision. Now we have seen their final system get refined and modified since A17 and now the game is almost a wrap. Please know that regardless of the snarky back and forth over LBD by community members, TFP has always taken their game seriously and been very careful in their decisions. I say this plainly and simply and with no intention of sneering about it. I'm simply being honest that there is 0 chance of getting LBD for player progression outside of modding.
Once the games sold and Steams refund has passed, and the money is in the devs pockets, what do they care. They aren't just making a game for themselves, but a player base - one composed of lots of opinions about what's been and whats gone, and I think we drive the change either proactively or passively by open discussion and/or passive acceptance of whatever the devs change, and/or Dev Apologists who defend anything the developers do.
The difference between good developers and other kinds is the involvement of the playerbase over devs know best, which clearly isn't always the case.
As a general statement of what could occur in this industry I agree. I personally don't think your description fits TFP. They have always cared about this game being the best that it can be according to their goals and just because the game has been financially successful and they can't lose that money to refunds doesn't mean they don't care. They absolutely care about how people react to what they have done. All of us are excited for experimental so that you all can try the new features and we hope that you will like them and it is hugely disappointing when people don't like them.
Some people feel like the money they paid gives them the right to be part of the directing team and that the player base that supported the game by paying for it should be able to override what the devs want to do and that the devs shouldn't change anything without first asking the player base who paid for the game if they want those changes.
Others feel like the money they paid gives them the right to play the game and witness the changes that occur during development and it's nice to be able to give feedback but ultimately the final decision rests with the developers and the final product will be whatever they create.
Still others just buy the game and play it for what it is at that moment in time until they get bored and then move on without ever following a single bit of it's development. They may come back to it and play again later but probably didn't pay attention enough to really register the changes. They know something is different but are not sure what it is.
I am in that second group and disagree with the assertions of the first group and have been in the third group for other early access games in my library.
I just think it's a good OPTION to have.
