I would ask, what equals "disservice to old timers" or "walk all over the old timers"?
I said what I mean. Is anything unclear or do you want to lead a sophisticated debate on fundamental principles?
Does intention have anything to do it?
Sure. In this case, the intention seems to be to make more money and cater to players who like a simple game.
So if TFP is making changes that they feel make the game better from their perspective but there is no ill intent towards anyone who has 1000s of hours would that be just an innocent "here's hoping old timers understand and still support us" or a more diabolical "lets walk all over them"?
Afaik, they simplify things to sell more copies and when old timers complain, they respond with "we don't cater to you". Is that wrong? In this post, you say very different things all the time. Was I mislead, to me it's only hearsay.
Is the standard simply "if I feel walked on then I was walked on"?
No.
As you pointed out nobody is saying ALL old timers feel spurned. So if it isn't a universal feeling of being screwed over then is it really real that anyone is actually being walked on?
There is no general answer to your general question, it has to be decided case by case. In the case we discuss here, my answer is yes.
Madmole has said a number of times that there will be some simplification particularly in the early game to make playing more intuitive and easy to understand but that he wants to add more complexity to mid and late game.
Then again, they already made millions with a game that did not have these simplifications. So why does he want them? Why does he think, he needs them? To sell as many copies as possible? And why did he make things "complicated" first?
Sure, we are the ones who supported TFP while they were starting out
See. They made a game that was so-and-so "complicated", that became a hit, sold - last thing I heard years ago - over 1.5 million copies, made the owners rich. Now that we are nearing the end of development, instead of getting the polished version of that great game we supported, the version we all were looking forward too, we (seem to) get a simplified version, that is simplified in hopes of selling more copies to new players who - obviously in the decision maker's mind - are too dumb to play the game they actually wanted to make. While the rest will hopefully still get enough entertainment outta the game with mods. That often-quoted "vision" that they had of the game is now too complicated? Hm.
and we have a reward in that we can remember the game how it once was. People starting in A18 can never get that. Sure they can go back but they won't appreciate Alpha 10 as the best version yet like we did when all we knew was Alpha 9. We can joke about all the broken legs in Alpha 11 and procedural caves that newbies will never have in their game.
And the point here is..? I certainly got my money's worth. Already with my playtime in A17+ I got my money's worth. The game is still pretty good. So?
Would it be nice to have procedural caves now? Absolutely. But is TFP's decision to not include them born out of wanting to stick it to old timers who remember playing with procedural caves or is it purely because of technical limitations? What if the truth is that TFP couldn't figure out how to do caves well enough for the standard of quality they require in their game but someone feels personally offended that TFP was walking on them by cutting procedural caves and most of the people in his circle also felt abandoned because they loved procedural caves so much. Did TFP walk all over them by cutting procedural caves?
Why do you discuss technical problems as a reason to remove great features when the issue is dumbing the game down so more copies can be sold to new players, who don't like sophisticated mechanics?
The Alpha disclaimer warns that a game in development may change into something you no longer are interested in playing. That is the risk of buying into early access.
Serious question: Why aren't all threads/posts where someone complains about changes responded to with a copypaste of the Alpha disclaimer and then closed? "That is the risk of buying into early access, case closed." Nice and easy.
Can recent changes to increase the accessibility of the game really be defined as walking over early supporters when some of those supporters feel the game has never been better, some feel it's changed for the worse but is still fun, some don't care for it unless they use mods, and some won't ever play it again no matter what?
Is that a question? If so, you know my answer. If you disagree, you might explain how and why, please while refering to the actual point, not changes that root in the devs genuine opinion that they improve the game or their inability to solve technical problems. Changes that are being made to sell more copies under the assumption that "all" new players prefer a simple game.
There is such a wide spectrum of responses to the development process and all of us were warned when we pledged our money that the game could change into something we personally don't like.
That's why we don't lawyer up and sue. We can still be upset when walked over, right?
I think we all agree on the fact that the game is being made to be more accessible to a wider audience.
You mean "being changed"..? I thought it was being made as a vision or so, devs had a great idea and wanted to make that one happen. Like artists.
Some feel personally affronted by that and others don't. How much responsibility for being offended does the offended party bear in feeling offended?
When someone offends me and then I find out there was no mean intent and it wasn't an attack the offended feelings bleed out of me almost instantly. Is it enough to know that TFP isn't intentionally attacking anyone by making these changes?
I am not offended, at this point, a hobby that was important to me has been taken away from me, with - afaik - the explanation that potential customers are now more important than I am. That sure is offensive, but only as in adding insult to the injury.