I know everyone knows the issues in this video but I’ll put it here anyways…
JaWoodle Video "What's Happening with 7 Days to Die?"
- Thread starter ProlificPoultry
- Start date
I think it's more of an issue of being a fanboi, such as yourself.
Riamus
Hunter
Okay. That happens in games that are in development. Things change. Some like the changes. Some don't. If sales are up and TFP is doing well, then it means they will keep making games. And if they make another than gives me so many hours of enjoyment, I'm happy. Regardless what I think of specific changes.
InfiniteWarrior
Scavenger
For how long? You yourself noted that sales and conncurrent player counts spike and dip, often severely. There is no "better and better."
Fair enough. I may have misunderstood your intentions.
Riamus
Hunter
Doesn't really matter how long. If they've made money, then it is a good thing. They continue to sell the game, and that is good.
If everything is ok then nothing is ok. It's reductive logic. Kind of like without light there is no dark. I feel like you are trying very hard to find a silver lining as much as others are trying to find faults on this one.
zztong
Hunter
I've had a chance to watch the video now. I have mixed feelings.
PRO: He makes good points about the new features and I hope TFP hears them.
MIXED: He laments the loss of a long list of mechanics. I share his feelings on some, but don't miss them all.
MIXED: I'm not sure his interpretation of the numbers available to him (or me, or anyone) stands up to scrutiny. My fear is the numbers are so general that they lend themselves to many interpretations. I would say that recent "Mixed" reviews would be troubling to me as decisions I make about what games to buy are influenced by that.
CON: He speculates about developer motivations in a way that I think some viewers will assume is fact, but that I don't think are likely to be accurate.
As for if it is a "movement", I'd say it is. Harder to characterize is if it is representative of the larger player base. I would note I haven't made a study of it, but my perception is that new arrivals on this forum are more likely to be complaining about the new features, which I think also suggests there is a "movement."
PRO: He makes good points about the new features and I hope TFP hears them.
MIXED: He laments the loss of a long list of mechanics. I share his feelings on some, but don't miss them all.
MIXED: I'm not sure his interpretation of the numbers available to him (or me, or anyone) stands up to scrutiny. My fear is the numbers are so general that they lend themselves to many interpretations. I would say that recent "Mixed" reviews would be troubling to me as decisions I make about what games to buy are influenced by that.
CON: He speculates about developer motivations in a way that I think some viewers will assume is fact, but that I don't think are likely to be accurate.
As for if it is a "movement", I'd say it is. Harder to characterize is if it is representative of the larger player base. I would note I haven't made a study of it, but my perception is that new arrivals on this forum are more likely to be complaining about the new features, which I think also suggests there is a "movement."
Riamus
Hunter
Considering more than half your posts are you getting upset (big feelings) and most posts that disagree with you are civil and not emotional, I think you have things backwards. Just because people disagree with you doesn't mean their opinions are not valid. You have this attitude that your opinions are better than those of people who have been here a long time, but it isn't true. If people who have played the game for years like it, so what? If they happen to not like certain parts and say so, but then don't agree with some part you don't like, that doesn't mean they are unwilling to hear "outside" opinions. It just means they don't agree with you.
And I see no reason why moderators cannot interact on the forum beyond policing people. Their opinions and information are just as valid as anyone else's.
HammerDano
Scavenger
well thank god you rode in to comment on this post...and every other thing that gets posted.
Riamus
Hunter
Case in point. You don't have exclusive rights to post.
Rightly or wrongly, I suspect the players expectations were for the new game mechanics to be in near release state awaiting final polish.
Publishing the same ol, 60% proof of concept prototype system, failed TFPs and the players in this instance. I agree some players are predisposed to negative reactions. However, as a newer player who aready feels the trader quest loop ruins the vanilla experience, I was taken aback by simply how lame the implimintation of two main mechanics for the release were. As many have pointed out, simply turning off the two main mechanics is a solution, but it certainly does not excite players to play the game.
InfiniteWarrior
Scavenger
Is it? What it isn't a solution to is that many, if not most, love the concepts and would probably love to use the features were they implemented differently. Everyone already playing the game fully expected that the partially implemented gear-based system to offset biome effects would be fully implemented as opposed to removed and replaced with the shallow, MMO-like 'challenge' window and magical smoothie/biome badge system, for example. "Turn them off if you don't like them" isn't going to change that.
QFT
I take woodle with a grain of salt now a days. The disingenuous stun baton series turned me off, as well as occasionally blaming the game for obvious game play decisions (or the statement in the video that the dew collector model is a rain collector.)
He is an obvious fan of the game. I will refrain from speculating on woodles motivations.
Last edited:
I think it is, just not a good one. At least with them off you have the previous version of the game. But I am with you, I would love to use the features were they implemented in a much better way.
I think @Riamus pointed out in another thread that it's likely unfinished design for end game material to which it would then make some sense on some of the design decisions such as loot stage caps.
I would fully expect them to redo the smoothie icons into something else rather than ditch the system altogether which I would still take as a win.
When/If temperature returns depending on how it's integrated storms could also be much better making the shallow nature of both more fleshed out and outright better.
It's just a shame it took them so long to get this far when for the time investment I would have expected temperature integration and better design with progression and smoothies.
I would agree that it is a dew collector, with a very poor design, with the major flaw being it would collect a lot of rain water.
zztong
Hunter
If we're diverting into Dew Collectors vs Rain Collectors, I think JaWoodle was partially right.
There are rain collectors with that design. That design also happens to collect dew. I suspect the difference in terms stems from the difference in where you live and the amount of rainfall you get. In a desert, it's a dew collector. In a rain forest, it's a rain collector.
When they first displayed the Dew Collector I too thought it was a rain collector and that they were thinking of a "Solar Still" which purifies water through evaporation. I assumed they had looked at the wrong graphics for inspiration.
There are rain collectors with that design. That design also happens to collect dew. I suspect the difference in terms stems from the difference in where you live and the amount of rainfall you get. In a desert, it's a dew collector. In a rain forest, it's a rain collector.
When they first displayed the Dew Collector I too thought it was a rain collector and that they were thinking of a "Solar Still" which purifies water through evaporation. I assumed they had looked at the wrong graphics for inspiration.
Funny how every post including the video has been merged even if the post has discussion outside of just the video. Even before the video was posted people were clamoring about the game and in the video comments you can see other prominent youtubers posting their concerns on it.
Too many focused on who is criticizing the game and not the actual points or thoughts. It's like collectively peoples brains turned to mush when a YouTuber discussed it.
I see a lot of people saying they want to focus on discussing the content. I posted a lot of it up feel free to look over it and disagree or agree with whatever. That is how you have a proper healthy discussion rather than worry about the posters intentions and spend half a thread discussing that instead of the content.
Too many focused on who is criticizing the game and not the actual points or thoughts. It's like collectively peoples brains turned to mush when a YouTuber discussed it.
If I say I have these issues. Then people will say that it's just me or a small minority. If I show evidence that others have this issue now it's appealing to a higher authority?
So your critique is that you didn't watch the video because you couldn't listen to someone setup a preamble for the negativity he would get from people (like on this forum)? He did formulate the problem. You just had to watch past 35 seconds to find out. This isn't even something unique. A lot of youtube videos start like this and half ask for a sub and follow. To be fair it's not like you had to watch the video and can't comment on why the video started off poorly in your eyes so I can't fault you for that. But you should read my post. A lot of what he discusses I break down with my own opinions on it. I would love to see what you think.
It's validation that you are not alone and the summary provided mirrors your own views. I honestly don't get the hate just because it's a youtuber posting it. A lot of the points he discussed were heavily debated just weeks prior with far less negative recoil. It's one thing to disagree with the content it's another just to throw shade just because of who it is. We call that discrimination. I wonder what happened to others that turned them off youtube reviews? I use those, steam reviews, reddit reviews anything I can when making an informed opinion on whether I should buy a game or not - take Ark Aquatica for example. The trailer looks neat, the reviews say otherwise.
I see a lot of people saying they want to focus on discussing the content. I posted a lot of it up feel free to look over it and disagree or agree with whatever. That is how you have a proper healthy discussion rather than worry about the posters intentions and spend half a thread discussing that instead of the content.
The preamble is the introduction. If he wants to talk about the game, then let him talk about the game. He started talking about the experience of filming a video - this has nothing to do with the game. Besides, I didn't listen, but read the subtitles. I don't speak English. Reading a lot of dynamic text on a flickering background is quite difficult.
That's why I don't watch videos. I read the forum. And on the forum it's common to express your thoughts in text. Text takes much less time to understand. For example, it took me less than 10 seconds to read your answer.
I'm fine with people posting videos describing some mistake, because sometimes it's hard to describe some things in words. But an idea can always be described in words.
Am generally against any form of gating but certainly biomes in any order would be an improvement from my point of view.
As for the storms I feel rather than blurred vision Blizzards and Sandstorms could reduce visibility to like 5m or some such extreme while doing small damage over time, that's not so trivial. There is much to play with here, the blizzards could do more damage over time than sand storms, while sand storms could cause gradual armour wear.
The wasteland could have a radiation cloud that does more damage over time than the blizzards and sandstorms but only reduce vision to 15m or the like.
This would have a genuine impact on the player while not simply causing a "lock-in". Equipment to offset the damage is a decent enough idea but I feel secondary to the potential of line of sight fog. Blurred vision is meh, but genuine line of sight fog not so trivial.
Last edited: