PC Optimized
- Thread starter Kzuy
- Start date
7 years in development and no optimization makes no sense, whether you want to quote "industry standards" or display posters calling us all idiots or not. Lack of zombies, slow downs and all manner of nastiness could have been solved with optimization. Even once a year would have been more useful than not.
Trying to cram more and more content in has slowed, reduced numbers and frustrated players. "industry standard" quotes dont make it right, nor do they preclude people asking the question about optimization. How many zombies around when bandits and npcs come in? How will that affect framerates without any sort of optimization? All valid questions that buyers have a right to ask!
Trying to cram more and more content in has slowed, reduced numbers and frustrated players. "industry standard" quotes dont make it right, nor do they preclude people asking the question about optimization. How many zombies around when bandits and npcs come in? How will that affect framerates without any sort of optimization? All valid questions that buyers have a right to ask!
theFlu
Well-known member
All valid questions to ask, but the answer remains the same; they're still in the phase of adding features, that's called alpha. They can't stop adding features, "go beta", for what is essentially legal reasons; they made promises in their kickstarter and they'll have to meet those or risk getting into trouble later.
While still adding features, optimizing any single aspect is a risk; the implementation may get discarded due to future issues, the optimizations themselves can actually conflict with coming features etc etc.. f.e. they overhauled water a couple times, and it still doesn't work. Wasted efforts a plenty. Optimizing the amount of time used for optimization needs to be a thing... and it's not like the game doesn't run on anything, there's some issues here and there, but overall it works.
When you run into issues, make bug reports.
While still adding features, optimizing any single aspect is a risk; the implementation may get discarded due to future issues, the optimizations themselves can actually conflict with coming features etc etc.. f.e. they overhauled water a couple times, and it still doesn't work. Wasted efforts a plenty. Optimizing the amount of time used for optimization needs to be a thing... and it's not like the game doesn't run on anything, there's some issues here and there, but overall it works.
When you run into issues, make bug reports.
alphaniner
New member
Let's look at the oldest ~10% (433) of that list. Of those, only 50 have more than 1k reviews. Only 13 have more than 10k reviews, 11 of which are net positive:
Project Zomboid 20k
7 Days to Die 77k
Stranded Deep 23k
Shellshock Live 15k
BeamNG.drive 28k
Empyrion - Galactic Survival 15k
The Isle 18k
Squad 33k
Scrap Mechanic 26k
Golf with Your Friends 18k
Factorio 57k
7 Days to Die 77k
Stranded Deep 23k
Shellshock Live 15k
BeamNG.drive 28k
Empyrion - Galactic Survival 15k
The Isle 18k
Squad 33k
Scrap Mechanic 26k
Golf with Your Friends 18k
Factorio 57k
Seems to me that 7DtD sticks out in a remarkably positive way. Funny how the same data can lead to very different conclusions...
Granted, I'm not a statistician so my "results" could be as misleading or as meaningless as yours. It seems to me that really interesting numbers would require asking questions like:
How many EA games released more than a few years ago still receive regular updates? How many former EA games have significant numbers of reviews complaining that the game left EA too early? How does the progress of 7DtD compare to that of other developmentally comparable games that started out in EA?
Unfortunately, you'd need to pay someone to compile the data necessary to answer these questions.
Linkhead2
New member
"Basing your development around avoidance of negative input"
There's no negative input because the game is optimized to function properly, Keeping consumers pleased and excited for future releases. We make sure were communicating and giving hope to the 30% of people we did not reach out to. (Mainly the bugs are fixed later on)
"but how can you be sure what you're doing is really beneficial in the long run?"
Because what is the point of planning to fly, when you cant even get off the ground? This is the oldest flaw in any long-term investment, its also the easiest to avoid. Plan from getting from A To B first, NOT A-Z. Having a rough view of what direction your going is a much safer and strategic plan.
"But I'm sure you did a rigorous cost-benefit analysis to arrive at that 70% target"
Or you know, you could just go onto the Review pages and read the reviews? Its not rocket science to work out what people do and do not like. I just checked up on the reviews and filtered the most upvoted. 7 out of 10 of them are negative, Mocking the game for its poor optimization and lack of clear direction.
FTP have no clear direction with this game, that's not a controversial statement from a viewer's perspective. They are facing a consistent war with their own ideas and public opinion and have no clear idea which one is more valuable. Each patch for a long while now has added/replaced/removed chunks of the game and to this day, they are still trying to fix this. To say there is going to be core audience once this game is complete...is heavily optimistic. I am the last person in my group of friends who thinks this game has a chance of succeeding.
"and keep detailed metrics so you can know how meeting it is affecting your release time-frame"
What release timeframe? The game is public, and monetized! Its not between friends or in a testing region. When you make a game public, you begin building a reputation. If your game is finished but your reputation is aids, you aint selling no game.
alphaniner
New member
Right, because knee-jerk input like upvotes and anecdotal data are all you need to get the full picture. And it's not like people are more inclined to advertise negative feelings than positive ones.
The fact is, only TFP are likely to have all the necessary data to properly understand the long-term health of the game. Yet everyone who's unhappy with the state of the game seems certain that the data supports their perspective. Could it be that's due to hubris rather than rigorous analysis? :eek2:
But anyway, you missed the point of that post. You said you're involved in indie game development and criticized how TFP are doing things. Instead of cherry-picking data about 7DtD, how about providing data about your game (like the aforementioned metrics) to indicate that your development philosophy is sound, and moreover that it has any bearing on the development of 7DtD?
really complicated thing with early access games..
games get more complicated and need more development time, without early access and early buyers, many games would not be possible at all imo.
on the other hand it is extremely annoying if a game is for several years in alpha, absolutely no release date on the horizon, people which complain about ongoing and serious issues get "silenced" with crap comments like "it's alpha, you are dumb".
just imagine, if this game is still in "alpha" in 10 years, or development just stops at some point? is it still okay because the dumb people bought early access alpha and have to know that this would happen? sure..
i don't think this happens to 7dtd, i think tfp try to make serious progress so that a release version is at some point really a thing, even if i really can't stand some of their priorities.
games get more complicated and need more development time, without early access and early buyers, many games would not be possible at all imo.
on the other hand it is extremely annoying if a game is for several years in alpha, absolutely no release date on the horizon, people which complain about ongoing and serious issues get "silenced" with crap comments like "it's alpha, you are dumb".
just imagine, if this game is still in "alpha" in 10 years, or development just stops at some point? is it still okay because the dumb people bought early access alpha and have to know that this would happen? sure..
i don't think this happens to 7dtd, i think tfp try to make serious progress so that a release version is at some point really a thing, even if i really can't stand some of their priorities.
Laz Man
Fun Pimps Staff
Agree 100%. There really isn't a set rule book for early access which I can understand can be frustrating to some. In the case of 7d2d, we have already come this far and it looks like gold release is finally on the horizon. It will be a bitter sweet moment for me as it has been an exciting Alpha ride (although no the fastest lol)...and hope the devs continue with DLCs or some type of sequel as there isnt anything on the market like 7d2d (adult voxel zombie pve/coop fun).
Roland
Moderator
It is also a false statement. There have been optimization made all along. Alpha 14 was a huge optimization release in preparation of the console version. Alpha 18 was another huge optimization release and for A19 faatal has been spending most of his programming time on optimizations.
7 Days to Die has been in development for a long time. 7 years is a long time in Early Access. There can be no denial of that fact. What is important is that they are still working on it at an unbroken pace. There is no abandonment. They are fully funded for the pace at which they are developing.
If the development process has you fatigued simply put the game aside until the announcement comes that it has gone gold. Then pull it back out and have an enjoyable time playing co-op with your grandkids.
Roland
Moderator
I can poke fun at the long alpha/ early access cycle because it doesn't bother me. There is no reason to feel threatened by the fact that 7 Days to Die is one of only 9 games that have been in early access since 2013. I consider it in good company with Project Zomboid....
Besides there are lots of people on this forum who have or will very soon have grandkids they can play this game with. It would be the way I would make myself the favored Grandpa after all.
Besides there are lots of people on this forum who have or will very soon have grandkids they can play this game with. It would be the way I would make myself the favored Grandpa after all.
Boidster
New member
Yabbut, srs ppl with srs concern will be along shortly. Think of the outrage!
I mean, just between you and me, I kinda like the extended alpha because it's like getting 30-50% of a new game every year or so. I get enough time on each alpha to have a bunch of fun, try out some new stuff, try out some old stuff and fail miserably, and when I'm kind of getting bored >boom< here's a revamp of several major components. Go try again!
I don't mean to give TFP any ideas, though...
I mean, just between you and me, I kinda like the extended alpha because it's like getting 30-50% of a new game every year or so. I get enough time on each alpha to have a bunch of fun, try out some new stuff, try out some old stuff and fail miserably, and when I'm kind of getting bored >boom< here's a revamp of several major components. Go try again!
I don't mean to give TFP any ideas, though...
BobTheBard
New member
This. The whole 'Early Access' craze, combined with crowdfunding and general overuse, has made the terms Alpha, Beta, and Release largely meaningless in the videogame industry since the definition of what is an alpha, what is a beta, and what is released vary from game to game, largely in accordance with whatever that developer happens to think of the terms. As an example, I remember RimWorld going from alpha to beta to release without changing in any significant way (visible to the player at least) beyond gaining more features and becoming more stable. I remember DOTA 2 staying in beta for a few months, changing little, then releasing before it was finished. I've seen Stellaris change more after being released than most alpha games do in their entire development cycle. To a jaded person like me those terms have become basically meaningless, especially when it comes to trying to dismiss complaints. Fact is, the game's been taking money from customers and giving them a product for six years now, which is longer than both RimWorld and Stellaris (DOTA 2 is technically free to play). I'm not gonna say the product is or is not worth it, but I am gonna say that people shouldn't try to use the development process as a shield against criticism when a developer has been selling their game for that long.
Last edited by a moderator:
Gazz
Fun Pimps Staff
People love to toss terms like alpha and beta around and ascribe all kinds of properties to those.
The only definition that (almost) everyone agrees with is that beta is feature complete, alpha is not.
7DTD is not feature complete, ergo alpha.
That some dude on the internet thinks that optimisation is only allowed in "beta" does not mean that TFP are bound by that.
The only definition that (almost) everyone agrees with is that beta is feature complete, alpha is not.
7DTD is not feature complete, ergo alpha.
That some dude on the internet thinks that optimisation is only allowed in "beta" does not mean that TFP are bound by that.