PC Some Steam Charts

[Poojam]

I was joking about the battle royal thing! Every game maker out there is just adding "hot feature X!" to their game, rinse and repeat.
You guys are the only ones making something worth playing on the long term in my opinion, where as everyone else is just interested in the latest gaming fad to maximize revenue.

Seems like you're trivializing competitive player vs player games. I can assure you that the people playing them having been doing it for a long time, and will be doing it for a long time after this game is antiquated and forgotten. Would sure be nice if they got 'dem some o that pee vee pee elements, so they might have a chance to create a community into the forseeable future. No community, no one plays it, and the ONLY people that are happy are the solo'ers/small co-ops. Congratuations 10,000 people of the many millions that bought the game, you got what you wanted.

This is the ONLY game that has gratifying building mechanics, interesting randomly generated maps with TONS of POIs,

Completely agree.

 

[Poojam]

I know it sounds crazy but the KS was literally to make the game that the bosses wanted to play but no one wanted to make. A game with actual gameplay - not just PVP - that could be played SP.Also not just a theme park / sandbox where the winning condition (when you stop playing) is when you reach a critical level of boredom.

Should they have made yet another battle royale game (YABRG) instead?

I guess it would have been a lot simpler because then you don't need much more than moving and shooting.

Doesn't sound crazy at all.

I'm not just advocating for a simple theme park/sandbox. Some progression is okay, just not this much. I'm advocating for design decisions to be made that understand there are an awful lot of people (myself primarily - just to be clear) that want this game to have some support for a competitive environment between players.

Take a look at this thread. There are dozens of ideas that can be used to achieve these goals. The implementation of many of them would have negligable impacts on PVE/Co-OP experience as well. Some are suited better for an isolated game mode, but many are capable to be introduced in this build environment. For example, can we make sound travel more than 250 meters for guns and power tools so that players can actually hear each other? This seems to literally affect nothing with regards to zombies and a coop experience. We're all wandering around in the dark trying to hunt each other with dowsing rods, so to speak.

https://7daystodie.com/forums/showthread.php?86578-Lets-help-TFP-improve-PvP

I tested it with a friend. You can see someone and shoot at them with a sniper rifle, but they can't hear the sound. That's how wrong this is.

 

[Jedo]

Go look at the OP

I did. When I read the stuff Roland posted, I think, "Interesting," and I move on with my life. When these concerned people look at it (you?), they think, "I need to fix...something." Why does one want to fix whatever they think there is to fix? (Why they think there is something to fix is a different matter entirely.)

 

[OzHawkeye]

Seems like you're trivializing competitive player vs player games. I can assure you that the people playing them having been doing it for a long time, and will be doing it for a long time after this game is antiquated and forgotten. Would sure be nice if they got 'dem some o that pee vee pee elements, so they might have a chance to create a community into the forseeable future. No community, no one plays it, and the ONLY people that are happy are the solo'ers/small co-ops. Congratuations 10,000 people of the many millions that bought the game, you got what you wanted.



Completely agree.

You're assuming there that the vast majority (in fact, by your numbers something like 99.99% of the playerbase is PVP'ers).

I STAGGERINGLY highly doubt that.

 

[meganoth]

Congratuations 10,000 people of the many millions that bought the game, you got what you wanted.

Concratulations on making up statistics out of thin air.

I tested it with a friend. You can see someone and shoot at them with a sniper rifle, but they can't hear the sound. That's how wrong this is.

It is a sensible suggestion to change that. And I think it will be. But we should never forget, it is our own choice playing an EA game, we have "signed the waiver" not to expect a finished and fully working game.

 

[RestInPieces]

I did. When I read the stuff Roland posted, I think, "Interesting," and I move on with my life. When these concerned people look at it (you?), they think, "I need to fix...something." Why does one want to fix whatever they think there is to fix? (Why they think there is something to fix is a different matter entirely.)

Because if forums were filled with people that said "Interesting" and moved on with their life, they wouldn't be any forums. Didn't you comment on what building perks could do the other day? One could say "why do you feel the need to fix anything about building, it's fine the way it is".

It's just feedback and discussion, nothing wrong with it.

 

[Jedo]

Because if forums were filled with people that said "Interesting" and moved on with their life, they wouldn't be any forums. Didn't you comment on what building perks could do the other day? One could say "why do you feel the need to fix anything about building, it's fine the way it is".
It's just feedback and discussion, nothing wrong with it.

As Roland has demonstrated before, there's a difference between giving feedback on mechanics and trying to fix TFP's business model/plan. You don't see a difference between saying, "A good building perk might be X," and "TFP needs to hop on the Battle Royale train so that they get more players"? (Don't get hung up on the examples.)

Besides, I'm not advocating an end of discussion. I'm trying to understand this desire to fix TFP.

 

[RestInPieces]

As Roland has demonstrated before, there's a difference between giving feedback on mechanics and trying to fix TFP's business model/plan. You don't see a difference between saying, "A good building perk might be X," and "TFP needs to hop on the Battle Royale train so that they get more players"? (Don't get hung up on the examples.)
Besides, I'm not advocating an end of discussion. I'm trying to understand this desire to fix TFP.

How would someone not working in TFP "try to fix their planning" in the first place? It implies that they are taking some action to do it, which is impossible, so the correct wording would be "giving feedback about TFP's planning".

(Edited to answer your question in a better way): And someone would give feedback about TFP's planning for the same reason someone voices their opinion about the e.g. building perks. Because he thinks it will improve the game. And my question is, why not?

 

[Jedo]

I think we've drifted a bit here. I started asking why people are trying to boost TFP's coverage (whether that is through marketing or adding in more elements that have mass appeal). It isn't just idle discussion of features that people would like. I would boil this down to a concern to make sure that TFP sells more copies of the game or keeps people invested in the game for years to come.

Why?

(You, RestInPieces, made it seem like an idle hobby. Ok. If that's the reason for most discussions like that, then I can chalk it up to a difference in interests. If there's a different reason--one more targeted or intentional--then I want to know that reason.)

 

[Poojam]

I think we've drifted a bit here. I started asking why people are trying to boost TFP's coverage (whether that is through marketing or adding in more elements that have mass appeal). It isn't just idle discussion of features that people would like. I would boil this down to a concern to make sure that TFP sells more copies of the game or keeps people invested in the game for years to come.
Why?

(You, RestInPieces, made it seem like an idle hobby. Ok. If that's the reason for most discussions like that, then I can chalk it up to a difference in interests. If there's a different reason--one more targeted or intentional--then I want to know that reason.)

Re-read the last sentence from the OP.

"Interested to hear analysis and see more comparison charts with games that have done better or worse than 7 Days to Die and why you believe that to be the case. "

 

[Poojam]

You're assuming there that the vast majority (in fact, by your numbers something like 99.99% of the playerbase is PVP'ers).
I STAGGERINGLY highly doubt that.

Stop putting words in my mouth. You're almost as bad as Gaz's over simplification/strawmanning. I didn't say the vast majority of the millions that bought the game are pvp'ers. I can only confidently say after looking at Roland's steam chart, 99.99% of the player base ain't playing the game anymore. I can say that there are massive numbers of players that play PVP games, and I think due to the culture shift that happened around A10/A11 it drove a significant portion of the people that bought the game away. They likely lost a lot of potential sales growth due to the limitations surrounding competitive play as well. I know I wouldn't buy the game today, even if everything they have done in A17 works great.

Roland's OP

"Interested to hear analysis and see more comparison charts with games that have done better or worse than 7 Days to Die and why you believe that to be the case. "

 

[LuckyStar]

Okay well.. I am going to flat out DISAGREE with this whole PvP needing to be in this game nonsense.

It does NOT need to be in here.

If you want that experience go play PUBG or whatever.

The focus on this game is and ALWAYS has been PvE.

At no point did TFP stray from that path NOR did they ever mislead the public into thinking otherwise.

MM did mention that IF, and that's a big "if", they turn their focus to PvP it'll be the last thing they work on.

Since I'm being completely candid, I find companies that take on the PvE challenge deserve far more credit.

It's extremely difficult to make a good AI and a game format that creates an environment conducive to a

real challenge to the Human intellect.

Add to that a Voxel world that's already using a lot of resources and you've got a SERIOUS challenge.

Congrats to TFP for no only taking that on but pushing the bar for the entire industry.

While the AI has room for improvement [and a couple bugs/exploits] it's still fun and challenging.

I'm looking forward to seeing the new improvements in A17 and as far as the PvPers.....

....You paid how much and want the world for it? Come on!

------------

**EDIT**

I made this post before my first coffee and now it's sounds a bit aggressive.

Sorry if I came across all grumpy like.

Still feel the same though.

Have a nice day....... aaaahh.... coffee. :triumphant:

 

[Poojam]

Okay well.. I am going to flat out DISAGREE with this whole PvP needing to be in this game nonsense.
It does NOT need to be in here.

If you want that experience go play PUBG or whatever.

The focus on this game is and ALWAYS has been PvE.

At no point did TFP stray from that path NOR did they ever mislead the public into thinking otherwise.

MM did mention that IF, and that's a big "if", they turn their focus to PvP it'll be the last thing they work on.

Since I'm being completely candid, I find companies that take on the PvE challenge deserve far more credit.

It's extremely difficult to make a good AI and a game format that creates an environment conducive to a

real challenge to the Human intellect.

Add to that a Voxel world that's already using a lot of resources and you've got a SERIOUS challenge.

Congrats to TFP for no only taking that on but pushing the bar for the entire industry.

While the AI has room for improvement [and a couple bugs/exploits] it's still fun and challenging.

I'm looking forward to seeing the new improvements in A17 and as far as the PvPers.....

....You paid how much and want the world for it? Come on!

------------

**EDIT**

I made this post before my first coffee and now it's sounds a bit aggressive.

Sorry if I came across all grumpy like.

Still feel the same though.

Have a nice day....... aaaahh.... coffee. :triumphant:

Ah yes. Thanks for reminding me that why I think the population isn't so hot, is out of scope or simply doesn't matter. Thanks for the input. Haven't heard that before.

 

[Jedo]

Re-read the last sentence from the OP.
"Interested to hear analysis and see more comparison charts with games that have done better or worse than 7 Days to Die and why you believe that to be the case. "

Oy vey.

I'm not asking why people are talking about it in this thread; and it's pretty disingenuous to pretend that this line of thinking only came about because Roland started this thread. Hiding behind Roland's invitation seems like a cowardly attempt to avoid answering the simple question.

If you must, pretend that I have started a new thread asking the following question:

Why do you, the customer, care whether TFP sells more copies of 7dtd or has a large player base for years to come?

 

[Damocles]

PUBG and Fortnight are symmetrical games. Players start with the same chances into a session. Just as other arena shooters. Just with the arena shrinking here.

7dtd is a typical asymmetric game. Player have vastly different starting condition in a PvP fight. PvP in such a setup is inherently unfair (not a fault of the design, but simply because players have had different playtimes added up).

Its one the the main reasons why PvP will never be as fun to the majority of players. And thus should not be the main focus of the game.

Also for playernumbers: its not a "Unity" problem. Its a basic networking problem. As the game is a voxel game with lots of changing elements, and a large area as playfield. All this adds up in the network traffic. A block (or several hundreds) placed on the other side of the world by one client, still need to be communicated to every client at one point.

Shooters are way less heavy in that regard, having less moving parts. They focus on quick package exchange.

 

[Roland]

I think it is great that TFP has avoided the PVP-centric pathway to development. Even if it means that 7 Days to Die is forever niche and never reaches 100k people playing concurrently it can still be wildly successful and a great launching point for TFP as a studio. There are a ton of games on the market that do PVP first and foremost and SP as an afterthought. This game not only puts SP first and foremost but also cooperative teamwork gameplay that is frankly amazing and fulfilling when playing with family and friends.

I totally agree that 7 Days to Die could've had a much larger footprint but that would've changed the community and the game in ways that I personally think would've meant a more superficial SP and MP PvE experience.

 

[LuckyStar]

I think it is great that TFP has avoided the PVP-centric pathway to development. Even if it means that 7 Days to Die is forever niche and never reaches 100k people playing concurrently it can still be wildly successful and a great launching point for TFP as a studio. There are a ton of games on the market that do PVP first and foremost and SP as an afterthought. This game not only puts SP first and foremost but also cooperative teamwork gameplay that is frankly amazing and fulfilling when playing with family and friends.
I totally agree that 7 Days to Die could've had a much larger footprint but that would've changed the community and the game in ways that I personally think would've meant a more superficial SP and MP PvE experience.

Firstly, I agree with everything you just said.

Let's build on that then.

So we know this is "primarily" a SP PvE game.

Once we accept that then we've got to also accept the responsibilities that come with that style of game.

The current climate in the industry, thanks to the Evil A-holes [or EA for short], the SP market is under attack.

That's forced developers to up the ante a LOT more than PvP games.

Now they are expected to have great story lines and decent voice acting.

Players are coming to appreciate it as well aren't they.

A live performance of the voice actors from "The Last of Us" doing all the character lines sold out.

That really tells you how much people come to "love" a good story.

If we're going to give TFP a pass on PvP stuff and all the responsibilities that come with honouring that clientele,

don't we then also have to expect TFP to come through with what has come to be Industry Standard?

I think rather than seeing 7DTD focus on PvP, they should hire an excellent writer and give us a compelling story.

THAT is how you win awards.

THAT is how you make people fall in love with your game.

THAT is how a SP game gets a large community.

Or.... I could be completely wrong.

I'll accept that.

Just an opinion.

 

[OldManBrian]

...I think rather than seeing 7DTD focus on PvP, they should hire an excellent writer and give us a compelling story.

THAT is how you win awards.

THAT is how you make people fall in love with your game.

THAT is how a SP game gets a large community.

Or.... I could be completely wrong.

I'll accept that.

Just an opinion.

I completely disagree with this. The game isn't lacking award winning story (which requires TONS of custom animation) or voice acting, the game is lacking stuff to do.

The most common reason I've seen people bounce off of this game is because they can't self-motivate and get bored or don't have a drive to do anything.

.

A lot of what the game really needs is already being worked on:

• Complex Cooperative Quests
  
• NPCs (Bandits, Traders, Survivors, etc)
  
• Dialog
  
• More POIs
  
• More Content (Weapons, vehicles, items, etc)
  
• RPG Elements
  

Aside from that, there are a few more things that would really help:

• Radiant Quests and Events (Much like Skyrim where the quests and events come to the player)
  
• Radiant AI (NPCs doing their own thing, "building" new POIs, stripping resouces, looting, etc)
  
• Optional over-arching Story ala Skyrim that you can visit at your leisure
  

.

 

[PumpkinKing]

[*]Optional over-arching Story ala Skyrim that you can visit at your leisure

.

Eh, I don't know if the game really needs a story. I mean maybe a loose series of quests type of thing, but I don't think a story would really benefit the game. I totally agree that the game needs more to do though. I think more NPCs should definitely be a priority, and maybe some better animals. Besides the zombies the world doesn't feel super alive to me.

 

[Kam R.]

Oy vey.
I'm not asking why people are talking about it in this thread; and it's pretty disingenuous to pretend that this line of thinking only came about because Roland started this thread. Hiding behind Roland's invitation seems like a cowardly attempt to avoid answering the simple question.

If you must, pretend that I have started a new thread asking the following question:

Why do you, the customer, care whether TFP sells more copies of 7dtd or has a large player base for years to come?

I'd say the reasons are pretty obvious – They're selfish reasons and there is nothing wrong with that:

TFP make the game the customer loves, so the customer wants TFP to stay in business and keep working on the game.

And the Player of the game –The Co-Op player specifically– loves the game so much, they dread the day the game dies and they have to play alone or move on to another game.

Therefore everyone described above tries in their own way to support the game. Some people go full "fanboi" and argue with the critics on forums til their fingers fall off from typing. Some people create mods. Some people run servers and organize server communities. And some people who (think they) know "the biz" try to influence TFP with their unsolicited wisdom. ^^

In any case, however fruitful or useful these efforts of the fans are, it's just your typical fandom's passions at work.