Time to reflect

[YourMirror]

That is exactly what is happening. Steam rating has a serious influence on the income of TFP. That is IMHO the reason why the town hall meeting happened and madmole asked about jars on reddit (or wherever). But it doesn't mean that the data TFP acts on now is reliable user survey data. It just means that TFP had to react to the steam score whether it shows a reliable picture or not.

To be fair, the steam score IS the most reliable unreliable measure we players have, with the exception of when review bombing happens. Looking at the steam votes over time ( https://www.lorenzostanco.com/lab/steam/ratings/251570/2years/m+u+ur+uc+urc/ ) you can see that the ratings dropping happened at the same time the voting increased by about ~100%-200% (starting ~mid of june, but obscured by the rolling window of "recent votes"), that is a sign of an orchestrated effort i.e. of someone rallying people to vote.



That doesn't mean people can't say they don't want jars back, even if it were a commercial necessity. Though at least with the changes announced at the town hall meeting I am largely pleased.

I am curious how far they will force TFP to go. TFP realistically would need to appeal to the usually silent group of players who like the game to make a vote on steam but as of yet that didn't happen. While the opposition has organised itself. There may be more delays coming before we ever see bandits.

Steam votes are somewhere in the 4000 when you look at the review bomb that was invoked. Overal 87% are still happy. More than half of that bomb is still positive in review. Last month there was a peak in concurrent players of more than 80000 and an average of 60000. I still don't get how those that are loud now in such small numbers can influence the game in such a way. I am betting the AI prompts used above are (smartly sneakingly) did not include weighing that negative result against numbers of players that are "just" playing the game. And that's way i always call out the members hiding behind "most of the community", "real fans", "core players" instead of just venting their OWN opinion. In my book a sign of insecurity of that same own opinion.

 

[theFlu]

voting increased by about ~100%-200% (starting ~mid of june, but obscured by the rolling window of "recent votes"), that is a sign of an orchestrated effort i.e. of someone rallying people to vote.

Voting increased mid June, that must be a conspiracy! Or, you know, the game released a major patch .. mid June.

 

[Charger265]

I disagree with pretty much everything. I feel you would have a valid gripe if you couldn’t reset your skill points. Putting a point into cooking to get more books and resetting later isn’t even a mild inconvience. If anything it just makes the game a little bit harder by having to actually care about what you are doing.

As for the grind until you drop skill progression. I never understood why people liked this in any game. RuneScape is the best example as I don’t want to spend my entire game session with my friends watching me chop down every forest in the game for levels. It turns a game into a chore IMO.

That townhall is the only reason I’m on here now because I was shocked by the amount of complaints for things that are only seem to make the game easier which is a massive disappointment. Even on the hardest difficulty the game is already way to easy

By all means i respect that you disagree. But at the same time your also shocked by the amount of complaints. I can only say that now would be the time to research a little and understand why someone would be complaining about the game direction and then after that i will be happy to have that discussion.

 

[Soulmonster]

I get all my mags from horde nights. Do you all have long time frames behind horde nights?

I use default, seven days.

Post automatically merged: Today at 8:46 AM

You mean except "I enjoyed the game before and now Im enjoying it even more"? Despite this being the most hated update I have ever seen? In any case, stop trolling. And if by some chance you legitimetly dont understand, there is no way for me to make you understand after all those attempts. So finally move on and stop dragging this off-topic 1vs1 discussion that nobody cares about.

Yes, I enjoyed it before and I enjoy it even more now. Why is that such a challenging concept? Is it because you feel different and you can't fathom different opinions?

My opinions on the game is actually not affected by what others feel. For most part, 2.0 is an improvement. I particularly like the new zombies, the better graphics, the less level terrain, the new POIs, and the changes to the perk trees. All of these compensates for what I didn't like, resulting in an improvement of the game. I also appreciate the changes that will now be implemented after the Town Hall, making the game even better.

Is it hard to hear that someone likes something you dislike?

 

[Charger265]

Steam votes are somewhere in the 4000 when you look at the review bomb that was invoked. Overal 87% are still happy. More than half of that bomb is still positive in review. Last month there was a peak in concurrent players of more than 80000 and an average of 60000. I still don't get how those that are loud now in such small numbers can influence the game in such a way. I am betting the AI prompts used above are (smartly sneakingly) did not include weighing that negative result against numbers of players that are "just" playing the game. And that's way i always call out the members hiding behind "most of the community", "real fans", "core players" instead of just venting their OWN opinion. In my book a sign of insecurity of that same own opinion.

So this will be interesting... I can see you have just taken the data at face value referencing the positive and negative reviews without looking at the content of the review. A large portion of the reviews have negative connotations in them. Citing statics like you have done clearly shows there is little understanding.
By the way i just ran some additional request on the steam dataset related to core player parameters for the time line between release date 1.0 and 22nd july

AI Response:
"Negative reviews often come from players with high playtime (500-2,000+ hours), indicating core community members. For example, Steam posts mention players with “thousands of hours” criticizing the magazine-based progression, nerfed survival mechanics, and shift to a “dumbed-down RPG” style. Players (with high hours) contribute significantly, roughly 60% of core reviewers express unhappiness.
The “General Discussions” and “Support & Bug Reports” sections (68,387 and 36,093 topics, respectively) show frequent complaints about V2.0’s balance and bugs. Often citing extensive playtime, dominate these threads. Estimating from thread sentiment, 55-65% of posters seem unhappy."


Im sorry but how is anyone meant to take your response seriously. its clear you have a grudge against anyone who has anything negative to say about the game where you feel the need to down vote anyone on the forum who has an opposing opinion. Its also clear you cant grasp the concept that there is actually an issue.

Now to show the same respect to you. The ignorance of someone to make such assumptions on ones judgment with little to no knowledge of the data or clearly the subject. Would appear one was living in some form of derealization.

 

[Kyoji]

That is exactly what is happening. Steam rating has a serious influence on the income of TFP. That is IMHO the reason why the town hall meeting happened and madmole asked about jars on reddit (or wherever). But it doesn't mean that the data TFP acts on now is reliable user survey data. It just means that TFP had to react to the steam score whether it shows a reliable picture or not.

To be fair, the steam score IS the most reliable unreliable measure we players have, with the exception of when review bombing happens. Looking at the steam votes over time ( https://www.lorenzostanco.com/lab/steam/ratings/251570/2years/m+u+ur+uc+urc/ ) you can see that the ratings dropping happened at the same time the voting increased by about ~100%-200% (starting ~mid of june, but obscured by the rolling window of "recent votes"), that is a sign of an orchestrated effort i.e. of someone rallying people to vote.

Just reading the forums you can see a trend for change with the 2.0 update. Even you yourself agreed that many of the initial release concepts needed work. If the steam score allows TFP to be more connected with their player base then I don't see this as a problem. An initial setback to be sure, but one that may prove very fruitful in the future development of both this game and others.

That doesn't mean people can't say they don't want jars back, even if it were a commercial necessity. Though at least with the changes announced at the town hall meeting I am largely pleased.

I am curious how far they will force TFP to go. TFP realistically would need to appeal to the usually silent group of players who like the game to make a vote on steam but as of yet that didn't happen. While the opposition has organised itself. There may be more delays coming before we ever see bandits.

I wasn't suggesting people can't say they don't want jars. I have been pretty vocal about being indifferent to them to a degree myself as I don't think jars are a major issue with the game that deserve much development time on.

If everyone speaks up you will see trends. If people stay silent then it means they consent by default in these cases and it's unreasonable for TFP to try and guess what a silent "majority" would want.

The only thing outside of 2.0 was a discussion about jars on reddit because it became a popular talking point. This is what developers should do. If you see a lot of people talking about something ask questions and pay attention to see if it's something easy to implement, fits within the scope of the game, and aligns with the designs of the game. They removed jars as water was too easy and I agree water was and still is too easy. Therefore the developers have to see if it's worth the effort to fix jars to fit within the scope of the game and is easy enough to implement. For the record I don't think it's worth the time that is why I became vocal about it on the forums instead of just being "silent".

I wholeheartedly disagree with the folks that suggest developers shouldn't listen to their fans and focus on what they want. I think there is sufficient evidence to support my stance as well. Again it's up to the developers to take the feedback and make something they think people will like.

That townhall is the only reason I’m on here now because I was shocked by the amount of complaints for things that are only seem to make the game easier which is a massive disappointment. Even on the hardest difficulty the game is already way to easy

What things from the town hall do you find to be easier? Temperature should make the game harder and a lot of the people complaining about jars and water want it to be harder to come by if you read the posts.

 

[Xacsis]

I use default, seven days.

Ok, I do a 3 day cycle with a 4 day variance so it always lands between 3-7 days with 60 min days it helps ensure I get a chance to get a horde night per play session. I also turn off any warnings too for extra fun.

Post automatically merged: Today at 10:48 AM

By all means i respect that you disagree. But at the same time your also shocked by the amount of complaints. I can only say that now would be the time to research a little and understand why someone would be complaining about the game direction and then after that i will be happy to have that discussion.

Which was I already did? You expressed you opinion while I expressed mine at this point in a normal conversation you would further expand on the context provided between the two comments and a discussion forms. Saying do your research about my opinions better and send me another comment is just saying you dont want to talk, which, if the case than just say that.

 

[Xacsis]

What things from the town hall do you find to be easier? Temperature should make the game harder and a lot of the people complaining about jars and water want it to be harder to come by if you read the posts.

To clarify, I wouldn't say it was things directly from the townhall but the murmors and discussion threads on steam, tiktok, reddit, etc that brought me to put my words here.

Good examples of this are the reductions of spawns, loot cap removal, blue\orange zombies not being good additions, storm warning time increases, etc.

 

[Kyoji]

To clarify, I wouldn't say it was things directly from the townhall but the murmors and discussion threads on steam, tiktok, reddit, etc that brought me to put my words here.

Good examples of this are the reductions of spawns, loot cap removal, blue\orange zombies not being good additions, storm warning time increases, etc.

I haven't seen a lot of people asking for reductions in spawns. Perhaps reduction in the new enemy types, but most things I read are about adding more zombies and how Xbox may or may not be the limiting factor.

Loot cap removal could potentially lower difficulty if you never leave the forest, but I think that is something the player can control. If you want to challenge yourself in harder biomes you can and more easily now with the changes to biome progression.

The charged and infernal issue I think is more to do with 2.0 being in development for so long that we got half baked storms and color swapped zombies. So the issue was with for the time investment the return was lackluster.

Storm warning increases because there will be other side effects tied with temperature. It was problematic if you didn't have shelter nearby and if you did then it was a nothing burger. No reason to go out. Now we get danger and rewards for venturing in the storms. I wager more will get killed trying to maximize profits than died hiding in a POI.

At least that is my take on it.

 

[grz__]

Storm warning increases because there will be other side effects tied with temperature. It was problematic if you didn't have shelter nearby and if you did then it was a nothing burger. No reason to go out. Now we get danger and rewards for venturing in the storms. I wager more will get killed trying to maximize profits than died hiding in a POI.

At least that is my take on it.

What rewards are there now for going out in a storm? Or am I missing something, I'm still on the first version 2.1.

And yes, there is a danger of storms turning into a walk in the park, because of the complaints of the “majority”.

Storms should not reward the player for going outside, they are there to be a danger of death, at least with the original vision of tfp.

 

[Kyoji]

What rewards are there now for going out in a storm? Or am I missing something, I'm still on the first version 2.1.

And yes, there is a danger of storms turning into a walk in the park, because of the complaints of the “majority”.

Storms should not reward the player for going outside, they are there to be a danger of death, at least with the original vision of tfp.

They talked about 100% loot bag drops or increased chance as a reward for braving the increased difficulty of the storm.

You have to offer a fitting reward for it otherwise people will just sit inside. It would be like T5 POIs offering the same loot as T1. Why would anyone do them?

If you watch the town hall they talk about ways to increase the difficulty without just outright killing you. My suggestion was double zombie spawns in the world (not POI) and make them feral while debuffing the player with stamina recovery, bad vision, etc. TFP made it sound like they will still put a DoT on you but it wither takes longer to start or the value will be lower.

Storms are not difficult they are tedious and boring. There is no benefit to going outside.

 

[Jeraal]

...

Storms are not difficult they are tedious and boring. There is no benefit to going outside.

Oh, there's a storm. I'll just step back inside and get up to make a pot of coffee.

 

[grz__]

They talked about 100% loot bag drops or increased chance as a reward for braving the increased difficulty of the storm.

You have to offer a fitting reward for it otherwise people will just sit inside. It would be like T5 POIs offering the same loot as T1. Why would anyone do them?

If you watch the town hall they talk about ways to increase the difficulty without just outright killing you. My suggestion was double zombie spawns in the world (not POI) and make them feral while debuffing the player with stamina recovery, bad vision, etc. TFP made it sound like they will still put a DoT on you but it wither takes longer to start or the value will be lower.

Storms are not difficult they are tedious and boring. There is no benefit to going outside.

I'm in favor of other debuffs, but I think it's silly to give you candy for being brave in the storm, it's supposed to be an apocalypse and the storm shouldn't be a piñata. if they raise the stamina debuffs too much they will punish aggressive players, and melee players, increasing the spawn is fine but that has nothing to do with the storm, it should be in the normal game, I use a spawn mod so I don't think I'll notice it,
Storms are not going to be more difficult by adding all that, and that they are boring and tedious is your opinion of course, sometimes tedious is linked to the difficulty, for example dying 50 times before defeating a boss in dark soul.

 

[grz__]

Oh, there's a storm. I'll just step back inside and get up to make a pot of coffee.

Are you aware that you can go out in a storm? Or are you just joking?

 

[Jeraal]

I'm aware.

 

[MaxTunnerX]

Yes, I enjoyed it before and I enjoy it even more now. Why is that such a challenging concept? Is it because you feel different and you can't fathom different opinions?

Its just extremely unlikely to be true, thats literally all there is to it. And again, if you really feel that way, I dont judge, Im just surprised/baffled.

 

[YourMirror]

And thats the whole problem. You can't "believe" anyone having a different opinion than yours. Your "baffled/surprised". And in the same second disqualify that opinion to be "extremely unlikely to be true". Well i could say the same thing bout your opinion. "Its just extremely unlikely to be true". But i wont. Because its YOUR opinion. See what i did there? Its actually pretty pathetic.

Im a veteran and have 10000 hours on the clock. And with the Townhall proposed changes im still happy to play the game. You dont believe it? Nobody cares. You have no weight in MY opinion. Get it now?

 

[meganoth]

Voting increased mid June, that must be a conspiracy! Or, you know, the game released a major patch .. mid June.

Uggh, I actually didn't notice. Thought storms brewing were out for a lot longer. So forget what I said about review bombing, didn't happen.

 

[Riamus]

For example, Steam posts mention players with “thousands of hours” criticizing the magazine-based progression, nerfed survival mechanics, and shift to a “dumbed-down RPG” style.

I just wanted to point out that this particular statement is concerning about accuracy. It doesn't say that those who have high numbers of hours are saying that. It is saying people who posted saying that they have high hours said that. That alone makes that a questionable response.

Just look at all the many posts by Grandpa Minion where he keeps saying he has over 20,000 hours of gameplay. I've calculated out his hours from multiple posts and he would have to play the game 12 hours a day every single day for months for that to be accurate. Instead, those hours are either server hours or hours sitting at menus. Add in anyone who does POI design, where all those goes that aren't gameplay add up quickly.

I actually find it odd that the response was being time played on what people say, considering Steam posts give the time played as part of the post.

The other issue is what you see when you look at posts from people who support the game versus those who don't. From my experience, the vast majority of people who mention their time played are complaining, while those with positive posts don't mention it. That means that is the AI is calculating data based on what people say about time played, it won't be accurate to the larger picture.

Finally, I think it is safe to say that at least 75% of players of almost any game do not post about liking it disliking the game. That means that no matter how accurate the data is, it is already biased and can't be trusted to be more than a very general idea. It is the same when we talk about what everyone is paying about here. It might be what people here are saying, but doesn't necessarily indicate the view of the majority.

Now, with all that said, I also want to add that you do seem to have a good grasp on the way to use AI. That isn't normal here, which is why people expect the worst and why either a good explanation of your process or the prompts used is helpful, which you did. So it is good that you are making good use of the prompts. But if you were to look at other AI posts here over the past month or two, you will see that they all have invalid information that is easy to recognize as being wrong. That leads to people not liking to see AI posts. It isn't anything against you, but just a general feeling caused by so many bad uses of AI.