Procedures, meeting, reports, etc. is necessary for running a business, but we are players (consumers), not managers, employees or investors. Would it be a good marketing decision to share this kind of info (edited, of course) with consumers? I don’t know, I can see reasons for and against it, but what I’m certain of is that as a player I’m not entitled to this sort of thing.
That sounds great in theory, but in practice… Every piece of information provided by the devs is immediately subject to heated discussions, with a part of the players necessarily feeling neglected or left out, their wishes unanswered all of this before they had a chance to see the idea implemented.
Or they can choose to do the game they want and hope that players will like it.
Look, as I said, I do think that SG could do a better job at communicating with their playerbase, and I hope that they will do something this year like they did last year with the Snapshot “suggestions” on Canny.
But you can’t have your cake and eat it too: you can’t say “devs, stop worrying about what half of your playerbase wants, just do a great game… Which it would be if only you would follow the directives of a miniscule, but vocal group of self-appointed representatives of a minor subset of all players (who being all of 3 still can’t agree among themselves on what they actually want)”
Well said, but in the end it all depends on success. The player doesn’t care about the internal processes. What counts is “fun” and “challenge”. If both are not right, the game will not be successful. It’s as simple as that. Whether CC are useful or devs listen to players will show where the journey goes. I don’t see any significant improvement so far. Let’s hope for the best. That goes for both sides.
Why then do you write here on the forum? Why vote for Canny? Let everything resolve itself. (And Devs will strangle the PP and open the countdown for PP2)
There is a difference between doing nothing and doing one-way communication (giving feedback), while in both cases you “hope for the best” from the devs’ side, one of them has a significantly higher chance (more than zero) to influence things. You might still not get what you want, but at least you tried (and doing that in a respectful, constructive tone helps that, being rude to the people who you just gave your ideas to is less effective).
Because priorities change all the damn time in software development, and working on new features should be after the current ones are without painful bugs and design errors, as long as they are worked on by the same people.
If your “more 0% effective” means “more than 0%”, then yes, because it has a chance of devs compiling feedback from forums even without you actually knowing about that. But giving feedback doesn’t mean they will act upon it, even if they personally agree with it, the “bigger design/priority goals” can overwrite lots of “little” things.
If the “Community” bought the game as a promise, then they should trust the devs, that’s the reason they bought the game for (mostly fig and pre-launch buyers). You can ofc be disappointed with what they delivered, but you gambled on a promise with the knowledge that it can fail.
If the “community” bought the game as launched, they decided it was worth their money in that state at that time, so every improvement is a boon. Can they hope for an improved game? Of course, that’s why giving your feedback is important, so that the devs know about your problems, which might not be what “most others” have. Yours might still not get “fixed/made better”, but as it is normal on the internet, you can find every possible direction as “recommended one” for any one problem, and resources are finite, they can’t just do everything.
Leaving the “Template” here is really no respect. There is too much difference between the abstract “X” and the reasons for ignoring Modding. And the lack of explanations for do Not introduce Custom Game Options. If you don’t give a damn about it (by inserting a formulaic excuse), it’s Not so for many others.
To discuss what is below from your post, I lost the desire.
add
Be consistent, buy a couple of starships in Star Citizen. What if this is your chance?
Resources are limited and AFAIK either you build from the ground up to support modding, or later it’s difficult to implement. Also, and this especially goes for this
While the game is nowhere approaching a finished state this is a wasted effort.
Edit: doesn’t mean that there might not be modding support and custom options at some point. I’m pretty sure that custom (“second wave”) options will happen eventually, and I hope that so will modding support.
I wrote this to you around a month ago, probably you forgot:
Custom Game Options are the same as any other feature, they need design, development, testing, all the usual stuff, and will not fix buggy gameplay, just make it a differently buggy one. That’s why first they should work on the painful bugs, so that they can then make new stuff.
@VOLAND , forcing me to dig out antiquities, you make the question even hotter. You obviously don’t want to hear the answers. And you put future “Agreements” in an immoral position. I won’t ask why.
@Potkeny, maybe you know well how it was there and here. But until the Devs themselves have explained their position / problems and their way forward, this is just speculation.
I think JG’s recent interview at the time of the Steam release will be Snapshot’s last word on modding. I don’t remember the quote exactly, but the gist of it was: “We wanted to include modding support, but unfortunately we have recently discovered that the way we’ve built the game means that it’s not compatible with the Steam Workshop, so sadly we can’t provide Mod Support on Steam.”
Whether you view that as a cock-up or some sort of deep Snapshot conspiracy to prevent modding from happening is entirely up to you, but it seems pretty conclusive to me, and I really can’t be bothered to talk about it any more.
All I will say is it’s a shame, because the modding community is what keeps games like this fresh and alive long after dev support has moved on to other things.
If you remember XCOM, which you are probably addressing to with custom options aka “second wave”, there was not such feature initially. “Second wave” was part of testing tools for game and was implemented later. And there wasn’t Steam workshop support as well.
What I mean isn’t “players must find the way to change game files themselves, because developers don’t allow it”. First of all, the development team should be allowed to finish their work with planned features which were delayed for DLCs, then after them fixing major bugs and rebalancing content, it would be appropriate to add new gameplay options and/or modding tools. As you mentioned it earlier, Gollop kinda proved their wish for this.
In my opinion, developers who release their game half-baked but with mod tools, show disrespect to the playerbase despite talking “Thank you for your support, now you can continue development of our game. We believe in our community, but won’t work on this project anymore. Our best wishes and good luck!”
Let there be no “inaccurate quotes”, but there will be an official appeal posted on the forum and social networks. Available for translation. + Explanation about Custom Game Options.
If by ‘Custom Game Options’ you mean Second Wave Options, I have been incessantly banging that drum every chance I get for the last 2 years.
AFAIK, the devs aren’t opposed to it, but they aren’t enthusiastic about it either, and up to now they have had other, higher priorities (like completely replacing the ODI & Pandoran Evo systems, and completely overhauling the game ready for Steam release, and figuring out how to stay above water during a global pandemic before you ask what).
But feel free to knock yerself out. I’d add my name to a call for both of them.
And now you try to use such things as local account data to disprove opposite opinion. How lame it is.
What about examples, you can search them yourself, I think they were mostly games from small studios. Personally I don’t remember now their exact names, because I keep in mind mostly games which are interesting for me. Maybe it was a sandbox RPG or some simulation game? Sorry for not being helpful on this subject.
It’s an off-topic (as well as my whole answer looking at the topic name), but I noticed already, that you like to quote others with pulling words out of context to prove your point of view. The only thing you forgot is that on this forum it’s possible to expand quote and see full text with its original meaning. And this makes your arguments quite questionable.
I expected for you to turn my words against this game. And maybe you forgot or just didn’t pay attention that after the release Phoenix Point wasn’t blamed for having mechanics which weren’t working completely. Some liked it, some didn’t. Except bugs, there were complaints for lack of tutorial and explanations about how game functions, high difficulty, unfriendly interface, game being unbalanced, little content. But mostly game was admitted as finished. Although it was only a base concept and work on development still continues.
I always (try) to keep the context in mind when I quote. And I highlight only the key part, as a guideline when building an answer. The part that got me hooked.
Give examples of my inaccuracy or lies, so as not to be (again) unfounded.
