What the devs do with all the criticism and feedback?

The goal is always above the possibilities. Without this, there is no development.

You still don’t get my main point and this is my problem. But once again, almost all problems are from misunderstanding. This means that both sides did not give an explanation to each other (the episode with the EGS and the current silence, become an internal rule of the SG).

For comparison, max Toxic - Cyberpunk 2077
1/4 of the players are dissatisfied Cyberpunk_2077

The bad way is the choice of the SG. I don’t have the strength to change it, but SG has the strength to explain it. When you try to explain something, you better understand Your position. This makes it possible to better work on Your mistakes.

I do get your point but we’re going to go into circular argument since the point I raised has been raised multiple times by other posters here, but you’re just not seeing it that way.

However you are entitled to stick to your point of view in spite of what everyone else says, so good luck man.

Peace out and I hope you are able to find some closure eventually.

1 Like

You “push” me into:
This forum is filled with Silent Men (in read-only mode). They wrote (over a year ago) their constructive proposals, which remained unanswered / ignored. Also, there is another category that Try with every DLC / major patch and then drop it until next time. And this is the Active and Smart / Constructive part of the Community, just Ignored by the Developers.
And that’s just a +1 disadvantage that can be turned into a virtue.

1 Like

@Valygar, I will duplicate here for convenience.

Two most important tracks for PP
Feedback on Phoenix Point as a XCOM Veteran - #21 by noStas
[Feedback][Spoiler] Goodbye Phoenix Point - #67 by noStas

I don’t have the skill to collect and group it all into one post.

I believe they are growing with money influx of Epic time and Steam release and being purchased by another big studio. Its no longer indie - kickstarter backed game.

I find @noStas feedback very relevant, but highly unlikely devs will turn the coin at this stage in big and deep changes, I expect bugfixes, balancing and some new DLC content.

But I do hope many of good ideas can be saved and done in PP2. Game deserves a series, and I hope it already is a financial success. At some point most of bugs will be fixed, DLC adding will be source of revenue and not so demanding for programmers, so development of PP2 could begin, based on most interesting player and community proposals. That would be right thing to do. Like Photoshop new version should be done based on innovation in field, but also in users feedback and requested tools.

One is comparing applies with oranges (or tomatoes - as it is also a fruit).

  1. These are 2 different genres where players have completely different expectations.

  2. The numbers of the player base between the two skew the percentages.

  3. Cyberpunk 2077 was in development for close to 9 years. They also spent close to $313 million in development. While SG’s costs were just over $1 million. PP’s development.time 3.75 years.

Find us more comparable fruit to help build your merry-go-round quest.

According to https://steamdb.info/

PP 1,615 reviews 73.56% positive
CP 366,168 reviews 78.21% postive

Just under 5% difference between the two. When looking at the total numbers, there really isn’t much difference. Especially when one considers the huge difference between the number of reviews between the two.

1 Like

This example was not about game rating (PP, CP). It was about the attitude of people to specific examples (1/3 and 1/4 of the negative flow from the total).

It wasn’t addressed to you.

And what percentage of the PP negatives are not about the game itself, but the Epic exclusive that yanked the rug out from under some folks’ feet? And as I pointed out The large number of Cyberpunk players/voters vs. the smaller pool of PP players/voters will certainly skew the percentages. You also ignore the other factors I mentioned that can skew the percentages.

I knew that there is no convincing you, as it appears that you are trolling us with the same stance over and over again. The only things that change are your argumentation in an attempt to keep the merry-go-round spinning. It’s amusing at least, if not boring.

Sounds like a boring thing after some time, but does not change the fact that asking for some core mechanics improvement is not a good idea. Game can progress in many other ways (as canny feedback shows) but its not from @noStas only that core mechanics improvement need has been voiced.

Steam rating of game is 72% positive, so really, about 1/3rd of game base owners does not recommend it. Some of the reviews are not usual “epic rants/privacy is broken/xcom is better” but really analyze in depth why and which core mechanics should be better

I tend to be in the middle: I wish we did not have such super duper powers and have more weapons and armors too boost soldiers other way then by WP powers. I feel this would be more realistic. In right combination, time you can feel powerful but very next full mutation set nulls it and puts you hard on track - which can be driving force once, but gets tiresome as it occurs more and more often. Too many events on earth size map while being limited by base system. I would like more freedom here and slower pace of Pandas 5 bases plus constantly raiding, so feeling you do protect planet is better. Hardness can be in larger human squad and larger enemy waves, not in increase of number of missions popping up.

My feeling is *from bugix list is that some of the criticism gets in, but its mostly most annoying bugs and some features balance, no more than that. There is no outgoing communication except canny under review and planned list

In progress


Under review

To be fair, complete list is also extensive, but popularity seems not having anything to do with it

1 Like

Absolute agree, see here:

1 Like

I agree that slower pace of game would create a way better feeling. I feel production is already slow, research without new bases too, so maybe making things a bit more expensive and giving more time to explore the map and obtain resource is simple and elegant way to make game not so frantic and giving time to player. Pandas evolution delayed or broken to smaller steps.

I fear keeping current pace and adding 1-2 DLCs can only make more frantic game with so many things to do " so little time" feeling, EVEN FURTHER.

I dont believe this is such a drastic game changer and is something that could be implemented easily. Should we create a canny ticket?

(More than 45% negative at the start (3.12.19) in the EGS)
Phoenix Point (3 Dec,20 - 24.2% negative) after 1 year of revision
26.65% (3 Jan)
26.50% (16 Jan) a month later

  • Imo, max reduction to 25% negative, for the future.

To compare the dynamics of negative movement:

max Toxic - Cyberpunk 2077 (10 Dec,20 - 29% negative) at the start
22% (16 Jan) a month later

  • Imo, reduced to a possible 10% negative, for the future.

I am not all about QUANTITY, but there are some quite fair judgement on elements that need to be improved there. So, as in POSITIVE so in NEGATIVE comments, some real nice spots on what needs to be improved can be found.
That should be QUALITY someone should be looking for that can prevent further negative comments, or lessen them.

And dont forget its not just negative comments, its not recommending the game at all. So its high degree of disappointment.

1 Like

I want to tell something. This game is still at development, not the bad way. They could just make the game and add DLC’s and at this point as 1 year already passed and a good launch at steam, they could just tell us that “yep, this is the game and we done everything until now and it’s enough. Like or not, it’s it”., but they did not. To be honest, as a small company, I would not be surprised to go on with another project from now on… for that reason I respect Snapshot.

Development a balance based tactical/strategical game with RPG elements is not easy. You think you know a solution for a problem and it could look great but you cannot know the results in game for every other aspects… I got very good ideas for heavy class and weapons but multiclass system just makes it worst because you get very powerful. Just an example…

Another thing is, they have a plan. There will at least 3 more DLC’s, many more free patches, many overhauls including vehicles with updates, weapons with mods, more aliens, air battles, extra things for every factions, more for PX… those are the only things we know they are or will work on them…

Maybe they are already noted all the solutions we gave them and made their plan but waiting for the overhaul patch time to handle it. They are even fixing things you just don’t expect but welcome when you see.

There is a pandemic out there…

Everybody got his dream game which PP should be but PP can’t be a dream game of everyone. Your dreams could be my nightmares… You think heavy class is perfect with it’s arsenal but it’s so bad for me… so who will win? not everyone for sure.

For short, we need to wait with patience and wait for at least 6 month and probably one year more. I can wait more… We saw the result when they did not wait with even great games as Cyberpunk as they got 500 people and at least 5 year… PP is not a cyberpunk but it’s the richest xcom type without mods… maybe not today but it will be after it’s development finished.

As a side note about suggestions, as I am new at Council and there are just 10+ people out there and Snapshot asks our ideas about things… they get 10+ different ideas and solutions with different point of views… I just thought if I were the one who would just select one of them, it’s a hell… because every idea is great and got a solid ground with proper reasons. I just find all of them reasonable, possible, make sense… so what? How to choose?.. and they are not only ideas, they are against each other too. One says other is is bad because this… yeah he is right… but another is right too… can I explain the situation?


You are new in the CC, and I have no desire to take away your desire. But all my objections are based on experience (albeit external) observing the development from Fig, carefully up to the current day.
I need irrefutable proof to change my pessimistic outlook. But I will be glad for the faint rungs of hope.

Brainstorming the Company, Medical Сoncilium … maybe the problem is in the Leader or in the wrong Concept, any disorder has a solution.

Perhaps this is a coincidence, a new recruitment in the CC and my attempts to “raise a riot”.Why is there no internal analysis and work with the negative?

Nobody can change your overlook, at least not someone here rather then the CEO or design leader of the Snapshot. I never saw this happened if it’s a one man game developer.

You can’t force them to do the game with only people’s ideas. Even you want at some degree you can’t just push them into your game every time you want.

Snapshot is not afraid for harsh critics which I did many times. I would discuss this after the development as I said… then you can just tell everything you want for the result which could be better. But, there is no perfect game…

I am a modder. I mostly can handle the problems by myself if modding is a thing. I want modding support too but without every aspect done, it’s not logical. FS will add air battles for example… we don’t know other patches and DLC’s would add…

and even without support we got great coder type modders who made good progress if you follow discord.

1 Like

It’s been very obvious that you can only see your view of the world. It’s your vantage point and you are most welcome to it. Time will tell if you are right or just have a narrow view.

If I were only focused on “my own truth”, I would have given up the game and discussion. I want the best for the PP, no less than You. And yes, I can be wrong, as you, as Devs.

Forum eats up too much time.

As Arnold says,

If you need more sleep, sleep faster.