Roland
-
Posts
14,184 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
393
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Store
Articles
A20 Bugs
A21 Bugs
Events
Posts posted by Roland
-
-
I didn't realize that 1000 bullet points were a prerequisite for modding. I've been modding all wrong this entire time.
0 -
2 hours ago, zztong said:
My sense is you're after a very fast progression, so you're probably not into that variant.
This doesn't make you a Jedi by any means ZZ...
0 -
Currently, the game supports keeping saves from previous versions. They appear in red. So if you have a save from A20 it shows in your list as red and unplayable. If you revert your game to A20 then those old saves become playable and any A21 saves turn red.
I won’t say you’re wrong because you may be right but it could be that with an update loaded that includes a new biome it might make old saves incompatible while that update it loaded. If so, then it would be better as a dlc which could be manually included or removed rather than an auto update that makes customers have to go into the beta list to revert to an earlier version. Maybe it could be as simple as selecting/deselecting it from the top menu, I don’t know.
If you’re right and it wouldn’t in any way affect or deny access to current saves and they would just ignore the new content then I agree that it could be just an auto update for everyone.
I wouldnt care much either way if it meant new biomes.
2 -
16 minutes ago, TWORDY said:
I don't honestly think that biomes themselves should become a separate package behind a paywall. I would rather see biomes available to all playerbase... but such an update might include some thematic outfits, skins, 1-3 weapons, and even a vehicle that might potentially come with a biome update... but, please do not divide the playerbase as a whole.
The inclusion of a new biome would most certainly require a restart and not work with current saves so it couldn't be something that was pushed out as an update. They almost certainly would have to make it a DLC giving gamers the choice to manually download it and have to start a new world. That doesn't mean that it has to be a paid DLC. They could do just as you said and make it a free download with some accompanying thematic outfits and skins that they charge for. However, I doubt something major like a new biome would simply be pushed out to everyone as an automatic update.
0 -
5 hours ago, Unamelable said:
Or nonsense on the part of the roadmap, which I also don’t understand
Let's say we already have update 1.0 ready. Release date so that developers have an audience on consoles. This is commendable, but the game is still at the alpha stage. And you can feel it.
Feel what? A21? You are correct that it is still alpha stage. But the roadmap is dealing with updates that will be post 1.0 and forgive me but you have not "felt" 1.0 as of yet. I look forward to reading 1000 bullet points about how you feel about 1.0 but that won't be for a few weeks yet.
5 hours ago, Unamelable said:Q4 2024: Probably the first priority will be the essentials, right?
- Weather System & Biome Progression Overhaul. Wouldn't it be more logical to do this only with the final major updates? Does this really have first priority??
- Wardrobe system could also be done with patches then focusing on the main problems of the game.
- Crossplay/Random Gen for consoles. Shouldn't this come with an update on consoles? Okay, let’s say we don’t have a community on consoles. Let there be all the best for buyers.
- Additional zombie stages, this could also be left in the background. Although there is still nothing to do in this game, it’s better than nothing.
- Spawn near friend, spawn near the player of an invited friend or NPC? This was explained incorrectly. If it's about an invited friend, then it should come with the patch. And not as a new feature.
- Twitch Drops, I have no idea why the hell this is the first priority. After all, before this there were a lot of mods where players created mods of a similar nature. But now in 7DTD this will be a full-fledged function for no one knows. Because the game is already more than 10 years old, no one will seriously hype a game in which the developers have long been rushing about what it will be like in the end. Even if we assume that it will be a good function and it will work. They will forget about it in a week. Is it worth the resources?
- Outfit DLC if the developers' minds are clouded by money. I'm giving up the game. After all, this is the worst thing that can happen - paid dlc's. Even if it's cosmetic. This is a straight path to the garbage. A 10-year journey that led straight to the trash heap.
Weather System and Biome Progression: Significant work has already been done and the only reason it won't be in next month's update is because it wasn't quite finished. Hence it will be in the next update. Logic dictates that when a feature is done and ready to be implemented it shall be implemented. The weather and biome progression is closely related to the outfit system which we are getting first in 1.0. The outfits will help us to survive in different biomes and weather conditions which will be coming soon after.
Wardrobe System: Creating a system that allows players to quickly and conveniently switch outfits is more than a simple patch. It will involve a major UI menu of its own. You'd have to be more specific about what major problem of the game should be address before this feature. In all likelihood, however, it is likely to be a different team of programmers who are doing the wardrobe system than the team working on whatever major problem you are thinking of.
Crossplay/Random Gen for Consoles: Why does it matter if this update comes to consoles at the same time the other updates come to both PC and consoles? These features will arrive when they are finished and working well without causing game crashes and corrupted saves. As with all features listed for Q4, siginificant progress has been made and they just need a bit more time to get them done-- hence their inclusion in the first major update.
Additional Zombie Stages: I don't understand your response to this. Why should this not be done in this first update? What do you imagine it even means? I'm not exactly sure myself but what do you know?
Spawn near friend: This probably means that we will be able to set allies and team mates before we spawn into the world so that when we do spawn in we will be able to spawn in together in close proximity. There has been a lot of community feedback asking for this and it sounds like TFP wants to fulfill that community request as soon as they can-- in the first major update.
Twitch Drops: Despite ten years old, the game is still very popular on Twitch and the twitch integration has become a major feature of the game. The twitch event management system is going to become the basis for the events management system in a later update. It makes sense that they finalize the twitch integration feature before they then use it to run the event manager for the game.
Outfit DLC: They are happening. If that is the deal breaker then you might as well leave now.
6 hours ago, Unamelable said:Q2 2025: Let's say it will be something worthwhile, right?
Bandits. Finally, at least some variety in the mercenary errand simulator? I hope it won't just be bandits? After all, if they want to implement new opponents. It would be logical to add allies, improve the AI so that it can have even more characters. Because right now the world is literally dead. And if there are only Bandits there, then what is the point of adding them? We kind of have... Zombies, animals, aaaand, zombies. We don’t consider traders as NPCs because they’re just a bunch of scripts that stand still.
UI/Main Menu Overhaul. I will pray to everyone and everything that this update does not become what happened to modern FPS. Where there are 20 tabs, 50 buttons and 350 sliders on the entire screen. To fit everything into one mess so that the player gets lost and has no room to breathe. Now I’m happy with the UI, in general there are no problems in it, but I’m sure that TFP will somehow miraculously ruin it, judging by the reviews of other players.
Event System, shouldn't that have been the first priority? Make, for example, a living world.... To make it feel more alive... MORE THAN 3 ZOMBIES ON THE LAND. Do players have to wait until the entire quarter of 2025 to get a worthwhile login update? I think this could be done together with Twitch Drops. After all, there is virtually nothing to do in the game other than being a mercenary.
New Quest Type, this is also one of the necessities that should be developed after the release of 1.0. I have no idea why these things come before Twitch Drops. Your game does not have gameplay, you are going to add it later after the Twitch Drops update. What's the point of old players coming in other than to look at the new armor? This is ridiculous.
Bandits: We don't have much information other than that TFP removed the bandits they originally implemented because they didn't want bandits to simply be zombies with guns which is what they were at the time. We will see what they bring to the game. I doubt they will ever be allies in the sense that they would team up with us and live in our base. But there is a reputation system coming so their attitude towards us will probably range from friendly to hostile. More than that we just have to wait. Not you though since you'll be out after the Q4 Outfit DLCs....
UI/ Main Menu: You are happy with the current feature. That 100% puts you on the opposite side of everybody else on every issue...
Event System: We don't have it now simply because it isn't finished. It will be a system based upon the twitch integration programming so it makes sense that they will finish their development of twitch integration first and then do the modding necessary to create the event system.
New Quest Types: Additional quest types are exactly the type of expansionary content that comes after 1.0. 1.0 comes with a basic number of quest types. Later updates will expand that number. Sounds pretty much like any game with basic features that are then expanded by....wait for it....expansions.
6 hours ago, Unamelable said:Q4 2025: These are the things that should go at the end after adding the main content, right?
Trader Overhaul, why is this in last place and not in Q2 2025? Traders there are overpowered, and they were given space for development right at the end of next year? Well, okay, let’s say this really doesn’t affect the gameplay that much... After what the developers added to A21 and the total need to get magazines, and the lack of basic things like teleporting a trader to a trader, taking several quests from one trader. A banal rewrite of looting. Where everything won’t be shoved into slots because you always don’t have enough of them. The fact is that the trader from the variety has 3 quests in the entire game. They focused so much on the trader that they paid attention to him last. What are these priorities??
Story Mode, Sandbox, RPG, Survival, World generation. And do you want to add Story Mode? Let's first finish the necessary things so that they work as intended and then we will add another element that will be created in the background only after everything has been fixed? I don’t think that 7 days to die really needs a story mode, considering what the game is currently lacking. If this is a story with 10 quests, then I will flush this game in the toilet. Because it should not appear in the roadmap as a separate element. In the end, the game may have an indirect connection with radio, newspapers, traders, etc. Story Mode will be a waste of resources and time.
Steam Workshop... I'm honestly shocked that they only added support for it at the end of the roadmap. To modify the game you already have a mods folder. What is stopping you from creating a Steam Workshop after the release of 1.0. Why is this the last priority. This is just surreal, the most necessary thing to keep your game alive at the very last point is just disrespect for the community. For me this is a personal insult.
New quest type, wouldn't it be more logical to push this into one section, didn't you have another feature or is this just the final final option? To be honest, I felt kind of sad after analyzing the roadmap. Of course I see it negatively. But for the most part, these are things that the game at least needs, and if the implementation is not bad, then the game has a chance to be really good. But it won’t be very soon, and it’s not a fact that TFP will close by then, because their path is some kind of crazy roller coaster.
Trader Overhaul: This is not the same thing as balancing traders. Traders have already been rebalanced for 1.0 to fix the issues of never needing to craft items that are given in quest rewards and quest loot. The trader overhaul has to do with reputation and their role in the story and possibly fast travel functionality although recently it sounds like they might be abandoning fast travel. As for your other complaints about inventory space and whatnot...that has nothing to do with traders.
Story Mode: You hate RPG elements and story modes. Got it. You ARE going to have to flush this game down the toilet in Q4 2025 because of story mode after getting it out of the dumpster you threw it into in Q4 2024 thanks to the Outfit DLC...lol. Just face the fact that this game isn't your cup of tea.
Steam Workshop: It's their call. The game has a robust modding community regardless of the lack of Steam Workshop support. Even in 2013 when they first kickstarted the game they put Steam Workshop support as the last thing they planned to implement. They've been advertising "Steam Workshop will be done last" for almost 11 years now and you're just now shocked? The owners are modders themselves. They probably never viewed Steam Workshop as a necessity for modding or playing mods.
New Quest Type: They want to trickle out the new quests one at a time. They probably realize that min/max locusts like yourself consume all new content in about four hours and then go right back to demanding moar. So they a spreading some of it out. There are other improvements and changes and new content that they plan to add and spread out across all the posted dates which is in the "and so much more" catchall.
But, man, don't worry about anything after Q4 2024 when those outfits go on sale as DLCs listed on Steam right under the game. That's when you're throwing the game away. riiiiiiiiiight?
riiiiiiiiiight......
1 -
5 hours ago, Unamelable said:
I played Raft...
5 hours ago, Unamelable said:Unturned...
5 hours ago, Unamelable said:Project Zomboid...
5 hours ago, Unamelable said:The Long Dark...
5 hours ago, Unamelable said:Don't Strave...
5 hours ago, Unamelable said:Palworld...
5 hours ago, Unamelable said:- I played The Forest...
What is clear is that 7 Days to Die holds its own in comparison to these other games in terms of ongoing popularity and number of people playing them. Sorry, I couldn't get the original The Forest. All that would come up is its sequel. Your entire premise is that compared to these other games 7 Days to Die has a mix of features and lack of polish that makes it unplayable compared to these other works. And yet.....there are more people playing 7 Days to Die than all of these other games. It can't be quite so unplayable as you make it out to be. Note that I am not arguing that 7 Days to Die is objectively better than these other games because of these comparison charts. I am simply saying that these comparison charts show that for tens of thousands of people 7 Days to Die is every bit as playable and fun as these other examples.
The best news is that it isn't a zero-sum scenario. Gamers can play all of these games if they choose. If you don't care for 7 Days to Die then pick one you enjoy and play it.
1 -
Unfortunately for you, your priorities are different than the dev’s priorities—clearly.
It’s too bad you feel the need to mix in so many insults and unnecessary jabs with your suggestions and criticism. You say you want the people to whom this all is directed to listen to you but then do everything in your power to turn their attitude against you. So much effort immediately nullified by so much rudeness. I guess you aren’t really serious about actually wanting any of the changes you say you want based on the strategy you’ve chosen for delivery….
2 -
On 5/5/2024 at 6:48 PM, Unamelable said:
Thats 1920 magazines for full progression
I hope I don't need to tell you how inflated that number is for basic progression
There is a huge gap between "full progression" and "basic progression" but you seem to be saying they are the same. You can play effectively and survive well without reaching full progression. The game doesn't begin only after you've found every magazine. Most people play their entire playthrough with less than a full tank in most categories and still have plenty of fun. I just don't see the developers truncating or increasing the pace of progression. After all, most of the iterative changes they have made over the years has been to elongate and slow the pace of progression.
1 -
9 minutes ago, Laz Man said:
🤣
Don't make me play Dixie Chicks, man!
1 -
1 hour ago, Guppycur said:
Why do streamers get it early? I paid for...
...oh, nevermind, I can't bring myself to make this joke this year...
What you paid for is Earl....
...meh, me neither...
0 -
12 hours ago, BFT2020 said:
That's not TFP, that is Titanium Games who is based in Australia that is doing the new port of 7 days to die to the console
Ah...I didn't put 2 and 2 together when answering pApA. Yeah, Titanium games is working together with TFP to port the game to console. When pApA stated that Rick gave hiring 10 new programmers from Australia as the reason for being able to leave Alpha and go 1.0 I was thinking PC only.
So the Australian programmers mentioned by pApA (still don't know the source on that statement) weren't the reason for the PC version going 1.0. They are the reason why the console version is to the point that it can be released as a parallel version of the PC game now and going forward.
I do know that TFP hired additional staff this past year to help them with the PC game and get more tasks done.
2 hours ago, BFT2020 said:Interesting, Sir Roland did mentioned version 1 back then with the launch of console assuming everything lined up for A22. So we were already getting hints at a version name change over a year ago.
Yeah, but tbh I wasn't thinking version 1 as in 1.0 because I wasn't in on the secret. The top devs kept that very close to the vest. I knew they weren't planning on calling the console version Alpha 22. Rick said in one of the video interviews a year ago that Alpha 22 on the pc would be Version 1 on console. Later they called the console version the Apocalypse Edition in order to differentiate it from the classic console version but there was discussion about that possibly causing confusion between the console and the PC versions.
Wanting to make sure people understood that the console version and the PC version were unified (as far as possible) and would be updated together going forward was definitely part of the decision to leave early access and name both versions simply 1.0 and to raise the PC price to equal what the console price was going to be. This was only possible to do because they were able to achieve their goals in what they wanted accomplished for the 1.0 version. Otherwise it is very possible they would have delayed the console launch and kept the next update as A22 and done their whole 1.0 thing for A23.
In the grand scheme of things it doesn't matter. They are continuing with development as though nothing has changed from their end. They know that they are wide open to criticism for lingering bugs without the alpha shelter to protect them. They know they must do their best to not break saves with future updates if at all possible. And instead of "Done when it done" we have a fully fleshed road map.
0 -
23 minutes ago, ElCabong said:
Last thing I want to do is mess around with steam settings
You’ll have a three-day long reminder alarm in the form of the Streamer Weekend to give a cozy window of time to switch over to the latest experimental. I wouldn’t worry about it until then.1 -
14 hours ago, pApA^LeGBa said:
Their argument why this isn´t just a relabeling is that they hired 10 extra developers from Australia (Still not sure why it matters where they come from, but the fact that he needed to point that out could be simply knowing that the argument isn´t really strong).
I didn't remember this being the case and so you made me watch the "Rick Ransom" video again and read through the FAQ and there was zero information about hiring Australians as the reason given for going 1.0 so you'll have to point me to your source on that. But if it is true, I would say that the reasoning is that they hired extra developers to help them with the final sprint so they could get the game to the readiness they wanted for a 1.0 release. In the 1.0 announcement video Rick clearly stated that internally they always planned for A22 to be 1.0 even though they called it A22. I admit that I was external to that internal memo btw...haha
14 hours ago, pApA^LeGBa said:The amount of people working on it isn´t what defines if a game is in early access or not, nor does it define if a game is in beta or in a final state or is an actual 1.0 version. Hiring extra stuff doesn´t change the fact that they planned 1.0 as A22 for a long time and just now, shortly before it´s done, changed it to 1.0. Nothing else changed, it´s still the same update we get as the one when it was still called A22. So yes, it´s relabeled from early access to 1.0.
The amount of people working on it can speed up tasks that must be accomplished if their goal was to make A22 be 1.0. The whole reason they called it A22 publicly was obviously that they weren't sure they could get all their 1.0 goals done so they were hedging their bets. If they didn't make it then it would stay A22 but if they did then they would reveal it as 1.0 just as they did. The hiring of extra staff to help them make it in time obvious paid off since we are getting 1.0 instead of A22.
I don't think 1.0 will be the same update that we would have gotten if they hadn't hired extra people and finished all their goals to make it be 1.0. There hasn't exactly been a lot of footage of 1.0. The PAX East gameplay was a limited demo with several things toggled off because they weren't quite ready. Since then nothing has been shown except the trailer.
It isn't simply a relabeling. TFP is literally taking 7 Days to DIe out of the early access program. It will no longer have the banner and no longer enjoy the shelter that Early Access provides against criticism of the game. If you are adamant that 7 Days to Die is still alpha and early access after the 1.0 release then for you I will continue to answer all your criticisms with "Its alpha"....
14 hours ago, pApA^LeGBa said:I am still saying they do this because either Sony or MS forces them or they need money. Both legit and understandable reasons.
You have the right to voice your fantasies, conspiracy theories, and speculations. They have provided their reasons. They are going 1.0 and raising the price on PC so that the version numbering and the pricing will match between pc and console. They also believe that the overall quality of the game they will be releasing as 1.0 is significantly better than what it was when they first established their price. They feel the game is polished enough to leave the protective incubator of Steam's Early Access program. They stressed that they know the game is unfinished and that they plan to continue working on it.
I think you are working really hard at ignoring key information that gives the 1.0 launch context all so that you can be outraged over this news. For those of us who bought into the game during early access nothing much is going to change other than not being able to use the alpha defense or the early access defense against angry critics--- except to you pApA since you emphatically will believe it is still alpha anyway.
1 -
7 hours ago, DaVegaNL said:
Ah, as the great Adam Savage said: 'I refuse your reality, and substitute my own!'
I'm sorry, but the game wasn't in beta from A18-19 onward. Development limbo (or hell) isn't equal to the traditional beta-fase during development.Development Hell or Limbo is characterized by a long period of nothing getting done. Work on the project is halted and the ability to finish is in serious doubt by the creators themselves.
7 Days to Die has never experienced a period of time during which development halted with the devs meeting to decide whether or not to continue with it. Never. The work done from A20 to present has been continues with updates coming at the same regular (albeit long) intervals as always. People were upset because all the work was improvement to visuals, replacing store bought assets with in house original art, reworking and iterating existing features, and a bunch of optimizing and bug fixing. Someone hoping for brand new features and disappointed that there was very little of that might erroneously surmise that no work was done. Someone angry about it might purposely push a narrative of “development hell” despite the fact that it doesn’t even come close to fitting.
I don’t know how someone can look at the list I posted above and NOT think, “Huh….that sounds like beta phase work”
0 -
2 hours ago, pApA^LeGBa said:
@Roland Now that i read this again, are you seriously trying to sell us that beta already happened with major content like bandits, new armor system, new quests still coming? That new content will definitely need major balance. I am too lazy to search for it, but i am pretty sure someone from the mod and/or dev team told us more than once during the A20/A21 phase that there will be a beta before release.
I’m telling you that looking back at the work that was primarily done during A20, A21, and currently for 1.0, it looks like beta phase work. That’s all. I’m not claiming that it was beta or was not alpha. I’m saying that despite features still missing from the game and a numbering label that says “Alpha”, the type of changes made to the game seem very much to be work done traditionally during beta.
I don’t think the basic labels of alpha or beta really fit any more and I’m glad they aren’t using those terms in the numbering system going forward. I hope they never use them in their future games.
You can go ahead and decide that the game is still in alpha and early access all you want. Knowing that, I will plan to continue to use the alpha defense in future conversations with you so you feel comfortable. 😜
0 -
30 minutes ago, zztong said:
Heh, yeh. Okay, that makes a nice line. Time to go shred all of my A21 gripes.
Don’t shred them. At least some will be able to be recycled after 1.0 comes out. Let’s not expect miracles…😂
1 -
1 hour ago, zztong said:
You're certainly correct, that vast majority of us speak of A21 as that's what we've got. Still, I'd hesitate to imply anyone's list of A21 gripes is pointless. It sort of begs the question: "After how many weeks/months into playing A22/1.0 do opinions about it become moot because A23 is being developed?"
Cute response and I won’t claim any definitive cutoff point other than saying A21 feedback was most helpful and relevant while A21.x updates were still being pushed out, still very important for months after that as devs would be making balance changes and looking at feedback for what they wanted to do for 1.0, but probably least important just 3 weeks before the next major update. I feel pretty secure in saying that when streamer weekend is taking applications that at that point it’s more useful to just see what the new update brings.1 -
5 hours ago, Unamelable said:
Im 100% sure that game does not respect player playstyle and time. Because many sandbox options are mostly irrelevant since the developers force the player to follow one path.
You've already established yourself as a min/max gamer which is why you feel forced to follow only one path. The sandbox elements are relevant to anyone who enjoys playing the game in different ways without letting efficiency get in the way. If you only ever do the one most optimal activity in the game then for sure it will get old fast but nobody forces you to play that way. It is your choice. You aren't denying that there are many sandbox options-- only that they feel mostly irrelevant. That, my friend, is the spot-on complaint of the min-maxer. Meanwhile, thousands of players play this game in numerous different ways every time they play because their number one goal isn't to level up as quickly as they possibly can.
6 hours ago, YourMirror said:Need water? You MUST buy a filter from a merchant. You want solar power? You MUST buy a solar panel along with cells from a merchant.
So there are two items out of hundreds that require you to visit the merchant, so what? You act like the merchant dominates and overshadows the entire game simply because you must purchase two items from them. Merchants are a real part of the game and the developers aren't going to design their relevance out of the game. At the same time their necessity for a full playthrough is very minimal. It's like everyone else is saying, Wow, I played for 100 hours and only needed to visit the trader to obtain two items out of everything I gained during my playthrough and you're saying, Wow, I played for 100 hours and I HAD TO VISIT THE TRADER TO OBTAIN TWO ITEMS! THEY ARE SO DOMINANT IN THE GAME!!!
9 hours ago, Unamelable said:For the most part, some items cannot be find and forced to be bought from merchants. If I could I'd disable their spawning altogether, but forcing players to use a merchant is a nasty thing to do and it completely ruins the nomad style of play. You decided to make your own decision to solve the problems? Because it's a sandbox game? We'll make sure they don't work. Because you have to find a "thought out our way". It's very strange to play such a closed sandbox game where 1/3 gives you free rein to solve different types of problems.
For the most part some items cannot be found and you are forced to buy from merchants? I thought there were just two items? What is the most part now? How are people playing No Trader Challenges (and succeeding) if what you claim is true? The game is not a pure sandbox game. It is a game with elements from several genres including sandbox games. For the purest of pure sandbox experiences, enable the creative menu. If you choose to do that then voila, it is a sandbox game. If you choose not to do that it is a game with sandbox elements which means that there will be some restrictions placed on the player. There is nothing bad about having merchants in the game and nothing forces you to use them more than to obtain two items during your entire playthrough.
9 hours ago, Unamelable said:I personally hate the standard leveling system where a player has to spend an unthinkable amount of time in solo to
- Leveling up
- Finding magazines
- For having no other sources of experience other than passive gaining
- Finding up to 177 on skills and 1920 on crafting. (Plus there will always be copies you can't trade for others. Good luck.)
That's fine. Not everyone needs to like the game. Just because you enjoy a faster pace to progression and want to be able to max out everything during a single playthrough doesn't mean the system is flawed. It just isn't to your taste and that is good to share in the community so you can find like-minded gamers and come together and possibly get a mod created that presses all the buttons you like. But it doesn't automatically mean the devs must change the balance to suit your desires. I actually agree that there are some magazine ladders that don't need 100 rungs and that they could reduce some of them and that would suit me just fine. But I recognize that as a personal preference and not as something that is flawed with the game. A flaw is not equal to anything we don't like.
9 hours ago, Unamelable said:Coupled with the unfinished mechanics of the game, it feels like a game that just came out yesterday. I don't see what the developers took so long to do other than assets, RWG, graphics, and stability. Everything else is very raw and needs total rework. At least for the sake of the players, because the game is played to enjoy and not to frustrate because of - for idiotic rules. The main basis of any game is fun, I see in this game only misery and doom. And it would be good if it worked like Project Zomboid. But I feel it because of underbaced mechanics that completely ruin immersiveness and logic in the most ordinary things.
Sorry you feel that way. Hopefully, 1.0 will change your mind when it releases in a few weeks.
2 -
2 hours ago, Unamelable said:
Like seriously this is the best source for feedback. What's stopping developers from listening?
Damn it, LISTEN to the players for a minute. I feel offended because a lot of the things that are said on reddit affect me. I'd sit there right now and take individual comments and write here what I agree with people there.
What makes you think they haven’t listened? Why are you so certain they haven’t looked at Reddit, Steam, here, Twitter, discord, streamers, and fan sites and read comments?
If all you want them to do is listen for a minute then I can assure you that they have done so many many times over. That doesn’t mean they will agree that jars should come back or that progression should be a hybrid between learn by doing and learn by reading, or that changes that make the game more conducive to a min/max efficiency gameplay style should be prioritized, or that changes that make the game primarily balanced for high population PvP servers should be implemented.
Your comments all seem to assume that the version you are playing (A21) is essentially what is going to be released as 1.0. It’s not. You are playing a 9 month old obsolete version of the game. You don’t know what has been polished over the last 9 months. We will all find out in a few weeks. Your entire list of gripes is for a version that will forever reside in the Steam beta branch after 1.0 releases.
I’ve played the most recent build and can see evidence that the devs have heard the feedback and made adjustments accordingly. They haven’t abandoned their designs but they’ve made adjustments to address community concerns. The game still may not be to your liking after 1.0 but you can be at peace that the devs listened for several minutes to your precious Reddit (among other feedback sources) when making their design choices.1 -
1 hour ago, Unamelable said:
On this side I could be wrong, as before I expected the vanilla version of the game and developed by the developers as it is now. That is, an unpolished platform for improvement for modding community. But then again, where is Steam Workshop?
Steam Workshop is primarily a way for the community to easily download mods and has little do with modders making mods. The evidence of this is all of the mods we already have and without Steam Workshop being some kind of requirement. In fact, I'd go so far to say that from the modder's perspective Steam Workshop will be more of a PITA than an assistance.
But as to your question of where it is you need only look at the primary source document that accompanied the 1.0 announcement to know precisely the plan for Steam Workshop and so I must wonder whether there was some other purpose in your asking the question.
1 -
1 hour ago, Riamus said:
If there is a mechanic or preference that seems very popular, then it would be something the devs might consider.
Even this can be problematic. I'm not saying they wouldn't consider making a very popular feature from a very popular mod part of the native vanilla experience, but people need to remember that the dev's purpose is not just to craft a game with great features but also to craft a great vanilla platform for modding. From the very start they wanted this project to be a springboard for modders and they really do want it to be a rich vanilla base upon which modders can add their own flavors. If they do their job right then we get lots of overhaul mods that are different and unique from each other. If they go too far in adding fan-favorite flavors from a popular mod then every overhaul mod will just feel like variations of that mod since that mod is the new base.
Every time I hear someone complain that the game is so basic compared to this mod or that mod and that the devs are getting out-done by the modders who are doing really special things to push the creative envelope of the game, I smile and think: Good Job TFP. That's some great vanilla you made.
0 -
2 hours ago, Unamelable said:
If developers don't stick to a standardized plan making up their names just because they want to. It's a great breeding ground for shady things to confuse other players about it. In the beta-branch of steam I only see alpha titles.
Independent studios form precisely to break molds and constraints that a lot of their team members experienced when employed at big studios. There's no reason to look for nefarious and dark purposes for a small indie studio doing things their own way. In some cases it spells disaster and those studios crumble. In this case TFP has grown and had great success. The strict definition of 1.0 has been eroding in the industry for years. At this point the only reason to cling to a strict definition of 1.0 and castigate a dev studio for deviating from the classic model is for the sake of arguing. The toothpaste isn't going back into the tube as far as the industry is concerned and as players we can bemoan the new normal and pine for the days when a game was finished at the 1.0 version but it is just noise. It has no substance compared to the willingness of the vast majority of players to purchase an unfinished 1.0 title. At least TFP, released plenty of accompanying information clearly spelling out exactly how this 1.0 version was not considered the finished game. The only people who could possibly be confused would be those who didn't go to the source material and instead read some rando's conspiracy theory on the internet and believed them completely.
2 hours ago, Unamelable said:And from Roland's post I just heard that A20-21 are beta. and A18-19 Hybro-Beta. Why should I be told this by a moderator and not the name of the updates, I shouldn't as a player have to navigate the roadmap to find out their naming plan just because the actual names don't adhere to the standard rules.
Sorry, but in this case I was just giving my opinion based on hindsight. Looking back I can see that the last couple of years were mighty beta-esque in the type of development that was happening. Like everyone else, though, I focused entirely on the tag and when talking about the game talked about it in terms of it being in alpha. Don't take what I posted as anything official. It just makes sense looking back.
My point is not that TFP did a great job communicating to everyone what was going on. They did not. My point is that regardless of labels, it isn't exactly accurate to say that the beta phase got entirely skipped. The beta version numbering got skipped, absolutely, but the actual development that fits with what is normally done during beta phase has been happening. Can you refute that?
So what is truly the most important? The numbering system or the actual work that was done? People are upset about the numbering and they are entitled to be upset about the things that anger them. I'm just glad that the game continues to improve and that there is a printed plan that covers the next year and a half of development. Communication about what they are doing and what they have planned was a shortcoming of the past and it appears they are changing that with everything they have outlined for the future and everything they explained about their intent with the 1.0 version. Are you not glad? It seems you are getting exactly what you want.
6 -
9 hours ago, LisikRey said:
- Transport still disappears if you get off it abruptly, and returns to the point where you put it. On some servers there is a mod /V, which returns the transport to the player, but on most servers do not know this mod. Will it be fixed?
Not sure about this but if it is a known issue then there is a good chance. Maybe @Jugginator can comment. I’ve never experienced it myself playing on a server with just three of us.
9 hours ago, LisikRey said:Do you think we're that interested in looking for every zombie in the house, and then going through the house for about 1-2h looking for the last zombie? nope!
You may not but there are people who do enjoy that and that’s why in A21 they fixed the problem. You can now select lower tier quests if you don’t enjoy searching a tier 4 or tier 5 POI for every last zombie. You can always do a tier 2 or 3 clear if you like a lighter quest for that type. Now everyone can play how they like. Perhaps you didn’t know that you can select lower tier quests if you don’t like the huge complex buildings that take hours to find every last zombie. Now you do. 😀9 hours ago, LisikRey said:- Crafting and the book system...
It doesn’t fit in with your playstyle because as a PvP player you need a system that is 100% deterministic so you can rush to the top before your opponents and use that advantage. I get it. That doesn’t mean it needs fixing. This game hasn’t been developing towards the goal of PvP balance since A11 introduced RPG elements for the first time. Since A11, the game has become more and more PvE focused and less PvP focused. This game is being developed primarily for 2-8 friends to play as a team rather than for 20-50 strangers to destroy each other and steal from each other. The crafting system, like many other systems are round holes that you want to fill with your square PvP pegs. Without the element of competition and a need to race to the top of progression before others, the system works great and makes each game feel different depending on what you can and can’t do. It’s awesome for a team wanting to work together to cooperate and help each other.9 hours ago, LisikRey said:Doors...
I don’t even understand what you are saying here. You mean opening 100 doors crashes the server or something? Again, if you PvP with dozens of strangers on a server, that’s great, but you aren’t really the target audience if the game. It’s cool that you are modding this primarily solo and small team cooperative game to play it as a large scale hunger games PvP experience. Modding the core game to something it’s not often creates problems with balance though.
9 hours ago, LisikRey said:- Broken Biome Multipliers.
Biome progression won’t be done for 1.0 but is on the roadmap for later. However, if your focus is on PVP and hence racing against others to progress, you probably won’t be satisfied with it even when it’s done. This isn’t really an issue for SP other than those who just like to optimize and min/max for its own sake. @Jugginator do you know anything about broken multipliers for the biomes?9 hours ago, LisikRey said:- Still remains a bug with loading, if you step back 100 meters or fly on a copter, you can see where the player is at his base, as the player loading further than the base. How to play on the PVP server?
Only an issue with PvP and most likely only on servers that are exceeding 8 players. I’ve not noticed that for many years. There are three of us on a server and I don’t see my brother load in without the rest of the chunk. But even if that did happen I’m not trying to discover his base or snipe him through his walls that haven’t rendered yet. It’s nothing that has to be fixed for the primary intended gameplay. It’s just a graphical glitch that can be jarring at times instead of a massive exploitive advantage.
9 hours ago, LisikRey said:In fact, there are many more bugs, they are not just many, they are a huge number, but I described the main ones, which you completely killed the game after A21, and the falling online showed it. Now it has grown again, because people come in hoping that you will fix this nonsense of crooked coders, but can you? Big question... We'll add a biker costume though, lol. Why don't you do the game first?
PvP servers of more than 8 players are a modded version of the game and so will always be problematic. Just like any mod, you roll with the punches and just try to live with the inevitable glitches. If this game was PvP-centric then all your priorities would be the top priorities of TFP and yet they are focused on adding a biker costume. Why do you think that is? Could it be that the devs are primarily targeting an audience that cares more about filling a role in a small team and so will enjoy specialized outfits and that servers of 20+ strangers trying to kill and rob each other aren’t on their radar at all?Yes. That’s what it surely means.
2 -
Why is it so easy for you and others to believe that 7 Days to Die will actually be Beta despite the 1.0 numbering system and yet it is so hard for you to believe that 7 Days to Die was essentially Beta during Alpha 20 and 21 (and this past year’s worth of development nobody has played yet) despite alpha numbering system?
Since Alpha 20 the devs have caught a lot of flack for not adding significant new content and instead just adding art, improving visuals, polishing and finalizing current systems, ignoring the end game, and working on optimizations. During Alpha 18 Madmole stated that their focus would not be on the types of things veterans of the game would want (expansionary content) but on what would make the game look and play well for new players. What does that sound like if not beta?
So it’s not that Beta stage got skipped. It’s that they never officially changed the numbering system. The true numbering system that fully reflects the development how it has gone would have been:
Alpha 1-17 (A1-17)
Alpha/Beta Hybrid 1-2 (A18-19)
Beta 1-2 (A20-21)
Beta/Gold Hybrid 1-3 (1.0-whatever)
Gold (End of roadmap)
In any case, it’s clear TFP hasn’t been, isn’t, and won’t be following a traditional development model regardless of the numbering system. Hopefully for their next game they will simply avoid any numbering system that references alpha and beta since people obviously fixate on the narrowest of definitions in order to either defend or criticize.
So yeah, 1.0 is going to feel very beta-like just like alphas 18 and 19 felt somewhat beta-like and alphas 20 and 21 felt very beta-like. The devs clearly stated that the 1.0 tag is not a claim that the game is finished. It’s just the beginning of a new numbering system, exit from early access, and price change.
2
.gif.a624816184ed383a1d1e1979230e0831.gif)
Version 1.0 (Alpha 22) Dev Diary
in News & Announcements
Posted
They showed it to the public so I believe it's fair game. Yes, Tier 6 gear will once again be craftable as long as you have a legendary part to include in the recipe. These are quite rare. Tier 6 recipes have been added into the magazine ladders. More details on that will have to be revealed by devs. Nice catch!