How to avoid bad reviews ?

[Hek Harris]

Hello

 

Despite its length, this text is absolutely not a long cry screamed at the face of the world... Personally, I play for 4 years at this amazing game, I love it and am fully satisfied with its current state. The new POIs delight me, the skill system is impeccable because rich and easily modifiable, the buffs are the gateway to an infinity of recipes and I enjoy the mods system for weapons, armors and tools. And I bless the improved graphics that increase immersion so much.

 

The problem comes from a certain category of players and from there actual and future reproaches.

 

When the A17 Experimental came out, the reviews on Steam were very favorable. Essentially because only fans of the game had launched the experimental version. These are looking for increased difficulty and usually own good computers to run a game that is relatively resource-intensive. Of course, on the forum, we saw many posts complaining about this version, but everybody knows that discontented players always rush to express their disappointment, while the others are content to play.

 

Now that the experimental has passed stable and the update is available to all, we will see the game being slaughtered because it is now the general public who is concerned. The game is usually bought between 5 and 10 bucks, on promotion or with keys. Many players possess it, without having the necessary configuration to make it work, let alone patience and intelligence to discover its richness and depth.

 

There are 3 things to consider before looking for solutions to the problem of bad reviews.

 

- All fools play video games. And fools are legions. They will not buy a complex strategy game, a chess game or a design software and so will not come to say of them that "it's sh*t". But they will all buy a game where they can explode zombies and stack cubes.

 

- Video game players are lazy. They like to have everything right now. For many, the concepts of "developing game" or "early access" are unapproachable. Most will launch the game with the default settings. The vast majority will not even try to look at xml files when some settings will displease them.

 

- Video game players are mostly young, socially inexperienced and therefore tend to express themselves very discourteously. Their opinion is often very crude and without nuances.

 

Reading the bad reviews, we can group them into different types :

 

1) The user is disappointed with the performance of the A17. His computer can not run the game properly (FPS drop).

 

2) The user judges the game too hard, and no longer finds pleasure because his usual activities are no longer doable in early game.

 

3) The user does not like the skill system and generally regrets the missing learning books.

 

For the first point, unfortunately devs can't do much at the moment. Maybe a pop-up by launching the game to advise to lower the resolution of the game by reminding that it's in the development phase. Or advice people to clean their computer by killing unnecessary processes. I don't know. Some people really can not run the game, others maintain so badly their hardware and software that, even having a good basic configuration, they get a poor result.

 

For the second point, and this is the purpose of this (already too long) post, I think it is essential to review - and quickly - the levels of difficulty. There is no need to have 5 or 6 levels : other settings like the z running or not, the loot rate, the duration of the days or other parameters that will be or could be added are real difficulty modifiers. But new players - and sometimes old ones, because some have thousands of hours of play and continue to do crap ("I used to do crap before, why isn't it possible anymore ?!!") - can start a game where they have fun without having to mess with settings that they only half understand (Who uses, when setting a game, the blocks solidity modifier, which is a great parameter to get ressources faster early in the game and to be forced to build stronger bases? Not many people, I think …)

 

I therefore suggest levels of difficulty expressed differently :

 

1) Builder: the easiest, for players who like to build and play easy games. The z are in minimal difficulty (really weak constitution and ridiculous damage). The player receives 10 skill points at the beginning (before the quest-tutorial which should be optional and therefore give no point). The loot rate is 200%. Infection and diseases are very rare (as currently ^^). The player receives 2 skill points per level. By default, zombies walk during the day and jog at night. No penalty of death. And whatever makes the game easier.

 

2) Adventurer: for players who like challenge. Corresponding to the current "Nomad" difficulty. The player receives 5 skill points. The loot rate is 100%. Infection and diseases are more common. The plants grow 2 times less quickly, the trees 5 times less.

 

3) Survivalist: The player does not receive any points. The loot rate is 50%. Zombies are extremely painful, but they are not hit points bags. Infection and diseases are very common. The plants grow 4 times less quickly. Trees 10 times slower.

 

Once the player has chosen his mode of play, the parameters are defined according to his choice. He can then modify them individually if he wants to.

 

Why include the loot rate ? Because it is absolutely necessary to satisfy the players who regret the learning books and thus put them back in the table of loot.

 

All these books already exist : these are magazines whose usefulness is very questionable. Let's make existing books each in several versions. Example: stealth level 1, very common. Stealth level 2, current. Stealth level 3, rare. Stealth level 4, very rare. Stealth level 5, only in the market, very expensive. With a high loot rate, the novice or casual player should find them easily. Conversely, those who like to explore, search, fight for a powerful character should find satisfaction.

 

When players find a book, they can read it and then assign an available skill point to the unlocked skill.

 

Visually, they just need a different color depending on the ability they depend on and a number from 1 to 5 depending on their level.

 

(The system of current magazines could be replaced by potions, why not only on the 5 characteristics (+1), and still for half an hour. But it's not very important.)

 

 

No matter how all this is ultimately proposed, the bottom line is that players who don't want a challenge (but who will never admit it) can start a game and be served copiously. This is the only way to prevent a majority of players investing less in a game for their taste than writing insulting and very negative comments.

 

In short : first and foremost, it is necessary to satisfy casual or impatient players. Those who love the challenge and which I am part of know perfectly how to modify xml. We just need the mechanisms in place, then we have fun with them.

 

I know that Pimps always do exactly what they want, and I'm fully satisfied of that. But I think they must take care of casual players or those who don't like difficulty, because they are definitely the most numerous and the quickest to ruin the reputation of a game.

 

I'm glad I took the time to express my opinion, even if everyone does'nt care

 

 

Sorry for my english and happy ultimate week before the end of the w... year !

[SurvivalUK]

When the A17 Experimental came out, the reviews on Steam were very favorable. Essentially because only fans of the game had launched the experimental version. These are looking for increased difficulty

The Steam reviews for the A17E were mixed, some good some bad.

 

usually own good computers to run a game that is relatively resource-intensive.

I'd say it is a very mixed bag and if anything 7 Days seems to have been run by a reasonable size of the player base on modest hardware. Nothing wrong with that but the push to get the game better looking and reduce the comments that it's dated are hurting the player base while left unoptimised. Looking at streamers and YT players with very cut down graphics settings do nothing to enhance the visual appeal of the game.

 

Of course, on the forum, we saw many posts complaining about this version, but everybody knows that discontented players always rush to express their disappointment, while the others are content to play.

Mixed again imo, vocal people on both sides. Those worried about the direction and those that embrace it. Neither right nor wrong, just opinions.

 

Now that the experimental has passed stable and the update is available to all, we will see the game being slaughtered because it is now the general public who is concerned.

Concerned or maybe some thinking "wtf just happened to the gameplay?", "where the hell did the performance go to?".

 

As for TFPs direction, they'll mould the game in their vision but have been responsive at times to community feedback.

 

What is clear imo at the moment is they aren't pleasing everyone. On the one hand casual players wanting either what they had or something fun vs hardcore players with 100's of hours wanting a challenge rather than just more bullet sponges. It's possible to please both camps but it's not where the game is right now.

 

TFPs could do a few things to help;

 

• Communication
  -It's poor at best these days, the odd snippet of a forum post but rarely joined up and structured. Compared with other EA devs these days they are stuck in the past.
  
• Roadmap
  -It doesn't seem to exist, there may be a long game but so much appears to be done on a whim depending what is in vogue at the time. Ziplines anyone? A friend put it very well, "i wish MM wasn't such a fan of FO4 or Skyrim". What the game was built on and work well keeps getting ripped up.
  
• Frequent updates
  -Massive this, pockets of work eased into the game instead of huge updates that change direction and create a whole heap of problems. Smaller focused steps would be far better in the spirit of agile methodologies.
  
• 
  

 

/the end

[linewalker]

Best way to avoid bad reviews....

 

Include an intelligence test, and a questionnaire ensuring that the purchaser actually understands what Alpha Development and EA is all about BEFORE allowing them to purchase the title.

[Katitof]

Best way to avoid bad reviews....

 

Include an intelligence test, and a questionnaire ensuring that the purchaser actually understands what Alpha Development and EA is all about BEFORE allowing them to purchase the title.

 

Aaaaand /thread

 

Alternatively, make the early access warning actually hit people in the face.

[babspsol]

I don't think it's fair to label everyone that writes a bad review as stupid and all those other derogatory terms you used / implied. In fact it's quite offensive and arrogant.

 

We should all be allowed to express our opinion without judgement and we certainly shouldn't be bullied into writing a positive review for fear of being labelled stupid casual baddies.

 

FWIW I gave this game a thumbs up but I take exception to labels being thrown at people who didn't

[Hek Harris]

We are not going to change the mentality of the players. This is not the point. Just for the record, when the experimental was released, the enthusiasm was indisputable. Not "mixed". Now that the game is available to the general public, we see the difference.

 

 

I'm pretty sure those people just need some love...

[Snowydeath]

Fun fact. Most gamers are not “young” most are mid 20s-30s. Statistically wayyyy more adults game.

[Arrek]

I think you are generalizing for sure, I waited until stable to leave a review because I knew things would changes better or worse. I'll concede that a lot of the reviews are "badly optimized" or something of the sort, but a lot of the others give real detailed feedback about what they don't like and it's not just whining about being too hard, If anything I feel aside from some POI deathtraps it's as easy as it ever was.

 

Like SurvivalUK touched on above, if they want to avoid bad reviews they should get more in touch with their broader community, I only came to register on these forums after reading a sticky on the steam forums saying if you want to be heard. come here. It seems like they are only taking feedback from what like 500 people here? Most of us who feel strongly for or against whatever issue we have, why not take the next poll in the client itself so you get feelings of the other 25.5k or so players? A roadmap or something would also help maybe get some feedback on a soon to be hated feature before you work on it for 9 months in secret and it's too late to change.

 

And Hek bro you are so right on one thing, options man. A whole screen full of ARK like sliders and options would keep a whole lot of people happy, because for some editing a XML is too intimidating or hard, but writing a short steam review saying the game sucks is super easy.

[xXBadDreamXx]

Not to say you don't have some good ideas OP but I think some stuff isn't really on point. Typically experienced players visit forums and are active in the community. This game is being pushed towards more hardcore play and experienced players because that's generally what they've been asking for. The general public buying this game might be purchasing it based on reviews of an easier build and then the game is nothing like what they expected and isn't very fun.I'm not going to speculate about what should be done to correct these problems as they'd fall on deaf ears anyways but typically steam reviews do work well and when a game gets a lot of bad reviews , those reviews are deserved.

[Roland]

Every game company has a tough choice to make in the face of bad reviews because of controversial changes.

 

If TFP caves and changes A17 to be more like A16 then those that want that will praise TFP for listening to customer feedback but those who don’t want that will criticize TFP for selling out on their vision to chase sales and dumb the game down for the masses.

 

If TFP sticks to its decisions then those who like that will praise them for being true to their vision while those who don’t want them to keep the new changes will criticize them for listening to fanbois and yes-men and being out of touch with the majority of their true fan base.

 

Whatever happens I’m glad to have my early development access to witness it all.

[Deceptive Pastry]

Lol. So often when I see criticism of this game it must be because:

 

- They're stupid

- They're sad/Lonely

- They're bad a video games/must just want it to be easy mode

- "It's early access!" (as if user feedback on mechanics and such isn't one of the points of EA)

 

They couldn't simply have different tastes or a few valid complaints, no, they are WRONG and the game is fine. I still generally enjoy the game while having my own complaints and issues with the direction certain mechanics have gone in. A LOT has changed in A17 and you're bound to have this. But people can't just have different opinions. As much as people talk about the "squeaky wheels" some the defenders seem to be just as, if not more, vocal and opinionated here.

 

I mean, whatever. I've pretty much accepted this is how things are. It's really just a matter of how *many* share the same opinions. Either the new direction will help sales and will make the majority happy or it won't. But for the near future that I continue playing and modding the game till I lose interest, it doesn't really matter. They already have my money.

[Noctoras]

Not to say you don't have some good ideas OP but I think some stuff isn't really on point. Typically experienced players visit forums and are active in the community. This game is being pushed towards more hardcore play and experienced players because that's generally what they've been asking for. The general public buying this game might be purchasing it based on reviews of an easier build and then the game is nothing like what they expected and isn't very fun.I'm not going to speculate about what should be done to correct these problems as they'd fall on deaf ears anyways but typically steam reviews do work well and when a game gets a lot of bad reviews , those reviews are deserved.

 

I second this notion. I think it generally pays to have the early game rather a bit easy and fun to explore and to add difficulty late game. Personally, I don't think it's good to put off newbies by making early game difficult.

 

Real challenging stuff should come late game and personally, I would have loved to see new, difficult zombie models (mind you, NOT radiated regen-monsters), bigger hordes and more content late game instead of mainly shifting existing content towards late game. Also, zombies appearing not before day 140 for instance could harbour a new epidemic virus more difficult to tackle than the standard virus, there would be many options.

 

The POI stuff has been somewhat overdone I think, more building and basebuilding options (electricity, animal farming, more automated base guns, whatnot, a broader medical system, possibilities are endless).

 

In short, I am a big fan of more content. Now I see, work has been done content wise (vehicles, POIs, digging zeds...) and vehicles and digging zeds as well as zombie AI are major improvements I think. Nonetheless, some of it has the feeling of unnecessary reinvention of the wheel. Some decisions like the reduction of biomes and their no-more-random-order I did not like.

 

Roland has a point, though, you most likely will not make it right for everyone. However, going too much after the real hardcore crowd will alienate more players than not. The forum is not representative of the general player base in this regard.

 

It kind of thwarts the "Youtuber Early Release" as well, since the game has moved away from the very target audience it tries to reach with this streamer thingy.

 

And this shows in reviews, so I also think these are deserved.

 

This thread had a lot of good input anyway. It might be of no use for this game, since re-re-inventing the wheel looks kind of over the top now, but maybe feedback can be used for a future voxel game.

[Laz Man]

Although there was quite a bit on generalization and assumptions by the OP, I appreciate his concern for the reputation of the game.

 

Hopefully, once we get closer to gold there will be more sandbox options to please more folks.

 

Almost every survival game out there has them. The very popular survival "Dont Starve " series has tons of options to customize the game to the players liking. Hopefully the dev's see the value in something like that down the line.

 

A great example of some of these nice settings are the new run speed settings that were just implemented.

[TheMouldyCheese]

Wow OP, way to generalise and stereotype. You came off as incredibly arrogant in some of that post.

 

However, some very good points were made and I hope TFP takes it on board.

[Kalarro]

 

Essentially because only fans of the game had launched the experimental version. These are looking for increased difficulty

get dow your high horse. Again and again this argument. Maybe some complain about the difficulty, but you cant imagine how many complains/feedback there is that is answered with a "you just want the game easier". No matter how clearly you explain it isnt the case. Even the funpimps themselves. I dont like the new buildings that a17 encourages, at all. After posts explaining in detail what the problem is, they sum it up with "you just dont want to adapt and want easy buildiongs like before".... when its totally the opposite. I built for 6 days before a17 to have a fortress for bloodmoon. Now you just need an easy path for the congaline you can build in half a day.

But yeah, us complainers dont like difficulty.

let alone patience and intelligence to discover its richness and depth.

Yeah you sometimes try to sound like a reasonable player stating the obvious, but then you cant help yourself and just insult the ones not agreeing with you

- All fools play video games. And fools are legions. They will not buy a complex strategy game,

Insulting again, yeah good point.

But more on the topic, I LOVE strategy games, I LOVE complex games. I have complained for example time and time again about the depth civilization lost after civ4. It just sounds cool for you to say that its you who likes complex games and not the ones not agreeing with you. Well guess what, a17 is less complex. The game changed direction into a more combat oriented game. I spend much mroe time just killing zombies than planing and building bases, compared to old builds. We lost big fortresses beeing useful, we lost 1-600 quality, we lost recipes, we lost weapon parts.... And in favour of all this we got mods, which are cool sure.

So yeah, complexity is good, and a17 went the other route.

- Video game players are mostly young,

 

Guess what young players usually prefer to do in games. Combat. Guess what playstyle is encouraged in a17. Combat.

Me beeing 37, I enjoyed planing and building, and complexity. Things that are now less important in a17

[WolfyBlah]

How to avoid bad reviews:

Its simple ♥♥♥♥.

-dont make 16 months between releases while you reinvent the wheel.

-dont release an unstable buggy mess to the stable branch just because its Christmas.

-Listen to the community.

[hotpoon]

How to avoid bad reviews:

Its simple ♥♥♥♥.

-dont make 16 months between releases while you reinvent the wheel.

-dont release an unstable buggy mess to the stable branch just because its Christmas.

-Listen to the community.

 

+1 to the above

 

I did not read the entire OP because of all the BS generalisations made in the first few sentences. I figured the rest of the post would be more of the same, but just wanted to say my review is a positive one. It was written long before A17 reared it's head though. At this point I really should change it to a negative one because I honestly don't currently recommend it in it's present state. What stops me is how much I effing love what this game was, and I have high hopes that things will improve, so for now my review remains positive. A17 isn't all bad, but as has been mentioned by many other people far more eloquently: the game didn't need to be reinvented.

[A Nice Cup of Tea]

Fun fact. Most gamers are not “young” most are mid 20s-30s. Statistically wayyyy more adults game.

 

"mid 20s-30s" IS young.

 

Get off my lawn!

[fallenbox]

it's really sad when it come to this game to see how many ass lickers on the forum are here only to prove that if people don't like the game as it is now it's because they are "stupid kiddy gne gne gne" while actually people MAYBE simply stopped liking the game cause it's basically a lite version of what it was, people have a brain to think with and just because they go in your opposite direction doesn't mean they are all tards but you.

[HeavensDoor405]

I fell in love with the game at A15, it was spam crafting, no sleepers, electricity wasn't really working all that well.

 

A16 was a fantastic leap, the spam crafting still existed to be sure, but was much reduced though it made more logical sense that crafting something over and over would cause you to be better at making that thing. I didn't read the release notes when I upgraded to 16, and had no idea about the sleepers, and nearly wet myself the first time. The addition of the electricity stuff was awesome.

 

I waited in barely contained anticipation for A17, with new vehicles, new POIs, and was even optimistic about the new skill trees. I was hoping for more electricity and traps.

 

The skill trees fell flat, the loss of learning recipes via books hit exploration hard. I know I've harped on the stamina thing several times in other threads, but it's fixable via some balancing things, same with the death penalty. An Int gate for crafting some things we had in A16 and it was fine, so it doesn't bother me, but a hard level gate on the base attributes doesn't sit well. I don't see how to fix the skill trees right now without scrapping big chunks of it, especially the crafting stuff. The laser focus of the Zombie AI in any instance is immersion breaking, like why should they know where I am unless I did something to draw their attention, much less laser focusing on a perceived weak block because you allow the AI to cheat and know the block HP, but this isn't completely new to A17, the Horde night was always this way. If it had been me I would spawn Horde night zombies in more than one place, and set their destination near the player, if the player moves or runs, the spawn points move with them, and the zombies are persistent until killed. If the player base is in the way of traveling to destination, and there is no "easy" path withing say 5-10 blocks, then destruction mode. If the player is detected, then attacking poles or supporting structures, but not by any means have them necessarily go for that one particular block. I don't think ALL zombies should be able to dig, just certain types.

 

These are just SOME of the things I can think of to fix it, and the reviews are moving steadily towards mixed from positive. I love this game for what it was, and what it could be. I bought mine a while ago, but I buy more copies to give to family and friends to add to the gameplay. I don't think very many bought this game to be an FPS, I've played tons of those, and most of them only once, there's no replay value there, but tons with this game. Once I've explored all the new POIs, and driven all the new vehicles there just isn't anything else to hold me without some element of randomness to make a new world enjoyable, and not a never ending grind.

[Shiana]

I fell in love with the game at A15, it was spam crafting, no sleepers, electricity wasn't really working all that well. A16 was a fantastic leap, the spam crafting still existed to be sure, but was much reduced though it made more logical sense that crafting something over and over would cause you to be better at making that thing. I didn't read the release notes when I upgraded to 16, and had no idea about the sleepers, and nearly wet myself the first time. I waited in barely contained anticipation for A17, with new vehicles, new POIs, and was even optimistic about the new skill trees. The skill trees fell flat, the loss of learning recipes via books hit exploration hard. I know I've harped on the stamina thing several times in other threads, but it's fixable via some balancing things, same with the death penalty. An Int gate for crafting some things we had in A16 and it was fine. I don't see how to fix the skill trees right now without scrapping big chunks of it, especially the crafting stuff. The laser focus of the Zombies in any instance is immersion breaking, like why should they know where I am unless I did something to draw their attention, much less laser focusing on a perceived weak block because you allow the AI to cheat and know the block HP.

 

Fully agree to that.

And in addition the loss of simple pure paint colors for the walls (only possible to choose moldy/rusty textures to splat on the walls) made even the paint tool completely stupid, and look more like an error in the game than a tool. I was soo hoping for an advancement like a15->a16, and not for .... another bland shooter, thats soo much worse than the free to play ones like warframe.....

[HeavensDoor405]

Fully agree to that.

And in addition the loss of simple pure paint colors for the walls (only possible to choose moldy/rusty textures to splat on the walls) made even the paint tool completely stupid, and look more like an error in the game than a tool. I was soo hoping for an advancement like a15->a16, and not for .... another bland shooter, thats soo much worse than the free to play ones like warframe.....

 

I doubt i'm the only one who moved into a POI early game, and "Fixed It Up". Being able to make a run down POI look nice again held some appeal for me, but the stamina stuff ruins the enjoyment of such things. I know it isn't house flipper, but it was one of the attractions of a sandbox voxel game, that I could destroy, build, and renovate. I would say the loss of some of the textures is temporary as they are redoing a lot of them. This is one of the features, that I still hold out some hope that they will actually fix. That and making the garage door tall enough to fit the 4x4 through. I think someone else said something along the line of adding in other doors for builders. The addition of the table saw really should make those kinds of additions more feasible from an immersion standpoint.

[Evorith]

My issue is that other than the graphic change, PoI's the vehicles not a lot has been added to the game in over a year. Rehashing everything else is just smoke and mirrors to hide the fact there really isn't much difference going forward with no creativity in play here. The AI changes are lazy at best. The rest is personal preference. A17 is not holding my attention like A16 did so I have to decided to mod it or go play something else. Ive played games for decades that I have over 2 years in game play time so I tend to be loyal and focus on one game at a time but how many games can do that these days. A17 is a disappointment. If I had bought it as A17 I would have played it a few hours and moved on were A16 held my attention far longer. Issue for TFP is not with me as I have paid my money its if others continue to buy it.

[PoppaTot]

Avoiding bad reviews should be easy if you already have good reviews at the time. TFP knows that. If the reviews start coming in mostly negative for the next couple months they will make changes and adapt. After all, that is exactly what they expected a large number of their player base to do when they totally overhauled the game, right?

[Reth]

To OP: I'm afraid you've missed the mark there.

 

A17 is not difficult. It's boring. I like difficult. I enjoy the challenge. I don't enjoy waiting for stamina to regenerate. That seems to be the only challenge 7D2D can provide me with these days. A zombie dog pack heading your way used to spell trouble. Now it's just an annoyance as they no longer know how to attack you.

 

A17 is not grindy. It's tedious. I'm fine with the grind, heck, I enjoy it. I managed to grind my way to the top in countless other games and I loved it. I had multiple high level characters in EQ, WoW and EQ2. A17 makes me wait before I can take the next action whatever that may be. This is a horrible game mechanic. It hasn't been used in games since the early days of EQ and other MMOs of that era.

 

I'm a builder in 7D2D. I don't want it easy and I don't need it easy. A17 is much easier than A16 due to AI's predictability. It used to take me three days to plan and and build a solid ground base in A16 that had a good chance of surviving the horde night. Now it takes me less than a day and I spend most of it making it pretty. It is no longer a base, it's a contraption.

 

TFP should really stop trying to reinvent the wheel here. So many issues they are struggling with have been solved great many times before. They just need to look at other games and figure out what works and what doesn't.