RWG Just When you think it can't get any worse

[Roland]

Straight streets? In A17? Liar!!!!

[Roland]

All arguments about publishing/developing/Alpha/Gamma/Beta aside;

 

I think the current system in the current latest_unstable version should not have been included in this unstable version. Yeah, I know, we are supposed to test for bugs, yada yada, but the current RGW is clearly a broken WIP. So why include it?

 

Its not about including it or not including it. It is simply that you guys get the same exact builds used for internal development. Build 20 was where they were at when they decided to push out what they had. Some changes had been committed to RWG but not all. Kinyajuu isn't going to upset his work by being careful to commit or not commit changes when he feels its time to do so because of experimental release schedules. They don't create special builds to push out for the players. They push out the ones they are using for development at that time. They could have waited but they wanted people to test the new options and see if other fixes had taken. This is what I mean by them literally treating Early Access as access to the actual development process. People complain about having to revert because the current build doesn't work for them but this is something that regularly occurs over time internally as well. Not good for folks who just want to play a game but interesting as hell for those who wanted a real peak.

 

They have listened to the overwhelming feedback of people wanting smaller updates more often and are trying to avoid waiting until lots of things are done before pushing out what they have.

[Royal Deluxe]

Straight streets? In A17? Liar!!!!

 

[DaVegaNL]

Its not about including it or not including it. It is simply that you guys get the same exact builds used for internal development. Build 20 was where they were at when they decided to push out what they had. Some changes had been committed to RWG but not all. Kinyajuu isn't going to upset his work by being careful to commit or not commit changes when he feels its time to do so because of experimental release schedules. They don't create special builds to push out for the players. They push out the ones they are using for development at that time. They could have waited but they wanted people to test the new options and see if other fixes had taken. This is what I mean by them literally treating Early Access as access to the actual development process. People complain about having to revert because the current build doesn't work for them but this is something that regularly occurs over time internally as well. Not good for folks who just want to play a game but interesting as hell for those who wanted a real peak.

 

They have listened to the overwhelming feedback of people wanting smaller updates more often and are trying to avoid waiting until lots of things are done before pushing out what they have.

 

Fair point, more updates the better, obviously. However, from a testing/playing point-of-view; this might be a bit counterproductive (or even intuitive). Because of a massively borked system (RGW, in this case, everyone seems to agree here, it seems), I don't play the unstable version. Many people apparently don't. So will TFP gather enough feedback to improve upon it?

 

It's like being asked to Q&A your driving experience to the office every day, whilst being given zero traffic, good roads, 3 tires, a clutch, and 1 windscreen-wiper. Obviously one cannot Q&A this experience, besides the obvious complaints that one hasn't been given a coffee-cup holder.

[Roland]

Fair point, more updates the better, obviously. However, from a testing/playing point-of-view; this might be a bit counterproductive (or even intuitive). Because of a massively borked system (RGW, in this case, everyone seems to agree here, it seems), I don't play the unstable version. Many people apparently don't. So will TFP gather enough feedback to improve upon it?

 

It's like being asked to Q&A your driving experience to the office every day, whilst being given zero traffic, good roads, 3 tires, a clutch, and 1 windscreen-wiper. Obviously one cannot Q&A this experience, besides the obvious complaints that one hasn't been given a coffee-cup holder.

 

It's fine. The bug thread seems pretty robust and the QA guys are active on there responding to the bug reports as well as making their own as they continue to play. Everything that the devs would like to be tested can be tested in Navezgane perfectly fine to be honest. There is no argument to be made for the ability to test being hampered. The only real argument is for the ability to have fun for just playing. Those who are super interested in testing will play Navezgane so they can continue to test because that is what they want to do. Those who are just interested in playing a fun game are the ones having a tough time, understandably.

 

Madmole likes specific balancing comments and lurks around the forums reading and deciding whether he agrees or not with the sentiments he comes across. Just today he changed the vending machines after reading some comments over the weekend and considering what he felt was best.

[Roland]

snip

 

I was joking! I believe you. I was poking fun at A17 RWG itself and its awful roads...lol

[Royal Deluxe]

I was joking! I believe you. I was poking fun at A17 RWG itself and its awful roads...lol

 

Yep, i thought this. But no reason to miss the opportunity to advertise this really nice seed ^^

[Aldranon]

Yep, i thought this. But no reason to miss the opportunity to advertise this really nice seed ^^

 

It's one of the best seeds I've played.

 

There are so many POI's I've only found 2 animals to hunt. So I have to loot or trade to live. I wore out a fresh tier 1 iron club on one POI, I don't know were they were coming from which included about a dozen of the lumberjacks, which I became very good at fighting after that!

[Mday]

I would have just say: "Sorry some changes that broke RWG are included in A17.2. Navezgane isn't affected so go ahead and give it a try."

 

It would have sounded better than: "RWG is broken and the dev aren't ready to hear any feedback about it coz they know how broken it is. Don't play 17.2 if you can't deal with it."

 

As much as I wanted to test out A17.2 and see how RGW's coal issue fix works, RGW isn't working so no point testing that right now. It is not like we don't have a working game on hand coz we still have those older Alpha. I will make a new game in A17.1 until they get RGW fixed.

[Lanadon Conners]

Roland,

I know this request is near impossible, very time consuming and a lot of work, but do you think there is "Any" chance that perhaps, sometime in the near future, yourself, Madmole and maybe a few others from the Dev team would be willing to run an hour or two long Podcast, where you scan questions and comments from folks who tune in and give the Dev team a chance to answer questions directly and have some players hear the answers they just can't seem to understand by reading on the forums? It would let the Dev team give accurate updates and hints at future plans/ideas.. comment on notes they have received from the player base and give folks the reassurance that their thoughts are being heard.

 

Just an idea about how to let the players and Devs "connect". We are all working towards the exact same goal; a Great Game.

[RCADICT]

Well I really like the new maps and all that play on my server do as well. People want boats and fishing but get upset by more water......

 

You cant make everyone happy.......

[Roland]

I would have just say: "Sorry some changes that broke RWG are included in A17.2. Navezgane isn't affected so go ahead and give it a try."

 

It would have sounded better than: "RWG is broken and the dev aren't ready to hear any feedback about it coz they know how broken it is. Don't play 17.2 if you can't deal with it."

 

As much as I wanted to test out A17.2 and see how RGW's coal issue fix works, RGW isn't working so no point testing that right now. It is not like we don't have a working game on hand coz we still have those older Alpha. I will make a new game in A17.1 until they get RGW fixed.

 

Technically, for the purposes of testing the coal issue fix, A17.2 RWG is working well enough. A map might not be worth doing a long term play but you definitely could test that issue.

 

This is the main issue here. For those who actually are interested in actual testing there is no barrier. It’s those who want to play purely for entertainment’s sake who are blocked at the moment and, unfortunately for most of them, Navezgane isn’t an option for fixing their entertainment gap any longer.

 

So using a 17.1 map is a possible fix for those just playing for fun and for those who are playing to test, either Navezgane or 17.2 RWG is viable depending on what your goal is.

[Windsailor]

Madmole likes specific balancing comments and lurks around the forums reading and deciding whether he agrees or not with the sentiments he comes across. Just today he changed the vending machines after reading some comments over the weekend and considering what he felt was best.

 

Sorry for hijacking this thread, but IMHO this describes in a nutshell the problem this game currently has.

 

If the CEO changes core elements of the game to something “what he felt was best” isn’t the way how product development should happen.

 

No wonder we have those 180 degrees turns (sometimes 360 degrees) and all those other “personal preferences”.

 

Sorry, if this sounds negative. But 7D2D has been (!) an awesome game. I always called it “bob the builder for adults with zombies”. I got hooked by Grand Spartan on YouTube and sunk many - probably too many - hours into it as it offered a mix of horror, shooter elements, free play style and creativity.

 

Now it’s a generic character development game. A lot of unique aspects have been nerfed and it has gotten pretty linear. Farm XP, drop points into X, rinse and repeat.

 

Base building has become a “let’s trick the (so called) AI” game.

 

I could probably go on for a while but I won’t as it doesn’t lead to anything.

 

And I know that 7D2D is Alpha™️ and experimental™️ but I have the impression that TFP have lost their “inner compass”. Which then leads to the above quoted post in this thread “what he felt was best”.

[OldManBrian]

Sorry for hijacking this thread, but IMHO this describes in a nutshell the problem this game currently has.

 

If the CEO changes core elements of the game to something “what he felt was best” isn’t the way how product development should happen.

 

No wonder we have those 180 degrees turns (sometimes 360 degrees) and all those other “personal preferences”.

 

Sorry, if this sounds negative. But 7D2D has been (!) an awesome game. I always called it “bob the builder for adults with zombies”. I got hooked by Grand Spartan on YouTube and sunk many - probably too many - hours into it as it offered a mix of horror, shooter elements, free play style and creativity.

 

Now it’s a generic character development game. A lot of unique aspects have been nerfed and it has gotten pretty linear. Farm XP, drop points into X, rinse and repeat.

 

Base building has become a “let’s trick the (so called) AI” game.

 

I could probably go on for a while but I won’t as it doesn’t lead to anything.

 

And I know that 7D2D is Alpha™️ and experimental™️ but I have the impression that TFP have lost their “inner compass”. Which then leads to the above quoted post in this thread “what he felt was best”.

 

This.

 

My group and I went back to a16.4 after almost abandoning the game and we're having a blast again, but it's a shame that we're missing out on improvements \ fixes by doing that. As have been said before, a16 was a FANTASTIC version of the game, and TFP would have benefited from building upon that instead of throwing all those gameplay mechanics out and coming up with something that ends up generic and repetitive. (We even prefer the older graphics, as it was always interesting and amusing to see how POI builders creatively used the limited blocks to make imaginative scenes and places. The new POIs seem bland and generic by comparison even though the graphics are much better.)

 

Usually during alphas you see games change over time, but I've never seen one make such drastic changes as this one (a16 -> a17) after already being beloved by the players.

 

But playing devil's advocate here, small business owners have the right to totally change up whatever they want based on their preferences. Not to mention, it's because of that fact that we even have amazing versions to play at all. Group think is a dangerous thing for a business, especially a game developer, and it's usually only the ones guided by a single person that end up producing something really special.

 

It's just a shame that we had such an amazing one (a16) and then had much of what made it special replaced in an update (a17).

[Roland]

You are welcome to your opinion but what Madmole is doing is exactly what most people on the forum hope that he's doing...Looking at player feedback and factoring that into his decisions. Sorry but the game is his. He has always made decision from the beginning according to his own preferences and then moderating that a bit if public outcry is too great. I guess as long as your preferences have aligned with his you've been happy and felt his methods were genius but now that some of your preferences differ you are crying foul...

 

At any rate Madmole doesn't just make sole decisions on a whim. He brings things up in team meetings and they discuss and decide things as a team. For small balancing issues he will make sole decisions and yes, admittedly that creates some swings until he can get it dialed in to where he's happy but that is his development style and whether you agree with it or disagree with it he isn't going to change.

 

Honestly, I think most people around here think that it is a good thing that the developers do read what is posted here as they make their decisions. And it is not a shame at all about what happened between A16 and A17 for those who enjoy and see A17 as an improvement in many cases and the first steps towards potential improvement in others. I'm glad you and your group have found enjoyment with A16. Maybe A18 will be great again for you and yours.

[Mday]

Well I really like the new maps and all that play on my server do as well. People want boats and fishing but get upset by more water......

 

You cant make everyone happy.......

 

Boats and fishing is great.

Thou tbh even if it is in the game already, it won't work with the 17.2 world gen. The 17.2 RWG give you a big island surrounded by water. With most of the POI located away from water, you won't be using that boat very often.

[Silbendy]

Art

 

You are welcome to your opinion but what Madmole is doing is exactly what most people on the forum hope that he's doing...Looking at player feedback and factoring that into his decisions. Sorry but the game is his. He has always made decision from the beginning according to his own preferences and then moderating that a bit if public outcry is too great. I guess as long as your preferences have aligned with his you've been happy and felt his methods were genius but now that some of your preferences differ you are crying foul...

 

At any rate Madmole doesn't just make sole decisions on a whim. He brings things up in team meetings and they discuss and decide things as a team. For small balancing issues he will make sole decisions and yes, admittedly that creates some swings until he can get it dialed in to where he's happy but that is his development style and whether you agree with it or disagree with it he isn't going to change.

 

Honestly, I think most people around here think that it is a good thing that the developers do read what is posted here as they make their decisions. And it is not a shame at all about what happened between A16 and A17 for those who enjoy and see A17 as an improvement in many cases and the first steps towards potential improvement in others. I'm glad you and your group have found enjoyment with A16. Maybe A18 will be great again for you and yours.

 

I think a lot of people tend to forget that computer games are an art form. How the art turns out is entirely up to the artist. I can just imagine Mozart releasing a test copy of a symphony online and dealing with all the comments from people who think this or that needs to be changed.

[HungryZombie]

Fair point, more updates the better, obviously. However, from a testing/playing point-of-view; this might be a bit counterproductive (or even intuitive). Because of a massively borked system (RGW, in this case, everyone seems to agree here, it seems), I don't play the unstable version. Many people apparently don't. So will TFP gather enough feedback to improve upon it?

 

It's like being asked to Q&A your driving experience to the office every day, whilst being given zero traffic, good roads, 3 tires, a clutch, and 1 windscreen-wiper. Obviously one cannot Q&A this experience, besides the obvious complaints that one hasn't been given a coffee-cup holder.

 

There are plenty of people who can look past the RWG problems and just test things out and provide feedback. The maps issues, as far as I know, don't have anything else to do with whatever other changes they put into the build to test.

 

I get that you and many others don't like the maps but there are plenty of people who are willing to provide feedback with things as they are.

 

If you can't get past the maps just play the stable. No one is forcing anyone to play the experimental and it seems to me TFP's are comfortable with the amount of feedback they get or otherwise they would heed your advice and not release test versions until everything is that bothers you and others is smoothed out.

[OldManBrian]

I think a lot of people tend to forget that computer games are an art form. How the art turns out is entirely up to the artist. I can just imagine Mozart releasing a test copy of a symphony online and dealing with all the comments from people who think this or that needs to be changed.

 

I've heard this argument before when Mass Effect 3 came out with their terrible ending. But it still stands that regardless of the developers' vision it still ended up with a greatly sub-par ending to a fantastic series (and in fact basically killed the series).

 

Games are different than art in that the user is interacting with it and spends MUCH more time (hundreds of hours) investing in it, where art is almost a sort of drive by appreciation thing that only takes a moment of your time. No harm no foul in with most art, you only lost a few minutes or at most a couple of hours (in the case of movies) if you end up not liking part of it.

 

To further complicate things, in the case of a16 you have something that was released and loved and then totally changed further down the line. (Yes yes, early access and all that) It's kind of like the original star wars trilogy edits George Lucas did, sure it was totally his right to do it and many people loved it, but something great was definitely lost there.

 

Don't get me wrong, it's still totally the developer's right to do pretty much whatever they want in this regard, I just think it's different than most art in that the players invest tons of time into it so it has much more of an impact on them than in most artistic situations.

[Ranzera]

<sigh>

 

Heheheh....We goofed folks. RWG is broke and we pushed it out to you anyway. I’m sure we’ll be back on track for A17.3. Let’s have a chuckle, now.

 

#justforyou.

 

Fair enough, happens to all of us :-)

 

It's just a shame that we had such an amazing one (a16) and then had much of what made it special replaced in an update (a17).

 

It might be possible to bring back 16.4 with a mod suite. The only problem there is that it seems that the dev team wants to shift into overdrive and rush the game to 1.0 (by the end of the year?). It'll make the game a somewhat fast moving target in that case. I'm not sure how much of the UI can be brought back and some of the systems might be completely gone (combining). I'm not sure how robust the mods can be.

[Roland]

Some people give video games as cursory a try as you give other forms of art and some people spend as much time appreciating and searching for meaning from other forms of art as you give to video games. You are making a mistake in saying that this art form is more involving than other art forms. All art touches people as shallowly or as deeply as they do and as their participants allow. If you flick your eyes momentarily at a Monet on your way to somewhere more important that is simply your level of appreciation. That is neither good nor bad but there are people who spend quite a lot more time than that on that same Monet.

[Hek Harris]

Yep, time is Monet.

[RestInPieces]

I've heard this argument before when Mass Effect 3 came out with their terrible ending. But it still stands that regardless of the developers' vision it still ended up with a greatly sub-par ending to a fantastic series (and in fact basically killed the series).

 

Games are different than art in that the user is interacting with it and spends MUCH more time (hundreds of hours) investing in it, where art is almost a sort of drive by appreciation thing that only takes a moment of your time. No harm no foul in with most art, you only lost a few minutes or at most a couple of hours (in the case of movies) if you end up not liking part of it.

 

To further complicate things, in the case of a16 you have something that was released and loved and then totally changed further down the line. (Yes yes, early access and all that)

 

Don't get me wrong, it's still totally the developer's right to do pretty much whatever they want in this regard, I just think it's different than most art in that the players invest tons of time into it so it has much more of an impact on them than in most artistic situations.

 

Some people give video games as cursory a try as you give other forms of art and some people spend as much time appreciating and searching for meaning from other forms of art as you give to video games. You are making a mistake in saying that this art form is more involving than other art forms. All art touches people as shallowly or as deeply as they do and as their participants allow. If you flick your eyes momentarily at a Monet on your way to somewhere more important that is simply your level of appreciation. That is neither good nor bad but there are people who spend quite a lot more time than that on that same Monet.

 

-To be fair video games are a combination of various forms of art.

-There is objectivity in a form of art being good or bad. History proves it. And if you look deeply, it is based on logic and practical reasons.

 

It's kind of like the original star wars trilogy edits George Lucas did, sure it was totally his right to do it and many people loved it, but something great was definitely lost there.

 

-And because I love my SP references

.

[meganoth]

It might be possible to bring back 16.4 with a mod suite. The only problem there is that it seems that the dev team wants to shift into overdrive and rush the game to 1.0 (by the end of the year?). It'll make the game a somewhat fast moving target in that case. I'm not sure how much of the UI can be brought back and some of the systems might be completely gone (combining). I'm not sure how robust the mods can be.

 

Overdrive? We are in the phase of development where the cement is drying.

 

A17 is the first alpha of 7D2D's history where practically all internal systems are in a somewhat final state and no placeholders anymore (a result also of their desire to finish the game). There will be no big changes anymore and bug fixing and polishing will take a bigger and bigger part of their development time.

 

For all of EA modders have been trying to paint grafiti on a moving train, beta is the train braking and 1.0 will mean the train has stopped.

[meganoth]

-

-There is objectivity in a form of art being good or bad. History proves it. And if you look deeply, it is based on logic and practical reasons.

 

A lot of art is not understood at the time of inception and only later gets recognized as a masterpiece. So whether you are right or not, in the short term art can be misjudged and objectivity is not reached.