Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
Kzuy

Optimized

Recommended Posts

...

 

The point is that the design of a core element was changed this deep into development and (possibly) this close to the final release, is problematic, particularly in case of progression, because such a mechanic needs to be fine tuned and can only be fine tuned with experience. When they replaced LBD with perks, they went back to square one of the core element "progression". And now they are in the process of tweaking it back and forth.

 

 

It's only problematic for those people who played when it was the old way, and liked it the old way.

 

You guys are really looking at things backwards. How will it look for the person picking the game up off the shelf for the first time when it's a finished product? Don't think about what used to be. Think about what will be. This is a game that is still being developed. Core features will change. That's a hard known that you basically have to agree to in order to participate in an Alpha or Beta. If you can't accept that, then go away. Playing games still in development is not for you. You are part of the issue.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

It's only problematic for those people who played when it was the old way, and liked it the old way.

 

You guys are really looking at things backwards. How will it look for the person picking the game up off the shelf for the first time when it's a finished product? Don't think about what used to be. Think about what will be. This is a game that is still being developed. Core features will change. That's a hard known that you basically have to agree to in order to participate in an Alpha or Beta. If you can't accept that, then go away. Playing games still in development is not for you. You are part of the issue.

I just said and marked that it's not about "I'm sad a feature I like was removed". And then I explained what the problem was. And now you pop up saying if I'm sad a feature I like was removed, I should go away.

 

Absurd. *shrugs*

 

So once more, buddy: We are back to square one of the progression system, because now the perk system has to be tweaked. It's not the end of the world and whatnot, but it's kinda a problem to go back to square one after the game is already longer in EA than 99% of all games in EA.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
... but it's kinda a problem to go back to square one after the game is already longer in EA than 99% of all games in EA.

 

You keep beringing this up like it means something. It doesn't. None of those games are even remotely as complex as this one. Hell, this game is more complex than 98% of the big name AAA companies titles whose average development time is 5-7 years. You just keep bringing up this strawman argument because it makes you seem like you're making a point, but you aren't. You're just comparing apples to oranges and getting bananas as a result. Go tape it to a wall somewhere.

 

You guys keep acting like you're playing with a finished product. Or that you previously played a finished product. You aren't, so stop pretending you are.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The point is that the design of a core element was changed this deep into development and (possibly) this close to the final release, is problematic, particularly in case of progression, because such a mechanic needs to be fine tuned and can only be fine tuned with experience.

 

I addressed this but you chose to ignore it-- I suppose to work on your bolded size 5 text.

 

Yours and Bob's premise is flat out wrong. Progression wasn't just completely and suddenly changed with no warning at A17 causing a problematic situation where they are now scrambling from square one.

 

A11 LBD tool crafting was introduced

A12 tool crafting was tweaked but still mainly LBD

A13 skills were added and were a point system. LBD crafting expanded.

A14 perks were added to the skills. Skills were changed to LBD. LBD crafting continued.

A15 LBD crafting cut.

A16 Skills could either be purchased or grinded. Perks remained points only

A17 LBD Skills cut. Perks expanded and Attributes added-- All points based

A18 Refinement of the system

A19 Further refinement of the system

A20 Further refinement of the system

A21 Further refinement of the system.

 

It seems clear to me that LBD rose and then diminished over a few alphas. It also appears that they have plenty of time still to refine before gold hits. I know you're clinging to your rumor that you heard but conservatively I don't see the game going gold before Summer of 2021. They still have time to do the fine tuning that is required, worry not. There is nothing problematic here.

 

When they replaced LBD with perks, they went back to square one of the core element "progression". And now they are in the process of tweaking it back and forth.

 

Aren't they. Roland. Aren't they.

 

 

Well are you talking about when they added perks way back in Alpha 13? I mean I've seen the perk Miner 69 (for example) on my character progression screen for years and years. It and many other perks didn't blink into existence suddenly with A17 to replace LBD. For a long time point based perks and LBD skills and LBD crafting existed together. As far as "tweaking it back and forth" I'm not sure what you mean. A18 is still central xp point system for perks and governed by attributes just like A17 was. There was some rebalancing done but not much. A19 will see more balancing done and more perks added because every weapon will have 3 tiers and some of the non-combat perks are being reduced to only 3 steps. But A19 will remain the same system we have right now. A20 and A21 will see minor refinements but no major changes.

 

so....

 

No they aren't. Kubikus. No they aren't.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
This discussion is not about "but I prefer LBD, I'm sad they removed it".

 

Thank you. People are getting too hung up on the dead horse. This has nothing to do with LBD except as an example of a pattern of behavior that is worrisome.

 

 

 

It's only problematic for those people who played when it was the old way, and liked it the old way.

 

You guys are really looking at things backwards. How will it look for the person picking the game up off the shelf for the first time when it's a finished product? Don't think about what used to be. Think about what will be. This is a game that is still being developed. Core features will change. That's a hard known that you basically have to agree to in order to participate in an Alpha or Beta. If you can't accept that, then go away. Playing games still in development is not for you. You are part of the issue.

 

You're also missing the point. The point is really quite simple, it's worrying that if these major changes continue happening there will never be a finished product to pick up, or at the very least it will happen so far into the future that few of us will still be here to see it. To repeat myself:

 

I see a lot of new ideas being tried - the scent system of earlier alphas, the removal of LBD for skills and perks, the shift from wandering zombies to sleepers, the infamous homing architect zombie AI of A17, the segregation of playstyles, the addition, removal, and re-addition of schematics, the Behemoth and Demolishers, the dungeonization of POIs.

 

I'm worried about a cycle of making new systems, testing them, balancing them, then getting rid of them for something new, over and over again. That's the difference between forward development and sideways development, and the real core of my point. That's what I'm worrying about. As I've said many times, I don't particularly care about LBD or the perk system anymore.

 

As for your last two lines, please. The 'If you don't like it then GTFO' attitude is terribly unprofessional coming from a community moderator. Criticism is going to happen, and attitudes like that only make the people who post it more argumentative and hostile. After all, if a mod does it, it must be okay, right?

Edited by BobTheBard (see edit history)
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So once more, buddy: We are back to square one of the progression system, because now the perk system has to be tweaked. It's not the end of the world and whatnot, but it's kinda a problem to go back to square one after the game is already longer in EA than 99% of all games in EA.

 

Definitely not square one. Point based perks have been in the game since A13. They aren't brand new. All that got cut was the skills which were point based even before they became LBD and then became point based and LBD at the same time. Really, all the dithering and back and forth tweaking happened during the time when LBD was part of the player progression system. Since A17 the system has remained solid with just refinement changes.

 

So no problem. Not even kinda a problem. Steam Charts show higher support than ever before-- at least that is how the devs see it. Plus we have at least a year ahead for polishing and refinement so regardless of what 98% of other games are doing or not doing this game is on a good track. It is being updated regularly. The devs are sharing information. It is being played more and more consistently than ever before. Really, these "problems" are exactly what the other 98% of the games would LOVE to have.

 

The player progression system has settled after several alphas of being heavily developed stretching all the way back to Alpha 11 when we all started for the very first time to grind stone axes trying to get that quality up. Now there is PLENTY of time to refine and polish it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
The player progression system has settled after several alphas of being heavily developed stretching all the way back to Alpha 11 when we all started for the very first time to grind stone axes trying to get that quality up. Now there is PLENTY of time to refine and polish it.

 

I just hope they don't start to refine it, encounter a problem, and decide to change it again. So in that sense, I'm happy with them refining the perk system over bringing LBD back. Forward motion is forward motion. I'll even forgive them the AI debacle of A17, since I know that was testing AI for an upcoming enemy type. I just hope that the team is happy with the current underpinnings and direction and can start moving forward instead of taking steps sideways.

 

Speaking of taking steps sideways, I think this debate (or at least my role in it) has run its course. Hopefully I've communicated my concern clearly enough, and further, that a concern is all it is. Something to think about and consider. The only action I'm insisting on is that the game keeps moving forward.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
The point is really quite simple, it's worrying that if these major changes continue happening there will never be a finished product to pick up, or at the very least it will happen so far into the future that few of us will still be here to see it.

 

To your point and only your point: I think you are over worrying. The player progression system is finished other than polishing and balancing. I've studied the Alpha 19 system and it is basically the same as the Alpha 18 system other than including the new weapons and balancing the economy of it. They aren't making any more major changes to the Character Progression System.

 

As far as other major changes they have planned who can say? Once again there seems to be a lack of consensus on what constitutes a major change. I think (risking more large font scolding) that it really just comes down to what an individual is upset or disappointed about in the game. When a change happens that you don't like it feels major to you.

 

Are the food and water bar and the effect their resurrection has had on the integrated survival system shown by the stamina and health bars going to be a major change? To some probably. Others will just be glad they can see their food go down distinctly from how max stamina goes down. But there is bound to be at least one who will become concerned by the change and wonder why TFP can't make up their minds about HUD bars.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Well where else are you going to get the data from? Just vivid guessing?? You are shooting down my arguments and not presenting your own...

To refute this silly statement...If someone is passionate about a specific topic, they are inclined to write one positive or negative, whether they vent their fustration or pleasure in the reviews or Forum posts, I have written both positive and negative critiques on the forum, So thats why your argument is poorly misinformed. Are you really trying to insinuate that the Fun Pimps have their own private reviewing section of reviews?

My perspective is based on the game's overall review of "Very Positive" and the lack of a downward trend over time. The only particular discrepancy I see in the reviews seems to correspond with the release of A17. AFAICT, that's about all that can be reasonably gleaned from reviews (as they are provided to players) without an inordinate amount of effort.

 

For example, I noticed that many of the players who reviewed A17 negatively have played hundreds of hours since they left their reviews. That's an interesting piece of information IMO, but I can't make anything of it without further investigation, and I'm not gonna further investigate unless I have the data in a "processable" form. For the same reason, you pointing to reactions to negative reviews suggests to me that you don't have much to back up your position.

 

"The fact is, only TFP are likely to have all the necessary data to properly understand the long-term health of the game."

Do they though? I mean have you asked them?

You're right, I don't know that TFP have the data. I just find it hard to believe they don't. Whether or not they pay attention to it is another matter. I can't speculate on that either way.

 

I dont need to know since FTP Staff member "madMole" Had to leave the forums for 1 week due to attacks.

I can't figure out why you'd mention this other than to imply that the number of attackers or the strength of their conviction has some bearing on the validity of their beliefs.

Whereas to me it only indicates that the people involved have emotional or psychological issues.

 

If your walking through reviews and find that quite a few people have the same scenario, your generally gonna feel like your perspective is more accurate and aligned with community opinion.

Reading reviews after forming a negative opinion can be cathartic, which is a good thing IMO. But you have to guard yourself against letting it influence your sense of the "accuracy" or general acceptance of your opinion.

 

Im gonna asssume your fairly new to the idsea of 7 days to die? Ive been playing the game near enough to its release date, Its why i stand firm on my opinions.

 

That's true in a sense. I kickstarted, played an early release, and hated that zombies ran indoors during the day. Because of that feature and because I had kickstarted without really considering anything beyond the voxel/sandbox aspect, I wrote it off as a bad investment. I pretty much forgot about the game until sometime before A15, and didn't play much until A17. I'm impressed with TFP's commitment to continuing development rather than abandoning it or releasing it prematurely.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

You keep beringing this up like it means something. It doesn't. None of those games are even remotely as complex as this one. Hell, this game is more complex than 98% of the big name AAA companies titles whose average development time is 5-7 years. You just keep bringing up this strawman argument because it makes you seem like you're making a point, but you aren't. You're just comparing apples to oranges and getting bananas as a result. Go tape it to a wall somewhere.

 

You guys keep acting like you're playing with a finished product. Or that you previously played a finished product. You aren't, so stop pretending you are.

Your terribly overused "it's EA"-litany does not apply, Sylent. It's besides the point.

 

 

I addressed this but you chose to ignore it-- I suppose to work on your bolded size 5 text.

 

Yours and Bob's premise is flat out wrong. Progression wasn't just completely and suddenly changed with no warning at A17 causing a problematic situation where they are now scrambling from square one.

 

A11 LBD tool crafting was introduced

A12 tool crafting was tweaked but still mainly LBD

A13 skills were added and were a point system. LBD crafting expanded.

A14 perks were added to the skills. Skills were changed to LBD. LBD crafting continued.

A15 LBD crafting cut.

A16 Skills could either be purchased or grinded. Perks remained points only

A17 LBD Skills cut. Perks expanded and Attributes added-- All points based

A18 Refinement of the system

A19 Further refinement of the system

A20 Further refinement of the system

A21 Further refinement of the system.

 

It seems clear to me that LBD rose and then diminished over a few alphas. It also appears that they have plenty of time still to refine before gold hits. I know you're clinging to your rumor that you heard but conservatively I don't see the game going gold before Summer of 2021. They still have time to do the fine tuning that is required, worry not. There is nothing problematic here.

 

 

 

Well are you talking about when they added perks way back in Alpha 13? I mean I've seen the perk Miner 69 (for example) on my character progression screen for years and years. It and many other perks didn't blink into existence suddenly with A17 to replace LBD. For a long time point based perks and LBD skills and LBD crafting existed together. As far as "tweaking it back and forth" I'm not sure what you mean. A18 is still central xp point system for perks and governed by attributes just like A17 was. There was some rebalancing done but not much. A19 will see more balancing done and more perks added because every weapon will have 3 tiers and some of the non-combat perks are being reduced to only 3 steps. But A19 will remain the same system we have right now. A20 and A21 will see minor refinements but no major changes.

 

so....

 

No they aren't. Kubikus. No they aren't.

 

Definitely not square one. Point based perks have been in the game since A13. They aren't brand new. All that got cut was the skills which were point based even before they became LBD and then became point based and LBD at the same time. Really, all the dithering and back and forth tweaking happened during the time when LBD was part of the player progression system. Since A17 the system has remained solid with just refinement changes.

 

So no problem. Not even kinda a problem. Steam Charts show higher support than ever before-- at least that is how the devs see it. Plus we have at least a year ahead for polishing and refinement so regardless of what 98% of other games are doing or not doing this game is on a good track. It is being updated regularly. The devs are sharing information. It is being played more and more consistently than ever before. Really, these "problems" are exactly what the other 98% of the games would LOVE to have.

 

The player progression system has settled after several alphas of being heavily developed stretching all the way back to Alpha 11 when we all started for the very first time to grind stone axes trying to get that quality up. Now there is PLENTY of time to refine and polish it.

I just don't see an argument here, Roland. *shrugs* Simple as that. You're once more in your "must... defend... the company..."-mode, looking for hairs to split and angles to counter valid criticism. It's boring.

 

Progression is a core element. Is that true? Yes.

 

It was redesigned in A17, from LBD to perks. Is that true? Yes.

 

Now it has to be balanced and fine tuned. Is that true? Yes.

 

You say no? lol

 

You've become incapable to have an actual discussion. You see any criticism as an act of high treason and go straight into Terminator mode. Ask a psychologist about your avatar, they can explain everything. Your only objective is to refute all criticism.

 

I guess you've done your job, as I'm tired of you.

 

Edit: The problem with how you handle criticism is in your attitude. You think that any criticism is an attack on the game and the company. It isn't. What all this really is 99.9% of the time, is a bunch of video game nerds chatting. Then someone says "man, the constant redesigns are dragging development out to eternity, it's so effin annoying". And up you show with "oh, but it is not constant, oh but it is not eternity, so - ha ha! - I've just proven that everything you said is totally wrong and everything about the game is totally great!"

 

And with your tireless dedication to do that, you're wearing every single individual who dares to criticise the game down. Next time I see you saying something I would normally respond to? I'll think twice.

 

 

To your point and only your point: I think you are over worrying. The player progression system is finished other than polishing and balancing. I've studied the Alpha 19 system and it is basically the same as the Alpha 18 system other than including the new weapons and balancing the economy of it. They aren't making any more major changes to the Character Progression System.

Dude, but they, as you obviously can't deny, did. And if they weren't redsigning core features all the time the game could'v already been finished. These redesigns - of very questionable relevance and quality, btw - are dragging out the development process. It's really not heresy to mention that. Edited by Kubikus (see edit history)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
Your terribly overused "it's EA"-litany does not apply, Sylent. It's besides the point.

 

 

I just don't see an argument here, Roland. *shrugs* Simple as that. You're once more in your "must... defend... the company..."-mode, looking for hairs to split and angles to counter valid criticism. It's boring.

 

It’s more like I’m defending the history and timeline of development than the company itself. And if I believe that player progression is more peripheral to the game than you do, what does that have to do with defending TFP? No, you are just personally attacking me instead of speaking to my points which is odd since you often berate others for doing that to you.

 

Progression is a core element. Is that true? Yes.

 

It was redesigned in A17, from LBD to perks. Is that true? Yes.

 

Now it has to be balanced and fine tuned. Is that true? Yes.

 

You say no? lol

 

I already stated my opinion on this and you quoted it but could not speak to any of it other than to attack me personally. I’m not going to repeat it again but you have my original post and your quote boxes of my original post to peruse plus more time to possibly formulate an actual answer to what I said.

 

You've become incapable to have an actual discussion. You see any criticism as an act of high treason and go straight into Terminator mode. Ask a psychologist about your avatar, they can explain everything. Your only objective is to refute all criticism.

 

Edit: The problem with how you handle criticism is in your attitude. You think that any criticism is an attack on the game and the company. It isn't. What all this really is 99.9% of the time, is a bunch of video game nerds chatting. Then someone says "man, the constant redesigns are dragging development out to eternity, it's so effin annoying". And up you show with "oh, but it is not constant, oh but it is not eternity, so - ha ha! - I've just proven that everything you said is totally wrong and everything about the game is totally great!"

 

And with your tireless dedication to do that, you're wearing every single individual who dares to criticise the game down. Next time I see you saying something I would normally respond to? I'll think twice.

 

More personal attacks. If anyone is refusing to have a discussion it is you. If you’re bored of the discussion, that’s fine, but don’t go into this very hypocritical ad hominem style of posting to try and discredit me somehow and tell me to go see a psychologist. All I did was outline the facts as I see them as someone who is present behind the scenes.

 

Dude, but they, as you obviously can't deny, did. And if they weren't redsigning core features all the time the game could'v already been finished. These redesigns - of very questionable relevance and quality, btw - are dragging out the development process. It's really not heresy to mention that.

 

You’re right that it isn’t heresy to speculate and give your opinion. I never said that nor do I believe it. But you ARE explicitly demanding that I shut up and stop responding when I know something isn’t true. Interesting. Not once have I speculated about YOUR motives for why you post and yet much of what you spend your time on is incorrectly stating what I think, feel, and want. But whatever, I’m hopeful that discerning readers will see that this vilification of me instead of speaking to the points I raised is simply your back-handed admission that my points are valid.

 

So my question to you is what are your motives? I won’t follow your actions and try to incorrectly speak them for you. I’ll simply ask. I have an insider’s perspective that I’m willing to share but since that contradicts your speculations on motives and reasons you want me to go away so that you can continue to.....what? gossip?

Edited by Roland
A few your to you’re edits. (see edit history)
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

It’s more like I’m defending the history and timeline of development than the company itself. And if I believe that player progression is more peripheral to the game than you do, what does that have to do with defending TFP? No, you are just personally attacking me instead of speaking to my points which is odd since you often berate others for doing that to you.

 

 

 

I already stated my opinion on this and you quoted it but could not speak to any of it other than to attack me personally. I’m not going to repeat it again but you have my original post and your quote boxes of my original post to peruse plus more time to possibly formulate an actual answer to what I said.

 

 

 

More personal attacks. If anyone is refusing to have a discussion it is you. If you’re bored of the discussion, that’s fine, but don’t go into this very hypocritical ad hominem style of posting to try and discredit me somehow and tell me to go see a psychologist. All I did was outline the facts as I see them as someone who is present behind the scenes.

 

 

 

You’re right that it isn’t heresy to speculate and give your opinion. I never said that nor do I believe it. But you ARE explicitly demanding that I shut up and stop responding when I know something isn’t true. Interesting. Not once have I speculated about YOUR motives for why you post and yet much of what you spend your time on is incorrectly stating what I think, feel, and want. But whatever, I’m hopeful that discerning readers will see that this vilification of me instead of speaking to the points I raised is simply your back-handed admission that my points are valid.

 

So my question to you is what are your motives? I won’t follow your actions and try to incorrectly speak them for you. I’ll simply ask. I have an insider’s perspective that I’m willing to share but since that contradicts your speculations on motives and reasons you want me to go away so that you can continue to.....what? gossip?

Yeah but Roland, I just don't know how to counter your arguments. What else remains but attacking you personally and discrediting you in front of the readers?!?

 

lol

 

I wanted an interesting discussion with someone interesting who has a different opinion. But we grew too far apart, it's not the same level anymore. What you're saying is kinda like 95% absurd in my perception. Besides the point, plain out wrong, and so on.

 

*shrugs*

 

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Yeah but Roland, I just don't know how to counter your arguments. What else remains but attacking you personally and discrediting you in front of the readers?!?

 

lol

 

I wanted an interesting discussion with someone interesting who has a different opinion. But we grew too far apart, it's not the same level anymore. What you're saying is kinda like 95% absurd in my perception. Besides the point, plain out wrong, and so on.

 

*shrugs*

 

 

Peace out then.....and so on....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
I feel like saying that the game is in "Alpha" Is just a lazy cop out at this point, it's been in "Alpha" for years. How about they move it to beta and straight up make 90% of thier focus bug fixing and optimization already. The game is already lots of fun to play, I think that after they drop the vehicle mods in they should move toBETA!

 

Why? Labeling it 'beta', isn't going to make them change their schedule on what they want to add, nor speed up the development.

The Optimization they have been doing, are good enough for them to test everything.(and for us to test/play everything).

Doing anymore, just for the sake that everyone can play what they have without issues:

'Might' make it more difficult to go back and 'shoehorn' in what they want, after the fact.

Which could/would slow down development even more.

Which will just mean it stays in 'beta' longer than it needs to.

Edited by Tin (see edit history)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...