Jump to content

Edit History

Please note that revisions older than 365 days are pruned and will no longer show here
meganoth

meganoth

10 hours ago, métaphore said:

I haven't seen any previous alpha that was ever close to "full release" standard.

 

You might have standards, the game industry does not 😉. Especially indy games have a lot of leeway anyway, with graphics and anything, but even big AAA publishers bring out games sometimes that are only graphically at "full release" standard.

 

10 hours ago, métaphore said:

Since, they keep re-doing things over and over, including core parts of the game and they have barely added any real new content in years (a drone and a few pipe weapon?) - they are rather removing quite a lot of stuff and are making things much simpler. So, yes, they could have labeled any previous version "Gold" and go for DLC "updates" instead. Then what? Would they have been more successful at making more money out of it with a bugged base game and such underpar graphics & animations?

 

Lets say they released A16 after 5 months of polishing/fixing bugs. Then started Early Access for the follow up game 7d3d with what now is A17, which felt as the biggest break of continuity for many players (aka just like a new game) and continued. All the players still playing the game now would have followed and bought into the new EA, at a minimum to check out the new stuff which you call "re-doing things".

 

Sorry, I find that "re-doing" argument silly. While they have been experimenting with their progression all the time (the "re-doing"), a lot of new features appeared as well. But they never promised to **increase** content (for example new workstations, new weapons, new recipes) beyond what there is now and it seems they have no intention to. Understandable because they might think about adding that stuff into 7D2D 2 or an expansion. I suspect what TFP is doing is the same thing that Blizzard did (without the public watching) when it still had standards to bring out the "perfect" game, i.e. experimenting until every part of the game feels right for them. Naturally whatever is perfect for them is not perfect for everyone else.

 

10 hours ago, métaphore said:

Really?

When I started playing it, they said 7d2d would be going Gold... "soon".

 

 Good point. 👍

 

10 hours ago, métaphore said:

And some people thought A21 was going to be released for console. My guess: they probably won't see A22 either.

 

 

But here you got lost somewhere. "some people thought"? Some people think the earth is flat.

 

The only serious communication out of TFP (AFAIK) was a guess that the console version would come out late this year or early next year and that was the typically optimistic guess by Madmole if I remember correctly 😉

My guess is that A22 for PC will be delayed because they want to release it for both PC and consoles at the same time (at least one of the stable versions though, not experimental)

 

10 hours ago, métaphore said:

Don't you?

For years now, they do have three main projects all running at the same time:  going Gold on PC, releasing for Xbox and Playstation, developing a new game.

 

Console version only materialized as a project less than a year ago when they presented their publishing partner. Before that I would guess the only guy working on it was their lawyer and one of the studio heads probably to find and make a deal with some publisher. I assume that the publisher is also funding the external workforce for the porting and is paying the "bribes" to MS and Sony, so this might also be one of their investors (just a guess).

 

At least one game they are developing right now is simply because of the pipelining every mid-sized developer has to do as game designers have no work to do when the previous game is fully designed but still in production. This does not cost them anything extra as it concerns people among those 60 who would otherwise be reading newspapers or drinking daiquiries. The new studio they created for the other game may be contract work where whoever hired them fronts the bill. Or they actually have enough money that they were confident enough to create that second studio.

 

 

10 hours ago, métaphore said:

All investors are promised one thing only: it's called ROI. There is usually a schedule attached to it.

 

Probably. Which means they either have made sure to give themselves enough time when negotiating or not. In the latter case they will have to release whatever game they have financed by this as is (with bugs and all). But it doesn't mean they have to add microtransactions (your original point) unless they specifically had this in mind when they made the deal with the investor. 

 

Lets get back to your original point: Your theory seems to be that they were in financial trouble and so they have added investors to fill the gap until they get money and are now looking for ways to get money, like microtransaction. But we don't see any indications of this, no hasty release of 7D2D, no changes in schedule, no shrinking of staff, no crunch to get out bandits in A21 already.

 

My theory is that they are not in financial trouble (at least in their own view) as they have been expanding, adding new developers and a new studio. Which also often results in taking up investors, but does not mean the company has to take drastic measures. A lot of what I used as indications is either official knowledge or has been hinted at from TFP sources. And a crude calculation of their income and costs seems to check out as well.

 

10 hours ago, métaphore said:

But they didn't release 4 years ago for a good reason: it really felt too much "early access" and they couldn't have possibly sold again the same crap every two years after this point.

 

Not really  "the same crap". Notice how many players regard what followed A16 as fundamentally different than A16. I don't play the FIFA games so can't make the comparison, but the differences between A21 and A16 are probably much bigger than between any two consecutive games in that series. And don't forget that they easily could have added "fluff" content like more recipes, workstations and weapons to make A21 into a sequel instead of another alpha. And they didn't need to release in two years again, if they made 7d3d with Early Access again, much of the money would have immediately appeared in their coffins.

 

meganoth

meganoth

9 hours ago, métaphore said:

I haven't seen any previous alpha that was ever close to "full release" standard.

 

You might have standards, the game industry does not 😉. Especially indy games have a lot of leeway anyway, with graphics and anything, but even big AAA publishers bring out games sometimes that are only graphically at "full release" standard.

 

9 hours ago, métaphore said:

Since, they keep re-doing things over and over, including core parts of the game and they have barely added any real new content in years (a drone and a few pipe weapon?) - they are rather removing quite a lot of stuff and are making things much simpler. So, yes, they could have labeled any previous version "Gold" and go for DLC "updates" instead. Then what? Would they have been more successful at making more money out of it with a bugged base game and such underpar graphics & animations?

 

Lets say they released A16 after 5 months of polishing/fixing bugs. Then started Early Access for the follow up game 7d3d with what now is A17, which felt as the biggest break of continuity for many players (aka just like a new game) and continued. All the players still playing the game now would have followed and bought into the new EA, at a minimum to check out the new stuff which you call "re-doing things".

 

Sorry, I find that "re-doing" argument silly. While they have been experimenting with their progression all the time (the "re-doing"), a lot of new features appeared as well. But they never promised to **increase** content (for example new workstations, new weapons, new recipes) beyond what there is now and it seems they have no intention to. Understandable because they might think about adding that stuff into 7D2D 2 or an expansion. I suspect what TFP is doing is the same thing that Blizzard did (without the public watching) when it still had standards to bring out the "perfect" game, i.e. experimenting until every part of the game feels right for them. Naturally whatever is perfect for them is not perfect for everyone else.

 

9 hours ago, métaphore said:

Really?

When I started playing it, they said 7d2d would be going Gold... "soon".

 

 Good point. 👍

 

9 hours ago, métaphore said:

And some people thought A21 was going to be released for console. My guess: they probably won't see A22 either.

 

 

But here you got lost somewhere. "some people thought"? Some people think the earth is flat.

 

The only serious communication out of TFP (AFAIK) was a guess that the console version would come out late this year or early next year and that was the typically optimistic guess by Madmole if I remember correctly 😉

My guess is that A22 for PC will be delayed because they want to release it for both PC and consoles at the same time (at least one of the stable versions though, not experimental)

 

9 hours ago, métaphore said:

Don't you?

For years now, they do have three main projects all running at the same time:  going Gold on PC, releasing for Xbox and Playstation, developing a new game.

 

Console version only materialized as a project less than a year ago when they presented their publishing partner. Before that I would guess the only guy working on it was their lawyer and one of the studio heads probably to find and make a deal with some publisher. I assume that the publisher is also funding the external workforce for the porting and is paying the "bribes" to MS and Sony, so this might also be one of their investors (just a guess).

 

At least one game they are developing right now is simply because of the pipelining every mid-sized developer has to do as game designers have no work to do when the previous game is fully designed but still in production. This does not cost them anything extra as it concerns people among those 60 who would otherwise be reading newspapers or drinking daiquiries. The new studio they created for the other game may be contract work where whoever hired them fronts the bill. Or they actually have enough money that they were confident enough to create that second studio.

 

 

9 hours ago, métaphore said:

All investors are promised one thing only: it's called ROI. There is usually a schedule attached to it.

 

Probably. Which means they either have made sure to give themselves enough time when negotiating or not. In the latter case they will have to release whatever game they have financed by this as is (with bugs and all). But it doesn't mean they have to add microtransactions (your original point) unless they specifically had this in mind when they made the deal with the investor. 

 

Lets get back to your original point: Your theory seems to be that they were in financial trouble and so they have added investors to fill the gap until they get money and are now looking for ways to get money, like microtransaction. But we don't see any indications of this, no hasty release of 7D2D, no changes in schedule, no shrinking of staff, no crunch to get out bandits in A21 already.

 

My theory is that they are not in financial trouble (at least in their own view) as they have been expanding, adding new developers and a new studio. Which also often results in taking up investors, but does not mean the company has to take drastic measures. A lot of what I used as indications is either official knowledge or has been hinted at from TFP sources. And a crude calculation of their income and costs seems to check out as well.

 

9 hours ago, métaphore said:

But they didn't release 4 years ago for a good reason: it really felt too much "early access" and they couldn't have possibly sold again the same crap every two years after this point.

 

Not the same crap. Notice how many players regard what followed A16 as fundamentally different than A16. I don't play the FIFA games so can't make the comparison, but the differences between A21 and A16 are probably much bigger than between any two consecutive games in that series. And don't forget that they easily could have added "fluff" content like more recipes, workstations and weapons to make A21 into a sequel instead of another alpha. And they didn't need to release in two years again, if they made 7d3d with Early Access again, much of the money would have immediately appeared in their coffins.

 

meganoth

meganoth

9 hours ago, métaphore said:

I haven't seen any previous alpha that was ever close to "full release" standard.

 

You might have standards, the game industry does not 😉. Especially indy games have a lot of leeway anyway, with graphics and anything, but even big AAA publishers bring out games sometimes that are only graphically at "full release" standard.

 

9 hours ago, métaphore said:

Since, they keep re-doing things over and over, including core parts of the game and they have barely added any real new content in years (a drone and a few pipe weapon?) - they are rather removing quite a lot of stuff and are making things much simpler. So, yes, they could have labeled any previous version "Gold" and go for DLC "updates" instead. Then what? Would they have been more successful at making more money out of it with a bugged base game and such underpar graphics & animations?

 

Lets say they released A16 after 5 months of polishing/fixing bugs. Then started Early Access for the follow up game 7d3d with what now is A17, which felt as the biggest break of continuity for many players (aka just like a new game) and continued. All the players still playing the game now would have followed and bought into the new EA, at a minimum to check out the new stuff which you call "re-doing things".

 

Sorry, I find that "re-doing" argument silly. While they have been experimenting with their progression all the time (the "re-doing"), a lot of new features appeared as well. But they never promised to **increase** content (for example new workstations, new weapons, new recipes) beyond what there is now and it seems they have no intention to. Understandable because they might think about adding that stuff into 7D2D 2 or an expansion. I suspect what TFP is doing is the same thing that Blizzard did (without the public watching) when it still had standards to bring out the "perfect" game, i.e. experimenting until every part of the game feels right for them. Naturally whatever is perfect for them is not perfect for everyone else.

 

9 hours ago, métaphore said:

Really?

When I started playing it, they said 7d2d would be going Gold... "soon".

 

 Good point. 👍

 

9 hours ago, métaphore said:

And some people thought A21 was going to be released for console. My guess: they probably won't see A22 either.

 

 

But here you got lost somewhere. "some people thought"? Some people think the earth is flat.

 

The only serious communication out of TFP (AFAIK) was a guess that the console version would come out late this year or early next year and that was the typically optimistic guess by Madmole if I remember correctly 😉

My guess is that A22 for PC will be delayed because they want to release it for both PC and consoles at the same time (at least one of the stable versions though, not experimental)

 

9 hours ago, métaphore said:

Don't you?

For years now, they do have three main projects all running at the same time:  going Gold on PC, releasing for Xbox and Playstation, developing a new game.

 

Console version only materialized as a project less than a year ago when they presented their publishing partner. Before that I would guess the only guy working on it was their lawyer and one of the studio heads probably to find and make a deal with some publisher. I assume that the publisher is also funding the external workforce for the porting and is paying the "bribes" to MS and Sony, so this might also be one of their investors (just a guess).

 

At least one game they are developing right now is simply because of the pipelining every mid-sized developer has to do as game designers have no work to do when the previous game is fully designed but still in production. This does not cost them anything extra as it concerns people among those 60 who would otherwise be reading newspapers or drinking daiquiries. The new studio they created for the other game may be contract work where whoever hired them fronts the bill. Or they actually have enough money that they were confident enough to create that second studio.

 

 

9 hours ago, métaphore said:

All investors are promised one thing only: it's called ROI. There is usually a schedule attached to it.

 

Probably. Which means they either have made sure to give themselves enough time when negotiating or not. In the latter case they will have to release whatever game they have financed by this as is (with bugs and all). But it doesn't mean they have to add microtransactions (your original point) unless they specifically had this in mind when they made the deal with the investor. 

 

Lets get back to your original point: Your theory seems to be that they were in financial trouble and so they have added investors to fill the gap until they get money and are now looking for ways to get money, like microtransaction. But we don't see any indications of this, no hasty release of 7D2D, no changes in schedule, no shrinking of staff, no crunch to get out bandits in A21 already.

 

My theory is that they are not in financial trouble (at least in their own view) as they have been expanding, adding new developers and a new studio. Which also often results in taking up investors, but does not mean the company has to take drastic measures. A lot of what I used as indications is either official knowledge or has been hinted at from TFP sources. And a crude calculation of their income and costs seems to check out as well.

 

9 hours ago, métaphore said:

But they didn't release 4 years ago for a good reason: it really felt too much "early access" and they couldn't have possibly sold again the same crap every two years after this point.

 

Not the same crap. Notice how many players regard what followed A16 as fundamentally different than A16. I don't play the FIFA games so can't make the comparison, but the differences between A21 and A16 are probably much bigger than between any two consecutive games in that series. And don't forget that they easily could have added "fluff" content like more recipes, workstations and weapons to make A21 into a sequel instead of another alpha. And they didn't need to release in two years again, if they made 7d3d with Early Access again, much of the money would have immediately appeared in their coffins.

 

meganoth

meganoth

7 hours ago, métaphore said:

I haven't seen any previous alpha that was ever close to "full release" standard.

 

You might have standards, the game industry does not 😉. Especially indy games have a lot of leeway anyway, with graphics and anything, but even big AAA publishers bring out games sometimes that are only graphically at "full release" standard.

 

7 hours ago, métaphore said:

Since, they keep re-doing things over and over, including core parts of the game and they have barely added any real new content in years (a drone and a few pipe weapon?) - they are rather removing quite a lot of stuff and are making things much simpler. So, yes, they could have labeled any previous version "Gold" and go for DLC "updates" instead. Then what? Would they have been more successful at making more money out of it with a bugged base game and such underpar graphics & animations?

 

Lets say they released A16 after 5 months of polishing/fixing bugs. Then started EA for the follow up game 7d3d with what now is A17, which felt as the biggest break of continuity for many players (aka just like a new game) and continued. All the players still playing the game now would have followed and bought into the new EA, at a minimum to check out the new stuff which you call "re-doing things".

 

Sorry, I find that "re-doing" argument silly. While they have been experimenting with their progression all the time (the "re-doing"), a lot of new features appeared as well. But they never promised to **increase** content (for example new workstations, new weapons, new recipes) beyond what there is now and it seems they have no intention to. Understandable because they might think about adding that stuff into 7D2D 2 or an expansion. I suspect what TFP is doing is the same thing that Blizzard did (without the public watching) when it still had standards to bring out the "perfect" game, i.e. experimenting until every part of the game feels right for them. Naturally whateve is perfect for them is not perfect for everyone else.

 

7 hours ago, métaphore said:

Really?

When I started playing it, they said 7d2d would be going Gold... "soon".

 

 Good point. 👍

7 hours ago, métaphore said:

And some people thought A21 was going to be released for console. My guess: they probably won't see A22 either.

 

But here you got lost somewhere. "some people thought"? Some people think the earth is flat. The only serious communication out of TFP was a guess that the console version would come out late this year or early next year and that was the typically optimistic guess by Madmole if I remember correctly 😉

My guess is that A22 for PC will be delayed because they want to release it for both PC and consoles at the same time (at least one of the stable versions though, not experimental)

7 hours ago, métaphore said:

Don't you?

For years now, they do have three main projects all running at the same time:  going Gold on PC, releasing for Xbox and Playstation, developing a new game.

 

Console version only materialized as a project less than a year ago when they presented their publishing partner. Before that the only guy working for it was their lawyer and one of the studio heads probably to find and make a deal with some publisher. I assume that the publisher is also funding the external workforce for the porting and is paying the "bribes" to MS and Sony, so this might also be one of their investors (just a guess).

 

At least one game they are developing is simply because of the pipelining every mid-sized developer has to do as game designers have no work to do when the previous game is fully designed but still in production. This does not cost them anything extra as it concerns people among that 60 who would otherwise be reading newspapers or drinking daiquiries. The new studio they created for the other game may be contract work where whoever hired them fronts the bill. Or they actually have enough money that they were confident enough to create that second studio.

 

8 hours ago, métaphore said:

All investors are promised one thing only: it's called ROI. There is usually a schedule attached to it.

 

Probably. Which means they either have made sure to give themselves enough time when negotiating or not. In the latter case they will have to release whatever game they have financed by this as is (with bugs and all). But it doesn't mean they have to add microtransactions (your original point) unless they specifically had this in mind when they made the deal with the investor. 

 

Lets break it down to this: Your theory seems to be that they were in financial trouble and so they have added investors to fill the gap until they get money and are now looking for ways to get money, like microtransaction. But we don't see any indications of this, no hasty release of 7D2D, no changes in schedule, no shrinking of staff, no crunch to get out bandits in A21 already.

 

My theory is that they are not in financial trouble (at least in their own view) as they have been expanding, adding new developers and a new studio. Which also often results in taking up investors, but does not mean the company has to take drastic measures. A lot of what I used as indications is either official knowledge or has been hinted at from TFP sources. And a crude calculation of their income and costs seems to check out as well.

 

9 hours ago, métaphore said:

But they didn't release 4 years ago for a good reason: it really felt too much "early access" and they couldn't have possibly sold again the same crap every two years after this point.

 

Not the same crap. Notice how many players regard what followed A16 as fundamentally different than A16. I don't play the FIFA games so can't make the comparison, but the differences between A21 and A16 are probably much bigger than between any two consecutive games in that series. And don't forget that they easily could have added "fluff" content like more recipes, workstations and weapons to make A21 into a sequel instead of another alpha. And they didn't need to release in two years again, if they made 7d3d with Early Access again, much of the money would have immediately appeared in their coffins.

 

×
×
  • Create New...