14 hours ago, Roland said:
I’m telling you that looking back at the work that was primarily done during A20, A21, and currently for 1.0, it looks like beta phase work. That’s all. I’m not claiming that it was beta or was not alpha. I’m saying that despite features still missing from the game and a numbering label that says “Alpha”, the type of changes made to the game seem very much to be work done traditionally during beta.
I don’t think the basic labels of alpha or beta really fit any more and I’m glad they aren’t using those terms in the numbering system going forward. I hope they never use them in their future games.
You can go ahead and decide that the game is still in alpha and early access all you want. Knowing that, I will plan to continue to use the alpha defense in future conversations with you so you feel comfortable. 😜
Their argument why this isn´t just a relabeling is that they hired 10 extra developers from Australia (Still not sure why it matters where they come from, but the fact that he needed to point that out could be simply knowing that the argument isn´t really strong).
The amount of people working on it isn´t what defines if a game is in early access or not, nor does it define if a game is in beta or in a final state or is an actual 1.0 version. Hiring extra stuff doesn´t change the fact that they planned 1.0 as A22 for a long time and just now, shortly before it´s done, changed it to 1.0. Nothing else changed, it´s still the same update we get as the one when it was still called A22. So yes, it´s relabeled from early access to 1.0.
I am still saying they do this because either Sony or MS forces them or they need money. Both legit and understandable reasons.