7DTD - Will it ever leave Early Access?

[Soup]

When WWII Online was made available via Steam... 17 years after it's launch... it came in as an Early Access title... and it remains so today.

 

Kids today are way too hung up on labels.

 

Which reminds me... I need to go label a few things.

[Reth]

[...]

1. Duke Nukem Forever: 1996-2011 (15 years)[/indent]

 

Fitting name, don't you think?

[Royal Deluxe]

Fitting name, don't you think?

 

You come 15 years to late with that realization ^^

[Psychodabble]

Do you guys still not see that he's trolling? Stop trying to talk sense to him and let this garbage thread die.

[fragtzack]

How many years did humans take to develop from stone wheels to steel wheels with rubber and pressured air?

 

3 to 4 thousand years?

 

More?

[Royal Deluxe]

Do you guys still not see that he's trolling? Stop trying to talk sense to him and let this garbage thread die.

 

But, its funny. he not even undertand who the trolled is here

[Pille]

Perfect video for this whole thread. This was the message board equivalent of the old flaming bag of poo.

 

Actually threads like this one are part of culture of this forum but their life span is limited. So enjoy the rants as long as you can.

[Morloc]

UFO2Extraterrestrials: Shadows Over Earth/Battle For Mercury 2009--2018(?)

 

I've also been waiting for a true successor to Master of Magic since 1994, and Master of Orion II since 1996. Many have duped me into giving over my hard-earned zloty.

 

-Morloc

[DeadMole]

Kids today are way too hung up on labels.

 

And way too impatient. Good things come to those who wait.

[Royal Deluxe]

And way too impatient. Good things come to those who wait.

 

From those who work ^^

[Jost Amman]

...I've also been waiting for a true successor to Master of Magic since 1994...

Really?? Did you completely miss Fallen Enchantress from Stardock? O_o

[Wyrda78]

Additional Incentives Beyond Your Payment

 

1) They love what they do and they have fun doing it.

2) They want to be proud of the final product.

3) They have additional projects planned and desire the good will that accompanies a strong reputation.

4) They want additional sales that comes from word of mouth and positive reviews.

5) They enjoy success.

 

The problem is that these things require ethics in your development team, something that can't be personally verified and is often in short supply.

 

Serious question... why annoyed? If they had released it years ago it would have released as a greatly inferior game to what it is today. A17 should improve it significantly over A16 and open up a great deal more tools for modders. In my own opinion it's like I bought a game years ago that was more than worth the price of admission and yet they continue to improve it without me having to give them more money. There are very few games that have that same track record. I sincerely wonder why anyone would find that trait annoying of all things? What is so magical about releasing the game that makes people think that's better than what we're getting now?

 

I don't want them to develop an unfinished game. I am simply annoyed that it it taking such a long time for the devs to capitalise on unused potential. And while speed of development is less important than other factors, I'm not gonna lie and say that I'm happy with the current pace.

[Royal Deluxe]

The problem is that these things require ethics in your development team, something that can't be personally verified and is often in short supply.

ethics plural in form but singular or plural in construction : the discipline dealing with what is good and bad and with moral duty and obligation

I really cant draw there a single conection beween ethics and Rolands Points.

All points are finally (healty) egoistic targets and what they are willed to do to reach them.

 

 

 

 

I don't want them to develop an unfinished game. I am simply annoyed that it it taking such a long time for the devs to capitalise on unused potential. And while speed of development is less important than other factors, I'm not gonna lie and say that I'm happy with the current pace.

Then be carefull how you say it

Because to imply that TFP works ineffective is a assumption. And so maybe a lie.

 

To say

"I would like a faster Development speed" would offend nobody and say the same.

 

But in my eyes at least

I think people who pay for early release with the expectation of further development are fools. Once you've given the developers your money, they have no incentive to continue working on the game. Thus I only pay for products I am happy for in the state that I buy them.

 

I'm happy enough with 7DTD that I bought it. I noticed i has come a long way since when I first played it. However I am annoyed that the development is taking so long.

was ok, i saw much more offending/offensive posts

[SylenThunder]

...

To say

"I would like a faster Development speed" would offend nobody and say the same.

Except that faster does not equal better. In fact, most of the time faster means worse. There would be less attention to detail. Less balancing of game mechanics. Less time spent fixing bug issues.

 

Especially given that this is a small development team. This is not some massive project put out by a AAA company. As you saw in my earlier posts, even AAA companies with huge development teams can take over 10 years to push a product. That's even using existing assets. Here most things are being developed and created as they go along.

 

I've probably said this before too but.... If it weren't for Early Access Alpha testing, this game wouldn't exist. It would maybe have been a blip on your radar for a few minutes as you saw some released footage of an upcoming game. You would have forgotten about it, the developers would have run out of funds to do the project, and it would be lost.

This isn't something like Doom where you had been expecting to hear something for three years before it was even put into the works. Where EA Beta access was the first chance a very limited number of people got to play with it and help fix bugs. You maybe got to start playing it in 2014, then it was released in 2016. (It still did spend almost 10 years in development. You just weren't there to see it like you can with 7 Days to Die.)

 

Really need to compare apples to oranges here, and that isn't something you can do with development speed. Show me any other developer with a very small team that created a game on this scale in less time. I bet you can fit the number on one hand.

[meganoth]

The biggest problem is the lack of roadmap and the seemingly endless tactic of throwing ♥♥♥♥ at the wall to see what sticks. How many times have the redone the skill system? Mining? Guns? etc.... They need to set a course, set some deadlines and get there.

 

Just stumbled over a quote by Ron Gilbert (The "Monkey Island" Gilbert) about crowdfunding that is the perfect reply to this:

 

"The big disadvantage is not to be able to change some things in the project. In normal games development you make deep-rooted changes on a design. This is difficult (if not impossible) with a crowdfunded game. It sometimes can be hard to understand for a large group of backers that the proposed changes are good (or even necessary)."

 

I had to translate back from a german games magazine, but it still should be evident what he was saying (I mean the stuff about deep-rooted changes being necessary, it that isn't clear). If you don't believe the developers of TFP, maybe you believe someone who is in the games industry for decades

[OzHawkeye]

Just stumbled over a quote by Ron Gilbert (The "Monkey Island" Gilbert) about crowdfunding that is the perfect reply to this:

 

"The big disadvantage is not to be able to change some things in the project. In normal games development you make deep-rooted changes on a design. This is difficult (if not impossible) with a crowdfunded game. It sometimes can be hard to understand for a large group of backers that the proposed changes are good (or even necessary)."

 

I had to translate back from a german games magazine, but it still should be evident what he was saying (I mean the stuff about deep-rooted changes being necessary, it that isn't clear). If you don't believe the developers of TFP, maybe you believe someone who is in the games industry for decades

 

Agreed 100%

 

I've been a good number of Early Access titles, and some had changed in ways that I didn't like, there's even aspects of 7Days that have gone down directions that wouldn't have been my own personal choice, but the fact that the Pimps are willing to experiment and keep working at a particular game mechanic until it comes up with something they're happy with, is a definite positive.

 

As for development time, meh, I really don't care how long it takes, so long as it's always (on the whole) getting better along the way.

[Royal Deluxe]

there's even aspects of 7Days that have gone down directions that wouldn't have been my own personal choice,

I think that there is nobody, inclusive all TFP members that would not like to do some things different.

But thats one of the most positive strenghts i like at TFP.

If they see that something work better a other way they are able to let loose.

 

Looks like this is a skill not all "Fans" share

[Aldranon]

Usually if game devs makes something that's fun for them to play, then they will have a game many others will like to play.

 

Game devs go wrong when they try to second guess what others would like. I'm looking at you Mass Effect 4...

 

So TFP would be foolish to do something that doesn't sound fun to them. It would be bad gaming business.

[Wyrda78]

I really cant draw there a single conection beween ethics and Rolands Points.

All points are finally (healty) egoistic targets and what they are willed to do to reach them.

 

 

Then be carefull how you say it

Because to imply that TFP works ineffective is a assumption. And so maybe a lie.

 

To say

"I would like a faster Development speed" would offend nobody and say the same.

 

But in my eyes at least

 

was ok, i saw much more offending/offensive posts

 

 

I'm very been one to particularly care if what I said was offensive to people or not. As to the question of if I think the slow speed of development is failing of the devs, I'd say it is. Once you've accepted money for a game, that brings upon an obligation for timely game development, rather than stagnation as in Day Z, and it entitles one to complain. Given the success of the crowdfunding and the popularity of the game on Steam, there doesn't seem to be a lack of resources needed to hire enough staff so I don't think the small dev team argument is an good response. Of course I don't know the internal processes of the devs so I can't be sure my criticism is entirely accurate, but based on the limited information I have it's my criticism nonetheless. Usually the truth is somewhere between the diehard dev apologists and the disgruntled critics. Not to imply that the devs are bad in all areas.

 

The incentives mentioned imply an ethical attitude of doing what you say you will do. We've seen plenty examples of devs taking the money and then abandoning the game.

[meganoth]

I'm very been one to particularly care if what I said was offensive to people or not. As to the question of if I think the slow speed of development is failing of the devs, I'd say it is. Once you've accepted money for a game, that brings upon an obligation for timely game development, rather than stagnation as in Day Z, and it entitles one to complain.

 

You see slow development speed. Are you in the games industry? Do you work for a developer so you can estimate what a normal speed would be like?

 

If not, do you see other games that are much faster? You talk about "Day Z" as if it isn't faster.

 

Isn't that an indication that what TFP and the Day-Z developers do might be the normal speed? If you think not, why?

[Wyrda78]

I've seen games that are much slower, such as Mount and Blade Bannerlord, or Europa Barborurum 2. The difference is that the devs didn't take money for an unfinished product during the extended development process. And I've already admitted that I'm not an objective or infallible judger of how fast development should be. But being a number of years and still in an alpha state, with many problems that are seemingly easily addressable, I would term this slow development.

[toores]

I've seen games that are much slower, such as Mount and Blade Bannerlord, or Europa Barborurum 2. The difference is that the devs didn't take money for an unfinished product during the extended development process. And I've already admitted that I'm not an objective or infallible judger of how fast development should be. But being a number of years and still in an alpha state, with many problems that are seemingly easily addressable, I would term this slow development.

 

If you can think TFP are lazy, you can just walk away and we don't have to read your complaining = happier times for everyone!

[OzHawkeye]

If you can think TFP are lazy, you can just walk away and we don't have to read your complaining = happier times for everyone!

 

Let's not get into opinion suppression. ;-)

 

- - - Updated - - -

 

I've seen games that are much slower, such as Mount and Blade Bannerlord, or Europa Barborurum 2. The difference is that the devs didn't take money for an unfinished product during the extended development process. And I've already admitted that I'm not an objective or infallible judger of how fast development should be. But being a number of years and still in an alpha state, with many problems that are seemingly easily addressable, I would term this slow development.

 

The problem Wyrda78, is that "slow" is a subjective term. Slow compared to what? To whom?

 

Personally, I think you should judge the game on the progress it's made during these past 16 Alphas. Is it better than it was? If you're answer is yes, then really does it matter how much longer it's got to go?

[meganoth]

But being a number of years and still in an alpha state, with many problems that are seemingly easily addressable, I would term this slow development.

 

EA aka a development where players can watch the proceedings has just started a few years ago. Non of these games (if comparable in size) seems from what I hear much faster than 7d2d and I notice you didn't even give one example of an EA game that IS actually faster. You give opinions like a statistician, but seem to operate on no data. Ok, your opinion is yours to do with what you want, I just want to point out how brittle the base is you are operating from.

 

I can compare development speed directly with Factorio, which might be a game a size category smaller. It is much more polished, lots more "beta" work included, but also has about the same time in EA (development started in 2012, company and indiegogo campaign was created in 2014).

 

I also have "Slay the Spire", a MUCH smaller game, where the development seems much faster, but that isn't a surprise really, considering the size and limited complexity of the game. I could not find any information of when development really began, it was already in an advanced state when it entered EA

 

It seems that for you taking money makes a big difference. But why? Development of a mid-sized game like 7D2D is an expensive endeavour, and like other EA games developers TFP probably started out with practically no money. They have a simple choice: Go to a publisher to get the money, with all the disadvantages that brings (maybe loss of IP, maybe influence of the publisher, maybe the publisher simply shuts down the game after 4 years in development if he doesn't like it). Or use kickstarter/EA/crowdfunding to get the necessary money. There is nothing shady about that. The only problem is whether the backers know that they have bought no influence, and they have risks similar to someone investing in company shares in the stock market

 

Correction: EA backers have the better deal because they can invest at exactly that moment when the game is worth the money it costs. They can play that version. Any further improvements are just bonus, should the game go into a direction the players don't like they still got their moneys worth out of the game. Unlike a stock market investor who can loose everything.

[toores]

Let's not get into opinion suppression. ;-)

 

- - - Updated - - -

 

Yeah, sorry about that!