|
|
Post by Gmr Leon on Jul 28, 2015 19:13:55 GMT
There are good points being made but the discussion appears to be slipping a little too much in EVERY direction again. Let's try to keep it a bit more focused. Thanks, was about to say the same as I came back to check on this. If that's the case, there'll be no difference between now and a year ago. We're currently working on Combat, an early build will be available on our Steam Opt-In testing channel when we feel that it is ready (It won't be too long now). This won't be a complete build - It will be buggy, it might be a little broken, there will be a way of offering feedback that will be looked at, listened to and assessed - I'll be one of the people in charge of collecting feedback and working with the production team to make sure that the important things that are brought up are worked on, fixed, tweaked, etc.. Community feedback will be incredibly important to the release of our combat. Opt-In will be the first chance to offer all kinds of in-game feedback on the combat. That's the current plan and that's all we're talking about at this moment.  What might constitute important things outside of basic functionality (e.g. doesn't crash the game, friendly units don't suddenly start killing each other, etc.)? Fixing and tweaking is what we've seen in the past, which is nice to have, but as stated, it appears to stop short of any major alterations that might improve the feature overall. In that same vein, how long should we expect to see this sort of work occur after the opt-in release before it's pushed to main release? We've seen the earliest bits of combat in opt-in for awhile now, but it's unclear to what degree any feedback on that was worthwhile after a month (or two weeks), since it no longer saw any updates to keep us in step with development to be able to provide relevant feedback. Trust me, I gave it a light try after it came out, and I could tell there wasn't much I could really contribute after it stopped seeing many updates past some slight fixes to make sure others could access it. It was simply too barebones to remain relevant after a short time. I don't imagine this version of combat will be as meagre, but if it's only going to see support for a couple weeks or a month, it mostly proves that you're only interested in very basic, superficial feedback (some might argue, again) regarding fixes/tweaks and nothing deeper than that. Your statement above, while good to hear, falls as little more than platitudes we've heard before (as others have already observed). Anyway, I know you can't talk future plans much, but the TL;DR of this is: -Will post opt-in release support go any deeper than basic fixes/tweaks? -How long will this support go before the opt-in combat is shuffled off to the main branch? Hopefully that's not too futurey to answer, given it should be packed in with the existing plans you outlined above. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 28, 2015 19:59:29 GMT
An unfortunate problem with information voids leading to natural topic drift. In this case, it's the matter of feedback and what it matters leading to the discussion of development involvement of the community leading into what people can expect the game to look like otherwise their suggestions might just ultimately be wasted time. The root of the problem is that 22cans will not tell us. Here is the problem and that's the only question i want them to answer. As long as they avoid to say us what game Godus should be any discussion, any feedback and any involvement is wasted time. For some reason 22cans avoids to explain and show us their vision since the kickstarter ended. It wasn't the alpha, it wasn't the so called beta, and it wasn't yesterday - it began right at the start of this project when they went developing a mobile f2p game and it didn't change. The so called openness in development never existed. It's a constant loop of the same behavior - only slightly changed because of them replacing the person in contact with us from time to time (or have to replace because of them leaving).
It's a question that I and many others ask since right in the beginning. I even remember me asking this question in the comments section of kickstarter while the campaign was running. There was never an answer - only diffuse excuses why they can't answer this questions. This in combination with the recent statements like "not all the promised features will make it in the game" "development until no more money from Godus" and the consequent refusal of refunds lead to the expactation of a spacebased game soon with at least as much lightweight features to prevent trouble with steam and kickstarter.
|
|
|
|
Post by colin22cans on Jul 28, 2015 20:01:56 GMT
There are good points being made but the discussion appears to be slipping a little too much in EVERY direction again. Let's try to keep it a bit more focused. Thanks, was about to say the same as I came back to check on this. We're currently working on Combat, an early build will be available on our Steam Opt-In testing channel when we feel that it is ready (It won't be too long now). This won't be a complete build - It will be buggy, it might be a little broken, there will be a way of offering feedback that will be looked at, listened to and assessed - I'll be one of the people in charge of collecting feedback and working with the production team to make sure that the important things that are brought up are worked on, fixed, tweaked, etc.. Community feedback will be incredibly important to the release of our combat. Opt-In will be the first chance to offer all kinds of in-game feedback on the combat. That's the current plan and that's all we're talking about at this moment. What might constitute important things outside of basic functionality (e.g. doesn't crash the game, friendly units don't suddenly start killing each other, etc.)? Fixing and tweaking is what we've seen in the past, which is nice to have, but as stated, it appears to stop short of any major alterations that might improve the feature overall. In that same vein, how long should we expect to see this sort of work occur after the opt-in release before it's pushed to main release? We've seen the earliest bits of combat in opt-in for awhile now, but it's unclear to what degree any feedback on that was worthwhile after a month (or two weeks), since it no longer saw any updates to keep us in step with development to be able to provide relevant feedback. Trust me, I gave it a light try after it came out, and I could tell there wasn't much I could really contribute after it stopped seeing many updates past some slight fixes to make sure others could access it. It was simply too barebones to remain relevant after a short time. I don't imagine this version of combat will be as meagre, but if it's only going to see support for a couple weeks or a month, it mostly proves that you're only interested in very basic, superficial feedback (some might argue, again) regarding fixes/tweaks and nothing deeper than that. Your statement above, while good to hear, falls as little more than platitudes we've heard before (as others have already observed). Anyway, I know you can't talk future plans much, but the TL;DR of this is: -Will post opt-in release support go any deeper than basic fixes/tweaks? -How long will this support go before the opt-in combat is shuffled off to the main branch? Hopefully that's not too futurey to answer, given it should be packed in with the existing plans you outlined above. Good questions, GMR Leon. At this stage, it's hard to say without players getting hands on time. There might be one feature might work better than others meaning others need tweaked, there might be major balancing issues that skew entire games, etc. The feedback gathered could impact on the time that it takes to come to the main branch, it's something we'll find out at the time. And I'll be keeping people updating as we progress. Personally, I expect the Opt-In feedback to be quite in-depth and the one that the most changes come from. I'm afraid I can't answer the support timeframe part, mainly because I don't have a definite answer on it - though it will be longer than a couple of weeks or a month. Our hope is that players are kept occupied by it for a significant amount of time. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 28, 2015 20:16:49 GMT
I think the main worry folks have is that it appears a question of how feedback may work with further development.
For example, if the next bit of development that 22cans goes into is going to be Eras, then how Combat is going to work in each Era is an important consideration.
It seems like it would be more beneficial to consider such things before actually spending development time on them and possibly having to backtrack.
|
|
|
|
Post by Gmr Leon on Jul 28, 2015 20:38:06 GMT
Anyway, I know you can't talk future plans much, but the TL;DR of this is: -Will post opt-in release support go any deeper than basic fixes/tweaks? -How long will this support go before the opt-in combat is shuffled off to the main branch? Hopefully that's not too futurey to answer, given it should be packed in with the existing plans you outlined above. Good questions, Gmr Leon. At this stage, it's hard to say without players getting hands on time. There might be one feature might work better than others meaning others need tweaked, there might be major balancing issues that skew entire games, etc. The feedback gathered could impact on the time that it takes to come to the main branch, it's something we'll find out at the time. And I'll be keeping people updating as we progress. Personally, I expect the Opt-In feedback to be quite in-depth and the one that the most changes come from. I'm afraid I can't answer the support timeframe part, mainly because I don't have a definite answer on it - though it will be longer than a couple of weeks or a month. Our hope is that players are kept occupied by it for a significant amount of time. Er, could you clarify what you consider features? I know this is a little nitpicky, but I think many of us consider combat as a whole a feature, and aspects of it (e.g. the different UI, enemy AI, etc.) to be just that, aspects or characteristics of that feature. I assume that's a little more of what you meant there, yeah? Not that that wouldn't overlap with other features (i.e. those unrelated to combat), but I think it's better to be clear on what we mean here. When I'm asking about this, I'm focused solely on how combat as a feature may be developed in response to our feedback. On top of that, not how in-depth our feedback may be, but how in-depth your response to said feedback may be, which is to say if you think we have a reasonable case for changing something, you'd be willing to revisit it thoroughly and not just with a surface gesture (i.e. click + drag silliness). |
|
|
|
Post by colin22cans on Jul 28, 2015 21:02:32 GMT
Good questions, Gmr Leon. At this stage, it's hard to say without players getting hands on time. There might be one feature might work better than others meaning others need tweaked, there might be major balancing issues that skew entire games, etc. The feedback gathered could impact on the time that it takes to come to the main branch, it's something we'll find out at the time. And I'll be keeping people updating as we progress. Personally, I expect the Opt-In feedback to be quite in-depth and the one that the most changes come from. I'm afraid I can't answer the support timeframe part, mainly because I don't have a definite answer on it - though it will be longer than a couple of weeks or a month. Our hope is that players are kept occupied by it for a significant amount of time. Er, could you clarify what you consider features? I know this is a little nitpicky, but I think many of us consider combat as a whole a feature, and aspects of it (e.g. the different UI, enemy AI, etc.) to be just that, aspects or characteristics of that feature. I assume that's a little more of what you meant there, yeah? Not that that wouldn't overlap with other features (i.e. those unrelated to combat), but I think it's better to be clear on what we mean here. When I'm asking about this, I'm focused solely on how combat as a feature may be developed in response to our feedback. On top of that, not how in-depth our feedback may be, but how in-depth your response to said feedback may be, which is to say if you think we have a reasonable case for changing something, you'd be willing to revisit it thoroughly and not just with a surface gesture (i.e. click + drag silliness). Anything really could be considered a feature. Big or small. If we gather enough feedback saying something doesn't work...then it doesn't work and would need changing/fixing/removing/tweaking, then it will happen. The initial feedback gathered will be dedicated to combat. Our response can't be in-depth without your (the community) in-depth feedback. |
|
|
|
Post by Gmr Leon on Jul 28, 2015 21:10:47 GMT
Er, could you clarify what you consider features? I know this is a little nitpicky, but I think many of us consider combat as a whole a feature, and aspects of it (e.g. the different UI, enemy AI, etc.) to be just that, aspects or characteristics of that feature. I assume that's a little more of what you meant there, yeah? Not that that wouldn't overlap with other features (i.e. those unrelated to combat), but I think it's better to be clear on what we mean here. When I'm asking about this, I'm focused solely on how combat as a feature may be developed in response to our feedback. On top of that, not how in-depth our feedback may be, but how in-depth your response to said feedback may be, which is to say if you think we have a reasonable case for changing something, you'd be willing to revisit it thoroughly and not just with a surface gesture (i.e. click + drag silliness). Anything really could be considered a feature. Big or small. If we gather enough feedback saying something doesn't work...then it doesn't work and would need changing/fixing/removing/tweaking, then it will happen. The initial feedback gathered will be dedicated to combat. Our response can't be in-depth without your (the community) in-depth feedback. ...Regarding that, "then it will happen," I guess we'll just have to hold you to that when the time comes. That's been the sticking point with every prior update and our feedback, we've said many a thing haven't worked but little of that changing has been thorough and/or happened at all. |
|
|
|
Post by colin22cans on Jul 28, 2015 21:26:46 GMT
Anything really could be considered a feature. Big or small. If we gather enough feedback saying something doesn't work...then it doesn't work and would need changing/fixing/removing/tweaking, then it will happen. The initial feedback gathered will be dedicated to combat. Our response can't be in-depth without your (the community) in-depth feedback. ...Regarding that, "then it will happen," I guess we'll just have to hold you to that when the time comes. That's been the sticking point with every prior update and our feedback, we've said many a thing haven't worked but little of that changing has been thorough and/or happened at all. Yeah, afraid I can't really add more than that at this time. Unfortunately, it is a time will tell situation and you'll have to hold me to that. |
|
Lord Ba'al
Supreme Deity
Posts: 6,260
Pledge level: Half a Partner
I like: Cats; single malt Scotch; Stargate; Amiga; fried potatoes; retro gaming; cheese; snickers; sticky tape.
I don't like: Dimples in the bottom of scotch bottles; Facebook games masquerading as godgames.
Steam: stonelesscutter
GOG: stonelesscutter
|
Post by Lord Ba'al on Jul 28, 2015 22:05:53 GMT
...Regarding that, "then it will happen," I guess we'll just have to hold you to that when the time comes. That's been the sticking point with every prior update and our feedback, we've said many a thing haven't worked but little of that changing has been thorough and/or happened at all. Yeah, afraid I can't really add more than that at this time. Unfortunately, it is a time will tell situation and you'll have to hold me to that. And that we will. Have no fear about that. Or do, depending on your point of view.  |
|
|
|
Post by colin22cans on Jul 28, 2015 23:03:20 GMT
Yeah, afraid I can't really add more than that at this time. Unfortunately, it is a time will tell situation and you'll have to hold me to that. And that we will. Have no fear about that. Or do, depending on your point of view. All the fear!  |
|
|
|
Post by Gmr Leon on Jul 30, 2015 0:33:55 GMT
...Regarding that, "then it will happen," I guess we'll just have to hold you to that when the time comes. That's been the sticking point with every prior update and our feedback, we've said many a thing haven't worked but little of that changing has been thorough and/or happened at all. Yeah, afraid I can't really add more than that at this time. Unfortunately, it is a time will tell situation and you'll have to hold me to that. P.S. Anything you can say on (re?)opening up a little more on the design phase of development, as was attempted briefly by FuriousMoo, perhaps with better coordination/organization? |
|
