Oh dear, the mobile version just caught on fire

What does this actually achieve? Do you honestly think that if the mobile game has worse reviews they are going to spend more time on the PC version? 

Sure, maybe you'll get a small sense of satisfaction out of the fact that they maybe don't earn more money, but it's like shooting yourself in the foot. For the best PC version of the game, we want the iPhone version to do well, because then they'll actually have the financial security to get on with the PC version and finish it to a good standard. If they have less money, they'll be forced to do the bare minimum they are obliged to do and the PC game will be worse.

I really doubt that upvoting the reviews is going to add any new feedback they don't already have, it's only going to make people less likely to want to try the game out. We know they have lots of feedback, it just takes a long time for them to act on it.

Here's an interesting thought.... Did mobile gamers receive a completed game?
IF they didn't, do they realize they are possibly spending real money on an uncompleted game where there may be potential to lose any progress/advantages they've achieved with that money?

The point being made is that the mobile version is likely being presented as a released game.
But it is the same product we have available to us right now - which is to say, a very much alpha type product being far from featurecomplete.

Hubworlds being just ONE of the major features intended to be part of the game that is still missing.
(I do wonder, how many mobile players have a constact connection to the internet that they could use this feature at all???)


Regardless, it'll be interesting to see how mobile players respond if/when they'd realize that they effectively have an alpha product in front of them that is barely 50% of the intended game.

Well I mainly asked with Hubworlds in mind - I mean, if the supposed 'key feature' going forward is going to be Hubworlds.
Then how many mobile players would be able to use this.

Now if that number turns out to be low, because globally speaking most mobile users do not have a constant connection or their bandwith cap is limited (and therefor precious).
That could very well also be part of the decision to put off Hubworlds in favor for some of the other rebalancing features.
Ofcourse I could be reading too much into things and the rebalancing and overhauling is just because they never bothered to actually 'design' the game in the first place.

I mean, Peter did say that his primary focus as a designer is to look into monetization, I guess he might've forgot to do the thing a designer is supposed to do. Which is to design an actual game in the first place. A rather silly concept that one would think wouldn't be really possible in the first place, but there it is. We have a 'game' with monetization in place - yet the 'game' lacks a lot of the actual gameplay elements that it was intended to have and the ones that ARE there are either incomplete or very much unbalanced.