|
|
Post by Danjal on Oct 3, 2014 15:43:05 GMT
Allow me to put some emphasis on something aswell.
Even though I'm not a fan of the kind of game Godus is becoming, that doesn't mean others aren't.
It also doesn't mean that the game isn't without its flaws.
And while I would solve these problems in a way that would bring the game closer to what I would personally enjoy.
That doesn't mean there aren't other ways to solve these problems that make the game overall more enjoyable.
22cans just needs to be willing to acknowledge that the flaws exist - instead of keeping Peter's head in the clouds and acting like its a piece of wonderful art thats entirely perfect.
Hearing you made a mistake is hard... Critics aren't generally known for sparing someones feelings...
Curling up in a ball or acting like they are wrong doesn't change that though, it just sets you up for more hurt in the future.
And the #1 complaint I've seen from the iOS players - the ones that are more willing to play a game like this...
Is that the timer balance is abysmal. And its only getting worse...
|
|
|
|
Post by 13thGeneral on Oct 3, 2014 15:53:23 GMT
Honestly, at this point, after all we've been through, after all the time and energy and effort we've put into it, no matter how encouraging and supportive we've been, or how harsh or repremanding our critisism and feedback may have been trying to get them to change, I feel the only recourse is to do as many caring and supportive parents must do at some point; step back and allow them to make thier mistakes and fail. Sometimes it's the only way they'll learn. It won't be easy, and it'll likely hurt all involved - there will be resentment and "I told you so's", but I feel it may be the only remaining action left.
At some point we have to accept it and let nature take it's course. The industry will pick up the pieces and put things right, hopefully, and there are already signs it's happening. Your efforts, and intellectual input, may be better applied to putting pressure and support where it's better utilised; the regulative authorities and the publishers/retailers.
I'm not saying give up and give in, I'm saying perhaps 22Cans should no longer be the focus of this conversation. I'm not particularly satisfied with this idea, but I'm also tired of this arguement; it hasn't yieled results and may never. But if it is refocused on another more aptly applied entity, we have better possible chance of seeing future positive change.
(I really don't know where I am going with this. *sigh*)
|
|
|
|
Post by Danjal on Oct 3, 2014 16:04:44 GMT
Its to that regard that I have no problems with it if 22cans ends up falling apart and ending under a truck due to lawsuits if they keep their current path.
It'd be a shame of a promising title, but its not a price too high to pay for such abuse.
Thats not saying that I wish them to fail - thats saying that I don't want them to succeed in cheating so many people out of their money.
This I still don't get...
What is the true reason for stickers to remain? Other than "I like stickers".
Is Peter having his son help him with developing his game?
Because that would certainly explain a thing or two about the drastic shift in focus towards this kind of game.
|
|
|
|
Post by 13thGeneral on Oct 3, 2014 16:11:26 GMT
Its to that regard that I have no problems with it if 22cans ends up falling apart and ending under a truck due to lawsuits if they keep their current path. It'd be a shame of a promising title, but its not a price too high to pay for such abuse. Thats not saying that I wish them to fail - thats saying that I don't want them to succeed in cheating so many people out of their money. This I still don't get... What is the true reason for stickers to remain? Other than "I like stickers". Is Peter having his son help him with developing his game? Because that would certainly explain a thing or two about the drastic shift in focus towards this kind of game. I think an early perception was that he might be designing it as a gift to his son, as some kind of legacy; which would explain much of his decisions in regards to the juvenile mechanics and easy-to-play linearity. It's also likely, going back to the artsy thing, he may partly envision this as his Opus to the world, thus sticking ridgedly to universal acceptance in the design. |
|
|
|
Post by Gmr Leon on Oct 3, 2014 17:31:58 GMT
This I still don't get... What is the true reason for stickers to remain? Other than "I like stickers". Is Peter having his son help him with developing his game? Because that would certainly explain a thing or two about the drastic shift in focus towards this kind of game. This is something I've been trying to get some clarification on. Are we talking both mechanically and aesthetically, or just mechanically? I can live with it on a mechanical basis, as long there are more interesting ways to produce/get them. I'm somewhat iffier on the aesthetics, I don't see any real reason to keep them in that fashion. As far as I'm concerned, the reason for their shift from cards was to make it more intuitive to apply them to the upgrades, which I can actually agree with to a degree. The original system was pretty finicky and laborious to flip back and forth between pages to verify you had enough resource cards, and what was worse, if memory serves, was that it may not have been entirely clear whether you did have enough cards or not. Or perhaps it was that you hadn't yet reached the next age to enable the activation of those cards. Whichever the case, there was a decent reason for overhauling it, but I don't think the aesthetic change was adequately justified by any stretch of the imagination. The mechanics remain essentially the same, I'd argue, the only difference is that it was made clearer and streamlined, while continuing to ignore the desire for different acquisition methods. |
|
|
|
Post by Danjal on Oct 3, 2014 18:09:53 GMT
Its definitely both a mechanical and aesthetical problem to me. With mechanics (acquisition) being the main culprit.
You say you can live with then from a mechanical standpoint as long as there are more interesting ways to acquire them - but thats the *main* problem with stickers from a mechanical standpoint, the acquisition is utterly random.
And if anything, I would say that altering the method of acquisition is more important than anything else.
If they "stickers" were dug up by followers or even better, acquired in a logical fashion (tools are crafted, wood/wheat are harvested, agricultural advances come through farms, social advances come from settlements and taverns that kinda stuff) then I could live with them remaining as "stickers".
Yes, it'd be really easy to take a paintbrush and slather on a different coat of paint.
Call "stickers" something different ("resources" anyone?) and call "gems" something like "divine/sacrificial energy" depending on where it came from.
It'd alter little to nothing about the core functionality but it'd give a completely different impression.
But if only a paintjob is applied, then the core functionality is still one of freemium transactions.
The subsequent application of "stickers" - even if a paintjob is applied - would need something as simple as being able to select multiple at once and apply them to a card/technology to unlock. Just add a little tickbox of +/- sign to select more of them at once - or even a simple "drag" selection box.
The way the timeline looks is pretty functional - though its very linear.
So an added depth there would be beneficial to the game. Add some choices, some variety.
Overall adding improvements would be great, but I have little to complain about the timeline itself.
Really the *big* issue is one of mechanics, which is the acquisition of stickers. Their primary purpose is to symbolize the development of your followers yet your followers are not at all included in the acquisition or application of it.
Its all going around the map and picking up litter from the floor. Then do some minigames as if you're at an arcade or carnival using slot machines hoping to win a prize. (You know the ones, buy $10 in coins, hope you win a bit, then exchange your coins for a plushie.)
|
|
|
|
Post by Gmr Leon on Oct 3, 2014 18:22:30 GMT
Given our prior discussions it probably needn't be said, but I fully agree. I'm not sure how exactly the acquisition would be changed by them because they won't tell us what the limits are (Voyages prove that hey, they're open to followers gathering stickers, believe it or not) and how they're open to changing them. All they're telling us is, yeah, these are staying and may be adjusted. Okay, but how? Where might our feedback fit?
So I mean, generally we agree, I'm just not as set in how I think it might be improved because I don't know how on Earth they're willing to elaborate on it and revise it. I've thrown out suggestions before, as we all have, but it all falls flat without knowing how it might best flow with the existing design without retaining what we consider the worst aspects of the feature.
|
|
|
|
Post by Danjal on Oct 3, 2014 18:31:52 GMT
I'd disagree that voyages are followers collecting or gathering stickers.
The voyages (in their current format) really are just you guiding them through a landscape.
If the followers had been water and the sculpting had been pipes, it'd be the same thing.
You 'the player' are the one doing the collecting.
I'd definitely be open to other solutions - I just don't see many others that would "work" from my perspective.
But hey, if there are those that aren't just extentions of the current picking up of random litter? More power to the devs!
One of the main problems I see in there, is that there's this idea that "casual" or "mobile" players are afraid of games that are more complex.
So everything is kept really simple. To the point of disrespecting the intelligence of your players.
If you ever saw one of Dragonstryk72's earlier video's - at some point he sat his mother down to play Godus (someone who is most definitely not a gamer).
And she literally said "do they think that I'm stupid or something?"
Not the impression you want to leave with your target audience.
|
|
|
|
Post by earlparvisjam on Oct 3, 2014 18:37:51 GMT
Given our prior discussions it probably needn't be said, but I fully agree. I'm not sure how exactly the acquisition would be changed by them because they won't tell us what the limits are (Voyages prove that hey, they're open to followers gathering stickers, believe it or not) and how they're open to changing them. All they're telling us is, yeah, these are staying and may be adjusted. Okay, but how? Where might our feedback fit? So I mean, generally we agree, I'm just not as set in how I think it might be improved because I don't know how on Earth they're willing to elaborate on it and revise it. I've thrown out suggestions before, as we all have, but it all falls flat without knowing how it might best flow with the existing design without retaining what we consider the worst aspects of the feature. It all boils down to the problem that they won't respond to anything we discuss. It's folly to spend too much energy discussing how to make things better when the people that actually do the changing won't show up to engage in the conversation. This topic alone merits more than a 30 minute video and several sets of questions to hash out between all parties. Without some means to actually work through even this single topic, there's no chance we're going to have meaningful progress. What surprises me the most after all this time is just how blind 22Cans seems to be to how observant we are. Time and time again, I've felt like Ted:  "I don't think it's going to work." |
|
|
|
Post by Gmr Leon on Oct 3, 2014 18:41:42 GMT
I'd disagree that voyages are followers collecting or gathering stickers. The voyages (in their current format) really are just you guiding them through a landscape. If the followers had been water and the sculpting had been pipes, it'd be the same thing. You 'the player' are the one doing the collecting. I'd definitely be open to other solutions - I just don't see many others that would "work" from my perspective. But hey, if there are those that aren't just extentions of the current picking up of random litter? More power to the devs! One of the main problems I see in there, is that there's this idea that "casual" or "mobile" players are afraid of games that are more complex. So everything is kept really simple. To the point of disrespecting the intelligence of your players. If you ever saw one of Dragonstryk72's earlier video's - at some point he sat his mother down to play Godus (someone who is most definitely not a gamer). And she literally said "do they think that I'm stupid or something?" Not the impression you want to leave with your target audience. Hah, oh wow. I could absolutely see that about insulting the audience's intelligence. I hadn't heard of anyone setting up someone more unfamiliar with games with Godus (besides a few sparse cases of mobile users). At any rate, as I said, I'm just at a loss for how to direct any feedback given the absence of a dialog. Regarding the Voyages, from a distant perspective, you're right...If you kind of look at it more from an in the moment view, it comes far closer than anything else to our followers actually somewhat doing something. (Even if that is being completely idiotic and killing themselves.) That's maybe being far too lenient, but when there's so little to work with, they don't leave you much of an option other than to grasp at the unappealing straws they've provided. >_> Given our prior discussions it probably needn't be said, but I fully agree. I'm not sure how exactly the acquisition would be changed by them because they won't tell us what the limits are (Voyages prove that hey, they're open to followers gathering stickers, believe it or not) and how they're open to changing them. All they're telling us is, yeah, these are staying and may be adjusted. Okay, but how? Where might our feedback fit? So I mean, generally we agree, I'm just not as set in how I think it might be improved because I don't know how on Earth they're willing to elaborate on it and revise it. I've thrown out suggestions before, as we all have, but it all falls flat without knowing how it might best flow with the existing design without retaining what we consider the worst aspects of the feature. It all boils down to the problem that they won't respond to anything we discuss. It's folly to spend too much energy discussing how to make things better when the people that actually do the changing won't show up to engage in the conversation. This topic alone merits more than a 30 minute video and several sets of questions to hash out between all parties. Without some means to actually work through even this single topic, there's no chance we're going to have meaningful progress. What surprises me the most after all this time is just how blind 22Cans seems to be to how observant we are. Time and time again, I've felt like Ted: "I don't think it's going to work." Blind or apathetic, sometimes I can't figure out which. Nevertheless that's another reason why I've bothered with this thread, despite it seeming folly. It's terribly uninteresting and unproductive to talk in circles over and over (even if this seems yet another repeated circle). By the way, what's that image from? |
|
|
|
Post by earlparvisjam on Oct 3, 2014 18:49:49 GMT
Blind or apathetic, sometimes I can't figure out which. Nevertheless that's another reason why I've bothered with this thread, despite it seeming folly. It's terribly uninteresting and unproductive to talk in circles over and over (even if this seems yet another repeated circle). By the way, what's that image from? That's a shot from the presentation at the end of Bill & Ted's Excellent Adventure. If you haven't seen it, I believe you've missed out on the foundation of Keanu Reeve's career. It's a gloriously absurd film and one of the best things to come out of the 80's. |
|
|
|
Post by Danjal on Oct 3, 2014 18:56:03 GMT
I agree, I'm equally at a loss on how to reasonably get the message through to Peter that as a business that sells a product.
Its only reasonable that he's expected to deliver on what he set out to create.
I just think that repeating the past year of "Just wait and see." is most definitely NOT the solution.
The only reason we keep going in circles is because we keep being pulled back to the same problematic issues.
And there really is only one person/group that can change that.
Be it by calling off PC development (or atleast officially putting it on hiatus), or by showing results.
Short of that, we will keep going in circles.
|
|
|
|
Post by hardly on Oct 3, 2014 19:42:26 GMT
I'm going to write about Matthew allens post while my thoughts are fresh in my mind and then go back and read everyone else's posts.
First of all the missing element that is ruining the community relationship is honesty from 22cans about what they are doing with the resources provided by this community. Throughout the entire process 22cans have sought to obscure their focus on mobile and to be honest you've been part of that charade even if you have never lied to is.
Second the issue that exists is 22cans have never facilitated a positive discussion about GODUS by giving us scope to influence the design. If for example ideas were announced early in the design phase we'd be able to have a constructive conversation with some chance of shifting the design. I've asked for this approach and not only has it not been done but my posts weren't responded to. One can only assume peter doesn't play well with others. Certainly out key feedback - no gems, no stickers, easier (ergonomically) sculpting, no having to turn off my computer waiting, etc. all ignored. The reason for this appears to be mobile has a veto on PC.
Your post ignores the incredibly constructive and well thought out posts that have been made and ignored. I challenge you to show me where the design has engaged with any of these great blue sky idea posts. Fabs and Feanix are probably the only ones I've seen brainstorm with us and it was really fun. No one from the actual design team came to play. The lack of scope for our input and the extreme lack of response and even evidence of hearing has warn people out.
Yes there are people who post horrible things or repetitive things, he'll there are posts I've made that I wouldn't make on a good day but I still think most people on this forum have a constructive outlook, we are just waiting for 22cans to engage with that. I bet they never will.
By the way Matthew you seem like a good guy but you work for a rotten firm. I know that's not constructive but sometimes the negative needs to be said.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 3, 2014 20:00:09 GMT
So I see that someone finally stepped in to quell the storm and calm the coming tide; steamcommunity.com/app/232810/discussions/0/616187839179798956/#c616189742754167296Thanks, Matthew Allen. Seriously. Although I don't have the energy nor desire to really comment or participate - posting long diatribes and rants - like I use to, I still read much of what goes on in the forums... and things were starting to get really severely tense. Well, it still is, but I for one very much appreciate your interjection. I don't think anyone was particularly wrong (tho there was a bit of mudslinging and condescension), be it fact or opinion, but there was certainly a lot of uneccessaary push and shove going on. I found myself agreeing and disagreeing with parts of every side (which is more of a decahedron dice than a coin) and not having a strong enough opinion either way. However, I'm sort of tired and worn out debating this game and this experience, sonmy emotions regarding it is one of ambivalence. I think you were spot on about much of what you said and respect your opinions and observations. I hope this whole thing doesn't leave a bitter taste in your mouth. I am still upset that it appears I won't get the Peter Molyneux God game I supported, but have come to terms with that; now I just hope that something resolves itself soon so we can move forward - or move on. What does he want to tell us? Ok, we took your money, gave you a pile of dirt and now be quit and complain on other games where the devs listen, because our design team wants to get rich with f2p? That's what i read in this posting. I think my english isn't good enough to completly understand what he is talking about. For me it only sounds like another insult by a person speaking for 22cans - and that's what he is. I want to see him in a Restaurant when the waitress takes his money brings him dog food and says if you have complaints please go to the restaurant on the other side of the street, our chef does only what he likes to do and now he is in the mood of dog food. Yes, i know on the menu it says lasagne but look there is meat and it was in the stove, so it's just the same - and look overthere are some dogs, do you see them complain? (not that i want to say iOS users are dogs - in fact i am an iOS user, too) The restaurant is business - game development is business - business is about money and there the fun has an end. 22cans behaves like they think they can take money from people and then are allowed to do what they want. And now they are upset because of people complaining about that?
22cans wants to see a community of happiness and cheerfulness? Go back, read the Kickstarter, look at the comments, read the official forum threads from the first two month of it's exsistense. Happiness and cheerfulness, fun and atmosphere of departure, motivation, joy. Remember the live shows from back there? What you have now isn't a community anymore, it hasn't been one since summer last year - and it wasn't the community that killed the community.
Yes, i can go on - forget about the 137 pounds I gave them - but why? They took my money to make the ios community happy, that's what i know for month now - what does it change? Do i get more happy when i know there are people out there who didn't pay anything for the game and now they got exactly what they want?
Why am i here? Because i can't let them come away with it. What they do is excactly why i went to kickstarter. I don't want to get fooled by money-grubbing publishers - i don't want to support f2p, paywalls, simplyfication of games. I want game Designers with visions making great games without drm, f2p, dlcs, regional pricing ... i want gaming communities where game designers take gamers for full, not only trying to squeeze out as much money as possible. What 22cans did has nothing to do with all that. May it be because of financial problems, or anything else. They are killing the spirit of this movement. Before Godus i backed 12 Games on different crowdfunding platforms, after Godus i backed one. And there have been some really interesting ideas out there. But i can't justify such an investment anymore. That's not only a problem of 22cans, it's a problem of the most part of the gaming industrie. They tend do overexcite. May it be DRM, DLC, unfinished releases, sales, trying to blocking second hand market - they are really good in upset their customers, it's almost better than the music industry.
In Germany we have a proverb:"Respekt muss man sich verdienen". And i don't see 22cans (and i mean 22cans as a company) has earned that respect.
|
|
|
|
Post by Danjal on Oct 3, 2014 20:07:46 GMT
I couldn't agree more @sundance - but it seems that they view it differently.
You paid £137? Oh thats just a minute fraction of the amount that goes into game development...
That doesn't give you the right to *demand* anything from US.
They conveniently forget that the things we demand, the things we want to see - are the things that they originally promised to create.
And that it is utterly unacceptable to expect people to wait 2~3 years while you go and develop something else with that money.
Had they made the PC game first and then taken the profits to develop an iOS title they'd be entirely in their rights.
But they never bothered to create a PC title in the first place, they released their iOS bullshit on PC.
|
|
|
|
Post by Gmr Leon on Oct 3, 2014 20:47:43 GMT
I think we crashed 22Cans from yesterday.
|
|
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 Oct 3, 2014 20:56:07 GMT
I think we crashed 22Cans from yesterday. What does that mean? |
|
|
|
Post by Gmr Leon on Oct 3, 2014 21:03:23 GMT
I think we crashed 22Cans from yesterday. What does that mean? Unless I'm overlooking some correspondence on their own forums/Twitter/Facebook, it's been radio silence from their end today over on Steam. Excluding a response from Matthew Allen, anyway. |
|
|
|
Post by hardly on Oct 3, 2014 21:12:01 GMT
I'm just working through the steam thread.
I'm so sick of the "peter won't come out unless you are really nice guys". Fuck that. This is abuse. Peter do your job, answer your backers, stop behaving like a child. I appreciate the efforts of George and Matthew but Peter has obligations that he needs to front up to. Id appreciate it if community members and CMs stopped suggesting that it is optional for peter to deliver PC GODUS and that it is optional for him to be open and transparent about its development.
Matthew if you could please pass on to Peter that the gaming community will never forget. So whatever he does - a great pc game or a shoddy mobile port, we will remember and it will haunt him for the rest of his life. It will be his legacy. So either he can keep hiding in his foxhole or he can come out and front up to his responsibilities. I'm guessing he will continue to choose the former.
The CMs and mods keep working into their posts the implication that developing pc GODUS is a choice peter can make. This pisses me off.
Matthew I do appreciate the candor of your post and the spirit of it. The problem is peter has put you between us and you. As you say you have worked for us but how to do we address when peter hides behind you and uses your credibility and goodwill to try and mollify us?
|
|
|
|
Post by hardly on Oct 3, 2014 21:13:21 GMT
Oh and Jack isn't without responsibility here to. So Jack and peter are both too busy? How about Jack makes some time to talk about the design?
|
|
