RoN should've stayed in EA

[Sikness]

I just went back and watched VOID's 2019 gameplay trailer and honestly, I'm kinda shocked...

https://youtu.be/JcA7Nwa1L9I?si=QxK4ELWa3xc9RaZI

And before some come to their defense, I want the game to succeed. It was because of trailers like the one mentioned that made me back the game all these years.

I also understand the intricacies of game development and didn't expect to have all features that were mentioned make it to the game such as ladders or even MP. But, we don't even have proper entry points, pre-planning screens, or incremental movement... It's very obvious there was a shift in focus for this game leading up to 1.0 and as a result features were scrapped and content was cut.

What do you think? Personally, I wish we would've gotten something closer to the game shown in the trailer.

EDIT: Also wanted to add we didn't get 9-bangs or balaclavas, WHERE ARE THE 9-BANGS AND BALACLAVAS?!? :c (I know there are mods)

[Olanov]

Drones would be so useful in big open maps, have 1 guy in your unit or you as lead in SP scope out areas ahead of time before acting on any plan.

[Saeletra]

Minimum viable product. The community kept praising them for half-assed updates and we got a half-assed 1.0.

[Nahmy]

Yeah, this is what I was convinced by to support the game all those years ago.
Here we are, three years late on the projected release, and missing half of the content in the game and functioning in that trailer.

[Metal Izanagi]

Well. Instead of rallying as a community and demanding better than what we were getting each update, we mostly resigned ourselves to what was being offered so the devs seem to have taken it as a sign that it'd be fine to release Not Ready instead of Ready or Not.

[Sir DBH Echo]

Completely agree.
If the testing/crowd funding community were able to see the 1.0 build it wouldn't be such a mess. Selling a $100 earlier access version of the game, not releasing any updates for a year, and not giving the community access before release to hit the Christmas crowd is a scum bag move.

[Sikness]

Originally posted by Metal Izanagi:

Well. Instead of rallying as a community and demanding better than what we were getting each update, we mostly resigned ourselves to what was being offered so the devs seem to have taken it as a sign that it'd be fine to release Not Ready instead of Ready or Not.

I admit I'm guilty of not being nearly as productive with development as I should've been throughout EA. However, the community was left in the dark for a year prior to this release, with no new content updates in between to give feedback on. I also don't think many of us would've predicted the game would launch as "1.0" so soon when there was still so much missing, especially after they decided to do away with deadlines.

[Woldelele]

What happened to the red/blue colors on the back of squad members? That should've stayed to help indicate who's who at a moments glance.

[Sgt. Osiris]

Originally posted by Metal Izanagi:

Well. Instead of rallying as a community and demanding better than what we were getting each update, we mostly resigned ourselves to what was being offered so the devs seem to have taken it as a sign that it'd be fine to release Not Ready instead of Ready or Not.

This is the opposite of what happened. We did not receive any updates for over a year. They set a deadline for themselves for December which they pushed out as 1.0. The game is nowhere near 1.0, even ignoring the problems with the suspect AI.

[moOx]

lets be honest here pushing the game to 1.0 only served as an excuse to up the price to 50 bucks, the game is good and working but content-wise there is still too little, but I guess most ppl are still happy, cuz gamers these days are not used to games that feel like a finished game.

[Jegedillo]

Still lots of bugs, several of which were in early access, enemies still on crack half the time, and non lethal is next to useless most of the time yet it's the only way to achieve S rank. I really like how the only thing they've improved, the friendly AI, is unused by most of the playerbase since most players play this in coop with friends.

[Revelene]

Agreed, calling this game "released" seems like a planned way to slow development.

[ΛƘ 420]

It's funny how the video starts with the caption "The content within this video is subject to change and improvement".

Change it did without doubt, now.. improvement? The trailer looks and feels far better than what we have now.

[Zaeld]

Originally posted by Revelene:

Agreed, calling this game "released" seems like a planned way to slow development.

I don't see the logic with this assumption. Wouldn't releasing this and getting more money to fund their project help develop the game faster? Why would it be slower if they have more funds to work with?

[Revelene]

Originally posted by Zaeldˣˢ:

Originally posted by Revelene:

Agreed, calling this game "released" seems like a planned way to slow development.

I don't see the logic with this assumption. Wouldn't releasing this and getting more money to fund their project help develop the game faster? Why would it be slower if they have more funds to work with?

Historically, games that are not fully developed that go ahead and release tend to slow down in development or even stop entirely.

I'd be willing to bet that after a week, there will be no update or just a small update with little fixes.

[hypster]

Going off of a trailer is like thinking the outfit will look the same on you as it does on the mannequin. To not be impressed or at least appreciative in the most part for the changes 1.0 brought as well as the transparency we've had until now, is pretty cringe tbh.

Is everyone unaware that we don't just get finished games on CDs anymore? That we get pieces of software that get updated as time goes on?