Early Access is NOT an excuse,

[TXI]

Everytime an early access game comes out after being "worked on" for "multiple years" it always ends up looking like a game that had 6 months of work maximum with optimisation never being good, not even acceptable.

This has been a HEAVY trend in survival craft games, they always claim to have worked on the game but then take 5-7 years of early access to call it a fully released game.

Gamers are so quick to criticise Ubisoft, 2K and EA for "bad" games but at least they fully release a title with tons of content and usually a whole 15-40 hour storyline. But for games like this people make excuses.

It's not good enough. There's nothing to do, the game's performance is terrible and it has LESS to offer than the previous title, how can you say this game having less builds is acceptable when all they would have to do is port over the previous code for things like boats?

Blows my mind how far gaming has sunken.

EDIT: If you want proof of hypocrisy, check the replies. People did exactly what I said they would do, hating on EA for being "bigger and not indie" forgetting The Forest is a multi-million dollar IP with hundreds of investors. If multi-million dollar companies are now classed as indie, then damn, Rockstar is a great indie company!

[The Milk Man]

Because early access...is an excuse? It literally means unfinished.

[TXI]

Originally posted by The Milk Man:

Because early access...is an excuse? It literally means unfinished.

They claimed to have worked on the game for multiple years but it has LESS content than the old game... they could have ported over code, that's not even an excuse that's laziness. That's purposefully releasing a game that is not even early-access level worthy.

[Valasy]

Originally posted by TXI:

Originally posted by The Milk Man:

Because early access...is an excuse? It literally means unfinished.

They claimed to have worked on the game for multiple years but it has LESS content than the old game... they could have ported over code, that's not even an excuse that's laziness. That's purposefully releasing a game that is not even early-access level worthy.

Can you elaborate as to how there is less then the original?

[Exaco]

Early Access isn't an excuse but Unity Engine is.

Look at BSG ( Escape From Tarkov devs ), their game has pretty much same issues ppl complain about Sons like their NASA PC's with RTX 4090 not pushing above 140fps. BSG never managed to fix it ( if there's still anything to fix besides CPU/RAM upgrade or map graphics/density downgrade ).

Of course Tarkov maps are insanely dense and the game hits way harder on CPU amd RAM compared to SoTF so it's a bit different story meaning there's still enough room for Sons of the Forest to significantly improve the performance.

[m4rcus]

dude koei/EA literally just released a fully finnished 70 bucks tripple A title that was 7 years in development which looks 10 times worse and runs 10 times as bad as this. and not even joking runs in literal slow motion on certain pcs and consoles alike since its first path.

sotf might be flat for now but it doesnt look bad for how it runs. it runs pretty well for its looks. its not a broken mess. it is at least titled early access and only 30 bucks. what do you want more?

[Ginger Spooky]

this dude supports EA... only thing that has sunken is you bro

[kuraiken]

Originally posted by TXI:

Originally posted by The Milk Man:

Because early access...is an excuse? It literally means unfinished.

They claimed to have worked on the game for multiple years but it has LESS content than the old game... they could have ported over code, that's not even an excuse that's laziness. That's purposefully releasing a game that is not even early-access level worthy.

1. You don't know what EA is.
2. You don't know how programming works.
3. You clearly haven't played The Forest recently to notice all the difference in ALL aspects, from gameplay mechanics to things like lighting systems, wind & weather, tree movement, etc. which all - shockingly! - do not happen automatically but had to be designed from scratch.
4. Someone should explain to you that items, objects & characters that look different and are animated differently then in the Forest are so because they were created by someone. Who didn't port them over from The Forest but designed them and animated them from scratch.

You've used a lot of words to say how little you know of things.
Which is probably why you bought the game in early access and are now frustrated at this decision of yours that you made - like so many things in life, it seems - in the depths of utter ignorance.

[TXI]

Originally posted by Nexaustria:

Originally posted by TXI:

They claimed to have worked on the game for multiple years but it has LESS content than the old game... they could have ported over code, that's not even an excuse that's laziness. That's purposefully releasing a game that is not even early-access level worthy.

Can you elaborate as to how there is less then the original?

Yeah sure,
- Less buildable houses and huts
- No boats or boat houses
- Bigger map with less in it
- Main story averages 13 hours to beat, the first game took 16 hours to beat
- First game had 45 achievements, this game has 28.
- First game had more caves to explore
- First games story was better by far, finding your son vs finding some random rich people

Basically, it's inferior on nearly every level so far, and it's more expensive than the first.

[Ricktap]

Originally posted by TXI:

Everytime an early access game comes out after being "worked on" for "multiple years" it always ends up looking like a game that had 6 months of work maximum with optimisation never being good, not even acceptable.

This has been a HEAVY trend in survival craft games, they always claim to have worked on the game but then take 5-7 years of early access to call it a fully released game.

Gamers are so quick to criticise Ubisoft, 2K and EA for "bad" games but at least they fully release a title with tons of content and usually a whole 15-40 hour storyline. But for games like this people make excuses.

It's not good enough. There's nothing to do, the game's performance is terrible and it has LESS to offer than the previous title, how can you say this game having less builds is acceptable when all they would have to do is port over the previous code for things like boats?

Blows my mind how far gaming has sunken.

The Forest was one of the successes of early access. Endnight was an indie studio and their still expanding, yet they have put out some of the best work in the genre.

Of course a triple a studio with tons of money behind them puts out a more polished game. Refund and go play theirs as it sounds like that experience suits your tastes a bit better.

[TXI]

Originally posted by BigGuy:

this dude supports EA... only thing that has sunken is you bro

Nah who said I support EA? I just said people are quick to hate on EA (probably reddit addicts) but will suck a survival crafts ♥♥♥♥ and refuse any criticism of it.

[TXI]

Originally posted by pat:

Originally posted by TXI:

Everytime an early access game comes out after being "worked on" for "multiple years" it always ends up looking like a game that had 6 months of work maximum with optimisation never being good, not even acceptable.

This has been a HEAVY trend in survival craft games, they always claim to have worked on the game but then take 5-7 years of early access to call it a fully released game.

Gamers are so quick to criticise Ubisoft, 2K and EA for "bad" games but at least they fully release a title with tons of content and usually a whole 15-40 hour storyline. But for games like this people make excuses.

It's not good enough. There's nothing to do, the game's performance is terrible and it has LESS to offer than the previous title, how can you say this game having less builds is acceptable when all they would have to do is port over the previous code for things like boats?

Blows my mind how far gaming has sunken.

The Forest was one of the successes of early access. Endnight was an indie studio and their still expanding, yet they have put out some of the best work in the genre.

Of course a triple a studio with tons of money behind them puts out a more polished game. Refund and go play theirs as it sounds like that experience suits your tastes a bit better.

Endnight made $5m from The Forest and the full 5 year development costed them $124.000. This game has way less content and is in a terrible state. They aren't indie anymore, they're worth millions.

[Ricktap]

Originally posted by TXI:

Originally posted by pat:

The Forest was one of the successes of early access. Endnight was an indie studio and their still expanding, yet they have put out some of the best work in the genre.

Of course a triple a studio with tons of money behind them puts out a more polished game. Refund and go play theirs as it sounds like that experience suits your tastes a bit better.

Endnight made $5m from The Forest and the full 5 year development costed them $124.000. This game has way less content and is in a terrible state. They aren't indie anymore, they're worth millions.

Learn to read. I said it was an indie studio, not that it is.

I'm done commenting here as it seems this game is
far better than it would have been with your input.

[TXI]

Originally posted by m4rcus:

dude koei/EA literally just released a fully finnished 70 bucks tripple A title that was 7 years in development which looks 10 times worse and runs 10 times as bad as this. and not even joking runs in literal slow motion on certain pcs and consoles alike since its first path.

sotf might be flat for now but it doesnt look bad for how it runs. it runs pretty well for its looks. its not a broken mess. it is at least titled early access and only 30 bucks. what do you want more?

Running at 50fps on my RYX 3060 on medium is unexcusable. The game doesn't look that good my guy. I run Cyberpunk 2077 at 90fps on medium...

[Ginger Spooky]

if you hate the game so much why are you still playing it, seems like either A: your still finishing the game and havent found all the content or B: Your being a troll or hypocritical

[Balls]

Originally posted by TXI:

Gamers are so quick to criticise Ubisoft, 2K and EA for "bad" games but at least they fully release a title with tons of content and usually a whole 15-40 hour storyline. But for games like this people make excuses.

You do know that this game was made by 7 people? Not 50 people like EA does. Just go enjoy your rushed and buggy triple A title and let us enjoy this.