Waiting

[Rod]

Waiting for the coop patch to play! Any date yet?

[Mkilbride]

Sadly never. The studio is shuttering.

[Sgt.JESUS]

The coop update is the first one after the next patch, which will revamp the crucible, for some reason, hate that place hehehe.

[Blowfeld]

Still on track for 2024 😉

[Gyson]

Originally posted by Rod:

Waiting for the coop patch to play! Any date yet?

Multiplayer is no longer the first major update, despite what the Early Access roadmap continues to advertise (which is a point of frustration all on its own).

Unfortunately, people complained about the the current state of the Crucible, which was just put in as a placeholder activity until it could be fleshed out much later in the development schedule. Regardless, some players unrealistically expected to get hundreds of hours of content out of that system and a game that had been in early access for a handful of weeks.

To address these complaints, the developers have opted to push work on the Crucible to the front of the schedule, and the multiplayer update which was advertised as being the next (first) major update to release has been pushed back to some unknown date.

We essentially have a core feature that will impact nearly every aspect of the game and is in dire need of thorough testing by players (multiplayer) being delayed in the interest of dumping development time into an end-game side activity (the Crucible) that will only satisfy and occupy the few players (500-1000 according to Steam Charts) currently grinding away at this game, likely leaving them even angrier once the inevitable progression wipe happens before launch.

[Stret]

Originally posted by Gyson:

Originally posted by Rod:

Waiting for the coop patch to play! Any date yet?

Multiplayer is no longer the first major update, despite what the Early Access roadmap continues to advertise (which is a point of frustration all on its own).

Unfortunately, people complained about the the current state of the Crucible, which was just put in as a placeholder activity until it could be fleshed out much later in the development schedule. Regardless, some players unrealistically expected to get hundreds of hours of content out of that system and a game that had been in early access for a handful of weeks.

To address these complaints, the developers have opted to push work on the Crucible to the front of the schedule, and the multiplayer update which was advertised as being the next (first) major update to release has been pushed back to some unknown date.

We essentially have a core feature that will impact nearly every aspect of the game and is in dire need of thorough testing by players (multiplayer) being delayed in the interest of dumping development time into an end-game side activity (the Crucible) that will only satisfy and occupy the few players (500-1000 according to Steam Charts) currently grinding away at this game, likely leaving them even angrier once the inevitable progression wipe happens before launch.

I dont think they are delaying crucible because of player feedback. It doesnt really make sense, updating the crucible is as much value as updating anything else, people are for more interested in multiplayer/areas/sidequests than more crucible. The feedback was straight up not that, and what people want the most isnt that either.

If i were to guess, they went with crucible first because its easier and faster to produce.

The release wasnt great and the game is growing poorer and poorer in terms of attention & playercount (normal for a singleplayer game, but this one specifically has less players than the dev's previous Ori game very frequently, its straight up very poor for what this game was supposed to be).
Basic investigation lets you know that the developer team can sometimes be a bit of a mess that often tosses priorities around. All things considered, it doesnt look very promising, though it does help explain why theyd suddenly choose to prioritize Crucible over The Breach or Multiplayer. They definitely need to put things out soon, because this poor start already dealt a lot of damage to this game's image and lasting power.

Dont get me wrong, when i say that they need to put something out fast, i dont wanna say that you should generally rush content and prioritize hype above the actual quality of the game. Thats why you dont put out the game in such a shabby state, even for EA standards, at $40, in the first place : in order to prevent all these problems

[Gyson]

Originally posted by Stret:

I dont think they are delaying crucible because of player feedback. It doesnt really make sense, updating the crucible is as much value as updating anything else, people are for more interested in multiplayer/areas/sidequests than more crucible. The feedback was straight up not that, and what people want the most isnt that either.

All I can do is go by what they've said publicly.

Question asked to Thomas: Are we still expecting multiplayer to be before the breach as per the roadmap, or plans changed and we’ll see the breach first?

Thomas: We actually did change plans a little bit based on player feedback. The next bigger thing we're releasing is turning the Crucible into what we always wanted it to be.

Later on there were some additional comments from Thomas about hoping players will be ok with them placing a large focus on the Crucible first, difficult choices to make, never making everyone happy, etc.

Keep in mind that players waiting patiently for the advertised multiplayer update were doing just that.. sitting quietly and waiting because they were told it was actively being worked and the first major update to be released. There was really nothing else to say at that point about it.

But there were players (not many given the metrics, but actively noisy) who wanted endless content from this game and they were constantly complaining about the lack of end-game content, over and over again. They were the constant squeaky wheel, and they ended up getting the grease.

Edit: And just to add.. I do suspect you are correct, that the shift occurred partly based on what was easier or what they preferred to work on. I'm just trying to give them the benefit of the doubt because the alternative would be really disappointing given that at least some copies of Wicked were sold based on what they advertised on their roadmap.

[Stret]

Nobody asked for constant replayable endless content. People asked for content at all. The $40 game growing bigger than a 6hr of content padded to 15-20. Im sure almost all these posts would be happier with The Breach than a crucible update

Like i said, yeah people want content, but Crucible being chosen over The Breach or Multiplayer isnt because of whiny noise players, and its certainly more due to the developer's own choice and condition

[Mr. Underhill]

Originally posted by Gyson:

Originally posted by Stret:

I dont think they are delaying crucible because of player feedback. It doesnt really make sense, updating the crucible is as much value as updating anything else, people are for more interested in multiplayer/areas/sidequests than more crucible. The feedback was straight up not that, and what people want the most isnt that either.

All I can do is go by what they've said publicly.

Question asked to Thomas: Are we still expecting multiplayer to be before the breach as per the roadmap, or plans changed and we’ll see the breach first?

Thomas: We actually did change plans a little bit based on player feedback. The next bigger thing we're releasing is turning the Crucible into what we always wanted it to be.

Later on there were some additional comments from Thomas about hoping players will be ok with them placing a large focus on the Crucible first, difficult choices to make, never making everyone happy, etc.

Keep in mind that players waiting patiently for the advertised multiplayer update were doing just that.. sitting quietly and waiting because they were told it was actively being worked and the first major update to be released. There was really nothing else to say at that point about it.

But there were players (not many given the metrics, but actively noisy) who wanted endless content from this game and they were constantly complaining about the lack of end-game content, over and over again. They were the constant squeaky wheel, and they ended up getting the grease.

Edit: And just to add.. I do suspect you are correct, that the shift occurred partly based on what was easier or what they preferred to work on. I'm just trying to give them the benefit of the doubt because the alternative would be really disappointing given that at least some copies of Wicked were sold based on what they advertised on their roadmap.

Here's some additional info provided by Thomas Mahler since the statements above.

On June 14th he posted on X:
"Yup, sorry for being a bit more silent recently, we’re just all super heads down on this upcoming update 😀👍

As I started before, the major theme this time is diving deeper into the Crucible with us working on whole new systems, but there will be good changes across the board! 👍"

On June 17th he posted on X:
"We usually have very long discussions on this stuff where we decide on what makes the most sense for Moon while also looking at what people want to see the most 👍

For now what we're hearing is simply more content and multiplayer. So we'll be addressing both! We're not just adding more endgame content, we're also refining the core while we have other people in the team focus on wrapping up the things that we couldn't get done for the Early Access launch.

And we think it makes the most sense to take a bit more time with the updates and properly theme and market them so that people don't get drip-feed updates, but every time we come out with an update, it should feel like a big splash! 👍❤️"

Basically they have taken the recent feedback regarding adding the Crucible update first before the multiplayer update, and decided to include work on both systems. How that changes the content of the next patch is to be seen. Based on the time since Patch 2, and now, it may be more substantial than we think. I guess we'll see.

You can just follow the socials-feed in the NRftW Discord channel for his posts. He also joins in the discussion in wicked-main every so often to talk about the ideas they are toying with, and clown around with folks. Overall they are pretty receptive, and sympathetic to the communities feedback. I get the sense that they prefer Discord's back and forth communicative nature vs, discussion boards like this. Ultimately there is info out there regarding the content release schedule, and the current ideas they are cooking into the game. I get the sense that Discord is the environment they prefer to engage with the players. My guess it's just Thomas', and Gennadiy's preferred medium. Take that however you want, but that's where the info is.

[Gyson]

Originally posted by Mr. Underhill:

You can just follow the socials-feed in the NRftW Discord channel for his posts. He also joins in the discussion in wicked-main every so often to talk about the ideas they are toying with, and clown around with folks. Overall they are pretty receptive, and sympathetic to the communities feedback. I get the sense that they prefer Discord's back and forth communicative nature vs, discussion boards like this. Ultimately there is info out there regarding the content release schedule, and the current ideas they are cooking into the game. I get the sense that Discord is the environment they prefer to engage with the players. My guess it's just Thomas', and Gennadiy's preferred medium. Take that however you want, but that's where the info is.

That may be their preferred medium but if a developer wants to take advantage of Steam's Early Access program then they should be adhering to Steam's expectations on communicating with their Early Access customers.

You must include Steam Early Access branding and information about the current state of your game on any third-party sites where you are distributing Steam keys for your Early Access game.

Make sure you set expectations properly everywhere you talk about your game. Be transparent with your community. For example, if you know your updates during Early Access will break save files, make sure you tell players up front. And say this everywhere you sell your Steam keys.

They're selling Steam keys on Steam. Not Discord. Not Twitter. No one is suggesting they shouldn't talk there, only that they should be communicating here as well. That's part of the whole Early Access expectation. It's not just players that need to understand how Early Access works.

[Torginsson]

maan I'm waiting for the coop update because I started playing it but dont want to continue cuz its soo good that I want to experience everything for the firs time with a friend

[Octavian Giaus]

Originally posted by Stret:

Nobody asked for constant replayable endless content. People asked for content at all. The $40 game growing bigger than a 6hr of content padded to 15-20. Im sure almost all these posts would be happier with The Breach than a crucible update

Like i said, yeah people want content, but Crucible being chosen over The Breach or Multiplayer isnt because of whiny noise players, and its certainly more due to the developer's own choice and condition

You should not think for other people, you are way off. The game needs content.
Co-op will do nothing with the limited content. That is the end of the conversation.
You and your boyfriends can go outside take your shirts off, hold hands and run through a field of daisy's faster than you could play a co-op game.

The developer understands that, most people who play, understand that.
The I want crowd doesn't get it. But you get your participation trophy for trying.

[Stret]

Originally posted by Octavian Giaus:

You should not think for other people, you are way off. The game needs content.

I have no idea what you mean by this, i directly said the game needs content and that the current state of the game isnt adequate. I was just saying people didnt ask for a SPECIFIC kind of content, that being endless and repeatable.

Co-op will do nothing with the limited content. That is the end of the conversation.

Ok, what does that have to do with anything? Judging by their own roadmap, Crucible gets in the way of The Breach, which is the actually interesting thing here. Surely people would be more interested in actual new areas, sidequests, plot and general progression than pure repetition?

Not sure if you are completely misunderstanding the point of the post, but i was specifically speaking against someone claiming that the choice to go with crucible over other parts of content were due to whiny players wanting immediate replayability.

[Rod]

Originally posted by Arthur Morgan:

maan I'm waiting for the coop update because I started playing it but dont want to continue cuz its soo good that I want to experience everything for the firs time with a friend

Same for me!

[OutR@gE]

There's not enough content for co-op. I certainly hope they finish the main game content before worrying about anything else

[Yung Gooner]

Originally posted by Octavian Giaus:

Originally posted by Stret:

Nobody asked for constant replayable endless content. People asked for content at all. The $40 game growing bigger than a 6hr of content padded to 15-20. Im sure almost all these posts would be happier with The Breach than a crucible update

Like i said, yeah people want content, but Crucible being chosen over The Breach or Multiplayer isnt because of whiny noise players, and its certainly more due to the developer's own choice and condition

You should not think for other people, you are way off. The game needs content.
Co-op will do nothing with the limited content. That is the end of the conversation.
You and your boyfriends can go outside take your shirts off, hold hands and run through a field of daisy's faster than you could play a co-op game.

The developer understands that, most people who play, understand that.
The I want crowd doesn't get it. But you get your participation trophy for trying.

I don’t think most people bought this for a roguelike endless dungeon….