Installa Steam
Accedi
|
Lingua
简体中文 (cinese semplificato)
繁體中文 (cinese tradizionale)
日本語 (giapponese)
한국어 (coreano)
ไทย (tailandese)
Български (bulgaro)
Čeština (ceco)
Dansk (danese)
Deutsch (tedesco)
English (inglese)
Español - España (spagnolo - Spagna)
Español - Latinoamérica (spagnolo dell'America Latina)
Ελληνικά (greco)
Français (francese)
Indonesiano
Magyar (ungherese)
Nederlands (olandese)
Norsk (norvegese)
Polski (polacco)
Português (portoghese - Portogallo)
Português - Brasil (portoghese brasiliano)
Română (rumeno)
Русский (russo)
Suomi (finlandese)
Svenska (svedese)
Türkçe (turco)
Tiếng Việt (vietnamita)
Українська (ucraino)
Segnala un problema nella traduzione
Regole e linee guida per le discussioni
Segnala questo messaggio
Accusing TFP of all the worst intentions they can think of while they're doing the right thing that other devs should do : finish their game, fulfil their duties to the customers by doing what they've promised, allow us to test and comment to polish what they can and many more (no micro-tx, no DLC, low price, SP/MP, allow private servers, ...).
And all that for what ? Cause they are individually against some content changes, that's all I hear from them that isn't just baseless allegations.
Sure it's still selling well, but almost certainly not as fast as a new product would, plus a lot of those 2 million sales, or many more, would probably happen immediately if you stopped development and just announced the game was gold. It's also almost always selling at well below full price now, frequently a quarter of the original full price tag.
My issue is with this fantasy that 'deliberately keeping a game in EA while spending huge amounts of money continuing to develop it is a scam'. It just isn't. If you wanted to scam you grab the cash as fast as possible while doing the least amount of dev work you can get away with.
TFPs expenditure is the highest it's ever been, with all the new hires they've done. Their income is not. The rate of sales have been much higher in the past. Pushing the game out with work undone and features not included is how you make money at the expense of customer satisfaction. If you are just interested in making money you do NOT do all the work to make the game good and complete after your sales peak has passed.
Instead of spending the last year and a half working on 7DTD, they could have called it finished, banged out a new crappy half-assed game, ideally that reuses a lot of 7DTD assets, and sold 12 million copies of that. They could probably do that three or four times before their reputation was completely trashed. People like Cyanide studios have been doing exactly that for decades and still have a fanbase.
Thanks mate.
Good points, thanks Uncle Al.
I am not sure that his kind of "scam" is what is meant with early access abuse.
After all as far as i know EA has also different benefits and obligations on platforms like steam ect but to be honest here.. though i have to admit i don't know any specifics.
so that may be another ankle why ppl believe its ea-abuse.. rather then it being an outright scam.
People believe a lot of things, like the world being flat...
But Steam's early access is buyer beware to the point you are warned several times before purchase about it. There is no limits on time, etc. Just that the game runs
Scams and abuse would be the various unity package flips (aka just taking a bunch of assets, calling it a game and throwing it out there)
Yeah, you're not wrong. EA is absolutely buyer beware. Steam should have a quiz or test before people purchase an EA game so they can prove they understand what they're getting into. Based on thousands of forum posts that I've read I don't think even half of the people who buy Early Access games really know what they're purchasing.
Some people just won't listen to logic or science even when there are many facts and incontrovertible proof that they are wrong, and the flat earth example is one of the best you could have used.
It's not only buyer's be aware. even EA-Games have rules and regulations if they want to be on steam. i know that there are rules for it.. what i don't know are ALL the rules, regulations and differences between EA-released and Full-Releases of games.
or in regards to other litigations, rules and regulations like customer-protection-laws ( yes i know they seem to be almost useless for the gaming-industry.. but only almost).
I may not be able to phrase my words accordingly to get my point across this time but...
what i have seen so far, those who dismiss a possible abuse-attempt out of hand, they are doing so from a customer-developer connection point of view but IF it is happening with 7Days it is probably more from a developer-platform-connection point of view.
just to make it clear, i personally don't think this is the case here but i cannot and will not dismiss every possibility out of hand just because of that.
The terms and conditons are publicly available on steam for early access both for customers and developers/publishers
Some people see Macdallan as a hater who trashes on everything. I see someone who loves the game and wants it to be the best he/she feels it can be.
Some people see Jost as a white knight who only defends the game. But if you read his/her posts closer they're also critical of the game but is much more reserved and patient in seeing what the future holds.
These two could be drinking buddies. I can imagine that drunken moment they both realize they're arguing the same point.
And then there are a few people whose sole purpose is to whiteknight/hate without ever subjecting themselves to the same level of logic consistency they ask of others, and using it to insult and trash on people freely.
Concerning the "more modding capabilities" of that A21 message Jost quoted, Are the Devs removing any "assets" they don't use in the vanilla game they envision for A21 ?
Specific example, the water jars : they remove the ability to have jars, which is weird to me, that is ONE thing a survival game or even survivalists in general will all agree on, YOU NEED containers, and that alone justified the difference between some things not leaving an empty container and other things doing so (drinks and tin cans), they could have easily given other things an "empty" ressource gain (like getting a few scraps of plastic/metal/glass depending on what it was) instead of removing the water jars.
But they wanted the survival to get artificially harder, and now, if I'm correct, you have chrysanthem in your left hand, goldenrod in your right hand, you magically hold it over fire for a few seconds without burning yourself, and boom, you magically get a sealed glass jar of tea or some plastic bottle of pure mineral water that used to drop a glass container...
A bit lacking in consistency it was, and even more lacking it will be...
To me, it seems like it's just a heavily inconsistent way of artificially increasing survival difficulty, relative to thirst.
I'm okay with them finding "too much" jars in houses and such, but it's a loot problem, and given they are going to FORCE the looter playstyle in A21, I think it would have been better sorted with some loot chance % adjustments.
Even considering the murky jars, boiled jars, etc represent a whole range of things, that people would have left in their refrigerators, (I mean, how often have you met people that keep boiled water in jars in their refrigerators or cupboards ?) like "oh, this is an old apple juice bottle, got murky" "oh, this is some fizzy water that has gone stale", you probably wouldn't find that much laying around in every house.
Sure, people have enough to drink for a week usually, heck, I've always have at least one unopened six-pack of 1.5L water bottles, and plenty other things, but IF i'm the careful/lucky survivalist, that didn't get pepsied by zombies, chances are that other houses either 1) died fast, moderate amount of ressources left, 2) died slow, no ressources left, or 3) survived up til very recently, hoarded what they could find in other houses = plenty ressources. (reminder, it's about how you find that in EVERY house)
Removing the jars altogether seems like a bad idea, only to provoke even more looting and farming (water collectors) burnout on players.
About the "snow" being used for water bottle, a little bit of science here :
if you're going to put in "dew" collector in the game, How is that different from SNOW shoveling ? I mean, it's water too, change the quantities, don't let 1 snow = 1 liter of perfectly fine drinking water, put it like "10 snow for 1 jar", something like 1 snow = 1 point of water, but remember, IT IS SNOW, AKA DEMINERALIZED WATER. Drink this, and you'll get the runs (diarrhea
So you COULD use snow water with a more realistic "10-for-1" ratio, for chem station crafts (glue etc), but you'd risk getting the runs or another debuff if you consumed too much of it, EVEN with the HELMET MOD. People would have to add a mineral tablet/pill into those bottles of pure snow water to make it drinkable. SO, add a chem station recipe to slowly (aka you trade wood and time for it) get mineral from stones and sand or something, and craft your own "mineral tablets/pills", that you could also find sometime in houses but probably more frequently in pop-n-pills/ambulances.
Back to the assets though, will they leave the jar models, inventory icons, etc so modders can actually use them to..."fix" what TFP will have done in A21 ? I understand them removing old zombie models because of how they look and how much they weight, but a basic prop like a jar wouldn't be that worthy of removal, right ?
Seeing how they progress on the dev, outside of the "They keep changing what's working and not addressing issue X" rant (which is at least partially true),
I see they sometime SEE what the problem is, sometime don't;
sometime get a good idea about what would fix it, sometime don't;
sometime implement good solutions, sometime don't.
Not doubting of their goodwill here, but this "3-factors" leads more often than not to some sort of disappointment in the community.
ex :
problem : Players not playing the intended way even though the game's name is "7 days to die" and refers directly to the main event of the game, the bloodmoon night and hords. Players cheesing by driving around leaving zombies behind. Some other players want to feel the need to fight, the inability to flee as intended.
Ideal solution would be "so many zombies around that we cannot keep driving, even if we managed to, by holing up in our base we only attract an infinitesimal part of the millions of zombies traveling through the county, and by driving around we pull in so much more and make it even harder to flee or survive", but game engine limitations and computer specs impose something else.
Kept solution is "prevent them from using vehicles during BM without getting more aggro and risking breaking the vehicle"
Implementation is : "here, have those radioactive turbo vultures puking orbs of destruction at you and your vehicle while rubberband-following you at escape velocity speeds"
What solution should have been kept : "prevent them from using vehicles during BM"
Implementation would have been "Something in the red mist is preventing combustion engines to work" (a bit better than "hurr durr EMP that only affect cars and motorcycle even though they have no on-board computer or real electronics of any kind, but doesn't fry the lights and everything else in your base")
See, good vision of the problem, almost perfect solution, but terrible implementation.
And you're judged (VERY VOCALLY as you've all seen) by the lowest factor.
You can apply this to almost any part of the game, and you'll see, they vary on every factor on every part you analyze.
Meaning they ARE able to clearly see problems, but not always (which is why we, players, should voice our concerns),
they ARE able to find solutions, but not always (which is why, given it's an EA, we should be able to provide some to the devs, it's a priviledge we have to help them),
and they ARE able to implement things as perfectly as is humanly possible, but not always (which is why we should give our honest opinions, and not just fanboying/hating).
As stated above, it's always the lowest factor that is the most important.
Have a bad vision of the problem, even with a perfect solution and implementation, you'll have players criticize, justly, why the devs changed X or Y, or why they even spent time on that.
Have a bad solution, with perfect vision and implementation, and players will remind you constantly, and justly so, that you did a perfect work for something much needed, but the worst way possible. (imagine you dentist saying "You tend to get cavities (problem), so my solution is to remove all you teeth preventively" and then he proceeds to remove every single tooth painlessly and effortlessly, with minimal trauma and perfect cicatrisation, like it's a masterpiece of surgery).
Have a perfect vision and solution, with a bad implementation, and players will, justly, remind you constantly that your implementation is
If the devs answer to that last one is to say "we're not going to invest any time or ressources into that problem anymore", you cannot hold a grudge for the players thinking "ah, they're just going to sweep it under the rug, or pretend it's not going to be a problem anymore because they are changing X or Y for the 3rd time since I bought the game"
Maybe I'm not aware of something, but I think the devs, considering it's still EA, should have some E-poll system with a really long series of questions concerning past, present, and future features/aspects of the game, in order to help them figure out where they're going and how, even if it took an hour to answer, i'm pretty sure many of the players would like to have a go at it.
It's probably worth mentioning that 'Seven Days to Die' comes from how long infection took to kill you if untreated. Blood Moon hordes were added to the game long after the name was already in place.
That said, blood moon is now a central feature of the game and I'd agree that the designers vision is it shouldn't be able to be trivialised (if you've got it turned on in the first place).
Personally I have no problem with the turbo murder vultures. It's actually a more amusing solution than just 'car doesn't start'. Put yourself in the place of a first time player who doesn't read the boards (most won't). The first time your base is overrun by a horde you probably run for your vehicle. It won't start is a decent escalation of threat, but giving you a moment to think you're safe as you mash the accelerator, before 'oh my god they're catching up with the car' is a much better horror movie trope.
Happy we are able to make someone laugh, and honestly I only hate things that I feel are making the game worse. You're right, I do absolutely want this game to be as good as it can be and right now I feel TFP have lost their way, that the development of the game is off track and the game is becoming something that it wasn't meant to be, something it shouldn't be.
Yes, I think that JOST also wants this to be a great game, and likes the game a lot, but he's a lot more lenient than I am about questionable or bad things that are planned or implemented than I am to the pont where he defends things even if it's pretty obvious to some of us that they're going to be bad. He's content to wait and see what it'll bring but if I don't like something, or something I like is getting removed, then I'll speak up about it. I think that's the biggest divide with us.
Yeah, I could absolutely sit down and have a few beverages with JOST and argue for a few hours. Might be fun,. too.
Thanks for seeing beyond the little squabbles JOST and I have had. I'm glad someone understands.
Yeah, I remember that was the case a long time ago. Then the blood moon horde TD mini-game (because that's kind of what it is) was added (and it was given a 7 day timer [by default] because the game was called 7 days to die...) and then the game started to focus too much on that "feature" instead of the other elements of the game. It can be a major distraction from the other elements of the game and I'd rather have random, and dangerous, hordes showing up than have a blood moon horde night know they'll magically GPS directly to me for one night a week (or however often I set the blood moon).
I'd rather the zeds just get more dangerous at night but perhaps have a lower detection range, and see larger hordes of them during the day with them moving around a bit more than they do. The 5 to 8 zed groups that wander around now are pretty pathetic. You can easily drop them before they even get close. There's also not enough danger in using loud weapons. You don't draw large hordes, or every zed in a 500m radius, when you repeatedly fire loud weapons or use explosives. Only the zombies that are extremely close notice, and sometimes they don't even react.
I'd also rather faster enemies that can maybe catch your vehicle than have a ridiculous mechanic like "your vehicles don't work for tonight because reasons." It's a horrible idea to force players to play the TD Blood Moon (tm) part of the game in that manner. If I want to drive around all night and try to avoid the zeds then I should be allowed to do that, but if the zombies were numerous enough then driving around might not work very well. You might end up blocked in the middle of a huge horde and be unable to get away. More realistic vehicle handling and more realistic vehicle physics (including more realistic damage) would definitely help with this.