Install Steam
login
|
language
简体中文 (Simplified Chinese)
繁體中文 (Traditional Chinese)
日本語 (Japanese)
한국어 (Korean)
ไทย (Thai)
Български (Bulgarian)
Čeština (Czech)
Dansk (Danish)
Deutsch (German)
Español - España (Spanish - Spain)
Español - Latinoamérica (Spanish - Latin America)
Ελληνικά (Greek)
Français (French)
Italiano (Italian)
Bahasa Indonesia (Indonesian)
Magyar (Hungarian)
Nederlands (Dutch)
Norsk (Norwegian)
Polski (Polish)
Português (Portuguese - Portugal)
Português - Brasil (Portuguese - Brazil)
Română (Romanian)
Русский (Russian)
Suomi (Finnish)
Svenska (Swedish)
Türkçe (Turkish)
Tiếng Việt (Vietnamese)
Українська (Ukrainian)
Report a translation problem
Discussions Rules and Guidelines
Report this post
We have had the groundwork and I explained it. Two, we should have menu options that we can change before we start the game. Using F keys while in-game is a weird way of changing game options.
The 'Why' of there not being a whole slew of endless options for every little nitpicky thing any player could possibly want an option for is that every additional option is that much more work when testing every new build. The devs decided awhile back that they already had a good amount of options and that adding more was off the table till the game was nearing completion- Because a lot of the options people want can either be served by Mods, By the existing options, or are just QoL stuff that while nice aren't strictly necessary at this point.
I disagree with the Options Menu vs F keys thing, though; Personally I think either way is fine.. And that accessible shortcuts available while playing are preferable because it enables hotswapping a setting instead of having to stop what you're doing, enter a menu and all that- EG, Diablo 2's hotkey to change between old-D2 and new-D2 graphics; This function would really lose it's benefit if you had to stop and menu every time you want to change it- And it would lose the visual impact of getting to see one, then the other seamlessly and without a menu.
Okay, for one. Do you have any proof of this? Or is this your own personal opinion?
I'm only asking because if they did feel like they already had enough options then why spend more time adding the F7 option to everyone?
Don't get me wrong, I'm fine with adding visual shortcut options. I wont ever use them myself, but I understand it has a place from another players viewpoint than mine does.
But this can't be your only option either, especially in a game like this. If you're going to go that route (F7) to give players the options to switch between options then you can't just have the F shortcuts either. You need to add menu options.
Also, adding options in an obscure way like this makes it seem sketchy as if they DON"T want to add options. Just like they did with farming.
A lot of people play this game solo and limiting us to very few options is one of the main complaints every single major AAA title faces. TFP is not a triple A title andthey act like they are. That's not a good sign.
At least it's an upper corner thing afaik so it's not a middle screen warning like I feared at some point.
I'm interested in that F7 feature as I expect playing without UI would be quite challenging and very immersive. I may try it in combat and check the UI only when out of it and if necessary.
TFP had 6 months to gauge fan responses and react accordingly and they did nothing. They don't care or read feedback.
The reason I bring it up is that I think it's unfair to levy the accusation that they don't care or read feedback just because they didn't take what you perceive to have been a better path. They do read it, and often interact back over on the main forum as far as I'm aware.. At least in the dev discussion thread.
They also have access to a lot more avenues of feedback than you do. But, reading feedback does not intrinsically mean something will change because of it. Just to pose an example, It's highly likely that, in seeing the opinions on the forums, that they decided there wasn't an appreciable enough amount of pushback to change their plans; But they might have in mind that a quick fix to add a toggle might be warranted depending on how the full scale Public launch goes; After all, It's one thing to armchair lobby over a change you THINK will be this huge annoyance/problem; It's another entirely to get a lot of feedback from players actually interacting with the system.
Correct. You are not asking for some huge slew of new options- But my point is rather not about you, and more about everyone else... Why should the devs listen to you, Specifically You, Over everyone else who also want's a specific option? Why does Your option get to be special? Why not someone elses? If they add this QOL thing why not That QOL thing or the other QOL thing?
Yes- You're absolutely right, Adding the option probably isn't terribly difficult. But, Every new option is again, More work. Put it this way....
Let's take a Hypothetical game.. It has no options at all- You play it EXACTLY the way the devs decide.
Now add a loot chance option with 5 selections, 20, 40, 60, 80, and 100. Now there are 5 different cases that they have to test for on top of normal development.
Now add a loot respawn rate option with 5 selections- Now you have not just 10, but more than 10 because these options interact with eachother.
Now add another, and another- Every new option is more work to test; You need to make sure they all work, that they function as intended, that they properly interact with every other option that they could conceivably work with.
That was the devs first few years- Regularly adding in new options and gradually expanding the list of options and save settings and making their workload larger and larger.
There WAS proof of it, but I think it got eaten with the database migration when they updated the main forum. I'm afraid I wouldn't know where to find it if it still exists at this point. In any case, It's not personal opinion- But I can understand if you'd prefer to mistrust that since I can't readily provide proof.
To the latter bit, I'm speaking speculatively but, I'd say it's because we're now just about to be exiting the long push for more development with no new options.. Almost all intended features are in at this point, the most notable outstanding ones being Bandits, now slated for A22 which is supposed to have a much quicker turnaround time than A21 did.. And story.
So we're kindof out of the woods now- Or nearly, and they can more safely provide new options without fearing that it's going to bog down the development of the game- Indeed, we're pretty close to hitting beta at which point the sole focus is basically going to be bug fixing and optimizing and making sure everything works right while searching for the right version candidate for release- The perfect environment to be building in long requested QOL things.
Will DEFFINATLY be an option in the future, weather official or a mod.
why are you crying about it breaking immersion when it's a fantasy zombie game where you can pull a jeep out of your back pocket and carry 500 metric tons of materials ?
Something you and op are forgetting. We are in early access which means we are testers of the game given the priveledge of playing the game before it is finished. As testers we are TESTING the poi feature to see if it works and if everything is properly named. There is no way even a team as large as tfps qa can check every single poi. We as a collective have a far better chance to see every poi and to note if a poi does not have a proper name.
MIstakes happen, especially if you are looking at a data sheet naming everything that did not have a name. A syntax error could have happened preventing dishong from being called dishong for example.
People seem to be forgetting that. Poor devs and moderators for their constant battle with explaining things.
Edit: oh you are op.
However, I also remember the discussion Shurenai referenced.
Someone else was asking why tfp would not add their preferred menu option. The response was that each added menu option exponentially increases the time it takes to bug test all of the available option combinations with each new version.
It was also mentioned that newly added features need to be unable to be turned off by default. They need to be tested on a wide variety of systems to make sure there are not rare bugs that only show up on one specific set up or part.
Many things can still be changed via mods, of course. but if they are added to vanilla it won't be until much closer to gold release.
My stance isnt that it should be optional, my stance is that it just shouldnt be. At all. Shouldnt exist.
Why was this necessary? Getting yourself into a hairy situation you didnt expect is part of the fun of a survival game no? I'd like to see the feedback from new players that guided the developers to make this choice. Was it voluminous enough to do this... really? No, it wasnt. <<< That's a guess, but cmon... probably not. SO - this was probably done to make the game more new user friendly, perhaps to increases sales. No problem with that amigo. Business is business and it runs on cash.
Bigger POI = more zombies. Hm! Didnt need a guide for that. And for the POIs that appear small and end up being a giant underground bunker... isnt that where common sense comes in? You go into the house, it seems small, you go down a ladder and it exposes a GIANT complex. Isnt there where you say... "im probably not equipped for this".
I dont know. I feel like this change presumes there's some lack of critical thinking in their playerbase.
Either way cant always get what you want, I'll deal.
OP is trying to have a conversation about it. Nobody asked Lao Tzu for a quick haiku on it. Thus far it's been a good conversation if you actually read the comments before adding your substandard quip.
Half the fun of going into a new POI is not being sure whether or not I'm in over my head. Having the game spoon feed me the difficulty rating rather than discovering it for myself is going to remove one of the few moments in the game that made me feel nervous, or at least cautious, which was a good thing.
Whether from TFP or from mods turning that off would be great, assuming it is going to display in a way that I can't easily avoid it.