Is the game complete?

[Thorny264]

Had this in the library for a little while but been waiting until it's got all it's content to start. Last roadmap I can see had 2022 down for the finish but I don't think some if not all of the items like summoning or nekaroo farming/breeding got implemented?

Does anyone know if there are still planned content updates or if the game is complete as is bar minor patches?

Cheers,

[Zzyl_tsw]

In the latest update (15/02 ?), they mention "unveiling new content" in the next update.

-----------------------------------------------------------------
What's Next?
Next month's fourth Community Update will bring fixes and new features to the overall UI as we continue to improve your gameplay experience.

We're also looking forward to unveiling an upcoming update with more content that will dramatically change the entry point into the adventure.

[Survival Gamer]

Does any game get "complete" in 2023? Sounds like a 1990s question.

[Mike_Kelehan]

The story is complete, but quality of life improvements keep coming, and there's talk of new content maybe happening. I played it through and had a great time.

[DedZedNub]

In some ways, perhaps the 1990s are looking like some good old days. Originally, I didn't think so when I lived it, but it is growing on me as a concept as time moves on. Yes, even with gaming as the topic.

[tracksone]

Originally posted by DedZedNub:

In some ways, perhaps the 1990s are looking like some good old days. Originally, I didn't think so when I lived it, but it is growing on me as a concept as time moves on. Yes, even with gaming as the topic.

Sadly i must remind people that in ths 90s, video games indeed released as a "complete" game but not really. Nearly all games were bug riddled to different degrees, isntead people learned to use them as feature. Games were no less buggy in the 90s. They couldnt just patch it and move on, many games would be fixed and re printed. Yall just didnt care

[Zzyl_tsw]

Originally posted by tracksone:

Sadly i must remind people that in ths 90s, video games indeed released as a "complete" game but not really. Nearly all games were bug riddled to different degrees, isntead people learned to use them as feature. Games were no less buggy in the 90s. They couldnt just patch it and move on, many games would be fixed and re printed. Yall just didnt care

The feature "point" might be true, perhaps more on pc.
But i dont remember seeing many (Any ?) bugs on my few Snes games : Zelda 3 or FF6, or BoF2...
Maybe there were bugs, but i did not see any while playing multiple times.

[Odai]

Originally posted by Survival Gamer:

Does any game get "complete" in 2023? Sounds like a 1990s question.

in 1990s we didnt had these question, because every game WAS complete! xD

[bacon.]

Originally posted by Odai:

Originally posted by Survival Gamer:

Does any game get "complete" in 2023? Sounds like a 1990s question.

in 1990s we didnt had these question, because every game WAS complete! xD

no

[bacon.]

Originally posted by tracksone:

Originally posted by DedZedNub:

In some ways, perhaps the 1990s are looking like some good old days. Originally, I didn't think so when I lived it, but it is growing on me as a concept as time moves on. Yes, even with gaming as the topic.

Sadly i must remind people that in ths 90s, video games indeed released as a "complete" game but not really. Nearly all games were bug riddled to different degrees, isntead people learned to use them as feature. Games were no less buggy in the 90s. They couldnt just patch it and move on, many games would be fixed and re printed. Yall just didnt care

This is literally why there are so many versions of Street Fighter games. They would send out cartridges for Nintendo and Super Nintendo that had game breaking bugs and you were just stuck with it until you bought the Ultra or the Ultra Turbo version of the game for the 3rd time.

[tracksone]

Originally posted by Zzyl_tsw:

Originally posted by tracksone:

Sadly i must remind people that in ths 90s, video games indeed released as a "complete" game but not really. Nearly all games were bug riddled to different degrees, isntead people learned to use them as feature. Games were no less buggy in the 90s. They couldnt just patch it and move on, many games would be fixed and re printed. Yall just didnt care

The feature "point" might be true, perhaps more on pc.
But i dont remember seeing many (Any ?) bugs on my few Snes games : Zelda 3 or FF6, or BoF2...
Maybe there were bugs, but i did not see any while playing multiple times.

Every speed run relies on exploiting bugs in those old games. Not everything is a game breaking situation. But all speedrunners utilize bugs and glitches

[AH-1 Cobra]

Originally posted by tracksone:

Sadly i must remind people that in ths 90s, video games indeed released as a "complete" game but not really. Nearly all games were bug riddled to different degrees, isntead people learned to use them as feature. Games were no less buggy in the 90s. They couldnt just patch it and move on, many games would be fixed and re printed. Yall just didnt care

Console games were generally free of major game breaking bugs. But yeah, if there was a small bug or some kind of exploit in a game, nobody really cared that much. The choice was to use it or not, if you even found it. Usually something along the lines of letting you duplicate items, or progression skip. There was a whole different culture around using exploits as features back in the 1990s, and gaming magazines would typically share these with the community. There was even speculation that some of these exploits may have been intentionally put there for the players to find.

Actual game breaking bugs that kept you from progressing were extremely rare. Games on all the cartridge based systems were rock solid and completely bug free or had extremely minor stuff people might consider a feature, and extremely rarely some kind of major issue.

Another important thing to note is that they actually paid people to play test games in the 1990s and earlier. These were skilled professionals who knew how to explore the game properly and try to break something, and more importantly they knew how to write up proper bug reports. This would explain why there were typically no major issues, but an occasional bizarre bug or exploit might have made it past testing. That's much preferable compared to today where AAA studios rush out unfinished, unoptimized, and virtually untested launch titles because me and you are expected to do the testing, and they got the nerve to wonder why people are mad and review bomb their games.

So nobody can tell me that it was just as bad in the 1990s, but they just couldn't patch their games. I got a couple hundred NES, SNES, megadrive games and 100% of them are fully playable with minor bugs at best, and nearly all of them are entirely bug free. No wonky performance/optimization/stability issues either.

[tracksone]

Originally posted by crimsonedge11:

Originally posted by tracksone:

Sadly i must remind people that in ths 90s, video games indeed released as a "complete" game but not really. Nearly all games were bug riddled to different degrees, isntead people learned to use them as feature. Games were no less buggy in the 90s. They couldnt just patch it and move on, many games would be fixed and re printed. Yall just didnt care

Console games were generally free of major game breaking bugs. But yeah, if there was a small bug or some kind of exploit in a game, nobody really cared that much. The choice was to use it or not, if you even found it. Usually something along the lines of letting you duplicate items, or progression skip. There was a whole different culture around using exploits as features back in the 1990s, and gaming magazines would typically share these with the community. There was even speculation that some of these exploits may have been intentionally put there for the players to find.

Actual game breaking bugs that kept you from progressing were extremely rare. Games on all the cartridge based systems were rock solid and completely bug free or had extremely minor stuff people might consider a feature, and extremely rarely some kind of major issue.

Another important thing to note is that they actually paid people to play test games in the 1990s and earlier. These were skilled professionals who knew how to explore the game properly and try to break something, and more importantly they knew how to write up proper bug reports. This would explain why there were typically no major issues, but an occasional bizarre bug or exploit might have made it past testing. That's much preferable compared to today where AAA studios rush out unfinished, unoptimized, and virtually untested launch titles because me and you are expected to do the testing, and they got the nerve to wonder why people are mad and review bomb their games.

So nobody can tell me that it was just as bad in the 1990s, but they just couldn't patch their games. I got a couple hundred NES, SNES, megadrive games and 100% of them are fully playable with minor bugs at best, and nearly all of them are entirely bug free. No wonky performance/optimization/stability issues either.

I stopped reading after your FIRST sentence because its hilariously wrong. S

[Zzyl_tsw]

Originally posted by tracksone:

I stopped reading after your FIRST sentence because its hilariously wrong. S

Depends on what you consider game breaking bug.
But for the "main population" on the "main sold games" by genre, i would say "game breaking" bugs were few or non-existent.
Nowdays you can look for "those existing bug" via google, but for most of them to occur, you have to do very specific actions, that almost no player will do while playing the games...