5 years and just v0.22?

[D z 9 .]

ok, v1.0 so at 2045.

[VectorStorm_Leanne]

Hi! I get that 5 years in early access can seem like a lot, so I'm not gonna try and say differently there. What I will say though, is that you can see there are regular updates to the game here on Steam, and if you hop in to our Discord you can also see that our solo full time dev works on this tirelessly. We literally *just* put another update out on the test branch. One person working full time on a game at a pace that is healthy and comfortable for them is okay :) Progress is being made!

[Xantanash]

Originally posted by D z 9 .:

ok, v1.0 so at 2045.

I was coming to forums to ask the same thing.

Originally posted by VectorStorm_Leanne:

Hi! I get that 5 years in early access can seem like a lot, so I'm not gonna try and say differently there. What I will say though, is that you can see there are regular updates to the game here on Steam, and if you hop in to our Discord you can also see that our solo full time dev works on this tirelessly. We literally *just* put another update out on the test branch. One person working full time on a game at a pace that is healthy and comfortable for them is okay :) Progress is being made!

People now, they think they can sell you a game in Early Access and just because it's a solo dev means it can take 5-10 years no worries... just like TFP, the solo dev received money for EA sales and should have hired more devs.

[half life 3: the card game]

Originally posted by Xantanash:

Originally posted by D z 9 .:

ok, v1.0 so at 2045.

I was coming to forums to ask the same thing.

Originally posted by VectorStorm_Leanne:

Hi! I get that 5 years in early access can seem like a lot, so I'm not gonna try and say differently there. What I will say though, is that you can see there are regular updates to the game here on Steam, and if you hop in to our Discord you can also see that our solo full time dev works on this tirelessly. We literally *just* put another update out on the test branch. One person working full time on a game at a pace that is healthy and comfortable for them is okay :) Progress is being made!

People now, they think they can sell you a game in Early Access and just because it's a solo dev means it can take 5-10 years no worries... just like TFP, the solo dev received money for EA sales and should have hired more devs.

This is wrong in multiple layers.

1 - Solo dev does not give him any sort of pass, since, it is a damn product/hobby and he can do whatever he wants with it, as long as the game is keep updated in Early Access. It's not like... he abandoned the game, there are crazy amount of updates came for this game.

2 - Hire other devs? That does not work that way. If you have vision for something you wish to create and you do not wish other people to meddle with it, or you just want to do it alone, you simply do it alone.


Don't get into the illusion of "I heard people say this about Hearthbound, therefore, if a game takes too much time in EA, I should have a bias for that game too" nonsense, generalizing the entire EA games by a lone bad actor is very wrong to do

[Mystery404H]

Originally posted by half life 3: the card game:

Originally posted by Xantanash:

I was coming to forums to ask the same thing.



People now, they think they can sell you a game in Early Access and just because it's a solo dev means it can take 5-10 years no worries... just like TFP, the solo dev received money for EA sales and should have hired more devs.

This is wrong in multiple layers.

1 - Solo dev does not give him any sort of pass, since, it is a damn product/hobby and he can do whatever he wants with it, as long as the game is keep updated in Early Access. It's not like... he abandoned the game, there are crazy amount of updates came for this game.

2 - Hire other devs? That does not work that way. If you have vision for something you wish to create and you do not wish other people to meddle with it, or you just want to do it alone, you simply do it alone.


Don't get into the illusion of "I heard people say this about Hearthbound, therefore, if a game takes too much time in EA, I should have a bias for that game too" nonsense, generalizing the entire EA games by a lone bad actor is very wrong to do

I would also like to add that TFP (I'm assuming you're talking about The Fun Pimps and 7 Days to Die), while they did take 10 years, used that time not only to remove placeholder assets but also experiment with game design. Ultimately, as someone who not only has played that game but also knows someone who literally has been playing since early alpha and considers it his favorite game, sometimes games need time to develop and flourish.

Also, a game being in Early Access means nothing if the game is fun. This game is fun, especially if you love building. Being in EA just means that the game will change a lot, meaning that new stuff is expected.

Give the devs time, and the game will be better in the end.

[D z 9 .]

Originally posted by half life 3: the card game:

Originally posted by Xantanash:

I was coming to forums to ask the same thing.



People now, they think they can sell you a game in Early Access and just because it's a solo dev means it can take 5-10 years no worries... just like TFP, the solo dev received money for EA sales and should have hired more devs.

This is wrong in multiple layers.

1 - Solo dev does not give him any sort of pass, since, it is a damn product/hobby and he can do whatever he wants with it, as long as the game is keep updated in Early Access. It's not like... he abandoned the game, there are crazy amount of updates came for this game.

2 - Hire other devs? That does not work that way. If you have vision for something you wish to create and you do not wish other people to meddle with it, or you just want to do it alone, you simply do it alone.


Don't get into the illusion of "I heard people say this about Hearthbound, therefore, if a game takes too much time in EA, I should have a bias for that game too" nonsense, generalizing the entire EA games by a lone bad actor is very wrong to do

That wasn't exactly a criticism. Just a basic calculation.
[0.2 = 5 years, so 1.0 = 25 years.] [2020+25=2045].
I wouldn't even be here if I didn't like the game, and I wish it were developed faster. But okay, we're making progress, and that's what matters. Good job!

[MycroftCanadaNS]

Originally posted by D z 9 .:

ok, v1.0 so at 2045.

Quality takes time. Project Zomboid has been in development since 2011, and that game is well worth the wait.

[Dudeus]

Patience is a virtue, and forums are hell.

[Volk]

Originally posted by VectorStorm_Leanne:

you can see there are regular updates to the game here on Steam

lol

[Ender]

The only thing i care about to check on an early access game is the updates, and as long as their are worthwhile updates, not just minor things then this is worth it, couldnt care if it was 5 years or 50, if theres content, and there is, its great, and this game in particular i got quite a bit of game time out of, and the last i played was 4 months ago and theyve gotten some great new content since then so the haters could chill...

[VstaR]

If a game is in EA, you know its a product which is to be considered incomplete.
As a customer please be aware of this, and when you buy it, you accept the risk it might be an incomplete experience, and might never be complete or up to your expectations.

As for version reading to make predictions, in software development, its not a liniar expressed version count like 0.1, 0.2, 0.3, ~~ 0.8, 0.9, 1.0. It only represents x.x.x = major.minor.patch. Meaning that unless anyone said there will be exactly 9 minor releases and then a major release it will not predict a thing about progress. So please don't use the version number as an indicator for release out of EA. It could even continue like 0.9, 0.10, 0.11, 0.12 and so on or go major after 0.5, only the dev will know.

My advice for Early Access games is to check if there is a developers roadmap, and check player reviews on the current EA state. If you doubt about the current state, just move on and perhaps leave a follow to check again later

[Tensar]

To me it's acceptable if a game is still updated, but I agree that sux and could probably be faster. But I wouldn't complain much about it

I don't even have the game but I continue to follow it because it's updated, if there wasn't any update anymore i wouldn't buy anyway.

[Yinoxa]

i've had the game in my library for aaagess and i've just been watchin'. i do hope they can find like-minded devs to help but i understand not wanting to, and to keep their vision pure.

[Multi(ple) Cults]

Originally posted by InsertGenericNameHere:

Originally posted by VANGUARD:

Rage bait.
Or maybe this sort of personality is the result of this atrocious "customer is king" mentality?
In any case, what Early Access is has been clearly defined by Steam and people like him need to stop making up their own rules, telling devs what they ought to do.

You can tell from the way they post that there opinion can be discarded. People are entitled to opinions, but those opinions can clearly be wrong.

That said, OP, I say this is a fantastic concept for a game and the DEV, who I don't know but suspect probably has a life with a regular job and possibly family, is still rolling out interesting updates and QOL fixes consistently. At this rate, though slow, the game will eventually be fantastic by the time it's 1.0

My only worry is the DEV will get fatigued and just decide to call it quits, claiming 1.0 before there vision is every really realized fully.

So it's worth noting, Trevor (the singular programmer for this) actually does this as his job, he works on it tirelessly, every day, and talks about it on occasion when asked in the discord.

The entire reason people say to join the discord (though it's understandable if people don't wish to, for a variety of reasons) is because there's a channel there dedicated to specifically showing the changes and updates Trevor makes to the code live in the dev build, that channel shows that Trevor commits *at minimum* 5 updates a *day* to the dev build, to the point where myself and a few others have *begged* him to take a break sometimes on a few occasions, as he's worked on the game even while sick.

The thing to note here is that this is, essentially, Trevor's second game he's ever made, on a custom engine he's crafted from scratch. This very update we just got for terrain and rivers was something Trevor said wouldn't be possible because the Engine just wasnt made for it but would be something he'd be doing for the 3rd game (as yes, he's mentioned wanting to make a 3rd with all the features people have wanted for this one but the engine wouldn't permit.)

However because so many people badly requested it, mainly on the discord but also here in the discussions, Trevor worked on a way to make it possible in some form.

That's not to excuse the whole "5 years later, still in EA" thing, but Trevor does work *incredibly* hard on this to give people what they want, and with a solo dev and this being their second game, they're still learning and making things as they go.

I know I sound like an incredible fanboy right now, but I just wanted to get the facts of the situation for this games dev cycle out there!

[Golden Johny]

Trevor is too egotistical to hire someone to help him. Look at how Norland started and how many steps it took in a few months. The pace is really slow, and regular updates? Unnecessary updates at the beginning. Dungeons that didn't bring anything if you didn't have the basics of economics or crafting. That took half a year. Translation into foreign languages, which also took several months instead of content.

[VANGUARD]

Hiring people takes money.
So the question is if there's even the necessary financial leeway to do so.