Εγκατάσταση Steam
Σύνδεση
|
Γλώσσα
简体中文 (Απλοποιημένα κινεζικά)
繁體中文 (Παραδοσιακά κινεζικά)
日本語 (Ιαπωνικά)
한국어 (Κορεατικά)
ไทย (Ταϊλανδικά)
Български (Βουλγαρικά)
Čeština (Τσεχικά)
Dansk (Δανικά)
Deutsch (Γερμανικά)
English (Αγγλικά)
Español – España (Ισπανικά – Ισπανία)
Español – Latinoamérica (Ισπανικά – Λατινική Αμερική)
Français (Γαλλικά)
Italiano (Ιταλικά)
Bahasa Indonesia (Ινδονησιακά)
Magyar (Ουγγρικά)
Nederlands (Ολλανδικά)
Norsk (Νορβηγικά)
Polski (Πολωνικά)
Português (Πορτογαλικά – Πορτογαλία)
Português – Brasil (Πορτογαλικά – Βραζιλία)
Română (Ρουμανικά)
Русский (Ρωσικά)
Suomi (Φινλανδικά)
Svenska (Σουηδικά)
Türkçe (Τουρκικά)
Tiếng Việt (Βιετναμικά)
Українська (Ουκρανικά)
Αναφορά προβλήματος μετάφρασης
Thank him for what: PR-gibberish, avoiding conversations with critical customers and trying to spin the sorry state of the game as an unavoidable result of the star constellations during development?
When was the last time you thanked your waiter/hairdresser/postman/cashier etc. for doing their job?
Yes, it's my job to talk to the community and relay how people are feeling about the game to the developers, and then to communicate the work on the game to the community. I don't want to be your enemy, and even if it would be too much for you to be my "friend," I am supposed to be "working for you" too. I advocate for the community to the developers, and then from the developers to the community. I'm the one who processes all of the community bugs to the development team, helps write the build notes, answers and adjusts all of the backer information and orders and writes up the newsletters. The idea is to keep you all informed and in the loop.
It's true that I haven't been around since the beginning. I joined in late August of 2017, 2 full years after the KS had already funded, and just a year before we would ultimately launch. I didn't even know the full extent of the KS rewards until I started working through our commitments, coordinating rewards, and making sure the team was working on those while fleshing out the game.
We have admitted that mismanagement was one of the many large factors that damaged UA's development. We lost sight of the vision of the game, which made it hard to tie all of our components together as individuals worked on entire systems. The BioWare article that recently came out jumps to mind. The team that launched UA in November 2018 only has some of the same people that started the KS in 2015. This is all on top of a dwindling budget and we started to crunch about two months before launch.
Not everyone had the same information, and a lot of this "deception" manifested due to scoping down based on budget, general mismanagement, a confusing production pipeline, and many other factors. We've improved a lot since launch with new production strategies (thank you, Rich) and we've had the opportunity to work on updates that align reasonably closer with the original vision for UA, with scope and budget still in mind.
Nothing about UA is innovative. Every element in the game has already been done, and done better include the physics and fire propagation. In many ways it's actually regressed (storytelling, save system, rpg elements ect.)
All you've given us is obvious PR speak. You always dodge the real questions either ignoring them or giving non answers. You STILL haven't properly explained why UA didn't launch in early access past non answers like "we weren't aware we needed to" and "we needed to release it immediately which are both completely BS answers to the question.
Maybe I need to bold those sections / only answer one thing at a time.
We had a deadline of November. If we didn't launch in November, we would not launch at all.
There were miscommunications between the various levels when we signed off that made multiple groups believe that Early Access was not possible / not an option and that the game was ready.
I've given you an answer but you seem to not trust it because you're dead-set convinced that EA was a viable answer. I'm not even denying that EA would have worked better for us on launch, if we had the option.
We didn't think we had that option.
Again: we had a deadline and a contract that we had already extended from October and were already working on our own funds to finance past that date.
Which I think seems a suspicious reason given the post-release updates and the upcoming console release(s).
Did you not even bother to approach your contract holder with the option of early access? Why wasn't EA considered from the start or even at the point where you started to realize youd be paying out of pocket? And how did the miscommunication happen when people were very vocal about the games problem during the backers beta. This stuff just seems so head scratchingly obvious, it hard to believe things worked out the way you claim they did.
Keeping the KS backers appraised of the situation would have softened the public's expectations by a great deal, who without warning had been expecting the title to have been as advertised. It would have turned a NOPE into a "wait and see, it could improve" without the mad dash to patch up the holes in the hull before another ship sinks.
But then again, most developers figure backers as free money despite KS often being more like a loan against the sales those people would have bought along with the word-of-mouth they would have promoted to others, and this regard for that source of funding didn't just take a back seat - it was tied to the bumper.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5HbBL62IiRE
That's a separate issue. They could've admitted that they ran out of money and had to launch the game in the state it was, explaining that it'd be in a poor state but they'd improve it along the way.
But this is not what happened. If you listen to Flarechess's explanations, they weren't aware of the poor state of the game. Doesn't matter if it was scheduled to release in a month or 6.. they were convinced the game was in a good state, despite their entire forums telling them otherwise ! This is the contradiction I'm speaking about, and that needs explanations.