Will you buy Subnautica 3 in EA, on release or not at all?

[リアンダ]

I've bought both Subnautica and Subnautica BZ in Early Access. While I did not regret that decision for the originial I wish I had waited to make a more informed buying decision when it comes to the latter. BZ is in my books an inferior product to the original in almost every aspect and not worth the 30 USD asking price.

Personally I'm not sure which direction UWE will go with part 3. Will they take notice of the drastically lower sales of BZ compared to the original? That BZ has about one third of the reviews and about one third of the daily active users the original has? Will they return to a more sandbox open world, with plenty of space to build and explore and a protagonist that doesn't banter 24/7 taking away any sense of danger, isolation and loneliness? Or will they double down on a linear, shallow (in every sense of the word) experience in a world that has been tamed by mankind to a degree where a geriatric women infected with a supposedly deadly disease can survive on her own for years.

Personally I am not sure which way they will go but the phrases "Californian developer" and "listening to player feedback" don't go together very well these days. So my guess is we'll probably get another relatively linear experience that ignores gameplay in favor of investing ressources into elaborate cutscenes, neverending audiologs, and other plot centric gimmicks. A plot that will once again one dimensionally deal with such novel topics like "destroying evironment: bad, big corporations: bad" while featuring a stereotypical sassy poc woman.

So personally I won't be buying SN3 unless there is plenty of stellar post release reviews from critics I know allign well with my own personal taste instead of buying the game blindly. But what do you think? Will you buy the game day one? I would love to hear what you think, where you agree and/or disagree. Wish you all a nice weekend.

[Mohguy]

I would be ready to take it in EA but I would wait to see some gameplay and see in which direction the devs went, if I like it or not, and if it meets what I expect from a Subnautica.
So I won't buy it blindly like I did with BZ

my guess is we'll probably get another relatively linear experience that ignores gameplay in favor of investing ressources into elaborate cutscenes, neverending audiologs, and other plot centric gimmicks

I'm a little afraid of that.
I honestly don't care about the cutscenes, it annoys me more than anything else, and the narration with the 500 PDAs was terrible, there's no need to do as much to offer something interesting (it's sometimes even the opposite).
Whether they focus on gameplay, map, exploration, survival mechanics etc, it would be better

But hey if they took a step back it would surprise me if they continued in the direction of BZ with even more narration

[admiral1018]

I was pretty disappointed with the way the early access period went for Below Zero. The devs ignored most of the feedback from the players outside of bug fixes, and the end product was kind of a mess. Some of the responses to players were actually quite condescending, basically amounting to "this is what we want to do, deal with it." The issues with people not being able to understand the new PDA voice comes to mind on that one. Now, the devs are certainly allowed to make whatever game they want, but then what's the point of an EA period where you request input from the fans if you don't actually want them to influence the development?

At this point, UWE isn't some indie developer that needs funding to realize their vision. They are owned by Krafton now and have all the resources they need to make any game they want. Another EA period where player input is ignored seems like a greedy cash grab. Just release the game when it's done if player input isn't important.

[リアンダ]

Originally posted by admiral1018:

Some of the responses to players were actually quite condescending, basically amounting to "this is what we want to do, deal with it."

I noticed that too. Not sure if it's a company thing or a california thing but they seem to be very set in their way. It feels like they expect the customers to finance their personal dream game instead of serving the customers interest first and their own second. Now ideally those two interests overlap. But if they don't it makes sense to not be condescening to the customers who keep the lights on in your studio.

Originally posted by Mohguy:

I would be ready to take it in EA but I would wait to see some gameplay and see in which direction the devs went, if I like it or not, and if it meets what I expect from a Subnautica.
So I won't buy it blindly like I did with BZ

Probably a good idea. And not just a scripted gameplay trailer but raw, unedited gameplay.

[Okihara Jones]

Well now, I hate to break it to you all, but seeing as I have a few moments to spare (and this here PBR is ice cold and delicious) I figure I'll add the pro-verbial two cents and what-not.

The cold, hard truth is that the majority of folks don't have a problem with the game. Why, just take a gander at those Steam user reviews. As of this writing 76,000+ positive, 7,000+ negative. While no game is perfect, and this here game does have it's flaws-- "too short" and "not a true sequel but more like an expansion pack" might/could set real comfy-like within the acceptable parameters for what even-keeled folks (such as myself, if I may toot my own horn there for a second) consider constructive criticism proper-- the game for the most part is fun underwater hi-jinx and I, for the one, will certainly and indeed be laying down the monies for future sea-side endeavors.

You see, that the majority of good folks out there ain't havin a problem with the game may be the perceived reason why certain folks take the viewpoint that the dee-velopers are, shall we say, "cavalier" in their attitude toward the lay-critic in the minority. Now, I ain't no professor of the human condition, not even by a long shot, but it does seem to me when one calls a video game character

Originally posted by ShakingZealot:

a stereotypical sassy poc woman

one fairly de-ligitimizes the critique as partisan in the pro game designing world (especially when said "sassy" character AIN'T, and, infact, may be more "annoying eggheaded and nerdy" than anything-- but like you said, "california devs" amirite wink wink wink).

Well, that's it for now. I surely did have fun talkin to you folks, and who knows-- mayhaps we all learnt us a thing or two. No matter-- hows-n-ever I'm afraid there lay callings upon yon horizon to which I must respond with immediacy-- mainly, my wife yappin at me from the next room (I done told her I was "doing something important" typing on the machine here tee hee hee). Have a good weekend yall. Have a PBR on me.

[リアンダ]

Originally posted by Okihara Jones:

As of this writing 76,000+ positive, 7,000+ negative.

Which only means that players generally liked the game more than they disliked it. It's a binary passing grade which makes Subnautica 1 and Below Zero look similar in player reception when they aren't. Go to any review site that allows to rate the game in a non binary system (like say metacritic) and you will see that BZ does singnificantly worse than SN in all of them. The MEDIAN value on steam is "very positive" so yeah. Go figure why this isn't a really strong talking point.

Originally posted by Okihara Jones:

one fairly de-ligitimizes the critique as partisan

I'm not even American. The rest of the world doesn't adhere to your partisan way of thinking so maybe stop perpeptually interpreting the world through this lens.

Originally posted by Okihara Jones:

"sassy" character AIN'T, and, infact, may be more "annoying eggheaded and nerdy" than anything--

No I think sassy is appropriate. She never displays any form of respect, fear, awe. When she communicates with Al-An she does it like you would with your highschool friend. Put yourself in her shoes, imagine how you would react to the presence of an almost godlike creature inhabiting your body against your will. The fear, the uncertainty, the excitement. But nah, not for Robin. Yeah, sassy seems pretty appropriate to me. Disagree if you want.

Originally posted by Okihara Jones:

but like you said, "california devs" amirite wink wink wink).

I've been to California three times in my life. As a European, this is quite a lot. It's a beautiful state, no doubt about that (unless you visit the larger cities, those are hellholes). I have never seen a more leftleaning place on earth other than maybe Sweden or the Netherlands (before they voted right wing governments into power last year). It's a bubble and the cultural outputs that emerge from that bubble exude this mentality as much as easter europan games exude depression:P Nothing wrong about that but to think that a piece of art isn't noticeably influenced by the average mindset of the people working on them seems a bit naive.

Originally posted by Okihara Jones:

Have a good weekend yall. Have a PBR on me.

You too :) I don't know what a PBR is but if I find out I will.

/edit: Ah, Pabst Blue Ribbon. It's not availeable here but I'll drink the worst Swiss bere I can find instead :)

[chris.ferrantegerard]

I personally don't care for Early Access really, prefer to wait until the game is ready for release, bugs fixed, etc. If it looks okay I'll wishlist it and wait for a decent sale, I have a big enough of a backlog as is lol and will be grabbing up games on discount first. Hopefully would be more aligned to the first game, Sub Zero is a decent game while the first was excellent. Needs more deep water and less land, Sub Zero just didn't give the same sense of dread while diving into the depths as there basically was no depths.

[Hotklou]

I liked SN1 and SNBZ, so IMO chances are that SN3 will be good as well. I will see how it goes in Early Access first though before I consider buying it before release, but both games have been great at release so I will probably end up buying the third game then.

[Mohguy]

The cold, hard truth is that the majority of folks don't have a problem with the game. Why, just take a gander at those Steam user reviews. As of this writing 76,000+ positive, 7,000+ negative.

The game was much less appreciated than the first, that’s undeniable.
And I think that if Steam had at least 3 response choices for its reviews (I always found this binary choice really stupid...), there would certainly have been a lot of "mixed" or "average" reviews, except that without that people often put "positive" so as not to penalize the game too much because the game does not offer a fundamentally "bad" experience (except on 1-2 aspects like the story and certain parts of progression).
Even I, who found the game very disappointing, if I had to leave an opinion with this very limited Steam system I would still put it "positive", because for someone who liked Subnautica, BZ is better than nothing, It's disappointing but it allows us to have some new features and extend the experience a little in another environment.
But if I had the choice I would have given an "average" review, not bad, not good

I think the devs saw very clearly that the players were generally less receptive to this latest opus, you would have to be blind or completely closed-minded not to see it.

[Neno]

If they commit to a proper sequel that expands the world with a MUCH bigger map, then I'll probably buy it day 1. The first game did an amazing job tricking the player into thinking the world is bigger than it is, I'm actually in awe of how clever some of the tricks were, but that only works once. For a sequel, they need to raise the bar and BZ doesn't look like it did that at all.

[リアンダ]

Originally posted by Mohguy:

that people often put "positive" so as not to penalize the game too much because the game does not offer a fundamentally "bad" experience (except on 1-2 aspects like the story and certain parts of progression).

This is spot on in my personal experience. I gave the game a thumbs up when I reviewed it because I felt there were more positives about it than negatives. A 6 or 7, depending on how well the performance is these days. The original game easily sits 2 points above that imo. I really hope UWE takes a hard look at the game that really put their company on the map. Moonbreaker looks to be a sizeable bomb and I'm not sure what will happen to the Studios should SN3 not be able to cacth up to the sales of the original.

Originally posted by Neno:

If they commit to a proper sequel that expands the world with a MUCH bigger map, then I'll probably buy it day 1.

That would propably bring me back too but only if the map is reasonably performant.

[Zarathustra1889]

Originally posted by ShakingZealot:

Originally posted by admiral1018:

Some of the responses to players were actually quite condescending, basically amounting to "this is what we want to do, deal with it."

I noticed that too. Not sure if it's a company thing or a california thing but they seem to be very set in their way. It feels like they expect the customers to finance their personal dream game instead of serving the customers interest first and their own second. Now ideally those two interests overlap. But if they don't it makes sense to not be condescening to the customers who keep the lights on in your studio.

Originally posted by Mohguy:

I would be ready to take it in EA but I would wait to see some gameplay and see in which direction the devs went, if I like it or not, and if it meets what I expect from a Subnautica.
So I won't buy it blindly like I did with BZ

Probably a good idea. And not just a scripted gameplay trailer but raw, unedited gameplay.

Condescension is the american way lmao

[Arondil]

Probably on final release, possibly in EA. It depends.

[miklkit]

SN is a full game made by the devs to please themselves. It also pleases a lot of other people. BZ is a technical exercise that was well enough liked to sell well. The devs built it for themselves.
The next game from them should be a full game that will also please the devs and most players are well. I'm pretty sure I will like it and buy it. EA or release? Dunno yet.

[LordSlug]

Probably not, I made that mistake with this one because I liked the first game a lot. I am still annoyed every time I try to go back and play this.

[Mohguy]

Originally posted by LordSlug:

Probably not, I made that mistake with this one because I liked the first game a lot. I am still annoyed every time I try to go back and play this.

I don't know if it's true or not, I have no information, but I had seen people say that it was apparently another team of developers on the next opus, so it could be a change for the better or the worst, we'll see.

Otherwise I don't think we should definitively condemn the Subnautica license just because Below Zero was disappointing (it wasn't catastrophic either, well perhaps on certain points but not in the overall game).
There was a very good game, an average game, we just have to see which path the 3rd takes.
It's a license with incredible potential. Subnautica 1 was very good but I feel that it can be even better and more complete, so for me it is possible that the 3rd game will be great, hence the fact of waiting to know more and to see concrete